Appendix B Visibility Impairment Associated with Coal fired EGUs and Industrial Boilers ( CALPUFF Estimates for 23 Scenarios) B 1 Table B 1 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 1 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 10000, 3500, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 116 104 121 118 119 115.6 0.1 100 92 102 93 97 106 98.0 0.1 200 68 80 64 66 84 72.4 0.5 50 31 33 3 45 33 29.0 0.5 100 21 23 19 28 26 23.4 0.5 200 11 14 10 19 11 13.0 1.0 50 9 11 13 15 14 12.4 1.0 100 5 8 8 10 11 8.4 1.0 200 2 3 4 8 4 4.2 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 3.80 2.18 1.75 1.71 1.51 1.41 1.28 1.25 1.09 0.99 50 1987 3.75 2.51 2.23 1.55 1.52 1.42 1.31 1.24 1.18 1.16 50 1988 3.25 2.55 2.46 1.87 1.54 1.46 1.33 1.24 1.21 1.15 50 1989 4.71 2.39 2.37 2.06 2.04 1.67 1.61 1.51 1.47 1.38 50 1990 3.82 3.35 1.98 1.71 1.61 1.43 1.34 1.25 1.18 1.15 50 5 yr. Avg. 3.87 2.60 2.16 1.78 1.64 1.48 1.38 1.30 1.23 1.17 100 1986 3.80 1.65 1.56 1.23 1.16 1.00 0.90 0.86 0.81 0.80 100 1987 2.43 2.37 1.66 1.52 1.44 1.38 1.17 1.01 0.93 0.91 100 1988 3.08 1.82 1.51 1.33 1.16 1.11 1.10 1.04 0.81 0.80 100 1989 2.26 1.95 1.74 1.66 1.49 1.37 1.33 1.31 1.26 1.10 100 1990 3.67 2.27 1.76 1.67 1.55 1.46 1.40 1.25 1.22 1.20 100 5 yr. Avg. 3.05 2.01 1.65 1.48 1.36 1.26 1.18 1.09 1.01 0.96 200 1986 1.70 1.24 1.08 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.67 0.63 0.63 0.57 200 1987 1.69 1.19 1.08 0.99 0.96 0.95 0.77 0.71 0.65 0.58 200 1988 2.08 1.33 1.24 1.02 0.75 0.65 0.62 0.58 0.57 0.54 200 1989 2.39 1.81 1.75 1.62 1.38 1.31 1.07 1.03 0.99 0.96 200 1990 2.95 1.39 1.27 1.02 0.95 0.89 0.81 0.71 0.71 0.56 200 5 yr. Avg. 2.16 1.39 1.28 1.10 0.98 0.93 0.79 0.73 0.71 0.64 B 2 Table B 2 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 2 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 10000, 6250, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 246 251 237 221 240 239.0 0.1 100 213 224 222 201 213 214.6 0.1 200 140 124 118 122 143 129.4 0.5 50 93 108 80 80 99 92.0 0.5 100 81 87 72 70 94 80.8 0.5 200 29 24 20 27 26 25.2 1.0 50 37 38 30 35 33 34.6 1.0 100 33 22 25 21 21 24.4 1.0 200 6 4 4 15 6 7.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 4.06 3.50 3.32 2.63 2.41 2.26 2.23 2.10 2.07 1.91 50 1987 4.74 3.75 3.26 2.72 2.47 2.41 2.19 2.14 1.88 1.85 50 1988 4.29 3.40 2.92 2.82 2.79 2.67 2.51 2.48 2.42 1.98 50 1989 5.76 5.49 5.07 4.59 4.47 4.45 3.90 3.70 3.67 3.30 50 1990 6.09 4.76 3.84 3.39 3.03 2.91 2.51 2.48 2.42 2.30 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.99 4.18 3.68 3.23 3.04 2.94 2.67 2.58 2.49 2.27 100 1986 3.18 2.56 2.42 2.35 2.01 1.87 1.86 1.78 1.62 1.60 100 1987 2.59 2.10 1.98 1.90 1.83 1.63 1.51 1.43 1.41 1.40 100 1988 3.81 2.37 2.03 2.00 1.73 1.69 1.60 1.47 1.44 1.42 100 1989 4.16 3.16 3.11 2.73 2.60 2.05 1.99 1.77 1.68 1.53 100 1990 4.18 2.82 2.28 2.25 2.12 2.00 1.78 1.43 1.38 1.26 100 5 yr. Avg. 3.58 2.60 2.36 2.25 2.06 1.85 1.75 1.57 1.51 1.44 200 1986 2.89 1.74 1.67 1.37 1.32 1.16 0.94 0.87 0.86 0.84 200 1987 2.30 1.41 1.28 1.01 0.90 0.88 0.85 0.77 0.74 0.73 200 1988 2.43 1.74 1.29 1.01 0.90 0.88 0.80 0.71 0.69 0.69 200 1989 2.89 2.75 1.95 1.58 1.37 1.37 1.35 1.32 1.31 1.24 200 1990 3.33 2.83 1.79 1.56 1.34 1.05 1.00 0.88 0.88 0.87 200 5 yr. Avg. 2.77 2.09 1.59 1.30 1.17 1.07 0.99 0.91 0.90 0.87 B 3 Table B 3 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 3 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 5000, 3500, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 93 82 107 99 93 94.8 0.1 100 69 79 67 82 71 73.6 0.1 200 47 54 42 49 56 49.6 0.5 50 14 17 15 23 20 17.8 0.5 100 9 9 10 13 14 11.0 0.5 200 6 6 4 12 9 7.4 1.0 50 4 4 4 7 4 4.6 1.0 100 2 3 2 4 4 3.0 1.0 200 1 0 1 1 1 0.8 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 2.47 1.57 1.26 1.02 0.98 0.93 0.82 0.81 0.70 0.68 50 1987 2.48 1.60 1.39 1.06 0.92 0.81 0.79 0.75 0.68 0.65 50 1988 1.81 1.64 1.48 1.33 0.93 0.90 0.86 0.70 0.68 0.68 50 1989 3.75 1.99 1.47 1.34 1.26 1.11 1.04 0.97 0.92 0.92 50 1990 2.39 2.09 1.24 1.09 0.94 0.90 0.80 0.72 0.71 0.67 50 5 yr. Avg. 2.58 1.77 1.37 1.17 1.01 0.93 0.86 0.79 0.74 0.72 100 1986 2.52 1.16 0.98 0.76 0.68 0.59 0.56 0.53 0.51 0.46 100 1987 1.64 1.43 1.01 0.88 0.80 0.79 0.63 0.57 0.53 0.50 100 1988 2.11 1.13 0.98 0.78 0.76 0.70 0.59 0.59 0.52 0.51 100 1989 1.37 1.19 1.16 1.08 0.97 0.93 0.85 0.80 0.77 0.70 100 1990 2.13 1.39 1.09 1.03 0.92 0.91 0.84 0.78 0.77 0.74 100 5 yr. Avg. 1.95 1.26 1.04 0.90 0.83 0.78 0.70 0.65 0.62 0.58 200 1986 1.07 0.88 0.68 0.58 0.58 0.55 0.48 0.46 0.37 0.34 200 1987 0.99 0.70 0.64 0.56 0.56 0.55 0.44 0.42 0.35 0.35 200 1988 1.35 0.85 0.81 0.55 0.49 0.37 0.36 0.32 0.32 0.30 200 1989 1.44 0.99 0.98 0.95 0.76 0.75 0.72 0.59 0.54 0.52 200 1990 1.68 0.82 0.67 0.61 0.51 0.49 0.45 0.44 0.38 0.33 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.31 0.85 0.76 0.65 0.58 0.54 0.49 0.45 0.39 0.37 B 4 Table B 4 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 4 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 5000, 6250, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 217 228 214 193 217 213.8 0.1 100 191 199 193 179 191 190.6 0.1 200 114 98 88 98 108 101.2 0.5 50 71 70 55 50 63 61.8 0.5 100 61 51 48 49 69 55.6 0.5 200 20 11 10 19 14 14.8 1.0 50 27 28 21 28 23 25.4 1.0 100 22 13 14 13 10 14.4 1.0 200 5 3 3 5 4 4.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 3.41 3.01 2.82 2.24 1.96 1.95 1.83 1.70 1.69 1.68 50 1987 4.14 3.03 2.60 2.30 2.11 2.04 1.84 1.67 1.63 1.48 50 1988 3.69 2.92 2.36 2.26 2.21 2.15 2.04 1.95 1.80 1.64 50 1989 4.60 0.51 4.00 3.63 3.59 3.53 3.19 2.98 2.92 2.56 50 1990 4.95 3.71 3.25 2.68 2.20 2.07 2.03 2.00 1.88 1.77 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.16 2.64 3.00 2.62 2.41 2.35 2.19 2.06 1.98 1.82 100 1986 2.61 2.26 2.11 2.06 1.80 1.60 1.53 1.45 1.38 1.35 100 1987 2.28 1.80 1.61 1.53 1.33 1.31 1.24 1.19 1.17 1.14 100 1988 3.10 1.93 1.63 1.60 1.36 1.29 1.24 1.18 1.13 1.11 100 1989 3.15 2.34 2.33 2.09 1.96 1.56 1.41 1.28 1.21 1.20 100 1990 3.21 2.20 1.70 1.67 1.64 1.61 1.48 1.15 1.09 1.02 100 5 yr. Avg. 2.87 2.11 1.88 1.79 1.62 1.47 1.38 1.25 1.20 1.16 200 1986 2.30 1.42 1.36 1.14 1.13 0.96 0.77 0.70 0.70 0.68 200 1987 1.82 1.19 1.04 0.83 0.73 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.53 200 1988 1.93 1.43 1.04 0.81 0.74 0.72 0.65 0.58 0.54 0.53 200 1989 2.11 2.03 1.55 1.10 1.08 0.99 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 200 1990 2.79 2.30 1.46 1.25 0.98 0.81 0.75 0.68 0.64 0.64 200 5 yr. Avg. 2.19 1.67 1.29 1.03 0.93 0.82 0.74 0.70 0.68 0.66 B 5 Table B 5 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 5 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 1000, 3500, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 64 48 67 74 66 63.8 0.1 100 35 34 35 47 37 37.6 0.1 200 21 22 17 24 23 21.4 0.5 50 4 7 6 9 5 6.2 0.5 100 3 4 3 4 4 3.6 0.5 200 2 1 1 2 1 1.4 1.0 50 2 1 1 2 1 1.4 1.0 100 1 1 1 0 0 0.6 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.67 1.05 0.77 0.54 0.47 0.46 0.41 0.39 0.39 0.33 50 1987 1.73 0.98 0.83 0.68 0.62 0.59 0.55 0.49 0.39 0.36 50 1988 1.06 0.87 0.75 0.62 0.58 0.56 0.39 0.38 0.37 0.37 50 1989 2.91 1.66 0.86 0.81 0.66 0.65 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.49 50 1990 1.29 0.98 0.63 0.54 0.51 0.47 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.43 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.73 1.11 0.77 0.64 0.57 0.55 0.48 0.46 0.43 0.40 100 1986 1.36 0.72 0.51 0.42 0.37 0.36 0.32 0.30 0.30 0.26 100 1987 1.06 0.82 0.55 0.53 0.41 0.35 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.27 100 1988 1.26 0.56 0.53 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.32 0.31 0.26 0.26 100 1989 0.90 0.72 0.55 0.53 0.49 