ATTACHMENT A: Emission Inventory
Table of Contents for Attachment A

Appendix A – Point Source Summary

Appendix B – Area Source Summary

Appendix C – Area Source Calculation Notes

Appendix D – Onroad Emission Projections

Appendix E – Onroad Mobile Source Summary

Appendix F – Nonroad Mobile Source Summary and Documentation

Appendix G – Cocke County Analysis

Appendix H – MOBILE6 Input and Output Files 
Appendix A – Point Source Summary
NOx Point Emissions

County

Company 

Number Company Name Emission Unit

Emission Release 

Point SCC

Summer Seasonal 

Operation

Days per 

Season Pollutant Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 001 S-001 10100212 25% 91.25 NOX 11,917.3 32.65 11,917.3 32.65 11,917.3 32.65 11,917.3 32.65 11,917.3 32.65 11,917.3 32.65

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 001 S-001 10100501 25% 91.25 NOX 13.0 0.04 6.6 0.02 7.5 0.02 27.8 0.08 7.0 0.02 6.9 0.02

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 002 S-002 10200501 25% 91.25 NOX 1.8 0.00 1.8 0.00 1.9 0.01 2.0 0.01 2.1 0.01 2.2 0.01

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 002 S-003 10200501 0% 91.25 NOX 1.8 0.00 1.8 0.00 1.9 0.00 2.0 0.00 2.1 0.00 2.2 0.00

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run Facility Totals 11,933.8 32.7 11,927.5 32.7 11,928.6 32.7 11,949.0 32.7 11,928.5 32.7 11,928.6 32.7

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013170 10200202 12% 91.25 NOX 280.8 0.37 281.3 0.37 284.4 0.37 286.3 0.38 290.0 0.38 290.0 0.38

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013171 10200202 12% 91.25 NOX 280.8 0.37 281.3 0.37 284.4 0.37 286.3 0.38 290.0 0.38 290.0 0.38

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013170 10200202 27% 91.25 NOX 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.7 0.01 4.7 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013171 10200202 27% 91.25 NOX 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.6 0.01 4.7 0.01 4.7 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 003 032435 50300101 25% 91.25 NOX 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 008 015413 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.2 0.00 1.4 0.00

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015239 30901097 25% 91.25 NOX 3.8 0.01 3.9 0.01 4.0 0.01 4.3 0.01 4.8 0.01 5.3 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015240 30901097 25% 91.25 NOX 3.8 0.01 3.9 0.01 4.0 0.01 4.3 0.01 4.8 0.01 5.3 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015454 30901097 25% 91.25 NOX 3.8 0.01 3.9 0.01 4.0 0.01 4.3 0.01 4.8 0.01 5.3 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015241 30901097 25% 91.25 NOX 3.8 0.01 3.9 0.01 4.0 0.01 4.3 0.01 4.8 0.01 5.3 0.01

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 212134 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21227 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21228 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21233 30990013 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.9 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21240 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 212134 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 212432 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 17.5 0.05 18.1 0.05 18.7 0.05 20.2 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.7 0.07

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 212113 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 21244 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 21245 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 21246 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 21247 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 212290 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 21226 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 212113 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 014 212128 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 12.4 0.03 12.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.3 0.04 15.9 0.04 17.5 0.05

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 016 21238 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 0.3 0.00 0.3 0.00 0.3 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 016 21248 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 0.3 0.00 0.3 0.00 0.3 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 027 99864 30999999 25% 91.25 NOX 6.1 0.02 6.3 0.02 6.6 0.02 7.1 0.02 7.8 0.02 8.7 0.02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 Facility Totals 827.4 1.5 838.5 1.5 852.9 1.5 878.8 1.6 917.7 1.7 952.4 1.8

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 005 S-005 10200602 25% 91.25 NOX 11.8 0.03 12.4 0.03 12.9 0.04 13.2 0.04 14.0 0.04 14.8 0.04

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 005 S-005 10200501 25% 91.25 NOX 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00 0.8 0.00 0.8 0.00 0.9 0.00 0.9 0.00

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 001 OF1S 50200601 25% 91.25 NOX 8.6 0.02 8.6 0.02 8.6 0.02 8.6 0.02 8.6 0.02 8.6 0.02

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 001 EF1S 50200601 25% 91.25 NOX 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E1S 20100802 25% 91.25 NOX 22.4 0.06 23.0 0.06 23.0 0.06 23.0 0.06 23.6 0.06 23.6 0.06

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E2S 20100802 25% 91.25 NOX 22.0 0.06 22.6 0.06 22.6 0.06 22.6 0.06 23.2 0.06 23.2 0.06

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E3S 20100802 25% 91.25 NOX 21.9 0.06 22.5 0.06 22.5 0.06 22.5 0.06 23.1 0.06 23.1 0.06

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E4S 20100802 25% 91.25 NOX 22.2 0.06 22.8 0.06 22.8 0.06 22.8 0.06 23.4 0.06 23.4 0.06

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill Facility Totals 110.5 0.3 113.6 0.3 114.1 0.3 114.5 0.3 117.7 0.3 118.5 0.3

Anderson County Totals 12,871.80 34.46 12,879.50 34.48 12,895.57 34.52 12,942.25 34.64 12,963.80 34.69 12,999.44 34.78

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 009 ANOD08 30300105 25% 91.25 NOX 60.7 0.17 58.2 0.16 56.2 0.15 60.7 0.17 67.7 0.19 76.0 0.21

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 016 POT45 30300104 25% 91.25 NOX 10.9 0.03 10.5 0.03 10.1 0.03 10.9 0.03 12.2 0.03 13.7 0.04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFRN05 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 2.8 0.01 2.7 0.01 2.6 0.01 2.8 0.01 3.1 0.01 3.5 0.01

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFNR07 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 1.9 0.01 1.8 0.00 1.7 0.00 1.9 0.01 2.1 0.01 2.4 0.01

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFNR06 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 2.6 0.01 2.5 0.01 2.4 0.01 2.6 0.01 2.9 0.01 3.3 0.01

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 MFRN09 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 14.4 0.04 13.8 0.04 13.3 0.04 14.4 0.04 16.0 0.04 18.0 0.05

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 HFRN10 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 2.8 0.01 2.7 0.01 2.6 0.01 2.8 0.01 3.1 0.01 3.5 0.01

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 MFRN11 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 16.7 0.05 16.0 0.04 15.4 0.04 16.7 0.05 18.6 0.05 20.9 0.06

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 HFRN12 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 1.1 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.2 0.00 1.3 0.00

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 029 DF201 30490033 25% 91.25 NOX 39.2 0.11 41.1 0.11 42.6 0.12 44.7 0.12 49.0 0.13 53.1 0.15

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 030 DF202 30490033 25% 91.25 NOX 19.6 0.05 20.6 0.06 21.3 0.06 22.4 0.06 24.5 0.07 26.6 0.07

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 031 MF203 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 7.4 0.02 7.1 0.02 6.8 0.02 7.4 0.02 8.2 0.02 9.2 0.03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 032 MF204 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 7.5 0.02 7.2 0.02 6.9 0.02 7.5 0.02 8.3 0.02 9.3 0.03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 033 MF205 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 6.5 0.02 6.3 0.02 6.1 0.02 6.5 0.02 7.3 0.02 8.2 0.02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 034 MF206 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 9.2 0.03 8.8 0.02 8.5 0.02 9.2 0.03 10.2 0.03 11.5 0.03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 034 MF207 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 7.5 0.02 7.2 0.02 6.9 0.02 7.5 0.02 8.4 0.02 9.4 0.03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 036 TRFN22 30490033 25% 91.25 NOX 0.9 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.2 0.00 1.3 0.00

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant Facility Totals 211.7 0.6 208.2 0.6 205.6 0.6 219.9 0.6 244.2 0.7 271.0 0.7

Blount 05-0030 TN Farmers Co-Op 012 S-007 10200603 25% 91.25 NOX 1.0 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.1 0.00 1.2 0.00 1.3 0.00

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 001 MF308 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 4.1 0.01 3.9 0.01 3.8 0.01 4.1 0.01 4.6 0.01 5.1 0.01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 002 MF307 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.0 0.00 1.2 0.00 1.3 0.00

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 003 MF304 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 4.1 0.01 3.9 0.01 3.8 0.01 4.1 0.01 4.6 0.01 5.2 0.01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 005 MF309 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 4.6 0.01 4.4 0.01 4.2 0.01 4.6 0.01 5.1 0.01 5.7 0.02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 006 MF303 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 6.7 0.02 6.4 0.02 6.2 0.02 6.7 0.02 7.5 0.02 8.4 0.02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 011 PF430 30390003 25% 91.25 NOX 63.1 0.17 63.0 0.17 61.7 0.17 61.1 0.17 62.3 0.17 64.3 0.18

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 020 MF305 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 0.6 0.00 0.5 0.00 0.5 0.00 0.6 0.00 0.6 0.00 0.7 0.00

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 021 BOI424 10100602 25% 91.25 NOX 2.1 0.01 2.2 0.01 3.1 0.01 4.9 0.01 5.2 0.01 4.7 0.01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 022 BOI425 10100602 25% 91.25 NOX 2.1 0.01 2.2 0.01 3.1 0.01 4.9 0.01 5.2 0.01 4.7 0.01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 023 BOI426 10100602 25% 91.25 NOX 2.1 0.01 2.2 0.01 3.1 0.01 4.9 0.01 5.2 0.01 4.7 0.01

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Page 1 of 2
NOx Point Emissions

County

Company 

Number Company Name Emission Unit

Emission Release 

Point SCC

Summer Seasonal 

Operation

Days per 

Season Pollutant Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Emission 

TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 024 BOI428 10100602 25% 91.25 NOX 2.8 0.01 3.0 0.01 4.3 0.01 6.8 0.02 7.1 0.02 6.6 0.02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 025 BOI429 30400103 25% 91.25 NOX 2.6 0.01 2.5 0.01 2.4 0.01 2.6 0.01 2.9 0.01 3.3 0.01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant Facility Totals 95.8 0.3 95.2 0.3 97.2 0.3 106.4 0.3 111.4 0.3 114.7 0.3

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 005 FUG-04 31401612 0% 91.25 NOX 0.1 0.00 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount County Totals 308.61 0.85 304.49 0.83 303.86 0.83 327.46 0.90 356.72 0.98 386.98 1.06

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 002 S-001 10200204 25% 91.25 NOX 119.0 0.33 119.2 0.33 120.6 0.33 121.3 0.33 122.9 0.34 124.6 0.34

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 002 S-002 10200602 25% 91.25 NOX 1.3 0.00 1.4 0.00 1.4 0.00 1.5 0.00 1.5 0.00 1.6 0.00

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 004 PG-1 20200107 25% 91.25 NOX 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.5 0.00

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase Facility Totals 120.7 0.3 121.0 0.3 122.4 0.3 123.2 0.3 124.9 0.3 126.7 0.3

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 FHS#1 30200768 25% 91.25 NOX 252.7 0.69 265.5 0.73 278.4 0.76 291.1 0.80 306.1 0.84 321.5 0.88

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 PES#23 30201525 25% 91.25 NOX 2.9 0.01 3.0 0.01 3.1 0.01 3.3 0.01 3.5 0.01 3.6 0.01

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 SDS 30201411 25% 91.25 NOX 3.9 0.01 4.1 0.01 4.3 0.01 4.5 0.01 4.7 0.01 5.0 0.01

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 005 BHS 10200204 25% 91.25 NOX 310.8 0.85 311.4 0.85 314.9 0.86 316.9 0.87 321.0 0.88 325.4 0.89

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 006 PES#71 20100202 25% 91.25 NOX 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00 0.7 0.00

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES28B 30125010 25% 91.25 NOX 0.1 0.00 0.1 0.00 0.1 0.00 0.2 0.00 0.2 0.00 0.2 0.00

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle Facility Totals 571.0 1.6 584.8 1.6 601.5 1.6 616.8 1.7 636.2 1.7 656.4 1.8

Loudon County Totals 691.7 1.9 705.8 1.9 723.9 2.0 740.0 2.0 761.1 2.1 783.1 2.1

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302 001 S-001A 20200201 20% 91.25 NOX 9.8 0.02 10.3 0.02 10.8 0.02 11.0 0.02 11.7 0.03 12.3 0.03

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302 002 S-002A 20200201 9% 91.25 NOX 4.3 0.00 4.5 0.00 4.7 0.00 4.8 0.00 5.1 0.00 5.3 0.01

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302 003 S-003A 20200201 8% 91.25 NOX 4.2 0.00 4.4 0.00 4.6 0.00 4.7 0.00 5.0 0.00 5.2 0.00

78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302 Facility Totals 0.03 19.21 0.03 19.98 0.03 20.47 0.03 21.67 0.03 22.82 0.04

Sevier County Totals 18.2 0.0 19.2 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.5 0.0 21.7 0.0 22.8 0.0

Page 2 of 2
VOC Point Emissions

County

Company 

Number Company Name Emission Unit

Emission Release 

Point SCC

Summer 

Seasonal 

Operation

Days per 

Season Pollutant Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 001 S-001 10100212 25% 91.25 VOC 72.1 0.197409041 74.3 2.04E-01 75.0 2.06E-01 74.4 2.04E-01 93.2 2.55E-01 120.8 3.31E-01

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 001 S-001 10100501 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000296748 0.1 1.51E-04 0.1 1.71E-04 0.2 6.35E-04 0.1 1.61E-04 0.1 1.58E-04

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 002 S-002 10200501 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 4.84932E-05 0.0 2.46E-05 0.0 2.80E-05 0.0 1.04E-04 0.0 2.62E-05 0.0 2.58E-05

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run 002 S-003 10200501 0% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Anderson 01-0009 TVA Bull Run Facility Totals 72.2 0.2 74.4 0.2 75.1 0.2 74.7 0.2 93.3 0.3 120.8 0.3

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 001 011272 40200101 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013171 10200202 12% 91.25 VOC 1.0 0.001315068 1.0 1.32E-03 1.0 1.33E-03 1.0 1.34E-03 1.0 1.36E-03 1.0 1.38E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013170 10200202 12% 91.25 VOC 1.0 0.001315068 1.0 1.32E-03 1.0 1.33E-03 1.0 1.34E-03 1.0 1.36E-03 1.0 1.38E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013170 10200202 27% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000473425 0.2 4.74E-04 0.2 4.80E-04 0.2 4.83E-04 0.2 4.89E-04 0.2 4.96E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 002 013171 10200202 27% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000473425 0.2 4.74E-04 0.2 4.80E-04 0.2 4.83E-04 0.2 4.89E-04 0.2 4.96E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015239 30901097 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000342466 0.1 3.55E-04 0.1 3.66E-04 0.1 3.96E-04 0.2 4.38E-04 0.2 4.84E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015454 30901097 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000342466 0.1 3.55E-04 0.1 3.66E-04 0.1 3.96E-04 0.2 4.38E-04 0.2 4.84E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015240 30901097 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000342466 0.1 3.55E-04 0.1 3.66E-04 0.1 3.96E-04 0.2 4.38E-04 0.2 4.84E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 010 015241 30901097 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000342466 0.1 3.55E-04 0.1 3.66E-04 0.1 3.96E-04 0.2 4.38E-04 0.2 4.84E-04

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21227 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.7 7.46E-03 2.8 7.71E-03 3.0 8.33E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21228 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.7 7.46E-03 2.8 7.71E-03 3.0 8.33E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21233 30990013 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.8 7.79E-03 3.0 8.35E-03 3.3 9.06E-03 3.7 1.03E-02 4.2 1.16E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 21240 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.7 7.46E-03 2.8 7.71E-03 3.0 8.33E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 212134 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.7 7.46E-03 2.8 7.71E-03 3.0 8.33E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 012 212432 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007205479 2.7 7.46E-03 2.8 7.71E-03 3.0 8.33E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 015 212108 30900198 25% 91.25 VOC 24.0 0.065753425 24.9 6.81E-02 25.7 7.04E-02 27.7 7.60E-02 30.7 8.41E-02 33.9 9.29E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 016 21248 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 4.4 0.012 4.5 1.24E-02 4.7 1.28E-02 5.1 1.39E-02 5.6 1.53E-02 6.2 1.70E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 019 2153 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 4.4 0.012 4.5 1.24E-02 4.7 1.28E-02 5.1 1.39E-02 5.6 1.53E-02 6.2 1.70E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 026 04485 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 3.7 0.010054795 3.8 1.04E-02 3.9 1.08E-02 4.2 1.16E-02 4.7 1.29E-02 5.2 1.42E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 026 04486 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 3.7 0.010054795 3.8 1.04E-02 3.9 1.08E-02 4.2 1.16E-02 4.7 1.29E-02 5.2 1.42E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 026 04487 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 3.7 0.010054795 3.8 1.04E-02 3.9 1.08E-02 4.2 1.16E-02 4.7 1.29E-02 5.2 1.42E-02

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 032 049324 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.002958904 1.1 3.06E-03 1.2 3.17E-03 1.2 3.42E-03 1.4 3.78E-03 1.5 4.18E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 032 049325 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.002958904 1.1 3.06E-03 1.2 3.17E-03 1.2 3.42E-03 1.4 3.78E-03 1.5 4.18E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 032 049326 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.002958904 1.1 3.06E-03 1.2 3.17E-03 1.2 3.42E-03 1.4 3.78E-03 1.5 4.18E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 032 049327 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.002958904 1.1 3.06E-03 1.2 3.17E-03 1.2 3.42E-03 1.4 3.78E-03 1.5 4.18E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 041 531144 30999999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.7 0.001780822 0.7 1.84E-03 0.7 1.91E-03 0.8 2.06E-03 0.8 2.28E-03 0.9 2.52E-03

Anderson 01-0020 DOE Y-12 Facility Totals 67.3 0.2 69.8 0.2 72.2 0.2 77.8 0.2 85.9 0.2 94.8 0.3

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 001 S-001A 30800105 25% 91.25 VOC 47.8 0.130876712 51.4 1.41E-01 54.6 1.49E-01 59.1 1.62E-01 65.5 1.79E-01 72.6 1.99E-01

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 001 S-001A 30800105 25% 91.25 VOC 10.9 0.029780822 11.7 3.20E-02 12.4 3.40E-02 13.4 3.68E-02 14.9 4.08E-02 16.5 4.52E-02

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 004 S-004A 30800107 25% 91.25 VOC 1.9 0.005205479 2.0 5.60E-03 2.2 5.95E-03 2.4 6.44E-03 2.6 7.14E-03 2.9 7.91E-03

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 004 S-004B 30800107 25% 91.25 VOC 4.6 0.012465753 4.9 1.34E-02 5.2 1.42E-02 5.6 1.54E-02 6.2 1.71E-02 6.9 1.89E-02

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 004 S-004C 30800107 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.003123288 1.2 3.36E-03 1.3 3.57E-03 1.4 3.86E-03 1.6 4.28E-03 1.7 4.74E-03

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 005 S-005 10200602 25% 91.25 VOC 0.6 0.001778082 0.7 1.87E-03 0.7 1.95E-03 0.7 2.00E-03 0.8 2.11E-03 0.8 2.22E-03

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 005 S-005 10200501 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 3.42466E-05 0.0 3.46E-05 0.0 3.66E-05 0.0 3.80E-05 0.0 4.00E-05 0.0 4.23E-05

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 008 S-008A 30800111 25% 91.25 VOC 2.9 0.008 3.1 8.60E-03 3.3 9.14E-03 3.6 9.90E-03 4.0 1.10E-02 4.4 1.22E-02

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation 008 S-008B 30800111 25% 91.25 VOC 0.9 0.002421918 1.0 2.60E-03 1.0 2.77E-03 1.1 3.00E-03 1.2 3.32E-03 1.3 3.68E-03

Anderson 01-0114 Carlisle Tire Corporation Facility Totals 70.7 0.2 76.0 0.2 80.7 0.2 87.4 0.2 96.8 0.3 107.2 0.3

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 001 OF1S 50200601 25% 91.25 VOC 0.4 0.001032877 0.4 1.03E-03 0.4 1.03E-03 0.4 1.03E-03 0.4 1.03E-03 0.4 1.03E-03

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 001 EF1S 50200601 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000150411 0.1 1.50E-04 0.1 1.50E-04 0.1 1.50E-04 0.1 1.50E-04 0.1 1.50E-04

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 001 FUG-01 50200602 25% 91.25 VOC 17.6 0.048219178 19.3 5.29E-02 20.9 5.73E-02 22.6 6.18E-02 24.7 6.77E-02 27.0 7.39E-02

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E1S 20100802 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000673973 0.3 6.92E-04 0.3 6.92E-04 0.3 6.92E-04 0.3 7.10E-04 0.3 7.10E-04

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E2S 20100802 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000663014 0.2 6.81E-04 0.2 6.81E-04 0.2 6.81E-04 0.3 6.99E-04 0.3 6.99E-04

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E3S 20100802 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000660274 0.2 6.78E-04 0.2 6.78E-04 0.2 6.78E-04 0.3 6.96E-04 0.3 6.96E-04

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill 002 E4S 20100802 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000668493 0.3 6.87E-04 0.3 6.87E-04 0.3 6.87E-04 0.3 7.05E-04 0.3 7.05E-04

Anderson 01-0170 Chestnut Ridge Landfill Facility Totals 19.0 0.1 20.7 0.1 22.3 0.1 24.0 0.1 26.2 0.1 28.4 0.1

Anderson County Totals 229.24 0.63 240.90 0.66 250.33 0.68 263.94 0.72 302.16 0.82 351.35 0.96

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 003 FUG-03 30399999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.0 0.005438356 1.9 5.21E-03 1.8 5.03E-03 2.0 5.43E-03 2.2 6.07E-03 2.5 6.80E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 007 ANOD82 30399999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.3 0.000707274 0.2 6.78E-04 0.2 6.55E-04 0.3 7.07E-04 0.3 7.89E-04 0.3 8.84E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 009 ANOD08 30300105 25% 91.25 VOC 9.6 0.026327151 9.2 2.52E-02 8.9 2.44E-02 9.6 2.63E-02 10.7 2.94E-02 12.0 3.29E-02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 011 FUG-11 30399999 25% 91.25 VOC 7.8 0.021323808 7.5 2.04E-02 7.2 1.97E-02 7.8 2.13E-02 8.7 2.38E-02 9.7 2.67E-02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 016 POT45 30300104 25% 91.25 VOC 2.1 0.005726027 2.0 5.49E-03 1.9 5.30E-03 2.1 5.72E-03 2.3 6.39E-03 2.6 7.16E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 016 FUG-16 30300104 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.00030137 0.1 2.89E-04 0.1 2.79E-04 0.1 3.01E-04 0.1 3.36E-04 0.1 3.77E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 017 POT48 30300104 25% 91.25 VOC 2.2 0.005917808 2.1 5.67E-03 2.0 5.48E-03 2.2 5.91E-03 2.4 6.60E-03 2.7 7.40E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 017 FUG-17 30300104 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000312329 0.1 2.99E-04 0.1 2.89E-04 0.1 3.12E-04 0.1 3.48E-04 0.1 3.91E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFRN05 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 3.5 0.009582384 3.4 9.18E-03 3.2 8.87E-03 3.5 9.57E-03 3.9 1.07E-02 4.4 1.20E-02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFNR07 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000515493 0.2 4.94E-04 0.2 4.77E-04 0.2 5.15E-04 0.2 5.75E-04 0.2 6.45E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 023 HFNR06 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 3.4 0.009338479 3.3 8.95E-03 3.2 8.64E-03 3.4 9.33E-03 3.8 1.04E-02 4.3 1.17E-02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 MFRN09 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.9 0.00515674 1.8 4.94E-03 1.7 4.77E-03 1.9 5.15E-03 2.1 5.75E-03 2.4 6.45E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 HFRN10 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 3.5 0.009582384 3.4 9.18E-03 3.2 8.87E-03 3.5 9.57E-03 3.9 1.07E-02 4.4 1.20E-02

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 MFRN11 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.8 0.004838123 1.7 4.64E-03 1.6 4.48E-03 1.8 4.83E-03 2.0 5.40E-03 2.2 6.05E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 024 HFRN12 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 2.5 0.006849315 2.4 6.56E-03 2.3 6.34E-03 2.5 6.84E-03 2.8 7.64E-03 3.1 8.56E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 029 DF201 30490033 25% 91.25 VOC 0.3 0.000957 0.4 1.00E-03 0.4 1.04E-03 0.4 1.09E-03 0.4 1.20E-03 0.5 1.30E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 030 DF202 30490033 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000544932 0.2 5.71E-04 0.2 5.92E-04 0.2 6.21E-04 0.2 6.81E-04 0.3 7.38E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 031 MF203 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.3 0.003690027 1.3 3.54E-03 1.2 3.42E-03 1.3 3.69E-03 1.5 4.12E-03 1.7 4.61E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 032 MF204 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.4 0.003736384 1.3 3.58E-03 1.3 3.46E-03 1.4 3.73E-03 1.5 4.17E-03 1.7 4.67E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 033 MF205 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.2 0.003276164 1.1 3.14E-03 1.1 3.03E-03 1.2 3.27E-03 1.3 3.65E-03 1.5 4.10E-03

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 034 MF206 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000299384 0.1 2.87E-04 0.1 2.77E-04 0.1 2.99E-04 0.1 3.34E-04 0.1 3.74E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 034 MF207 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 7.47945E-05 0.0 7.17E-05 0.0 6.92E-05 0.0 7.47E-05 0.0 8.34E-05 0.0 9.35E-05

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South Plant 036 TRFN22 30490033 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000240178 0.1 2.52E-04 0.1 2.61E-04 0.1 2.74E-04 0.1 3.00E-04 0.1 3.25E-04

Blount 05-0008 ALCOA - South PlantFacility Totals 45.5 0.1 43.7 0.1 42.2 0.1 45.6 0.1 50.9 0.1 57.0 0.2

Blount 05-0011 AlCOA-Blount-Maryville Landfill 001 FUG-01 50100402 25% 91.25 VOC 19.6 0.05369863 20.6 5.65E-02 21.6 5.92E-02 22.9 6.27E-02 24.4 6.68E-02 25.9 7.09E-02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 001 MF308 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.2 0.003279082 1.1 3.14E-03 1.1 3.04E-03 1.2 3.28E-03 1.3 3.66E-03 1.5 4.10E-03

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 002 MF307 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000287356 0.1 2.75E-04 0.1 2.66E-04 0.1 2.87E-04 0.1 3.20E-04 0.1 3.59E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 003 MF304 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.2 0.00322674 1.1 3.09E-03 1.1 2.99E-03 1.2 3.22E-03 1.3 3.60E-03 1.5 4.03E-03

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 005 MF309 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 1.3 0.003568301 1.2 3.42E-03 1.2 3.30E-03 1.3 3.57E-03 1.5 3.98E-03 1.6 4.46E-03

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 006 MF303 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.4 0.00101037 0.4 9.68E-04 0.3 9.35E-04 0.4 1.01E-03 0.4 1.13E-03 0.5 1.26E-03

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 009 FUG-09 50400151 25% 91.25 VOC 3.1 0.008364384 3.2 8.80E-03 3.4 9.23E-03 3.6 9.76E-03 3.8 1.04E-02 4.0 1.10E-02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 011 PF430 30390003 25% 91.25 VOC 3.5 0.009504164 3.5 9.50E-03 3.4 9.30E-03 3.4 9.21E-03 3.4 9.38E-03 3.5 9.69E-03

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Page 1 of 3
VOC Point Emissions

County

Company 

Number Company Name Emission Unit

Emission Release 

Point SCC

Summer 

Seasonal 

Operation

Days per 

Season Pollutant Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 012 MIL422 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 400.9 1.098352685 384.1 1.05E+00 371.1 1.02E+00 400.6 1.10E+00 447.1 1.22E+00 501.3 1.37E+00

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 014 MIL417 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 52.5 0.143929425 50.3 1.38E-01 48.6 1.33E-01 52.5 1.44E-01 58.6 1.61E-01 65.7 1.80E-01

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 014 MIL420 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000586301 0.2 5.62E-04 0.2 5.43E-04 0.2 5.86E-04 0.2 6.54E-04 0.3 7.33E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 015 FUG15A 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 1.0 0.002721808 1.0 2.61E-03 0.9 2.52E-03 1.0 2.72E-03 1.1 3.04E-03 1.2 3.40E-03

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 015 FUG15B 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 4.8 0.013280233 4.6 1.27E-02 4.5 1.23E-02 4.8 1.33E-02 5.4 1.48E-02 6.1 1.66E-02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 015 FUG15C 30400150 25% 91.25 VOC 5.8 0.015815315 5.5 1.52E-02 5.3 1.46E-02 5.8 1.58E-02 6.4 1.76E-02 7.2 1.98E-02

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 017 PNTS42 40200101 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 020 MF305 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000151945 0.1 1.46E-04 0.1 1.41E-04 0.1 1.52E-04 0.1 1.69E-04 0.1 1.90E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 021 BOI424 10100602 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000310274 0.1 3.25E-04 0.2 4.65E-04 0.3 7.43E-04 0.3 7.79E-04 0.3 7.14E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 022 BOI425 10100602 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000310274 0.1 3.25E-04 0.2 4.65E-04 0.3 7.43E-04 0.3 7.79E-04 0.3 7.14E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 023 BOI426 10100602 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000310274 0.1 3.25E-04 0.2 4.65E-04 0.3 7.43E-04 0.3 7.79E-04 0.3 7.14E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 024 BOI428 10100602 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000429233 0.2 4.50E-04 0.2 6.43E-04 0.4 1.03E-03 0.4 1.08E-03 0.4 9.88E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North Plant 025 BOI429 30400103 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000396452 0.1 3.80E-04 0.1 3.67E-04 0.1 3.96E-04 0.2 4.42E-04 0.2 4.96E-04

