______ The Benham Companies, LLC 3700W. Robinson, Sle. 200 Nonnan, OK 73072

# ~BEIV;w." Telephone 405.321.3895 

## infrastructure 

## &environment Fax405.364.1708
info@benham.com www.benham.com


# December 1, 2006

Mr. Eddie Terrill Air Quality Division Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 707 N. Robinson Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677

Re: Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant, Woodward, Oklahoma Class I Area Visibility Analysis and BART Waiver Application Submittal



# Dear Mr. Terrill: 

# RECEIVED**DEC"Q~** 

# 1 2006·**~--I**

# A~R 

# QUALJTY

On behalf of Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. (Terra), The Benham Companies, LLC (Benham) is submitting the enclosed three (3) copies of a Class I area visibility analysis and Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) waiver application for the Woodward Plant (Facility) located in Woodward County Oklahoma.

Benham is submitting the enclosed modeling analysis and application on behalf of Terra pursuant to the requirements under Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAG) 252:100-8-75(c). which states that the "owner or operator of a BART-eligible source shall submit to the Director by December 1, 2006, an application for a waiver pursuant to OAC 252:1 00-8-73."

. 	 . 

# Based on the information presented in the enclosed report, it is not believed that Terra causes or contributes to visibility impairment in a Class I area. Therefore, Terra is requesting a waiver from ODEQ that a BARTdetermination is not required in accordance with OAC 252:100-8-73.
If you should have any questions or need further information regarding the modeling methodology or results, please contact Mr. Brian Flanagan at (580) 254-8225. Sincerely, 

# ct**~**

Kimberly Wahnee Air Quality Specialist

Enclosures



# cc: Brian Flanagan, Terra

# I I I 

# I CLASS IAREAVISIBLITY MODELING ANALVSIS AND BARTWAIVER APPLICATION 

# I TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT WOODWARD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I

Submitted To:· 

# I AirQuality Division Oklahoma DepartmentofEnvironmental Quality 707 North Robinson 

# I Oklahoma City, OK 73101 

# I

For Information Contact: Mr. Brian Flanagan 

# I Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. ·1000 Terra Drive Woodward, Oklahoma 73801 

# I (580) 254-8225 

# I Prepared By: The Benham Companies, LLC 

# I Infrastructureand Environment 3700 West Robinson, Suite#200 Norman, Oklahoma 73072 

# I (405) 321-3895 

# I 

# I November2006 

# I I I RECEIVE.D

DECO'l 2006 ' 

# AIR QUAL.ITY

# I I Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I TABLE OF CONTENTS


# Section 

# I 1.0 INTRODUCTION

...........................................................................................

# 1-1 2.0 SOURCE DESCRIPTION

.............................................................................**2~1** 

# I 2.1 Facility Location

..........................................................................................

# 2-1 2.2 Facility Description

.....................................................................................

# 2-1 

# I 2.3 BART Eligible Sources

...................................... ................................. ......

# 2-1 2.4 Affected Class IAreas

................................................................................2-4 

# I 3.0 AIR.QUALITY MODELAND MODELING INPUT DATA

............. ................

# 3-1 3.1 Model Selection

...........................................................................................

# 3-1 

# I 3.2 Domain Configurations and Receptors

.....................................................

# 3-2 

# I 3.3 Source Parameters and Emissions Input

.................................................

# 3-3 3.4 Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF)

...........:

...................................................3-6 

# I 3.5 Post Processing (CALPOST)

......................................................................3-7 4.0 MODELING RESULTS

.................................................................................4-1 

# I 5.0· REFERENCES

...............................................................................................5-1 

# I I 

# I I 

# I I 

# II

I

J:\2005\4100&04402\70_Enviro\10_Report\BART Walver\TW BART WaiverApp FINALdoc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc.

. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 

# I A Summary ofCALPUFF Control File Inputs 8 Summary of POSTUTIL Control File Inputs 

# I C Summary of CALPOST Control File Inputs 

# o Copy of Monthly f(RH) Values for Each Mandatory Class IArea 

# I E Modeling Files on DVD-ROM 

# I I I I 

# I I I I I 

# I 

# I I I ii 1:1200614100604402l70_Enviro\10_ReportIBARTwaiver\TW BART WaiverApp FINAL.doe

# I I CLASS IAREAVISIBLITY MODELING ANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER APPLICATION 

# I TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT WOODWARD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I NOVEMBER 2006 

# I 1.0 INTRODUCTION


# Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. (Terra) operates a nitric acid, ammonia, urea 

# I ammonium nitrate (UAN), and. methanol production facility (Facility) located in Woodward, Oklahoma. The Facility is currently authorized to operate under Permit No. 

# I 98-299-TV (Permit), which was issued by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) on February 26, 2002. 

# I

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Regional Haze 

# I Regulations initially in 1999 to improve visual air quality in national parks and wilderness areas (Class I areas) across the country. The regulation**sp~cifically** 

# I 

# ·1 requires states to establish goals for improving visibility in Class I areas and to develop long-term strategies for reducing emissions of certain air pollutants. The EPA 

# I published final amendments to the 1999 Regional Haze Rule on July 6, 2005 which includes final guidance for Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) determinations in 

# I Appendix Y ofthe Federal Register (70 FR 39104-39172). Under the Regional Haze Rule, states have the authority to exempt**cert~in** 

# BART-eligible sources based on 

# I dispersion modeling demonstrating that the source cannot reasonably be anticipated to

cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I area. 

# I Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAO) 252:100-8, Part 11 addresses BART eligible 

# I sources that may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in any mandatory federal Class I area. The Air Quality Council (AQC) 

# I approved OAC 252:100-8, Part 11 for permanent rulemaking on April 19, 2006. The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) approved Part 11 as both a permanent and emergency rule on August 22, 2006. The rule was signed by the Governor as 

# I I 1-1 1:\2006\4100S04402\70_EnV'lro\10_Report\BARTWaiver\TW BARTWaiverApp FfNALdoc

# I I Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. Woodward Plant November2006


# emergency on October 8, 2006. Part 11 of OAC 252:100-8 is expected to become 

# I permanently effective on June 15, 2007.



# I I I Terra is submitting this Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART Waiver Application (Application) to request and obtain a waiver from the ODEQ in accordance 

# I with OAC 252:100-8-73(c)(3), which states a BART determination is not required 

# "ifthe

owneroperatorofthe BART-eligible source demonstrates bymodeling, in accordance with 

# a protocol approved by the Director, that

# a source does not emit anyairpollutant which may 

# reasonably be anticipated to cause orcontribute to visibility impairment in 

# I any Class I Federal area." In addition, OAC 252:100-75(c), requires that any BART waiver applications be submitted by December 1, 2006. 

# I At the request of Terra, The Benham Companies, LLC (Benham), has performed an 

# I Class 

# IArea visibility modeling analysis to document that the source does not emit any air pollutant which may reasonable be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility 

# I impairment in any mandatory Class I Federal area. This modeling analysis was performed based on guidance found in the Central Regional Air Planning Association 

# I (CENRAP) BART Modeling Guidelines (December 2005) (CENRAP Guidance) and from guidance obtained from the ODEQ. 

# I The remaining sections ofthis Application consist ofthe following: Source Description 

# I • 2.0 Air Quality Model and Model Input Data • 3.0 Modeling Results 

# • 4.0 

# I References • 5.0

• Appendices 

# I I I I 1-2**1:\2006\4100604402\70~EnvffO\10_Repott\BART** WaivenTW BART WaiverApp FINAl,doc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I 2.0 SOURCE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Facility Location 

# I The Facility is located at 1000 Terra Drive, Woodward, Oklahoma. Figure 2-1 shows the Facility in relation to nearby state highways and roadways. The approximate legal 

# I description of the Facility is Section 29, Township 23N, Range 21W, Woodward County, Oklahoma. The Facility is located two (2) miles west of Woodward.on State 

# I Highway 15. 

# I 2.2 Facility Description 

# The Facility consists of nitric acid, ammonia, urea/ammonium nitrate, and methanol 

# I production facilities (SIC 2873). 

# I The following general processes are performed at the Facility:


# >- Natural gas desulphurization 

# I >- Catalytic steam reforming


# >- Carbon monoxide "shift" Carbon dioxide removal/liquefaction 

# I >­ 

# I >- Methanation


# >- Ammonia synthesis 

# I

2.3 BART Eligible Sources 

# I >­ Nitric acid production 

# >­ Ammonium nitrate production 

# >­ Urea synthesis 

# >­ Urea-ammonium nitrate production 

# >­ Methanol Syntheses 

# >­ Product Storage and Loading



# I I OAC 252:100-8-71 includes definitions used to identify a BART-eligible source. In addition, OAC 252:100-8-72 incorporates Appendix Y of 40 CFR 51, Guidelines for 

# I BART Determinations underthe Regional Haze Rule, by reference. The ODEQ defines

sources that are potentially BART-eligible as existing stationary sources ofair pollutants from one of 26 identified source categories, including any reconstructed source, which

was not in operation prior to August 7, 1962, and was in existence on August 7, 1977, 

# I and has the potential to emit (PTE) 250 tons per year (T/yr) or more ofany air visibilityimpairing pollutants. 

# I

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November 2006 

# I I The BART guidelines under Appendix Y of40 CFR 51 include a step-by-step analysis for determining if a source may be considered to be BART-eligible. The four steps are

as follows: 

# I I > Step 1: 

# > Step 

# 2: 

# > Step 

# 3: 

# I Identifythe emission units in the BART categories Identifythe start-updates ofthose emission units Compare the potential emissions from the units identified in steps 

# 1 and 2 to the 250 

# T/yrthreshold 

# > Step 4: Identify the emission units and pollutants that constitute the BART

# I eligible source 

# I A brief summary of each ofthese steps is provided in Sections 2.3.1 through 2.3.4. A
summaryofthe BART-eligible sources atthe Facility is included in Table 2-1. 

# I

2.3.1 Step 1 : Identify Emission Units in the BART 

# Categories 

# I The BART categories include major stationary sources as identified on the list of 26

source categories as included in OAC 252:100-8-71. The Standard Industrial 

# I Classification (SIC) Code for the Facility is 2873. The Facility is included on the list under three specific source categories: "nitric acid plants", "chemical process plants", 

# I and "fossil-fuel boilers of more than 250 million British Thermal Units per hour (MMBtu/hr) heat input." 

# I

2.3.2 Step 2: Identifythe Start-up Dates ofthe Emission Units 

# I Emission units identified in Step 1 are BART-eligible if they were "in existence" on August 7, 1977 but**we~e** 

# not "in operation" before August 7, 1962. Under OAC 

# I 252:100-8-71, the term "in existence" is identified as meaning "that.the owner or operator has obtained all necessary preconstruction approvals or permits required by 

# I the Department and EPA and either has: (A) begun, or caused to begin, a continuous
program of physical construction ofthe facility; or (B) entered into binding agreements 

# I I _2 2 1;\2006\4100SO«02\70_Enviro\10_RepOrlIBA,R1' WaivenTW BART Waiver App FINAL.doc

# I 

# I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART WaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I or contractual obligations which cannot be cancelled or modified without substantial 

# I loss to the owner or operatorto undertake a program of construction ofthe facility to be completed in a reasonable time." The term "in operation" is defined as "engaged in activity related to the primary design function ofthe source." 

# I I The BART guidelines require facilities to also take into consideration**so~rces** 

# which

were in operation before August 7, 1962 and were "reconstructed" during the August 7, 

# I 1962 to August 7, 1977 timeframe. A source is considered reconstructed "if the fixed capital cost of the new component exceeds 50 percent of the fixed capital cost of a 

# I comparable entirely new source." The current BART regulations do not provide exemptions forsourcesthatwere "modified" afterAugust 7, 1977. 