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.37 0.37 100 1990 0.84 0.64 0.62 0.50 0.48 0.45 0.40 0.39 0.33 0.29 100 5 yr. Avg. 1.08 0.69 0.55 0.47 0.42 0.39 0.35 0.34 0.31 0.29 200 1986 0.70 0.55 0.40 0.36 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.28 0.21 0.18 200 1987 0.57 0.49 0.44 0.34 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 200 1988 0.72 0.45 0.44 0.39 0.27 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 200 1989 0.70 0.54 0.41 0.35 0.32 0.28 0.28 0.25 0.25 0.23 200 1990 0.63 0.42 0.31 0.25 0.23 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.66 0.49 0.40 0.34 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.19 B 6 Table B 6 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 6 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 1000, 6250, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 165 184 165 162 175 170.2 0.1 100 158 150 155 150 155 153.6 0.1 200 79 60 65 70 73 69.4 0.5 50 55 52 41 39 42 45.8 0.5 100 45 42 39 32 44 40.4 0.5 200 12 5 7 10 9 8.6 1.0 50 18 17 17 19 16 17.4 1.0 100 16 8 8 9 7 9.6 1.0 200 3 2 2 3 3 2.6 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 2.92 2.60 2.39 1.99 1.74 1.73 1.56 1.50 1.49 1.37 50 1987 3.63 2.41 2.07 1.84 1.76 1.69 1.62 1.50 1.32 1.28 50 1988 3.19 2.47 2.00 1.82 1.79 1.72 1.70 1.51 1.47 1.27 50 1989 3.57 3.45 3.05 2.87 2.83 2.74 2.57 2.40 2.24 1.93 50 1990 3.93 2.79 2.74 2.08 1.76 1.66 1.56 1.48 1.42 1.33 50 5 yr. Avg. 3.45 2.74 2.45 2.12 1.97 1.91 1.80 1.68 1.59 1.44 100 1986 2.16 2.03 1.85 1.82 1.62 1.33 1.30 1.19 1.15 1.13 100 1987 2.05 1.55 1.37 1.19 1.16 1.15 1.11 1.01 0.99 0.98 100 1988 2.49 1.68 1.39 1.28 1.13 1.09 1.03 1.02 0.96 0.95 100 1989 2.26 1.66 1.63 1.56 1.39 1.15 1.06 1.06 1.02 0.96 100 1990 2.36 1.76 1.46 1.25 1.23 1.15 1.07 0.97 0.91 0.87 100 5 yr. Avg. 2.26 1.74 1.54 1.42 1.31 1.18 1.11 1.05 1.00 0.98 200 1986 1.81 1.15 1.11 0.97 0.95 0.80 0.63 0.60 0.58 0.57 200 1987 1.42 1.04 0.84 0.68 0.63 0.49 0.47 0.46 0.43 0.41 200 1988 1.50 1.17 0.84 0.65 0.57 0.54 0.50 0.48 0.42 0.42 200 1989 1.60 1.34 1.22 0.97 0.72 0.70 0.68 0.62 0.59 0.58 200 1990 2.33 1.86 1.16 1.00 0.76 0.69 0.58 0.56 0.52 0.49 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.73 1.31 1.03 0.85 0.73 0.64 0.57 0.54 0.51 0.49 B 7 Table B 7 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 7 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 1000, 350, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 10 12 13 19 17 14.2 0.1 100 6 8 8 10 12 8.8 0.1 200 3 4 4 10 4 5.0 0.5 50 0 0 0 1 0 0.2 0.5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 0.45 0.24 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.10 50 1987 0.44 0.28 0.25 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 50 1988 0.38 0.29 0.28 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.12 50 1989 0.57 0.27 0.27 0.24 0.23 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.15 50 1990 0.46 0.40 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 50 5 yr. Avg. 0.46 0.30 0.24 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 100 1986 0.45 0.18 0.17 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 100 1987 0.27 0.27 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.10 100 1988 0.35 0.20 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.08 100 1989 0.25 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 100 1990 0.44 0.25 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.13 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.35 0.22 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 200 1986 0.18 0.13 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 200 1987 0.18 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 200 1988 0.23 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 200 1989 0.27 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 200 1990 0.34 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.24 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 B 8 Table B 8 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 1 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 1000, 625, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 40 46 34 35 38 38.6 0.1 100 35 26 27 24 26 27.6 0.1 200 6 4 4 15 6 7.0 0.5 50 0 1 1 6 2 2.0 0.5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 0.46 0.40 0.37 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.23 0.21 50 1987 0.56 0.45 0.37 0.31 0.29 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.22 0.21 50 1988 0.52 0.40 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.22 50 1989 0.72 0.69 0.63 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.42 0.38 50 1990 0.80 0.58 0.47 0.42 0.34 0.34 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.25 50 5 yr. Avg. 0.62 0.50 0.43 0.38 0.35 0.34 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.25 100 1986 0.36 0.28 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.17 100 1987 0.29 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 100 1988 0.45 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.15 100 1989 0.49 0.36 0.35 0.30 0.29 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.16 100 1990 0.49 0.31 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.14 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.41 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 200 1986 0.32 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 200 1987 0.25 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 200 1988 0.27 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 200 1989 0.32 0.31 0.21 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 200 1990 0.38 0.32 0.19 0.16 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.31 0.23 0.17 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 B 9 Table B 9 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 9 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 30000, 10000, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 161 153 164 163 164 161.0 0.1 100 146 153 146 153 171 153.8 0.1 200 124 139 133 128 136 132.0 0.5 50 90 81 95 93 87 89.2 0.5 100 66 71 64 81 65 69.4 0.5 200 48 54 39 49 56 49.2 1.0 50 45 42 56 64 45 50.4 1.0 100 32 32 29 45 41 35.8 1.0 200 20 20 20 34 20 22.8 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 8.57 5.04 4.52 4.16 3.73 3.71 3.36 3.32 2.68 2.60 50 1987 8.57 5.55 5.16 4.04 3.98 3.66 3.36 3.33 3.14 3.08 50 1988 7.66 6.26 5.67 4.71 4.04 3.81 3.54 3.32 3.25 3.12 50 1989 9.89 5.93 5.79 5.15 4.83 4.34 4.20 3.96 3.65 3.38 50 1990 8.60 7.71 5.05 4.31 3.87 3.79 3.58 3.35 3.19 3.11 50 5 yr. Avg. 8.66 6.10 5.24 4.47 4.09 3.86 3.61 3.46 3.18 3.06 100 1986 8.66 4.26 4.08 3.31 3.05 2.70 2.46 2.35 2.24 2.22 100 1987 5.98 5.83 4.33 3.99 3.80 3.66 3.15 2.75 2.57 2.50 100 1988 7.29 4.70 3.91 3.54 3.12 3.02 2.96 2.85 2.27 2.19 100 1989 5.60 4.94 4.46 4.30 3.91 3.58 3.55 3.49 3.38 2.98 100 1990 8.42 5.69 4.57 4.29 4.02 3.72 3.70 3.26 3.25 3.23 100 5 yr. Avg. 7.19 5.08 4.27 3.88 3.58 3.34 3.16 2.94 2.74 2.62 200 1986 4.40 3.31 2.92 2.39 2.36 2.26 1.88 1.78 1.77 1.59 200 1987 4.39 3.21 2.96 2.71 2.64 2.61 2.16 1.99 1.82 1.65 200 1988 5.24 3.55 3.32 2.80 2.10 1.83 1.75 1.65 1.62 1.54 200 1989 5.92 4.67 4.54 4.23 3.67 3.51 2.91 2.82 2.72 2.63 200 1990 7.07 3.70 3.41 2.79 2.61 2.46 2.26 1.99 1.98 1.58 200 5 yr. Avg. 5.40 3.69 3.43 2.98 2.67 2.53 2.19 2.05 1.98 1.80 B 10 Table B 10 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 10 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 3000, 10000, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 113 100 122 116 107 111.6 0.1 100 83 95 84 89 90 88.2 0.1 200 83 72 62 62 67 69.2 0.5 50 28 32 34 39 37 34.0 0.5 100 15 19 18 28 22 20.4 0.5 200 11 15 8 16 6 11.2 1.0 50 9 10 9 15 14 11.4 1.0 100 