March 6, 2024 | ZeroGeoengineering.com | Image Source
NATO’s Unexpected Role in Shaping Air Quality Policies
Key Points:
- NATO’s Influence on U.S. and Global Pollution Policy
- Environmental Protection as a Racket
- Evolution into Solar Radiation Modification (SRM)
- EPA’s Historical Failures
IT ALL STARTS HERE…
NATO is a military force closely aligned with the United Nations (UN).
Is NATO with US or Against US?
Related: Environmental Protection within NATO
This foreign military is not an elected organization or in any way qualified to lead environmental protection efforts or establish public safety policies. The idea that this agency may have played a key role in influencing the creation of worldwide air quality policy and standards warrants wider public scrutiny.
According to the book AIR POLLUTION MODELING AND ITS APPLICATION XV, in 1969 NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) established the Committee on Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS) and developed a framework to study pollution modeling and its applications. This 2004 book is a compilation of scientific and technical reports from the 25th year of international conferences held during 2001.
MODELING DEFINED…
Modeling may involve the use of computer simulations and may also involve “in-situ” observations of experimentation using actual pollutants.
“In-situ” refers to measurements or observations taken directly at the location where a phenomenon is occurring: Ultrafine aerosol particles in aircraft plumes In situ observations
Both approaches, in-situ observation and modeling, complement each other. Observations provide real-world data for validation and refinement of models.
The book, AIR POLLUTION MODELING AND ITS APPLICATION XV, covers topics such as: Regional Air Pollution and Climate; Global and Long-Range Transport; Integrated Regional Modelling; Role of Atmospheric Models in Air Pollution Policy and Abatement Strategies; New Developments; and Model Assessment and Verification are documented in the book. *Note the spelling difference between UK “modelling” and US “modeling” terms.
Obviously a lot of time, money, and coordination went into these decades-long studies, but why? Why was NATO, a foreign military, leading this effort?
Countries worldwide followed NATO’s lead and replicated similar modeling protocols and air quality standards were adopted. In the United States the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) became the leading agency charged with developing and enforcing pollution standards. All 50 States adopted air dispersion or modeling protocols. Scroll down to find your state’s modeling protocols at the end of this article.
EPA WROTE THE RULES?
The assumption that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is actively working to eliminate pollution is not accurate. In the US we take air quality standards for granted without considering the foreign military, NATO, which helped create and develop the standards.
These protocols involve the use of models and averages to determine “acceptable” levels of exposure to various pollutants. Given that there is a distinct difference between engineering statistical models and real world impacts on biological life, pollution dispersion protocols are inadequate in protecting and honoring the sanctity of life.
If the goal was genuinely to protect life and the environment, then protocols would be implemented to effectively prohibit the release of pollution, not to allow further releases.
IT’S ACTUALLY A RACKET
Since the U.S. government is a corporation, the EPA functions within the business plan to keep the wheels of commerce rolling.
The EPA was established in 1970 under Richard Nixon’s notoriously corrupt administration. Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s National Security advisor and Secretary of State was linked to the Rockefeller-created UN, the KGB (Soviet intelligence) and promoted policies of worldwide depopulation, known also as activities to accelerate fertility decline.
Infiltration by Soviet agents such as Kissinger into positions of influence and power in American government is an important fact to better understanding recent history and current events. For more information on this see the 2003 article by Charlotte Iserbyt, United States Russian Merger: A Done Deal?
The intention to “comfortably” merge the Soviet Union with the United States was the goal of the UN and major Tax-Exempt Foundations.
US-Russian Merger
Notably, the Nixon administration, under Kissinger’s direction, was involved in advancing international weather modification efforts:
Source
Related:
Weather Modification in North Vietnam and Laos (Project Popeye)
SOVIET AND U.S. PLAN EMERGES
In 1975, DARPA published a report called, “Soviet Developments in Weather Modification, Climate Modification, and Climatology.” The report describes applications of weather and climate modification as well as methods of moderating hypothetical warming trends by increasing the concentration of sulfate aerosol in the lower stratosphere.
