CENRAP

Regional Haze State Implementation Plan Department of Environmental Quality

Submitted to the U. S. EPA, Region 6

December 31, 2008 Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION PURPOSE REGIONAL PLANNING PROCESS CONSULTATION PROCESS WITH FEDERAL LAND MANAGER (FLM) DESCRIPTION OF CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS ASSESSMENT OF BASELINE, NATURAL, AND CURRENT VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT, CONDITIONS AT CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS DATA FROM IMPROVE OR PM 2.5 MONITORS IN ARKANSAS OTHER MONITORING DATA OUTSIDE OF ARKANSAS ANNUAL AVERAGE VISIBILITY FOR ALL DAYS, 20 PERCENT BEST AND 20 PERCENT WORST DAYS FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREAS NORMALIZED PERCENTAGE OF 20 PERCENT BEST AND WORSE DAYS BY MONTH FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE VISIBILITY IN DECIVIEWS FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREAS AEVERAGE COMPONENT CONTRIBUTION TO VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE SULFATE EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREA MONTHLY AVERAGE NITRATE EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE ORGANIC CARBON EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE ELEMENTAL CARBON EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE FINE SOIL PARTICULATE MATTER EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS MONTHLY AVERAGE COARSE PARTICULATE MATTER EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS TRANSMISSOMETER SCHEMATIC ANNUAL TRANSMISSOMETER VISIBILITY TRENDS ANNUAL RECONSTRUCTED VISIBILITY TRENDS ASSESSMENT OF EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTION TO IMPAIRMENT AT CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCES IN ARKANSAS BART OF COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS DUE TO ONGOING AIR POLLUTION CONTROL

i PROGRAMS SOURCE RETIREMENT AND REPLACEMENT SCHEDULES MODELING MODELING DOMAINS MODELING INPUTS SELECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION AND SPECIFIC METEOROLOGICAL MODELING EPISODES MODEL APPLICATION AND RESULTS OF CALIBRATION TO ENSURE ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE MODELING CONCLUSIONS LONG-TERM STRATEGY REQUIREMENTS FOR REASONABLY ATTRIBUTABLE VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT EXISTING IMPAIRMENT THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGER CERTIFIED TO THE STATE MODELING CONCLUSIONS ON EMISSION REDUCTIONS CONTROL STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE EMISSION REDUCTIONS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT CONTROL STRATEGIES MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES EMISSIONS LIMITATIONS AND SCHEDULES FOR COMPLIANCE TO ACHIEVE THE REASONABLE PROGRESS GOAL SMOKE MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES FOR AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTATION OF ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF CONTROL STRATEGIES RULES AND COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES OF ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES ALTERNATIVE CONTROLS (INCLUDING MARKET TRADING) AND ENGINEERING ANALYSES SCHEDULE FOR PERIODIC REVIEWS APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR SECTION 110 AND PART D OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT, 40 CFR PART 51, REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS SPECIFIC LEGAL AUTHORITY PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, FLM NOTIFICATION, AND PUBLIC HEARING DOCUMENTATION

APPENDICES

ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

iii INTRODUCTION

Haze is caused when sunlight encounters tiny pollution particles in the air. Some light is absorbed by particles. Other light is scattered away before it reaches an observer. More pollutants mean more absorption and scattering of light, which reduce the clarity and color of what we see. Some types of particles, such as sulfates, scatter more light, particularly during humid conditions.

Air pollutants come from a variety of natural and manmade sources. Natural sources can include windblown dust, and soot from wildfires. Manmade sources can include motor vehicles, electric utility and industrial fuel burning, and manufacturing operations. Some haze-causing particles are directly emitted to the air. Others are formed when gases emitted to the air form particles as they are carried many miles from the source of the pollutants.

Some of the pollutants that form haze have also been linked to serious health problems and environmental damage. Exposure to very small particles in the air have been linked with increased respiratory illness, decreased lung function, and even premature death. In addition, particles such as nitrates and sulfates contribute to acid rain formation that makes lakes, rivers, and streams unsuitable for many fish, and erodes buildings, historical monuments, and paint on cars.

The term visibility, when used in the context of scenic vistas at mandatory

Federal Class I areas, refers to the clarity with which distant objects are perceived.

Visibility is affected by pollutant concentrations, the viewing angle, relative humidity, cloud characteristics, and other physical factors such as color contrast between objects.

1 Without the effects of manmade air pollution, a natural visual range would be nearly 140

miles (225 km) in western areas and 90 miles (145 km) in eastern areas.