6 5 5 11 8 7.0 1.0 200 4 3 4 4 2 3.4 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 4.35 2.72 2.11 1.43 1.36 1.21 1.12 1.05 1.03 0.93 50 1987 3.58 2.62 2.21 1.76 1.58 1.58 1.47 1.34 1.07 1.01 50 1988 2.90 2.38 2.06 1.75 1.51 1.44 1.07 1.05 1.04 0.96 50 1989 6.82 4.01 2.39 2.09 1.85 1.84 1.60 1.52 1.45 1.36 50 1990 3.28 2.59 1.70 1.49 1.39 1.31 1.30 1.27 1.18 1.17 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.18 2.86 2.09 1.70 1.54 1.48 1.31 1.25 1.15 1.08 100 1986 3.56 2.00 1.42 1.18 1.01 1.01 0.93 0.86 0.81 0.72 100 1987 2.83 2.23 1.54 1.52 1.17 0.97 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.81 100 1988 3.34 1.59 1.50 1.10 1.06 0.99 0.88 0.82 0.78 0.75 100 1989 2.43 2.02 1.53 1.47 1.39 1.22 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.04 100 1990 2.29 1.76 1.75 1.35 1.33 1.25 1.17 1.11 0.96 0.87 100 5 yr. Avg. 2.89 1.92 1.55 1.32 1.19 1.09 1.00 0.95 0.89 0.84 200 1986 1.88 1.57 1.12 1.05 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.77 0.60 0.54 200 1987 1.56 1.38 1.23 0.98 0.72 0.70 0.66 0.63 0.60 0.60 200 1988 2.01 1.29 1.28 1.11 0.78 0.62 0.55 0.52 0.50 0.48 200 1989 1.94 1.54 1.17 1.02 0.92 0.82 0.81 0.72 0.71 0.67 200 1990 1.77 1.20 0.87 0.72 0.68 0.53 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.46 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.83 1.40 1.13 0.97 0.81 0.72 0.69 0.63 0.58 0.55 B 11 Table B 11 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired EGU located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 11 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 3000, 1000, and 50 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 48 45 59 65 54 54.2 0.1 100 34 34 28 46 41 36.6 0.1 200 21 22 20 30 21 22.8 0.5 50 4 3 4 7 5 4.6 0.5 100 2 3 2 4 4 3.0 0.5 200 1 1 1 4 1 1.6 1.0 50 1 1 1 1 2 1.2 1.0 100 1 0 1 0 1 0.6 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.29 0.69 0.57 0.54 0.47 0.44 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.30 50 1987 1.26 0.81 0.71 0.49 0.48 0.45 0.41 0.38 0.37 0.37 50 1988 1.09 0.83 0.80 0.59 0.48 0.46 0.43 0.39 0.38 0.36 50 1989 1.60 0.78 0.76 0.66 0.66 0.52 0.52 0.47 0.46 0.43 50 1990 1.31 1.12 0.63 0.54 0.51 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.36 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.31 0.85 0.69 0.56 0.52 0.46 0.43 0.40 0.38 0.36 100 1986 1.28 0.51 0.49 0.37 0.36 0.31 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.24 100 1987 0.78 0.77 0.52 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.37 0.31 0.29 0.28 100 1988 1.01 0.58 0.47 0.41 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.24 100 1989 0.73 0.62 0.55 0.53 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.41 0.39 0.34 100 1990 1.25 0.73 0.56 0.52 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.39 0.38 0.37 100 5 yr. Avg. 1.01 0.64 0.52 0.46 0.42 0.40 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.30 200 1986 0.53 0.37 0.33 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.17 200 1987 0.53 0.37 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.18 200 1988 0.66 0.41 0.38 0.32 0.23 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 200 1989 0.77 0.58 0.55 0.51 0.43 0.41 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.30 200 1990 0.98 0.43 0.40 0.32 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.17 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.69 0.43 0.40 0.34 0.30 0.29 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.20 B 12 Table B 12 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 12 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 7000, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 157 161 142 136 167 152.6 0.1 100 103 101 92 94 115 101.0 0.1 200 53 60 47 53 61 54.8 0.5 50 53 51 42 55 61 52.4 0.5 100 22 19 15 26 22 20.8 0.5 200 12 7 6 12 10 9.4 1.0 50 18 23 13 22 18 18.8 1.0 100 6 8 7 10 9 8.0 1.0 200 2 1 3 4 2 2.4 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 5.99 3.27 2.51 2.01 1.98 1.84 1.77 1.56 1.39 1.34 50 1987 4.02 3.19 2.92 2.58 2.17 2.10 1.82 1.70 1.59 1.53 50 1988 3.21 2.38 2.15 2.13 1.87 1.86 1.57 1.39 1.37 1.24 50 1989 5.59 3.21 2.71 2.58 2.08 1.95 1.84 1.79 1.66 1.65 50 1990 4.33 3.35 2.68 2.20 1.79 1.73 1.70 1.69 1.61 1.40 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.63 3.08 2.59 2.30 1.98 1.90 1.74 1.62 1.53 1.43 100 1986 3.32 2.46 1.80 1.55 1.35 1.04 0.99 0.96 0.93 0.86 100 1987 2.52 1.81 1.39 1.26 1.16 1.08 1.07 1.06 0.83 0.81 100 1988 3.84 1.69 1.50 1.27 1.12 1.10 1.02 0.86 0.75 0.71 100 1989 3.64 1.92 1.61 1.40 1.29 1.28 1.19 1.19 1.17 1.06 100 1990 3.46 2.05 1.48 1.27 1.21 1.13 1.06 1.04 1.00 0.88 100 5 yr. Avg. 3.35 1.99 1.55 1.35 1.23 1.12 1.07 1.02 0.94 0.86 200 1986 1.67 1.08 0.96 0.89 0.66 0.65 0.56 0.56 0.53 0.52 200 1987 1.52 0.95 0.87 0.84 0.63 0.55 0.54 0.44 0.42 0.40 200 1988 1.94 1.18 1.12 0.84 0.76 0.51 0.49 0.38 0.36 0.33 200 1989 2.17 1.37 1.23 1.12 0.88 0.83 0.72 0.70 0.66 0.66 200 1990 2.19 1.17 0.98 0.83 0.73 0.68 0.67 0.54 0.53 0.50 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.90 1.15 1.03 0.91 0.73 0.64 0.60 0.53 0.50 0.48 B 13 Table B 13 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 13 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 7000, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 252 263 251 240 247 250.6 0.1 100 189 195 207 181 195 193.4 0.1 200 103 88 83 86 95 91.0 0.5 50 93 93 90 81 92 89.8 0.5 100 41 32 31 30 36 34.0 0.5 200 9 6 7 18 8 9.6 1.0 50 33 26 21 25 21 25.2 1.0 100 7 6 6 40 6 13.0 1.0 200 1 1 1 3 2 1.6 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 6.05 3.30 2.73 2.27 1.97 1.94 1.86 1.75 1.64 1.61 50 1987 3.89 3.11 3.09 2.53 2.26 2.01 1.92 1.81 1.74 1.65 50 1988 6.27 4.15 2.99 2.73 2.38 2.12 1.83 1.69 1.60 1.56 50 1989 5.36 4.60 3.83 3.65 3.51 3.48 3.19 3.10 3.05 2.91 50 1990 5.33 3.89 3.72 3.24 2.62 2.32 2.29 2.19 2.13 1.87 50 5 yr. Avg. 5.38 3.81 3.27 2.88 2.55 2.38 2.22 2.11 2.03 1.92 100 1986 1.52 1.42 1.27 1.27 1.25 1.23 1.12 0.93 0.89 0.88 100 1987 2.64 1.53 1.15 1.10 1.06 1.01 0.96 0.89 0.81 0.76 100 1988 3.01 2.64 1.56 1.33 1.20 1.10 0.91 0.89 0.81 0.80 100 1989 2.59 2.24 2.10 1.90 1.75 1.41 1.24 1.22 1.03 1.01 100 1990 3.16 1.73 1.55 1.46 1.16 1.05 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.81 100 5 yr. Avg. 2.58 1.91 1.53 1.41 1.28 1.16 1.04 0.98 0.90 0.85 200 1986 1.35 0.83 0.79 0.69 0.68 0.64 0.63 0.51 0.51 0.49 200 1987 1.20 0.87 0.68 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.49 0.46 0.44 0.43 200 1988 1.77 0.97 0.74 0.65 0.56 0.55 0.52 0.42 0.42 0.40 200 1989 1.69 1.40 1.07 0.91 0.85 0.84 0.79 0.73 0.70 0.68 200 1990 1.63 1.42 1.00 0.77 0.66 0.62 0.53 0.53 0.48 0.44 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.53 1.10 0.86 0.73 0.67 0.64 0.59 0.53 0.51 0.49 B 14 Table B 14 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 14 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 900, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 78 86 73 79 98 82.8 0.1 100 33 37 27 45 34 35.2 0.1 200 18 15 10 6 9 11.6 0.5 50 12 16 9 13 10 12.0 0.5 100 4 3 3 2 2 2.8 0.5 200 1 0 1 1 1 0.8 1.0 50 3 3 1 4 1 2.4 1.0 100 1 0 1 1 0 0.6 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 2.48 1.07 1.01 0.99 0.83 0.69 0.67 0.65 0.61 0.58 50 1987 1.56 1.36 1.14 0.99 0.86 0.79 0.77 0.71 0.67 0.60 50 1988 1.14 0.96 0.86 0.82 0.73 0.71 0.68 0.64 0.50 0.44 50 1989 2.30 1.23 1.16 1.01 0.86 0.73 0.66 0.62 0.58 0.55 50 1990 1.55 0.90 0.89 0.75 0.72 0.65 0.63 0.57 0.54 0.52 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.81 1.10 1.01 0.91 0.80 0.71 0.68 0.64 0.58 0.54 100 1986 1.15 0.81 0.60 0.51 0.46 0.43 0.39 0.33 0.31 0.29 100 1987 0.88 0.69 0.54 0.47 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.31 