Blount 05-0090 ALCOA - North PlantFacility Totals 476.6 1.3 457.1 1.3 442.2 1.2 477.3 1.3 532.2 1.5 595.9 1.6

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P01 SFC-1A 40202220 25% 91.25 VOC 31.5 0.08630137 33.9 9.28E-02 36.0 9.86E-02 39.0 1.07E-01 43.2 1.18E-01 47.9 1.31E-01

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P01 SFC-1B 40202229 25% 91.25 VOC 13.5 0.036986301 14.5 3.98E-02 15.4 4.22E-02 16.7 4.58E-02 18.5 5.07E-02 20.5 5.62E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P01 SFC-1C 40202201 25% 91.25 VOC 5.4 0.014657534 5.8 1.58E-02 6.1 1.67E-02 6.6 1.81E-02 7.3 2.01E-02 8.1 2.23E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P01 SFC-1D 40202230 25% 91.25 VOC 17.0 0.046575342 18.3 5.01E-02 19.4 5.32E-02 21.0 5.76E-02 23.3 6.39E-02 25.8 7.08E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P01 SFC-1E 40202239 25% 91.25 VOC 39.7 0.108767123 42.7 1.17E-01 45.3 1.24E-01 49.1 1.35E-01 54.4 1.49E-01 60.3 1.65E-01

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P02 SFC-2A 40202230 25% 91.25 VOC 13.5 0.036986301 14.5 3.98E-02 15.4 4.22E-02 16.7 4.58E-02 18.5 5.07E-02 20.5 5.62E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P02 SFC-2B 40202220 25% 91.25 VOC 15.0 0.04109589 16.1 4.42E-02 17.1 4.69E-02 18.6 5.08E-02 20.6 5.63E-02 22.8 6.24E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P02 SFC-2C 40202229 25% 91.25 VOC 27.3 0.074794521 29.3 8.04E-02 31.2 8.54E-02 33.8 9.25E-02 37.4 1.03E-01 41.5 1.14E-01

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P02 SFC-2D 40202201 25% 91.25 VOC 0.9 0.002523288 1.0 2.71E-03 1.1 2.88E-03 1.1 3.12E-03 1.3 3.46E-03 1.4 3.83E-03

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P02 SFC-2E 40202239 25% 91.25 VOC 31.6 0.086575342 34.0 9.31E-02 36.1 9.89E-02 39.1 1.07E-01 43.3 1.19E-01 48.0 1.32E-01

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-1 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 4.1 0.011178082 4.1 1.14E-02 4.2 1.15E-02 4.5 1.24E-02 5.0 1.38E-02 5.6 1.53E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-2 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-3 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 4.1 0.011178082 4.1 1.14E-02 4.2 1.15E-02 4.5 1.24E-02 5.0 1.38E-02 5.6 1.53E-02

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-4 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-5 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 2.3 0.006191781 2.3 6.29E-03 2.3 6.37E-03 2.5 6.87E-03 2.8 7.62E-03 3.1 8.48E-03

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC P03 SPB-6 40200110 25% 91.25 VOC 2.3 0.006191781 2.3 6.29E-03 2.3 6.37E-03 2.5 6.87E-03 2.8 7.62E-03 3.1 8.48E-03

Blount 05-0176 USI, INC Facility Totals 208.1 0.6 222.9 0.6 236.2 0.6 255.8 0.7 283.5 0.8 314.2 0.9

Blount 05-0183 DENSO 001 EF-27 31303502 25% 91.25 VOC 6.3 0.017123288 6.3 1.72E-02 6.2 1.71E-02 6.9 1.89E-02 7.9 2.17E-02 9.0 2.48E-02

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 001 1A 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 12.5 0.036986301 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 001 1B 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 12.5 0.036986301 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 001 1C 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 12.5 0.036986301 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 001 1D 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 8.8 0.026038356 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 001 1E 31401612 0% 91.25 VOC 1.6 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 002 FUG-01 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 60.9 0.18019726 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 003 FUG-02 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 12.1 0.03580274 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 004 FUG-03 31401612 27% 91.25 VOC 1.6 0.004734247 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice 005 FUG-04 31401612 0% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Blount 05-0199 Skier's Choice Facility Totals 122.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Blount County Totals 878.56 2.43 750.65 2.06 748.44 2.05 808.49 2.22 898.84 2.46 1,002.04 2.75

Jefferson 45-0079 Tel-Trax Co Plant #2 001 S-001A 30800799 32% 91.25 VOC 1.5 0.00512 1.6 5.50E-03 1.7 5.85E-03 1.8 6.33E-03 2.0 7.02E-03 2.2 7.78E-03

Jefferson 45-0079 Tel-Trax Co Plant #2 001 S-001B 30800799 32% 91.25 VOC 1.5 0.00512 1.6 5.50E-03 1.7 5.85E-03 1.8 6.33E-03 2.0 7.02E-03 2.2 7.78E-03

Jefferson 45-0079 Tel-Trax Co Plant #2 002 S-002 40200201 32% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000280548 0.1 2.98E-04 0.1 3.15E-04 0.1 3.46E-04 0.1 3.91E-04 0.1 4.43E-04

Jefferson 45-0079 Tel-Trax Co Plant #2Facility Totals 3.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.7 0.0 4.1 0.0 4.6 0.0

Jefferson County Totals 3.00 0.01 3.22 0.01 3.42 0.01 3.71 0.01 4.12 0.01 4.56 0.02

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 001 FE-09 62540023 25% 91.25 VOC 2.9 0.008027397 3.1 8.43E-03 3.2 8.84E-03 3.4 9.25E-03 3.5 9.72E-03 3.7 1.02E-02

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 001 FE-10 62540023 25% 91.25 VOC 1.0 0.002808219 1.1 2.95E-03 1.1 3.09E-03 1.2 3.24E-03 1.2 3.40E-03 1.3 3.57E-03

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase 001 FE-11 62540024 25% 91.25 VOC 0.7 0.001884932 0.7 1.98E-03 0.8 2.08E-03 0.8 2.17E-03 0.8 2.28E-03 0.9 2.40E-03

Loudon 53-0003 Viskase Facility Totals 4.6 0.0 4.9 0.0 5.1 0.0 5.3 0.0 5.6 0.0 5.9 0.0

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 MHS 30200761 25% 91.25 VOC 25.1 0.068767123 26.4 7.23E-02 27.6 7.57E-02 28.9 7.92E-02 30.4 8.33E-02 31.9 8.75E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 FHS#1 30200768 25% 91.25 VOC 241.8 0.662465753 254.1 6.96E-01 266.4 7.30E-01 278.6 7.63E-01 292.9 8.02E-01 307.6 8.43E-01

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 FHS#2 30200766 25% 91.25 VOC 27.4 0.075068493 28.8 7.89E-02 30.2 8.27E-02 31.6 8.65E-02 33.2 9.09E-02 34.9 9.55E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 PES#64 30200766 25% 91.25 VOC 0.4 0.00109589 0.4 1.15E-03 0.4 1.21E-03 0.5 1.26E-03 0.5 1.33E-03 0.5 1.39E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 PES#23 30201525 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000438356 0.2 4.61E-04 0.2 4.83E-04 0.2 5.05E-04 0.2 5.31E-04 0.2 5.58E-04

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 PES#66 30299998 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007123288 2.7 7.48E-03 2.9 7.85E-03 3.0 8.21E-03 3.1 8.63E-03 3.3 9.06E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 PES#67 30299998 25% 91.25 VOC 57.1 0.156438356 60.0 1.64E-01 62.9 1.72E-01 65.8 1.80E-01 69.2 1.90E-01 72.6 1.99E-01

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 003 SDS 30201411 25% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000547945 0.2 5.76E-04 0.2 6.04E-04 0.2 6.31E-04 0.2 6.64E-04 0.3 6.97E-04

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES28A 30125010 25% 91.25 VOC 12.3 0.03369863 12.2 3.33E-02 12.2 3.34E-02 13.0 3.56E-02 14.1 3.87E-02 15.3 4.20E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES28B 30125010 25% 91.25 VOC 1.1 0.002931507 1.1 2.90E-03 1.1 2.90E-03 1.1 3.10E-03 1.2 3.37E-03 1.3 3.65E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES54A 40700809 25% 91.25 VOC 1.8 0.004931507 1.8 4.88E-03 1.8 4.88E-03 1.9 5.21E-03 2.1 5.67E-03 2.2 6.14E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES54B 40700809 25% 91.25 VOC 1.8 0.004931507 1.8 4.88E-03 1.8 4.88E-03 1.9 5.21E-03 2.1 5.67E-03 2.2 6.14E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES#55 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 7.0 0.019178082 7.4 2.02E-02 7.7 2.11E-02 8.1 2.21E-02 8.5 2.32E-02 8.9 2.44E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES#59 40301099 25% 91.25 VOC 1.0 0.002739726 1.0 2.87E-03 1.1 3.04E-03 1.2 3.17E-03 1.2 3.34E-03 1.3 3.52E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES#61 40301099 25% 91.25 VOC 1.6 0.004383562 1.7 4.59E-03 1.8 4.86E-03 1.9 5.08E-03 1.9 5.34E-03 2.1 5.63E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES#98 40700809 25% 91.25 VOC 0.4 0.000958904 0.3 9.48E-04 0.3 9.49E-04 0.4 1.01E-03 0.4 1.10E-03 0.4 1.19E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 004 PES#99 40700809 25% 91.25 VOC 1.4 0.003835616 1.4 3.79E-03 1.4 3.80E-03 1.5 4.05E-03 1.6 4.41E-03 1.7 4.78E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 005 BHS 10200204 25% 91.25 VOC 25.3 0.069315068 25.3 6.94E-02 25.6 7.02E-02 25.8 7.07E-02 26.1 7.16E-02 26.5 7.26E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 005 PES#43 40301075 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 8.21918E-05 0.0 8.61E-05 0.0 9.11E-05 0.0 9.52E-05 0.0 1.00E-04 0.0 1.06E-04

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 PES#5 30200768 25% 91.25 VOC 6.7 0.018356164 7.0 1.93E-02 7.4 2.02E-02 7.7 2.11E-02 8.1 2.22E-02 8.5 2.34E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 002 PES#65 30200768 25% 91.25 VOC 4.4 0.012054795 4.6 1.27E-02 4.8 1.33E-02 5.1 1.39E-02 5.3 1.46E-02 5.6 1.53E-02

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 006 PES#71 20100202 25% 91.25 VOC 0.5 0.001369863 0.5 1.44E-03 0.7 2.05E-03 1.2 3.28E-03 1.3 3.44E-03 1.2 3.15E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 007 PES#72 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.6 0.007123288 2.7 7.48E-03 2.9 7.85E-03 3.0 8.21E-03 3.1 8.63E-03 3.3 9.06E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 007 PES#73 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.5 0.001369863 0.5 1.44E-03 0.6 1.51E-03 0.6 1.58E-03 0.6 1.66E-03 0.6 1.74E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 007 PES#74 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 2.1 0.005753425 2.2 6.05E-03 2.3 6.34E-03 2.4 6.63E-03 2.5 6.97E-03 2.7 7.32E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 007 PES#75 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.5 0.001369863 0.5 1.44E-03 0.6 1.51E-03 0.6 1.58E-03 0.6 1.66E-03 0.6 1.74E-03

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 007 PES#76 30299999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000356164 0.1 3.74E-04 0.1 3.92E-04 0.1 4.10E-04 0.2 4.31E-04 0.2 4.53E-04

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle 008 FUGITIVE 30200821 25% 91.25 VOC 242.9 0.665479452 255.2 6.99E-01 267.6 7.33E-01 279.9 7.67E-01 294.2 8.06E-01 309.0 8.47E-01

Loudon 53-0081 Tate & Lyle Facility Totals 668.7 1.8 700.3 1.9 732.5 2.0 766.0 2.1 805.1 2.2 845.1 2.3

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir City 002 E09 30899999 25% 91.25 VOC 9.0 0.024547945 9.6 2.64E-02 10.2 2.80E-02 11.1 3.04E-02 12.3 3.37E-02 13.6 3.73E-02

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir City 002 FUG-02 30899999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Page 2 of 3
VOC Point Emissions

County

Company 

Number Company Name Emission Unit

Emission Release 

Point SCC

Summer 

Seasonal 

Operation

Days per 

Season Pollutant Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day Emission TPY

Emission 

Ton/Day

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir City 003 FUG-03 30899999 25% 91.25 VOC 92.8 0.254246575 99.8 2.73E-01 106.0 2.90E-01 114.8 3.15E-01 127.2 3.49E-01 141.0 3.86E-01

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir City 004 E10 30800722 25% 91.25 VOC 0.1 0.000191781 0.1 2.06E-04 0.1 2.19E-04 0.1 2.37E-04 0.1 2.63E-04 0.1 2.91E-04

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir City 005 E09 30899999 25% 91.25 VOC 0.0 0 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00 0.0 0.00E+00

Loudon 53-0090 Hubbell - Lenoir CityFacility Totals 101.8 0.3 109.5 0.3 116.3 0.3 126.0 0.3 139.6 0.4 154.7 0.4

Loudon County Totals 775.2 2.1 814.6 2.2 853.9 2.3 897.3 2.5 950.3 2.6 1,005.8 2.8

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302001 S-001A 20200201 20% 91.25 VOC 0.5 0.001093674 0.5 1.15E-03 0.5 1.20E-03 0.6 1.23E-03 0.6 1.30E-03 0.6 1.37E-03

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302002 S-002A 20200201 9% 91.25 VOC 0.2 0.000213137 0.2 2.24E-04 0.2 2.33E-04 0.2 2.39E-04 0.3 2.53E-04 0.3 2.67E-04

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302003 S-003A 20200201 8% 91.25 VOC 0.1 6.33509E-05 0.1 6.67E-05 0.1 6.94E-05 0.1 7.11E-05 0.1 7.52E-05 0.1 7.92E-05

Sevier 78-0086 East TN Natl Gas Co 3302 Facility Totals 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.0 0.0

Sevier County Totals 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.94 0.002 0.98 0.002

Page 3 of 3
Appendix B – Area Source Summary
Area Source NOx

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2102001000 Industrial - Anthracite Coal 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.66E+00 2.67E-04 6.01E-01 9.69E-05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.60E-01 4.20E-05

2102002000 Industrial - Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.35E+02 5.41E-02 1.22E+02 1.96E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.27E+01 8.50E-03

2102004000 Industrial - Distillate Oil 3.67E+01 9.85E-02 3.08E+01 8.27E-02 1.12E+01 3.00E-02 1.38E+01 3.71E-02 4.84E+00 1.30E-02

2102005000 Industrial - Residual Oil 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.85E+00 1.03E-02 1.40E+00 3.75E-03 1.73E+00 4.64E-03 6.05E-01 1.63E-03

2102006000 Industrial - Natural Gas 1.07E+02 2.86E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.43E+01 9.22E-02 4.23E+01 1.14E-01 1.19E+01 3.19E-02

2103004000 Commercial/Institutional - Distillate Oil 6.65E+00 1.07E-02 6.05E+00 9.78E-03 1.50E+00 2.43E-03 1.62E+00 2.62E-03 6.77E+00 1.09E-02

2103005000 Commercial/Institutional - Residual Oil 1.53E-01 2.47E-04 1.39E-01 2.25E-04 3.46E-02 5.59E-05 3.73E-02 6.02E-05 1.56E-01 2.51E-04

2103006000 Commercial/Institutional - Natural Gas 4.24E-02 6.86E-05 3.86E-02 6.24E-05 9.59E-03 1.55E-05 1.03E-02 1.67E-05 4.32E-02 6.98E-05

2103007000 Commercial/Institutional - Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) 1.25E+00 3.35E-03 1.14E+00 3.05E-03 2.82E-01 7.58E-04 3.04E-01 8.17E-04 1.27E+00 3.41E-03

2104001000 Residential - Anthracite Coal 1.49E-03 2.40E-07 5.70E-04 9.20E-08 7.46E-04 1.20E-07 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.26E-04 8.49E-08

2104002000 Residential - Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 7.49E-01 1.21E-04 2.86E-01 4.62E-05 3.75E-01 6.04E-05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.64E-01 4.27E-05

2104004000 Residential - Distillate Oil 5.55E-01 8.95E-05 1.48E+00 2.39E-04 8.28E-01 1.34E-04 4.21E-01 6.79E-05 1.36E+00 2.19E-04

2104006000 Residential - Natural Gas 4.54E+01 7.32E-03 4.65E+01 7.50E-03 1.02E+01 1.65E-03 1.76E+01 2.83E-03 1.29E+01 2.09E-03

2104007000 Residential - Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) 4.02E+00 1.08E-02 1.89E+01 5.07E-02 5.49E+00 1.48E-02 5.53E+00 1.49E-02 1.04E+01 2.79E-02

2104011000 Residential - Kerosene 8.59E-01 0.00E+00 2.29E+00 0.00E+00 1.28E+00 0.00E+00 6.52E-01 0.00E+00 2.10E+00 0.00E+00

2302002100

Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Conveyorized 

Charbroiling

2302002200 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Under-fired Charbroiling

2302003000 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Deep Fat Fying

2302003100 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Flat Griddle Frying

2302003200 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Clamshell Griddle Frying

2401001000 Surface Coating - Architectural Coatings

2401005000 Surface Coating - Auto Refinishing: SIC 7532

2401008000 Surface Coating - Traffic Markings

2401015000 Surface Coating - Factory Finished Wood: SIC 2426 thru 242

2401020000 Surface Coating - Wood Furniture: SIC 25

2401025000 Surface Coating - Metal Furniture: SIC 25

2401030000 Surface Coating - Paper: SIC 26

2401040000 Surface Coating - Metal Cans: SIC 341

2401045000 Surface Coating - Metal Coils: SIC 3498

2401055000 Surface Coating - Machinery and Equipment: SIC 35

2401060000 Surface Coating - Large Appliances: SIC 363

2401065000 Surface Coating - Electronic and Other Electrical: SIC 36 - 363

2401070000 Surface Coating - Motor Vehicles: SIC 371

2401075000 Surface Coating - Aircraft: SIC 372

2401080000 Surface Coating - Marine: SIC 373

2401085000 Surface Coating - Railroad: SIC 374

2401090000 Surface Coating - Miscellaneous Manufacturing

2401100000 Surface Coating - Industrial Maintenance Coatings

2401200000 Surface Coating - Other Special Purpose Coatings

2415000000 Degreasing

2420000000 Dry Cleaning

2425000000 Graphic Arts

2460100000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Personal Care 

Products

2460200000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Household Products

NOx

SCC Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier SCC Description

Page 1 of 3
Area Source NOx

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

NOx

SCC Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier SCC Description

2460400000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Automotive 

Aftermarket Products

2460500000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Coatings and Related 

Products

2460600000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Adhesives and 

Sealants

2460800000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All FIFRA Related 

Products

2460900000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - Miscellaneous Products 

(Not Otherwise Covered)

2461021000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Commercial - Cutback Asphalt

2461022000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Commercial - Emulsified Asphalt

2501011011

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - 

Permeation

2501011012

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - 

Evaporation (includes Diurnal losses)

2501011013

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Spillage 

During Transport

2501011014

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Refilling 

at the Pump - Vapor Displacement

2501011015

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Refilling 

at the Pump – Spillage

2501012011

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - 

Permeation

2501012012

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - 

Evaporation (includes Diurnal losses)

2501012013

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Spillage 

During Transport

2501012014

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Refilling 

at the Pump - Vapor Displacement

2501012015

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Refilling 

at the Pump – Spillage

2501050120

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Bulk Terminals: All Evaporative Losses - 

Gasoline

2501055120

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Bulk Plants: All Evaporative Losses - 

Gasoline

2501060051

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: 

Submerged Filling

2501060052

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: 

Splash Filling

2501060053

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: 

Balanced Submerged Filling

2501060100 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 2: Total

2501060201

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Underground 

Tank: Breathing and Emptying

2501080050

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Airports : Aviation Gasoline - Stage 1: 

Total

2501080100

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Airports : Aviation Gasoline - Stage 2: 

Total

Page 2 of 3
Area Source NOx

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

NOx

SCC Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier SCC Description

2505030120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport – Truck - Gasoline

2505040120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport - Pipeline - Gasoline

2610000100 Open Burning - Yard Waste - Leaf Species Unspecified 7.10E-01 1.91E-03 1.03E+00 2.76E-03 8.79E-01 2.36E-03 5.30E-01 1.43E-03 1.27E+00 3.40E-03

2610000400 Open Burning - Yard Waste - Yard Waste - Brush Species Unspecified 5.73E-01 1.54E-03 8.29E-01 2.23E-03 7.09E-01 1.91E-03 4.28E-01 1.15E-03 1.02E+00 2.74E-03

2610000500 Open Burning - Land Clearing Debris (use 28-10-005-000 for Logging Debris Burning) 1.69E+01 3.35E-02 3.05E+01 6.06E-02 2.42E+01 4.81E-02 1.72E+01 3.42E-02 4.81E+01 9.56E-02

2610030000 Open Burning -Household Waste (use 26-10-000-xxx for Yard Wastes) 2.75E+00 7.39E-03 3.98E+00 1.07E-02 3.40E+00 9.15E-03 2.05E+00 5.52E-03 4.90E+00 1.32E-02

2630020000 Wastewater Treatment - Public Owned

Totals 2.24E+02 4.62E-01 4.85E+02 2.95E-01 2.18E+02 2.27E-01 1.04E+02 2.19E-01 1.61E+02 2.15E-01

Page 3 of 3
Area Source VOC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2102001000 Industrial - Anthracite Coal 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 5.52E-02 8.90E-06 2.00E-02 3.23E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 8.68E-03 1.40E-06

2102002000 Industrial - Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.52E+00 2.46E-04 5.53E-01 8.92E-05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.40E-01 3.86E-05

2102004000 Industrial - Distillate Oil 3.67E-01 9.85E-04 3.08E-01 8.27E-04 1.12E-01 3.00E-04 1.38E-01 3.71E-04 4.84E-02 1.30E-04

2102005000 Industrial - Residual Oil 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.96E-02 5.27E-05 7.11E-03 1.91E-05 8.78E-03 2.36E-05 3.08E-03 8.28E-06

2102006000 Industrial - Natural Gas 5.86E+00 1.57E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.89E+00 5.07E-03 2.33E+00 6.26E-03 6.52E-01 1.75E-03

2103004000 Commercial/Institutional - Distillate Oil 1.13E-01 1.83E-04 1.03E-01 1.66E-04 2.56E-02 4.13E-05 2.75E-02 4.45E-05 1.15E-01 1.86E-04

2103005000 Commercial/Institutional - Residual Oil 3.14E-03 5.08E-06 2.86E-03 4.62E-06 7.10E-04 1.15E-06 7.65E-04 1.24E-06 3.20E-03 5.17E-06

2103006000 Commercial/Institutional - Natural Gas 2.33E-03 3.77E-06 2.12E-03 3.43E-06 5.28E-04 8.53E-07 5.69E-04 9.19E-07 2.37E-03 3.84E-06

2103007000 Commercial/Institutional - Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) 6.87E-02 1.84E-04 6.24E-02 1.68E-04 1.55E-02 4.17E-05 1.67E-02 4.49E-05 6.99E-02 1.88E-04

2104001000 Residential - Anthracite Coal 4.97E-03 8.02E-07 1.90E-03 3.07E-07 2.49E-03 4.01E-07 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.75E-03 2.83E-07

2104002000 Residential - Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 8.23E-01 1.33E-04 3.15E-01 5.08E-05 4.12E-01 6.64E-05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.91E-01 4.69E-05

2104004000 Residential - Distillate Oil 2.16E-02 3.48E-06 5.76E-02 9.28E-06 3.22E-02 5.19E-06 1.64E-02 2.64E-06 5.28E-02 8.51E-06

2104006000 Residential - Natural Gas 2.66E+00 4.29E-04 2.72E+00 4.39E-04 5.99E-01 9.66E-05 1.03E+00 1.66E-04 7.57E-01 1.22E-04

2104007000 Residential - Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) 1.57E-01 4.21E-04 7.34E-01 1.97E-03 2.14E-01 5.75E-04 2.15E-01 5.79E-04 4.04E-01 1.09E-03

2104011000 Residential - Kerosene 3.34E-02 0.00E+00 8.91E-02 0.00E+00 4.98E-02 0.00E+00 2.53E-02 0.00E+00 8.17E-02 0.00E+00

2302002100 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Conveyorized Charbroiling 4.42E-01 1.19E-03 7.21E-01 1.94E-03 3.02E-01 8.12E-04 2.73E-01 7.35E-04 5.03E-01 1.35E-03

2302002200 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Under-fired Charbroiling 1.52E+00 4.08E-03 2.48E+00 6.67E-03 1.04E+00 2.80E-03 9.41E-01 2.53E-03 1.73E+00 4.65E-03

2302003000 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Deep Fat Fying 4.62E-01 1.24E-03 7.54E-01 2.03E-03 3.16E-01 8.50E-04 2.86E-01 7.68E-04 5.26E-01 1.41E-03

2302003100 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Flat Griddle Frying 2.18E-01 5.85E-04 3.55E-01 9.55E-04 1.49E-01 4.00E-04 1.35E-01 3.62E-04 2.48E-01 6.67E-04

2302003200 Food and Kindred Products: SIC 20 - Commercial Cooking – Clamshell Griddle Frying 8.48E-03 2.28E-05 1.38E-02 3.72E-05 5.81E-03 1.56E-05 5.25E-03 1.41E-05 9.67E-03 2.60E-05

2401001000 Surface Coating - Architectural Coatings 1.13E+02 3.04E-01 1.85E+02 4.97E-01 7.75E+01 2.08E-01 7.01E+01 1.88E-01 1.29E+02 3.47E-01

2401005000 Surface Coating - Auto Refinishing: SIC 7532 2.62E+01 7.03E-02 4.82E+01 1.30E-01 3.74E+00 1.00E-02 9.12E+00 2.45E-02 1.38E+01 3.69E-02

2401008000 Surface Coating - Traffic Markings 9.48E+00 2.55E-02 1.46E+01 3.93E-02 1.01E+01 2.71E-02 7.55E+00 2.03E-02 1.58E+01 4.23E-02

2401015000 Surface Coating - Factory Finished Wood: SIC 2426 thru 242 7.70E+00 2.07E-02 1.23E+00 3.31E-03 7.91E+00 2.13E-02 1.23E+00 3.31E-03 1.23E+00 3.31E-03

2401020000 Surface Coating - Wood Furniture: SIC 25 2.62E+01 7.03E-02 4.82E+01 1.30E-01 3.74E+00 1.00E-02 9.12E+00 2.45E-02 1.38E+01 3.69E-02

2401025000 Surface Coating - Metal Furniture: SIC 25 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.02E+01 2.76E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401030000 Surface Coating - Paper: SIC 26 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401040000 Surface Coating - Metal Cans: SIC 341 5.74E+01 1.56E-01 9.56E+00 2.59E-02 1.67E+02 4.54E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401045000 Surface Coating - Metal Coils: SIC 3498 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.22E+01 1.69E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.04E+01 2.81E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401055000 Surface Coating - Machinery and Equipment: SIC 35 4.31E-01 1.17E-03 1.70E+01 4.62E-02 7.11E+00 1.93E-02 1.91E+01 5.19E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401060000 Surface Coating - Large Appliances: SIC 363 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401065000 Surface Coating - Electronic and Other Electrical: SIC 36 - 363 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401070000 Surface Coating - Motor Vehicles: SIC 371 9.42E+01 2.65E-01 2.73E+02 7.66E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.69E+01 7.55E-02 2.69E+01 7.55E-02

2401075000 Surface Coating - Aircraft: SIC 372 9.28E-01 2.61E-03 1.99E+00 5.59E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401080000 Surface Coating - Marine: SIC 373 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 1.67E+01 4.53E-02 3.63E+01 9.84E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401085000 Surface Coating - Railroad: SIC 374 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2401090000 Surface Coating - Miscellaneous Manufacturing 4.74E+00 1.29E-02 1.43E+00 3.90E-03 3.45E+00 9.40E-03 1.00E+01 2.74E-02 2.92E+00 7.98E-03

2401100000 Surface Coating - Industrial Maintenance Coatings 4.03E+01 1.10E-01 6.58E+01 1.80E-01 2.76E+01 7.53E-02 2.49E+01 6.81E-02 4.59E+01 1.25E-01

2401200000 Surface Coating - Other Special Purpose Coatings 2.56E-01 7.00E-04 4.19E-01 1.14E-03 1.76E-01 4.79E-04 1.59E-01 4.33E-04 2.92E-01 7.98E-04

2415000000 Degreasing 4.21E-01 1.14E-03 1.30E+02 3.53E-01 2.99E+01 8.10E-02 5.06E+01 1.37E-01 2.50E+01 6.78E-02

2420000000 Dry Cleaning 8.43E+00 2.31E-02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.66E+00 7.30E-03 1.57E+00 4.32E-03 3.25E+01 8.93E-02

2425000000 Graphic Arts 1.55E+02 4.25E-01 5.19E+01 1.42E-01 2.67E+02 7.32E-01 7.00E+00 1.92E-02 2.45E+01 6.71E-02

2460100000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Personal Care Products 6.96E+01 1.87E-01 1.14E+02 3.05E-01 4.76E+01 1.28E-01 4.31E+01 1.16E-01 7.93E+01 2.13E-01

2460200000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Household Products 6.59E+01 1.77E-01 1.08E+02 2.89E-01 4.51E+01 1.21E-01 4.08E+01 1.10E-01 7.52E+01 2.02E-01

2460400000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Automotive Aftermarket 

Products 4.98E+01 1.34E-01 8.13E+01 2.19E-01 3.41E+01 9.16E-02 3.08E+01 8.29E-02 5.68E+01 1.53E-01

