1. Reasonable Progress: Chiricahua NM & Wilderness Area
Implementation Workgroup Meeting
San Diego, California
April 17 – 19, 2007

2. Chiricahua NM & Wilderness Area
Overview of Chiricahua NM & WA
Monitoring/Baseline Conditions
Annual Average
20% Worst Visibility Days
Emissions & Source Apportionment
Sources
Species
Reasonable Progress/Modeling
Model Performance
Modeling Results
Visibility Projections
Summary

3. Arizona Class One Areas
Source:

4. Chiricahua NM & Wilderness Area
2km Terrain Map
20km Terrain Map
The Chiricahua Wilderness is located south of the Chiricahua National Monument. The IMRPOVE monitor is located west of the National Monument.
Source: WRAP Causes of Haze Website (

5. Glide Slope Annual Average (in dv)
Baseline Conditions: dv
Natural Conditions: 4.0 dv

6. Annual Light Extinction
Results show particle extinction. The baseline extinction is Mm -1.

7. Glide Slope for 20% Worst Days (in dv)
Baseline = dv; Natural Conditions = 7.2 dv

8. Baseline Extinction Budget
Visibility impairment on worst days is mostly attributed to sulfates, coarse mass, fine soil, and organic carbon.

9. Baseline Species – Time Series
This shows extinction for all species for each year of the baseline period.

10. Baseline Worst 20% Light Extinction

11. Average 20% Worst Day Composition (baseline ’00 – ‘04)
Light Extinction (Mm -1)
Source: Chart made from spreadsheet posted at:
WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Composition

12. Average 20% Best Day Composition (baseline ’00 – ’04)
Light Extinction (Mm -1)
Source: Chart made from spreadsheet posted at:
WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Composition

13. Species Glide Slope – Worst 20%
This shows the baseline and glide slope by species.

14. Species Trends and URP Glide Slope (Worst Days)

15. Emissions & Source Apportionment

16. Upwind Residence Time on 20% Worst Visibility Days (2000-04)
Highest values are located in southern Arizona, west Sonora, Baja California Norte, and north Chihuahua.

17. Sources Located Near Chiricahua
Point Sources
Douglas Power Plant; Douglas, AZ
Apache Station (AEPCO); Wilcox, AZ
Apache Nitrogen; St. David, AZ
Chemical Lime; Paul Spur, AZ
Area Sources
Vehicle Emissions: highways, unpaved roads, recreational areas
Other Sources
Naco Dump: 40 miles south of wilderness area near Naco, Mexico

18. Source Apportionment for Sulfate (SO4)
The left column shows (plan02c) and the right column shows 2018 (base18b) for each state and region.
PSAT results indicate that sources in Arizona, Mexico, CENRAP, EUS, and pacific off-shore are the largest contributors.

19. Weighted Emissions Potential – SO4

20. Weighted Emissions Potential – SO4

21. Arizona SOx Emissions
Source: Saguaro Reasonable Progress presentation on 1/22/07, L. Alter

22. Source Apportionment for Nitrate (NO3)
The left column shows (plan02c) and the right column shows 2018 (base 18b) for each state and region.
The largest contributors of nitrate are Arizona and California. Sources from CENRAP, Mexico, New Mexico, and pacific off-shore are also likely to contribute to nitrate.

23. Weighted Emissions Potential – NO3

24. Weighted Emissions Potential – NO3

25. Arizona NOx Emissions
Source: Saguaro Reasonable Progress presentation on 1/22/07, L. Alter

26. Weighted Emissions Potential – Organic Carbon (OMC)

27. Weighted Emissions Potential – OMC

28. Arizona OC Emissions
Source: Saguaro Reasonable Progress presentation on 1/22/07, L. Alter

29. Weighted Emissions Potential – Elemental Carbon (EC)

30. Weighted Emissions Potential - EC

31. Weighted Emissions Potential – Fine Soil (Soil)

32. Weighted Emissions Potential - Soil

33. Weighted Emissions Potential – Coarse Particulate Matter (CM)

34. Weighted Emissions Potential – CM

35. Modeling

36. Model Performance
The left points are modeled data and the right points are from IMPROVE.

37. Visibility Modeling Results

38. Visibility Projections – NO3
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

39. Visibility Projections – SO4
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

40. Visibility Projections - OMC
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

41. Visibility Projections - EC
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

42. Visibility Projections – CM
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

43. Visibility Projections – Soil
This shows baseline conditions, glide slope, and projected 2018 light extinction.

44. Summary Largest Contributors to Visibility Impairment in Chiricahua
Sulfates
Coarse Mass, Fine Soil
Organic Carbon

45. Continuing Progress Continuing Analysis of Chiricahua
Additional WRAP Products (e.g. CoDust)
Local Emission Inventories (e.g. Douglas/Agua Prieta)
Nonattainment/Maintenance Area Plans
Local analysis (FLM, Tribal)
Impact from BART and other non-BART
Microscale Modeling????