# I Terra operates units that were "in existence" prior to August 7, 1977 and were not "in operation" prior to August 7, 1962. In addition, the units identified have not been 

# I "reconstructed" afterAugust 7, 1977. 

# I 2.3.3 Step 3: Compare the Potential Emissions to the 250 T/yr

# Cutoff The purpose ofthis step is to determinewhetherthe total emissions represent a current 

# I PTE that is greater than 250 T/yr of any single visibility-impairing pollutant. The BART guidelines address emissions of sulfur dioxides (S02). nitrogen oxides (NOx ), 

# and 

# I particulate matter (pM) as visibility-impairing pollutants. PM with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10) 

# is used as an indicator in this step. States have 

# I the option to also include volatile organic compounds (VOC) and ammonia as visibilityimpairing pollutants. The Facility hasthe potential to emitVOC and ammonia; however, 

# I ammonia and VOC emissionswere not included in accordancewith OAC 252:100-8-73. 

# I As presented in Table 2-1, the PTE for NOx

# from the sources identified is greater than 

# 250 T/yr. 

# I I 

# I 2-3 1:\2000\4100604402\70_Eoviro\10

....Repor1\BART Wah,enTW BARTWaiverAppFINAL.doc:

# I I Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART WaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November2006



# 2.3.4 Step 4: Identify the Emissions Units and Pollutants That Constitute the 

# I I BART-eligible Source 

# A source is considered BART-eligible ifthe emissions from the list of emissions units at 

# I a stationary source exceed a PTE of250 T/yr

# for any visibility-impairing pollutant. The guidelines indicate that if a source has a PTE greater than 250 T/yr for one visibility

# I impairing pollutant (i.e. NOx), 

# then the source is subject to a BART review for all visibility-impairing pollutants (Le. NOx, 

# S02, 

# and PM). 

# I 2.4 Affected Class IAreas 

# I A Class I area is an area of the country with special national or regional value from a natural, scenic, recreational, or historic perspective. These Class I areas are afforded special protection to minimize the impacts ofsources on their airquality. In accordance 

# I with the CENRAP modeling guidance, all Class I areas located within a 300 kilometer (km) radius ofthe Facility are required to be evaluated forvisibility. 

# I
This modeling analysis evaluated visibility impacts at the Wichita Mountains National 

# I Wildlife Refuge (WMNWR), located approximately 194 km or approximately 120 miles to the southeast of the Facility. There are no other Class I areas located within a 300 

# I km radius ofthe Facility. 

# I A map of the Facility's location in relation to each Class I area located within a 300 km from the Facility's center is provided in Figure 2-2. 

# I I 

# I I I 

# I 2-4 I,1200614100604402170_Enviro\10J",portIBART Wal••rlTWBART WaiverApp FlNAL.doc

# --

-- 

# I I

TABLE 2-1 

# I SUMMARYOF BART·ELIGIBLE SOURCES 

# I CLASS I AREA VISIBIL TVANALYSISAND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL(OKLAHOMA). INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I I I ...



# ..**~**



# ..

.. SourcelD Emission Point 

### 10 Description Construction Date 

### PM,o 502 NO. Emission

Rate (T/yr) Emission Rate (T/yr) Emission Rate (Tlyr)



# - 10300 REF Primary Reformer (800 MMBTUH 1975 32.80 

### 3.20 700.80 10301 BORN Bam Boiler (310.4 MMBTUHl 1975 11.90 

### 0.90 271.90 10302 START Converter Start-up Heater (1846 MMBTUHl 1975 0.90 0.40 27.00 10303 UTILITY

. Utility Boiler (87.16 MMBTUH) 1976 7.50 1,10 76.20 10304 UPGRD NitricAcid Plant (Upgrade) 1976 

# - 216.00 10305 ANNEUT Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 1976 139.70


# - 13013A NFLARE Ammonia Process Ememencv Flare (North Flare) 1975



## - 

# - 25.20

-" 13013C NH3FLARE StoraQe Tank EmerQencv Flare 1975



## - - 1.28 10313B SFLARE Non-Ammonia Process Emergency Flare (South Flare) 1975 

## - - 58.60 Total 

### 192.80 5.60 1 376.98 Threshold 

### 250 250 250 >Threshold NO NO 

## YES 

# I Notes: 1. Emission rates are potential or permitted emission rates as represented in Permit No. 98-299-TV, issued February 26,2002. 2. Potential emission rates from the three (3) flares are as represented in the Title V renewal application submitted on

August 23, 2006 currently under review. 

# I I I I I I I I I I I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls ITable 2-1

# I I I I I 

# I I I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I T

(

f**" '~** 

r "



# ....

-J

\

. 1
'II 

# ""'.'

_ .... 

# ,.

W L 

### j,

- 1

, 

# .. r""--,1

'(**:~**

" 

# ,­ "**~** 

# "



# --­- ,

# .

---= ­



# -**-~-** 

# ­**~**



### ,**.~** 

# -­**--~**

1

- : :..'­ J I

- 

# L**~~_ .** **~--**

- 'I'" !'" :

- ...I
.. " ••



### -­ "



# - - -r

# --- -r­

, 

# , .**~**

# ..**~.**



# -..**~:** 

# -,T

·: -. '

. ... .' I "'-

..·1._ 

## J**-- .** **:--** .._ I 

# :; ' .i:- I



### , " 

### .T ::::;::..­

--...**-.~ --~n:..** 



# - -

" " 

# i

.:':

0

.25 0

.5 1.5 

### !&!!!iiiiiiil!!!!!iiiiiiii!!!!!!!!!!!!Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!!!!!!! Miles

FIGURE TITLE DATE 11/1712006 

## AREA MAP
- WOODWARD PLANT SCALE 1 :48.000

DOCUMENTTITLE 

## CLASS IAREAVISIBLITY MODELING ANALYSIS AN D BARTWAIVERAPPLICATION DESIGNED BY
APPROVED BY

DRAWN BY SF
1M
SF 

# I CLIENT 

### The Benham Companies, LLC PROJECT NUMBER 

## TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC

. infrastructure & 

### environment 

### 4100604402

3700 W. Robinson, Suite 200 Norman, Oklahoma 73071 LOCATION FIGURE NUMBER 

# I (405) 321·3895 

## 1000TERRA DRIVE, WOODWARD, OK 73801 www.benham.com

# I I
}



## . Class I Area**Vi~ibility** 

### Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I 3.0 AIR QUALITY MODELAND MODELING INPUT DATA


# 3.1 Model Selection 

# I According to the Regional Haze Rule's BART modeling guidance, a source can use the 

# I California Puff (CALPUFF) model to predict the visibility impacts from a single source at

a Class I area. 

# I Benham used the CALPUFF screening approach consistent with the procedures outlined in the CENRAP Guidance.. The CALPUFF screening methodology uses a 

# I standard set of default meteorological, air quality, and dispersion conditions that are consistent with the Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (lWAQM), Phase 2 

# I recommendations for long-range transport guidance (December 1998) and Federal Land Managers' Air Quality Related Values Workgroup (FLAG) Phase 1 

# I recommendations (December 2000). The CALPUFF screening approach provides a conservative analysis to predict the source's visibility impact at a Class I area. 

# I

Based on guidance obtained from ODEQ, the version ofthe CALPUFF model used in 

# I this analysis is the CALPUFF VISTAS Recommended Version for BART Modeling (VISTAS Version 5). Benham utilized the BEEST Professional CALPUFF Version 2.33 

# I (BEEST Pro' CALPUFF) program, which has incorporated the CALPUFF VISTAS Version 5 modeling system. In addition, the BEEST Pro CALPUFF program includes a 

# I CENRAP screening feature that has incorporated the. CALPUFF screening recommendations and defaults. 

# I

There are three (3) main components ofthe CALPUFF modeling system: 

# I**~** 

# Meteorological Data Modeling (CALMET); 

# I**~** 

# Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF); and, 

# I**~** 

# Post Processing (CALPOST). 

# I I 3-1 1:12006\4100Ei04402170_Enviroll0_RepoltIBARTWalver\TW BARTWaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiver Application Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November 2006 

# ,I The remainder ofthis section provides a description ofthe modeling inputs and general modeling approach. 

# I 3.2 Domain Configurations and Receptors


# I I For the CALPUFF screening approach,. model-ready meteorological data sets have been developed by CENRAP for three (3) CENRAP sub-regional domains. The data
sets cover three (3) contiguous years (2001, 2002, and 2003) and are resolved to a six 

# I (6) km horizontal resolution grid. Due to the location ofthe Facility and the location of the Class I area in consideration, the CALPUFF screening modeling for the Facilitywas 

# I conducted using the CENRAP south six (6) km grid for years 2001, 2002, and 2003. The extent ofthe CENRAP south sub-regional domain is shown in Figure 3-1. 

# I Based on CENRAP guidance, the computational domain used in the modeling analysis 

# I includes all Class I areas located within 300 km from the Facility, As described previously in Section 2.4, the WMNWR is located approximately 194 km from the Facility. The computational domain was determined based on the distance from the 

# I Facility to the nearest receptor in the Class I area. A buffer of 50 km in each cardinal direction was then added to the modeling domain. There are no other Class I areas 

# I located within 300 km ofthe Facility. The extent ofthe computational domain is shown in Figure 3-2. 

# I Receptors are locations where model results are calculated and provided in the 

# I CALPUFF output files. Receptor locations and elevations were derived from the National Park Service (NPS) Class I area receptor database. The discrete receptors 

# 'I were necessaryfor calculating visibility impacts in WMNWR. 

# I 

# I I 

# I

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc, 

# I Woodward Plant November 2006 

# I 3.3 Source Parameters and Emissions Input 

# I I 3.3.1 Stack Parameters The stack parameters required for modeling the BART-eligible units at the Facility are 

# I stack height from ground, stack diameter, exit gas flow rate, exit gas temperature, base elevation above sea level, and location coordinates of the stack. A summary of the modeled stack parameters is included in Table 3-1. 

# I 

# I 3.3.2 Modeled Emission Rates According to the BART guidance, emission rates applied in the BART analysis should be based on the 24-hour average actual emission rate from normal operations from the 

# I, highest emitting day of the year. The highest emitting day of the year is determined based on data from a 3-5 year period. In addition, days where startup, shutdown, or 

# I malfunctions occurred should be excluded unless these activities are regular, frequent

occurrences. Based on the guidelines, identification of the maximum 24-hour actual 

# I emission rates should be made for the most recent years according to the following prioritization: 

# I'

);> 

# Continuous Emissions Monitoring (CEM) data; 

# I );> 

# Facility emissions tests;
);> 

# Emissions factors; 

# I );> 

# Permit limits; or lastly,
);> 

# Potential to emit. 

# I

The species that should be modeled in the screening analysis include 

# S02. NOx and 

# I PM1o

. 

# According to OAC 252:100-B-73(c)(1) and (2), if a source has the potential to 'emit less than de minimis 

# quantities (i.e. 40 T/yr

# of

# S02 and NOx or less than 15 T/yr

# of 

# I PM1Q) a BART determination is not required. 

# I I 3-3 1:\2006\4100604402\70_Enviro\10_Report\BART Waiver\TW BART WaiverApp F1NALdoc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication 

# 'I Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. Woodward Plant November 2006 

# I To be conservative. the permitted emission rates for each source were input into the 

# I model instead of actual emission rates. The permitted facility-wide S02 emission rates

are below the de minimis 

# level (Le. less than 40 T/yr) and are not subject to BART 

# I review; therefore, S02 emissions from the BART-eligible sources atthe Facility were excluded from the modeling analysis. 

# I The plant flares were modeled assuming continuous operation of the flare pilot gas. 

# I Emissions resulting from start-ups, shutdowns, or upsets from the flares were excluded from the model based on the CENRAP modeling guidelines. 

# I 3.3.3 Speciation and PM Size Distribution 

# I Particle size parameters were used in the CALPUFF input file for dry deposition of 

# particles. There are default values for "aerosol" species (Le., sulfate (S04), nitrate (N03). 

# and PM2 

# .5). The default value for each ofthese species is 0.48 micrometer (IJm) 

# I geometric mass mean diameter and 2.0 IJm geometric standard deviation. 

# I The PM emissions from each source are required to be separated by size category, if such data is known or available. The size categories employed in this modeling 

# I analysis consisted of coarse PM (PMC) and fine PM (PMF). PMC includes particles with an aerodynamic diameter between 10 to 2.5 micrometers and PMF includes particles with an aerodynamic diameter lessthan 2.5 micrometers. 

