Slide 1

1 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Modeling for 8-hour Ozone Preliminary 2002 Results For Metrolina and Great Smoky Mountain National Park Stakeholders Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Laura Boothe, NCDAQ George Bridgers, NCDAQ May 26, 2005 Slide 2 2 Outline Ozone overview SIP Modeling overview Meteorological modeling Emissions modeling Air Quality modeling Future year emissions summary Menu of possible control options Next steps Slide 3 3 Ozone and SIP Modeling Overview Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch Chief Slide 4 4 Slide 5 5 Ozone Public Health Risks When inhaled, even at low levels, ozone can: Cause inflammation of lung tissue Cause acute or chronic respiratory problems Aggravate, possibly trigger asthma Decrease lung capacity Repeated exposure in children may lead to reduced lung function as adults Slide 6 6 Background 8-hour ozone standard If a monitored design value is > 0.08 ppm (84 ppb), that monitor is violating the standard The design value is defined as: 3-year average of the annual 4 th highest daily maximum 8-hour average Slide 7 7 2001-2003 Ozone Design Values (Highest Value Per County) Slide 8 8 Violating Ozone Monitors Based on 01-03 data Green dots = attaining monitors Red dots = violating monitors Slide 9 9 NC 8-hr Ozone Nonattainment Areas Slide 10 10 Metrolina 8-hr Ozone Design Values Monitor County Line Enochville Rockwell Garinger Crouse Arrowood Monroe York County Mecklenburg Rowan Mecklenburg Lincoln Mecklenburg Union York, SC 01-03 98 99 100 96 92 84 88 84 02-04 92 91 94 91 86 81 85 80 2005* 83 87 76 83 91 104 97 110 * 4 th highest 8-hr max in 2005 can be no higher than this value in order to attain by the end of the 2005 ozone season. ** Number of times the 4 th highest has been this value or lower in the last 5 years. # ** 1 of 5 2 of 5 0 of 5 2 of 5 5 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 Slide 11 11 Ozone Nonattainment Timeline Immediate (June 15, 2004) New source review One year Transportation conformity Three years State Implementation Plan (SIP) attainment demonstration Five years (or as expeditiously as practicable) Basic areas attain standard (Triangle, RMT, GSMNP) Six years (or as expeditiously as practicable) Moderate areas attain standard (Metrolina) Slide 12 12 Ozone Nonattainment Timeline Definitions for Metrolina Area Effective date = June 15, 2004 Transportation conformity date = June 15, 2005 SIP submittal date = June 15, 2007 Attainment date = June 15, 2010* Data used to determine attainment = 2007-2009 (Modeling) Attainment year = 2009 * Or as early as possible Slide 13 13 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Need a SIP submittal to EPA within three years Attainment Demonstration that details the States plan to bring the area into attainment of the Federal standard For Metrolina areamust include: 15% VOC Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) Plan VOC & NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs (I/M) Slide 14 14 State Implementation Plan (SIP) 15% VOC RFP Plan Calculated from the 2002 base year Cannot substitute other emissions for the first plan Phase 2 implementation guidance should say what can and cannot be counted towards the 15% plan Includes reductions from all man-made emissions, i.e. point, area, highway mobile and off-road mobile May need to implement additional controls to meet this requirement Slide 15 15 State Implementation Plan (SIP) VOC & NOX RACT All existing point sources with potential to emit 100 tons/year (TPY) NC has pre-adopted VOC RACT rules (2D.0900) and NOx RACT rule (2D.1413) Will have to update to include entire Metrolina 8-hour ozone nonattainment area Will have to activate these rules SC has a statewide VOC rule for new sources with actual emissions 100 TPY and statewide NOx rule for large boilers (>10 MBTU/hour) Starting to identify potential sources subject to RACT requirements Slide 16 16 State Implementation Plan (SIP) RACM Requirements Applies to all source sectors (point, area, highway mobile & off- road mobile sources) Only what is necessary to attain NAAQS NC has already adopted some RACM type rules Open burning