Currently, this Soviet sulfate aerosol injection strategy is called Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), and is being funded by the US Congress, in partnership with federal agencies, the UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO), private partners, and academia relative to Solar Radiation Modification (SRM).
Congressionally Mandated Research Plan and an Initial Research Governance Framework Related to Solar Radiation Modification
Weather and climate modification is now being promoted as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB), and other terms, as research, or more accurately, experimentation. Presenting Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) as legitimate “research,” when the potential adverse consequences of this dual purposed military weaponry have been known for decades, is how these activities have been able to proceed without being challenged.
The EU is also proposing a similar global governance framework for SRM research.
European Commission Report on Geoengineering Governance
Horizon Europe Report: SRM Governance of Research
Pakistan is also discussing a global governance framework for SRM research.
Pakistan Policy Brief: Governance of Solar Radiation Modification
The Vatican has been discussing global governance framework for SRM research for years.
C2G2: Vatican Seminar on the Governance of Geoengineering
More Information: SRM Governance
Notably missing from these discussions and proposals for global SRM governance is public consent. Legitimate governance requires the consent of the governed.
EPA HISTORY OF FAILURE TO PROTECT
A prime example of EPA failure to protect public health from harmful pollution may be found in the 1978 report: Efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency To Protect the Public from Environmental Nonionizing Radiation Exposures. According to the 15-page report, symptoms attributed to low-level exposure to radiation include, “headache, weariness, dizziness, irritability, emotional instability, partial loss of memory, loss of appetite, cardiovascular effects, electroencephalogram changes, blood chemistry changes, changes in respiration, and possible genetic effects.”
No action was taken based on the report. Why?
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS
It’s worth reiterating: The assumption that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is actively working to eliminate pollution is not accurate.
Since the 1970’s, awareness of pollution, driven by professional marketing campaigns, has become a modern economic phenomenon.
Billions and billions of dollars are now hinged on investment schemes such as carbon credits, ESG bond ratings, and the latest, NAC’s (Natural Asset Companies). Anything that is linked to the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) or the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), and claims to be helping anyone besides investors is suspect. For such entities, the primary goal is profit.
Consider UN “climate action” plans implemented in your state or nation based on the carbon dioxide (CO2) hypothesis that was proposed in the 1975 DARPA-Soviet report mentioned above.
Between 1975 and now, sophisticated marketing campaigns have driven consumers and entire nations toward “virtuous cycles of investment.”
source
UN AGENDA 21 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
In 1992 Untied Nations (UN) codified virtuous investment branded as Sustainable Development or Agenda 21, which has since evolved into more precise planning for Agenda 2030 and Agenda 2050. This was made possible by the UN in concert with The World Bank and a host of financial giants.
Under UN Agenda 21, international observation and “research” programs in global atmospheric chemistry were adopted by participating nations via the World Meteorological Organization (WMO),which is also part of the UN.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is a primary driver of atmospheric experimentation and weather modification. The WMO Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW) Implementation Plan 2016-2023, states:
“GAW also supports the enhancement of aviation meteorological services through research of atmospheric aerosol dispersion.”
Outside and beyond the context of legitimate governance, weather modification programs have been operating without safety regulations, public oversight, or public consent, since the 1950’s.
At the 2017 GLOBAL WEATHER ENTERPRISE SEMINAR it was no secret that the public might have better ideas regarding pollution abatement:
“There is a huge risk in not acting globally now, because local solutions will be developed and
possibly interfere with broader ones” -p.8
Link
The U.S. Federal Weather Enterprise was linked to the above mentioned Global Weather Enterprise.
STRATEGIC PLAN FOR FEDERAL WEATHER ENTERPRISE
Link to 2018-2022 Strategic Plan For Federal Weather Enterprise Coordination
“4.1 Exercise leadership in coordinating U.S. efforts in international weather research priorities including the current World Meteorological Organization Grand Challenges.” -Quote from Federal Weather Enterprise Budget and Coordination Reports in 2019, 2020, and p.3 of the 2021 Federal Weather Enterprise (FWE).