# I , 

# I The majority of the BART-eligible sources at the Facility are natural gas-fired combustion units. AP-42 Section 1.4 indicates that all PM is assumed to be less than 

# I 1.0 micrometer in diameter. Therefore, all PM from the natural gas fired sources was assigned to the PMF category orwas assumed to be PM2

.5

. 

# I

For the ammonium nitrate neutralizer, PM emissions were categorized based on 

# I information found in EPA's PM calculator program. PM calculator estimates that 83% ofthe total PM from the neutralizer is less than 2.5 micrometers. Therefore, 83% ofthe 

# I I 3-4 1:\2006\4100604402\70_Enviro\10_Report\BARTWaivenTW BART WaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. 

# I Woodward Plant November2006


# total PM emissions were assigned to the PMF category (i.e. PM2.5) and the remainder 

# I (i.e. 17%) was assigned to the PMC category (i.e. PM 10). 

# I A summary ofthe modeled emission rates are provided in Table 3-2. 

# I 3.3.4 Building Downwash Analysis 

# I The modeling conducted for BART applications ,is focused on long range transport 

# I instead of localized impacts. Including the effects ofdownwash in the BART screening analysis is not necessary due to the distance'from the Facility in relation to the 

# I WMNWR. However, the CENRAP guidance suggests that building downwash should be included for each BART screening application without taking into consideration the distance ofthe Facilityfrom the Class I areas. 

# I
The Building Profile Input Program Prime (BPIP-Prime, Version 95086) was used to 

# I determine directionally-dependent aerodynamic**do~nwash** 

# structure dimensions (Le. heights and projected widths) for each emission point modeled, as a function of the 

# I layout of the structures'and emission points. The automated algorithm used for this analysis was the BEE BPIP-Prime software. The BPIP-Prime algorithm generates 

# I directionally-dependent vertical and horizontal structure dimensions for each emission point, for each 10-degree directional segment. The structure dimensions are then 

# I imported into the CALPUFF model on an emission point-specific basis. 

# I 3.3.5 Meteorological Data Modeling (CALMET) 

# As previously indicated, the 2001-2003 CENRAP-developed CALMET dataset was 

# I applied in the BART screening analysis. Since no observational data were used in the CALMET outputs developed by CENRAP, the prognostic meteorological dataset from 

# I MM5 was not supplemented with surface or upper air observations during the CALMET processing. The use of observations is thought to counterbalance smoothing that may 

# I occur when using the coarse grid scale of the MM5 data. Thus, CENRAP considers 

# I I 3-5 1:\2006\4100604402\70_Envlro\10_Report'lBARTWalvtu\TW BARTWaiverApp FINAL.dOC

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra Intemational (Oklahoma). Inc. 

# I Woodward Plant November 2006 

# I this screening modeling to be conservative and does not require the use of observational data. 

# I I Modeling was performed for each of the annual datasets. For year 2003, only 8,736 hours (Le. 364 days) were input into the model since the dataset only includes 12 hours

on December31,2003. A total of8,760 hourswas modeled foryears 2001 arid 2002. 

# I I 3.4 Dispersion Modeling (CALPUFF) The CALMET output is used as input into the CALPUFF model. The CALPUFF model 

# I simulates the effects ofthe meteorological conditions in the transport and dispersion of pollutants from an individual source. The CENRAP provided default options were used 

# I in the CALPUFF model. The CALPUFF model also has a puff-splitting option that splits puffs that become large over greater transport distances. Based on CENRAP guidance, the puff-splitting option was not u'sed in the screening analysis. 

# I Appendix A includes a summary of the CALPUFF settings used in the screening 

# I analysis. 

# I 3.4.1 Ozone and Ammonia Concentrations Ozone (03) and ammonia (NH3) were input into CALPUFF as monthly background 

# I values. Background ozone and ammonia concentrations are assumed to be temporally and spatially invariant and were fixed at 40 and 3 parts per billion (ppb), respectively, 

# I across the entire domain for each month (January thru December). The values used for background ozone and ammonia concentrations in CALPUFF are consistent with 

# I CENRAP guidelines. 

# I 3.4.2 CALPUFF Outputs The CALPUFF modeling results are displayed in units of micrograms per cubic meter 

# I (l.Jg/m\ 

# To determine visibility impacts from the Facility on the WMNWR, the 

# I I 3-6 1:\2006\4100604402\70_Enviro\10_Repol1\BARTWaiven.TW BART WaiverApp FINAl.doc

# I

Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. 

# I Woodward Plant November2006 

# I CALPUFF model results must be post processed using the POSTWTIL and CALPOST features. 

# I 3.5 Post Processing (CALPOST) 

# I Post processing involves processing the CALPUFF model results with the POSTUTIL 

# I and CALPOST to determine visibility conditions. POSTUTIL takes the concentration file output from CALPUFF and recalculates the nitric acid and nitrate partition based on 

# I total available sulfate and ammonia. CALPOST uses the concentration file processed through POSTUTIL, along with relative humidity data, to perform visibility calculations. 

# I A summary of the detailed settings used for POSTUTIL are provided in Appendix B. 

# I The ammonia limiting method (ALM) in CALPUFF repartitions the nitric acid and nitrate

on a receptor-by-receptor and hour-by-hour basis to account for the CALPUFF model's

over prediction due to overlapping puffs. The CENRAP guidance suggests that this 

# I correction should be used by setting MNITRATE = 

# 1 in POSTUTIL to perform repartitioning of nitric acid and ammonia. For this screening application, repartitioning 

# I of nitric acid and ammonia was not performed, which results' in a more conservative approach for determining visibility impacts. 

# I

A summary ofthe detailed settings used for CALPOST are provided in Appendix Cwith 

# I additional details for specific parameters provided in the following sections. 

# I 3.5.1 Light Extinction Coefficient Perceived visibility in deciviews (dv) is derived from the light extinction coefficient. The 

# I CALPOST program has several methods for computing light extinction. CENRAP guidance re.commends that Method 6 be used to estimate light extinction. Method 6 

# I computes light extinction from speciated particulate matter with monthly Class I areaspecific relative humidity adjustment factors. Relative humidity is a factor in calculating 

# I light extinction since sulfate and nitrate aerosols, which absorb.moisture from the air, have greaterextinction efficiencies with greater relative humidity. 

# I 

# I

3-7**~;\2006\4100604402\10_Eoviro\10_Report\BART** WaivonTW BARTWaNerAPI> FINAL,doc

# I

Class I Area Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART WaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. 

# I Woodward Plant November

### 2006 

# I I The relative humidity correction factors (f(RH)) for the WMNWR was obtained from EPA's "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze 

# I Rule" dated September 2003. The values are provided in Table A-3 of the EPA "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze Rule" 

# I dated September 2003. For reference, a copy ofthe f(RH) values from the 2003 EPA document are provided in Appendix D. 

# I 3.5.2 Visibility Impacts 

# I The visibility change related to background is calculated using'the modeled and established natural visibility conditions. Forthe BART screening analysis, daily visibility is expressed as a change in dv (delta dv) compared to natural visibility conditions. 

# I
The natural conditions for a Class I area is based on whetherthe Class I area is located 

# I in the eastern or western part of the United States. The data is provided in EPA's "Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze Rule" 

# I dated September 2003. The WMNWR is located in the eastern part of the United States. The annual average natural levels of aerosol components at the WMNWR are 

# I summarized in Appendix C. 

# I The EPA BART guidelines allow the use ofthe 98th 

# percentile impact for determining if

a source has the potential to cause orcontribute to regional haze in a Class Iarea. The 

# I 98th 

# CENRAP guidance deviates from the use of the percentile. As discussed previously, the model ready CALMET datasets were processed without using the 

# I surface and upper air meteorological observations (Le. "No-Obs") in the wind field interpolation. Since the use of "No-Obs" may lead to less conservative calculations as 

# I compared to the use of CALMET with observations, EPA has recommended to CENRAP that the maximum visibility impact be used for the CALPUFF screening 

# I analysis. Therefore, the maximum impact was used for determining ifthe Facility has the potential to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in the Class Iarea. 

# I I

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BART WaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc.

. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I Sources with maximum modeled impacts below the 0.5 dv threshold are exempt from 

# I the remainder ofthe BART process. Ifthe impacts are greaterthan the 0.5 dv, sources have the option of performing a refined CALPUFF analysis to showthatthe impacts are 

# I below 0.5 dv or continuewith the BART process and perform a BART analysis. 

# I 

# I I 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I I I 3-9 1:1201l514101l504402\70_Enviro\10_ReportIBARTWaivertlW BART WaiverApp FINALdoc

# I I TABLE 3-1

BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE STACK PARAMETERS 

# I CLASS I AREAVISIBIL TV ANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I I I I Stack 10#

REF1 REF2 REF3 BORN UTILITY SFLARE NFLARE START UPGRD NH3FLARE ANNEUT

Notes: Location UTM Stack Base Base Gas Exit Source Description UTM Height Elevation Elevation Diameter Velocity UTM East UTM North Zone Datum

km km ft m ft ft fils

## PrimaryRef~ 4032.733 1 NAD83 92 625.1 Primary Refo .826 4032.734 625.1 2050 Primary Reformer Sta .835 4032.734 625.1 Bom Boiler (310.4 MMBTUH) 457.798 4032.711 14 NAD83 182 625.1 2050

. Utility Boiler (87.16 MMBTUHl 457.838 4032.777 14 NAD83 25 625.1 2050 3.50 14.03 Non-Ammonia Process EmergencY Flare 457.837 4032.566 14 NAD83 343 628.2 2060 20.13 65.60

Ammonia Process EmergencY Flare 457.837 4032.575 14 NAD83 343 628.2 2060 20.13 65.60 Startup Heater 457.864 4032.566 14 NAD83 67 628.2 2060 5.50 9.50 NitricAcid Plant (Upgrade) 457.527 4032.691 14 NAD83 50 637.3 2090 3.00 80.60 Storage Tank EmergencY Flare 457.723 4032.825 14 NAD83 138 626.3 2054 5.69 65.60 Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 457.499 4032.695 14 NAD83 35 633.6 2078 1.25 2.72 Stack Gas Exit Temp.
deg F

I 260

260 260 400 350 1,832 1,832 400 300 1832 120 

# I
1. The source parametersfortheflare, including calculation ofan equivalent heightand diameter, are based on ODE

# a modeling guidelines for Hares. 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I I I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls I Table 3-1

# I I TABLE 

## 3-2

BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCE STACK PARAMETERS 

# I CLASS I AREA VISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I 

# I I I 

# I Modeled Emission Rates'

StacklD# Source Description S02 Emissions 2 

### NO. 

### Emissions PM,0-2.5 Emissions

(PMF) PM:.• Emissions

(PMC) Particle Speciation 3



### filterable

PM

### ,o condensable PM,. Ibs/hr Ibs/hr Ibslhr Ibslhr 

### % % REF1 Primary Reformer Stack#1 0.00 53.30 0.00 2.50 0 100 REF2

. Primary Reformer Stack#2 0.00 53.30 0.00 2.50 0 100 REF3 Primary Reformer Stack #3 0.00 53.30 0.00 2.50 0 100 BORN Born Boiler (310.4 MMBTUH) 0.00 0.00 2.70 0 100 UTILITY Utility Boiler (87.16 MMBTUH) 0.00 17.40 0.00 1.70 0 100 SFLARE Non-Ammonia Process Emergency Flare • 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 0 NFLARE Ammonia Process Emergency Flare • 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 0 START UPGRD Startup Heater NitricAcid Plant (Upgrade) 0.00 0.00 6.20 52.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 NH3FLARE Storage Tank Emergency Flare' 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 0 ANNEUT Ammonium Nitrate Neutralizer 0.00 0.00 5.42 26.48 17 83 

# I

Notes: 1. Unless otherwise indicated. modeled emission rates are as represented in Permit No. 98-299-TV, issued February 26, 2002. 