100 1988 1.29 0.55 0.53 0.47 0.38 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.25 0.25 100 1989 1.25 0.78 0.47 0.47 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 100 1990 0.97 0.62 0.42 0.37 0.33 0.29 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.23 100 5 yr. Avg. 1.11 0.69 0.51 0.46 0.39 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.28 200 1986 0.51 0.37 0.29 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.18 200 1987 0.36 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.24 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.14 200 1988 0.55 0.32 0.28 0.24 0.21 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 200 1989 0.75 0.33 0.26 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 200 1990 0.55 0.33 0.22 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.09 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.54 0.33 0.27 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.13 B 15 Table B 15 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 15 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 900, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 160 170 161 155 156 160.4 0.1 100 102 79 94 89 100 92.8 0.1 200 23 18 21 21 21 20.8 0.5 50 33 29 23 24 19 25.6 0.5 100 7 5 4 5 2 4.6 0.5 200 1 0 1 0 2 0.8 1.0 50 8 8 5 11 5 7.4 1.0 100 0 1 1 0 1 0.6 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 2.75 1.30 1.28 1.25 1.19 1.08 1.05 1.03 0.99 0.98 50 1987 2.17 1.49 1.44 1.27 1.16 1.10 1.07 1.06 0.92 0.85 50 1988 3.12 1.85 1.22 1.14 1.13 0.98 0.91 0.87 0.85 0.81 50 1989 2.05 1.85 1.62 1.55 1.54 1.53 1.31 1.22 1.19 1.16 50 1990 2.28 1.93 1.46 1.43 1.32 0.97 0.93 0.68 0.67 0.66 50 5 yr. Avg. 2.47 1.68 1.40 1.33 1.27 1.13 1.05 0.97 0.92 0.89 100 1986 0.81 0.80 0.71 0.65 0.64 0.62 0.50 0.46 0.45 0.43 100 1987 1.20 0.73 0.62 0.60 0.54 0.48 0.48 0.43 0.40 0.35 100 1988 1.20 0.95 0.73 0.54 0.44 0.40 0.40 0.38 0.37 0.36 100 1989 0.83 0.77 0.65 0.61 0.56 0.49 0.40 0.38 0.37 0.36 100 1990 1.06 0.61 0.50 0.49 0.48 0.47 0.41 0.38 0.36 0.36 100 5 yr. Avg. 1.02 0.77 0.64 0.58 0.53 0.49 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.37 200 1986 0.52 0.39 0.38 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.20 0.19 0.18 200 1987 0.45 0.34 0.29 0.27 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.14 200 1988 0.66 0.42 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.13 200 1989 0.47 0.46 0.34 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.20 200 1990 0.68 0.61 0.39 0.37 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.16 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.56 0.44 0.34 0.30 0.25 0.22 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.16 B 16 Table B 16 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 16 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 900, 300, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 38 37 30 50 50 41.0 0.1 100 16 15 10 18 14 14.6 0.1 200 5 4 5 6 4 4.8 0.5 50 2 3 1 2 2 2.0 0.5 100 1 0 1 1 1 0.8 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 1 0 0 1 0 0.4 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.20 0.53 0.42 0.35 0.32 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.24 0.24 50 1987 0.68 0.54 0.52 0.48 0.37 0.35 0.30 0.27 0.27 0.26 50 1988 0.55 0.39 0.35 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.27 0.25 0.20 0.19 50 1989 1.06 0.55 0.46 0.44 0.35 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.26 0.25 50 1990 0.73 0.54 0.45 0.36 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.23 50 5 yr. Avg. 0.84 0.51 0.44 0.39 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.24 100 1986 0.56 0.40 0.28 0.25 0.22 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 100 1987 0.41 0.27 0.22 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.12 100 1988 0.65 0.26 0.23 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.11 100 1989 0.60 0.28 0.26 0.22 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.15 100 1990 0.54 0.32 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.55 0.31 0.24 0.21 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 200 1986 0.25 0.17 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 200 1987 0.22 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 200 1988 0.30 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 200 1989 0.35 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 200 1990 0.32 0.16 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.29 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 B 17 Table B 17 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 17 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 900, 300, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 76 76 72 58 72 70.8 0.1 100 31 19 23 17 21 22.2 0.1 200 7 3 3 10 4 5.4 0.5 50 2 2 3 9 4 4.0 0.5 100 0 0 1 0 1 0.4 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 1 0 1 0 1 0.6 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.20 0.57 0.45 0.39 0.37 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.30 50 1987 0.74 0.56 0.50 0.46 0.37 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.31 0.30 50 1988 1.28 0.77 0.51 0.45 0.38 0.36 0.31 0.30 0.28 0.28 50 1989 0.99 0.84 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.63 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.49 50 1990 1.01 0.73 0.65 0.59 0.48 0.40 0.39 0.36 0.33 0.30 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.04 0.69 0.56 0.51 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.33 100 1986 0.27 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.15 100 1987 0.46 0.23 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 100 1988 0.51 0.43 0.25 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 100 1989 0.41 0.36 0.33 0.30 0.27 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 100 1990 0.52 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.13 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.44 0.31 0.25 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 200 1986 0.22 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.07 200 1987 0.19 0.14 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 200 1988 0.28 0.16 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 200 1989 0.26 0.21 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 200 1990 0.26 0.24 0.16 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.24 0.18 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 B 18 Table B 18 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 18 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 0, 1000, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 40 42 39 52 52 45.0 0.1 100 18 20 17 25 13 18.6 0.1 200 9 5 2 6 2 4.8 0.5 50 5 4 2 4 1 3.2 0.5 100 1 0 1 1 0 0.6 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 1 1 0 1 0 0.6 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.36 0.63 0.63 0.61 0.55 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.33 50 1987 1.03 0.72 0.69 0.55 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.37 50 1988 0.71 0.54 0.50 0.44 0.41 0.38 0.36 0.36 0.30 0.26 50 1989 1.24 0.73 0.63 0.55 0.49 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.34 0.34 50 1990 0.85 0.47 0.42 0.41 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.32 0.30 0.29 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.04 0.62 0.57 0.51 0.46 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 100 1986 0.57 0.39 0.30 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.18 100 1987 0.47 0.43 0.31 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.17 100 1988 0.61 0.33 0.28 0.28 0.21 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.13 100 1989 0.67 0.49 0.27 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.16 