The funding of more than 30 U.S. agencies is outlined on page 30 of the 2021 Federal Weather Enterprise. NOAA, DOC, EPA, FAA, DOE, DOD, NASA, and others are listed as participants in a system of meteorology for climate control within an international NGO (non-government agency) called the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), which is also part of the UN.
Notably, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is consistently listed as a top funded agency in partnership with the Department of Commerce (DOC).
CIA INTEREST IN METEOROLOGY FOR CLIMATE CONTROL: 1960
“Technological developments of the past two decades have provided the understanding, the techniques, and the means necessary for an assault on the problems of climate control. Control of any kind requires capabilities in all these areas. Meteorology is just now beginning to acquire such capabilities.” November 22, 1960, p.5 of 17
In 1961 JFK delivered a speech to the United Nations promoting globalism, cooperation in global weather control, satellite communications to link the whole world, and international disarmament, whereby the UN would become the world’s military police force.
Who is the UN’s military partner? NATO.
This is problematic for numerous reasons including the fact that Russia is on the UN security council and China is a leading funder of the UN, with both being members of the UN’s World Meteorological Organization along with the U.S.. This may explain why Chinese weather balloons have been allowed to travel freely over the United States.
The Amazing Deception
The five permanent members of the UN Security Council are: China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
“We shall propose further cooperative efforts between all nations in weather prediction and eventually in weather control.” President John F. Kennedy, 25 September 1961 Link To Full Speech Quote @ 22:02
In 1962 Lyndon Johnson described the development of a weather satellite to permit man to determine the world’s cloud layer and ultimately to control the weather. Johnson stated: “he who controls the weather will control the world.”
NATO 2030
An important revelation written in the Foreign Policy Institute/Henry A. Kissinger Center for Global Affairs,
Johns Hopkins University SAIS 2021 white paper, NATO 2030 states:
“Notably, it is no longer a given that the United States will play a significant leadership role in the Alliance.” Intro p. 13
Link To NATO 2030 Towards a New Strategic Concept and Beyond HERE
Is the U.S. Military Operating Under NATO Command?
Additionally, NATO collaborates with the International Civil Aviation Organization.
This international group is partnered with the UN as well as the UN’s global weather apparatus, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and plays a central role in facilitating global air traffic.
Published in separate English, French, Russian and Spanish editions by the INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION 999 University Street, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7 International Civil Aviation Organization 2011 330
MERGING OF CIVIL AND MILITARY AVIATION
“There is now a clearly defined need to establish procedures that support the efficient integration of military and civil aviation in day-to-day operations.” Chapter 6 p. 22
With reference to the list of acronyms on page (x) of this 2011 document, note the multiple mentions of remotely piloted aircraft systems, unmanned aircraft, and satellite systems.
“Historically, offshore airspace is regarded as optimal for conducting hazardous air activity due to its natural separation from both people and property and from other air activity. As a result, much of the offshore airspace around the U.S. has been designated as SUA (Special use airspace).” – p.28
EXACTLY WHOSE MILITARY?
As stated in the NATO 2030 document, there has been a diminishing U.S. leadership role in NATO.
This is consistent with the overarching establishment of UN global governance plans that have been in the works for at least a century.
The UN-linked International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) merger of global civil and military aviation operations has undermined legitimate USA Constitutional authority as well as national jurisdictions and sovereignty.
Remember, there is a difference between civil aviation operations such as flying to a destination and military operations involving warfare-related activities.
The global merging of military and civil aviation operations prevents essential public oversight of potentially catastrophic and hazardous atmospheric experimentation.
In the USA, the FAA, along with the EPA, as revealed in the source documents above, are not able to function in the best interests of the people because of the merging with a foreign military.
Air quality standards adopted by the EPA, spawned by NATO aka UN-linked military, allow regulatory cover for continual atmospheric dispersion modelling.
In conclusion, what’s being marketed as “climate change” is the result of over 70 years of weather and climate modification undertaken without public consent. It is now called Solar Radiation Modification (SRM).