# I 2. S02 emissionswere not modeled since Facility-wide emissions ofS02 are belowde minimis of40Tlyr. 3. Particle speCiation data forcombustion of natural gaswas obtained from AP-42 Section 1.4. Particale speciation data forthe ammonium nitrate neutralizerwas obtained from EPA's PMCalculator program. 

# I 4. Modeled emissions from the flares are based on combustion offlare pilot gas onlyand does not include emissions from start-up, shutdown or upsets. 

# I I I I 

# I I I I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls,Table 3-2DATE 11120/06 SCALE 1: 10,000.000

DESIGNED BY KW
APPROVED BY SF

DRAWN BY KW

PROJECT NUMBER 

## 4100604402

FIGURE NUMBER 

# 3-1**~~------, (** 


## CENRAP 6 km Domain



# I Facility Location 

# I I

.. r

# ~ 

# I I I 

# I I I 

# I**I~~--------------~ ~~** **~--~~--~** Legend 

# o USFS Class IAreas NPS Class IAreas FV·/S Class IAre2s

FIGURE TITLE 

## CENRAP 6 KM SOUTH CALPUFF METEORLOGICAL DOMAIN

# ~BEIU..iAM 

# I I The Benham Companies, LLC infrastructure 

### &environment

3700 W. Robinson, Suite 200 Norman, Oklahoma 73071 (405) 321·3895 www.benham.com 105 210 420 630 840

## ~§~~~iiiiil~~~~~§iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~~~~~~i**Kllometels**



## CLASS IAREA VISIBILITYAND MODELING ANALYSIS

CLI ENT



## TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC

.
LOCATION



## WOODWARD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I 

# I

# I~--~-,~----~--------~------~----~~ 

# I I

, 

# I I**I~** 

## ;



# I I I I I I**\\ ~**  CENRAP Meteorological Domain



# I 

# \

Legend 

# o USFS Class IAreas 105 210 420 630 640
NPS Cla.s IAreas Kilometers 

# I
D FWS Class IAreas

# ~BEIllHAm 

# I FIGURE TITLE 

## CALPUFF COMPUTATIONAL DOMAIN DATE " 120106 SCALE 1 : 10,000.000
DESIGNED BY KW

':tr251 nJelJr=**~ "vir** **. m~** **J** DOCUMENT TITLE APPROVED BY SF 

## CLASS IAREA VISIBILITYAND MODELING ANALYSIS DRAWNBY KW

PROJECT NUMBER 

### The Benham Companies, 

### LLC infrastructure & 

### environment

3700 

### W. Robinson, Suite 200

Norman, Oklahoma 73071 (405) 321-3895 www

.benham.com CLIENT 

## TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. 

## 4100604402

FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION



## WOODWARD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# 3-2 

# I 

# I

# I 

# I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma), Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I 4.0 MODELING RESULTS 

# I The CALPOST processor computes the daily (24-hour) maximum change in (delta) deciviews at the Class I area from the modeled sources. A summary of the daily maximum delta deciviewfor each year is provided in Table 4-1. 

# I
A summary ofthe modeling results is as follows: 

# I I > Numberof receptors within each Class I area with impacts> 0.5 dv 

# = 0 

# > Numberofdays atall, receptors within each Class Iarea with impacts> 0.5 dv 

# = 0 

# > Largest delta deciview

# =0.405 

# I

As indicated in the results provided in Table 4-1, the daily maximum change in 

# I deciviews is below the threshold of 0.5; therefore,the Facility is not expected to cause
or contribute to visibility impairment in the WMNWR. In addition, the CALPUFF 

# I screening modeling approach recommended by CENRAP and utilized for this application includes a high degree of conservatism compared with the refined 

# I CALPUFF methodology. 

# I In accordance with OAC. 252:100-B-73(c), Terra is eligible to obtain a waiver for the Facility from ODEQ that a BART determination is not required and further refined 

# I modeling is notwarranted. 

# I Electronic copies ofthe modeling files on DVD-ROM are provided in Appendix E. 

# I I 

# I I 

# I 4-1**1:\2006\4100604402\70_Enviro\10_~eport\sART** Walver\TW BARTWarverApp FlNALdoc

# I I

TABLE 4·1 

# I I SUMMARY OF MODELING RESULTS CLASS IAREA VISIBILTVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I' I Class IArea 

# 2001 Delta·

.Deciview 

# 2002DeltaDeciview 

# 2003DeltaDeciview Maximum

Delta-Deciview
Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge 0.405 0.218 0.199 

# 0.405 

# I I I I I I 

# I I I I 

# I I I CALPUFFModReportTables.xls 

## ITable 4-1

# I I Class IAreaVisibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiverApplication Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I 5.0 REFERENCES 

# I AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Document AP-42, Fifth Edition, May 1995, as amended. 

# I Alpine Geophysics, 200S, CENRAP BART Modeling Guidelines, Prepared by Alpine Geophysics for the Central Region Air Planning Association, December 1S, 

# 'I 200S. 

# I EPA, 1998, Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long Range Transport Impacts, Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling 

# 'I (IWAQM), EPA4S4/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle**Pa~k,** 

# NC. 

# I
EPA, 2003, Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional 

# I Haze Rule, EPA-4S4/B-03-00S, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

# I
EPA, 200S, Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for Best Available Retrofit 

# I Technology (BART) Determinations, Federal Register, 70 FR39104, July 6, 200S. 

# I

FLAG, 2000, Federal Land Managers Air Quality Related Values Workgroup Phase 1 

# I Report, U.S. Forest Services, National Park Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, December, 2000. 

# I 

# I' IWAQM, 1998, Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (lWAQM) Phase 2 

# I Summary Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long Range Transport and Impacts on Regional Visibility, EPA-4S4/R-98-019, U.S. Environmental 

# I Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

# I S-1 1:1200IMl00604402170_Envlro\10_ReportIBARTWaiverlTWBART WaiverAppFINALdoc

# I I Class IArea Visibility Modeling Analysis and BARTWaiver Application Terra International (Oklahoma). Inc. Woodward Plant November2006 

# I**Oklahom~** Administrative Code, Title 252, Chapter 100, June 15, 2006. 

# I TCEQ, 2006, Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Modeling Protocol to 

# I Determine Sources Subject to BARTin the State of Texas, Texas Commission

on Environmental Quality, Air Permits Division, September2006. 

# I VISTAS, 2005, VISTAS Protocol for the Application of the CALPUFF Model for 

# I Analyses of BestAvailableRetrofit Technology (BART), Prepared by the Visibility ImprovementState and Tribal Association ofthe Southeast (VISTAS) Technical 

# I Analysis Workgroup (TAWG) and Earth Tech, Inc. 

# I I I 

# ,I I 

# I I 

# I I I 

# I 5-2 1:\2006\4100604402\10_Envim\10_Report\BARTWaiver\TW BARTWaiverApp FINAL.doc

# I I 

# I I I I I I I I APPENDIXA

SUMMARY OF CALPUFF CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I I I 

# I I 

# ;1



# I I I

# I I

APPENDIX A 

# I SUMMARYOF CALPUFF CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I CLASS I AREAVISIBILTY ANALYSISAND BARTWAIVER**REQUE~T** 

### TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA). INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I I I I I I 

# I I

I I I Variable

IBMO IBDY XBTZ

IRlG

NSPEC NSE METFM AVET

MGAUSS MCTADJ

MCTSG**,~,** 

### '" MTRANS MTIP MBDW

MSHEAR MSPLIT

MCHEM MAQC MWET MDRY

MDISP

MTURBVW

MDISP2 MROUGH MPARTL IMTINV

TIBl MBCON MFOG

MREG Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS Control parameterfor running all periods in met file (O=no; 1=yes) 0 Y All model penod in metfile{s) will be run StartingyearofCALPUFF run 2001 nla 2002 and 2003 also modeled Starting month 1 nla StartinQ day 

### I 1 n/a Base time zone (6=CSn 6 nla Central standard time 2002

### = 8760 hours length ofthe run (hours)

. 8760 nla 2003" 8746 hours (0 hourson 12131/03) NumberofMESPUFF II chemical species Total numberofspecies modeled 7 

### 5 modeled Numberofspecies emitted 

### 4 

### 3 Meteorological data format 

### 1 Y CAlMET binary file (CAlMET.MEn**~time** (minutes) 60 Y time (minutes) for PG 60 Y INPUTGROUP 2: TECHNICAL OPTIONS Control variable determiningthe vertical distribution used in the nearfield 

### 1 Y Gaussian distribution used in nearfield Terrain adjustment method 

### 3 Y Partial plume path adjustment CAlPUFF sub-grid scale complexterrain module Sub-grid scale complexterrain not IC 0 Y modeled
as elongated 0 Y No Transitional plume rise modeled? 1 Y Transitional plume rise modeled Stack tip downwash modeled? 1 Y Stacktip downwash used Method used to simulate building downwash? 

### 2 N PRIME method used Verticalwind shearabove stacktop modeled plume rise? 0 Y No Puffsplitting allowed? 

### 0 Y No Transformation rates computed intemally Chemical mechanism flag 1 Y IMESOPUFF II scheme)
us phase transformationflag 0 Y AQUeous phase not modeled Wet removal modeled? 1 Y Yes Dry deposition modeled? 1 Y Yes

PG dispersion coefficients in RURAL areas Method used to compute disperion coefficients 

### 3 Y and MPcoefficients in urban areas Sigma-v/sigma-theta. sigma-w measurements Use both sigma-vlsigma-theta from PROFILE-DATtocompute sigma-y and used? 3 3 sigma-z
Backup method used·to compute dispersion when PG dispersion coefficients in RURALareas measured turbulence data are missing 3 Y and MP coefficients in urban areas PG siQma-y. z adiustements for roughness? 0 Y No Partial plume penetration ofelevated inversion? 1 Y Yes Strength oftemperature inversion 0 

### Y No PDF used fordispersion underconvective conditions? 0 Y No Sub-gridTIBl Module used for shoreline? 

### 0 Y No Boundaryconditions (concentration) modeled? 0 Y No Configure for FOG model output 0 Y No

TESToptions specified to see ifthey conformto Technical options mustconform to USEPA regulatory values? 1 Y long Range Tansport {LRn guidance 

# o I I

# I I I 

# I I 

# I 

# I

I 

# I I I 

# I 

# 8 I 

# I I 

# I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUT GROUP 3: Species List DryDeposition (O=none, 1=computed

gas, 2=computed Emitted particle, 3=user 

## CSPEC Modeled (1=yes, O=no) (1=yes, O=no) specified) Output Group Number(O=none) S02 1 

### 0 1 

### 0 S04 1

# ~ 2 

### 0 NOx 1 1 

### 0 HN03 1 1 

### 0 N03 1 2 

### 0 PMC 1 1 2 

### 0 PMF 1 1 2 0 INPUT GROUP 4: Map Projection and Grid Control Parameters PMAP Map projection LCC N Lambert conformal conic FEAST False Eastina 

### 0 Y FNORT False Northina 0 Y RLATO Latitude of projection oriQin 40N nfa Latitude of proiection oiiQ!n RLONG Lonaitude of projection oriain 97W nfa lonQitude ofproiection omiln XLAT1 33N nfa iXLAT2 Matchina parallel of latitude for projection 45N nfa WGS-B4 GRS 80 spheroid, global DATUM Datum reQion forthe coordinates WGS-G N coveraae IWGSB4) NX No, X grid cells in metgrid 306 NY No. Y grid cells in metgrid 246 NZ No vertical layers in metarid 10 nfa DGRIDKM Grid soacina (km) I 8 nfa 0,20,40, BO,