The natural visual range is limited because atmospheric gases and aerosols

absorb and scatter the light traveling from the vista to the observer. Absorbed light is

converted into heat, and the scattered light is redirected from its straight-line approach.

The natural light scattered from air molecules is referred to as Rayleigh scattering and

causes the blue appearance of the sky. Visibility is impaired beyond the Rayleigh

scattering as additional gases and particles are introduced into the air.

In mandatory Federal Class I areas, the atmospheric pollutants that most often

affect visibility exist as aerosols (tiny particles dispersed in the air). An aerosol particle

is made of solid and/or liquid molecules that are held together by intermolecular or

adhesive forces and act as a single unit. Fogs and mists are common examples of

aerosols formed primarily from water vapor. Particulate matter refers to the nonwater particles that form solid or liquid aerosols in the atmosphere.

The particulate matter that most greatly affects visibility in mandatory Federal

Class I areas has an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns. (For comparison, a human hair has a diameter of about 70 microns). The individual aerosol particles

(composed of both solid particles and liquid droplets) cannot be seen in the atmosphere, but they scatter and absorb light to impair the view.

PURPOSE

The national visibility goal, established in section 169A of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) Amendments of 1977, requires the “prevention of any future, and the remedying

of any existing, impairment of visibility in mandatory Federal Class I areas which

2 impairment results from manmade air pollution.” EPA issued regulations in 1980 to address the visibility problem that is “reasonably attributable” to a single source or small group of sources. At that time, EPA acknowledged that the regulations were only the first phase addressing visibility impairment and deferred regulations dealing with regional haze until improved monitoring and modeling techniques were developed, and

EPA could improve its understanding of the pollutants causing the impairment.

In 1988, the States, Federal Land Managers (e.g. , U.S.

Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management), and EPA, began monitoring of fine particle concentrations and visibility in 30 national parks and wilderness areas across the country. That data was analyzed to understand what portion of fine particles and visibility impairment can be attributed to various pollutants in the areas—sulfates, nitrates, organic and elemental carbon, and crustal material (soil dust).

In 1999 under the 1990 CAAA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced a major effort to improve air quality in national parks and wilderness areas.

The final rule calls for states to establish goals aimed at improving visibility in the mandatory Federal Class I areas (see Table 1) and also to develop long-term plans for reducing pollutant emissions that contribute to visibility degradation. States are required to establish goals to improve visibility for the 20 percent worst days and to allow no degradation of the 20 percent best days. The rule gives states the flexibility to develop cost-effective strategies for pollution reductions and encourages states to coordinate through regional planning efforts.

3 The states and tribes of Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota,

Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas formed the Central Regional Air Planning

Association (CENRAP). The following table provides information on the national parks and wilderness areas found in the CENRAP Regional Planning Organization.

Table 1. CENRAP Class I Areas (as listed in 40 CFR 81) State Name of Area Acreage Federal Land Manager Arkansas Area 14,344 USDA-FS Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area 9,912 USDA-FS Iowa No Class I Area Kansas No Class I Area Louisiana Breton Wilderness Area 5,000 USDI-FWS Minnesota Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Area 747,840 USDA-FS Voyageurs National Park 114,964 USDI-NPS Missouri Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area 12,315 USDA-FS Mingo Wilderness Area 8,000 USDI-FWS Nebraska No Class I Area Oklahoma Wichita Mountains Wilderness Area 8,900 USDI-FWS Texas Big Bend National Park 708,118 USDI-NPS Guadalupe Mountains National Park 76,292 USDI-NPS

REGIONAL PLANNING PROCESS

[SIP Placeholder:

A. States and Tribes in CENRAP

B. Goals

C. Objectives

D. Management

E. Decision-making Structure

F. Deadlines for Completing Significant Technical Analysis

G. Development of Emission Management Strategies]

4 AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING IN THE REGIONAL PLANNING PROCESS IN THE FUTURE

[SIP Placeholder:

A. Development of Ongoing Emission Management Strategies,

B. Schedule for State review and adoption of regulations implementing the

recommendations of the regional group.]

CONSULTATION PROCESS WITH FEDERAL LAND MANAGER (FLM)

[SIP Placeholder]

DESCRIPTION OF CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WILDERNESS AREAS

5 The Congress designated the Caney Creek Wilderness Area in

1975 and it now has a total of 14,460 acres. All of the wilderness is in the state of

Arkansas. Located on the southern edge of , Caney Creek

Wilderness protects a rugged and lovely portion of the Ouachita Mountains. From heights above 2,000 feet in the east, Short Creek and Caney Creek flow all the way across the area before plunging into the on the western boundary. Along the creeks you'll find beech, large pines, and bottomland hardwoods. Sharp ridges separate the creeks and offer splendid views of the surrounding region. Occasional sandstone outcroppings dot the landscape.

