State Implementation Plan SIP Modeling for 8hour Ozone Preliminary 2002 Results For Metrolina and Gr

1
State Implementation Plan (SIP) Modeling for
8-hour OzonePreliminary 2002 ResultsFor
Metrolina and Great Smoky Mountain National Park
Stakeholders

• Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ
• Laura Boothe, NCDAQ
• George Bridgers, NCDAQ
• May 26, 2005

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

3
Ozone and SIP Modeling Overview

• Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch
  Chief

4
(No Transcript)
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

6
Background

• 8-hour ozone standard
• If a monitored design value is gt 0.08 ppm (84
  ppb), that monitor is violating the standard
• The design value is defined as
• 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily
  maximum 8-hour average

7
2001-2003 Ozone Design Values(Highest Value Per
County)
8
Violating Ozone Monitors Based on 01-03 data
Green dots attaining monitors Red dots
violating monitors
9
NC 8-hr Ozone Nonattainment Areas
10
Metrolina 8-hr Ozone Design Values
Monitor County Line Enochville Rockwell Garinger
Crouse Arrowood Monroe York
County Mecklenburg Rowan Rowan Mecklenburg Lincol
n 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
1 of 5 2 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 2 of 5 5 of 5 4
of 5 5 of 5
4th 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 4th
highest has been this value or lower in the last
5 years.
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)

12
Ozone Nonattainment TimelineDefinitions 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
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)

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

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 (gt10 MBTU/hour)
• Starting to identify potential sources subject to
  RACT requirements

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

17
State Implementation Plan (SIP)

• Most significant emission controls are already
  underway
• Clean Smokestacks Act
• Vehicle emissions testing
• Ultra-Low sulfur fuels
• Cleaner engines

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

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.

20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
Emissions Inventories 2002 2009
Met, Emissions and AQ Model performance and
protocol
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

24
Air Quality Modeling System
25
Modeling Domains
12 km
36 km
26
Grid Structure
Vertical MM5 34 layers SMOKE CMAQ 19
layers
48,000 ft
Horizontal 36 km 12 km
Layer 1 36 m deep
Ground
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.

28
Meteorological Modeling Overview

• George Bridgers, NCDAQ Meteorologist

29
Meteorological Modeling

• Penn State / NCAQ MM5 meso-scale meteorological
  model
• Version 3.6.1
• Widely used in theresearch and
  regulatorycommunities
• VISTAS Contracted WithBarons AdvancedMeteorologi
  cal Systems(BAMS)
• Run at both 36km (Nationwide)and 12km
  (Southeastern US) resolutions

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

31
Model Performance StatisticsMeteorology In North
Carolina
May, June, July, August, and September (MJJAS)
32
Temperature

• Overall diurnal pattern captured very well
• Slight cool bias in the daytime
• Slight warm bias overnight

33
May
June
July
August
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

35
May
June
July
August
36
Moisture (Relative Humidity)

• High bias in the daytime
• Low bias at night
• RH is linked to temperature and moisture biases

37
Wind Speed

• 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 lt 3 mph, so
  winds lt 3 mph are reported as calm

38
May
June
July
August
39
May
June
July
August
40
Cloud Cover

• 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

41
Cloud Cover

• General over prediction of clouds (example July
  18 2PM)

42
Precipitation

• Mixed precipitation performance typical of
  any summertime weather pattern / forecast
• Good performing day (Spatially and magnitude)

43
Precipitation

• Poorer performing day (Magnitude okay is spots,
  but significant precip I-95 corridor that is
  false)

44
Observed Precip MAY
Modeled Precip MAY
Observed Precip JUNE
Modeled Precip JUNE
45
Observed Precip JULY
Modeled Precip JULY
Observed Precip AUGUST
Modeled Precip AUGUST
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

47
National MM5 Comparisons
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

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

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

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

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

53
Southeast RegionalMM5 Comparisons
54
North Carolina MJJAS 2002 T Error 1.55 for
all pairs
55
North Carolina MJJAS 2002 WS RMSE 1.84 for
all pairs WS RMSE 1.54 for no calms
56
North Carolina MJJAS 2002 WS IA 0.73 for all
pairs WS IA 0.74 for no calms
Closer to 1.0 indicates better performance
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

58
2002 Emissions Overview

• Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer
  II

59
Emissions Inventory Definitions

• Actual the emissions inventory developed to
  simulate what happened in 2002
• Typical 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)
• Future 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.

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

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

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

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

64
VISTAS 2002 Inventory - Area

• Annual 2002
• CMU NH3 model v.3.6
• Provides NH3 estimates from agricultural
  practices and other animal waste

65
VISTAS 2002 Inventory Onroad and Nonroad

• Onroad
• Annual 2002 VMT and MOBILE6 inputs collected from
  States / Locals
• Nonroad
• Annual 2002

66
Emission Processing
67
Gridding
12 km
36 km
68

• Speciation

• Converts emissions inventory VOCs to Carbon
  Bond IV Species

12 km
36 km
69
Temporal
Weekday diurnal profile for On-road Mobile
12 km
Adjusts the annual emissions/data to the month of
the year, day of the week and to the hour of the
day
36 km
70
Emission Processing
71
GSMNP Overview

• Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch
  Chief

72
GSMNP 8-hr Ozone Design Values
Monitor Purchase Knob
County Haywood
01-03 85
02-04 82
2005 102
5 of 5
4th 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 4th highest has
been this value or lower in the last 5 years.
73
Ozone Nonattainment TimelineDefinitions 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
74
2002 Air Quality Modeling Overview