2460500000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Coatings and Related Products 3.48E+01 9.35E-02 5.68E+01 1.53E-01 2.38E+01 6.40E-02 2.15E+01 5.79E-02 3.97E+01 1.07E-01

2460600000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All Adhesives and Sealants 2.09E+01 5.61E-02 3.41E+01 9.16E-02 1.43E+01 3.84E-02 1.29E+01 3.47E-02 2.38E+01 6.40E-02

2460800000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - All FIFRA Related Products 6.52E+01 1.75E-01 1.06E+02 2.86E-01 4.46E+01 1.20E-01 4.04E+01 1.08E-01 7.43E+01 2.00E-01

SCC

VOC

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier SCC Description

Page 1 of 2
Area Source VOC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day SCC

VOC

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier SCC Description

2460900000

Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Consumer and Commercial - Miscellaneous Products (Not 

Otherwise Covered) 2.56E+00 6.89E-03 4.19E+00 1.12E-02 1.76E+00 4.72E-03 1.59E+00 4.27E-03 2.92E+00 7.85E-03

2461021000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Commercial - Cutback Asphalt 2.86E+00 7.74E-03 3.94E+00 1.06E-02 2.34E+00 6.34E-03 2.38E+00 6.44E-03 2.36E+00 6.39E-03

2461022000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial: Commercial - Emulsified Asphalt 1.16E+01 3.13E-02 1.59E+01 4.30E-02 9.47E+00 2.56E-02 9.62E+00 2.60E-02 9.55E+00 2.58E-02

2501011011 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Permeation 1.80E+01 3.93E+01 9.95E+00 1.39E+01 4.00E+01

2501011012

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Evaporation 

(includes Diurnal losses) 3.52E+01 7.68E+01 1.94E+01 2.71E+01 7.81E+01

2501011013

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Spillage During 

Transport 2.80E+00 6.12E+00 1.55E+00 2.16E+00 6.22E+00

2501011014

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Refilling at the 

Pump - Vapor Displacement 9.82E-01 2.15E+00 5.42E-01 7.58E-01 2.18E+00

2501011015

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Residential Portable Gas Cans - Refilling at the 

Pump – Spillage 7.57E-02 1.67E-01 4.22E-02 5.69E-02 1.69E-01

2501012011 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Permeation 5.75E-01 1.25E+00 3.15E-01 4.41E-01 1.28E+00

2501012012

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Evaporation 

(includes Diurnal losses) 1.12E+00 2.45E+00 6.20E-01 8.63E-01 2.49E+00

2501012013

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Spillage During 

Transport 3.82E+00 8.34E+00 2.11E+00 2.94E+00 8.49E+00

2501012014

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Refilling at the 

Pump - Vapor Displacement 1.90E+00 4.14E+00 1.05E+00 1.46E+00 4.21E+00

2501012015

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Commercial Portable Gas Cans - Refilling at the 

Pump – Spillage 1.47E-01 3.20E-01 7.89E-02 1.11E-01 3.27E-01

2501050120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Bulk Terminals: All Evaporative Losses - Gasoline 1.62E+01 4.35E-02 1.09E+02 2.93E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2501055120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Bulk Plants: All Evaporative Losses - Gasoline 6.86E+00 1.84E-02 4.63E+01 1.24E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

See Note 

below

2501060051

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: Submerged 

Filling 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2501060052 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: Splash Filling 3.29E+02 8.85E-01 4.60E+02 1.24E+00 3.01E+02 8.09E-01 2.88E+02 7.75E-01 5.03E+02 1.35E+00

2501060053

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 1: Balanced 

Submerged Filling 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2501060100 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Stage 2: Total 9.98E+01 2.68E-01 1.38E+02 3.72E-01 8.89E+01 2.39E-01 8.81E+01 2.37E-01 1.44E+02 3.88E-01

2501060201

Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Gasoline Service Stations - Underground Tank: 

Breathing and Emptying 1.65E+01 4.43E-02 3.08E+01 8.28E-02 1.98E+01 5.32E-02 1.80E+01 4.85E-02 3.53E+01 9.49E-02

2501080050 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Airports : Aviation Gasoline - Stage 1: Total 3.62E+00 9.73E-03 3.02E+01 8.12E-02 7.25E-02 1.95E-04 6.10E+00 1.64E-02 1.92E+01 5.16E-02

2501080100 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage - Airports : Aviation Gasoline - Stage 2: Total 2.07E-01 5.58E-04 1.73E+00 4.66E-03 4.16E-03 1.12E-05 3.50E-01 9.40E-04 1.10E+00 2.96E-03

2505030120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport – Truck - Gasoline 1.24E+00 3.32E-03 2.31E+00 6.21E-03 1.48E+00 3.99E-03 1.35E+00 3.63E-03 2.65E+00 7.11E-03

2505040120 Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport - Pipeline - Gasoline 7.34E+00 1.97E-02 4.95E+01 1.33E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

2610000100 Open Burning - Yard Waste - Leaf Species Unspecified 3.21E+00 8.62E-03 4.64E+00 1.25E-02 3.97E+00 1.07E-02 2.40E+00 6.44E-03 5.72E+00 1.54E-02

2610000400 Open Burning - Yard Waste - Yard Waste - Brush Species Unspecified 2.18E+00 5.85E-03 3.15E+00 8.46E-03 2.69E+00 7.24E-03 1.63E+00 4.37E-03 3.88E+00 1.04E-02

2610000500 Open Burning - Land Clearing Debris (use 28-10-005-000 for Logging Debris Burning) 3.91E+01 7.78E-02 7.08E+01 1.41E-01 5.62E+01 1.12E-01 3.99E+01 7.93E-02 1.12E+02 2.22E-01

2610030000 Open Burning -Household Waste (use 26-10-000-xxx for Yard Wastes) 2.26E+01 6.07E-02 3.27E+01 8.79E-02 2.80E+01 7.52E-02 1.69E+01 4.54E-02 4.03E+01 1.08E-01

2630020000 Wastewater Treatment - Public Owned 1.39E+00 3.73E-03 2.26E+00 6.09E-03 9.50E-01 2.55E-03 8.59E-01 2.31E-03 1.58E+00 4.25E-03

Totals 1.49E+03 3.83E+00 2.57E+03 6.50E+00 1.40E+03 3.65E+00 1.01E+03 2.55E+00 1.71E+03 4.15E+00

Note: No Allocation Factor found in Vistas to compute ton/day for the indicated rows

See Note 

below

Page 2 of 2
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2102001000 0.00 0.00 1.66 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00

2102002000 0.00 0.00 335.95 0.05 121.90 0.02 0.00 0.00 52.82 0.01 0.00 0.00 339.70 0.05 123.26 0.02 0.00 0.00

2102004000 37.04 0.10 31.11 0.08 11.29 0.03 13.94 0.04 4.89 0.01 39.14 0.11 32.87 0.09 11.92 0.03 14.72 0.04

2102005000 0.00 0.00 3.86 0.01 1.40 0.00 1.73 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.96 0.01 1.44 0.00 1.77 0.00

2102006000 112.19 0.30 0.00 0.00 36.11 0.10 44.59 0.12 12.49 0.03 116.72 0.31 0.00 0.00 37.57 0.10 46.39 0.12

2103004000 7.10 0.01 6.46 0.01 1.60 0.00 1.73 0.00 7.22 0.01 7.51 0.01 6.83 0.01 1.70 0.00 1.83 0.00

2103005000 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.00

2103006000 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00

2103007000 1.27 0.00 1.16 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.31 0.00 1.30 0.00 1.27 0.00 1.16 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.31 0.00

2104001000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2104002000 0.73 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00

2104004000 0.54 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.41 0.00 1.33 0.00 0.53 0.00 1.42 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.40 0.00

2104006000 47.54 0.01 48.65 0.01 10.72 0.00 18.37 0.00 13.55 0.00 48.62 0.01 49.75 0.01 10.96 0.00 18.79 0.00

2104007000 4.10 0.01 19.22 0.05 5.60 0.02 5.64 0.02 10.58 0.03 4.18 0.01 19.59 0.05 5.71 0.02 5.74 0.02

2104011000 0.84 0.00 2.24 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.64 0.00 2.06 0.00 0.82 0.00 2.19 0.00 1.22 0.00 0.62 0.00

2302002100

2302002200

2302003000

2302003100

2302003200

2401001000

2401005000

2401008000

2401015000

2401020000

2401025000

2401030000

2401040000

2401045000

2401055000

2401060000

2401065000

2401070000

2401075000

2401080000

2401085000

2401090000

2401100000

2401200000

2415000000

SCC

2010 2010 2013 2013 2013 2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2010 2010 2010

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon

Page 1 of 6
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

SCC

2010 2010 2013 2013 2013 2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2010 2010 2010

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon

2420000000

2425000000

2460100000

2460200000

2460400000

2460500000

2460600000

2460800000

2460900000

2461021000

2461022000

2501011011

2501011012

2501011013

2501011014

2501011015

2501012011

2501012012

2501012013

2501012014

2501012015

2501050120

2501055120

2501060051

2501060052

2501060053

2501060100

2501060201

2501080050

2501080100

2505030120

2505040120

2610000100 0.74 0.00 1.07 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.55 0.00 1.31 0.00 0.76 0.00 1.11 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.57 0.00

2610000400 0.59 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.44 0.00 1.06 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.46 0.00

2610000500 17.51 0.03 31.65 0.06 25.13 0.05 17.85 0.04 49.94 0.10 18.17 0.04 32.85 0.07 26.08 0.05 18.53 0.04

2610030000 2.85 0.01 4.13 0.01 3.53 0.01 2.13 0.01 5.09 0.01 2.96 0.01 4.28 0.01 3.67 0.01 2.21 0.01

2630020000

Total 233.14 0.48 489.81 0.30 222.27 0.24 108.35 0.23 164.85 0.22 242.26 0.50 498.77 0.31 227.34 0.24 112.42 0.24

Page 2 of 6
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

2102001000

2102002000

2102004000

2102005000

2102006000

2103004000

2103005000

2103006000

2103007000

2104001000

2104002000

2104004000

2104006000

2104007000

2104011000

2302002100

2302002200

2302003000

2302003100

2302003200

2401001000

2401005000

2401008000

2401015000

2401020000

2401025000

2401030000

2401040000

2401045000

2401055000

2401060000

2401065000

2401070000

2401075000

2401080000

2401085000

2401090000

2401100000

2401200000

2415000000

SCC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.69 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.00 0.62 0.00

53.41 0.01 0.00 0.00 341.90 0.06 124.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 53.75 0.01 0.00 0.00 346.33 0.06 125.66 0.02

5.17 0.01 40.72 0.11 34.20 0.09 12.41 0.03 15.32 0.04 5.38 0.01 42.77 0.11 35.92 0.10 13.03 0.04

0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.99 0.01 1.45 0.00 1.79 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.04 0.01 1.47 0.00

12.99 0.03 119.56 0.32 0.00 0.00 38.49 0.10 47.52 0.13 13.31 0.04 126.54 0.34 0.00 0.00 40.73 0.11

7.64 0.01 7.96 0.01 7.24 0.01 1.80 0.00 1.94 0.00 8.10 0.01 8.31 0.01 7.56 0.01 1.88 0.00

0.20 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.07 0.00

0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00

1.30 0.00 1.28 0.00 1.17 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.31 0.00 1.31 0.00 1.29 0.00 1.17 0.00 0.29 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.25 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.35 0.00

1.30 0.00 0.52 0.00 1.39 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.40 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.50 0.00 1.33 0.00 0.75 0.00

13.86 0.00 49.71 0.01 50.87 0.01 11.21 0.00 19.21 0.00 14.17 0.00 51.52 0.01 52.72 0.01 11.62 0.00

10.78 0.03 4.28 0.01 20.08 0.05 5.85 0.02 5.89 0.02 11.05 0.03 4.43 0.01 20.80 0.06 6.06 0.02

2.01 0.00 0.79 0.00 2.10 0.00 1.18 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.93 0.00 0.72 0.00 1.93 0.00 1.08 0.00

2016 2020 2020 2020

Sevier

2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2016 2016 2016 2016

Anderson Blount Jefferson

Page 3 of 6
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

SCC

2420000000

2425000000

2460100000

2460200000

2460400000

2460500000

2460600000

2460800000

2460900000

2461021000

2461022000

2501011011

2501011012

2501011013

2501011014

2501011015

2501012011

2501012012

2501012013

2501012014

2501012015

2501050120

2501055120

2501060051

2501060052

2501060053

2501060100

2501060201

2501080050

2501080100

2505030120

2505040120

2610000100

2610000400

2610000500

2610030000

2630020000

Total

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2016 2020 2020 2020

Sevier

2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2016 2016 2016 2016

Anderson Blount Jefferson

1.36 0.00 0.79 0.00 1.15 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.59 0.00 1.42 0.00 0.83 0.00 1.21 0.00 1.03 0.00

1.10 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.48 0.00 1.14 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.83 0.00

51.83 0.10 18.87 0.04 34.12 0.07 27.09 0.05 19.25 0.04 53.84 0.11 19.82 0.04 35.83 0.07 28.45 0.06

5.28 0.01 3.08 0.01 4.45 0.01 3.81 0.01 2.30 0.01 5.48 0.01 3.23 0.01 4.67 0.01 4.00 0.01

169.42 0.23 249.21 0.52 505.82 0.32 231.21 0.25 115.66 0.24 173.60 0.24 261.68 0.54 516.78 0.33 237.92 0.26

Page 4 of 6
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

2102001000

2102002000

2102004000

2102005000

2102006000

2103004000

2103005000

2103006000

2103007000

2104001000

2104002000

2104004000

2104006000

2104007000

2104011000

2302002100

2302002200

2302003000

2302003100

2302003200

2401001000

2401005000

2401008000

2401015000

2401020000

2401025000

2401030000

2401040000

2401045000

2401055000

2401060000

2401065000

2401070000

2401075000

2401080000

2401085000

2401090000

2401100000

2401200000

2415000000

SCC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.73 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00

0.00 0.00 54.45 0.01 0.00 0.00 351.03 0.06 127.37 0.02 0.00 0.00 55.19 0.01

16.09 0.04 5.65 0.02 45.31 0.12 38.05 0.10 13.81 0.04 17.05 0.05 5.98 0.02

1.81 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.14 0.01 1.50 0.00 1.85 0.00 0.65 0.00

50.29 0.14 14.09 0.04 133.27 0.36 0.00 0.00 42.90 0.12 52.97 0.14 14.84 0.04

2.03 0.00 8.46 0.01 8.57 0.01 7.79 0.01 1.94 0.00 2.09 0.00 8.72 0.01

0.07 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.32 0.00

0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00

0.31 0.00 1.31 0.00 1.28 0.00 1.17 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.31 0.00 1.31 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00

0.38 0.00 1.22 0.00 0.48 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.36 0.00 1.17 0.00

19.91 0.00 14.69 0.00 53.09 0.01 54.33 0.01 11.97 0.00 20.52 0.00 15.14 0.00

6.10 0.02 11.45 0.03 4.61 0.01 21.64 0.06 6.30 0.02 6.35 0.02 11.91 0.03

0.55 0.00 1.77 0.00 0.65 0.00 1.74 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.49 0.00 1.59 0.00

2020 2020 2024

Loudon Sevier Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2024 2024 2024 2024

Page 5 of 6
Area Source Inventory

NOx Future Years

SCC

2420000000

2425000000

2460100000

2460200000

2460400000

2460500000

2460600000

2460800000

2460900000

2461021000

2461022000

2501011011

2501011012

2501011013

2501011014

2501011015

2501012011

2501012012

2501012013

2501012014

2501012015

2501050120

2501055120

2501060051

2501060052

2501060053

2501060100

2501060201

2501080050

2501080100

2505030120

2505040120

2610000100

2610000400

2610000500

2610030000

2630020000

Total

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2020 2020 2024

Loudon Sevier Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2024 2024 2024 2024

0.62 0.00 1.49 0.00 0.87 0.00 1.26 0.00 1.08 0.00 0.65 0.00 1.56 0.00

0.50 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.70 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.53 0.00 1.26 0.00

20.21 0.04 56.54 0.11 20.74 0.04 37.50 0.07 29.77 0.06 21.15 0.04 59.17 0.12

2.41 0.01 5.76 0.02 3.38 0.01 4.89 0.01 4.18 0.01 2.52 0.01 6.03 0.02

121.30 0.26 179.56 0.25 274.02 0.57 528.17 0.35 244.73 0.28 126.94 0.27 185.39 0.26

Page 6 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

2102001000 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

2102002000 0.00 0.00 1.53 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00

2102004000 0.37 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.15 0.00

2102005000 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00

2102006000 6.17 0.02 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.01 2.45 0.01 0.69 0.00 6.42 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.07 0.01 2.55 0.01

2103004000 0.12 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00

2103005000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2103006000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2103007000 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00

2104001000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2104002000 0.81 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00

2104004000 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00

2104006000 2.78 0.00 2.85 0.00 0.63 0.00 1.07 0.00 0.79 0.00 2.84 0.00 2.91 0.00 0.64 0.00 1.10 0.00

2104007000 0.16 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00

2104011000 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00

2302002100 0.46 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.30 0.00

2302002200 1.60 0.00 2.61 0.01 1.09 0.00 0.99 0.00 1.82 0.00 1.67 0.00 2.73 0.01 1.15 0.00 1.04 0.00

2302003000 0.49 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.32 0.00

2302003100 0.23 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.15 0.00

2302003200 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00

2401001000 122.79 0.33 200.50 0.54 84.08 0.23 76.04 0.20 140.00 0.38 132.12 0.36 215.74 0.58 90.47 0.24 81.83 0.22

2401005000 27.72 0.07 51.08 0.14 3.96 0.01 9.66 0.03 14.57 0.04 29.15 0.08 53.72 0.14 4.16 0.01 10.16 0.03

2401008000 9.73 0.03 15.00 0.04 10.36 0.03 7.75 0.02 16.17 0.04 9.85 0.03 15.19 0.04 10.49 0.03 7.85 0.02

2401015000 7.99 0.02 1.28 0.00 8.21 0.02 1.28 0.00 1.28 0.00 8.26 0.02 1.32 0.00 8.49 0.02 1.32 0.00

2401020000 26.11 0.07 48.12 0.13 3.73 0.01 9.10 0.02 13.72 0.04 25.48 0.07 46.96 0.13 3.64 0.01 8.88 0.02

2401025000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.17 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.92 0.03 0.00 0.00

2401030000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2401040000 59.40 0.16 9.90 0.03 173.26 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.38 0.17 10.23 0.03 179.02 0.49 0.00 0.00

2401045000 0.00 0.00 64.43 0.17 0.00 0.00 10.74 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66.57 0.18 0.00 0.00 11.09 0.03

2401055000 0.55 0.00 21.86 0.06 9.13 0.02 24.57 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 26.84 0.07 11.21 0.03 30.17 0.08

2401060000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2401065000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2401070000 100.36 0.28 290.29 0.82 0.00 0.00 28.63 0.08 28.63 0.08 104.67 0.29 302.78 0.85 0.00 0.00 29.86 0.08

2401075000 0.95 0.00 2.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.95 0.00 2.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2401080000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.09 0.05 37.12 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.17 0.05 37.28 0.10

2401085000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2401090000 4.95 0.01 1.49 0.00 3.60 0.01 10.49 0.03 3.05 0.01 5.09 0.01 1.54 0.00 3.70 0.01 10.80 0.03

2401100000 44.19 0.12 72.16 0.20 30.26 0.08 27.37 0.07 50.39 0.14 48.14 0.13 78.61 0.21 32.96 0.09 29.81 0.08

2401200000 0.25 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.16 0.00

2415000000 0.42 0.00 131.23 0.36 30.13 0.08 51.01 0.14 25.20 0.07 0.43 0.00 131.59 0.36 30.21 0.08 51.15 0.14

SCC Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2010 2010 2010

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon

2010 2010 2013 2013 2013 2013

Page 1 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

SCC Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2010 2010 2010

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon

2010 2010 2013 2013 2013 2013

2420000000 9.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.86 0.01 1.69 0.00 34.98 0.10 9.64 0.03 0.00 0.00 3.04 0.01 1.80 0.00

2425000000 150.16 0.41 50.32 0.14 258.78 0.71 6.79 0.02 23.72 0.07 148.47 0.41 49.76 0.14 255.86 0.70 6.71 0.02

2460100000 72.20 0.19 117.89 0.32 49.44 0.13 44.71 0.12 82.32 0.22 74.93 0.20 122.35 0.33 51.30 0.14 46.40 0.12

2460200000 68.40 0.18 111.69 0.30 46.83 0.13 42.36 0.11 77.99 0.21 70.98 0.19 115.91 0.31 48.60 0.13 43.96 0.12

2460400000 51.68 0.14 84.39 0.23 35.39 0.10 32.01 0.09 58.92 0.16 53.63 0.14 87.57 0.24 36.72 0.10 33.22 0.09

2460500000 36.10 0.10 58.95 0.16 24.72 0.07 22.36 0.06 41.16 0.11 37.46 0.10 61.17 0.16 25.65 0.07 23.20 0.06

2460600000 21.66 0.06 35.37 0.10 14.83 0.04 13.41 0.04 24.70 0.07 22.48 0.06 36.70 0.10 15.39 0.04 13.92 0.04

2460800000 67.64 0.18 110.45 0.30 46.31 0.12 41.89 0.11 77.12 0.21 70.19 0.19 114.62 0.31 48.06 0.13 43.47 0.12

2460900000 2.66 0.01 4.34 0.01 1.82 0.00 1.65 0.00 3.03 0.01 2.76 0.01 4.51 0.01 1.89 0.01 1.71 0.00

2461021000 3.14 0.01 4.32 0.01 2.57 0.01 2.61 0.01 2.59 0.01 3.40 0.01 4.68 0.01 2.79 0.01 2.83 0.01

2461022000 12.69 0.03 17.45 0.05 10.39 0.03 10.55 0.03 10.47 0.03 13.74 0.04 18.90 0.05 11.26 0.03 11.43 0.03

2501011011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501011012 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501011013 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501011014 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501011015 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501012011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501012012 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501012013 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501012014 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501012015 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501050120 16.62 0.04 112.01 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.83 0.05 113.41 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2501055120 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

2501060051 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2501060052 338.12 0.91 471.94 1.27 308.94 0.83 296.02 0.80 515.96 1.39 342.34 0.92 477.83 1.28 312.80 0.84 299.71 0.81

2501060053 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

25010600100 102.43 0.28 142.13 0.38 91.28 0.25 90.41 0.24 148.28 0.40 103.70 0.28 143.90 0.39 92.42 0.25 91.54 0.25

2501060201 16.93 0.05 31.62 0.08 20.31 0.05 18.51 0.05 36.23 0.10 17.14 0.05 32.02 0.09 20.57 0.06 18.74 0.05

2501080050 4.04 0.01 33.77 0.09 0.08 0.00 6.82 0.02 21.47 0.06 4.43 0.01 36.98 0.10 0.09 0.00 7.46 0.02

2501080100 0.23 0.00 1.94 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.00 1.23 0.00 0.25 0.00 2.12 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.43 0.00

2505030120 1.27 0.00 2.37 0.01 1.52 0.00 1.39 0.00 2.72 0.01 1.29 0.00 2.40 0.01 1.54 0.00 1.41 0.00

2505040120 7.45 0.02 50.24 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.65 0.02 51.53 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2610000100 3.33 0.01 4.81 0.01 4.12 0.01 2.49 0.01 5.93 0.02 3.45 0.01 5.00 0.01 4.28 0.01 2.58 0.01

2610000400 2.26 0.01 3.27 0.01 2.80 0.01 1.69 0.00 4.03 0.01 2.34 0.01 3.39 0.01 2.90 0.01 1.75 0.00

2610000500 40.62 0.08 73.43 0.15 58.30 0.12 41.42 0.08 115.87 0.23 42.15 0.08 76.21 0.15 60.51 0.12 42.99 0.09

2610030000 23.46 0.06 33.93 0.09 29.04 0.08 17.52 0.05 41.82 0.11 24.34 0.07 35.21 0.09 30.13 0.08 18.18 0.05

2630020000 1.46 0.00 2.38 0.01 1.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 1.66 0.00 1.53 0.00 2.50 0.01 1.05 0.00 0.95 0.00

Totals 1472.34 3.94 2479.46 6.65 1401.46 3.74 997.22 2.66 1631.46 4.31 1515.40 4.06 2563.19 6.87 1434.65 3.83 1030.70 2.75

Page 2 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

2102001000

2102002000

2102004000

2102005000

2102006000

2103004000

2103005000

2103006000

2103007000

2104001000

2104002000

2104004000

2104006000

2104007000

2104011000

2302002100

2302002200

2302003000

2302003100

2302003200

2401001000

2401005000

2401008000

2401015000

2401020000

2401025000

2401030000

2401040000

2401045000

2401055000

2401060000

2401065000

2401070000

2401075000

2401080000

2401085000

2401090000

2401100000

2401200000

2415000000

SCC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00

0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.55 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.57 0.00 0.57 0.00

0.05 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.13 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00

0.71 0.00 6.58 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.12 0.01 2.61 0.01 0.73 0.00 6.96 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.24 0.01

0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.28 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.38 0.00

0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.00

0.81 0.00 2.91 0.00 2.98 0.00 0.66 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.83 0.00 3.01 0.00 3.08 0.00 0.68 0.00

0.42 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.24 0.00

0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.00

0.55 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.37 0.00

1.91 0.01 1.75 0.00 2.86 0.01 1.20 0.00 1.08 0.00 2.00 0.01 1.84 0.00 3.00 0.01 1.26 0.00

0.58 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.38 0.00

0.27 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.18 0.00

0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00

150.64 0.40 140.21 0.38 228.94 0.62 96.01 0.26 86.83 0.23 159.86 0.43 149.45 0.40 244.04 0.66 102.33 0.27

15.32 0.04 30.87 0.08 56.88 0.15 4.41 0.01 10.76 0.03 16.22 0.04 33.01 0.09 60.83 0.16 4.72 0.01

16.37 0.04 9.72 0.03 14.98 0.04 10.35 0.03 7.74 0.02 16.15 0.04 9.39 0.03 14.47 0.04 10.00 0.03

1.32 0.00 8.74 0.02 1.40 0.00 8.99 0.02 1.40 0.00 1.40 0.00 9.39 0.03 1.50 0.00 9.65 0.03

13.39 0.04 28.74 0.08 52.97 0.14 4.11 0.01 10.02 0.03 15.11 0.04 33.52 0.09 61.77 0.17 4.79 0.01

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.19 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.05 0.04

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 66.32 0.18 11.05 0.03 193.43 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.33 0.20 12.22 0.03 213.87 0.58

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.92 0.20 0.00 0.00 11.99 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79.53 0.22 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.79 0.00 31.33 0.09 13.09 0.04 35.23 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 37.83 0.10 15.80 0.04

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

29.86 0.08 113.28 0.32 327.69 0.92 0.00 0.00 32.31 0.09 32.31 0.09 126.12 0.35 364.82 1.03 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 1.03 0.00 2.21 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.14 0.00 2.44 0.01 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.62 0.05 40.43 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.53 0.06

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14 0.01 5.45 0.01 1.64 0.00 3.96 0.01 11.56 0.03 3.36 0.01 5.99 0.02 1.80 0.00 4.35 0.01

54.89 0.15 53.15 0.15 86.79 0.24 36.39 0.10 32.92 0.09 60.60 0.17 60.35 0.16 98.54 0.27 41.32 0.11

0.29 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.20 0.00

25.26 0.07 0.46 0.00 142.43 0.39 32.70 0.09 55.37 0.15 27.35 0.07 0.51 0.00 158.35 0.43 36.35 0.10

Sevier

2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2016 2016 2016 2016

Anderson Blount Jefferson

2016 2020 2020 2020

Page 3 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

SCC

2420000000

2425000000

2460100000

2460200000

2460400000

2460500000

2460600000

2460800000

2460900000

2461021000

2461022000

2501011011

2501011012

2501011013

2501011014

2501011015

2501012011

2501012012

2501012013

2501012014

2501012015

2501050120

2501055120

2501060051

2501060052

2501060053

25010600100

2501060201

2501080050

2501080100

2505030120

2505040120

2610000100

2610000400

2610000500

2610030000

2630020000

Totals

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

Sevier

2013

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2016 2016 2016 2016

Anderson Blount Jefferson

2016 2020 2020 2020

37.21 0.10 10.17 0.03 0.00 0.00 3.21 0.01 1.90 0.01 39.24 0.11 10.75 0.03 0.00 0.00 3.39 0.01

23.46 0.06 159.33 0.44 53.40 0.15 274.57 0.75 7.20 0.02 25.17 0.07 173.68 0.48 58.21 0.16 299.31 0.82

85.43 0.23 77.84 0.21 127.10 0.34 53.30 0.14 48.21 0.13 88.75 0.24 81.73 0.22 133.46 0.36 55.97 0.15

80.93 0.22 73.74 0.20 120.41 0.32 50.49 0.14 45.67 0.12 84.08 0.23 77.43 0.21 126.44 0.34 53.02 0.14

61.15 0.16 55.71 0.15 90.98 0.24 38.15 0.10 34.51 0.09 63.52 0.17 58.50 0.16 95.53 0.26 40.06 0.11

42.71 0.11 38.92 0.10 63.55 0.17 26.65 0.07 24.10 0.06 44.37 0.12 40.87 0.11 66.73 0.18 27.98 0.08

25.63 0.07 23.35 0.06 38.13 0.10 15.99 0.04 14.46 0.04 26.62 0.07 24.52 0.07 40.04 0.11 16.79 0.05

80.03 0.22 72.92 0.20 119.07 0.32 49.93 0.13 45.16 0.12 83.14 0.22 76.57 0.21 125.03 0.34 52.43 0.14