100 1990 0.46 0.28 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.12 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.56 0.38 0.27 0.25 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.15 200 1986 0.26 0.18 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 200 1987 0.21 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 200 1988 0.23 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 200 1989 0.37 0.18 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.06 200 1990 0.26 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.27 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 B 19 Table B 19 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 19 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 0, 500, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 17 25 19 30 25 23.2 0.1 100 8 8 5 7 4 6.4 0.1 200 1 1 1 1 1 1.0 0.5 50 1 1 0 1 0 0.6 0.5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 0.72 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.17 50 1987 0.53 0.37 0.35 0.29 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 50 1988 0.36 0.28 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.16 0.14 50 1989 0.64 0.37 0.32 0.28 0.25 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.17 50 1990 0.44 0.24 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 50 5 yr. Avg. 0.54 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 100 1986 0.29 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 100 1987 0.24 0.22 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 100 1988 0.31 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 100 1989 0.34 0.25 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 100 1990 0.23 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.28 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 200 1986 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 200 1987 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 200 1988 0.12 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 200 1989 0.18 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 200 1990 0.13 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.13 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 B 20 Table B 20 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 20 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 0, 1000, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 117 105 98 105 106 106.2 0.1 100 59 49 52 48 61 53.8 0.1 200 10 5 7 8 7 7.4 0.5 50 15 11 10 12 7 11.0 0.5 100 2 1 1 0 1 1.0 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 1 1 2 1 2 1.4 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 1.58 0.88 0.84 0.81 0.79 0.69 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.63 50 1987 1.46 0.98 0.90 0.83 0.76 0.70 0.69 0.68 0.60 0.51 50 1988 1.88 1.07 0.75 0.74 0.70 0.59 0.56 0.55 0.53 0.51 50 1989 1.08 0.99 0.95 0.90 0.87 0.83 0.77 0.65 0.63 0.62 50 1990 1.27 1.17 0.83 0.81 0.78 0.55 0.51 0.43 0.42 0.38 50 5 yr. Avg. 1.45 1.02 0.85 0.82 0.78 0.67 0.64 0.59 0.57 0.53 100 1986 0.51 0.50 0.45 0.41 0.40 0.38 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.26 100 1987 0.70 0.47 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.31 0.30 0.27 0.25 0.21 100 1988 0.64 0.48 0.42 0.35 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.22 100 1989 0.45 0.41 0.35 0.33 0.32 0.27 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 100 1990 0.51 0.35 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.22 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.56 0.44 0.38 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 200 1986 0.28 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.10 200 1987 0.24 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 200 1988 0.35 0.24 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 200 1989 0.26 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 200 1990 0.39 0.34 0.22 0.22 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.30 0.24 0.19 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.09 B 21 Table B 21 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 21 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 0, 500, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 63 59 51 50 57 56.0 0.1 100 20 11 11 14 14 14.0 0.1 200 3 1 2 1 4 2.2 0.5 50 1 2 2 2 2 1.8 0.5 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 0.82 0.46 0.44 0.41 0.41 0.35 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 50 1987 0.75 0.50 0.46 0.42 0.39 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.31 0.27 50 1988 0.98 0.55 0.39 0.38 0.35 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.27 50 1989 0.55 0.50 0.48 0.46 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.32 0.31 0.31 50 1990 0.65 0.60 0.43 0.42 0.39 0.28 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.20 50 5 yr. Avg. 0.75 0.52 0.44 0.42 0.40 0.34 0.33 0.30 0.29 0.27 100 1986 0.25 0.25 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 100 1987 0.35 0.24 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.11 100 1988 0.32 0.24 0.21 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 100 1989 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 100 1990 0.25 0.18 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 100 5 yr. Avg. 0.28 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 200 1986 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 200 1987 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 200 1988 0.17 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 200 1989 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 200 1990 0.20 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 200 5 yr. Avg. 0.15 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 B 22 Table B 22 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Eastern domain  Run/ Scenario # 22 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 7000, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 148 152 134 133 171 147.6 0.1 100 97 100 90 94 113 98.8 0.1 200 54 60 48 51 62 55.0 0.5 50 46 44 40 51 57 47.6 0.5 100 22 19 15 25 22 20.6 0.5 200 10 7 6 13 10 9.2 1.0 50 16 17 13 16 15 15.4 1.0 100 7 8 6 10 8 7.8 1.0 200 2 1 3 4 2 2.4 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 5.35 3.07 2.30 1.90 1.82 1.64 1.61 1.38 1.31 1.26 50 1987 4.12 2.83 2.58 2.16 2.05 1.87 1.72 1.52 1.38 1.36 50 1988 3.08 2.28 1.99 1.84 1.76 1.59 1.47 1.33 1.24 1.21 50 1989 5.04 3.05 2.64 2.47 2.06 1.74 1.62 1.54 1.52 1.47 50 1990 4.08 3.16 2.46 2.21 1.66 1.59 1.57 1.55 1.35 1.26 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.34 2.88 2.39 2.12 1.87 1.68 1.60 1.46 1.36 1.31 100 1986 3.10 2.32 1.87 1.46 1.31 1.05 1.02 0.88 0.86 0.85 100 1987 2.45 1.86 1.45 1.23 1.15 1.10 1.08 1.05 0.76 0.74 100 1988 3.81 1.66 1.39 1.27 1.13 1.12 0.95 0.87 0.77 0.72 100 1989 3.52 1.90 1.63 1.43 1.23 1.20 1.17 1.16 1.12 1.08 100 1990 3.50 2.06 1.48 1.28 1.21 1.14 1.08 1.04 0.94 0.88 100 5 yr. Avg. 3.28 1.96 1.57 1.33 1.20 1.12 1.06 1.00 0.89 0.85 200 1986 1.66 1.10 0.92 0.90 0.69 0.66 0.55 0.54 0.52 0.51 200 1987 1.46 0.96 0.87 0.87 0.64 0.58 0.55 0.44 0.42 0.41 200 1988 1.98 1.23 1.13 0.85 0.76 0.50 0.47 0.39 0.35 0.33 200 1989 2.08 1.37 1.25 1.14 0.91 0.84 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.65 200 1990 2.21 1.19 0.98 0.87 0.73 0.69 0.68 0.54 0.54 0.52 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.88 1.17 1.03 0.93 0.74 0.65 0.59 0.52 0.50 0.48 B 23 Table B 23 Visibility impairment associated with a coal fired Industrial Boiler located in the Western domain  Run/ Scenario # 23 ( CALPUFF model estimates are based on SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 emissions of 7000, 1400, and 20 tpy, respectively)