ban during ozone events Expanded I/M program SC has adopted some RACM type rules Open burning Degreasers Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs (I/M) NC has already have met this requirement in Metrolina area SC working on a program for the nonattainment area in York County Slide 17 17 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Most significant emission controls are already underway Clean Smokestacks Act Vehicle emissions testing Ultra-Low sulfur fuels Cleaner engines Slide 18 18 NC/SC SIP Coordination Working together in VISTAS Making use of VISTAS 2002 meteorological, emissions and air quality modeling Future year (2009) work will be completed through VISTAS Control strategies for the Metrolina area will be developed through a consultation process involving NCDAQ, SCDHEC and appropriate stakeholders Slide 19 19 VISTAS Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast Regional Planning Organization established under the 1999 Regional Haze Rule Collaborative effort of States and Tribes to support management of regional haze and related air quality issues in the Southeastern US No independent regulatory authority and no authority to direct or establish State or Tribal law or policy. Slide 20 20 Slide 21 21 Slide 22 22 Met, Emissions and AQ Model performance and protocol Emissions Inventories 2002 & 2009 Slide 23 23 Modeling Application Process Select areas or domains of interest Select representative ozone season/episodes Prepare and refine meteorological simulations Prepare and refine emission model inputs Apply air quality modeling system Performance evaluation on episodes Prepare current and future year emissions (Projected and Potential Control Strategies) Re-apply air quality modeling system Analyze the effectiveness of control strategies Apply the attainment test Slide 24 24 Air Quality Modeling System Meteorological Model Emissions Processor Air Quality Model MM5 SMOKE CMAQ Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions Community Multiscale Air Quality System Temporally and Spatially Gridded Air Quality Output predictions Slide 25 25 Modeling Domains 36 km 12 km Slide 26 26 Grid Structure Horizontal: 36 km & 12 km Vertical: MM5 = 34 layers SMOKE & CMAQ = 19 layers Layer 1 = 36 m deep Ground ~48,000 ft Slide 27 27 Modeling Season / Episode Full Year of 2002 selected for VISTAS modeling Regional Haze / Fine Particulate: Full Year Ozone: Late May End Of August The higher portion of the 2002 ozone season selected for the Ozone SIP and Attainment Demonstration modeling. Slide 28 28 Meteorological Modeling Overview George Bridgers, NCDAQ Meteorologist Slide 29 29 Meteorological Modeling Penn State / NCAQ MM5 meso-scale meteorological model Version 3.6.1+ Widely used in the research and regulatory communities VISTAS Contracted With Barons Advanced Meteorological Systems (BAMS) Run at both 36km (Nationwide) and 12km (Southeastern US) resolutions Slide 30 30 Met Model Performance Model Performance For Key Variables: Temperature Moisture (Mixing Ratio & Relative Humidity) Winds Cloud Cover Precipitation Comparisons With Other Met Modeling Studies Summary Of Met Model Performance Slide 31 31 Model Performance Statistics Meteorology In North Carolina May, June, July, August, and September (MJJAS) Slide 32 32 Overall diurnal pattern captured very well Slight cool bias in the daytime Slight warm bias overnight Temperature Slide 33 33 MayJune JulyAugust Slide 34 34 Moisture (Mixing Ratio) Tracks observed trends fairly well Low bias in the morning through the early afternoon High bias in the late afternoon and at night Slide 35 35 MayJune JulyAugust Slide 36 36 High bias in the daytime Low bias at night RH is linked to temperature and moisture biases Moisture (Relative Humidity) Slide 37 37 ~1 mph high bias day, ~2 mph high bias at night Partly due to relative inability of winds in the model to go calm (There is always some wind) Also due to starting thresholds of observation network network cant measure winds < 3 mph, so winds < 3 mph are reported as calm Wind Speed Slide 38 38 MayJune JulyAugust Slide 39 39 MayJune JulyAugust Slide 40 40 General overestimation of clouds in the met model