3.15 0.01 2.87 0.01 4.68 0.01 1.96 0.01 1.78 0.00 3.27 0.01 3.01 0.01 4.92 0.01 2.06 0.01

2.81 0.01 3.67 0.01 5.05 0.01 3.01 0.01 3.05 0.01 3.03 0.01 4.02 0.01 5.53 0.01 3.29 0.01

11.34 0.03 14.83 0.04 20.40 0.06 12.15 0.03 12.34 0.03 12.24 0.03 16.23 0.04 22.33 0.06 13.30 0.04

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

0.00 0.00 16.60 0.04 111.89 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.04 0.04 108.09 0.29 0.00 0.00

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

522.41 1.40 337.77 0.91 471.45 1.27 308.62 0.83 295.71 0.79 515.43 1.39 326.28 0.88 455.41 1.22 298.12 0.80

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

150.13 0.40 102.32 0.27 141.98 0.38 91.18 0.25 90.32 0.24 148.12 0.40 98.84 0.27 137.15 0.37 88.08 0.24

36.68 0.10 16.91 0.05 31.59 0.08 20.29 0.05 18.49 0.05 36.19 0.10 16.33 0.04 30.51 0.08 19.60 0.05

23.51 0.06 4.75 0.01 39.68 0.11 0.10 0.00 8.01 0.02 25.23 0.07 5.18 0.01 43.31 0.12 0.10 0.00

1.35 0.00 0.27 0.00 2.27 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.46 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.30 0.00 2.48 0.01 0.01 0.00

2.75 0.01 1.27 0.00 2.37 0.01 1.52 0.00 1.39 0.00 2.71 0.01 1.23 0.00 2.29 0.01 1.47 0.00

0.00 0.00 8.03 0.02 54.10 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.52 0.02 57.45 0.15 0.00 0.00

6.16 0.02 3.59 0.01 5.19 0.01 4.44 0.01 2.68 0.01 6.40 0.02 3.77 0.01 5.45 0.01 4.66 0.01

4.18 0.01 2.44 0.01 3.52 0.01 3.01 0.01 1.82 0.00 4.34 0.01 2.56 0.01 3.70 0.01 3.17 0.01

120.25 0.24 43.79 0.09 79.17 0.16 62.86 0.12 44.66 0.09 124.92 0.25 45.98 0.09 83.13 0.17 66.00 0.13

43.40 0.12 25.29 0.07 36.58 0.10 31.30 0.08 18.88 0.05 45.08 0.12 26.55 0.07 38.41 0.10 32.87 0.09

1.74 0.00 1.62 0.00 2.64 0.01 1.11 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.85 0.00 1.72 0.00 2.82 0.01 1.18 0.00

1683.08 4.45 1571.18 4.21 2667.23 7.15 1493.60 3.99 1064.62 2.84 1724.23 4.55 1638.89 4.39 2798.79 7.51 1566.44 4.19

Page 4 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

2102001000

2102002000

2102004000

2102005000

2102006000

2103004000

2103005000

2103006000

2103007000

2104001000

2104002000

2104004000

2104006000

2104007000

2104011000

2302002100

2302002200

2302003000

2302003100

2302003200

2401001000

2401005000

2401008000

2401015000

2401020000

2401025000

2401030000

2401040000

2401045000

2401055000

2401060000

2401065000

2401070000

2401075000

2401080000

2401085000

2401090000

2401100000

2401200000

2415000000

SCC

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00

0.16 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.06 0.00

0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.77 0.01 0.77 0.00 7.33 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.36 0.01 2.91 0.01 0.82 0.00

0.03 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.15 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00

0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00

1.16 0.00 0.86 0.00 3.11 0.00 3.18 0.00 0.70 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.89 0.00

0.24 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.46 0.00

0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00

0.33 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.64 0.00

1.14 0.00 2.10 0.01 1.93 0.01 3.16 0.01 1.32 0.00 1.20 0.00 2.20 0.01

0.35 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.67 0.00

0.16 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.32 0.00

0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00

92.56 0.25 170.40 0.46 157.34 0.42 256.91 0.69 107.73 0.29 97.44 0.26 179.39 0.48

11.51 0.03 17.35 0.05 35.24 0.09 64.94 0.17 5.03 0.01 12.28 0.03 18.52 0.05

7.48 0.02 15.60 0.04 9.02 0.02 13.91 0.04 9.61 0.03 7.19 0.02 14.99 0.04

1.50 0.00 1.50 0.00 10.06 0.03 1.61 0.00 10.34 0.03 1.61 0.00 1.61 0.00

11.68 0.03 17.62 0.05 39.08 0.11 72.02 0.19 5.58 0.02 13.62 0.04 20.54 0.06

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.22 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 81.08 0.22 13.51 0.04 236.48 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

13.25 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 87.93 0.24 0.00 0.00 14.66 0.04 0.00 0.00

42.53 0.12 0.00 0.00 1.15 0.00 45.25 0.12 18.91 0.05 50.87 0.14 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

35.98 0.10 35.98 0.10 141.16 0.40 408.33 1.15 0.00 0.00 40.27 0.11 40.27 0.11

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 2.68 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

44.59 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.53 0.06 48.91 0.13 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

12.70 0.03 3.69 0.01 6.60 0.02 1.99 0.01 4.80 0.01 14.00 0.04 4.07 0.01

37.38 0.10 68.81 0.19 68.49 0.19 111.84 0.31 46.90 0.13 42.42 0.12 78.09 0.21

0.18 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.36 0.00

61.56 0.17 30.40 0.08 0.57 0.00 176.51 0.48 40.52 0.11 68.62 0.19 33.89 0.09

Loudon Sevier

2024

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2020 2020 2024 2024 2024 2024

Page 5 of 6
Area Source Inventory

VOC Future Years

SCC

2420000000

2425000000

2460100000

2460200000

2460400000

2460500000

2460600000

2460800000

2460900000

2461021000

2461022000

2501011011

2501011012

2501011013

2501011014

2501011015

2501012011

2501012012

2501012013

2501012014

2501012015

2501050120

2501055120

2501060051

2501060052

2501060053

25010600100

2501060201

2501080050

2501080100

2505030120

2505040120

2610000100

2610000400

2610000500

2610030000

2630020000

Totals

TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day TPY ton/day

Loudon Sevier

2024

Anderson Blount Jefferson Loudon Sevier

2020 2020 2024 2024 2024 2024

2.01 0.01 41.49 0.11 11.31 0.03 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.01 2.11 0.01 43.65 0.12

7.85 0.02 27.44 0.08 188.98 0.52 63.33 0.17 325.66 0.89 8.54 0.02 29.86 0.08

50.62 0.14 93.19 0.25 85.54 0.23 139.67 0.38 58.57 0.16 52.97 0.14 97.53 0.26

47.96 0.13 88.29 0.24 81.03 0.22 132.32 0.36 55.49 0.15 50.19 0.13 92.39 0.25

36.23 0.10 66.71 0.18 61.23 0.16 99.97 0.27 41.92 0.11 37.92 0.10 69.81 0.19

25.31 0.07 46.60 0.13 42.77 0.11 69.84 0.19 29.28 0.08 26.49 0.07 48.76 0.13

15.19 0.04 27.96 0.08 25.66 0.07 41.90 0.11 17.57 0.05 15.89 0.04 29.26 0.08

47.42 0.13 87.31 0.23 80.13 0.22 130.85 0.35 54.87 0.15 49.63 0.13 91.37 0.25

1.86 0.01 3.43 0.01 3.15 0.01 5.15 0.01 2.16 0.01 1.95 0.01 3.59 0.01

3.34 0.01 3.32 0.01 4.38 0.01 6.03 0.02 3.59 0.01 3.65 0.01 3.62 0.01

13.50 0.04 13.40 0.04 17.72 0.05 24.37 0.07 14.51 0.04 14.74 0.04 14.62 0.04

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.41 0.04 103.89 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

285.65 0.77 497.89 1.34 313.61 0.84 437.73 1.18 286.54 0.77 274.56 0.74 478.56 1.29

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

87.24 0.23 143.08 0.38 95.00 0.26 131.82 0.35 84.66 0.23 83.86 0.23 137.53 0.37

17.86 0.05 34.96 0.09 15.70 0.04 29.33 0.08 18.84 0.05 17.17 0.05 33.60 0.09

8.74 0.02 27.53 0.07 5.65 0.02 47.22 0.13 0.11 0.00 9.53 0.03 30.02 0.08

0.50 0.00 1.58 0.00 0.32 0.00 2.71 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.55 0.00 1.72 0.00

1.34 0.00 2.62 0.01 1.18 0.00 2.20 0.01 1.41 0.00 1.29 0.00 2.52 0.01

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.06 0.02 61.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.81 0.01 6.72 0.02 3.94 0.01 5.70 0.02 4.88 0.01 2.94 0.01 7.03 0.02

1.91 0.01 4.56 0.01 2.68 0.01 3.87 0.01 3.31 0.01 2.00 0.01 4.77 0.01

46.89 0.09 131.17 0.26 48.12 0.10 87.00 0.17 69.08 0.14 49.08 0.10 137.27 0.27

19.83 0.05 47.34 0.13 27.79 0.07 40.20 0.11 34.40 0.09 20.75 0.06 49.54 0.13

1.07 0.00 1.97 0.01 1.83 0.00 2.99 0.01 1.25 0.00 1.13 0.00 2.09 0.01

1104.46 2.94 1766.88 4.66 1709.01 4.58 2939.29 7.89 1642.42 4.39 1145.75 3.05 1807.79 4.77

Page 6 of 6
Appendix C – Area Source Calculation Notes
Area Source Calculation Notes – Amanda Davis

Area Source Inventory was developed using EPA Nonpoint files located on EPA’s Chief 

Emission Inventory website for 2008 NEI, 

www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html#inventorydata as well as Appendix A 

from Documentation for the Final 2002 Nonpoint Sector (Feb 06 version) National 

Emission Inventory for Criteria and Hazardous Air Pollutants, 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/nonpoint/2002nei_final_non

point_documentation0206version.pdf. 

Changes with the 2008 EPA’s 2008 NEI files:

Aviation Gasoline Distribution – Stage I – Activity Data – 2007 amount of AvGas 

consumed obtained from the Petroleum Supply Annual for designated Petroleum 

Administration Districts, or PADDs; 2007 LTOs (landing and take-offs) by 

http://aspm/faa/gov/opsnet/sys/airport.asp

Aviation Gasoline Distribution – Stage II – again 2007 AvGas consumption and 

LTOs (note: could not allocate to county level LTO by City and SCC so used file 

developed by Laurel Driver at OAQPS)

Gasoline Distribution Stage I – (a) Bulk Terminals and Pipelines – Table 2 of 

Volume I of Petroleum Supply Annual (PSA) 2007; national volume of wholesale 

gasoline supplied – movement of finished motor gasoline by pipeline between 

PADDs, 2007 Table 35 of PSA - Bulk Terminals – state refinery, bulk terminal 

& natural gas plant stocks of motor gasoline, 2007 Table 33 of PSA – 2007 

County Business Patterns for NAICs 42471 to go from state to county; (b) Bulk 

Plants – Table 2 for 2007 gasoline consumption – NAICs 42471 by 2007 County 

Business Patterns; (c) Tank Trucks in Transit – used Alternative Method from 

EIIP, volume III – allocate to county using 2007 County Business Patterns for 447 

NAICs – gasoline station; (d) Underground Storage Tank (EST) Breathing and 

Emptying – use same method as (c) for activity data; (e) Gasoline Service Station 

Unloading – 2007 TN Monthly Gasoline Through put MF33-GA @ 2007 Federal 

Highway Statistics – allocation to county by getting county monthly allocation 

factor for 2008 w/ 2008 county monthly gasoline throughput/TN monthly 

throuput

Gasoline Distribution Stage II – 2007 NMIM run – rf (refueling) table

Solvent Utilization – Activity Data – US Census Bureau for 2007 Populations and 

2007 County Business Patterns for associated NAIC; no change to Traffic Paints 

since used 2007 Road miles to calculate emissions

Publicly Owned Treatment Works – used 2007 projected flow rates and 

population for 2007

Commercial Cooking – Population for 2007
Open Burning – Res Household Waste – pop for 2007

Open Burning – Yard Waste – Leaf and Brush – Pop 2007

Open Burning – Land Clearing – 2007 housing stats for resi construction – 2007 

annual value of construction put in place for non-res construction – 2007 County 

Business Patterns for NAICs 2362 – 2007 Highway Stats Table SF-12A

Asphalt Paving – Cutback and Emulsified – no changes since the activity data is 

from a bought survey – VMT values are for 2007

Gasoline Distribution – Portable Fuel Containers – interpolated between 2002 and 

2010 to get 2007

Fossil Fuel Combustion - Residential – Coal, Distillate Oil, Natural Gas, LPG, 

and Kerosene – used State Energy Data for 2007 from Energy Information 

Administration

Fossil Fuel Combustion – Industrial and Commercial/Institutional – used 

Appendix A methodology from 2002 – activity from EIA’s 2007 State Energy 

Data and NAICs from 2007 County Business Patterns

For list with Point Source Contribution – EDL’s were searched for SCC and NAICs 

associated with Area Source, summed VOC and NOx emissions and subtracted from 

Area Source calculations

Files for using County Business Allocations and temporal allocation factors to get 

Ton/Day also included in files
Nonpoint Sectors for 2008 NEI

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html

Nonpoint - The following is a list of sectors in which EPA will provide county level emission 

estimates. These estimates have been developed in consultation with the Eastern Regional 

Technical Advisory Committee (ERTAC). This data should be available on the EIS Gateway by 

the end of August, 2009. These data will be used in those cases where S/L do not submit data.

Architectural Coatings

Aviation Gasoline Distribution Stage 1

Aviation Gasoline Distribution Stage 2

Traffic Paints

Consumer Solvents

Residential Heating; Distillate Fuel

Residential Heating; Natural Gas

Residential Heating; LPG

Residential Heating; Wood

Residential Heating; Kerosene

Residential Heating; Anthracite Coal

Residential Heating; Bituminous Coal

Paved Roads

Unpaved Roads

Commercial Cooking

Construction (Residential, Road & Commercial/Industrial/Institutional)

Cutback Asphalt

Emulsified Asphalt

Portable Fuel Containers (gas cans)

Open Burning - Yard Waste

Land Clearing

Household Waste Burning

Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW)

Animal Husbandry

Fertilizer Application

Pesticide Application

Portable Fuel Containers

Additionally, for the emission sectors listed below, EPA will provide tools to help the S/L 

develop county level emission estimates. These sectors all have potential point source 

contributions and EPA is not able to develop county level emission estimates. Examples of 

these tools are emission factors based on employment data and county level employment 

data.

Fuel Combustion; Industrial, Commercial, & Institutional

Surface Coating - Auto Refinishing

Surface Coating - Factory Finished Wood: SIC 2426 thru 242

Surface Coating - Wood Furniture

Surface Coating - Metal Furniture: SIC 25

Surface Coating - Paper, foil, and film

Surface Coating - Metal Can Coating

Surface Coating - Sheet, strip, and coil
Surface Coating - Machinery and Equipment: SIC 35

Surface Coating - Large Appliances: SIC 363

Surface Coating - Electronic and other Electric Coatings

Surface Coating - Motor Vehicles

Surface Coating - Aircraft

Surface Coating - Marine

Surface Coating - Railroad

Surface Coating - Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Industrial Maintenance Coatings

Other Special Purpose Coatings

Degreasing

Graphic Arts

Dry Cleaning

Solvent Documentation

ERTAC State Comparison

Gasoline Distribution Stage I

Stage 2 Gasoline Refueling

These are the nonpoint emission sectors that EPA is not planning to estimate unless addiitonal 

resources become available.

Agricultural Tiling

Agricultural Pesticide Application

Cremation, Human and Animal

Chrome plating (these reside in the facility inventory)

Cotton Ginning

Dental Preparation and Use

Drum and Barrel Reclamation

General Laboratory Activites

Grain Elevators

Hospital Sterilization

Lamp (Fluorescent) Recycling

Lamp Breakage (Landfill emissions)

Landfills (these currently reside in the facility inventory)

Mining and Quarrying

Open Burning - Scrap Tires

Structure Fires

Swimming Pools

Wood Combustion, Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
Appendix D – Onroad Emission Projections
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-1

Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emissions Projections

The onroad mobile source emissions for the Greater Knoxville 8-hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area were estimated for a typical summer day for the month of July 

using the EPA’s latest MOBILE6.2 emission factor model. The input parameters for the 

model runs were developed and agreed to through Interagency Consultation (IAC).

Base year (2007) VMT data was developed by the Tennessee Department of

Transportation (TDOT) through the HPMS (highway performance monitoring system) 

system. Future VMT (vehicle miles traveled) estimates were provided by the Knoxville 

Area TPO based on travel demand modeling (TDM) performed for the 6 counties by the 

Knoxville Area TPO. A summary of the modeling inputs used and the results of the 

emission estimates are described in this section.

Emissions for base year 2007 were developed by the State and Local Air Pollution 

Control Programs. The final year of the maintenance demonstration, 2024, had onroad 

emissions developed by the Knoxville TPO in the most recent Metropolitan 

Transportation Plan (MTP) and Conformity Determination Report (CDR). The latest 

CDR that contains emissions calculation estimation methodologies is attached to this 

document. Emissions estimation methodologies between the two efforts are consistent. 

For all interim years between the years 2007 and 2024, onroad emissions were 

interpolated between the values for 2007 and 2024. 

Input Parameter Descriptions

The following input parameter descriptions briefly outlines the input parameters used to 

develop onroad emissions. The following inputs were developed through consultation 

with the IAC group.

1.) Calendar Years of Evaluation:

The analysis year developed by the State and Local Air Pollution Control Program is 

2007. The last year of the Plan as agreed is 2024. This last year has been developed 

by the TPO; the analysis for which is contained in the attached Conformity 

Determination Report (CDR).

2.) Month of Evaluation:

July is most appropriate for ozone season analysis.

3.) Temperature:

The IAC group has previously agreed to use 66/96 as the MIN/MAX temperature input 

for the ozone analysis. This is based on the requirement to remain consistent with the 

temperature input that was used in the current Conformity Determination Report (CDR).

4.) Absolute Humidity:

There has been much discussion for the humidity input by the IAC during previous 

conformity analysis, and ultimately it was determined to use the MOBILE6.2 default 
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-2

value of 75 grains/lb primarily in order to remain consistent with the most recent 

Conformity Determination Report (CDR). 

5.) Vehicle Age Distribution:

This analysis used the vehicle age distribution that was developed by UTCEE for 

Knoxville region, which was used for the 2002 emissions inventory development. The 

vehicle age distributions are only available for the light duty vehicle and light duty truck 

categories at a local level, the MOBILE6.2 defaults are used for the others. The EPA 

technical guidance strongly recommends using local data for this input where available. 

Since this is the most current data available, it was deemed the most appropriate.

6.) Vehicle Activity:

Historical HPMS data for 2007 (Table 1.) is used for vehicle VMT except for the portion in 

Cocke County. The TPO has provided vehicle counts for 2007, and has developed 

future DVMT for the nonattainment portion of Cocke County. This information will be 

used for an off-model analysis for Cocke County (see Appendix G).

Table 1. 2007 HPMS Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT).

ANDERSON BLOUNT JEFFERSON KNOX LOUDON SEVIER

Interstate Rural 506,714 0 1,150,844 643,627 1,124,992 0

Principal Arterial Rural 127,488 299,542 186,358 238,015

Minor Arterial Rural 80,734 95,497 353,602 196,138 160,929 486,603

Major Collector Rural 297,592 43,041 185,776 98,759 149,028 224,999

Minor Collector Rural 105,191 110,029 112,281 180,740 113,073 187,347

Local Rural 105,443 187,213 120,184 248,035 83,605 531,031

Ramp Rural 6,909 0 6,980 3,970 11,847 0

Interstate Urban 0 77,725 43,171 4,722,503 81,284 298,222

Freeways Urban 42,185

Principal Arterial Urban 628,464 966,091 171,320 2,710,862 189,524 918,069

Minor Arterial Urban 243,604 424,369 65,271 1,673,707 35,300 186,763

Collector Urban 70,021 347,664 45,453 856,362 44,375 143,050

Local Urban 131,695 486,599 47,508 2,818,749 51,435 231,858

Ramp Urban 0 7,899 3,117 233,838 3,886 7,229

Total 2,303,855 3,045,669 2,305,508 14,429,475 2,235,637 3,453,187

Historical HPMS DVMT data was seasonally adjusted to develop the VMT for a typical 

summer day for 2007 as well as all future years. Seasonally adjusted DVMT for 2014 

and 2024 was obtained from the Knoxville TPO’s Travel Demand Model. DVMT for 

2010, 2013, 2016 and 2020 were interpolated. Table 2. illustrates the DVMT for the 

applicable years.
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-3

Table 2. Seasonally Adjusted Summer Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled.

Year 2007 2010 2013 2014 2016 2020 2024

County

Anderson 2,382,982 2,521,316 2,659,649 2,705,760 2,789,674 2,957,503 3,125,332

Blount 3,099,644 3,458,761 3,817,879 3,937,585 4,152,278 4,581,665 5,011,051

Cocke3 17,538 18,970 20,403 20,880 21,718 23,395 25,072

Jefferson 2,428,378 2,590,626 2,752,873 2,806,956 2,921,987 3,152,050 3,382,113

Knox 14,640,148 15,582,752 16,525,356 16,839,557 17,323,544 18,291,519 19,259,493

Loudon 2,353,782 2,505,623 2,657,464 2,708,078 2,767,226 2,885,523 3,003,819

Sevier 3,540,719 3,715,372 3,890,024 3,948,242 4,108,906 4,430,235 4,751,564

Total 28,463,192 30,393,420 32,323,649 32,967,058 34,085,335 36,321,890 38,558,444

2DVMT for 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2020 are interpolated.

3DVMT is for the nonattainment portion of Cocke County consisting only of the area in the GSMNP.

Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled1,2

1Data for 2007 is TDOT HPMS Data; that for 2014 and 2024 w as produced by the Knoxville TPO's Travel Demand Model (except 

Cocke County).

7.) VMT by vehicle classification (vmt mix):

The VMT by vehicle classification is available from TDOT vehicle classification data.

The TDOT data has to be further disaggregated to the several vehicle types recognized 

by MOBILE6.2 from the three major classifications that TDOT uses. Updated 

classification data was developed from 2006 fractions provided by TDOT.

8.) Functional classification:

The TPO’s Travel Demand Model allocates estimates of VMT into the appropriate

functional classification as defined by TDOT. As a matter of practice, the TPO 

traditionally combines rural major and minor collectors into a single rural collector 

functional class. In addition, the urban expressway is combined with the urban 

interstate for Knox County. This approach will also be taken in the development of 

emissions for the Redesignation Request. There are four driving cycles used by

MOBILE6.2, the following table (Table 3.) shows the Driving Cycle proposed for each 

FHWA functional classification category:

Table 3. MOBILE6.2 Drive Cycle Applied to FHWA Functional Classes.

FHWA Highway Functional System MOBILE6.2 Driving Cycle

Rural Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Rural Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector1

Rural Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Rural Major Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Minor Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Local Arterial/Collector

Urban Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Freeways Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Collector Arterial/Collector

Urban Local Local Roadway

1

The technical guidance recommends the Freeway and Freeway Ramp driving cycle for the Rural Other Principal Arterial 

class; however the arterial/collector cycle seems to be more appropriate in this region due to the lack of access control on 

these types of facilities.
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-4

9.) VMT Fraction by Average Speed by Hour of the Day:

The TPO travel demand model has three time periods - AM Peak (6 - 9 am), PM Peak 

(3 - 6 pm) and the rest of the day. Therefore an average speed can be developed for 

each of these time periods, by direction of travel in order to capture the peaking effect 

on speed. The SPEED VMT command will be used as it has a single VMT distribution 

for the AM peak three-hour period, a single VMT distribution for the PM peak three-hour 

period and one for the other 18 hours of the day. Separate scenarios will be run for

Interstates, Arterials and Collectors which are handled with setting the appropriate field 

in the VMT BY FACILITY command to 1.0. SPEED VMT files have been developed for 

2006; the TPO believes these speed estimates are reasonable for representing speeds 

in 2007.

10.) Weekday and Weekend Day Activity:

The technical guidance states that “for most purposes, EPA will not expect States to 

develop local estimates that vary by day of the week”. There is no mention of seasonal

variation factors although it is fairly standard practice to apply a seasonal adjustment

factor (SAF) to account for differences in travel during the summer months since the 

HPMS data and travel demand model VMT estimates are normalized to an average 

annual daily traffic volume. Seasonal variation factors are available from TDOT which 

were used to develop an appropriate SAF.

Table 4. from TDOT was used to calculate an average summer time VMT adjustment 

factor in order to account for changes in traffic volume:
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-5

The averages for Rural Interstates in June, July and August were calculated as 0.93, 

Rural other facilities as 0.96, and Urban as 0.99. The VMT estimates were divided by 

these factors to calculate the summer traffic volumes.

11.) RVP Levels:

For July, the regulatory RVP maximum is 9.0 psi.

Results of Onroad Emission Estimates

MOBILE6 was run to develop emission factors in grams/mile for NOx and VOC for each 

county, facility type and year. The emission factors were multiplied by the VMT for each 

county and facility type, then summed to tons/day emissions for each county and year. 

Table 5. contains the onroad emissions estimates for the Greater Knoxville 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Area for 2007.

2003 JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.

Interstate, Rural

Sunday 1.31 1.24 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.94 0.88 0.91 1.03 1.00 0.95 1.15

Monday 1.28 1.23 1.12 1.04 1.02 1.03 0.96 1.01 1.02 1.07 1.08 1.06

Tuesday 1.23 1.20 1.11 1.05 0.99 1.02 0.94 1.03 1.08 1.06 1.01 1.09

Wednesday 1.23 1.17 1.07 1.01 0.97 0.97 0.92 1.01 1.06 1.03 0.91 1.07

Thursday 1.23 1.11 0.99 0.94 0.92 0.93 0.88 0.93 1.01 0.99 1.02 1.02

Friday 1.21 1.04 0.85 0.80 0.83 0.85 0.78 0.82 0.87 0.88 0.91 0.93

Saturday 1.18 1.17 0.92 0.92 0.99 0.91 0.84 0.88 1.01 1.01 0.99 1.07

Average 1.239 1.166 1.010 0.961 0.960 0.950 0.886 0.941 1.011 1.006 0.981 1.056

Other, Rural

Sunday 1.50 1.37 1.30 1.14 1.14 1.09 1.10 1.10 1.15 1.14 1.15 1.31

Monday 1.29 1.29 1.10 0.96 0.99 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.99 0.93 0.95 1.06

Tuesday 1.20 1.14 1.14 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 1.07

Wednesday 1.25 1.09 1.16 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.91 1.09

Thursday 1.25 1.34 1.13 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.91 0.93 0.91 0.90 1.00 1.05

Friday 1.17 1.25 1.04 0.88 0.85 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.83 0.83 0.89 1.00

Saturday 1.33 1.29 1.12 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.94 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.99 1.14

Average 1.284 1.253 1.141 0.973 0.970 0.961 0.953 0.961 0.964 0.951 0.977 1.103

Urban

Sunday 1.54 1.39 1.33 1.32 1.35 1.26 1.24 1.24 1.28 1.29 1.31 1.33

Monday 1.04 1.00 0.94 0.96 1.00 0.93 0.98 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.93 1.01

Tuesday 1.00 0.97 0.94 0.97 0.98 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.92 0.95

Wednesday 0.99 0.97 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.92 0.94 0.91 0.92 0.93 0.91 0.93

Thursday 1.02 1.00 0.90 0.94 0.94 0.90 0.96 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.95

Friday 0.97 0.92 0.84 0.91 0.89 0.86 0.89 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.91 0.93

Saturday 1.21 1.13 1.02 1.09 1.12 1.05 1.07 1.04 1.09 1.10 1.12 1.15

Average 1.110 1.054 0.986 1.020 1.036 0.977 1.006 0.973 0.990 0.999 1.001 1.036

Table 4. Seasonal Adjustment Factors.
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-6

Table 5. 2007 Onroad Emissions for the Greater Knoxville 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC

Rural interstate 3.66 0.54 0.00 0.00 3.31 0.74 8.77 1.21 7.74 1.22 0.00 0.00

Rural local 0.15 0.22 0.27 0.39 0.36 0.52 0.17 0.25 0.12 0.17 0.80 1.11

Rural major collector 0.43 0.36 0.06 0.05 0.14 0.12 0.28 0.23 0.22 0.18 0.34 0.28

Rural minor arterial 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.12 0.35 0.23 0.67 0.42 0.33 0.19 0.68 0.62

Rural minor collector 0.15 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.23 0.17 0.14 0.17 0.14 0.28 0.23

Rural other principle arterial 0.20 0.15 0.52 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.22 0.34 0.30

Urban collector 0.09 0.09 0.48 0.45 1.19 1.10 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.21 0.19

Urban interstate 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.09 17.09 4.96 0.29 0.04 0.49 0.08 1.82 0.29

Urban local 0.18 0.27 0.69 0.98 3.99 5.69 0.07 0.10 0.07 0.10 0.35 0.47

Urban minor arterial 0.34 0.30 0.62 0.53 2.42 2.10 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.25 0.23

Urban other freew ays 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Urban other principle arterial 0.88 0.76 1.50 1.14 4.08 3.27 0.26 0.21 0.28 0.23 1.24 1.15

Rural ramp 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00

Urban ramp 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.53 0.31 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01

Total 6.24 2.93 4.58 4.24 33.81 19.32 10.87 2.74 9.99 2.65 6.32 4.87

Anderson

--tons/day--

Blount Knox Jefferson Loudon Sevier
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-7

The onroad emissions for 2024 were obtained from the Knoxville Transportation 

Planning Organization’s most recent Transportation Conformity Determination (CDR). 