., 160, 320, 640, 1200,2000, iZFACE Cell face heights (m) 3000,4000 nfa XORIGKM Reference X coordinate ofSWcorner of meteorological grid cell (km) n/a Reference Y coordinate of SWcomer of YORIGKM meteorological grid cell (km) -1620 n/a Computation,,1 Grid IBCOMP X index of lower leftcomer 88 JBCOMP . Y index oflower left comer 164 IECOMP X index of upper right comer 175 JECOMP Y index ofupper right comer 248 n/a LSAMP Loaical flag indicating ifsampling grid is used F T Samolina arid is not used Sampling Grid IBSAMP X index oflower leftcorner 

### 88 JBSAMP Y index oflower left comer 184 IESAMP X index ofupper right comer 175 Must be equal 

### to or a subset ofthe JESAMP Y index ofupperright comer 246 computational grid factor ofsampling grid 1 Y INPUTGROUP 5: OutputOptions 1 :: create file, 0 '" do notcreate file; Outputfile CONC.DAT containing concentrations Concentrations saved for S02, S04, NOX, ICON is created 1 Y HN03, N03 PM2.5, PM10 Outputfile DFLX.DAT lORY created Y Outputfile WFLX.DAT containing concentrations IWET is created 1 Y Outputfile containing relative humidity data is IVIS created 1 Y LCOMPRS Perform data compression in outout file T Y Create standard series ofoutput files suitable for 

## Iplotting? 1 

### Y 1=ves, 0

# = no Mass flux across specified boundaries for selected ilMFLX species reported? 0 Y Do not calculate mass flux

IIMRAI Mass balance for each species not Mass balance for each species reported? 0 Y reported ICPRT Printconcentrationfields to the output list file? 0 Y 1;;; print 0

### =do notorint IDPRT Printdryfluxes to the output listfile? 0 Y IWPRT Printwetfluxes

### to the output listfile? 0 Y Concentrationfields are printed to output list file 1

# = g/m3for concentration, g/m3/s for ICFRQ every hour 1 Y deoosition

# I I I 

# I I 

# I

I I I I I 

# I I I 

# I 

# I I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments Dry fluxfields are printed to output listfile every IOFRQ hour 1 Y Wetflux fields are printed tooutput list file every IWFRQ hour 1 Y 1- 91m3 for concentration. gim2lsfor IPRTU Units for line printeroutput 1 Y deposition Messages tracking the progress of run written to 2

# = yes

### \fYYYJJJHH. 

### # old puffs. 

### # IMESG screen 2 Y emitted puffs) LDEBUG LOQical value for debug output F Y IPFDEB Firstpufftotrack 1 Y NPFDEB Numberof puffs to track 1000 N NNl Met period to start output 1 Y NN2 Met period toend output 8760 N INPUT GROUP

### 6: Subgrid scale complexterrain inputs (CTSG)

NHILL Number ofterrain features 0 Y NCTREC Numberofspecial complexterrain receptors 0 Y Input terrain and receptor data for CTSG hills MHILL input in CTDMformat 

## 2 nla 2 = Hill data created by OPTHILL Conversion factor forchanging horizontal XHIlL2M dimensions to meters 1 Y Conversion factor for changing vertical ZHIlL2M dimensions to meters 1 Y X origin ofCDTM system relative to CALPUFF XCTDMKM coordinate system (km) 0.0 E+OO nla Y origin ofCOTM system relative to CALPUFF YCTDMKM coordinate system (km) 0.0 E+OO nla INPUT GROUP

### 7: Chemical Parametersfor Dry Deposition ofGases

SPECIES Chemical parameters for dry deposition ofgases 

## - Y S02 NOX HN03 :DIFFUSIVITY Y 0.1509 0.1656 0.1628 TAR Y 1000 1 1 lTV Y 8 8 18 MESO RES Y 0 5 0 HENRYSC Y 0.04 3.S 8.0E-8 INPUT GROUP 

### 8: Size Parametersfordrydepositionofparticles SPECIES S04 Geometric mass mean diameter (Ilm) 0.48 0.48 Standard deviation" 2.0 N03 Geometric mass mean diameter (Ilm) 0.48 2.0 Standard deviation = 2.0 IPMC Geometric mass mean diameter OJm) 6.0 2.0 Standard deviation

- 2.0 PMF Geometric mass mean diameter (Ilm) 0.48 2.0 Standard deviation

- 2.0 INPUT GROUP

### 9: Miscellaneous Dry Deposition Parameters RCUTR Reference cuticle resistance Wem) 30 Y RGR Reference ground resistance (stem) 10 Y REACTR Reference pollutant reactivity 8 Y Numberofparticlesize intervals to evaluate NINT effective particle deposition velocity 

### 9 Y 1=vegitation in non-irrigated areas is active IVEG Vegetation state in non,irrigated areas 1 Y and unstressed INPUT GROUP 

### 10: Wet DepoSition Parameters SPECIES 

# =

coefficientfor liquid precip (5' ) 3.21E-5 S02 coefficentforfrozen precip (5") 0 Y Scavenging coefficient for liquid precip (5' ) 1.0E-4 S04 Scavenging coefficentforfrozen precip (5") 3.0E-5 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (s' ) 6.0E-5 HN03 Scavenging coefficentfor frozen precip (s"} 0 Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (5' ) 1.0E-4 N03 Scavenging coefficentfor frozen precip (5") 3.0E-5 Y Scavenging coefficient for liquid precip (5' ) 1.0E-4 PMC Scavenging coefficentforfrozen precip (s·') 3.0E-S Y Scavenging coefficientfor liquid precip (5' ) 1.0E-4 PMF Scavenging coefficentforfrozen precip (5") 3.0E·S Y INPUT GROUP 

### 11: Chemistry Parameters

MOZ Ozone inputdata option 1 N 1=use a monthly background ozone value

BCK03 Monthly background ozone concentrations (ppb) 12'40 N

# I I I I



# I I

I I I I I I 

# u I I 

# I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments BCKNH3 Monthly background NH3 concentrations (ppb) 12'3 N RNITEl Nighttime S02 loss rate in percent/hour 0.2 Y RNITE2 Nighttime NOx loss rate in percentlhour 2.0 Y RNITE3 Nighttime HN03formation rate in percent/hour 2.0 Y

MH202 H202 data inputoption 1 Y Aqueous phasetransformations not modeled (MQACHEM = 0, not used)

BCKH202 Backaround monthlv H202 concentrations 1 Y Aqueous phase transformations not modeled (MQACHEM '" 0, not used) BCKPMF OFRAC VCNX Fine particulate concentration for SOA option Organicfraction offine particulate VOC/NOx ration for SOA option 1 0.2 50 Y Y Y MCHEM 1, therefore, SOA option not used INPUTGROUP 12: Dispersion and Computational Parameters

SYDEP Horizontal Size ofa puff in meters beyond which the lime dependant dispersion equation of Heffler is used 550 Y

MHFTSZ Switchfor using Hefflerequation forsigma z as above 0 Y Do not use Hefflerformulas for siQma z

JSUP Stability class used to determine plume growth rates for puffs above boundary layer 5 Y

CONKl Vertical dispersion constantfor stable conditions 0.01 Y

CONK2 Vertical dispersion constantfor neutral/unstable conditions 0.1 Y

TBD Factor determining transition pointfrom Schulman Scireto Huber-Snyder building 0.5 Y Use ISCtransition point

IURBl Lower range ofland use categoriesfor which urban dispersion is assumed 10 Y METFM=l, notused

IURB2 Upper range ofland use categories forwhich urban dispersion is assumed 19 Y METFM=l notused ILANDUIN Land usecateaorvfor modellnQ domain



## -­ 

## - METFM=1, not used ZOIN Roughness length for modeling domain (m) 

## - - METFM=l, notused XLAIIN Leafarea indexfor modelina domain


# -­ - METFM=l not used ELEVIN Elevation above sea level


# - - METFM-1, not used XLATIN Latitude (degrees)

### for met location 

# - - METFM=l not used XLONIN Longitude (degrees) for met location 

# - - METFM-l not used ANEMHT Anemometer height (m)


# - - METFM-l not used ISIGMAV Form oflateralturbulence data in PROFILE.OAT 1 Y Read sigma v IMIXCTDM Choice ofmixing heights



## - 

# - METFM=l not used

XMXLEN Maximum length ofemitted SIU? in m.eteorological grid units 1 Y

XSAMLEN Maximumtravel distance ofa puff/slug during one sampling unit 1 Y

MXNEW Maximum numberofpuffs orslugs released from
one source during onetime step 99 Y

MXSAM Maximum numberofsampling steps during one time step 99 Y

NCOUNT Numberofiterations used when computing the transport wind for a sampling stepthat includes transitional plume rise 2 Y SYMIN Minimum sigma

### yfora new puff/slug (m) 1 Y SZMIN Minimum Sigma z fora new puff/slug (m) 1 Y

SVMIN Minimum lateral turbulence velocities (m/s) for each stability class 0.5 Y

SWMIN Minimum vertical turbulence velocities (m/s) for each stability class



## -­ Y A B C 0 E F 0.2 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.016

CDIV Divergence criterion for dw/dz across puffused to initiate adjustmentfor horizontal convergence 0,0 Y WSCALM Minimum non-calmwind speeds (mls) 0.5 Y XMAXZl Maximum mixing heightem) 3000 y XMINZ1 Minimum mixing height (m) 20 N

WSCAT Default wind speed classes



# -­ Y 1 2 3 4 

### 5 1.54 3.09 5.14 8.23 10.80

PLXO Defaultwind speed profile power-lawexponents for stabilities 1-6


# - Y (lSC RURAL) A B C 0 E F 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.15 0.35 0.55

PTGO Default potentialtemperature gradient for stable classes E, F (deg KIm) 0.020.0.035 Y

PPC Default plumepath coefficients foreach stability class 

## - Y A 

### B 

### C 

### 0 E F 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.35 0.35 SL2PF Maximum Sy/pufflength 10 Y

NSPLIT Numberofpuffs that result everytime a puff is split 3 Y

# I I I I 

# u I I I I I I I I I 

# D 

# I I 

# '1 Variable Description InoutValue Default? Comments

# ~TI~ of d",

### who,

..' '''''

# 'ffi ."bO

### to '"

# "II'

: once again (typically once perday, around sunset IRE before nocturnal sheardevelops)

. Hour17::o1 

### Y ZISPL Previous hours mimimum mixing height (m) 100 

### Y Previous max mixing heightlcurrent mixing height ratio, must be lessthan this value to al10w puffto ROLDMAX split 0.25 

### Y NSPLITH Numberofpuffs resulting from a splil 

### 5 

### Y SYSPLITH**Minim~** before it

### maysplit 1 

### Y Minimum p rete duetowind shear SHSPLITH before it 

### maysplit 2 

### Y Minimum concentration ofeach species in puff CNSPLITH before itmay be split 1.00E-07 Y EPSSLUG Criterion for SLUG sampling 1.DOE-04 Y EPSAREA Criterion for area source integration 1.DDE-D6 Y

DSRISE Trajectory step-length for numerical rise algorithm 1 

### Y Minimum height (m) towhich BC puffs are mixed HTMINBC asthey are.emitted. 500 Y Search radius (in BC segment lengths) about a RSAMPBC receptorfor sampling nearest BC puff. 10 Y Near-surface depletion adjustmentto concentration profile used when sampling BC MDEPBC puffs? 1 Y Adiustconcentration for depletion INPUTGROUP 13: Point Source Parameters NPT1 Numberof point sources with parameters 11 nla IPTU Unitsfor pointsource emission rates 3 N 3

# = Iblhr Numberofpoint source-species combinations NSPT1 with variable emissions scaling factors 0 Y Numberofpoint sourceswith variable emission NPT2 Iparameters provided in external file 0 nla Other point source parameters include stack height (H), stack diameter (d), exittemperature (T), exit velocity (v), downwash flag and emissions MISC 

# Ibyspecies


## - nla INPUTGROUP 14: Area Source Parameters. Not Used
INPUTGROUP 15: Line Source Parameters· Not Used
INPUTGROUP 16:Volume Source Parameters· Not Used
INPUTGROUP 17: Non-gridded (Discrete) Receptor Information NREC INumberof non..gridded receptors 