The designated the Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area in

1975 and it now has a total of 12,018 acres. The flows down the center of this Wilderness through a rough forested land of steep slopes that descend into deep valleys. People once made their homes down in the valleys, but the last resident moved out in 1948. However, you'll see their old homes, stone fences surrounding pastures, antiquated farm equipment, worn-out roads, and silent cemeteries. The interior of the Upper Buffalo is so remote the quality of its rich water supply, in runs and runnels and rivulets, is classified as excellent.

Squirrels are everywhere in the Upper Buffalo, and squirrel hunters report their success runs from good to superior, perhaps better than anywhere else in the southern

United States. White-tailed deer, wild turkeys, and black bears are the largest resident species, with a fair number of smaller animals including foxes, raccoons, minks, beavers, skunks, opossums, bobcats, and woodchucks.

6 White oaks, red oaks, and hickory populate the forest. The summer climate is

known to be hot and humid. A few people choose to visit the Upper Buffalo in winter

when January temperatures may drop below zero. During the cold months, ice encrusts

a number of small waterfalls and hangs in frozen drips from overhangs, and a cold

peace settles on the land. No matter what the season, you'll have to find your way

through the area without the assistance of maintained trails.

ASSESSMENT OF BASELINE, NATURAL, AND CURRENT VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT CONDITIONS AT CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

DATA FROM IMPROVE OR PM 2.5 MONITORS IN ARKANSAS AND SURROUNDING STATES [SIP Placeholder]

OTHER MONITORING DATA OUTSIDE OF ARKANSAS

There is a large east-west gradient in haze in the United States, with most of the

gradient occurring in the CENRAP states. Because there are large spatial gaps in long-

term data, particularly across the CENRAP area, the gradients are not well resolved.

[Within the next couple of years, enough data should be available from the newly

established CENRAP sites to accurately resolve the gradients.] Most of the gradient is

due to much higher levels of sulfate in the eastern U.S.; this area also has large

emissions of sulfur dioxide from coal-burning power plants, although emission levels are

being reduced. In terms of average visibility at the ten CENRAP Class I areas, there

seem to be two groupings of sites, plus one site (Wichita Mountains) with intermediate

visibility. Monitoring data from the period [? To ?] was examined.

The sites in Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana have considerably higher aerosol

light extinction than the other sites. This is due largely to higher sulfate concentrations,

7 although organic aerosol and nitrate are also high at these sites, on average. The west

Texas sites and the northern Minnesota sites have much lower light extinction. At

Wichita Mountains, Oklahoma, the limited data available to date suggests intermediate

levels of sulfate and light extinction at this site. Sulfate is the largest contributor to haze

at all CENRAP sites.

Haze from particulate nitrate is substantial at many CENRAP sites from late fall

to early spring. At Upper Buffalo and Boundary Waters, during winter months, average

nitrate extinction is nearly as large as average sulfate extinction. Short-term data from

Mingo, in southeastern Missouri shows nitrate values higher than Upper Buffalo and

Boundary Waters. At the five sites analyzed in detail, organic carbon is about 10% of the light extinction, with elemental carbon about 5%. Big Bend has reported high

visibility impacts from fires in Mexico, Boundary Waters from fires in Canada, and Mingo from burning that must be of local origin. Haze from crustal material (e.g., windblown dust) was low at most sites except the west Texas sites where they contributed to about

23% of the particle haze at Big Bend and 26% at Guadalupe Mountains.

Analysis of airflow patterns showed that for most areas, flow from the north or west was associated with good visibility while flow from the east or south was associated with poor visibility. Overall, the analysis suggests significant contributions to haze from within the CENRAP area itself, and on occasion, from states to the east of the CENRAP region. Transport of air from states east of the CENRAP region is very likely to be associated with poor visibility at CENRAP Class I areas. Less frequently, transport from fires in Mexico and Canada can lead to hazy conditions at the southern

and northern CENRAP Class I areas, respectively. Other sources in Mexico also are

8 likely to contribute to haze in the southern CENRAP area at times, but the amount has not been well quantified.