• George Bridgers, NCDAQ Meteorologist

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

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

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

78
AQ Monitor Network Overview
79
Model Performance Statistics1 Hour Ozone
80
Model Performance Statistics8 Hour Ozone
81
Crouse 1 Hour Time Series
82
(No Transcript)
83
(No Transcript)
84
(No Transcript)
85
(No Transcript)
86
Crouse 8 Hour Time Series
87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
89
(No Transcript)
90
(No Transcript)
91
Garinger 1 Hour Time Series
92
(No Transcript)
93
(No Transcript)
94
(No Transcript)
95
(No Transcript)
96
Garinger 8 Hour Time Series
97
(No Transcript)
98
(No Transcript)
99
(No Transcript)
100
(No Transcript)
101
York, SC 1 Hour Time Series
102
(No Transcript)
103
(No Transcript)
104
(No Transcript)
105
(No Transcript)
106
York, SC 8 Hour Time Series
107
(No Transcript)
108
(No Transcript)
109
(No Transcript)
110
(No Transcript)
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

112
AQ Monitor Network Overview
113
Model Performance Statistics1 Hour Ozone
114
Model Performance Statistics8 Hour Ozone
115
Clingmans Dome 1 Hour Time Series
116
(No Transcript)
117
(No Transcript)
118
(No Transcript)
119
(No Transcript)
120
Clingmans Dome 8 Hour Time Series
121
(No Transcript)
122
(No Transcript)
123
(No Transcript)
124
(No Transcript)
125
Cades Cove 1 Hour Time Series
126
(No Transcript)
127
(No Transcript)
128
(No Transcript)
129
(No Transcript)
130
Cades Cove 8 Hour Time Series
131
(No Transcript)
132
(No Transcript)
133
(No Transcript)
134
(No Transcript)
135
Look Rock 1 Hour Time Series
136
(No Transcript)
137
(No Transcript)
138
(No Transcript)
139
(No Transcript)
140
(No Transcript)
141
(No Transcript)
142
(No Transcript)
143
(No Transcript)
144
(No Transcript)
145
(No Transcript)
146
(No Transcript)
147
(No Transcript)
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

149
June 8 18, 2002Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots
150
(No Transcript)
151
(No Transcript)
152
(No Transcript)
153
(No Transcript)
154
(No Transcript)
155
(No Transcript)
156
July 14 20, 2002Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots
157
(No Transcript)
158
(No Transcript)
159
(No Transcript)
160
(No Transcript)
161
August 17 29, 2002Daily 1 Hour Peak Plots
162
(No Transcript)
163
(No Transcript)
164
(No Transcript)
165
(No Transcript)
166
(No Transcript)
167
(No Transcript)
168
(No Transcript)
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.

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?

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.

172
2002 typical and 2009 Emissions Overview

• Mike Abraczinskas, NCDAQ Environmental Engineer
  II

173
Emissions Inventory Definitions

• Actual the emissions inventory developed to
  simulate what happened in 2002
• Typical 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)
• Future 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.

174
2002 typical 2009Emissions Comparison
175
2002 typical 2009Emissions Comparison
176
2002 typical and 2009 Point Source Summary

• Metrolina nonattainment area
• NOx and VOC bar charts
• Plots of emission differences 2009-2002

177
(No Transcript)
178



Metrolina nonattainment area
179
Point Source NOx 2009 minus
2002 (daily max difference, all layers)

• Increases only
• Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s

180
Point Source NOx 2009 minus
2002 (daily max difference, all layers)

• Decreases only
• Scale 0 to -0.1 moles/s

181
(No Transcript)
182
Point Source VOC 2009 minus
2002 (daily max difference, all layers)

• Increases only
• Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s

183
Point Source VOC 2009 minus
2002 (daily max difference, all layers)

• Decreases only
• Scale 0 to -0.1 moles/s

184
2002 typical and 2009 Area Source Summary

• Metrolina nonattainment area
• NOx and VOC

185
(No Transcript)
186
(No Transcript)
187
2002 typical and 2009 Nonroad Source Summary

• Metrolina nonattainment area
• NOx and VOC
• Plots of emission differences 2009-2002

188
(No Transcript)
189
NONROAD NOx 2009 minus 2002 (max
difference)

• Reductions only
• Scale 0 to 0.1 moles/s

190
(No Transcript)
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

192
(No Transcript)
193
Cabarrus County
2009 NOx Emissions
2002 NOx Emissions
194
Gaston County
2009 NOx Emissions
2002 NOx Emissions
195
Iredell County
2002 NOx Emissions
2009 NOx Emissions
196
Lincoln County
2002 NOx Emissions
2009 NOx Emissions
197
Mecklenburg County
2002 NOx Emissions
2009 NOx Emissions
198
Rowan County
2002 NOx Emissions
2009 NOx Emissions
199
Union County
2002 NOx Emissions
2009 NOx Emissions
200
ONROAD Mobile NOx 2009 minus 2002 (max
difference)

• Reductions only
• Scale 0 to 0.5 moles/s

201
(No Transcript)
202
Identification of Potential NOx and VOC Control
Measures

• Laura Boothe, NCDAQ Attainment Planning Branch
  Chief

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.

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

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

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

207
Questions/Comments

• http//ncair.org
• Laura Boothe, Chief of Attainment Planning
• 919-733-1488
• Laura.Boothe_at_ncmail.net
• Mike Abraczinskas, Environmental Engineer II
• 919-715-3743
• Michael.Abraczinskas_at_ncmail.net
• George Bridgers, Meteorologist
• 919-715-6287
• George.Bridgers_at_ncmail.net

208

• Thank You!