Greatest bias overnight & smallest bias early afternoon Nighttime cloud observations questionable Bias ~4% in May, peaks at ~15% in July, and declines to ~3% in September Cloud Cover Slide 41 41 General over prediction of clouds (example July 18 2PM) Cloud Cover Slide 42 42 Mixed precipitation performance typical of any summertime weather pattern / forecast Good performing day (Spatially and magnitude): Precipitation Slide 43 43 Poorer performing day (Magnitude okay is spots, but significant precip I-95 corridor that is false): Precipitation Slide 44 44 Observed Precip MAY Observed Precip JUNE Modeled Precip MAY Modeled Precip JUNE Slide 45 45 Observed Precip JULY Observed Precip AUGUST Modeled Precip JULY Modeled Precip AUGUST Slide 46 46 Comparisons With Other Met Modeling Studies The next series of slides are adapted from Alpine Geophysics documentation for the VISTAS AQ Modeling project. The bar charts are comparisons of VISTAS Phase I (Sensitivities) MM5 modeling to other national and Southeast regional MM5 simulations The performance characteristics of VISTAS Phase I MM5 modeling is very similar to VISTAS Phase II (Annual) MM5 Modeling Slide 47 47 National MM5 Comparisons Slide 48 48 The 3 green bars: - VISTAS 1 = January 2002 episode - VISTAS 2 = July 2001 episode - VISTAS 31 = July 1999 episode The yellow bars: - USEPAs 2001 Annual MM5 simulation Slide 49 49 The 3 green bars: - VISTAS 1 = January 2002 episode - VISTAS 2 = July 2001 episode - VISTAS 31 = July 1999 episode The yellow bars: - USEPAs 2001 Annual MM5 simulation Slide 50 50 The 3 green bars: - VISTAS 1 = January 2002 episode - VISTAS 2 = July 2001 episode - VISTAS 31 = July 1999 episode The yellow bars: - USEPAs 2001 Annual MM5 simulation Slide 51 51 The 3 green bars: - VISTAS 1 = January 2002 episode - VISTAS 2 = July 2001 episode - VISTAS 31 = July 1999 episode The yellow bars: - USEPAs 2001 Annual MM5 simulation Slide 52 52 The 3 green bars: - VISTAS 1 = January 2002 episode - VISTAS 2 = July 2001 episode - VISTAS 31 = July 1999 episode The yellow bars: - USEPAs 2001 Annual MM5 simulation Slide 53 53 Southeast Regional MM5 Comparisons Slide 54 54 North Carolina MJJAS 2002 T Error = 1.55 for all pairs Slide 55 55 North Carolina MJJAS 2002 WS RMSE = 1.84 for all pairs WS RMSE = 1.54 for no calms Slide 56 56 Closer to 1.0 indicates better performance North Carolina MJJAS 2002 WS IA = 0.73 for all pairs WS IA = 0.74 for no calms Slide 57 57 Take Away Messages The 2002 meteorological model performance: Compares favorably to the performance in similar modeling projects / studies, including that of EPA Can be considered State Of The Science The daytime biases would tend to contribute to lower ozone concentrations in the AQ model: Cooler afternoon high temperatures Higher relative humidity Rapid atmospheric moisture increase late day Greater cloud and precipitation coverage Slightly higher wind speeds Generally, a little too much atmospheric mixing Slide 58 58 2002 Emissions Overview Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer II Slide 59 59 Emissions Inventory Definitions ActualActual = the emissions inventory developed to simulate what happened in 2002 TypicalTypical = the emissions inventory developed to characterize the current emissions It doesnt include specific events, but rather averages or typical conditions (e.g. Electric Generating Units and fires) FutureFuture = the emissions inventory developed to simulate the future (e.g. 2009 for Metrolina modeling) ***Note Actual is used for model performance evaluation only! Typical and Future are used to determine future attainment status. Slide 60 60 Emission Source Categories Point sources: utilities, refineries, industrial sources, etc. Area sources: gas stations, dry cleaners, farming practices, fires, etc. Motor vehicles: cars, trucks, buses, etc. Nonroad mobile sources: agricultural equipment, recreational marine, lawn mowers, construction equipment, etc. Biogenic: trees, vegetation, crops Slide 61 61 VISTAS 2002 Inventory Actual inventory developed for model evaluation Utilize June 2004 State Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) submittals Actual 2002 calendar year inventories (Annual 2002) Augment State data where pollutants missing Process onroad mobile through MOBILE6 module of SMOKE emissions system Generate fires as specific daily events Improved temporal and spatial allocation for modeling Use of actual Continuous Emissions Monitor (CEM) distributions New CMU monthly ammonia (NH3) profiles by county/SCC Slide 62 62 VISTAS 2002 Inventory - Point Annual 2002 Includes Electric Generating Units (EGUs), non-EGU point source data Reviewed by stakeholders Hourly EGU data generated to temporally allocate emissions during appropriate episodes Used United State Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) CEM and stakeholder provided data Slide 63 63 VISTAS 2002 Inventory - Fire Annual 2002 Includes agricultural, prescribed, land clearing and wildfire data Modeling files generated using more specific raw data Includes acres, dates, and locations of fire activity Generated elevated fire file for sources with appropriate data elements (large wildfires and prescribed burns) Non-elevated sources retained in county-level area source file Slide 64 64 VISTAS 2002 Inventory - Area Annual 2002 CMU NH3 model v.3.6 Provides NH3 estimates from agricultural practices and other animal waste Slide 65 65 VISTAS 2002 Inventory Onroad and Nonroad Onroad Annual 2002 VMT and MOBILE6 inputs collected from States / Locals Nonroad Annual 2002 Slide 66 66 Emission Processing GriddingSpeciationTemporalEmission Inventory SMOKE Emission Model Air Quality Model Slide 67 67 Gridding 36 km 12 km Slide 68 68 36 km 12 km Speciation Converts emissions inventory VOCs to Carbon Bond IV Species Slide 69 69 Temporal 36 km 12 km Adjusts the annual emissions/data to the month of the year, day of the week and to the hour of the day Weekday diurnal profile for On-road Mobile Slide 70 70 Emission Processing GriddingSpeciationTemporalEmission Inventory SMOKE Emission Model Air Quality Model Slide 71 71 GSMNP Overview Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch Chief Slide 72 72 GSMNP 8-hr Ozone Design Values Monitor Purchase Knob County Haywood 01-03 85 02-04 82 2005* 102 * 4 th highest 8-hr max in 2005 can be no higher than this value in order to continue to be in attainment by the end of the 2005 ozone season. ** Number of times the 4 th highest has been this value or lower in the last 5 years. # ** 5 of 5 Slide 73 73 Ozone Nonattainment Timeline Definitions for GSMNP Area Effective date = June 15, 2004 Transportation conformity date = June 15, 2005* SIP submittal date = June 15, 2007 Attainment date = June 15, 2009** Data used to determine attainment = 2006-2008 (Modeling) Attainment year = 2008 *Isolated Rural Area **Or as early as possible Slide 74 74 2002 Air Quality Modeling Overview George Bridgers, NCDAQ Meteorologist Slide 75 75 Air Quality Modeling Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ) Version 4.4 (With SOA Modifications) Widely used in the research & regulatory communities VISTAS Contracted With UC-Riverside, Alpine Geophysics LLC, and ENVIRON International Corp Run at both 36km (Nationwide) and 12km (Southeastern US) resolutions Slide 76 76 AQ Model Performance Metrolina Modeled Ozone Performance 1 & 8 Hour Statistical Tables 1 & 8 Hour Time Series And Statistical Plots Great Smoky Mountains Modeled Ozone Performance 1 & 8 Hour Statistical Tables 1 & 8 Hour Time Series And Statistical Plots Ozone Spatial Plots and Animations Summary Of AQ (Ozone) Model Performance Slide 77 77 Metrolina AQ Monitoring Network Overview Model Performance Statistical Tables 1 Hour Ozone Statistics 8 Hour Ozone Statistics Monitor Time Series And Statistical Plots Rural Site: Crouse Urban Site: Garinger SC Site: York Slide 78 78 AQ Monitor Network Overview Slide 79 79 Model Performance Statistics 1 Hour Ozone Slide 80 80 Model Performance Statistics 8 Hour Ozone Slide 81 81 Crouse 1 Hour Time Series Slide 82 82 Slide 83 83 Slide 84 84 Slide 85 85 Slide 86 86 Crouse 8 Hour Time Series Slide 87 87 Slide 88 88 Slide 89 89 Slide 90 90 Slide 91 91 Garinger 1 Hour Time Series Slide 92 92 Slide 93 93 Slide 94 94 Slide 95 95 Slide 96 96 Garinger 8 Hour Time Series Slide 97 97 Slide 98 98 Slide 99 99 Slide 100 100 Slide 101 