========
IT ALL ENDS HERE…
Legitimate Constitutional regulatory mechanisms to prohibit and penalize atmospheric experimentation involving the intentional release of polluting emissions is necessary to protect human health and our environment.
Nations and States must step up to defend the rule of law.
Kentucky SB217 states: “Pursuant to the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and the inherent right for Kentucky citizens to engage in thoughtful deliberation and determine public policy by voting, the citizens of the Commonwealth do not consent to any unconstitutional actions or efforts made by the federal government or international bodies that intentionally release polluting emissions into the Commonwealth’s atmosphere, through geoengineering, cloud seeding, weather modification, or any other means;”
Illinois Weather Modification Act Introduced
Tennessee HB2063 and SB2691 Introduced
Clean Air Bill Introduced in Connecticut
========
SUMMARY:
Economic Interests Driving Pollution Policy:
-
- Pollution policy, driven by marketing campaigns, has become an economic phenomenon tied to investment schemes such as carbon credits and NACs.
- Entities linked to financial markets prioritize profit, potentially overshadowing genuine efforts to combat pollution.
UN’s Role in Harmonizing Atmospheric Experimentation:
-
- UN-NATO led initiatives prioritizing Agenda 21/2030 sustainable development goals (SDGs) have guided sovereign nations toward global atmospheric experimentation without public consent or legitimate governance.
- Weather modification and climate control programs, now termed SRM, lack public consent and oversight.
Merging Civil and Military Aviation:
-
- The merging of civil and military aviation, facilitated by organizations like NATO and the ICAO, excludes public oversight of hazardous atmospheric experimentation.
- The diminishing U.S. leadership role in NATO aligns with broader UN global governance plans.
Call for Constitutional Regulation:
-
- Constitutional regulatory mechanisms are crucial to prohibit and penalize atmospheric experimentation releasing pollutants intentionally.
- Nations and states are urged to defend the rule of law, exemplified by Kentucky SB217, asserting citizens’ right to reject and prohibit unconstitutional actions related to atmospheric experimentation.
========
Collection of U.S. States’ Air Dispersion and Modeling Information Illustrating Compliance with EPA’s Adoption of NATO-directed NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards).
Alabama
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
MODELING GUIDELINES – PSD AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS (alabama.gov)
========
Arizona
AQD | Air Dispersion Modeling | ADEQ (azdeq.gov)
Air Dispersion Modeling Guidelines (azdeq.gov)
========
Arkansas
air_permitting_introductory_guide_final-6-16-21.pdf (state.ar.us)
arkansas_source_characterization.pdf (epa.gov)
Chemical Hazards Research Center | Chemical Hazards Research Center | University of Arkansas (uark.edu)
========
Alaska
Air Quality Dispersion Modeling (alaska.gov)
acp-23-5641-2023.pdf (copernicus.org)
=========
California
HARP AERMOD Meteorological Files | California Air Resources Board
California aerosols – their physical and chemical characteristics (Journal Article) | OSTI.GOV
METEOROLOGICAL AND AIR DISPERSION MODELING APPROACH
========
Colorado
Colorado (state.co.us)
Air Quality Modeling Guidance for Permits | Department of Public Health & Environment (colorado.gov)
1 (epa.gov)
Microsoft Word – 119656715_1.docx (coag.gov)
=========
Connecticut
Air Quality Dispersion Modeling (ct.gov)
SO2DataRequirementsEPALetterpdf.pdf (ct.gov)
========
Delaware
Air Contaminant Equipment Registration – DNREC (delaware.gov)
Air Quality Dispersion Modeling – Screening Models | US EPA
Air Quality Pre-Application Review – DNREC (delaware.gov)