The CDR is attached to this document. Onroad emissions for years between 2007 and 

2024 were estimated by interpolation. These estimates are contained in Table 6 and 

Table 7. 

Table 6. Onroad NOx Emissions Summary for the Knoxville 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Anderson 6.24 5.47 4.70 3.93 2.90 1.87

Blount 4.58 4.19 3.79 3.39 2.85 2.32

Cocke* 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01

Jefferson 10.87 9.42 7.96 6.51 4.57 2.63

Knox 33.81 29.76 25.71 21.66 16.27 10.87

Loudon 9.99 8.62 7.25 5.88 4.05 2.22

Sevier 6.32 5.62 4.93 4.23 3.30 2.37

Total 71.84 63.09 54.35 45.61 33.95 22.29

-12 -24 -37 -53 -69

*Only includes the area in the GSMNP.

--tons/day--

Percent change in 

emissions from 2007

Table 7. Onroad VOC Emissions Summary for the Knoxville 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Anderson 2.93 2.66 2.39 2.12 1.75 1.39

Blount 4.24 3.94 3.63 3.33 2.92 2.52

Cocke* 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01

Jefferson 2.74 2.49 2.25 2.00 1.68 1.35

Knox 19.32 17.61 15.90 14.19 11.91 9.63

Loudon 2.65 2.40 2.15 1.90 1.56 1.22

Sevier 4.87 4.41 3.95 3.49 2.88 2.27

Total 36.78 33.54 30.29 27.05 22.72 18.39

-9 -18 -26 -38 -50

*Only includes the area in the GSMNP.

--tons/day--

Percent change in 

emissions from 2007
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-8

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call

February 19th, 2010

Meeting Notes

Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Alan Jones, TDOT

Tameka Macon, FHWA TN Division

Steve McDaniel, Knox County Air Quality Management

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Jim Renfro, National Park Service

Bob Rock, TDOT

Kelly Sheckler, EPA

Dianna Smith, EPA

Jane Spann, EPA

Jerry Yuknavage, TDOT

Note: this discussion was held in conjunction with the TPO’s Interagency 

Consultation Conference Call to discuss the next Transportation Conformity 

Determination.

There was considerable discussion regarding planning assumptions for use in 

developing onroad emissions for the redesignation request. Key planning assumptions 

discussed by the IAC are listed below.

1.) Calendar Years of Evaluation:

The analysis years proposed are:

2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2020, 2024

The proposed budget year: 2024

The base year (2007) will need a developed inventory. For the budget year (2024), it is 

proposed the emissions inventory from the May 27th, 2009 Knoxville TPO’s CDR be 

used to establish budgets. Emissions for the intermediate inventory years (2010, 2013, 

2016, 2020) will be interpolated.

2.) Month of Evaluation:

July is most appropriate for ozone season analysis.

3.) Temperature:
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-9

The IAC group has previously agreed to use 66/96 as the MIN/MAX temperature input 

for the ozone analysis. This is based on the requirement to remain consistent with the 

temperature input that was used in the current CDR.

4.) Absolute Humidity:

There has been much discussion for the humidity input by the IAC during previous 

conformity analysis, and ultimately it was determined to use the MOBILE6.2 default 

value of 75 grains/lb primarily in order to remain consistent with the TPO’s current CDR, 

which also used the default value for humidity. 

5.) Vehicle Age Distribution:

The TPO used the vehicle age distribution that was developed by UTCEE for Knoxville 

region, which was used for the 2002 emissions inventory development. The vehicle age 

distributions are only available for the light duty vehicle and light duty truck categories at 

a local level, the MOBILE6.2 defaults are used for the others. The EPA Technical 

Guidance1strongly recommends using local data for this input where available. Since 

this is the most current data available, it is proposed this age distribution be used.

There was discussion on the age of this vehicle age distribution data. Although it is the 

most current local data available, if it is possible to substantiate this further, or 

demonstrate that this information is still the most reasonable, that would be helpful in 

the documentation.

6.) Vehicle Activity:

Historical HPMS data for 2007 is proposed for vehicle VMT except for the portion in 

Cocke County. The TPO has vehicle counts for 2007, and has developed DVMT for the 

nonattainment portion of Cocke County. This information will be used for an off-model 

analysis for Cocke County.

For ramp facilities the methodology recommended by the technical guidance is to 

assume that the HPMS data for Freeway facilities can be broken out as 92% VMT on 

the actual freeway and the other 8% on ramps. However, the Knoxville TPO may have 

developed ramp fractions, if these are available, these should be used.

7.) VMT by vehicle classification (vmt mix):

The VMT by vehicle classification is available from TDOT vehicle classification data.

The TDOT data has to be further disaggregated to the several vehicle types recognized 

by MOBILE6.2 from the three major classifications that TDOT uses. Updated 

classification data was developed from 2006 fractions provided by TDOT. This 

information is proposed for use in this redesignation request and maintenance plan. 

8.) VMT by functional classification:

The TPO model allocates estimates of VMT into the appropriate functional classification 

as defined by TDOT. As a matter of practice, the TPO traditionally combines rural 

major and minor collectors into a single rural collector functional class. In addition, the 

urban expressway is combined with the urban interstate for Knox County. This 
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-10

approach will also be taken in the development of emissions for the Redesignation 

Request. There are four driving cycles used by MOBILE6.2, the following table shows 

the Driving Cycle proposed for each FHWA functional classification category:

FHWA Highway Functional System MOBILE6.2 Driving Cycle

Rural Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Rural Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector*

Rural Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Rural Major Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Minor Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Local Arterial/Collector

Urban Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Freeways Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Collector Arterial/Collector

Urban Local Local Roadway

* The technical guidance recommends the Freeway and Freeway Ramp driving cycle for the Rural Other Principal Arterial class; 

however the arterial/collector cycle seems to be more appropriate in this region due to the lack of access control on these types of 

facilities.

9.) VMT Fraction by Average Speed by Hour of the Day:

The TPO travel demand model has three time periods - AM Peak (6 - 9 am), PM Peak 

(3 - 6 pm) and the rest of the day. Therefore an average speed can be developed for 

each of these time periods, by direction of travel in order to capture the peaking effect 

on speed. The SPEED VMT command will be used as it has a single VMT distribution 

for the AM peak three-hour period, a single VMT distribution for the PM peak three-hour 

period and one for the other 18 hours of the day. Separate scenarios will be run for

Interstates, Arterials and Collectors which are handled with setting the appropriate field 

in the VMT BY FACILITY command to 1.0. SPEED VMT files have been developed for 

2006; the TPO believes these speed estimates are reasonable for representing speeds 

in 2007.

10.) Weekday and Weekend Day Activity:

The technical guidance states that “for most purposes, EPA will not expect States to 

develop local estimates that vary by day of the week”. There is no mention of seasonal

variation factors although it is fairly standard practice to apply a seasonal adjustment

factor (SAF) to account for differences in travel during the summer months since the 

HPMS data and travel demand model VMT estimates are normalized to an average 

annual daily traffic volume. Seasonal variation factors are available from TDOT which 

were used to develop an appropriate SAF.

11.) RVP Levels:

For July, the regulatory RVP maximum is 9.0 psi.
Appendix D Onroad Mobile Source NOx and VOC Emission Projections D-11

The IAC discussed these planning assumptions in light of any more recent information, 

as well as the fact that these planning assumptions were also considered recently for 

the 2009 CDR developed by the TPO.

1Unless otherwise noted, the term “technical guidance” in the explanation of the input 

values refers to the EPA guidance document – Technical Guidance on the Use of

MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation, U.S. EPA Office of Transportation and Air

Quality, August 2004.
AIR QUALITY

CONFORMITY DETERMINATION

Addressing the PM 2.5 and Ozone 

Standards 

for 

The 2009-2034 Knoxville

Regional Long Range Mobility

Plan

and

The Lakeway Area Metropolitan

Transportation Planning

Organization 2034 Long Range

Transportation Plan

May 27, 2009

Prepared by:
The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway 

Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State 

Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of 

Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of 

the U.S. Department of Transportation
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Adopting Resolution by TPO Executive Board for Regional Mobility Plan...... iii

Adopting Resolution by TPO Executive Board for Conformity Determination iv

Adopting Resolution by East Tennessee South RPO............................................ v

Adopting Resolution by LAMTPO Executive Board for LRTP ......................... vi

Adopting Resolution by LAMTPO Executive Board for Conformity................ vii

Executive Summary................................................................................................. viii

Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background Information..................................... 1

 1.0 – Introduction............................................................................................................ 1

 1.1 – Transportation Plans Covered under this Conformity Determination Report ....... 1

 1.2 – Background on the Knoxville Region Ozone and PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas... 1

 1.3 – Transportation Conformity Background................................................................ 3

 1.4 – Nonattainment Area Jurisdictional Coordination .................................................. 3

 1.5 – Emissions Analysis Background ........................................................................... 3

 1.6 – Emissions Analysis Procedures............................................................................. 4

 Chapter 2 – Statement of Conformity.................................................................... 5

 2.0 – Introduction............................................................................................................ 5

 2.1 – Statement of Conformity – 8-Hour Ozone Standard ............................................. 5

 2.1.1 – Interim Emissions Test #1 – 1-Hour Budget Test for Knox County ......... 5

 2.1.2 – Interim Emissions Test #2 – No greater than Baseline 2002 Emissions Test 6

 2.1.3 – Summary of 8-Hour Conformity Analysis ................................................ 7

 2.2 – Statement of Conformity – PM2.5 Standard ........................................................ 7

 2.2.1 – Summary of PM2.5 Conformity Analysis................................................. 9

Chapter 3 – Interagency Consultation .................................................................. 10

 3.0 – Introduction............................................................................................................ 10

 3.1 – Participating Agencies........................................................................................... 10

 3.2 – Overview of Consultation Process and Comments................................................ 10

Chapter 4 – Mobile Source Emissions Analysis & Applicable Governing Regulations 11

 4.0 – Introduction............................................................................................................ 11

 4.1 – Regulations Related to Development of LRTP and Transportation Conformity... 11

 4.2 – Regulations Governing Mobile Source Emissions Analyses................................. 12

Chapter 5 – Conclusion and Summary of Comments.......................................... 18

 5.0 – Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 18

 5.1 – Public Involvement Summary ............................................................................... 18

 5.2 – Public Comment and Response ............................................................................. 19
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination ii

 References................................................................................................................. 20

Glossary of Terms.................................................................................................... 21

 Appendix

Appendix A – IAC Participant List .................................................................................... 24

Appendix B – IAC Meeting Minutes.................................................................................... 26

Appendix C – Emissions Analysis Summary for each County ............................................ 44

Appendix D – Travel Demand Model and Land Use Allocation Model Development ....... 67

Appendix E – ULAM Population and Employment Control Totals..................................... 74

Appendix F – MOBILE6 Input Description......................................................................... 87

Appendix G – Regional Significance Screening Criteria ..................................................... 93

Appendix H – Highway Project List..................................................................................... 95

Appendix I – Existing Plus Committed Projects.................................................................. 114

Appendix J – Updated Non-Exempt TIP/LRMP Project Number Reference ...................... 115

Additional Technical Information and specific Input Files contained on Separate CD-ROM

Maps

1. Knoxville 8-Hour and PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas...................................................... 2

2. Travel Demand Model Coverage Area .......................................................................... 16

Tables

2.1 Results of the 1-Hour Budget Test for Ozone .............................................................. 6

2.2 Results of the No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for Ozone ............................ 7

2.3 Results of the No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for PM2.5............................ 8
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination iii
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination iv
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination v
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination vi
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination vii
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

An Air Quality Conformity Determination for transportation plans and programs within the 

Knoxville Region is required since it is designated as a Nonattainment Area for both the 8-Hour 

Ozone and Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5) Standards. The analysis included in this report 

demonstrates that the 2009 – 2034 Long Range Transportation Plans and FY 2008 – 2011 

Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) of both the Knoxville Regional Transportation 

Planning Organization (KRTPO) and the Lakeway Area Metropolitan Transportation Planning 

Organization (LAMTPO) conform to federal regulations from the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA-LU).

The 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area includes Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, Loudon, 

Sevier and a portion of Cocke County. An original finding of conformity was made June 1, 2005 

and is being updated in this report. There are two Metropolitan Planning Organization 

jurisdictions within the 8-Hour Nonattainment Area – the KRTPO covers the urbanized portions 

of Blount, Knox, Loudon and Sevier counties and the LAMTPO covers the urbanized portion of 

Jefferson County. This Conformity Determination Report includes an analysis for the entire 

Nonattainment Area and is applicable for both the 2009- 2034 Knoxville Regional Mobility Plan 

and the LAMTPO 2034 Long Range Transportation Plan.

The Ozone conformity analysis consisted of a 1-Hour Budget Test for Knox County and a No 

Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for the other counties for ozone-forming emissions of 

“Volatile Organic Compounds” (VOC) and “Oxides of Nitrogen” (NOx). The results are

summarized below:

Knox County 1-Hour Budget Test for Ozone:

Analysis Year

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): 2009 2014 2024 2034

Emissions Budget 29.24 22.12 22.12 22.12

Projected Emissions 19.28 14.40 9.63 10.38

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2009 2014 2024 2034

Emissions Budget 33.89 22.49 22.49 22.49

Projected Emissions 32.05 20.72 10.87 9.46

(emissions in tons per day)
2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination ix

No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for Ozone*:

Analysis Year

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 25.11 25.11 25.11

Projected Emissions 12.70 8.77 10.02

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 57.94 57.94 57.94

Projected Emissions 21.86 11.42 10.31

 (emissions in tons per day)

*Analysis includes Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Loudon, Sevier and portion of Cocke counties.

The PM2.5 Nonattainment Area includes Anderson, Blount, Knox, Loudon and a portion of Roane 

County. The designation as a Nonattainment Area under the PM2.5 Standard became effective on 

April 5, 2005. An original finding of conformity was made April 3, 2006 and is being updated in 

this report. The PM2.5 analysis consisted of a No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for all counties in the 

PM2.5 Nonattainment Area for the annual PM2.5-related emissions from on-road mobile sources 

known as “Direct PM2.5” and “Oxides of Nitrogen” (NOx). The results of the emissions analysis 

are summarized below:

No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for PM2.5**:

Analysis Year

Direct Particulate Matter 2.5: 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 473.6 473.6 473.6

Projected Emissions 213.6 182.1 202.8

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 31,609 31,609 31,609

Projected Emissions 12,313 6,534 5,866

 (emissions in tons per year)

**Analysis includes Anderson, Blount, Knox, Loudon and portion of Roane counties

The emissions analysis performed by the KRTPO demonstrated that the projected emissions from 

the proposed transportation system are less than the allowable amount for each of the required 

analysis years of 2009, 2014, 2024 and 2034; and the Plan is therefore in conformity for both 

standards. Since the TIPs are a direct subset of the LRTPs, they also meet the requirements for 

conformity.

The conformity determination was coordinated with stakeholder and regulatory agencies through 

an Interagency Consultation process and a 30-day public review and comment period was held. A 

summary of comments that were received and responses is included in the report.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 1

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.0 Introduction

The purpose of this document is to demonstrate that the 2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional 

Long Range Mobility Plan (LRMP) meets Transportation/Air Quality Conformity 

requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) and the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) for the 

pollutants of Ozone and Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM2.5). The 2009 – 2034 LRMP

contains projects from the entire Ozone and PM2.5 Nonattainment Area in the Knoxville 

Region, which includes the portion of Jefferson County within the Lakeway Area 

Metropolitan Transportation Planning Organization (LAMTPO).

1.1 Transportation Plans Covered under this Conformity Determination Report 

The 2009 – 2034 LRMP is an update to the 2005 – 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan, 

for which the original finding of Conformity by the U.S. Department of Transportation 

under the 8-hour Ozone Standard was made on June 1, 2005 and a finding of Conformity 

under the PM2.5 Standard was made on April 3, 2006. The SAFETEA-LU legislation 

requires that long range transportation plans be fully updated at a minimum of every four 

years in a nonattainment area; therefore this Conformity Determination Report satisfies the 

requirement for an update by June 1, 2009. Other Plans covered by this Conformity 

Determination Report include: 

The LAMTPO 2034 Long Range Transportation Plan, 

FY 2008 – 2011 Transportation Improvement Program, and

The Knoxville Regional TPO FY 2008 – 2011 Transportation Improvement 

Program.

The Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) for the Knoxville Regional TPO and 

LAMTPO were adopted prior to and will remain active beyond the date of the adoption of 

the 2009 – 2034 Long Range Mobility Plan. All of the projects in the TIPs are included in 

the updated LRMP, and a new cross-reference of projects between the TIP and LRMP was 

developed to match the updated project numbering system (included in Appendix J). Since this conformity determination report accompanies the LRMP document, there are 

certain sections that are covered in the LRMP document such as the financial constraint 

methodology.

1.2 Background on the Knoxville Region Ozone and PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas

The Clean Air Act requires the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to 

set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six “Criteria Pollutants” - Particulate Matter, Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Lead

in order to protect human health and the environment from unsafe levels of these pollutants. 

These pollutants are regulated through the EPA setting maximum limits on exposure levels, 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 1

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 2

which are based on scientific based guidelines that are reviewed periodically. Regions

which are found to be out of compliance with those limits may be designated as a 

“Nonattainment Area”. Portions of the Knoxville Region have been designated as 

nonattainment for two of the Criteria Pollutants – Ozone and Particulate Matter. Ozone is 

measured as exposure for an 8-hour period, known as the “8-hour Ozone Standard”. Particulate Matter is measured as exposure over both a daily and annual basis for different 

sizes of particles. The Knoxville Region is currently nonattainment for the annual 

maximum standard for Particulate Matter measuring 2.5 microns or less in diameter, also 

known as “PM2.5”.

Map 1 depicts the geographical extents of both the Ozone and PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas 

for the Knoxville Region. The counties of Anderson, Blount, Knox and Loudon carry a 

designation as a Nonattainment Area for both pollutants, while there is a small portion of 

Roane County that is designated as a PM2.5 Nonattainment Area only; and the counties of 

Jefferson, Sevier and a small portion of Cocke County are designated as Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas only. The designations of Ozone nonattainment areas (under the 8-Hour Ozone Standard) were 

made effective on June 15, 2004 while the designations of PM2.5 areas were made effective 

on April 5, 2005 by EPA.

MAP 1: KNOXVILLE 8-HOUR OZONE and PM2.5 

NONATTAINMENT AREAS
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 1

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 3

1.3 Transportation Conformity Background

Transportation Conformity is required in nonattainment and maintenance areas by federal 

regulations (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) and is the mechanism through which on-road mobile 

source emissions are addressed in the area’s goals for cleaner air. The basic intent of 

Transportation Conformity is to ensure that federal funds will not be spent on transportation 

projects that may delay the attainment of the air quality standard for which the area is 

currently out of compliance. Therefore transportation plans and programs must be 

demonstrated to conform to the “State Implementation Plan” (SIP), which details the 

emissions levels from each sector including mobile sources needed to regain compliance 

with the air quality standard. If conformity is not demonstrated then the area may enter 

what is known as a “lapse” period in which only very specific projects may move forward, while funding is essentially frozen for most new roadway construction or widening 

projects.

1.4 Nonattainment Area Jurisdictional Coordination

The Knoxville Regional TPO (KRTPO) does not encompass the entire Nonattainment Area 

for Ozone and PM2.5, and as such coordination with other transportation planning 

organizations and the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) is required in order 

to ensure all of the proposed transportation projects are included in the conformity analysis. 

The KRTPO boundary includes the urbanized portions of Blount, Knox, Loudon and Sevier 

counties while the LAMTPO boundary includes the urbanized portions of Jefferson County 

within the 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area. TDOT is responsible for transportation 

planning in the rural portions of the nonattainment areas, and TDOT has set up a Rural 

Planning Organization (RPO) that includes all counties within the Knoxville Nonattainment 

Area, known as the “East Tennessee South RPO” which was coordinated with for this 

LRMP update.

A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was entered into by KRTPO, LAMTPO and TDOT

in 2004 and subsequently revised in 2007. The MOA specifies that the KRTPO is 

responsible for compiling a single Conformity Determination Report for the entire 

Nonattainment Area and that TDOT and LAMTPO will provide the KRTPO with proposed 

project lists for their respective jurisdictions. The LAMTPO is a fairly new Metropolitan 

Planning Organization as it was created based on the 2000 Census.

1.5 Emissions Analysis Background

Transportation Conformity is demonstrated through a technical process known as an 

“emissions analysis”, in which future estimates of emissions from the transportation system 

are compared against what has been determined to be sufficient to allow the area to re- attain the air quality standard. Different types of emissions are involved in the production 

of Ozone and PM2.5 pollution as described below:
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 1

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 4

Ozone: Ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere; rather it is formed 

through a chemical reaction between “Volatile Organic Compounds” (VOC) and 

“Oxides of Nitrogen” (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. Mobile-sources contribute

both sources of emissions – VOC are primarily formed from the evaporation of 

motor fuel, while NOx is formed from the internal combustion process and emitted 

in vehicle exhaust.

PM2.5: There are some PM2.5 emissions, known as “Direct PM2.5”, that are 

directly emitted from motor vehicles. Direct PM2.5 emissions consist of elements 

contained in vehicle exhaust as well as particles resulting from brake and tire wear. 

In addition, it is believed that NOx emissions can contribute to secondary formation 

of PM2.5 so it is included in the emissions analysis. 

1.6 Emissions Analysis Procedures

The emissions analysis is performed primarily using two different models – a Travel 

Demand Forecasting Model (TDFM), developed by the KRTPO and the MOBILE6 

emissions rate model, which was developed by EPA and allows the user to input localized 

parameters. The TDFM provides outputs of the estimated Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) 

on the transportation system and associated average speeds by functional classification. 

The MOBILE6 model provides outputs of emission factors in grams per mile of vehicle 

travel, such that an overall emissions amount can be calculated by multiplying the VMT 

output from the TDFM with the emission factor from MOBILE6.

There is one area – the partial Cocke County Ozone Nonattainment Area that is not 

represented in the TDFM for which an “off-model” analysis was performed. The off-model 

analysis primarily consisted of using historical traffic count data to determine a growth 

trend with which to project future VMT.

Appendix D describes the Travel Demand Forecasting Model parameters in more detail and 

Appendix F of this document describes the MOBILE6 input structure that was used in the 

emissions analysis. Finally, the emissions analysis must also be performed for different years throughout the 

life of the LRMP since the timeframe covered by the LRMP is from 2009 – 2034. The 

main requirement is that a year within the first five years of the plan must be studied as well 

as the final year of the plan, and then years must be chosen in between such that no more 

than ten years separate any analysis year.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 2

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 5

Chapter 2

Statement of Conformity

2.0 Introduction

This report covers the conformity requirements for the Knoxville Region under both the 8- Hour Ozone Standard as well as the PM2.5 Standard. The transportation conformity 

analysis is being updated for the 8-Hour Ozone Standard, which was first approved on June 

1, 2005 by the U.S. DOT and for the PM2.5 analysis, which was originally approved on 

April 3, 2006. The conformity report and LRMP comply with all applicable requirements 

found in the State Implementation Plan (SIP), Clean Air Act, Tennessee Transportation 

Conformity Regulation and the MPO Planning Regulations from SAFETEA-LU (23 CFR 

450.322).

2.1 Statement of Conformity – 8-Hour Ozone Standard

In order to demonstrate conformity of the LRTP and TIP with the 8-Hour Standard the 

following interim emissions tests must be passed:

2.1.1 Interim Emissions Test #1 – 1-Hour Budget Test for Knox County

The EPA decided that prior to the development of a Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 

(MVEB) for the 8-Hour Standard, areas with existing budgets under the 1-Hour Standard 

should continue to use them as an interim emissions test to demonstrate 8-Hour conformity. 

The latest available MVEB is the one that was most recently approved for the 1-Hour

Maintenance Plan update for Knox County. The Knox County Maintenance Plan MVEB 

was published in the Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 21 on Monday, February 2, 2004 and 

established the following MVEB for VOC and NOx in tons per day for Knox County:

2004 2014

VOC 29.24 22.12

NOx 33.89 22.49

The budget set for year “2004” above must be used if an analysis year falls between 2004 

and 2013, while the budget set for “2014” must be used for analysis years of 2014 and 

beyond.

The conformity analysis was performed for the years 2009, 2014, 2024 and 2034, which 

meet the requirements for analysis years specified in 23 CFR 93.106(a)(1) of the 

Transportation Conformity Rule. Appendix C of this document includes a detailed 

breakdown of the emissions analysis for the 1-Hour Budget Test, which is summarized in

Table 2.1 below:
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 2

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 6

Table 2.1: Results of the 1-Hour Budget Test

Analysis Year

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): 2009 2014 2024 2034

Emissions Budget 29.24 22.12 22.12 22.12

Projected Emissions 19.28 14.40 9.63 10.38

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2009 2014 2024 2034

Emissions Budget 33.89 22.49 22.49 22.49

Projected Emissions 32.05 20.72 10.87 9.46

(emissions in tons per day)

The results of the 1-Hour emissions budget test demonstrate that the projected emissions 

are less than the required MVEB from the State Implementation Plan for each analysis year, 

and therefore conformity is demonstrated for the 2009 – 2034 LRMP under Interim 

Emissions Test #1.

2.1.2 Interim Emissions Test #2 – No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Emissions Test

In absence of any type of MVEB, either for the 8-Hour Standard or the 1-Hour Standard, an 

area that is designated as a Basic Nonattainment Area has the choice of two types of interim 

emissions test – either the “No-greater-than Baseline Year 2002” test or the “Build no- greater-than No-Build” test. The KRTPO has chosen (with concurrence from its 

Interagency Consultation Partners) to demonstrate conformity for the area within the 

Knoxville Nonattainment Area but outside of Knox County using the No-greater than 

Baseline Year 2002 test. This test is performed by determining an estimate of the actual 

emissions that were present in the year 2002 (for VOC and NOx) and showing that 

projections of future emissions for the life of the LRMP will be less than those 2002 

emissions.

An analysis was performed to determine the estimated amount of emissions present in the 

year 2002 for VOC and NOx using vehicle miles of travel (VMT) obtained from TDOT 

along with other data as outlined in subsequent sections of this report. The following sum 

of emissions from the area outside of Knox County, but within the Nonattainment Area was 

calculated in tons per day for 2002:

2002

VOC 25.11

NOx 57.94

The following table (Table 2.2) presents the results of the emissions analysis conducted for 

interim emissions test #2. The analysis years of 2014, 2024 and 2034 were chosen under 

guidelines required by 23 CFR 93.106(a)(1) of the Transportation Conformity Rule, which 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 2

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 7

specify that a year no more than five years from the adoption year of the Long Range Plan 

must be analyzed plus the last year of the Plan and years in between such that there are no 

more than ten years between an analysis year. 

Table 2.2: Results of the No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for Ozone

Analysis Year

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 25.11 25.11 25.11

Projected Emissions 12.70 8.77 10.02

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 57.94 57.94 57.94

Projected Emissions 21.86 11.42 10.31

 (emissions in tons per day)

Note: The above table represents the sum of emissions for the entire Ozone Nonattainment area outside of Knox County, which includes 

Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Loudon, Sevier and a portion of Cocke County. Appendix C contains a summary of the emissions analysis 

results for each individual county.

The results of Interim Emissions Test #2 demonstrate that the projected emissions are in all 

cases less than the emissions estimated in the Baseline Year 2002, and therefore this 

conformity test is passed.

2.1.3 Summary of 8-Hour Conformity Analysis

Based on the quantitative conformity analysis the KRTPO staff has determined that the

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP, the LAMPTO 2034 Long Range Transportation 

Plan as well as the KRTPO and LAMTPO FY 2008 – 2011 TIPs demonstrate conformity 

for the 8-Hour Ozone Standard using the necessary interim emissions tests. Compliance 

with the regulations of the Clean Air Act, 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 (Transportation 

Conformity Rule) and 23 CFR Part 450 (Metropolitan Planning Regulations established by 

SAFETEA-LU) has also been demonstrated. All Plans are financially constrained 

consistent with 23 CFR Part 450 Subpart C based on the projected costs and revenues as 

presented in the accompanying KRTPO LRMP and LAMTPO LRTP documents. 2.2 Statement of Conformity – PM2.5 Standard

Similar to the 8-Hour Ozone standard, there has not yet been a MVEB established for the 

Knoxville Region for the emissions that comprise PM2.5. The conformity rule therefore 

requires that an interim emissions test be chosen in the absence of a MVEB, which are the 

same options of either a “Build No Greater than No-Build” test or a “No Greater than 

Baseline Year 2002” test similar to the Ozone standard. Since the KRTPO conducted a No 

Greater than Baseline Year 2002 test for Ozone, it made the most sense to use the same test 

for PM2.5 since many of the model parameters and analysis techniques are shared between 

the two.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 2

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 8

Through the Interagency Consultation Process it was determined that this conformity 

determination should address the Direct PM2.5 emissions from vehicle exhaust and 

brake/tire wear and the PM2.5 precursor of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). The other types of 

potential PM2.5 emissions from mobile sources were determined to not be required until 

further analysis could be undertaken to determine their contribution to overall PM2.5 

pollution – these included the Direct PM2.5 emissions of re-entrained road dust and 

construction dust, and the PM2.5 precursors of volatile organic compounds, sulfur oxides 

and ammonia. It was also determined through IAC that the KRTPO conformity analysis 

should only address the “Annual” PM2.5 standard.

An analysis was performed to determine the estimated amount of emissions present in the 

year 2002 for Direct PM2.5 and NOx using vehicle miles of travel (VMT) obtained from 

TDOT along with other data as outlined in subsequent sections of this report. 