Days Above Delta dv Threshold Threshold Distance 5 year ( delta dv) ( km) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Avg.

0.1 50 248 256 247 240 241 246.4 0.1 100 187 193 202 179 192 190.6 0.1 200 103 88 83 85 93 90.4 0.5 50 86 87 86 73 80 82.4 0.5 100 39 31 31 28 32 32.2 0.5 200 9 6 7 18 8 9.6 1.0 50 24 26 20 24 18 22.4 1.0 100 7 5 6 9 6 6.6 1.0 200 1 1 1 3 2 1.6 Ten Highest Delta dv Values Dist ( km) Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 50 1986 5.11 3.24 2.60 2.27 1.81 1.78 1.70 1.62 1.55 1.53 50 1987 3.51 3.07 3.02 2.35 2.21 1.97 1.72 1.72 1.64 1.56 50 1988 5.50 4.04 2.66 2.52 2.22 2.10 1.78 1.62 1.53 1.41 50 1989 5.16 3.84 3.55 3.33 3.30 3.22 3.18 2.99 2.89 2.81 50 1990 5.29 3.80 3.50 2.97 2.50 2.23 2.21 2.16 2.09 1.86 50 5 yr. Avg. 4.91 3.60 3.07 2.69 2.41 2.26 2.12 2.02 1.94 1.83 100 1986 1.52 1.37 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.21 1.08 0.92 0.88 0.85 100 1987 2.58 1.50 1.17 1.10 1.02 0.99 0.93 0.89 0.80 0.75 100 1988 2.63 2.29 1.49 1.26 1.17 1.04 0.90 0.87 0.83 0.82 100 1989 2.62 2.14 2.11 1.90 1.78 1.40 1.22 1.20 1.01 0.97 100 1990 3.23 1.76 1.57 1.51 1.10 1.04 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.80 100 5 yr. Avg. 2.52 1.81 1.52 1.40 1.26 1.14 1.02 0.97 0.89 0.84 200 1986 1.34 0.82 0.79 0.69 0.66 0.64 0.63 0.52 0.51 0.49 200 1987 1.21 0.86 0.67 0.60 0.58 0.56 0.49 0.45 0.44 0.42 200 1988 1.71 0.97 0.71 0.69 0.55 0.53 0.52 0.43 0.40 0.40 200 1989 1.72 1.41 1.07 0.93 0.85 0.84 0.81 0.70 0.69 0.68 200 1990 1.58 1.44 0.98 0.78 0.66 0.60 0.55 0.53 0.49 0.44 200 5 yr. Avg. 1.51 1.10 0.85 0.74 0.66 0.64 0.60 0.53 0.51 0.48