=========
Florida
Air Modeling for Air Permitting | Florida Department of Environmental Protection
PSD Air Quality Modeling Best Practices_2022_0.pdf (floridadep.gov)
========
Georgia
Air Quality Modeling | Environmental Protection Division (georgia.gov)
Georgia AERMET Meteorological Data | Environmental Protection Division
Interim Air Dispersion Modeling Guidance (providenceoris.com)
========
Hawaii
Meteorological and Air Quality Modeling for Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands – PMC (nih.gov)
Clean Air Branch | Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) + State & Local Emissions Inventory System (SLEIS) (hawaii.gov)
========
Idaho
State of Idaho Air Quality Modeling Guideline
Guideline for Performing Air Quality Impact Analyses_Revised Section 3 – 0721.docx (live.com)
========
Illinois
pcb.illinois.gov.doc (live.com)
Air-Quality-Impact-Evaluation-Interim-Guidance.pdf (chicago.gov)
Revised Emissions and Air Dispersion Modeling Study (chicago.gov)
========
Indiana
IDEM: Air Quality: Air Dispersion Meteorological Data (in.gov)
IDEM: Air Quality: Modeling
========
Iowa
Dispersion Modeling (iowadnr.gov)
modeling_guidelines.pdf (iowadnr.gov)
modeling_guidelines.pdf (iowa.gov)
Air Dispersion Modeling Evaluation (polkcountyiowa.gov)
========
Kansas
Modeling-Protocol-Guidance-Document-PDF (ks.gov)
Air Permit Modeling | KDHE, KS
2023 Regional, State, and Local Dispersion Modelers’ Workshop | US EPA
========
Kentucky
Modeling and Meteorology – Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet
Meteorological Data for Dispersion Modeling | LouisvilleKY.gov
Kentucky Annual Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan 2022
========
Louisiana
Air Modeling Resource | Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Microsoft Word – LA Modeling Guidelines62006.doc (louisiana.gov)
2015-4-4.pdf (la-awma.org)
PowerPoint Presentation (la-awma.org)
========
Maine
Modeling Protocols and Submittals, Air Quality,Maine DEP
Permit Air Quality Modeling Guidelines Maine DEP
Chapter 115: Emission License Regulations | EPA-Approved Maine Regulations | State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
========
Maryland
Air Quality Planning (maryland.gov)
York Mod InitialandSupplementDocket07-23.pdf (maryland.gov)
Dispersion Modeling, Air Miodeling, Air Dispersion | SCS Engineers
========
Massachusetts
Microsoft Word – modguid (mass.gov)
Air Quality Modeling Submittal (AQ MM) | Mass.gov
Federal Register :: Guideline on Air Quality Models; Enhancements to the AERMOD Dispersion Modeling System
========
Michigan
Modeling and Meteorology (michigan.gov)
Dispersion Modeling Info (michigan.gov)
MDEQ Air Quality Division Updates two key Policy and Procedure Documents (govdelivery.com)
========
Minnesota
Air quality modeling | Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (state.mn.us)
MPCA Air Quality Dispersion Modeling Practices Manual (state.mn.us)
MPCA Air Dispersion Modeling Practices Manaul (providenceoris.com)
========
Mississippi
NSR Air Quality Modeling – MDEQ (ms.gov)
Air Dispersion Modeling for Mississippi – High Level Overview for Managers & Decision Makers | Trinity Consultants
IJERPH | Free Full-Text | Some Observational and Modeling Studies of the Atmospheric Boundary Layer at Mississippi Gulf Coast for Air Pollution Dispersion Assessment (mdpi.com)
Air Quality Modeling for the Urban Jackson, Mississippi Region Using a High Resolution WRF/Chem Model – PMC (nih.gov)
========
Missouri
Air Permit Modeling | Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Minor Source Dispersion Modeling Protocol Template Minor Source Category | Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Atmosphere | Free Full-Text | Combining Dispersion Modeling and Monitoring Data for Community-Scale Air Quality Characterization (mdpi.com)
========
Montana
Air Quality Monitoring | Montana DEQ (mt.gov)