The following sum of emissions from the entire PM2.5 Nonattainment Area was calculated 

in tons per year for 2002:

2002

Direct PM2.5 473.6

NOx 31,609

The analysis years that are required are the same as for the Ozone Interim Emissions Test 

#2. The following table (Table 2.3) presents the results of the emissions analysis conducted 

for the analysis years of 2014, 2024 and 2034 against the estimated 2002 Baseline 

emissions level:

Table 2.3: Results of the No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 Test for PM2.5

Analysis Year

Direct Particulate Matter 2.5: 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 473.6 473.6 473.6

Projected Emissions 213.6 182.1 202.8

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx): 2014 2024 2034

Budget (2002 Emissions) 31,609 31,609 31,609

Projected Emissions 12,313 6,534 5,866

 (emissions in tons per year)

Note: The above table represents the sum of emissions for the entire PM2.5 Nonattainment Area including Anderson, Blount, Knox, 

Loudon and a portion of Roane County. Appendix C contains a summary of the emissions analysis results for each individual county.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 2

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 9

2.2.1 Summary of PM2.5 Conformity Analysis

Based on the quantitative conformity analysis the KRTPO staff has determined that the 

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP and the FY 2008 – 2011 TIP demonstrate 

conformity for the Particulate Matter 2.5 Standard using the necessary interim emissions 

test. Compliance with the regulations of the Clean Air Act, 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 

(Transportation Conformity Rule) and 23 CFR Part 450 (Metropolitan Planning 

Regulations established by SAFETEA-LU) has also been demonstrated. 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 3

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 10

Chapter 3

Interagency Consultation

3.0 Introduction

The Transportation Conformity Rule in 40 CFR Part 93.105 requires that Interagency 

Consultation be a part of conformity determinations. Interagency Consultation allows for 

formal deliberation of any issues that arise as part of the conformity analysis and allows for 

input from all stakeholder agencies into the process. Specific consultation procedures are 

specified in the Tennessee Transportation Conformity Regulation found in 1200-3-34-

.01(3) of the Tennessee State Code.

3.1 Participating Agencies

The core list of Interagency Consultation Participants included representatives from the 

following agencies:

Knoxville Regional TPO

Knox County Department of Air Quality Management

Tennessee Department of Transportation

Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation

Federal Highway Administration

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Federal Transit Administration

Lakeway Area Metropolitan TPO

Great Smoky Mountains National Park Service

Additionally, several local jurisdictions were involved and provided input to the process. A 

list of participant names is included in Appendix A. 3.2 Overview of Consultation Process and Comments

The conformity analysis process began with a presentation of background information and 

proposed analysis procedures to the Interagency Consultation Group on August 7, 2008. Several subsequent meetings were held via teleconference in order to discuss modeling 

parameters, project lists and to receive agreement on necessary assumptions. Appendix B

contains supporting documentation and minutes of each of the interagency meetings.

There were no significant comments on the draft conformity determination report from the 

Interagency Consultation Group.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 11

Chapter 4

Mobile Source Emissions Analysis and Applicable 

Governing Regulations

4.0 Introduction

The Metropolitan Planning Regulations of SAFETEA-LU (23 CFR Part 450, February 14, 2007) and the USEPA Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93, August 

15, 1997 and amended July 1, 2004) specify certain minimum requirements that must be 

addressed in performing a mobile source emissions analysis in order to determine 

conformity of a Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The following sections in this 

chapter discuss these requirements and how they were addressed by the KRTPO in making 

the determination of conformity on the amended 2009 – 2034 LRMP. 4.1 Regulations related to Development of LRTP and Transportation Conformity

The Metropolitan Planning Regulations found in 23 CFR Part 450 specify the content of 

Long Range Transportation Plans and relevant aspects related to Transportation 

Conformity.

23 CFR 450.322(a) – The LRTP must have a minimum 20-year planning 

horizon. The LRTP being updated covers the period of 2009 – 2034 which 

meets the requirement for a minimum 20-year planning horizon.

23 CFR 450.322(b)(6) – The LRTP must “include design concept and scope 

descriptions of all existing and proposed transportation facilities in 

sufficient detail, regardless of the source of funding, in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to permit conformity determinations under the U.S. 

EPA conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 51. In all areas, all proposed 

improvements shall be described in sufficient detail to develop cost 

estimates”. The project list included in the LRMP document and in Appendix 

H covers the necessary detail and project scopes to develop cost estimates as 

accurately as possible.

23 CFR 450.322(b)(11) – The LRTP must “include a financial plan that 

demonstrates the consistency of proposed transportation investments with 

already available and projected sources of revenue...” The LRMP document 

contains a financial analysis that demonstrates financial constraint.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 12

4.2 Regulations Governing Mobile Source Emissions Analyses

The Transportation Conformity Rule was published in the Federal Register on August 15, 

1997 and amended to cover the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards on July 1, 2004. Subsequent amendments to the Final Transportation Conformity 

Rules for Ozone and PM2.5 have been made by EPA on November 29, 2005 and May 6, 

2005 respectively. Applicable guidelines from the Transportation Conformity Rule are as 

follows:

40 CFR 93.106(a) – The transportation plan must specifically describe the 

transportation system envisioned for certain future years, which are called 

horizon years and are subject to the following restrictions:

The horizon years may be no more than 10 years apart;

The first horizon year may not be more than 10 years from the base year 

used to validate the transportation demand planning model.

If the attainment year is in the time span of the transportation plan, the 

attainment year must be a horizon year.

The last horizon year must be the last year of the transportation plan’s 

forecast period.

The base year for validation of the KRTPO’s transportation demand planning model is 

2006 and the LRMP’s forecast period is from 2009 – 2034. Therefore the analysis years 

used in developing the conformity analysis are:

For Ozone:

All Counties except Knox – Emission Test of “Less than Baseline Year 2002 Emissions” 

for NOx and VOC

Analysis Years –

2014 – Year that is no more than 5 years out from Plan adoption year

2024 – Year such that there are no more than 10 years between analysis 

years

2034 – Ultimate horizon year of Plan

Knox County – Emission Test against the 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan MVEB for NOx 

and VOC.

Analysis Years –

2009 – 8-hour Ozone Attainment Year (Required analysis year for areas 

with previous 1-Hour Budgets)

2014 – Year with a 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Budget
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 13

2024 – Year such that there are no more than 10 years between analysis 

years

2034 – Ultimate horizon year of Plan

Note: The 2009 analysis year will use the MVEB established for 2004 and the others will 

be compared against the MVEB established for 2014.

For PM2.5 (Annual Standard):

All Counties = Analysis Years of 2014, 2024 and 2034 using Emission Test of "Less than 

Baseline Year 2002 Emissions" for Direct PM and NOx. (Same rationale as for the ozone 

areas outside of Knox County). Proposing to use the ‘Single-Run’ approach.

2009 – Year within ten years of validation of the transportation demand 

planning model and also the attainment date for the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard.

2014 – Year no more than 10 years apart, and also a 1-Hour Maintenance 

Plan year for Knox County.

2020 – Year no more than 10 years apart.

2030 – Last horizon year of LRTP.

The analysis years were discussed and determined to be appropriate in the Interagency 

Consultation process as noted earlier.

40 CFR 93.106(a)(2)(i) – The transportation plan shall quantify and 

document the demographic and employment factors influencing the 

expected transportation demand. The summary of county-level estimates of socioeconomic data and growth projections for 

all study years is included in Appendix E of this document. The travel demand model used 

the following socioeconomic characteristics in order to determine estimates of travel for 

each analysis year:

Total Population

Household Population

Number of Households

Average Persons per Household

Average Median Household Income 

Workers per Household

Vehicles per Household

Students per Household

School Enrollment (K-12)

University Student Enrollment

Total Employment

Basic Employment
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 14

Industrial Employment

Retail Trade Employment

Services Employment

The 2000 Census provided estimates of base year values for the above socioeconomic data. 

The KRTPO acquired forecasted data for the above variables from Woods & Poole 

Economics, Inc. since they provided the most comprehensive set of data which was 

available for each county in the KRTPO’s travel demand model coverage area. A land use 

allocation model known as ULAM was developed and applied for this LRMP, which 

allocated the growth to appropriate Traffic Analysis Zones based on a number of factors 

such as the amount of vacant and developable land. More information on the ULAM 

process is provided in Appendix D. 40 CFR 93.106(a)(2)(i) – The highway and transit system shall be described 

in terms of the regionally significant additions or modifications to the 

existing transportation network which the transportation plan envisions to 

be operational in the horizon years.

The transportation system is described in the travel demand model through a GIS-based 

network of links and nodes with attributes describing the character of roadway. Some of 

the key attributes that were used to account for the improvement projects that are being 

proposed include:

FHWA Functional Classification

Divided or Un-divided Roadway

Level of Access Control

Number of Lanes in each direction

Lane Width

Posted Speed Limit

Area Type (Rural, Suburban, Urban or Major Employment District)

Transit usage is not formally modeled as part of the travel demand model since it currently 

accounts for a very small percentage of trips (approximately 1% of all work trips), and there 

is little reason to expect a major shift to transit in the future, however some increased use of 

transit will likely occur with the increased opportunities being proposed by the LRMP.

40 CFR 93.110 – The conformity determination must be based upon the 

most recent planning assumptions in force at the time of the conformity 

determination. The KRTPO documented its assumptions and planning data 

with the Interagency Consultation Group, which is summarized in the meeting 

information included in the Appendix B. The demographic and transportation 

modeling assumptions are documented in Appendix D & E.

40 CFR 93.111 – The conformity determination must be based on the latest 

emission estimation model available. MOBILE6.2 software is the latest 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 15

mobile-source emission estimation model that is available and was used for this 

conformity determination. Development of specific inputs used for MOBILE6.2 

to describe the Knoxville Region is documented in Appendix F. 40 CFR 93.112 – The conformity determination must satisfy consultation 

requirements in the applicable implementation plan. Chapter 3 and 

documentation in the appendix relate to the interagency consultation process.

40 CFR 93.118 and 93.119 – Motor vehicle emissions budget and other 

applicable conformity tests that must be used. Chapter 2 of this report 

documents the emissions tests that were used to demonstrate conformity. The 

emissions tests were discussed in the Interagency Consultation process to 

determine their appropriateness.

40 CFR 93.122 – Procedures for determining transportation-related 

emissions. The TPO documented its assumptions and methodology for 

determining future growth in vehicle miles of travel on the regionally significant 

transportation system with the Interagency Consultation Group. The primary 

source for projecting future vehicle activity is the travel demand forecasting 

model, which includes all regionally significant roadways and represents all 

regionally significant highway projects being proposed for implementation in 

the LRTP by analysis year. All counties in the nonattainment area are 

represented in the travel demand model except for the portion of Cocke County 

within the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Map 2 below shows the 

extents of the travel demand forecasting model’s coverage area as well as the 

roadways that are included. Again, it should be noted that regionally significant 

roadways are included; however greater coverage of lower-order roadways 

(collectors and locals) is also provided in the core TPO planning area of Knox 

and Blount counties as shown in the yellow-shaded area.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 16

MAP 2: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL COVERAGE AREA

An existing plus committed (E+C) network was developed for the travel demand 

forecasting model due to the fact that the validation year of the model is 2006 and 

the first analysis year for the Knox County 1-HR Budget Test is 2009. The E+C 

network serves to incorporate changes in the roadway system that occurred since the 

year 2006, primarily due to construction projects having been completed and also 

includes projects that are currently under construction and should be completed by 

the end of 2009. The E+C network serves as the “base” roadway network upon 

which all future improvements proposed in the LRMP are analyzed. A full list of 

the E+C projects that were added to the travel demand model prior to developing the 

future analysis years is included in Appendix I. An off-model analysis was performed for Cocke County in which future growth of 

vehicle miles of travel was estimated using a growth trend that was based on growth 

of historical observed traffic counts through 2008. Since there were only three 

roadways that were included in the analysis for Cocke County, and none are 

proposed for improvement during the life of the LRTP, the off-model analysis used 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 4

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 17

a very simplified approach that is documented in the minutes of the Interagency 

Consultation meetings and the chapter on MOBILE6.2 input development.

Other than Cocke County, there were other off-model procedures that were 

performed in order to account for the increase in VMT and change of emissions for 

the transportation system not included in the model, which is primarily the local 

road system outside of Knox County. It was assumed that the local VMT 

percentage (as a proportion of the rest of the county’s VMT) would remain constant.

40 CFR 93.126 and 93.127 – Projects exempt from regional emissions 

analysis. The highway project list included in the Appendix H of this document

describes which projects were determined to be exempt from air quality 

analysis. These projects were deliberated through the Interagency Consultation 

process to ensure that there was full agreement on the exempt status for projects.

Examples of exempt projects include:

Bridge Replacement Project – A project that only entails rehabilitating or 

replacing the existing bridge in-kind without any additional laneage 

being constructed.

Pedestrian Improvement Project

Interchange Reconfiguration Project

Intersection Project – This could include any type of project that 

involves only a single intersection such as adding turn lanes 

(channelization) or a traffic signal.

Street Lighting

Pavement Resurfacing

Reconstruction of a 2-lane roadway which is only improving the width 

and geometrics of the roadway and perhaps some additional turn lanes.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 5

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 18

Chapter 5

Conclusion and Summary of Comments

5.0 Conclusion

The analysis included in this report has demonstrated that the 2009 – 2034 Knoxville 

Regional Long Range Mobility Plan and accompanying 2008 – 2011 Transportation 

Improvement Program are in conformity with air quality regulations found in the Clean Air 

Act Amendments of 1990 and SAFETEA-LU. The LAMTPO LRTP and TIP are direct 

subsets of the 2009 – 2034 Regional LRMP and therefore are also in conformance. The 

ozone-forming emissions of VOC and NOx and the PM2.5 emissions of Direct PM2.5 and 

NOx from on-road mobile sources are projected to be less than the amounts of allowable 

emissions as determined by the required interim emissions tests by EPA.

Although Vehicle Miles of Travel are projected to increase steadily in the future, the 

corresponding emissions rates from vehicles are expected to decrease even more 

significantly according to the modeling performed by the KRTPO. The primary reason that 

emission rates are projected to decline so much is due to several regulations affecting 

tailpipe emission standards and fuel sulfur levels (both gasoline and diesel) which will be 

implemented nationwide by the year 2010. The MOBILE6 model incorporates these 

regulations into its calculations and determines their impacts, which increase over time as 

the vehicle fleet turns over and includes more of the vehicles affected by the new 

regulations.

Currently there are no transportation control measures (TCMs) in the Tennessee SIP for the 

Knoxville 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 nonattainment areas. However, should TCMs be 

introduced in the area, nothing in the LRMP nor the Transportation Improvement Program 

will prohibit the timely implementation of any that are approved in the SIP for the 

Knoxville area.

5.1 Public Involvement Summary

The Knoxville Regional TPO conducted a 30-day comment period between April 27, 2009 

to May 27, 2009 to allow for public review and comment on the Air Quality Conformity 

Determination. In addition, two formal public hearings were held as part of regularly 

scheduled Technical Committee and Executive Board meetings that were on May 12, 2009

and May 27, 2009 respectively. Copies of the Conformity Determination Report were 

provided to area libraries and made available on the KRTPO web site. Public notice and 

advertisements for the hearings and locations to view the draft conformity determination 

report were placed in newspapers including The Knoxville News Sentinel, Maryville Daily 

Times, The Oak Ridger, The Clinton Courier, Loudon County News Herald, Enlightener 

(paper targeted toward minority population) and Mundo Hispano (paper targeted toward 

Hispanic population).

The Lakeway Area MTPO conducted a public comment period from April 27, 2009 

through their Long Range Plan adoption on May 27, 2009 and held Public Comment 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Chapter 5

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 19

meetings for their LRTP and the Conformity Determination Report on Tuesday, May 12, 

2009 at both White Pine Town Hall and at Jefferson City City Hall and on Wednesday, 

May 13, 2009 at the Morristown City Center Building. 5.2 Public Comment and Response

Public Comments at Public Hearings:

No questions or comments were received from the public hearings that were held on the 

final air quality conformity determination.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization References

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 20

References

1. Technical Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation, U.S. EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Jan 2002. 

2. User’s Guide to MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2: Mobile Source Emission Factor 

Model, OTAQ, U.S. EPA, EPA420-R-02-028, Oct 2002.

3. Davis, W. T., Miller, T. L., Reed, G. D., Tang, A. M. Y., Doraiswamy, P., and 

Sanhueza, P., Effects of Growth in VMT and New Mobile Source Emission 

Standards on NOx and VOC Emissions in Tennessee, Dept. of Civil and 

Environmental Engineering in the University of Tennessee, Mar. 14, 2002.

4. Yun, Jeongran, Draft Report On-Road Mobile Source Emissions in Tennessee for 

2002 an Inventory and Analysis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering in 

the University of Tennessee, July 2004.

5. MOBILE6 website, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/m6.htm

6. Guidance for Creating Annual On-Road Mobile Source Emission Inventories for 

PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas for Use in SIPs and Conformity, U.S. EPA Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, August 2005.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Glossary of Terms

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 21

Glossary of Terms

1-Hour Ozone Standard – A national ambient air quality standard set for ozone based on 

the peak 1-hour concentration of ozone measured at a monitoring site. The maximum level 

of ozone allowed under the standard is 124 parts per billion of ozone. The EPA 

implemented a revised 8-Hour Ozone Standard effective on June 15, 2004, with the 1-Hour 

Standard being replaced by the 8-Hour Standard one year later on June 15, 2005.

8-Hour Ozone Standard – Similar to 1-Hour Standard, but changes measurement to a 

maximum level of 84 parts per billion over an 8-hour average timeframe.

Arterial Roadway – A major roadway facility with the primary function of traffic 

movement and connects activity centers in the region.

CAA – The U.S. Clean Air Act, referring to the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955, as 

amended.

Collector Roadway – A minor roadway facility primarily serving to provide access to and 

from local streets and adjacent land use.

Conformity – An analysis which demonstrates that a transportation plan, program, or 

project conforms with the State Implementation Plan purpose of eliminating or reducing the 

severity and number of violations of the national ambient air quality standards and 

achieving expeditious attainment of such standards; and that such activities will not cause 

or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any area; increase the frequency or 

severity of any existing violation of any standard in any area; or delay timely attainment of

any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area.

EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Exempt Project – Projects that are determined to be exempt from the requirement to 

determine conformity such as safety, maintenance, certain transit and other projects as 

determined through Interagency Consultation. These projects may proceed toward 

implementation even in absence of a conforming transportation plan and TIP.

Financial Constraint – The requirement that the proposed projects in the transportation 

plans for an area must not have costs which exceed the reasonably expected revenues.

FHWA – Federal Highway Administration.

FTA – Federal Transit Administration.

Freeway – A divided highway with two or more lanes for the exclusive use of traffic in 

each direction, and with full control of access and egress.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Glossary of Terms

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 22

HPMS – Highway Performance Monitoring System. Summary information obtained from a

sample of the arterial and collector functional systems to assess highway condition, 

performance, air quality trends, and future investment requirements.

Interagency Consultation – The formal process used to involve stakeholder agencies into 

the conformity determination development. 

Local Roadway – A road, usually with low traffic volume, designed solely to serve

adjacent development rather than through traffic.

LRTP/LRMP – Long Range Transportation Plan. Requirement for the metropolitan 

transportation planning process under SAFETEA-LU, must have a minimum of 20-year 

horizon and be updated every four years in metro areas with greater than 200,000 

population.

Maintenance Area – A classification of an area which was in nonattainment of an air 

quality standard at one point in time and is required to demonstrate the ability to maintain 

the standard.

MOBILE6 – An emissions rate model approved by EPA for estimating on-road vehicle 

emission factors. Most current version is MOBILE6.2.

MVEB – Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget. Established by the SIP, it sets out the 

maximum levels of emissions from on-road mobile sources for an area.

NAAQS – National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Nonattainment Area – An area designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

as not being in attainment of the national standard for a specified pollutant.

NOx – Oxides of Nitrogen, an emission resulting from the process of fuel combustion.

Ozone – A secondary pollutant formed by the combination of VOCs and NOx in the 

presence of sunlight.

PM2.5 - PM2.5 particles are air pollutants with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less, small 

enough to invade even the smallest airways. These particles generally come from activities 

that burn fossil fuels, such as traffic, smelting, and metal processing.

Ramps – Connections to and from freeway facilities to the arterial and collector roadway 

system.

Regionally Significant Project – A project which is on a facility which serves a regional 

transportation need and would normally be included in the modeling of an area’s 

transportation network. These projects must be accounted for specifically in the regional 

air quality analysis.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Glossary of Terms

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 23

SAFETEA-LU – Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users. The federal transportation legislation governing the use of federal funds 

for transportation investments.

SIP – State Implementation Plan. Mandated by the Clean Air Act, SIPs contain details to 

monitor, control, maintain, and enforce compliance with National Ambient Air Quality

Standards.

TAZ – Traffic Analysis Zone. A small geographic area for which socioeconomic data is 

estimated in the KRTPO travel demand model.

TDEC – Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation

TDOT – Tennessee Department of Transportation

TIP – Transportation Improvement Program. A biennial document listing a three to five 

year program of projects with some phase of work to be implemented such as design, right- of-way or construction. Travel Demand Forecasting Model – A computer software tool developed to estimate the 

travel activity of a region based on the correlation between household-level characteristics 

and travel behavior.

TPO – Transportation Planning Organization. Each urbanized area in the U.S. with greater 

than 50,000 population must have a MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) in order to 

coordinate transportation planning. In the Knoxville urbanized area the name TPO was 

chosen to better represent the activities that are performed.

VMT – Vehicle Miles of Travel. Is calculated from the average daily traffic volume 

multiplied by the length of roadway.

VOC – Volatile Organic Compounds. VOCs are emitted in the storage and use of fuel, 

solvents, and many industrial and consumer chemicals, as well as from vegetation. 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix A

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 24

Appendix A

Knoxville-Area Primary Interagency Consultation Participants

AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE

Knoxville Regional TPO Jeff Welch, TPO Director

400 Main Street Suite 403 Mike Conger, Transportation Engineer

Knoxville, TN 37902 Katie Habgood, Transportation Planner

(865) 215-2500 FAX 215-2068

Knox County Dept. of Air Quality Mgmt. Lynne Liddington, Director

140 Dameron Avenue Steve McDaniel, Engineer

Knoxville, TN 37917

(865) 215-5900 FAX 215-5902

Tennessee Dept. of Transportation Bob Rock, Transportation Manager III

505 Deaderick Street Angie Midgett, Transportation Specialist

Nashville, TN 37243 Alan Jones, Air Quality Policy Supervisor

(615) 741-2848 FAX 532-8451 Mark McAdoo, Env. Policy Analyst

TDEC Air Pollution Control Division Quincy Styke, Deputy Director

401 Church Street, 9th floor L&C Annex Vicki Lowe

Nashville, TN 37243-1531 Marc Corrigan, Environmental Specialist

(615) 532-0554 FAX 532-0614

Federal Highway Administration, Tenn. Division Tameka Macon, Community Planner

640 Grassmere Park

Nashville, TN 37211

(615) 781-5767 FAX 781-5773

FHWA, Southern Resource Center Michael Roberts, Air Quality Specialist

61 Forsyth Street

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404) 562-3570 FAX 562-3700

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Kelly Sheckler, Environmental Planner

61 Forsyth Street Dianna Smith, Environmental Scientist

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404) 562-9077 FAX 562-9019
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix A

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 25

Knoxville-Area Primary Interagency Consultation Participants 

(continued)

Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta Abigail Rivera, Community Planner

61 Forsyth Street

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404) 562-3500 FAX 562-3505

Lakeway MTPO Rich DesGrosseillers, MTPO Director

100 W. 1st North Street

Morristown, TN 37814

(423)581-0100 FAX 585-4679

GSMNP Resource Management & Science Division Jim Renfro, Air Quality Branch Chief

1314 Cherokee Orchard Road Teresa Cantrell, Transportation Planner

Gatlinburg, TN 37738

(865)436-1708 FAX 430-4753
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 26

Appendix B

Interagency Consultation Meeting Information

B1: Meeting 1 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 8/7/08

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Thursday, August 7, 2008. A set of 

information was previously emailed to each participant for their review including an 

agenda and an excerpt from a report prepared by Pechan & Associates on behalf of TDOT 

describing current and upcoming air quality and conformity issues in the Knoxville region. Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Jeff Welch, TPO

Katie Habgood, TPO

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Jerry Yuknavage, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Alan Jones, TDOT

Kelly Sheckler, EPA

Rich DesGroseillers, Lakeway MTPO 

Jim Renfro, National Park Service

Discussion Items:

1.) Background & Discussion of Preliminary Schedule

Mike Conger provided a brief background of the nonattainment status of the area and the 

upcoming need for a conformity determination based on an update of the Long Range 

Transportation Plan. Angie Midgett asked if there was not a conformity determination that 

had been prepared fairly recently and if so why would another update be needed so soon. 

Mike replied that the TPO had done a few updated conformity determinations since the 

original 2005 LRTP and conformity determination, but that these only involved relatively

minor amendments and were not for a complete LRTP update as this one is. A complete 

Plan and conformity update is required every 4 years so this is to satisfy that requirement. 

Mike reviewed the preliminary schedule that was included in the information provided with 

the agenda for this meeting. Mike stressed that the conformity analysis was being done 

for the entire nonattainment area which includes areas outside of the TPO planning area 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 27

and also includes part of the Lakeway TPO area. Mike noted that timelines were being 

coordinated with the Lakeway TPO such that their LRTP development would provide the 

necessary information to the Knoxville TPO in order to remain on schedule.

2.) Discussion of Required Analysis Years and Emissions Tests

Mike reviewed the need for determining the required analysis years so that the process of 

developing travel demand model forecasts can be finalized, which subsequently feeds into 

the development of the LRTP project lists and associated conformity analyses. Mike also 

noted that it would be preferable to align as many of the upcoming conformity triggers as 

possible in order to avoid re-doing conformity so often. 

Mike asked for guidance from EPA regarding appropriate emission tests and analysis years. 

Kelly Sheckler responded that there are several unknowns at this time which will likely 

affect what emissions tests and analysis years will be required. One major issue she noted 

was with the vacature of the CAIR rule, which could affect the recent PM2.5 SIP submittals 

because of the emission reductions that were taken credit for from CAIR. It was also 

noted that guidance was being waited on from EPA headquarters regarding the issue of 

the court remand of the designation of areas under Subpart I like Knoxville for the 8-hour 

Ozone Standard.

Kelly stated that she had developed a preliminary proposal for how the Knoxville area 

could best align the conformity triggers to minimize the number of conformity 

determinations that would be required, but that she still needed to review it with others at 

EPA before she could send it out to the IAC group. She also stated that she would check 

on the other issues raised today to get a response as soon as possible. She asked what 

the TPO’s “drop-dead” date would be to get the analysis years and emission tests finalized. 

Mike responded that he would have to think about it and get back to her later on what the 

exact deadline should be, but that it needs to be fairly soon. The IAC participants agreed 

that this conformity process cannot wait until all the outstanding issues are fully resolved 

so we need to proceed forward as necessary to stay on schedule.

Marc Corrigan raised an issue regarding what the first required analysis year should be. 

Marc noted that if the PM2.5 SIP budgets were found adequate in the timeframe of this 

conformity determination then it may be likely that a 2009 analysis year would be required 

since that is the attainment year for PM2.5. Mike stated that a 2009 analysis year did not 

make much sense in terms of the LRTP development since the plan will actually be 

adopted in 2009 and therefore any transportation projects in the 2009 analysis year will be 

basically those that are already built or close to being completed. Also, there is a potential 

issue with meeting the emission budget for 2009 since it was developed using planning 

assumptions and models which have since been updated. Since there is no safety margin 

in the budget there could be a problem with meeting it if the new models predict even 

small increases in emission rates than the previous models. Marc indicated that a SIP 

revision to account for the new model changes would be very difficult to achieve within 

the timeframe needed to stay on schedule for the Knoxville LRTP update. Marc asked 

Kelly to consider these issues as she discusses the analysis year requirements and PM2.5 

SIP review process with the others at EPA.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 28

3.) General Discussion of Latest Planning Assumptions

Mike stated that the TPO had a new transportation model validated to a 2006 base year 

and a land use model that would provide the basis for the emissions analyses of this 

conformity determination, he further noted that additional detail regarding planning 

assumptions would be provided at a future meeting. Two specific items were discussed 

regarding recommendations from the “Pechan” report that was prepared for TDOT.

First was the issue of diesel truck traffic potentially increasing at a higher rate than 

passenger vehicle traffic, which would affect air quality because of the typically higher 

emission rates for large trucks. Alan Jones noted that FHWA sources are predicting 

increases in freight and particularly truck traffic such that it should probably be accounted 

for. Mike agreed that he has seen that information as well and that he would check into it 

further. Jeff Welch noted that TDOT now has a freight planning assistance contract with a 

consultant who might be able to assist with this issue. Mike stated he would explore that 

possibility further as well as check with TDOT on obtaining actual classification data from 

past years to see what the recent trends are with respect to truck VMT percentages. Mike 

also noted that he would coordinate with the TDOT modeling office on what the statewide 

travel model was predicting in terms of truck growth at our model’s external stations.

The second issue dealt with the possible need to update the vehicle age distribution that is 

used as a MOBILE6 input. Mike stated that we have been using an input file that was 

developed by U.T. for TDEC and TDOT that was based on year 2002 motor vehicle 

registration data for our area. Kelly responded that she would need to check into what the 

requirement for updating this information was. She stated it was her recollection that it 

was more of a guidance statement rather than a strict requirement and that it was around 

6 years for update intervals. Marc noted that it was the intent of TDEC to update this 

information, but that they preferred to tie the update in with the switch over to the MOVES 

model and that it would not likely be available in the timeframe of this conformity process. 