101 York, SC 1 Hour Time Series Slide 102 102 Slide 103 103 Slide 104 104 Slide 105 105 Slide 106 106 York, SC 8 Hour Time Series Slide 107 107 Slide 108 108 Slide 109 109 Slide 110 110 Slide 111 111 Great Smoky Mountains AQ Monitoring Network Overview Model Performance Statistical Tables 1 Hour Ozone Statistics 8 Hour Ozone Statistics Monitor Time Series And Statistical Plots High Elevation Site: Clingmans Dome Low Elevation Site: Cades Cove Annual Time Series Site: Look Rock Slide 112 112 AQ Monitor Network Overview Slide 113 113 Model Performance Statistics 1 Hour Ozone Slide 114 114 Model Performance Statistics 8 Hour Ozone Slide 115 115 Clingmans Dome 1 Hour Time Series Slide 116 116 Slide 117 117 Slide 118 118 Slide 119 119 Slide 120 120 Clingmans Dome 8 Hour Time Series Slide 121 121 Slide 122 122 Slide 123 123 Slide 124 124 Slide 125 125 Cades Cove 1 Hour Time Series Slide 126 126 Slide 127 127 Slide 128 128 Slide 129 129 Slide 130 130 Cades Cove 8 Hour Time Series Slide 131 131 Slide 132 132 Slide 133 133 Slide 134 134 Slide 135 135 Look Rock 1 Hour Time Series Slide 136 136 Slide 137 137 Slide 138 138 Slide 139 139 Slide 140 140 Slide 141 141 Slide 142 142 Slide 143 143 Slide 144 144 Slide 145 145 Slide 146 146 Slide 147 147 Slide 148 148 Spatial Plots And Animations Daily 1 Hour Peak Model Ozone Spatial Plots With Observations Overlaid June 8 18 July 14 20 August 17 29 Slide 149 149 June 8 18, 2002 Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots Slide 150 150 Slide 151 151 Slide 152 152 Slide 153 153 Slide 154 154 Slide 155 155 Slide 156 156 July 14 20, 2002 Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots Slide 157 157 Slide 158 158 Slide 159 159 Slide 160 160 Slide 161 161 August 17 29, 2002 Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots Slide 162 162 Slide 163 163 Slide 164 164 Slide 165 165 Slide 166 166 Slide 167 167 Slide 168 168 Slide 169 169 Take Away Messages Under-predictions of the afternoon peak modeled ozone concentrations account for the majority of the negative bias and error. There are not significant spatial or temporal errors with the modeled ozone that held consistently throughout the 2002 Ozone Season. Episodic air quality (ozone) cycles are well captured by the CMAQ air quality model with reasonable buildup and clean-out of ozone concentrations. Slide 170 170 Take Away Messages Modeled ozone response at the high elevation sites of the Great Smoky Mountains deserves further investigation: Horizontal and vertical grid resolution in the mountains Modeled boundary layer dynamics at a ridge top location Use of model layer 3 or 4 ozone instead of layer 1? Slide 171 171 Take Away Messages Thinking ahead to Typical and Future year modeling, Relative Reduction Factor (RRF) calculations, and the Modeled Attainment Test: The relative sense of the modeling will make the afternoon peak under-predictions of ozone less significant and not influence strategy decisions. There are a sufficient number of modeled days in this Base or Actual year modeling at each monitoring location that exceeds the 70ppb threshold to compute RRFs without the need for additional modeling. Slide 172 172 2002 typical and 2009 Emissions Overview Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer II Slide 173 173 Emissions Inventory Definitions ActualActual = the emissions inventory developed to simulate what happened in 2002 TypicalTypical = the emissions inventory developed to characterize the current (2002) emissions It doesnt include specific events, but rather averages or typical conditions (e.g. EGUs and fires) FutureFuture = the emissions inventory developed to simulate the future (e.g. 2009 for Metrolina modeling) ***Remember Actual is used for model performance evaluation only! Typical and Future are used to determine future attainment status. Slide 174 174 2002 typical & 2009 Emissions Comparison Slide 175 175 2002 typical & 2009 Emissions Comparison Slide 176 176 2002 typical and 2009 Point Source Summary Metrolina nonattainment area NOx and VOC bar charts Plots of emission differences 2009-2002 Slide 177 177 Slide 178 178 * * * * Metrolina nonattainment area Slide 179 179 Point Source NOx 2009 