Montana Modeling Guideline for Air Quality Permits (providenceoris.com)
STATE OF MONTANA (mt.gov)
========
Nebraska
703_20231129-160531.pdf (nebraskalegislature.gov)
Microsoft Word – 06-188.doc (providenceoris.com)
nebraska_source_characterization.pdf (epa.gov)
========
Nevada
Microsoft Word – NBAPC_Model_Guide_Draft.doc (nv.gov)
Planning and Modeling | NDEP (nv.gov)
ARL Divisions: SORD – Air Resources Laboratory (noaa.gov)
========
New Hampshire
Modeling | NH Department of Environmental Services
Guidance and Procedure for Performing Air Quality Impact Modeling in New Hampshire (nh.gov)
New Hampshire Administrative Code | Part Env-A 606 – AIR POLLUTION DISPERSION MODELING IMPACT ANALYSIS | Casetext
Microsoft Word – NH_modeling_procedures_2006.doc (providenceoris.com)
========
New Jersey
NJDEP| Air Planning | Air Quality Evaluation and Planning
TECHNICAL MANUAL 1002 (nj.gov)
Section 7:27-22.8 – Air quality dispersion modeling and risk assessment, N.J. Admin. Code § 7:27-22.8 | Casetext Search + Citator
========
New Mexico
Air Quality Modeling (nm.gov)
Dispersion Modeling Guidelines & Data — City of Albuquerque (cabq.gov)
New Mexico Air Pollution Control Bureau (nm.gov)
feb2016-coa-dispersion-modeling-guidelines-1.pdf (cabq.gov)
========
New York
DAR-10: NYSDEC Guidelines on Dispersion Modeling Procedures for Air Quality Impact Analysis
Air Toxics Program – NYDEC
Air Quality Dispersion Modeling | US EPA
Expert Air Dispersion Modeling Services by C.T. Male Associates (ctmale.com)
========
North Carolina
Modeling & Meteorology | NC DEQ
Modeling | NC DEQ
Air Quality Modeling | Air Quality (mecknc.gov)
Atmospheric Dispersion and Pollution Transport – Air Quality Portal (ncsu.edu)
========
North Dakota
Air Quality – North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality (nd.gov)
ND_Air_Dispersion_Modeling_Guide.pdf
Search Results < North Dakota State University (ndsu.edu)
EPA – Dispersion Modeling Analysis of PSD Class I Increment Consumption in North Dakota and Eastern Montana (ndhealth.gov)
========
Ohio
State Implementation Plan Section/Modeling | Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
EG69_11-14-18_final.pdf (ohio.gov)
Air Quality Modeling | Ohio University
Ohio-Modeling-guidance.pdf (providenceoris.com)
========
Oklahoma
1 Introduction (ok.gov)
6.4 The Oklahoma Dispersion Model: a Web-based management tool for near-surface releases of gases and small particulates (2002 – AFMAPUE_12airpoll) (confex.com)
A simple urban dispersion model tested with tracer data from Oklahoma City and Manhattan – ScienceDirect
========
Oregon
CAORP-AirQualityModeling.pdf (oregon.gov)
Department of Environmental Quality : Short-Term 1-Hour and 24-Hour NAAQS Requirements : Air Quality Permits : State of Oregon
nextCombMPrawp.pdf (state.or.us)
Recommended procedures for air quality dispersion modeling – September 2021 | Oregon State Library
========
Pennsylvania
Air Resource Management Division (pa.gov)
files.dep.state.pa.us/RegionalResources/SWRO/SWROPortalFiles/Community Info/Westmoreland_Sanitary_Landfill/Westmoreland_LF_Dispersion_Modeling_Protocol.pdf
BAQ Functions (pa.gov)
Air Dispersion Modeling (geosyntec.com)
Appendix A – Summary of Revised Air Dispersion Modeling for IRA.pdf (state.pa.us)
========
Rhode Island
RI DEM/Air Resources- Air Dispersion Modeling Guidelines for Stationary Sources
RIDEM, Office of Air Resources, GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSING HEALTH RISKS FROM PROPOSED AIR POLLUTION SOURCES
Rhode Island Air Pollution Control Regulation 9: Air Pollution Control Permits (epa.gov)
BEEST Suite – Air Quality Modeling, AERMOD | Providence-Oris (providenceoris.com)
========
South Carolina
Air Dispersion Modeling – Guidance and General Information | SCDHEC
Air Dispersion Modeling Overview | SCDHEC
========
South Dakota