### 59 nla Wichita Mountains NWR

# I I I I 

# I I 

# g I I 

# I APPENDIX B

SUMMARY OF POSTUTIL CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I I I I I 

# I I I I

# I 

# I

APPENDIX B 

# I SUMMARY OF POSTUTILCONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I CLASS I AREAVISIBIL TVANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA). INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I 

# I I 

# I D 

# I 

# I I I 

# I 

# I I I 

# I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 

### 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS ISYR Starting year 2001 nla 2002 and 2003 also modeled ISMO Slartina month 1 nla 2002 and 2003 also modeled IDY StartinQ day 1 n/a ISHR StartinQ hour 1 nla

NPER Numberofperiods 10 process 8760 nla 2002 :: 8760 hours 2003 = 8746 hours (0 hours on 12131103)

NSPECINP Numberofspecies to process from CALPUFF
runs 7 nla NSPECOUT Numberofspecies towrite to outputfile 9 n/a

NSPECCMP Numberofspecies tocompute from those modeled 2 n/a MDUPLCT Stop run 

### ifduplicate species namesfound? 0 Y Multiplefiles are not used NSCALED NumberofCALPUFF data files to 'scale' 0 Y

MNITRATE Re-compute the HN03/N03 partition for concentrations? 0 Y Ammonia limiting method not used

BCKNH3 Defaultammonia concentration used for HN03/N03 partition 0 n/a Nobackground used

AVET Averaging time (minutesL 60 Y PGTIME Averaging time (minutesl for PG 60 Y INPUTGROUP 

### 2: SPECIES PROCESSING INFORMATION

ASPECI NSPECINP specieswill be processed


# - n/a S02. S04. NOX. HN03, N03, PMF. PMC

ASPECO NSPECOUTspecieswill be written



## -­ n/a S02. S04, NOX, HN03, N03, PMF, PMC, N,S

CSPECCMP Nitrogen species to be computed by scaling and summing one ormoreofthe processed input species using the scaling factors for each ofthe NSPECINP input species



## - n/a CSPECCMP-N S02 =0.0 S04 = 0.291667 NO 

### = 0.466667 N02= 0.304348 HN03

# =0.222222 N03= 0.451613 PMC = 0.0 PMF= 0,0

CSPECCMP Sulfurspecies to becomputed by scaling and summing one ormore ofthe processed input sPE!Cies using the scaling factors foreach ofIhe NSPECINP input species



### -­ n/a CSPECCMP=S S02= 0.50 S04 = 0.333333 NO = 0.0 N02= 0.0 HN03 = 0.0 N03: 0.0 PMC =0.0 PMF::0.0

MODDAT Each species in NSCALED CALPUFF data files may be scaled before processing.


# - - This oplion was nol used

# I I I I 

# I I I 

# I I I APPENDIXC
SUMMARY OF CALPOST CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I 

# I I I I 

# I, I I I

# I I

APPENDIXC 

# I SUMMARYOFCALPOST CONTROL FILE INPUTS 

# I CLASS IAREAVISIBILTVANALYSISAND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL(OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD PLANT 

# I 

# I I I I I I 

# .1 I I I 

# I 

# I I I Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments INPUTGROUP 1: GENERAL RUN CONTROL PARAMETERS METRUN Option to run all periodsfound in metfiles O. Y Run period explicitly defined ISYR Starting year 2001 

### nfa 2002 and 2003 also modeled 

# I Startin!l month 

### 1 nla 2002 and 2003 also modeled Starting day 

### 1 n/a Starting hour 1 nla 2002 = 8760 hours NHRS Numberofperiodsto process 8760 

### nfa 2003

# = 8746 hours (0 hours on 12131f03) NREP Process every hourofdata? 

### 1 Y Every hour processed ASEPC Speciesto process VISIB nla Visibility processin!l

. ILAYER 

# I**Layerl~e;SitiOn** code 1 Y CALPUFF concentrations A B s X (new)

# = X (old) • A+B 0,0 Y No scalina factors used LBACK ckground concentrationslfluxes? F Y MSOURCE Optionto process source contributions 0 Y LG Gridded receptors processed? F N LD Discrete receptors processed? T Y Receptors located in Class Iarea LCT CTSGcomplex terrain receptors processed? F Y LORING**~rt** results by DISCRETE receptor RING? 

### F Y for all receptors afterthe last one assigned is NDRECP setto "0" 

### ·1 Y Selectall discrete receptors IBGRID IX index of lower leftcomer ofindexgrid ·1 Y Entire arid processed if LG=T JBGRIO I Y indexoflowerleftcomerof index grid ·1 Y

## ~""'t~~;",""id -1 Y JE right comerofindex grid 

### -1 Y NG Number ofgridded receptor rows 0 Y NGXRECP Exclude specifiC gridded receptors 1 0 Gridded receptor not processed INPUTGROUP

### 2; SPECIES PROCESSING INFORMATION Particle growth curve f(RH) for hygroscopic MFRH !species 2 Y FLAG (2000) f(RH) tabulation RHMAX Maximum RH (%) used in particle growth curve 98 Y Not used LVS04 Compute light extinction forsulfate? T Y LVN03 Compute lightextinction for nitrate? T Y LVOC Compute lightextinction for organiccarbon? F N LVPMC Compute lightextinction forcoarse particles? T Y LVPMF Compute light extinction for fine particles? T Y lVEC Compute lightextinction for elemental carbon? F N LVBK Include background in extinction calculation? T Y SPECPMC Course particulate species PMC Y SPECPMF Fine particulate species PMF 

### Y I EEPMC Extinction efficiencyforcoarse particulates 0.6 Y EEPMF Ovtinl"tir>n efficiencyforfine particulates 1.0 

### Y Extinction efficiencyfor background course EEPMCBK Qarticulates 0.6 Y EES04 Extinction efficiencyfor ammonium sulfate 3.0 Y EEN03 Extinction efficiencyfor ammonium nitrate 3.0 Y EEOC Extinction efficiencyfororganiccarbon 4.0 

### Y EESOIL Extinction efficiencyforsoil 1.0 

### Y EEEC Extinction efficiencyforelemental carbon 10.0 Y LAVER Background extinctioncomputation F Y Method 6 used for background light extinction. Computeextinction from speciated PM measurements. FLAG RH adjustmentfactorapplied toobserved and MVISBK Method used for background lightextinction 6 N modeled sulfate and nitrate.

Extinction coefficients for modeled and Factorsfrom EPA (2003) guidance baCkground hygroscopic species computed using document, Table A-3, used for Wichita RHFAC EPA(2003) monthly RH adjustmentfactors 

## - nfa Mountains NWR BKS04 l!!ac;kground sulfate extinction coefficient 0.12 nla BKN03 Background nitrate extinction coefficient 0.10 nla

# I



# I I 

# I I I I I 

# I 

# I I I I I I I I i Variable Description InputValue Default? Comments Background coarse particulate extinction BKPMC coefficient 3.0 nla 

## iBKOC Background organic carbon extinction coefficient 0.47 nla BKSOll 0,50 Background soil extinction coefficient nla Background elemental carbon extinction BKSEC 0,02 coefficient nla Extinction dueto Rayleigh scattering (llMm) BEXTRAY 10 Y 

### INPUT GROUP 3: OUTPUT OPTIONS Print documentation image? Y Printoutput units**(~g/m·)** for concentrations and**(~glm2/sec)** for IPRTU LOOC 

### F

Units forall output '3 N deposition L1HR Report 1 houraveraging times N L3HR 

### F Report 3 hour averaging times 

### F N L24HR Report 24 hour averaging times T Y LRUNL Report run-length (annual) averaging times N LT50 

### F Top 50 table N LTOPN 

### F F, Top 'N' table Y NTOP Numberoftop 'N' values ateach recePtor' Y ITOP 

### F Ranks oftop 'N' values ateach receptor 0 nla Y THRESH1 our average 

### F LEXCD**~d** exceedance counts 

### Y THRESH3 -1 Averaging timethreshold for 3 houraverage -1 Y THRESH24 Averaging timethreshold for 24 houraverage -1 Y THRESHN Averagingtimethreshold for NAVG-hraverage -1 Y NDAY Y NCOUNT Accumulation period, days 0 Y LECHO tion 1 

# I**Numbe~** ofexceedances allowed 

### F 'Y LTIME rles option Y LPEAK 

### F Peak value option 

### F Y IECHO Days selected for output Y LPLT 366"0 Plotfile option 

### F Y LGRD Y Create file of DAilY (24 hour) DeltaMDVIS Grid fonnat option 

### F

N**Ou~ut** file with visibilitychange at each receptor? 1 Deciview LDEBUG Y**Ou~ut** infonnation for debugging? 

### F

# I 

# I I I 

# I I I I I 

# I APPENDIX D
MONTHLYf(RH) VALUES FOR CLASS IAREAS 

# I I I 

# I I 

# I 

# I' I 

# I

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

GuidaltceforEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertlteRegionalHazeRule

TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specificf(RH) Values forEachMandatoryFederalClassI Area, Based on the CentroidoftheArea (SupplementalInformation)

.

Class IArea Site Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sap Site Name MaplD Code St LAT LONG f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RHI Oct f(RHI Nov f(RH) Dec f(RH) Acadia Agua Tibia Alpine lakes Anaconda

- PinUer Ansel Adams Arches Badlands Bandelier Bering Sea (a) Big Bend Black Canyon ofthe Gunnison Bob Marshall Bosquedel Apache BoundaryWatersCanoe Area Breton Bridger Brigantine Bryce Canyon CabinetMountains CaneyCreek Canyonlands Cape Romain Capitol Reef Caribou Carlsbad Caverns Chassahowitzka Chirlcahua NM Chiricahua W Cohutta Craterlake Cratersofthe Moon Cucamonga Denali Desolation Diamond Peak Dolly Sods Dome land Eagle Cap Eagles Nest Acadia 1 ACADl ME 44.37 68.26 3.3 2.9 2.B 

### 3.4 3.1 3.0 3.4 3.6 4.0 Agua Tibia 100 AGTll CA 33.41 116.98 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 Snoqualmie Pass 80 SNPA1 WA 47.42 1.21.42 4.3 3.6 3.5 3.9 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.1 3.3 Sula 71 SULA1 MT 45.98

. 113.42 3.3 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 2.1 Kaiser 110 KAISl CA 37.65 119.20 3.0 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 Canyonlands 50 CANYl UT 38.64 109.56 2.6 2.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Badlands 59 BADl1 SO

. 43.74 101.94 2.6 2.7 2.6 2,4 2.8 2.7 2:5 2,4 2.2 Bandelier 33 BANDl NM 35.78 106.27 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.7 2.1 1.9 60,45 172.79 Big Bend 31 BIBEl TX 29.31 103.19 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.1 Weminuche 55 WEMll CO 38.58 107.70 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.6 1.7 1.9 .2.0 Monture 73 MONTl MT 47.75 113.38 3.6 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.2 2.6 Bosque del Apache 38 BOAPl NM 33.79 106.83 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.3

. 1.8 2.0 1.9 BoundaryWaters 23 BOWA1 MN 47.95 91.50 3.0 2.6 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.5 Breton 20 BRET1 lA 29.73 88.88 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.2 Bridger 65 BRIDl WY 42.98 109.76 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.7 Brigantine 

### 5 BRIGl NJ 39.46 74.45 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.7 3.6 Bryce Canyon 49 BRCAl UT 37.62 112.17 2.6 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 CabinetMountains 75 CABi1 MT 48.21 115.71 3.8 3.3 2.9 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.2 2.6 CaneyCreek 29 CACR1 AR 34.41 94.06 3.4 3.1 2.9 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.6 Canyonlands 50 CANY1 UT 36.46 109.82 2.6 2.3 

### 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 Cape Romain 15 RaMAl SC 32.94 79.66 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.8 3.2 3.7 3.6 4.1 4.0 Capitol Reef 52 CAPll UT 38.36 111.05 2.7 2.4 2.0 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 lassenVolcanic 90 lAV01 CA 40.50 121.18 3.7 3.1 2.8 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.2 Guadalupe Mountains 32 GUMOl TX 32.14 104.46 2.1 2.0 1.e 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.1