[Federal Register: September 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 184)]
[Notices]
[Page 48759-48760]
[DOCID:fr24se09-74]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0664]

Risk Communication Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.

    Name of Committee: Risk Communication Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on November 12, 2009,
from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and November 13, 2009, from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m.
    Location: The Hilton Hotel, 8727 Colesville Rd., Silver Spring,
MD 20910.
    Contact Person: Lee L. Zwanziger, Office of the Commissioner,
Office of Policy, Planning and Preparedness, Office of Planning,
Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, rm. 14-90,
Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-
741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area), code<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this
meeting. A notice in the Federal Register about last minute
modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee
meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely
notice. Therefore, you should always check the agency's Web site and
call the

appropriate advisory committee hot line/phone line to learn about
possible modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: On November 12 and 13, 2009, the Committee will discuss
strategies and programs designed to communicate with the public
about the risks and benefits of FDA-regulated products so as to
facilitate optimal use of these products. For more specific agenda
topics, please visit the following Web site and scroll down to the
appropriate advisory committee link (http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm), or call the FDA Advisory
Committee Information Line as detailed under ``Contact Person''. FDA
intends to provide specific agenda topics at both these locations no
later than 15 days before the meeting.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public
no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable
to post the background material on its Web site prior to the
meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at
the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background
material will be posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting.
Background material is available at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the
appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
November 4, 2009. Oral presentations from the public will be
scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. on November 12,
2009, and between approximately 10:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. on
November 13, 2009. Those desiring to make formal oral presentations
should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the
general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present,
the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication
of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or
before November 4, 2009. Time allotted for each presentation may be
limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater
than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public
hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers
for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person
will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by
November 5, 2009.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the agency is not responsible for providing access to
electrical outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory
committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons
with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Lee Zwanziger at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory
committee meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for
procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 18, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-23001 Filed 9-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61445-61446]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24148]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Seventy-Sixth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 147, Minimum
Operational Performance Standards for Traffic Alert and Collision
Avoidance Systems Airborne Equipment

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 147, Minimum
Operational Performance Standards for Traffic Alert and Collision
Avoidance Systems Airborne Equipment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Seventy-Sixth meeting of RTCA Special Committee 147, Minimum
Operational Performance Standards for Traffic Alert and Collision
Avoidance Systems Airborne Equipment.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 22-24, 2013, from 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 147. The agenda will
include the following:

October 22

 Opening Plenary Session
     Chairmen's Opening Remarks
     Introductions
     Approval of Minutes from 75th meeting of SC 147
     Approval of Agenda
 Working Group Reports
 SC-147 Terms of Reference (ToRs)
     Scope, Deliverables and Schedule
     Coordination with other SCs
 EUROCAE Working Group (WG)-75 Status
     Status of Current Activities
 SESAR Activities/Work
     Status of Current Activities
 AVS Activities/Report
     TCAS II TSO-C119d/AC 20-151 () updates
 FAA TCAS Program Office
     Status of Current Activities
     ACAS X Concept Review

    [ssquf] ACAS X ConOps Overview
    [ssquf] System Overview
     Threat Resolution Module

October 23

 Continuation of FAA TCAS Program Office
     ACAS X Functional Architecture
     Verification & Validation Activities Overview
    [ssquf] System Validation
    [ssquf] TSIM X
    [ssquf] Certification Perspective
     2013 FAA Flight Test Quick-Look
     Operational Performance
     Program Handouts
 Working Group Realignment
     Proposed Structure
     WG Formulation/Chairs
     Roles & Responsibilities
 Committee Process
     Change Proposal (CP) process
     Envisioned Products
     Degrees of Freedom for Manufactures
 MOPS Development Issues
     Technical Approach
     Technical Content

October 24

 Working Group Stand-ups
     Scope/Organization of Work
     High-level Schedule/Milestones
     Technical Discussion
     Planning
    [ssquf] Initial Actions
    [ssquf] Scheduling of teleconferences, etc.
     Working Group Sign-up
 Other Business
 Action Items
 Time and Place of Next Meeting
 Plenary Adjourn

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 25, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-24148 Filed 10-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63115-63117]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25066]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF14-1-000]

Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC; Supplemental Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Planned Southeast
Market Pipelines Project and Request for Comments on Environmental
Issues Related to New Alternatives Under Consideration

    In response to concerns raised about the Sabal Trail Transmission
LLC's (Sabal Trail) planned Sabal Trail Project (Project),\1\
additional pipeline route alternatives and compressor station location
alternatives are now being considered. These alternatives which are
described below would affect new landowners; therefore, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) is issuing this
supplemental notice (Notice) to provide these landowners and other
interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Project. The FERC
is the lead federal agency responsible for conducting the environmental
review of this Project. The Commission's staff will prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS) that discusses the environmental
impacts of the Project. This EIS will be used in-part by the Commission
to determine whether the Project is in the public convenience and
necessity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Project is one of three projects being reviewed
concurrently as the Southeast Market Pipelines Project (SMP
Project).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You have been identified as a landowner or an interested party that
may be affected by new alternatives being considered or by the
corresponding segment of the currently planned route. Information in
this Notice was prepared to familiarize you with these new
alternatives, the Project as a whole, and the Commission's
environmental review process, and instruct you on how to submit
comments about the Project and the alternatives under consideration.
This Notice is also being sent to: Federal, state, and local government
agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups;
Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries
and newspapers. We encourage elected officials and government
representatives to notify their constituents about the Project and
inform them on how they can comment on their areas of concern. Please
note that comments on this Notice should be filed with the Commission
by November 14, 2014.
    If your property would be affected by one of the alternatives under
consideration, you should have already been contacted by a Sabal Trail
representative. A Sabal Trail representative may have also contacted
you or may contact you in the near future about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities or
request permission to perform environmental surveys on your property.
Some landowners may not be contacted if the alternative across their
property is found to be either not feasible or not environmentally
preferable to other alternatives being considered. If the Commission
approves the Project, that approval conveys with it the right of
eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an
agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings
where compensation would be determined in accordance with state law.
    To help potentially affected landowners and other interested
parties better understand the Commission and its environmental review
process, the ``For Citizens'' section of the FERC Web site
(www.ferc.gov) provides information about getting involved in FERC
jurisdictional projects, and a citizens' guide entitled ``An Interstate
Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need to Know?'' This guide
addresses a number of frequently asked questions, including the use of
eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