In order to understand the sources contributing to haze and to predict the reduction in haze levels as air pollutant emissions are reduced, a good inventory of emissions is needed. The study reviewed the existing emissions inventory and recommended a number of areas for which emissions are quite uncertain. These include:

• Windblown agricultural dust • Wildfires and prescribed fires • Agricultural burning • Fugitive road dust • Biogenics • Point sources • On-road mobile • Off-road mobile • Livestock ammonia emissions • Fertilizer ammonia emissions • Biomass burning.

ANNUAL AVERAGE VISIBILITY FOR ALL DAYS, 20 PERCENT BEST AND 20 PERCENT WORST DAYS FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

NORMALIZED PERCENTAGE OF 20 PERCENT BEST AND WORSE DAYS BY MONTH FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE VISIBILITY IN DECIVIEWS FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

9

[SIP Placeholder]

AVERAGE COMPOENT CONTRIBUTION TO VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE SULFATE EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE NITRATE EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE ORGANIC CARBON EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE ELEMENTAL CARBON EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

MONTHLY AVERAGE FINE SOIL PARTICULATE MATTER EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

10 MONTHLY AVERAGE COARSE PARTICULATE MATTER EXTINCTION FOR CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

[SIP Placeholder]

TRANSMISSOMETER SCHEMATIC

[SIP Placeholder]

ANNUAL TRANSMISSOMETER VISIBILITY TRENDS

[SIP Placeholder]

ANNUAL RECONSTRUCTED VISIBILITY TRENDS

[SIP Placeholder]

ASSESSMENT OF EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTION TO IMPAIRMENT AT CANEY CREEK AND UPPER BUFFALO WINDERNESS AREAS

As stated previously, visibility impairment in the mandatory Federal Class I areas usually results from light scattering and absorption by particulate matter. The particulate matter that most greatly affects visibility in Mandatory Federal Class I areas has an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns. Sulfates most often exist as ammonium sulfate [(NH4)2SO4] and ammonium bisulfate [NH4HSO4]. When ammonia availability is low, sulfates occur as sulfuric acid [H2SO4]. Sulfates form in the atmosphere when sulfur gases oxidize to sulfuric acid and then combine with ammonia to create ammonium sulfate particles. Sulfate particles are relatively stable in the atmosphere and are removed by settling and precipitation. The ammonia that combines

11 with the sulfate to form sulfate PM is generated from both natural and manmade sources.

Nitrate particulate matter exists in the atmosphere mainly as ammonium nitrate

(NH4NO3] but may take the form of nitric acid [HNO3] when ammonia is not available.

Nitrogen oxides collectively referred to as NOx are emitted from high-temperature

combustion processes and life processes of certain soil microbes. The nitrogen oxides

are converted into nitrate in the atmosphere.

Organic carbon represents the accumulation of all organic compounds existing in

atmospheric aerosol particles. Organic carbon may rise into the atmosphere under the

buoyant forces of processes such as forest and range wildfires, opening burning, wood

burning, cooking, incineration, and automobile exhaust. The organic carbon aerosols

rise into the air during incomplete combustion and represent the major primary sources

of organic carbon emissions. In the atmosphere, these gases are partially oxidized and

converted into products with lower saturation pressures. The organic carbon products then condense as secondary organic aerosol particles in the atmosphere.

Elemental carbon is often referred to as light-absorbing carbon and represents

the soot from combustion practices. Elemental carbon is emitted directly into the

atmosphere and therefore has only primary emission sources. The natural source of

elemental carbon is wildfire activity, and the manmade sources include prescribed forest

and range fires, motor vehicle exhaust (especially diesel exhaust), wood burning, and

cooking operations. Industrial processes can prevent the escape of elemental carbon to

the atmosphere with control devices such as fabric filters and cyclones.

12 Crustal material is composed of the particulate matter entrained in the

atmosphere by various physical processes and therefore has only primary emission sources. Crustal material is composed of two measured fractions of particulate matter: fine soil and coarse mass. The fine soil particles have aerodynamic diameters less than

2.5 microns and the coarse mass particles have a diameter between 2.5 and 10 microns. Wind erosion of the soil introduces particulate matter into the atmosphere, as does wind’s re-entrainment of previously deposited particles. Manmade physical processes that introduce crustal material to the atmosphere include fugitive dust from industrial processes, entrainment of dust from vehicular traffic over paved and unpaved roads, construction and demolition activities, and agricultural tilling activities. These processes also introduce considerable quantities of large, visible particles to the atmosphere; however, the larger particles quickly settle out of the air when the winds calm.