minus 2002 (daily max difference, all layers) Increases only Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s Slide 180 180 Point Source NOx 2009 minus 2002 (daily max difference, all layers) Decreases only Scale 0 to -0.1 moles/s Slide 181 181 Slide 182 182 Point Source VOC 2009 minus 2002 (daily max difference, all layers) Increases only Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s Slide 183 183 Point Source VOC 2009 minus 2002 (daily max difference, all layers) Decreases only Scale 0 to -0.1 moles/s Slide 184 184 2002 typical and 2009 Area Source Summary Metrolina nonattainment area NOx and VOC Slide 185 185 Slide 186 186 Slide 187 187 2002 typical and 2009 Nonroad Source Summary Metrolina nonattainment area NOx and VOC Plots of emission differences 2009-2002 Slide 188 188 Slide 189 189 NONROAD NOx 2009 minus 2002 (max difference) Reductions only Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s Slide 190 190 Slide 191 191 2002 typical and 2009 Onroad Mobile Source Summary Metrolina nonattainment area NOx and VOC Plots of emission differences 2009-2002 Animation of 2009 NOx Metrolina NOx per county per vehicle type Slide 192 192 Slide 193 193 Cabarrus County 2002 NOx Emissions 2009 NOx Emissions Slide 194 194 Gaston County 2002 NOx Emissions 2009 NOx Emissions Slide 195 195 Iredell County 2002 NOx Emissions2009 NOx Emissions Slide 196 196 Lincoln County 2002 NOx Emissions2009 NOx Emissions Slide 197 197 Mecklenburg County 2002 NOx Emissions2009 NOx Emissions Slide 198 198 Rowan County 2002 NOx Emissions2009 NOx Emissions Slide 199 199 Union County 2002 NOx Emissions2009 NOx Emissions Slide 200 200 ONROAD Mobile NOx 2009 minus 2002 (max difference) Reductions only Scale 0 to 0.5 moles/s Slide 201 201 Slide 202 202 Identification of Potential NOx and VOC Control Measures Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch Chief Slide 203 203 What is Needed to Meet 15% VOC Plan? Reviewing preliminary emission values to see how close we are to meeting the 15% VOC requirement Potential point source reductions from meeting RACT & MACT requirements? Will look at reductions from extending lower reid vapor pressure (RVP) requirements in Metrolina area Currently 7.8 psi in Mecklenburg & Gaston Counties & 9.0 psi for other Metrolina counties. Slide 204 204 What is Needed to Show Attainment? Will review preliminary air quality results to see how close we are to meeting the 8-hour ozone NAAQS If not attaining, will look for additional NOx controls Will have to address RACM requirements Potential point source reductions to meet NOx RACT requirements Will review emission inventories and potential control measures to get greatest reductions for the cost Need Stakeholders to assist in coming up with potential cost effective control measures Slide 205 205 Schedule/Next Steps Expect preliminary 2009 air quality modeling results in mid-June June 28, 2005 meeting Review 02-09 emissions Present preliminary air quality modeling results Attainment test 2009 Sensitivity modeling (later this summer/fall) Control Strategy discussion (if needed) 15% VOC plan Controls needed for 8-hr ozone NAAQS Outline next steps Slide 206 206 Contributors South Carolina Department of Health and Environment Conservation Pat Brewer, VISTAS Greg Stella, Alpine Geophysics Cyndi Loomis, Alpine Geophysics Don Olerud, Baron Advanced Meteorological Systems Bill Barnard, MACTEC Ed Sabo, MACTEC Kristen Theising, PECHAN Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Gail Tonneson, University of California-Riverside Dennis McNally, Alpine Geophysics Jim Boylan, Georgia Environmental Protection Department Sheila Holman, NCDAQ Bebhinn Do, NCDAQ Nick Witcraft, NCDAQ Phyllis Jones, NCDAQ Vicki Chandler, NCDAQ Pat Bello, NCDAQ Bob Wooten, NCDAQ Matt Mahler, NCDAQ Janice Godfrey, NCDAQ Ming Xie, NCDAQ Mildred Mitchell, NCDAQ VISTAS Stakeholders Slide 207 207 Questions/Comments http://ncair.org Laura Boothe, Chief of Attainment Planning 919-733-1488 Laura.Boothe@ncmail.net Mike Abraczinskas, Environmental Engineer II 919-715-3743 Michael.Abraczinskas@ncmail.net George Bridgers, Meteorologist 919-715-6287 George.Bridgers@ncmail.net Slide 208 208 Thank You!