. 2.2 Chassahowitzka 18 CHAS1 Fl 26.75 82.55 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.9 3.9 4.2 4.1 Chiricahua 39 CHIRl 

### AZ 32.01 109.39 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.8 2.1 1.6 Chiricahua 39 CHIR1 

### AZ 31.84 109.27 2.0 1.9 • 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.8 2.1 1.8 Cohutta 12 COHUl GA 34.92 64.58 3.3 3.1 3.0 2.8 3.4 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.2 Craterlake 86 CRLA1 OR 42.90 122.13 4.6 3.9 3.7 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.9 3.1 Cratersofthe Moon 69 CRMOl 10 43.47 113.55 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.6 San Gabriel 93 SAGA1 CA 34.25 117.57 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 Denali 102 DENAl AK 63.72 148.97 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.2 2.5 3.0 2.6 Bliss 95 BLiSl CA 38.98 120.12 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 Crater lake 86 CRLAl OR 43.53 122.10 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.7 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.9 3.1 Dolly Sods 8 00501 WV 39.11 79.43 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.9 3.9 Dome land 109 DOMEl CA 35.70 118.19 2.5 2.3 2.2

. 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 Starkey 76 STARl OR 45.10 117.29 3.6 3.2 2.5 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.6 White River 56 WHRll CO 39.69 106.25 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.8 2.0 

### 2.0 3.6 2.3 3.9 2.5 1.6 1.6 2.3 1.7

1.9 1.8 2.9 1.6 2.8 3.7 2.0 3.3 1.6 3.0 3.5 1.6 3.7 1.7 2.4 1.8 3.9 1.5 1.5 3.6 3.6 2.0 2.2 2.9 1.9 3.7 3.3 1.9 2.3 1.9 3.6 2.1 4.5 3.2 2.3 2.0 2.7 2.0

1.8 2.1 3.5 1.8 3.2 3.7 2.4 2.9 2.0 3.7 3.4 2.0 3.4 2.1 3.0 1.9 3.7 1.6 1.6 3.4 4.6 2.8 2.1 3.0 2.4 4.6 3.0 2.0 3.4 2.1 3.5 2.2 4.5 3.3 2.7 2.3 2.7 2.2

1.9 2.3 3.5 2.2 3.2 3.7 2.4 2.6 2.4 3.9 3.5 2.3 3.2 2.5 3.4 .2.1 3.9 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.6 3.0 2.2 3.1 3.0 '4.6 3.1 2.2 4.0 2.1



# A -10

# •

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ­

Guidance!orEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertheRegionalHazeRule
TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specific f(RH) Values for EachMandatoryFederalClassI Area, Basedon theCentroid oftheArea (SupplementalInformation)

Class IArea Site Site Name 

### Ma 10 Code 

### st LAT LONG Emigrant Everglades Fitzpatrick FlatTops Galiuro Gates ofthe Mountains GearhartMountain Gila Glacier Glacier Peak Goat Rocks Grand Canyon Grand Teton Great Gulf Great Sand Dunes GreatSmoky Mountains Guadalupe Mountains Haleakala Hawaii Volcanoes Hells Canyon Hercules·Glade Hoover Isle Royale James River Face Jarbidge John Muir Joshua Tree Joyce Kilmer· Slickrock Kaiser Kalmlopsis Kings Canyon la Garita lassenVolcanic lava Beds I.:invilfe Gorge Lostwood Lye Brook Mammoth Cave Marble Mountain Yosemite 96 YOSEl CA 38.20 119.75 Everglades 19 EVERl FL 25.39 80.68 Bridger 65 BRIDl WY 43.27 109.57 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 White River 56 WHRll CO

_39.97 107.25 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.9 Chiricahua 39 CHIRl 

### PZ. 32.56 110.32 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.8 Gates ofthe Mountains 74 GAMOl MT 46.87 111.81 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.0 1.9 CraterLake 86 CRLAl OR 42.49 120.85 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.3 Gila Cliffs 42 GICL1 NM 33.22 108.25 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.2 2.1 2.0 Glacier 72 GlACl MT 48.51 114.00 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 2.8 2.6 North Cascades 81 NOCAl WA 48.21 121.04 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.8 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.1 White Pass 79 WHPAI WA 46.54 121.48 4.3 3.8 3.4 4.2 2.8 3.4 3.0 3.2 Grand Canyon, Hance 48 GRCA2 

### PZ. 35.97 111.98 2.4 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.7 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 WY 43.68 110.73 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 GreatGulf 4 GRGUI NH 44.31 71.22 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.8 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 Great Sand Dunes 53 GRSAI CO 37.73 105.52 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 2.3 Great SmokyMountains 10 GRSMI TN 35.63 83.94 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.7 3.2 3.9 3.8 4.0 Guadalupe Mountains 32

. GUMOI TX

. 31.83 104.80 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.9 2.2 Haleakala 108 HAlEl HI 20.81 156.28 2.7 2.6 2'.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 Hawaii Volcanoes 107 HAVOI HI 19.43 155.27 3.2 

## i9 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.1 3.2 Hells Canyon 77 HECAI OR 45.34 116.57 3.7 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 Hercules·Glade 28 HEGll MO 36.69 92.90 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 Hoover 97 HOOVI CA 38.14 119.45 3.1 2.8 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.5 Isle Royale 25

- ISlEl MI 47.99 88.83 3.1 2.5 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.6 3.0 3.2 James River Face 7 JARII VA 37.62 79.48 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.4 3.0 3.3 3.4 3.7 Jarbidge 68 JARBl NV 41.89 115.43 3.0 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2­ 1.6 1.4 Kaiser 110 KAISI CA 37.39 118.84 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 

### L7 1.7 1.7 Joshua Tree 101 JOSHI CA 34.03 116.18 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.0 Great SmokyMountains 10 GRSMI TN 35.43 84.00 3.3 3.1 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.8 4.0 4.2 Kaiser 110 KAISI CA 37.28 119.18 3.0 2.7 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.7 Kalmiopsis 89 KAlMl OR 42.27 123.93 4.5 3.9 3.B 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.2 Sequoia 98 SEOUl CA 36.82 118.76 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.7 Wemlnuche 55 WEMII CO 37.96 106.81 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.1 lassenVolcanic 90 LAVOl CA 40.54 121.57 3.B 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 lava Beds 87· lABEl CA 41.71 121.34 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.3 Linville Gorge 13 lIG01 NC 35.89 81.89 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.1 4.5 lostwood 62 lOSTl ND 48.60 102.48 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.3 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.4 lye Brook 3 LYBRI VT 43.15 73.12 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 Mammoth Cave 9 MACAI KY 37.22 86.07 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.6 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.9 Trinity 104 TRINI CA 41.52 123.21 4.4 3.8 3.7 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 1.7 1.9 1.6 2.1 2.4 1.8 3.2 3.3 3.1 1.6 1.7 4.0 2.2 4.2 2.2 2.4 3.2 1.8 3.4 1.6 3.8 3.6 1.4 1.7 2.0 4.2 1.7 3.3 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 4.4 2.3 3.7 3.9 3.2 2.0 1.8 1.5 2.4 2.8 1.6 3.5 3.9 3.8 1.6 2.0 3.4 1.9 3.8 1.8 2.5 3.2 2.4 3.1 1.8 2.7 3.2 1.6 1.9 2.0 3.8 1.9 3.6 1.9 1.8 2.4 2.7 3.7 2.4 3.3 3.4 3.4 2.4 2.2 1.6 2.8 3.7 1.8 3.8 4.4 4.4 1.9 2.4 3.1 2.4 3.3 1.9 2.8 3.7 3.5 3.1 2.3 3.3 2.8 2.4 2.2 1.9 3.3 2.3 4.4 2.3 2.2 3.1 3.5 3.2 3.2 2.9 3.2 4.1 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.8 3.8 2.2 3.9 4.4 4.6 2.3 2.6 2.9 2.4 3.4 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.9 3.3 2.8 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.0 3.5 2.7 4.3 2.5 2.3 3.5 3.8 3.4 3.2 2.8 3.5 4.2 Maroon Bells·Snowmass White River 56 WHRll CO 39.15 106.82 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.1 2.1



# A -11

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Guidance forEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions UndertlteRegionalHazeRule


# TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specific f(RH) Values for EachMandatoryFederalClass I Area, Based on the Centroid oftheArea(SupplementalInformation)

Class IArea Site Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sits Name MaD 

### 10 Code 

### St tAT LONG f(RHI f(RHI flRHI flRHI f(RH, f(RH, f(RH, f(RH) Sep f(RHI Oct flRH) Nov f(RH) Dec f(RH) Mazatzal Medicine Lake MesaVerde Mingo Mission Mountains Mokelumne Moosehorn MountAdams MountBaldy Mount Hood Mount Jefferson Mount Rainier MountWashington MountZirkel Mountain Lakes North Absaroka North Cascades Okefenokee OlympiC Otter Creek Pasay1en Pecos Petrified Forest Pine Mountain Pinnacles Point Reyes Presidential Range

- 

### Dry River Rawah Red Rock Lakes Redwood Rocky Mountain RooseveltCampobello Saguaro Saint Marks SaltCreek San Gabriel SanGorgonio SanJacinto San PedroParks San Rafael Ike's Backbone 46 IKBAl AZ 33.92 111.43 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.7 Medicine Lake 63 MEtAl MT 48.50 104.29 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.5 2.2 MesaVerde 54 MEVEl CO 37.20 108.49 2.5 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 2.0 Mingo 26 MINGl MO 36.98 90.20 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.6 3.0 3.2, 3.3 3.5 Monture 73 MONT1 MT 47.40 113.85 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.2 Bliss 95 BLISl CA 38.58 120.03 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.6 Moosehorn 2 MOOSl ME 45.12 67.26 3.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.8 White Pass 79 WHPAl WA 46.19 121.50 4.3 3.8 3.4 4.4 2.9 3.5 3.1 3.3 Mount Baldy 43 BALOl AZ 34.12 109.57 2.2 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.6 1.9 Mount Hood 85 MOHOl OR 45.38 121.69 4.3 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.0 3.2 2.9 '3.0 Three Sisters 84 THSll OR 44.55 121.83 4.4 3.9 3.6 3.7 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.9 Mount Rainier 78 MORAl WA 46.76 122.12 4.4 4.0 3.6 4.7 3.1 3.7 3.3 3.5 Three Sisters 84 THSll OR 44.30 121.87 4.4 3.9 3.6 3.7 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 MountZirkel 58 MOZll CO 40.55 106.70 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.9 CraterLake 86 CRLAl OR 42.34 122.11 4.3 3.6 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.6 2.5 2.5 North Absoraka 67 NOABl WY 44.77 109.76 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 North Cascades 81 NOCAl WA 48.54 121.44 4.1 3.7 3.4 3.7 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 Okefenokee 16 OKEFl GA 30.74 82.13 3.5 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.6 3.7 3.7 4.1 Olympic 63 OLYMl WA 47.32 123.35 4.5 4.1 3.8 4.1 3.2 3.5 3.1 3.5 Dolly Sods 8 OOSOl 