In closing Mike noted that it would he would like to schedule a regular monthly time for 

IAC calls throughout the conformity determination process. It was determined 

preliminarily that the first Thursday of each month at 2:00 pm ET would work as a possible 

recurring time for these calls.

B2: Meeting 2 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 9/ 18/08

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Thursday, September 18, 2008. A 

set of information was previously emailed to each participant for their review including an 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 29

agenda and documentation on the latest planning assumptions and proposed analysis 

years and emissions tests.

Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Alan Jones, TDOT

Kelly Sheckler, EPA

Dianna Smith, EPA

Jim Renfro, National Park Service

Discussion Items:

1.) Discussion of Proposed Analysis Years and Emissions Tests

Mike Conger reviewed the document that was provided to the IAC participants on the 

proposed analysis years and emissions tests including the rationale for choosing them. 

Mike explained that although we were previously planning to go out to the year 2035 with 

our long range plan it makes more sense to back it off to year 2034 in terms of minimizing 

the number of required analysis years and still meeting the requirement that the plan go 

out at least 20 years in the future. There was agreement from the IAC participants that 

the proposed analysis years and emissions tests would be appropriate given the current 

circumstances.

2.) Discussion of Latest Planning Assumptions and TPO Modeling Updates

Mike reviewed the documentation that was provided to the IAC members regarding the 

development of socioeconomic data and modeling updates in the Knoxville Nonattainment 

study area. One major upgrade to the modeling process in the study area is the 

development of a land use model that can be used to improve the methodology used to 

allocate future growth in the region to the TAZ level. Kelly Sheckler asked if the land use 

model consultant could provide more information to the IAC on the model and how it is 

connected to the travel demand model process. Mike replied that he would request a 

presentation by the consultant for a future meeting. 

Mike noted that another feature of the land use model was the ability to develop various 

future growth scenarios to analyze their impacts on the transportation system. Mike 

stated that it was desired to promote compact development growth that would potentially 

reduce vehicle miles of travel as a mix of land uses are built closer together to allow for 

greater transit use as well as walking and biking. Mike asked if anyone had experience 

with how other areas in the country dealt with scenario planning with respect to 

conformity analysis. Kelly responded that the Atlanta area had done some of this type of 

scenario planning and that discussions among the IAC were required to determine which 

scenarios were realistic with respect to being able to be enforced through actual land use 

regulations and policies that were in place. Mike responded that our area has very little in 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 30

the way of strict regulations such that we should rely on a scenario that fits in with what is 

‘on the books’ with regard to land use policies rather than using the compact growth 

scenario to demonstrate conformity. Kelly agreed and stated that it was still good to have 

the capability to show the other scenarios in order to begin the dialogue of affecting future 

land use decisions.

Mike noted that the validation statistics for the travel demand model’s base year of 2006 

were included in the background documentation. He pointed out that for most facility 

types the model was well within the 20% margin of error for VMT that was recommended 

by the ‘Pechan report’ for TDOT. As you would expect for a model area of this size there 

were some lower order facilities such as local roads and collectors that required higher 

correction factors. Marc stated that he thought these statistics looked good and that 

overall it appeared that more effort had been put into this model update than ever before. 

He asked if there was expected to be much difference in the future year projections than 

what had previously been forecasted. Mike responded that it is still too early to tell for 

sure as we are still refining our future year land use modeling, but that he did not expect 

there to be a great deal of difference.

3.) Discussion of Preliminary MOBILE6 Input Structure & Assumptions

Mike stated that he wanted to briefly discuss some of the major changes proposed for 

MOBILE6 inputs and that most input assumptions would just carry over from the most 

recent conformity determinations. There was discussion regarding the possibility of 

changing the way that average speeds were computed in order to better account for 

directional speeds on a roadway link. Mike asked how best to address the development of 

the 2002 baseline emissions in terms of either needing to develop a new model scenario 

for that year or if the previous emissions estimates that were developed for 2002 in the 

previous conformity determination could be used. Mike noted that it could be an issue of 

an ‘apples to oranges’ comparison if we compare the future year emissions against the 

2002 emissions using different assumptions about the average speed computation 

methodology. Marc Corrigan noted that since the model now has a 2006 base year 

perhaps that could be used to develop 2006 baseline emissions, which would be used a 

test rather than a 2002 baseline year emissions test. Kelly Sheckler responded that she 

would need to check into this further to get an answer on appropriate methodologies.

4.) Future Meeting Discussion Topics

Mike gave an overview of possible topics for future calls. He stated that the next call will 

most likely involve discussion of more specific MOBILE6 inputs. He also mentioned that he 

would like to revisit the definition of what is a “Regionally Significant Project” so that we 

can have something a little better defined than what is just noted in the conformity 

regulations for our area. Marc noted that a lot of time it comes down to an IAC 

determination as to whether a specific project is regionally significant, but that it is good to 

have a set of ground rules to work from. Mike asked for the IAC participants to please 

forward him any examples that others might be aware of for definitions of regional 

significance for other areas of the country. Angie Midgett noted that she was aware of 

some others that she would try to find and pass along. 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 31

Another issue that Mike raised was in regards to the definition of what qualifies as an 

‘Exempt’ project. In particular there was previously agreement that any project that just 

added a center turn lane no matter the length would be considered exempt from 

conformity, however in a recent case it was questioned by EPA as to whether this type of 

project would automatically be exempt. Kelly responded that she would follow-up to 

determine what the final decision was with regard to the exempt status for this type of 

project.

B3: Meeting 3 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 11/ 13/08

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Thursday, November 13, 2008. A 

set of information was previously emailed to each participant for their review including an 

agenda and documentation on the land use model recently developed for the TPO and 

MOBILE6 input assumptions.

Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Katie Habgood, TPO

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Dianna Smith, EPA

Tameka Macon, FHWA TN Division

Steve McDaniel, Knox County Air Quality Management

Mike Brown, Transportation Planning Services, Inc.

Discussion Items:

1.) Presentation on Urban Land Use Allocation Model (ULAM)

Mike Conger introduced the consultant, Mike Brown who was retained by the TPO to 

develop the ULAM model. Mike Conger provided background on the project and an 

overview of the data that was collected. Mike Brown presented information on the steps 

that were taken to develop the model and the basics of how it works to determine the 

allocation of future land uses to the traffic analysis zone level. Mike Brown noted that one 

of the main benefits of ULAM was in its ability to provide a linkage between transportation 

and land use decisions. It was also noted that coordination with local planning agencies, 

the private sector and the TPO Technical Committee were critical components of the 

process of developing the model as well as the leadership and financial support from 

TDOT.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 32

2.) Discussion of MOBILE6 Input Structure and Assumptions

Mike reviewed the documentation that was provided to the IAC members regarding the 

assumptions that are being proposed for the inputs to MOBILE6 that will be used for this 

conformity determination. Mike noted that many of the inputs were simply going to be 

carried forward from previous conformity determinations since many conditions have not 

changed given the fact that SIPs have not yet been officially established for either Ozone 

or PM2.5. Mike noted where slight deviations were expected from previous 

methodologies, which include the ability to model the roadway network in the Roane 

County partial nonattainment area rather than performing an off-model analysis, inclusion 

of all freeway ramps in the model network, updated vehicle classification data for the year 

2006 from the previous year 2002 data and a new methodology for inputting speed into 

MOBILE6. Mike stated that further information would be provided at a future call that 

would also help to clarify these input changes.

Steve McDaniel asked whether the temperature inputs that were being proposed still

needed to be tied back to the 1-hour Ozone Maintenance Plan since it was his 

understanding that the 1-Hour Ozone Standard had been revoked. Dianna Smith 

responded that it was still required to be consistent with the inputs used in the 

Maintenance Plan SIP until either a SIP rule revision was made or a new 8-hour SIP was 

established for the area. 

Dianna Smith asked whether the TPO received resolution on an issue related to the 

requirements to model the 2002 base year that was raised on a previous conference call. 

Mike stated that Kelly Sheckler had responded on that issue and basically what was 

determined was that a new model run had to be made for 2002 rather than being able to 

rely on the emissions generated for 2002 in the most recent conformity determination. 

This would be required in order to match the assumptions being modeled for the future 

years since the modeling assumptions had been changed from the previous conformity 

determination. Mike also noted that Kelly responded to another issue that was raised 

regarding whether it would be allowable to use an emission test of no greater than 

baseline year 2006 rather than 2002 since the model was now calibrated to a 2006 base 

year. Kelly’s responses was that the requirement per the conformity regulations was that 

it must still be a no greater than baseline year 2002 test even though it was likely that the 

2006 test would be more stringent.

The IAC group agreed with the other basic MOBILE6 assumptions being proposed noting 

that no changes have been made to what has already been established regarding fuel RVP 

and so forth.

3.) Discussion of Future Meeting Topics

Mike stated that the TPO was in the midst now of developing the LRTP project listing, 

which would probably occur through December and into January such that he did not think 

that there would be sufficient new information to require another IAC conference call until 

sometime in January 2009.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 33

B4: Meeting 4 - Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 2/ 17/09

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, February 17, 2009. A set 

of information was previously emailed to each participant for their review including an 

agenda, draft roadway improvement project list and other items.

Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Katie Habgood, TPO

Ralph Comer, TDOT

Bob Rock, TDOT

Jerry Yuknavage, TDOT

Alan Jones, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Dianna Smith, EPA

Victor Otero, FHWA TN Division

Britta Stein, FHWA TN Division

Rich DesGrosseillers, Lakeway Area MTPO

Steve McDaniel, Knox County Air Quality Management

Jim Renfro, National Park Service

Discussion Items:

1.) Discussion of Conformity Determination for Lakeway Area MTPO 

“SAFETEA-LU Compliant” Plan

Mike Conger provided background on the proposed action which is to reaffirm that the 

updated Lakeway MTPO Long Range Transportation Plan still meets conformity. The 

Lakeway MTPO updated their LRTP in order to satisfy the requirements that it be 

compliant with the SAFETEA-LU planning regulations. Mike noted that the update did not 

affect any projects listed in the LRTP and therefore no new conformity analysis would be 

required. Mike described the history of conformity determinations that have been made 

on the current Regional LRTP and that they still remain valid after this action. He noted 

that the Lakeway Board was set to adopt the plan update on 2/18/09. Ralph Comer noted 

that Deborah Fleming would not be able to attend that meeting, but that Angie Midgett 

would be there representing TDOT. Mike asked if there were any comments or questions 

from the IAC on this action, he stressed that this was completely separate from the major 

LRTP update that we were conducting currently and hoped there was not confusion about 

this item. Victor Otero and Dianna Smith from FHWA and EPA respectively agreed that no 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 34

further conformity action was required as a result of the Lakeway SAFETEA-LU compliant 

Plan update.

2.) Discussion of Roadway Improvement Project List and Exempt/Non- Exempt Status

Mike noted that we need to discuss projects and their “exempt” status, but he did not 

want to go through all 200+ projects on this call so he identified ones that might be 

questionable on the list in orange for discussion. The first type of questionable project type 

is that of an addition of a continuous center turn lane. Dianna Smith stated that there are 

some different interpretations around such as certain areas that use project length 

thresholds for when a center turn lane project might be considered non-exempt. Dianna 

said that she would check with headquarters to get further clarification and guidance on 

this issue. Marc Corrigan asked how the transportation model treated a center turn lane. 

Mike responded that the TPO model has the capability of coding the presence of a median, 

whether it is a center turn lane or raised median makes no difference but these do add 

some limited amount of capacity to the roadway in the model. Marc stated that until we 

learn otherwise from EPA we should probably go with previous assumption that these are 

exempt unless there are unique situations that warrant treatment as a non-exempt 

project. Dianna noted that Project #636 shows a 5 mile-long center turn lane, which was a 

possible non-exempt candidate. Mike responded that project is so far in the future, we 

don’t really know what the final design may end up with. We assume that there will be 

turn lanes at major intersections, but we aren’t sure whether it will warrant a continuous 

center turn lane. Mike stated that he will try to review the proposed center turn lane 

projects further and provide additional information to the IAC.

Mike raised a question regarding whether auxiliary lane projects should be treated as 

exempt. Marc stated that it could depend on the scope and length of the project and used 

an example in Nashville where a significant length of ramp was extended to connect 

interchanges whereby a vehicle entering one interchange going to the next interchange 

could stay in the same lane. Mike stated that although it is possible for vehicles to use 

auxiliary lanes in that manner that he felt they were still not adding the same amount of 

capacity as a new through lane would so the issue was with how to model them. There 

was consensus that auxiliary lanes would typically be considered non-exempt. 

Marc Corrigan asked about Project #312 – speed limit reduction sign replacement in terms 

of its scope and whether it should be non-exempt. Mike stated that project came from the 

Lakeway project listing and he wasn’t familiar with what was involved. Rich 

DesGrosseillers stated he would find out more information. Note – subsequent to the IAC 

call Rich DesGrosseillers provided the information that this project only involves the 

replacement of substandard actual “Reduced Speed Limit Ahead” signs and does not 

change the actual posted speed limit.

Mike discussed Project #410 which involves converting an at-grade intersection to grade 

separated and whether this falls under the exempt category of an “Interchange 

Reconfiguration” project. There was consensus that this should be considered exempt. 

There was further discussion regarding other interchange reconfiguration projects in the 

list and whether they should all be considered exempt or be looked at on a case-by-case 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 35

basis. Some issues raised by the group dealt with whether the facility involved Interstate 

lanes and other high traffic facilities with significant lane mile addition to the network 

could possibly be non-exempt. Mike stated that the main problem was that most of these 

projects had not completed design so there was no way to know exactly what would go on 

the ground and therefore how to model these projects. Mike stated that he would try to 

provide additional information to the group on these projects in order to assist in making a 

determination on their exempt status. 

Marc asked about Project #510 which involves a widening from 2-lanes to 4-lanes but was 

listed as exempt. Mike responded that was an error and it should be instead listed as non- exempt. Marc also mentioned Project #246 which involves construction of a new 2-lane 

road being listed as exempt and Mike responded that was also an error as we 

automatically assume new roadway construction and widening projects with additional 

through lanes are non-exempt. Marc also brought up Project #654 which is an interchange 

project of three Interstates. Mike responded that project probably warrants a non-exempt 

description as it involves additional laneage although it is still very conceptual at this stage.

Mike asked the group for comments regarding the exempt status of projects where 

capacity was being removed, which are known as “Road Diet” projects. There was 

agreement with Mike’s assumption that these should be treated as non-exempt.

3.) Discussion of Regional Significance Definition

Mike described the definition of a regionally significant roadway in the conformity 

regulations and noted that there might be a need to develop a more specific one to guide 

our IAC process. Mike noted however that the Knoxville TPO intends to model all of the 

projects included in the project listing so this is not a major issue at this point in time. 

Mike confirmed with EPA that changes in scope or horizon year will affect whether or not a 

new regional emissions analysis will be needed based on whether the roadway is 

regionally significant or not. Mike stated that he has some examples from other areas that 

he would share at a future IAC meeting to help guide possible development of a specific 

definition for our area.

4.) Discussion of Project Description & Phasing Issues/Requirements

Mike described an issue with a particular large scale project in the project list which is 

planned to be built in phases. The issue is with a mismatch in the NEPA document termini 

and what will actually be constructed based on an overlap with another bypass project. 

There was discussion regarding different questions and issues surrounding this project and 

it was determined that further clarification was needed to be provided to the group. Different options may be available and it was agreed that the IAC had the authority to 

determine a proper course of action if consensus is achieved. Mike stated that he would 

put together more information for future discussion.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 36

5.) Discussion of Conformity Timeline & Request for Expedited Review

Mike reviewed a tentative timeline for completing the conformity determination. He 

reminded the group that the ultimate deadline we are working towards is June 1st. Since 

we do not plan to have our Executive Board approve the Plan until May 27th we will need 

to request an expedited review from EPA and FHWA. Mike stated that the TPO was 

planning on formally submitting the conformity determination in conjunction with the May 

12 Technical Committee approval of the Long Range Plan with the signed resolutions from 

the Executive Boards from the TPO and the Lakeway TPO to follow. Dianna Smith, EPA 

and Victor Otero, FHWA indicated that an expedited review would be possible assuming 

that drafts were available to review prior to the end and major issues are worked out prior 

to final submittal. Mike stated that it was his intention to keep the group informed of 

progress on a frequent basis from here on out.

B6: Meeting 5 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 3/ 11/09

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Thursday, March 11, 2009. A set 

of information was previously emailed to each participant for their review. Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Bob Rock, TDOT

Jerry Yuknavage, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Darlene Reiter, Bowlby & Associates (TDOT Environmental Consultant)

Dianna Smith, EPA

Kelly Sheckler, EPA

Britta Stein, FHWA TN Division

Jim Renfro, National Park Service

Discussion Items:

1.) Discussion of Center Turn Lane Projects and Exempt Status

Mike Conger noted that a separate listing was provided to the IAC group of all the 

proposed center turn lane projects in the 2034 Long Range Mobility Plan. Dianna Smith, 

EPA, stated that she received further guidance from headquarters regarding the exempt 

status of these types of projects and that the criteria she had heard was that unless the 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 37

project involved only turn lanes at a single intersection of less than a quarter mile in length 

then it would be considered a non-exempt project. Mike clarified that these projects were 

all proposed to be greater than a quarter mile in length and would span multiple 

intersections so they would therefore be non-exempt. Mike asked if any IAC members had 

an objection to still considering projects of the type “reconstruct 2-lane section” as 

exempt. He explained that these projects entail improving existing roadways that are 

deficient in terms of lane width and geometric issues, but that they could also include 

addition of turn lanes at certain intersections where warranted by traffic volume and safety 

concerns. There was agreement that these projects should still be considered exempt 

under 93.127 “Intersection channelization projects”.

2.) Discussion of Interchange Modification Projects and Exempt Status

Mike stated that similar to the previous item a separate listing showing each Interchange 

modification project in the proposed LRMP listing was sent to the IAC group. Mike stated 

that he was still unsure about the intent of the conformity rule’s intent on making 

Interchange Reconfiguration Projects as an exempt project as per 93.127, Table 3. Mike 

stated that several of the proposed interchange projects on the listing had not been 

through design or planning level analysis to determine the exact extent of improvements, 

which makes it difficult to include them in the transportation model. He stated that most 

interchanges have capacity issues dealing with a need for additional turn lanes on the 

ramps or intersecting roadway. Kelly Sheckler stated that significant lengths of turn lane 

improvements would be non-exempt. Dianna stated that EPA could investigate the issue 

further with respect to the projects on the list that was provided, but that it would be 

difficult without further information. Mike replied that limited information was available as 

most projects were just conceptual in nature. Mike asked for further interpretation of the 

exempt status intent for interchange reconfiguration projects - specifically for projects 

where a new loop ramp is added to an existing interchange or where an existing diamond 

interchange were converted into a single-point urban interchange (for a description of a 

single point urban interchange see the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single- point_urban_interchange ). It was determined that this issue should be discussed further 

pending additional clarification from EPA.

3.) Discussion of Regional Significance Examples

Mike summarized briefly the examples of other MPO definitions for Regional Significance. 

He explained that most used the standard conformity rule definition and then expanded on 

the issue of which minor arterial and lower classified roadways should be also considered 

regionally significant. Of the examples provided it appeared that Chattanooga had the 

most detail with regard to how regional significance should be determined on these 

roadway types using different criteria. Mike noted that Chattanooga actually developed a 

specific listing of roadways that are regionally significant, but he felt that might be too 

cumbersome in our area given the large size of our nonattainment area. Mike stated that 

he preferred to develop a screening tool that could be used to help determine regional 

significance based on interrogatories similar to how the PM2.5 hotspot analysis process is 

set up. He proposed to develop a series of questions and apply that to our proposed 

project list for review by the IAC. He stated that this would be developed in the next few 

days so that the IAC could review it prior to its next meeting. One issue that Mike wanted 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 38

to clarify was whether an exempt project could automatically be determined to be not 

regionally significant. Dianna confirmed that was true.

Mike discussed a specific project that the TPO was being requested by FHWA to add to its 

TIP which could be used as a case study with respect to both regional significance and for 

interchange reconfiguration projects. The project is a proposed slip ramp serving a new 

mixed use (commercial and retail) development at Northshore Drive and I-140 in Knox 

County. A schematic diagram was provided to the group showing the extent of the 

project, which affects only the off ramp from I-140 to Northshore Drive. Mike noted that 

this project had previously gone through a PM2.5 hotspot determination and was 

determined to be exempt and non-regionally significant since the ramp connected to a 

local road system that could not be modeled. Kelly asked why FHWA considered the 

project to be regionally important. Mike replied that it was his understanding that it was 

requested by Charlie O’Neill, Planning and Program Management Team Leader at FHWA 

TN Division since he felt that because federal action was required on an Interchange 

Modification Study that it should be reflected in the TPO’s TIP. Mike asked Britta Stein, 

FHWA, if she had further info and she replied that others at her office were involved with 

this and she would have to check with them. Mark McAdoo stated that he was involved 

with the PM2.5 determination and that he supports the proposal that this project be 

considered exempt. He noted that it was determined to not be a project of concern in 

terms of localized air quality impacts so he felt it would therefore not have a regional 

impact either. Dianna stated that this was a special case that would merit further 

investigation. Mike stated that he would send out information related to the previous 

PM2.5 determination and that he would like to resolve this issue at the next IAC 

conference call as to whether this project should be considered non-exempt and regionally 

significant. Mike noted that if the project were determined to be non-exempt and 

regionally significant then a conformity determination would be required, which would 

mean that it would have to be included in the LRMP update.

4.) Discussion of Alcoa Hwy Phasing

Mike stated that discussions were held with TDOT and FHWA in order to try and match the 

segments and design parameters between the LRMP/TIP and NEPA documents. Mike 

explained that a spreadsheet was sent out earlier in the day with the newly proposed 

project descriptions, which should facilitate future project development and environmental 

approvals. He noted that the segment between Pellissippi Parkway and Singleton Station 

Road was left in the project list even though it may not get widened if the Alcoa Bypass is 

built as planned.

5.) Discussion of Non-Roadway Project List

Mike stated that a listing of non-roadway projects being proposed in the LRMP update was 

provided for the group’s information. He noted that these projects were all being 

considered as exempt from conformity analysis, but that if anyone had questions or 

comments to please let him know.

6.) Future Meeting Topics
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 39

Mike stated that the tentative date for the next meeting was Tuesday, March 31st at 2:00 

pm and to let him know if there were any conflicts. He noted that there were items from 

today’s meeting that would be followed up on as well as a plan to present some draft 

emissions analysis results. The major items requiring follow-up are: 

Guidance from EPA on intent of what constitutes an exempt interchange 

reconfiguration project, 

Regional significance criteria and updated roadway project list to be provided by 

the TPO, 

Review of I-140/Northshore Drive interchange ramp exempt status, TPO to provide 

additional information from previous PM2.5 determination.

B7: Meeting 6 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 3/ 31/09

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, March 31, 2009. A set of 

information was previously emailed to each participant for their review. Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Katie Habgood, TPO

Jeff Welch, TPO

Bob Rock, TDOT

Jerry Yuknavage, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Dianna Smith, EPA

Kelly Sheckler, EPA

Tameka Macon, FHWA TN Division

Cecilia Crenshaw, FHWA TN Division

Steve McDaniel, Knox County Air Quality Management

Discussion Items:

1.) Discussion of Interchange Modification Projects and Exempt Status –

follow up from previous call

Mike Conger stated that he requested additional information from the federal partners at 

the previous conference call regarding what types of Interchange Reconfiguration projects 

qualify as “exempt” as per 93.127. Tameka Macon responded with guidance that was 

provided from FHWA HQ that one example would be going from a diamond interchange to 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 40

a cloverleaf interchange. Kelly Sheckler responded that the intent of the interchange 

project should be safety related and not necessarily increasing capacity but improving 

operations and through-put for it to be considered exempt. Mike stated that with that 

being the case then several projects on the proposed improvement list should be regarded 

as exempt since they would most likely involve reconfiguring existing diamond-type 

interchanges to some other type or would involve intersection improvements rather than 

major capacity expansion. Mike noted that projects #215 and #512 would be exceptions 

as these projects are envisioned to include new access to the Interstate where none 

currently exists. 

Kelly asked why there was not more information in the project list for these projects as the 

way they are currently shown it is very difficult to determine what exactly is going to be 

built. Jeff Welch responded that most of these projects have not been fully designed and 

that there are only preliminary alternatives for ones that actually have had some planning 

studies done. He stated that generally the case is that these interchanges have been 

determined to be deficient and in need of operational improvements in general. Kelly 

asked if further information could be provided as to whether the project involved 

improvements to address safety and operations versus major capacity additions. Mike 

responded that he could revise the project list to include additional information for each of 

the interchange projects as to the intent of the improvements. 

2.) Discussion of Pellissippi Parkway/Northshore Drive Interchange Slip 

Ramp – follow up from previous call

Mike stated that the TPO had further discussions prior to today’s call with FHWA and the 

determination was made that this project should be considered Non-exempt and 

Regionally Significant. Tameka explained that in discussing the project with FHWA HQ, 

they felt that based on the scope of the project which involves connecting a major mixed- use development to the Interstate that it should definitely be modeled and considered 

non-exempt. Mike replied that the TPO understands the interpretation being made and 

will include this project in the regional emissions analysis. 

3.) Discussion of Regional Significance Screening Criteria/Updated 

Roadway Project List

Mike described the screening process which was developed to help guide the IAC in 

determining regional significance of specific projects although he noted that this was just a 

guide and that the IAC still has discretion on making final determinations of regional 

significance based on other factors and interpretations. Mike noted that a revised project 

list was sent out with the information related to each of the screening criteria for all of the 

projects. Mike noted that projects that are non-exempt and on a principal arterial or 

higher have been automatically considered Regionally Significant, while projects that have 

been determined to be exempt are considered Non-Regionally Significant, however the IAC 

can still determine otherwise if it is determined that the project would have regional 

impacts for any reason.

Mike discussed the types of areas that were considered as major activity centers in the 

Knoxville Region. Marc Corrigan suggested that other terminals besides just the airport 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 41

should be listed as well, including freight terminals and intermodal transfer centers. Marc 

also asked if tourist destinations included sports complexes and Mike replied that he could 

add that to the list as a separate item as well as the terminals. There was some more 

discussion regarding specific examples of tourist destinations and major retail centers and 

Mike stated that his preference was to not list every specific location, but rather leave it 

more general. Jeff Welch asked if we should develop a specific threshold for amount of 

Average Daily Traffic on a roadway that would determine its regional significance. Mike 

replied that the ADT was more for informational purposes and it would be difficult to come 

up with a specific number to use as a cutoff. Marc stated that it was helpful to know the 

amount of traffic in order to compare it against other roadways. 

Mike asked the group to review the screening criteria and the determinations that have 

been made for each project on the project list and to provide him any additional 

comments by the next conference call.

4.) Discussion of Preliminary Emission Results

Mike briefly described the emission tests results that were sent out earlier that day to the 

IAC group. He noted that it appears that all conformity tests will be passed for both 

Ozone and PM2.5 under the interim emissions tests. He stated that technical 

documentation would be prepared to explain how these results were obtained and sent 

out to the group within a week and discussed at the next conference call.

Steve McDaniel asked if this emissions analysis was done using MOBILE6 or the MOVES 

model. Mike replied that we were still required to use MOBILE6 as MOVES had not yet 

officially been released. Dianna Smith stated that MOVES was still in the draft 

development stages and the final version was not expected until the end of 2010.

5.) Discussion of Conformity Timeline 

Mike reviewed the remaining schedule for completion of the conformity determination. He 

noted that the intent was to get draft reports by next week and allow a month of review 

by the IAC. He stated that his intent was to hold IAC conferences calls every two weeks 

as necessary through the completion of the conformity determination. He noted that a 

short turnaround time was needed from the adoption of the Long Range Plan and 

Conformity Determination on May 27th to the deadline date of June 1st for approvals by 

U.S. DOT. Steve McDaniel asked what it meant if the June 1st deadline weren’t met and 

Mike replied that we would enter a conformity lapse grace period where the existing Long 

Range Plan and TIP could still move forward but could not be amended with non-exempt 

projects. Mike stated that this schedule was based on everything going smoothly and 

there not being any major changes to the drafts that the IAC would be reviewing along the 

way.

The next conference call time was discussed and it was determined that the best date 

would be Monday, April 13th at 2:00 PM ET.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 42

B7: Meeting 7 – Meeting Minutes:

Knoxville Air Quality Interagency Consultation Conference Call 

Meeting Minutes for 4/ 27/09

Background:

The Interagency Conference Call began at 2:00 pm on Monday, April 27, 2009. A set of 

information was previously emailed to each participant for their review. Call Participants:

Mike Conger, TPO 

Katie Habgood, TPO

Jeff Welch, TPO

Dianna Smith, EPA

Angie Midgett, TDOT

Deborah Fleming, TDOT

Mark McAdoo, TDOT

Darlene Reiter, Bowlby Associates/TDOT

Marc Corrigan, TDEC

Steve McDaniel, Knox County Air Quality Management

Rich DesGrosseillers, LAMTPO

Discussion Items:

6.) Discussion of IAC Comments on Draft Conformity Determination Report

Mike Conger opened the floor for any comments to this point on the draft CDR. Mike 

noted that he had received and responded to some comments via email from Marc Corrigan. 

Marc stated that his comments to this point were informal in nature, but that he did have a 

follow-up question regarding one issue, which was to what extent has the change in 

methodology for calculating Local Road VMT growth changed the growth estimates as 

compared to the previous methodology. Mike responded that he could take a look at that 

and send a response to the group. Mike gave additional background on the reasons for a 

change in methodology to the group and he stated that he would also send out a link to 

some guidance that he had discovered regarding this issue in which one recommendation 

was to use VMT growth for collector facilities as a surrogate for local road VMT growth.