Table 2. Atmospheric Fine Particles and Their Major Emission Sources Atmospheric Primary Sources Secondary Sources Pollutant Natural Manmade Natural Manmade Sulfate Sea spray Fossil fuel Oxidation of Oxidation of combustion sulfur bases sulfur dioxide emitted by emitted from volcanoes, fossil fuel oceans, combustion. wetlands, and forest fires. Nitrate N/A Motor vehicle Oxidation of Oxidation of exhaust. NOx produced NOx emitted by soils, forest from fossil fuel fires, and combustion, lightning. motor vehicle exhausts, and prescribed burning. Ammonia N/A Motor vehicle Wild animals Animal exhaust. and husbandry,

13 Atmospheric Primary Sources Secondary Sources Pollutant Natural Manmade Natural Manmade undisturbed sewage soils. treatment, and fertilized land. Organic Carbon Wildfires. Open burning, Oxidation of Oxidation of wood burning, hydrocarbons hydrocarbons prescribed emitted by emitted by burning, vegetation and motor vehicles, cooking, motor wildfires. open burning, vehicle wood burning, exhaust, fuel storage incineration, and transport, and tire wear. and solvent usage. Elemental Wildfires Motor vehicle N/A N/A Carbon exhaust, wood burning, prescribed burning, and cooking. Crustal Material Wind erosion Fugitive dust N/A N/A and re- from paved and entrainment of unpaved roads, deposited agricultural particles. operations, and forestry.

BART-ELIGIBLE SOURCES IN ARKANSAS

[SIP Placeholder]

BART OF COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS

[SIP Placeholder]

EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS DUE TO ONGOING AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS

[SIP Placeholder]

SOURCE RETIREMENT AND REPLACEMENT SCHEDULES

14 [SIP Placeholder]

MODELING

Appendix W to Part 51 (40 CFR) speaks to the guidelines for use of air quality

computer models. Appendix A to Appendix W of Part 51, Summaries of Preferred Air

Quality Models lists the following computer models as “preferred.” Those model names

include Buoyant Line and Point Source Dispersion Model (BLP), Caline3, Climatological

Dispersion Model (CDM 2.0), Gaussian-Plume Multiple Source Air Quality Algorithm

(RAM), Industrial Source Complex Model (ISC3), Urban Airshed Model (UAM), Offshore

and Coastal Dispersion Model (OCD), Emissions and dispersion Modeling System

(EDMS), and Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for Unstable

Situations (CTDMPLUS).

Appendix B to Appendix W of Part 51, 3.2 speaks to the use of alternative

models. An EPA document, “Interim Procedures for Evaluating Air Quality Models,”

was prepared to assist in developing a consistent approach when justifying the use of other than the preferred modeling techniques recommended in this guide. In addition, another EPA document, “Protocol for Determining the Best Performing Model,” provided alternative evaluations based on other criteria beyond performance measures. The procedures in both documents provide a general framework for objective decision- making on the acceptability of an alternative model for a given regulatory application.

The documents contain procedures for conducting both the technical evaluation of the model and the field test or performance evaluation.

15 When no model listed above (Appendix A to Appendix W of Part 51) is applicable to the modeling problem, an alternative refined model may be used provided that:

1. the model can be demonstrated to be applicable to the problem on a

theoretical basis; and

2. the data bases which are necessary to perform the analysis are available

and adequate; and

3. performance evaluations of the model in similar circumstances have

shown that the model is not biased toward underestimates; or

4. after consultation with the EPA Regional Office, a second model is

selected as a baseline or reference point for performance and the interim

procedures protocol are then used to demonstrate that the proposed

model performs better than the reference model.

The Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx) was approved by

EPA as an alternative model with case-by-case justification. The CAMx Model was selected for several reasons. CAMx is appropriate for simulating hourly ozone, CO, and

PM concentrations from the urban-scale to regional-scale; the hourly concentration estimates can be used to generate mean ozone, CO, and PM concentrations at longer than hourly time-scales, including 8-hour, daily, monthly, seasonal, and annual.

CAMx is a multi-scale, three-dimensional photochemical grid model. The model contains two-way grid nesting, subgrid-scale Plume-in-Grid (PiG), fast accurate chemistry solver, a chemical mechanism compiler, generalized coordinate system to accommodate multiple map projections, and options for using more accurate solvers for transport and diffusion. A plume-in-grid algorithm is required to adequately represent

16 the near source impacts of major NOx sources. Two-way grid nesting is essential for

regional scale modeling. One-way grid nesting is considered inadequate because emissions are not treated consistently between the coarse and fine grids.

CAMx unique attributes include two options for condensed photochemical kinetics mechanisms: the Carbon Bond Version IV (CB-IV) mechanism and the 1997 version of the mechanism from the State Air Pollution Research Center (SAPRC97).