### WV 39.00 79.65 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6 3.2 3.5 3.7 4.1 Pasayten 82 PASAl WA 48.65 120.52 4.2 3.7 3.4 3.7 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 WheelerPeak 35 WHPEl NM 35.93 105.64 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.8 2.1 Petrified Forest 41 PEFOl AI. 35.08 109.77 2.4 2.2 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.5 1.8 Ike's Backbone 46 IKBAl AZ 34.31 111.80 2.2 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.8 Pinnacles 92 PINNl CA 36.49 121.16 3.2 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.1 Point Reyes 91 POREl CA 38.12 122.90 3.6 3.3 3.1 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.6 Great Gulf 4 GRGUl NH 44.21 71.35 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.0 MountZirkel 58 MOZll CO 40.70 105.94 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.0 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 WY 44.67 111.70 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.6 Redwood 88 REOWl CA 41.56 124.08 4.4 3.9 4.6 3.9 4.5 4.7 4.9 4.7 Rocky Mountain 57 ROMOl CO 40.28 105.55 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.0 Moosehorn 2 MOOSl ME 44.88 66.95 3.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.8 Saguaro 40 SAGUl AZ 32.25 110.73 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.8 SaintMarks 17 SAMAl FL 30.12 84.08 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 4.0 4.1 4.4 SaltCreek 36 SACRl NM 33.61 104.37 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.0 San Gabriel 93 SAGAl CA 34.27 117.94 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.2 San Gorgonio 99 SAGOl CA 34.18 116.90 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.9 San Gorgonio 99 SAGOl CA 33.75 116.65 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 San Pedro Parks 34 SAPEl NM 36.11 106.81 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.7 2.0 San Rafael 94 RAFAl CA 34.78 119.83 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.5

--­ 1.6 2.2 1.9 3.5 2.5 1.7 3.9 3.1 1.7 3.1 3.0 3.4 3.0 2.0 2.6 1.6 3.5 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.3 2.0 1.7 1.6 2.1 2.6 4.3 2.0 1.8 4.3 1.9 3.9 1.6 4.2 2.1 2.2 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.4 1.5 2.4 1.7 3.1 2.9 1.9 3.5 3.9 1.6 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.8 1.9 3.1 2.0 3.9 3.8 4.4 3.3 3.9 1.7 1.6 1.5 2.3 2.7 3.5 1.9 2.1 3.7 1.8 3.5 1.4 3.8 1.8 2.3 1.9 2.1 1.7 2.5 1.7 3.2 2.1 3.,1 3.5 2.4 3.2 4.5 1.8 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.6 2.1 4.1 2.4 4.4 3.5 4.8 3.0 4.4 2.0 1.9 1.7 2.5 2.9 3.1 2.1 2.6 3.8 1.8 3.3 1.6 3.7 1.8 2.1 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.1 3.2 2.3 3.3 3.6 2.9 3.2 4.6 2.2 4.6 4.5 4.7 4.6 2.1 4.3 2.4 4.4 3.6 4.8 3.1 4.5 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.9 3.3 3.0 2.0 2.7 

### 3.4 1.7 3.2 2.1 3.8 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.5



# A -12

# - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Guidance forEstimatingNatural Visibility Conditions Under theRegionalHazeRule


# TableA-3 Monthly Site-Specificf(RH) Values forEachMandatoryFederalClassI Area, Based on theCentroid oftheArea(SupplementalInformation)

Class IArea Site Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Site Name Map 10 Code St LAT LONG f(RHI f(RH) f(RHI f(RHI f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) f(RH) Sep f(RH) Oct f(RH} Nov f(RH) Dec f(RH) Sawtooth Scapegoat Selway«Bitterroot Seney Sequoia Shenandoah Shining Rock SierraAncha Simeonot Sipsey South Warner StrawberryMountain Superstition Swanquarter Sycamore Canyon Teton Theodore Roosevell Thousand Lakes Three Sisters Tuxedni UL Bend Upper Buffalo Ventana Virgin Islands (b) Voyageurs Washakie Weminuche WestElk WheelerPeak White Mountain Wichita Mountains Wind Cave WolfIsland Yellowstone Yolla Bolly« Middle Eel Yosemite lion Sawtooth 70 SAWT1 10 44.18 114.93 3.3 2.9 2.3 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.4 Monture 73 MONT1 MT 47.17 112.73 3.2 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.1 2.0 Sula 71 SULA1 MT 45.86 114.00 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.3 2.4 2.3 1.9 1.9 Seney 22 SENE1 MI 46.26 86.03 3.3 2.8 2.9 2.7 2.6 3.1 3.6 4.0 Sequoia 98 SEOU1 CA 36.50 118.82 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 Shenandoah 6 SHEN1 VA 38.52 78.44 3.1 2.8 2.8 2.5 3.1 3.4 3.5 3.9 Shining Rock 11 SHR01 NC 35.39 82.78 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.7 3.4 3.9 4.1 4.5 Sierra Ancha 45 SIAN1 

### /'Z. 33.82 110.88 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.8 Simeonot 105 SIME1 AK 54.92 159.28 4.3 4.1 3.6 3.9 3.9 4.3 5.0 5.2 Sipsey 21 SIPS1 AL 34.34 87.34 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.8 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.9 Lava Beds 87 LABE1 CA 41.33 120.20 3.6 3.1 2.7 2.4 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.9 Starkey 76 STAR1 OR 44.30 118.73 3.9 3.3 2.8 2.9 2.3 2.4 2.0 2.0 Tonto 44 TONT1 

### /'Z. 33.63 111.10 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.7 Swanquarter 14 SWAN1 NC 35.31 76.28 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.9 3.2 3.4 3.5 Sycamore Canyon 47 SYCA1 

### /'Z. 34.03 116.18 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.0 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 

### WY 44.09 110.18 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 Theodore Roosevelt 61 THR01 NO 47.30 104.00 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.2 LassenVolcanic 90 LAV01 CA 40.70 121.58 3.8 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.1 Three Sisters 84 THSI1 OR 44.29 122.04 4.5 4.0 3.6 3.7 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.9 Tuxedni 103 TUXE1 AK 60.15 152.60 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.6 4.0 UL Bend 64 ULBE1 MT 47.55 107.87 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.8 Upper Buffalo 27 UPBU1 AR 35.83 93.21 3.3 3.0 2.7 2.6 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 Pinnacles 92 PINN1 CA 36.22 121.59 3.2 2.9 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.3 Virgin Islands 106 VIIS1 VI 18.33 64.79 Voyageurs 24 VOYA2 MN 48.59 93.17 2.8 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.3 3.1 2.7 3.0 North Absoraka 67 NOAB1 

### WY 43.95 109.59 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.5 Weminuche 55 WEMll CO 37.65 107.80 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.6 2.0 White River 56 WHRI1 CO 38.69 107.19 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.7 .1.8 2.1 WheelerPeak 35 WHPE1 NM 36.57 105.42 2.3 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.8 2.2 White Mountain 37 WHITl NM 33.49 105.83 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.8 2.0 Wichita Mountains 30 WIM01 OK 34.74 98.59 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.4 3.0 2.7 2.3 2.5 Wind Cave 60 WICAl SO 43.55 103.48 2.5' 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.3 Okefenokee 16 OKEF1 GA 31.31 81.30 3.4 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.3 3.7 3.7 4.1 Yellowstone 66 YELL2 

### WY 44.55 110.40 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.6 Trinity 104 TRIN1 CA 40.11 122.96 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.5 Yosemite 96 YOSE1 CA 37.71 119.70 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.5 lion 51 ZlON1 UT 3725 113.01 27 

### 2A 2.0 1.6 1 5 1.3 1 2 14 1.5 2.3 2.1 4.1 1.8 3.9 4.4 1.6 4.5 3.9 2.0 1.9 1.6 3.4 2.0 1.7 2.2 2.2 3.0 3.9 1.9 3.6 2.2

3.2 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.9 2.2 4.0 1.8 2.6 1.5 14 2.0 2.6 2.6 3.4 1.9 3.2 3.8 1.5 3.8 3.6 2.3 2.6 1.5 3.1 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.4 3.8 3.5 2.2 3.3 2.4

2.6 2.0 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 2.6 2.2 3.7 2.1

. 2.7 1.8 16 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.6 2.3 3.0 3.3 1.7 4.0 3.3 3.1 3.7 1.7 2.8 1.9 2.4 3.0 3.1 4.6 3.5 2.7 3.2 2.5

2.9 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.2 1.8 2.7 2.6 3.5 2.5 3.3 2.4 2.0 3.3 3.1 3.5 3.5 2.3 3.1 3.4 2.1 4.3 3.4 3.4 4.1 2.1 2.9 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.6 3.7 2.7 3.3 2.9

2.8 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.8 2.6 3.5 2.5 3.6 2.8 2.4


## a: No particulate matter samplingorvisibility monitoring is conducted 

## ill the Bering Sea Wilderness. 

## b:f(RH) values for Virgin Islands National Parkwere notcalculated because ofthe limitedRHdata available.



# A-13

# II I I I 

# I I I I

APPENDIX E 

# I
MODELING FILES ON DVD-ROM 

# I I I I I I I 

# I I

# I I

APPENDIX E 

# I 

# I SUMMARY OF CALPLIFF FILES ON DVD-ROM CLASS IAREAVISIBIL TYANALYSIS AND BARTWAIVER REQUEST TERRA INTERNATIONAL (OKLAHOMA), INC. WOODWARD COUNTY, OKLAHOMA 

# I I 

# I I 

# I CALPUFF File Names" Description Type ofAnalysis CALPUFF.INP CALPUFF.LST CONC.DAT DFLX.DAT WFLX.DAT VISB.DAT CALPUFF Input File CALPUFF Output File CALPUFF OutputFile CALPUFF Output File CALPUFF Output File CALpUFF Output File CALPUFF User Control File CALPUFF List File Concentration File Dry Flux File Wet Flux File Relative Humidity File POSTUTILINP POSTUTIL.LST TFLX.DAT POSTUTIL Input File POSTUTIL Output File POSTUTIL Output File POSTUTIL User Control File POSTUTIL List File Total Flux File CALPOSTINP CALPOST.LST DECIVIEW.DAT CALPOST Input File CALPOSTOutput File CALPOST Output File CALPOST UserControl File CALPOST List File Daily Visibility Impacts File *Generated for each year - 2001, 2002, 2003 

# I I I I I I I I 

# I 

# I

# ------------------- ::l
...J

# y~ .,; Q) 'C' 

## '" "­ E 0 0



# , 2 E



# ; 1 c: Q) <1l 

# '" F

# ~ N M

# ~**~OS£L** 

### )10 'mnfMaOOM**'3J\I~a V~~31** **OOO~ UOJI~:)(** **n** <0 0 0 N 

## ;:::**~ ~**  0 0 0 0 0 l[) c:'J**~ ~**  (fJ

# ~**~** (fJ 

### Q; .D 

### E OJ 

## z N 0 

# "'" "'" 0 <D 0 0**~** 

# "'" ti Q) 'i5' 

# n: Q; .D 

### E OJ Z Q) 

### ':i OJ 

### u::: 

### N I 

### N**"~NI** 

### '(VII'JOH'v'l)lO)**lVNOI1VN~3.LNI ~~31**  IUS!I:::>**NOI1V~llddV ~3J\IVM**  

### H::IV8 aNV SISA1VNV 8NIl3001/1J A.11l181SIJ\**V3~V** 

### I SSV1;) situ.**uaw ~O** **a** Q) 

## ro 0 Q) 

## 1§ (fJ >­ III "0 Q) c OJ 'iii Q) O >­ III "0 Q) > 

# eDD

## « >­ III C 

### ;;:**~** O 

### dVI/IJ**snla~** 

### W)I 

## 00£
91111. 8mB!.::!

1
( 

# [

1



# I I

I 

# I

# l

I

I 

# I I 

# I \


# \

1(1)

# J**~ ~**  

# \

,



# ."**~**



## ,
J

# l 11' (tJ 

# E 0 ' J::I

# I

I I



### I:t: 

# I**~**

# ~ j Z**~** 

# s: 

# l

0 ...J

# ~ I 

# I "(3 CO 

### u.

I' III Q; Qj 

# l 0 (Y)



# ( l[) N N 

# I 

# J

1 

# l

0

### ~

l[)

- f"

-

l[) 

## r-: (Y) 

# I,I 0



# r I( 

# r

JI

# J~

, I 

### E .Q o 

### :,z 

# \ I I



# I 1 

# I .I 

# I ) I !I) 

# :a :J

CO 

### I:t: 

# E ,:,t:. 

### >(



# ,

# , 

# - - -- 1**~** 

# I

"



# I


# 1 

# I

I
I 

# I f 

# 1

I 

# I

I
>, 

# I

I 

# 1