Project Background

    On October 16, 2013 the Commission's environmental staff approved
Sabal Trail's request to use the Commission Pre-Filing Process for the
Project. The purpose of the Pre-Filing Process is to encourage the
early involvement of interested stakeholders to identify and resolve
project-related issues before an application is filed with the
Commission. On February 18, 2014 the Commission issued a Notice of
Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Planned
Southeast Market Pipelines Project, Request for Comments on
Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Meetings.
    During the course of the Pre-Filing Process, numerous concerns have
been expressed about the potential environmental impacts of the
Project. Based on the merits of these comments and to ensure that
public concerns are fully considered during the Pre-Filing Process,
additional alternatives have been identified and are being considered.

Project Summary

    As noted previously, the Project is part of the SMP Project and
will be reviewed concurrently along with the Florida Southeast
Connection Project and the Hillabee Expansion Project. The SMP Project
would involve the construction and operation of over 650 miles of
interstate natural gas transmission pipeline and associated facilities
in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. The Project would connect with the
Hillabee Expansion Project in Alabama, and the Florida Southeast
Connection Project in Florida.
    The Sabal Trail portion of the SMP Project would involve the
construction and operation of approximately 460 miles of 36-inch-
diameter natural gas transmission pipeline beginning in Tallapoosa
County, Alabama and ending in Osceola County, Florida. Sabal Trail also
plans to construct and operate approximately 14 miles of 36-inch-
diameter natural gas transmission pipeline in Osceola and Orange
Counties, Florida (Hunters Creek Line) and approximately 24 miles of
24-inch-diameter natural gas transmission

pipeline in Marion and Citrus Counties, Florida (Citrus County Line).
In addition to the planned pipelines, Sabal Trail would construct and
operate five new compressor stations located in Tallapoosa County,
Alabama; Dougherty County, Georgia; and Suwannee, Marion, and Osceola
Counties, Florida.

Project Alternatives

    The following alternatives are being considered. Illustrations of
these alternatives are provided in Appendix 1.

Sasser Route Alternative (Terrell and Dougherty Counties, Georgia)

    To address concerns regarding the planned route's impact on the
environment and its proximity to numerous residences located in the
Kiokee-Flint area of Dougherty County, the Sasser Route Alternative
would deviate from Sabal Trail's planned route near Milepost (MP) 138.5
and extend south and east for approximately 21.5 miles before rejoining
Sabal Trail's planned route at the proposed site of the Albany
Compressor Station near MP 168.5.

Albany Compressor Station Alternatives (Dougherty County, Georgia)

    To address concerns regarding the planned compressor station's
proximity to the City of Albany and the potential effects of the
station on the surrounding environment, two additional compressor
station locations (Sites 3A and 5) have been identified and are being
considered.
    Albany Compressor Station Site Alternative 3A is an approximately
53-acre parcel located at MP 155.7 of the planned pipeline route, 1.7
miles north of Leary Road and 0.8 miles west-southwest of Woods Valley
Trail. This site is adjacent to both the planned pipeline route and the
Sasser Route Alternative.
    Albany Compressor Station Site Alternative 5 is an approximately
53-acre parcel located along the Sasser Route Alternative, south of
Gillionville Road at its intersection with Tallahassee Road. This site
would only be suitable for the Sasser Route Alternative.

Withlacoochee River Crossing Route Alternative (Hamilton and Suwannee
Counties, Florida)

    To address concerns regarding the planned route's impact on karst
terrain and known springs, the Withlacoochee River Crossing Route
Alternative would deviate from Sabal Trail's planned route near MP
260.8 and extend for approximately 11.4 miles in a generally south and
southeasterly direction, crossing the Suwannee River State Park via
horizontal direction drill and rejoining the planned route at
approximately MP 270.4.

Wacassassa Flats Route Alternative (Gilchrist County, Florida)

    In response to the Gilchrist County Board of Commissioners and to
address concerns regarding the planned route's impact on karst terrain,
known springs, its proximity to residences, and its impacts on
landowners, the Wacassassa Flats Route Alternative would deviate from
Sabal Trail's planned route at approximately MP 320.8 and extend 19.4
miles generally south and east through the area known as the Wacassassa
Flats until rejoining the planned route at approximately MP 339.3.

Happy Trails Route Alternative (Osceola County, Florida)

    To address concerns regarding the planned route's effects on
wetlands and its proximity to residences, the Happy Trails Route
Alternative would deviate from Sabal Trail's planned route at
approximately MP 466.6 and extend generally east and then south before
rejoining the planned route at approximately MP 469.2.

The EIS Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
This process is referred to as scoping. The main goal of the scoping
process is to focus the analysis in the EIS on the important
environmental issues. By this Notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the alternative pipeline routes and aboveground facility
locations currently under consideration. We will consider all filed
comments including any additional alternatives that are suggested
during the preparation of the EIS.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in a draft
EIS that will be placed in the public record, published, and
distributed to the public for comments. We will also hold public
comment meetings in the Project area and will address comments on the
Draft EIS in a Final EIS. The Final EIS will also be placed in the
public record, published, and distributed to the public. To ensure your
comments are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in
the Public Participation section below.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this supplemental Notice to inform the
Georgia and Florida State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) of the
alternatives under consideration, and to solicit their views and those
of other government agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public
on the SMP Project's potential effects on historic properties.\2\ We
will define the project-specific Area of Potential Effects (APE) in
consultation with the SHPOs as the SMP Project develops. On natural gas
facility projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all areas subject
to ground disturbance (examples include construction right-of-way,
contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor stations, meter stations, and
access roads). Our EIS for the SMP Project will document our findings
on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of
consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments about the Project. Your comments should focus on the potential
environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid
or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the
more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments are considered
in a timely manner and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before
November 14, 2014.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the
Project docket number (PF14-1-000) with your submission. The Commission
encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available
to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested
persons to

submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing;'' or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for Project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the Project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
planned Project.
    Copies of the draft EIS will be sent to the environmental mailing
list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a
paper copy of the document instead of the CD version or would like to
remove your name from the mailing list, please return the attached
Information Request (Appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once Sabal Trail files its application with the Commission, you may
want to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's Web
site. Please note that the Commission will not accept requests for
intervenor status at this time. You must wait until the Commission
receives a formal application for the Project.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits (i.e., PF14-1). Be sure you
have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866)
208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: October 15, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-25066 Filed 10-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P