The CAMx is designed to compute primary and secondary particulate matter (PM)

concentrations. The simulation of PM requires emissions of sulfur oxides (SOx),

ammonia (NH3), and primary PM species.

The Fifth Generation PSU/NCAR mesoscale model (MM5, version 3.4) was

selected because it is the most technically advanced and widely used public-domain

prognostic model. MM5 has been widely used for preparing inputs to urban- and

regional-scale photochemical air quality models. MM5 is based on the full set of non-

hydrostatic primitive equations. Optional parameterizations exist for boundary layer

schemes; cloud and precipitation physics; heat budgets for multiple soil layers; the

kinematic effects of terrain; and cumulus convection. MM5 can also encompass a

broad range of scales, from the microscale to synoptic systems. One- or two-way

interactive grid nesting is allowed, as well as moveable nests that allow the model to

follow weather features such as hurricanes.

MM5 contains a FDDA package that allows for nudging toward gridded analyses

or individual observations separately or in combination. The model equations are solved horizontally on an Arakawa-B grid structure defined on a number of available

map projections. The Lambert Conformal projection is used for air quality applications

17 in the U. S. The vertical coordinate is a terrain-following sigma-p representation.

Typically, 20-30 vertical levels are specified, with the first grid point 20-50 meters above

the surface, and the top of the model around 16-km above sea level. MM5 is also

publicly available at no cost and with no license restrictions.

EPS2x was selected as the emissions modeling system to process

anthropogenic emissions into the gridded, hourly resolved, and chemically speciated

emissions needed for photochemical modeling. EPS2x was selected because of its (1)

ability to incorporate EPA’s MOBILE6 and NONROAD emissions estimates into the

modeling system, (2) fast processing of emissions to generate model-ready inventories,

(3) strong Quality Assurance (QA) and reporting capabilities, (4) free public access and

availability without any restrictions on its use, and (5) compatibility with other studies.

MODELING DOMAINS

[SIP Placeholder and revise next 2 paragraphs]

The MM5 grids will be determined when the episodes are finalized [NEED TO

MAKE CHANGES HERE.] The MM5 data-assimilation package will be used to nudge the MM5 predictions toward 3-hourly 40-km gridded meteorological analysis fields from

the Eta Data Assimilation System (EDAS). The MM5 coarse domain is sized to fit within the spatial limits of the EDAS fields. This is necessary in order to model the flow over the entire Gulf of Mexico, and to provide sufficient room for all the nested grid boundaries in southern Texas and northern Mexico. The 36-km grid extends several grid points beyond the boundaries of the CAMx 36-km grid in each direction. The 12- km MM5 grid will be placed over Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Missouri to resolve larger mesoscale influences. The 4-km nested grid will cover the area of the

18 CAMx 4-km grid with sufficient overlap that any boundary artifacts near the southern and western edges of the 4-km MM5 grid will not impact the CAMx grid.

In the vertical, MM5 will be configured to run with 20 to 30 levels, with a minimum surface layer depth of 30-50 m. About ten layers will resolve the typical depth of the daytime boundary layer. The model will nominally extend to a pressure altitude of 100 mb (~ 16-km).

MODELING INPUTS

There are several input requirements for the CAMx model. Source data for ozone modeling include gridded, hourly emissions of CB-IV or SAPRC97 speciated

VOC, CO NO, and NO2 for low-level and elevated sources along with stack conditions,

stack height, stack diameter, exit velocity, and exit temperature for elevated sources.

Meteorological data needed are hourly, gridded, three-dimensional horizontal

winds, temperature, pressure, vertical turbulent exchange coefficients, and optionally

either total opaque cloud cover or cloud cover fraction, depth, and liquid water content.

Additional hourly, gridded two-dimensional inputs for rainfall rate (optional), land use

cover fractions, total ozone column, albedo, and turbidity are also needed.

Emission inventories will be used to develop SIP quality modeling episodes that

perform within the EPA’s accepted margin of accuracy, including a base case and future

case. Therefore, inventories must sufficiently account for projected future growth in

particulate emissions, particularly from stationary, non-road, and on-road mobile

sources.

19 Quantifiable emission reduction measures will be integrated into the future case to produce one or more control cases. These control cases will be used to indicate the relative effectiveness of different measures and aid in selecting appropriate measures.

Prior to plan implementation the control strategies should be determined based on model results from a control case episode that shows achievement towards visibility

goal.

SELECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION AND SPECIFIC METEOROLOGICAL MODELING EPISODES [SIP Placeholder]

MODEL APPLICATION AND RESULTS OF CALIBRATION TO ENSURE ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE

[SIP Placeholder]

MODELING CONCLUSIONS

[SIP Placeholder]

LONG-TERM STRATEGY REQUIREMENTS FOR REASONABLY ATTRIBUTABLE VISIBILITY IMPAIRMENT

EXISTING IMPAIRMENT THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGER CERTIFIED TO THE STATE

[SIP Placeholder]

MODELING CONCLUSIONS ON EMISSION REDUCTIONS

[SIP Placeholder]

CONTROL STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE EMISSION REDUCTIONS

[SIP Placeholder]

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT CONTROL STRATEGIES

[SIP Placeholder]

20

MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

[SIP Placeholder]

EMISSIONS LIMITATIONS AND SCHEDULES FOR COMPLIANCE TO ACHIEVE THE REASONABLE PROGRESS GOAL

[SIP Placeholder]

SMOKE MANAGEMENT TECHINIQUES FOR AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY MANAGEMENT

[SIP Placeholder]

DOCUMENTATION OF ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF CONTROL STRATEGIES

[SIP Placeholder]

RULES AND COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES OF ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES

[SIP Placeholder]

ALTERNATIVE CONTROLS (INCLUDING MARKET TRADING) AND ENGINEERING ANALYSES

[SIP Placeholder]

SCHEDULE FOR PERIODIC REVIEWS

[SIP Placeholder: A. Reasonable Progress Goals Expressed in Deciviews B. Discussion of Ability of Long-Term Plan to Remedy and Prevent Future Impairment

APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR SECTION 110 AND PART D OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT, 40 CFR PART 51, REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

21 Section 110 and Part D address the requirements for state implementation plans

(SIPs). The following is a summary of Arkansas’s compliance actions to section 110.

Part D requirements are not applicable as they address requirements for areas that have been designated as nonattainment for a National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS). Certain provisions of 40 CFR Part 51

Section 110(a)(1) – Each State shall, after reasonable notice and public hearings, adopt and submit to the Administrator, within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof) under section 109 for any air pollutant, a plan which provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such primary standard in each air quality control region (or portion thereof) within such State. In addition, such State shall adopt and submit to the Administrator (either as a part of a plan submitted under the preceding sentence or separately) within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national ambient air quality secondary standard (or revision thereof), a plan which provides the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such secondary standard in each air quality control region (or portion thereof) within such State. Unless a separate public hearing is provided, each State shall consider its plan implementing such secondary standard at the hearing required by the first sentence of this paragraph.

Legal notification announced the public hearings. Public hearings were held in

(city name) on (date). A copy of the public hearing proceedings and documentation of the notifications for public hearing are found in Appendix ___.

Section 110(a)(2)(A) – Each implementation plan submitted by a State under this Act shall be adopted by the State after reasonable notice and public hearing. Each such plan shall—(A) include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques.…to meet the applicable requirements of this Act.

[Describe board approval process/public hearing and any control measures and adoption procedures of control measures.]

Section 110(a)(2)(B) – provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to—(i) monitor, compile,

22 and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator;

Arkansas will continue to operate IMPROVE and PM air monitoring stations, collect samples, and implement the Quality Assurance Plan.

Section 110(a)(2)(C) – include a program to provide for the enforcement of the measures described in subparagraph (A), and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D;

Arkansas has the legal authority to enforce emission limitations and other control measures, means or techniques as well as to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by this SIP to assure that the particulate matter 2.5 NAAQS is achieved.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) – contain adequate provisions—(i) prohibiting, consistent with the provisions of this title, any sourced or other type of emissions activity within the State from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will—(I) contribute significantly to Nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan for any other State under part C to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility, (ii) insuring compliance with the applicable requirements of sections 126 and 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution abatement);

The State will continue to implement the approved Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements of AAC [provide legal citation] and other permitting requirements under AAC [provide legal citation] (Major Sources Affecting Nonattainment Areas). Transport (sections 126 and 115) is addressed in the modeling section.