Administrative Rule 74:36:21:04 | South Dakota Legislature (sdlegislature.gov)
sd-remarks-r2.pdf (epa.gov)
sd-rec-r2.pdf (epa.gov)
========
Tennessee
apc_ppo-TN-DAPC-PSD-Dispersion-Modeling-Protocol-Template-10132023final.pdf
Air Quality Modeling (tn.gov)
Microsoft Word – Georgia Air Dispersion Modeling Guidance.doc (tn.gov)
========
Texas
Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling – Texas Commission on Environmental Quality – www.tceq.texas.gov
TCEQ Air Quality Modeling Guidelines (texas.gov)
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=20011RKE.TXT
========
Utah
Air Quality Modeling Program – Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Geographic Information Systems (GIS): Air Quality Modeling Program – Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Pardyjak Lab (utah.edu)
========
Vermont
Air Quality Modeling | Department of Environmental Conservation (vermont.gov)
Section 5-406 Required Air Modeling | Chapter 5 Air Pollution Control, Subchapter IV. Operations and Procedures (epa.gov)
Technical manual (vermont.gov)
========
Virginia
Air Assessments | Virginia DEQ
Virginia Modeling Guideline for Air Quality Permits
04616 RM849-20200424100447 (epa.gov)
References | Assessing Air Pollution Dispersion Models for Emissions Regulation | The National Academies Press
========
Washington
Air Dispersion Modeling Protocol (wa.gov)
PowerPoint Presentation (washington.edu)
Microsoft PowerPoint – CEE 357 air dispersion models.ppt [Compatibility Mode] (washington.edu)
Project Report Template (pscleanair.gov)
========
West Virginia
Air Modeling Group (wv.gov)
Microsoft Word – CMC Kent – PSD Modeling Protocol v0.7 – Post Comments (wv.gov)
Microsoft Word – Cover Sheet Attachment 1.docx (epa.gov)
========
Wisconsin
Air Dispersion Modeling | | Wisconsin DNR
Air Permits | Wisconsin DNR
“Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling of Pollutants in Milwaukee Using AERMO” by Otito Onwuzurike (marquette.edu)
Air dispersion modeling : foundations and applications – Catalog – UW-Madison Libraries (wisc.edu)
=========
Wyoming
[DRAFT] Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality/Air Quality Division (providenceoris.com)
An assessment of the air quality modeling efforts in southwest Wyoming (Technical Report) | OSTI.GOV
WDEQ-AQD Final Comment – PM2.5 Ozone Permit Modeling Guidance – 11.18.21.pdf (epa.gov)
=========
Relevant Related Documentation
EPA
https://www.epa.gov/scram/air-quality-dispersion-modeling
https://www.epa.gov/scram/modeling-applications-and-tools
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atmospheric_dispersion_models
EPA Can Strengthen Its Process for Revising Air Quality Dispersion Models that Predict Impact of Pollutant Emissions
Federal Register :: Guideline on Air Quality Models; Enhancements to the AERMOD Dispersion Modeling System Dec 2023
WMO
https://community.wmo.int/en/dispersion-models
NATO Air Pollution Modeling and Its Application
https://vdocuments.net/5750a3021a28abcf0c9f7be7.html?page=6
USA Air Modeling – State Modeling | US EPA
Atmospheric dispersion for impact assessment in France
Ultrafine aerosol particles in aircraft plumes In situ observations
Models, In situ, and Remote sensing of Aerosols (MIRA): Formation of an International Working Group
Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Environmental Pollution Applications
An Introduction to Atmospheric Pollutant Dispersion Modelling
Air Pollution Meteorology and Dispersion
DOE Two Column Aerosol Project Science Plan – DOE
Stratospheric Aircraft Exhaust Plume and Wake Chemistry – NASA
Method for Estimating Aircraft Black Carbon Mass and Particle Number Emissions USDA
DOD Management Issues Related to Chaff
EPA Dispersion Models AERMOD
New Evidence of Corruption at EPA Chemicals Division (theintercept.com)
Whistleblowers Expose Corruption in EPA Chemical Safety Office (theintercept.com)
==========