Section 110(a)(2)(E) – provide (i) necessary assurances that the State (or, except where the Administrator deems inappropriate, the general purpose local government or governments, or a regional agency designated by the State or general purpose local governments for such purpose) will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under State (and as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementation plan (and is not prohibited by any provision of Federal or State law from carrying out such implementation plan or portion thereof), (ii) requirements that the State comply with the requirements respecting State boards under section 128, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the State has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provision;

23 The Division of Air Quality has ____ persons designated to meet air quality objectives and a FY 2002-2003 budget of $ ______. R.S. 27A [NEED AUTHORITY CITATION]

Section 110(a)(2)(F) - require, as may be prescribed by the Administrator--- (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the State agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this Act, which reports shall be available to reasonable times for public inspection

Arkansas DEQ is required by state statute [provide legal citation] to maintain and update at least annually an inventory of air emissions from stationary sources. Additionally, the Department follows the procedures and deadlines established by the U. S. EPA to complete the periodic inventory every three years that includes point sources, area sources, and both on-road and off-road mobile sources. Emissions inventories are available to the public.

Section 110(a)(2)(G) – provide for authority comparable to that in section 303 and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority;

Arkansas does not have a “state” risk assessment and management commission. Section 303 provides for the U.S. EPA to establish a national commission. Upon directions from EPA’s risk assessment studies, Arkansas will be in a position to enact regulations governing exposure limits to various pollutants. It is anticipated that such regulations will be initiated and enforced by the Arkansas Department of Health and Hospitals and their appropriate technical and medical staff [update as needed].

Section 110(a)(2)(H) – provide for revision of such plan – (i) from time to time as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) except as provided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the national ambient air quality standard which it implements or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements established under this Act;

The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality follows mandatory provisions of the Federal Clean Air Act as well as complies with the replacement of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that are unable to achieve the specific NAAQS.

Section 110(a)(2)(I) – in the case of a plan or plan revision for an area designated as a Nonattainment area, meet the applicable requirements of part D (relating to Nonattainment areas);

24

The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality follows mandatory provisions of the Federal Clean Air Act.

Section 110(a)(2)(J) – meet the applicable requirements of section 121 (relating to consultation), section 127 (relating to public notification), and part C (relating to prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and visibility protection);

Section 121 is met through workgroup meetings through CENRAP that are held between 3 and 4 times each year in addition to conference calls. FLMs participate as workgroup members. Draft copies of the Regional Haze working documents and the SIP were submitted to local governments, the metropolitan planning organization, designated organizations of elected officials of local governments, and any Federal Land Manager having authority over Federal land to which the State Plan applies. (See Appendix __ for a list of persons directly solicited for comments.) A request for written or verbal comments from these sources as well as an offer to make a presentation on the Regional Haze SIP was included. Section 127 is met by the Legal Notice announcing the public hearings in the (name of publication---???, which is also the official state journal), and the local newspapers in the towns in which the hearings took place, and an inclusion on the Department’s Internet site. Part C is addressed in a triennial review of the SIP for visibility protection of the (name of Class I area) and through the ongoing Regional Planning Organization process to address the requirements of the U.S. EPA Regional Haze rule.

Section 110(a)(2)(K) – provide for – (i) the performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a national ambient air quality standard, and (ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such air quality modeling to the Administrator;

The computer model selection, episode selection, modeling protocol, and modeling results are detailed elsewhere in this document.

Section 110(a)(2)(L) – require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this Act, a fee sufficient to cover – (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator’s approval of a fee program under title V; and

25 The Department has a permit review/permit fee that is periodically reviewed to assess the sufficiency of covering reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for a permit.

Section 110(a)(2)(M) – provide for consultation and participation by local political subdivisions affected by the plan.

This section’s requirement is met through workgroup meetings through CENRAP that are held between 3 and 4 times each year in addition to conference calls. FLMs participate as workgroup members. Draft copies of the Regional Haze working documents and the SIP were submitted to local governments, the metropolitan planning organization, designated organizations of elected officials of local governments, and any Federal Land Manager having authority over Federal land to which the State Plan applies. (See Appendix __ for a list of persons directly solicited for comments.) A request for written or verbal comments from these sources as well as an offer to make a presentation on the Regional Haze SIP was included. Section 127 is met by the Legal Notice announcing the public hearings in the (name of publication---???, which is also the official state journal), and the local newspapers in the towns in which the hearings took place, and an inclusion on the Department’s Internet site. Part C is addressed in a triennial review of the SIP for visibility protection of the (name of Class I area) and through the ongoing Regional Planning Organization process to address the requirements of the U.S. EPA Regional Haze rule.

Other Sections of 110 – Not applicable to this SIP.

SPECIFIC LEGAL AUTHORITY

[SIP Placeholder]

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, FLM NOTIFICATION, AND PUBLIC HEARING DOCUMENTATION

[SIP Placeholder]

APPENDICES

26