There were no further comments on the draft CDR at this point in time. Mike stated that he 

wanted to get all IAC comments by the close of business on Friday, May 8th which is 30 

days from when the original draft was sent to the group.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix B

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 43

7.) Discussion of next steps

Mike stated that the Long Range Plan and Conformity were currently out for public 

comment and that he would send a link to the TPO website where both documents can be 

found. He noted that the upcoming public comment opportunities included the TPO 

Technical Committee meeting on May 12 and the Executive Board meeting on May 27 

where the Plan and Conformity were planned to be adopted. He stated that the adoption 

date was contingent on there not being any significant comments either from the public or 

IAC which would possibly require new documents and additional review time. Marc 

Corrigan asked what would qualify as a significant comment. Katie Habgood responded 

that the TPO Public Participation Plan states that the TPO Director makes the ultimate 

decision on what is a significant comment. Angie Midgett stated that usually the comment 

has to affect something on the financial side or be a project change in order to be 

considered significant. Mike noted that the IAC would be consulted as well in order to help 

determine the significance level of any comments.

Mike stated that we could have another conference call in two weeks to discuss the final 

IAC comments. A tentative date and time of Monday, May 11 at 10:00 EDT was selected 

for the next conference call.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 44

Appendix C

Emissions Analysis Summary for each County

C1: Ozone Analysis

C1.1. Baseline Year 2002:

Anderson County 

2002

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 1.392 9.956 585,938 0.90 6.43

Rural Principal Arterial 1.769 2.116 128,009 0.25 0.30

Rural Minor Arterial 1.731 2.216 82,336 0.16 0.20

Rural Collector 1.797 1.974 415,364 0.82 0.90

Rural Local 1.797 1.974 116,956 0.23 0.25

Rural Ramps 1.850 4.611 7,718 0.02 0.04

Urban Interstate 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 1.820 1.968 621,164 1.25 1.35

Urban Minor Arterial 1.883 1.938 248,731 0.52 0.53

Urban Collector 2.038 1.824 67,900 0.15 0.14

Urban Local 3.196 1.827 131,453 0.46 0.26

Urban Ramps 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 2,405,569 4.75 10.41

Blount County 

2002

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 1.718 2.348 351,198 0.67 0.91

Rural Minor Arterial 1.776 2.151 82,958 0.16 0.20

Rural Collector 1.824 1.938 384,786 0.77 0.82

Rural Local 1.824 1.938 311,300 0.63 0.67

Rural Ramps 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 1.685 2.268 72,499 0.13 0.18

Urban Principal Arterial 1.772 2.162 867,920 1.70 2.07

Urban Minor Arterial 1.866 2.056 295,955 0.61 0.67

Urban Collector 1.963 1.930 264,581 0.57 0.56

Urban Local 3.189 1.922 281,439 0.99 0.60

Urban Ramps 2.226 2.012 14,744 0.04 0.03

TOTAL 2,927,381 6.26 6.71
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 45

Jefferson County 

2002 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 1.372 10.528 1,196,190 1.81 13.88

Rural Principal Arterial 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 1.729 2.557 457,546 0.87 1.29

Rural Collector 1.796 2.009 318,803 0.63 0.71

Rural Local 1.796 2.009 116,648 0.23 0.26

Rural Ramps 1.824 4.796 23,168 0.05 0.12

Urban Interstate 1.372 10.528 42,651 0.06 0.49

Urban Principal Arterial 1.817 2.138 109,802 0.22 0.26

Urban Minor Arterial 1.880 2.095 19,613 0.04 0.05

Urban Collector 1.897 1.977 12,809 0.03 0.03

Urban Local 3.186 1.944 28,856 0.10 0.06

Urban Ramps 1.824 4.796 3,112 0.01 0.02

TOTAL 2,329,197 4.05 17.16

Loudon County 

2002 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 1.41 9.449 1,142,305 1.78 11.90

Rural Principal Arterial 1.693 2.880 166,833 0.31 0.53

Rural Minor Arterial 1.720 2.780 180,844 0.34 0.55

Rural Collector 1.813 1.977 322,713 0.64 0.70

Rural Local 1.813 1.977 107,297 0.21 0.23

Rural Ramps 1.873 4.447 26,892 0.06 0.13

Urban Interstate 1.431 8.915 19,783 0.03 0.19

Urban Principal Arterial 1.857 2.025 138,182 0.28 0.31

Urban Minor Arterial 1.903 1.955 25,580 0.05 0.06

Urban Collector 1.868 1.950 17,458 0.04 0.04

Urban Local 3.188 1.954 23,281 0.08 0.05

Urban Ramps 1.900 4.263 954 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 2,172,120 3.83 14.70
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 46

Sevier County 

2002 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 1.834 1.940 479,029 0.97 1.02

Rural Minor Arterial 1.863 1.931 475,683 0.98 1.01

Rural Collector 1.825 2.002 502,438 1.01 1.11

Rural Local 1.825 2.002 509,290 1.02 1.12

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 1.427 8.979 304,608 0.48 3.01

Urban Principal Arterial 1.894 1.903 573,268 1.20 1.20

Urban Minor Arterial 1.876 1.908 55,063 0.11 0.12

Urban Collector 1.948 1.987 44,390 0.10 0.10

Urban Local 3.184 2.034 83,741 0.29 0.19

Urban Ramps 1.895 4.292 7,490 0.02 0.04

TOTAL 3,034,999 6.18 8.92

C1.2. Analysis Year 2009:

Knox County 

2009

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.816 4.297 734,535 0.66 3.48

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.952 1.500 215,002 0.23 0.36

Rural Collector 1.045 1.140 297,612 0.34 0.37

Rural Local 1.045 1.140 282,556 0.33 0.36

Rural Ramps 1.039 2.383 4,906 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.885 2.828 4,999,671 4.88 15.59

Urban Principal Arterial 1.033 1.217 2,850,838 3.25 3.82

Urban Minor Arterial 1.083 1.175 1,853,730 2.21 2.40

Urban Collector 1.105 1.139 926,797 1.13 1.16

Urban Local 1.746 1.170 3,091,579 5.95 3.99

Urban Ramps 1.113 1.830 251,064 0.31 0.51

TOTAL 15,508,290 19.28 32.05
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 47

C1.3. Analysis Year 2014:

Anderson County 

2014 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.546 2.741 640,123 0.39 1.93

Rural Principal Arterial 0.701 0.785 145,936 0.11 0.13

Rural Minor Arterial 0.689 0.814 99,665 0.08 0.09

Rural Collector 0.712 0.746 472,928 0.37 0.39

Rural Local 0.712 0.746 123,560 0.10 0.10

Rural Ramps 0.676 1.506 8,727 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.720 0.738 717,337 0.57 0.58

Urban Minor Arterial 0.743 0.727 265,555 0.22 0.21

Urban Collector 0.792 0.704 80,335 0.07 0.06

Urban Local 1.184 0.724 151,594 0.20 0.12

Urban Ramps 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 2,705,760 2.10 3.63

Blount County

 2014

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.686 0.823 375,164 0.28 0.34

Rural Minor Arterial 0.706 0.764 131,425 0.10 0.11

Rural Collector 0.723 0.721 199,844 0.16 0.16

Rural Local 0.723 0.721 286,326 0.23 0.23

Rural Ramps 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.674 0.850 169,013 0.13 0.16

Urban Principal Arterial 0.707 0.784 1,114,064 0.87 0.96

Urban Minor Arterial 0.738 0.755 552,724 0.45 0.46

Urban Collector 0.763 0.736 450,244 0.38 0.37

Urban Local 1.178 0.754 641,604 0.83 0.53

Urban Ramps 0.82 0.771 17,176 0.02 0.01

TOTAL 3,937,585 3.44 3.33
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 48

Knox County

 2014 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.574 2.302 825,027 0.52 2.09

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.671 0.917 237,221 0.18 0.24

Rural Collector 0.726 0.731 317,951 0.25 0.26

Rural Local 0.726 0.731 311,112 0.25 0.25

Rural Ramps 0.707 1.340 5,089 0.00 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.620 1.618 5,378,823 3.68 9.59

Urban Principal Arterial 0.720 0.776 3,164,677 2.51 2.71

Urban Minor Arterial 0.748 0.752 1,979,824 1.63 1.64

Urban Collector 0.758 0.737 1,082,769 0.90 0.88

Urban Local 1.179 0.756 3,270,727 4.25 2.73

Urban Ramps 0.755 1.100 266,336 0.22 0.32

TOTAL 16,839,557 14.40 20.72

Jefferson County 

2014

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.542 2.806 1,436,782 0.86 4.44

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.693 0.834 427,646 0.33 0.39

Rural Collector 0.711 0.753 371,715 0.29 0.31

Rural Local 0.711 0.753 151,615 0.12 0.13

Rural Ramps 0.672 1.531 8,715 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.548 2.704 50,169 0.03 0.15

Urban Principal Arterial 0.713 0.798 187,741 0.15 0.17

Urban Minor Arterial 0.737 0.779 72,593 0.06 0.06

Urban Collector 0.744 0.742 46,235 0.04 0.04

Urban Local 1.179 0.752 50,124 0.07 0.04

Urban Ramps 0.679 1.492 3,622 0.00 0.01

TOTAL 2,806,956 1.94 5.75
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 49

Loudon County 

2014

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.554 2.600 1,298,162 0.79 3.72

Rural Principal Arterial 0.684 0.862 292,546 0.22 0.28

Rural Minor Arterial 0.696 0.830 185,776 0.14 0.17

Rural Collector 0.720 0.739 323,779 0.26 0.26

Rural Local 0.720 0.739 102,989 0.08 0.08

Rural Ramps 0.685 1.455 13,671 0.01 0.02

Urban Interstate 0.561 2.504 95,486 0.06 0.26

Urban Principal Arterial 0.707 0.939 227,836 0.18 0.24

Urban Minor Arterial 0.719 0.902 46,279 0.04 0.05

Urban Collector 0.732 0.738 53,681 0.04 0.04

Urban Local 1.177 0.760 63,309 0.08 0.05

Urban Ramps 0.694 1.415 4,566 0.00 0.01

TOTAL 2,708,078 1.91 5.19

Sevier County

 2014

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Factored VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.723 0.750 265,800 0.21 0.22

Rural Minor Arterial 0.733 0.746 564,600 0.46 0.46

Rural Collector 0.727 0.719 478,811 0.38 0.38

Rural Local 0.727 0.719 626,488 0.50 0.50

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.562 2.488 367,192 0.23 1.01

Urban Principal Arterial 0.741 0.741 914,143 0.75 0.75

Urban Minor Arterial 0.733 0.742 203,785 0.16 0.17

Urban Collector 0.768 0.754 203,258 0.17 0.17

Urban Local 1.172 0.787 315,264 0.41 0.27

Urban Ramps 0.694 1.409 8,901 0.01 0.01

TOTAL 3,948,242 3.28 3.94
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 50

C1.4. Analysis Year 2024:

Anderson County 

2024 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.317 0.952 751,646 0.26 0.79

Rural Principal Arterial 0.398 0.423 157,986 0.07 0.07

Rural Minor Arterial 0.393 0.433 119,223 0.05 0.06

Rural Collector 0.403 0.415 556,197 0.25 0.25

Rural Local 0.403 0.415 144,140 0.06 0.07

Rural Ramps 0.401 0.607 10,224 0.00 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.410 0.410 814,598 0.37 0.37

Urban Minor Arterial 0.421 0.410 306,725 0.14 0.14

Urban Collector 0.422 0.406 91,649 0.04 0.04

Urban Local 0.733 0.405 172,944 0.14 0.08

Urban Ramps 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,125,332 1.39 1.87

Blount County 

2024

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.390 0.438 498,248 0.21 0.24

Rural Minor Arterial 0.404 0.414 167,799 0.07 0.08

Rural Collector 0.404 0.408 237,421 0.11 0.11

Rural Local 0.404 0.408 366,187 0.16 0.16

Rural Ramps 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.384 0.454 618,920 0.26 0.31

Urban Principal Arterial 0.402 0.416 1,118,882 0.50 0.51

Urban Minor Arterial 0.402 0.416 651,843 0.29 0.30

Urban Collector 0.436 0.405 509,384 0.24 0.23

Urban Local 0.730 0.412 815,157 0.66 0.37

Urban Ramps 0.471 0.444 27,210 0.01 0.01

TOTAL 5,011,051 2.52 2.32
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 51

Jefferson County 

2024 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.317 0.951 1,753,356 0.61 1.84

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.394 0.435 510,278 0.22 0.24

Rural Collector 0.405 0.414 446,596 0.20 0.20

Rural Local 0.405 0.414 183,760 0.08 0.08

Rural Ramps 0.402 0.607 10,578 0.00 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.320 0.927 61,560 0.02 0.06

Urban Principal Arterial 0.407 0.422 217,139 0.10 0.10

Urban Minor Arterial 0.423 0.414 83,982 0.04 0.04

Urban Collector 0.424 0.407 52,354 0.02 0.02

Urban Local 0.730 0.412 58,312 0.05 0.03

Urban Ramps 0.405 0.599 4,197 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,382,113 1.35 2.63

Knox County 

2024

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC (tons/day)NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.332 0.829 998,530 0.37 0.91

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.382 0.461 274,135 0.12 0.14

Rural Collector 0.413 0.404 390,482 0.18 0.17

Rural Local 0.413 0.404 361,683 0.16 0.16

Rural Ramps 0.417 0.567 5,505 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.354 0.653 6,025,892 2.35 4.34

Urban Principal Arterial 0.411 0.419 3,650,188 1.65 1.69

Urban Minor Arterial 0.426 0.411 2,358,083 1.11 1.07

Urban Collector 0.436 0.405 1,224,115 0.59 0.55

Urban Local 0.730 0.413 3,671,343 2.95 1.67

Urban Ramps 0.438 0.522 299,537 0.14 0.17

TOTAL 19,259,493 9.63 10.87
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 52

Loudon County

 2024

 Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT (miles/day)VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.322 0.904 1,344,983 0.48 1.34

Rural Principal Arterial 0.375 0.511 356,819 0.15 0.20

Rural Minor Arterial 0.381 0.493 220,029 0.09 0.12

Rural Collector 0.411 0.407 381,120 0.17 0.17

Rural Local 0.411 0.407 112,965 0.05 0.05

Rural Ramps 0.407 0.593 15,750 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.325 0.887 98,180 0.04 0.10

Urban Principal Arterial 0.407 0.449 271,165 0.12 0.13

Urban Minor Arterial 0.416 0.434 58,670 0.03 0.03

Urban Collector 0.419 0.403 65,047 0.03 0.03

Urban Local 0.729 0.413 73,749 0.06 0.03

Urban Ramps 0.410 0.586 5,342 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,003,819 1.22 2.22

Sevier County

2024 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.414 0.409 309,261 0.14 0.14

Rural Minor Arterial 0.417 0.409 683,058 0.31 0.31

Rural Collector 0.415 0.402 591,354 0.27 0.26

Rural Local 0.415 0.402 757,824 0.35 0.34

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.325 0.884 450,141 0.16 0.44

Urban Principal Arterial 0.425 0.405 1,086,427 0.51 0.49

Urban Minor Arterial 0.419 0.405 242,052 0.11 0.11

Urban Collector 0.415 0.409 243,114 0.11 0.11

Urban Local 0.726 0.419 377,536 0.30 0.17

Urban Ramps 0.410 0.584 10,798 0.00 0.01

TOTAL 4,751,564 2.27 2.37
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 53

C1.5. Analysis Year 2034:

Anderson County 

2034

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.293 0.572 1,191,915 0.38 0.75

Rural Principal Arterial 0.379 0.357 173,180 0.07 0.07

Rural Minor Arterial 0.375 0.363 147,183 0.06 0.06

Rural Collector 0.384 0.354 599,221 0.25 0.23

Rural Local 0.384 0.354 191,665 0.08 0.07

Rural Ramps 0.373 0.409 15,853 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.391 0.349 869,941 0.37 0.33

Urban Minor Arterial 0.402 0.348 332,624 0.15 0.13

Urban Collector 0.403 0.347 98,289 0.04 0.04

Urban Local 0.706 0.346 185,475 0.14 0.07

Urban Ramps 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,805,346 1.57 1.76

Blount County

 2034

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.371 0.367 611,674 0.25 0.25

Rural Minor Arterial 0.383 0.351 209,597 0.09 0.08

Rural Collector 0.392 0.344 287,551 0.12 0.11

Rural Local 0.392 0.344 449,419 0.19 0.17

Rural Ramps 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.367 0.375 744,819 0.30 0.31

Urban Principal Arterial 0.383 0.354 1,275,604 0.54 0.50

Urban Minor Arterial 0.399 0.347 886,561 0.39 0.34

Urban Collector 0.419 0.343 503,251 0.23 0.19

Urban Local 0.703 0.347 959,265 0.74 0.37

Urban Ramps 0.449 0.384 33,320 0.02 0.01

TOTAL 5,961,062 2.88 2.32
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 54

Jefferson County

2034 

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.295 0.568 2,050,968 0.67 1.28

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.375 0.360 597,824 0.25 0.24

Rural Collector 0.385 0.351 540,096 0.23 0.21

Rural Local 0.385 0.351 216,211 0.09 0.08

Rural Ramps 0.375 0.409 12,400 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.298 0.561 72,879 0.02 0.05

Urban Principal Arterial 0.388 0.351 247,664 0.11 0.10

Urban Minor Arterial 0.405 0.347 95,549 0.04 0.04

Urban Collector 0.405 0.345 58,913 0.03 0.02

Urban Local 0.703 0.347 66,733 0.05 0.03

Urban Ramps 0.378 0.407 4,766 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,964,003 1.49 2.05

Knox County 

2034

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.31 0.518 1,182,691 0.40 0.68

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.363 0.373 316,097 0.13 0.13

Rural Collector 0.394 0.344 479,175 0.21 0.18

Rural Local 0.394 0.344 420,370 0.18 0.16

Rural Ramps 0.391 0.402 6,888 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.331 0.450 6,929,228 2.53 3.44

Urban Principal Arterial 0.392 0.353 4,141,078 1.79 1.61

Urban Minor Arterial 0.406 0.348 2,643,270 1.18 1.01

Urban Collector 0.406 0.347 1,359,773 0.61 0.52

Urban Local 0.703 0.348 4,126,820 3.20 1.58

Urban Ramps 0.410 0.397 332,663 0.15 0.15

TOTAL 21,938,052 10.38 9.46
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 55

Loudon County

2034

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0.3 0.538 1,802,589 0.60 1.07

Rural Principal Arterial 0.356 0.387 424,183 0.17 0.18

Rural Minor Arterial 0.362 0.378 260,470 0.10 0.11

Rural Collector 0.393 0.345 455,024 0.20 0.17

Rural Local 0.393 0.345 144,200 0.06 0.05

Rural Ramps 0.379 0.406 17,558 0.01 0.01

Urban Interstate 0.302 0.538 128,627 0.04 0.08

Urban Principal Arterial 0.388 0.356 351,214 0.15 0.14

Urban Minor Arterial 0.397 0.345 68,996 0.03 0.03

Urban Collector 0.398 0.341 77,261 0.03 0.03

Urban Local 0.702 0.348 93,597 0.07 0.04

Urban Ramps 0.383 0.405 6,438 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 3,830,158 1.47 1.90

Sevier County 

2034

Facility Type

VOC 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

VMT 

(miles/day)

VOC 

(tons/day)

NOx 

(tons/day)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.394 0.348 362,361 0.16 0.14

Rural Minor Arterial 0.398 0.348 813,594 0.36 0.31

Rural Collector 0.396 0.343 727,752 0.32 0.28

Rural Local 0.396 0.343 910,967 0.40 0.34

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.302 0.537 525,591 0.17 0.31

Urban Principal Arterial 0.407 0.343 1,288,223 0.58 0.49

Urban Minor Arterial 0.401 0.343 294,893 0.13 0.11

Urban Collector 0.431 0.343 286,383 0.14 0.11

Urban Local 0.699 0.348 447,304 0.34 0.17

Urban Ramps 0.383 0.405 13,052 0.01 0.01

TOTAL 5,670,122 2.60 2.27
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 56

C1.6. Cocke County Ozone Emissions Analysis:

2002 

Summer 

VMT

2014 

Growth 

Factor

2014 

Summer 

VMT

2024 

Growth 

Factor

2024 

Summer 

VMT

2034 

Growth 

Factor

2034 

Summer 

VMT

Foothills Parkway 5662 1.43 8096.66 1.79 10134.98 2.25 12739.5

Cosby Campground Road 471 1.37 645.27 2.09 984.39 3.17 1493.07

State Route 32 11344 1.07 12138.08 1.23 13953.12 1.41 15995.04

Total 17,477.00 20,880.01 25,072.49 30,227.61

VOC Emissions Rate 1.841 0.724 0.483 0.394

TOTAL VOC Emissions 

(tpd) 0.0355 0.0167 0.0133 0.0131

NOx Emissions Rate 1.984 0.746 0.485 0.351

TOTAL NOx Emissions 

(tpd) 0.0382 0.0172 0.0134 0.0117

Summer is defined as average of June, July and August

A summertime Recreational Seasonal Adjustment factor of 0.72 was applied to the State Route 32 ADT
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 57

C2: PM2.5 Analysis

C2.1. 2002 Baseline Year:

Anderson County 

2002

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.1409 10.0790 198,896,786 30.89 2209.79

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0346 2.2620 44,854,485 1.71 111.84

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0346 2.3690 28,850,695 1.10 75.34

Rural Collector 0.0313 2.1190 145,543,385 5.02 339.96

Rural Local 0.0313 2.1190 40,981,470 1.41 95.72

Rural Ramps 0.1409 4.7360 2,619,715 0.41 13.68

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0323 2.1080 224,457,480 7.99 521.57

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0324 2.0720 89,879,060 3.21 205.28

Urban Collector 0.0307 1.9420 24,535,665 0.83 52.52

Urban Local 0.0316 1.8850 47,500,370 1.65 98.70

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 848,119,110 54.23 3724.41

Blount County

 2002 

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT (miles/year)PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0361 2.5030 123059750 4.90 339.53

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0361 2.2950 29068600 1.16 73.54

Rural Collector 0.0328 2.0770 134829175 4.87 308.69

Rural Local 0.0328 2.0770 109079520 3.94 249.74

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.0304 2.4350 26197619.87 0.88 70.32

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0359 2.3070 313622965 12.41 797.56

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0360 2.1900 106943175 4.24 258.17

Urban Collector 0.0336 2.0550 95606275 3.54 216.57

Urban Local 0.0347 1.9800 101698125 3.89 221.97

Urban Ramps 0.0304 2.1830 5327795.135 0.18 12.82

TOTAL 1,045,433,000 40.01 2548.91
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 58

Knox County

 2002

Facility Type

PM2.5

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0983 7.0960 426,445,151 46.21 3335.67

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0377 2.5620 176,832,280 7.35 499.40

Rural Collector 0.0331 2.0850 295,915,355 10.80 680.11

Rural Local 0.0331 2.0850 163,479,485 5.96 375.73

Rural Ramps 0.0983 3.7480 3,439,074 0.37 14.21

Urban Interstate 0.0763 5.4110 1,414,955,106 119.01 8439.69

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0351 2.2570 925,094,325 35.79 2301.57

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0352 2.1730 471,720,160 18.30 1129.93

Urban Collector 0.0338 2.0670 245,547,910 9.15 559.48

Urban Local 0.0350 1.9940 948,074,360 36.58 2083.89

Urban Ramps 0.0763 3.2410 116,381,589 9.79 415.79

TOTAL 5,187,884,795 299.31 19835.46

Loudon County

2002

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.1340 9.5750 400263682.4 59.12 4224.66

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0507 3.0260 58458400 3.27 194.99

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0507 2.9210 63367650 3.54 204.04

Rural Collector 0.0328 2.1180 113078460 4.09 264.01

Rural Local 0.0328 2.1180 37596825 1.36 87.78

Rural Ramps 0.1341 4.5750 9422788.839 1.39 47.52

Urban Interstate 0.1262 9.0440 7148716.446 0.99 71.27

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0354 2.1590 49932000 1.95 118.83

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0354 2.0820 9243260 0.36 21.21

Urban Collector 0.0346 2.0820 6308295 0.24 14.48

Urban Local 0.0359 2.0130 8412520 0.33 18.67

Urban Ramps 0.1262 4.3950 344697.0194 0.05 1.67

TOTAL 763,577,295 76.70 5269.12
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 59

Roane County

2002

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.1401 9.9670 18820860 2.91 206.78

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Collector 0.0319 1.9500 3457280 0.12 7.43

Rural Local 0.0319 1.9500 1632280 0.06 3.51

Rural Ramps 0.1401 4.7120 662840 0.10 3.44

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0336 2.0560 4298605 0.16 9.74

Urban Collector 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Local 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 28,871,865 3.35 230.91

C2.2. Analysis Year 2014:

Anderson County

2014

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0399 2.7860 217,289,643 9.56 667.31

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0152 0.8440 51,135,829 0.86 47.57

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0152 0.8750 34,922,773 0.59 33.68

Rural Collector 0.0146 0.8030 165,714,085 2.67 146.68

Rural Local 0.0146 0.8030 43,295,517 0.70 38.32

Rural Ramps 0.0399 1.5520 2,962,529 0.13 5.07

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0147 0.7940 259,209,833 4.20 226.87

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0147 0.7810 95,958,214 1.55 82.61

Urban Collector 0.0145 0.7520 29,028,877 0.46 24.06

Urban Local 0.0145 0.7490 54,778,464 0.88 45.23

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 954,295,763 21.59 1317.41
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 60

Blount County

2014

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0152 0.8850 131457540.8 2.20 128.24

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0152 0.8210 46051395.98 0.77 41.68

Rural Collector 0.0146 0.7760 70025240.74 1.13 59.90

Rural Local 0.0146 0.7760 100328696.6 1.61 85.82

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.0147 0.9160 61072966.68 0.99 61.67

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0155 0.8410 402567132.7 6.88 373.20

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0155 0.8080 199726775.1 3.41 177.89

Urban Collector 0.0153 0.7860 162695748.6 2.74 140.96

Urban Local 0.0153 0.7800 231843756.1 3.91 199.34

Urban Ramps 0.0147 0.8370 6206470.442 0.10 5.73

TOTAL 1,411,975,724 23.75 1274.43

Knox County

2014

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0343 2.3510 280,055,485 10.59 725.78

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0170 0.9780 83,122,363 1.56 89.61

Rural Collector 0.0149 0.7850 111,410,116 1.83 96.41

Rural Local 0.0149 0.7850 109,013,590 1.79 94.33

Rural Ramps 0.0343 1.3900 1,727,462 0.07 2.65

Urban Interstate 0.0260 1.6740 1,943,637,616 55.71 3586.55

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0154 0.8320 1,143,555,957 19.41 1048.79

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0154 0.8040 715,409,325 12.14 634.04

Urban Collector 0.0153 0.7880 391,258,603 6.60 339.86

Urban Local 0.0153 0.7820 1,181,877,334 19.93 1018.79

Urban Ramps 0.0260 1.1570 96,240,589 2.76 122.74

TOTAL 6,057,308,439 132.38 7759.55
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 61

Loudon County

2014

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0382 2.6460 454876089.1 19.15 1326.75

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0163 0.9220 102508000.6 1.84 104.18

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0163 0.8870 65095802.77 1.17 63.65

Rural Collector 0.0149 0.7940 113452336.6 1.86 99.30

Rural Local 0.1490 0.7940 36087346.61 5.93 31.59

Rural Ramps 0.0382 1.5020 4790150.525 0.20 7.93

Urban Interstate 0.0368 2.5510 34503758 1.40 97.02

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0204 0.9890 82328388.7 1.85 89.75

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0204 0.9500 16722907.94 0.38 17.51

Urban Collector 0.0154 0.7910 19397651.16 0.33 16.91

Urban Local 0.0155 0.7860 22876640.85 0.39 19.82

Urban Ramps 0.0368 1.4630 1649762.82 0.07 2.66

TOTAL 954,288,836 34.57 1877.08

Roane County

2014

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0396 2.7490 24510921.65 1.07 74.27

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Collector 0.0149 0.7520 3739790 0.06 3.10

Rural Local 0.0149 0.7520 2227595 0.04 1.85

Rural Ramps 0.0396 1.5400 795083.15 0.03 1.35

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0147 0.7700 5218558.3 0.08 4.43

Urban Collector 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Local 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 36,491,948 1.29 85.00
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 62

C2.3. Analysis Year 2024:

Anderson County

2024

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0237 0.9770 255,146,139 6.67 274.78

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0127 0.4570 55,358,374 0.77 27.89

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0127 0.4690 41,775,670 0.58 21.60

Rural Collector 0.0124 0.4490 194,891,542 2.66 96.46

Rural Local 0.0124 0.4490 50,506,547 0.69 25.00

Rural Ramps 0.0237 0.6330 3,470,642 0.09 2.42

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0125 0.4420 294,354,849 4.06 143.42

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0125 0.4410 110,835,128 1.53 53.88

Urban Collector 0.0124 0.4370 33,117,309 0.45 15.95

Urban Local 0.0124 0.4150 62,493,472 0.85 28.59

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 1,101,949,672 18.36 689.98

Blount County

2024

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0127 0.4740 174586001.4 2.44 91.22

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0127 0.4460 58796786.53 0.82 28.91

Rural Collector 0.0124 0.4410 83192267.88 1.14 40.44

Rural Local 0.0124 0.4410 128311827.7 1.75 62.38

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.0126 0.4910 223646586.8 3.11 121.05

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0127 0.4480 404308159.6 5.66 199.66

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0127 0.4480 235543632.1 3.30 116.32

Urban Collector 0.0126 0.4330 184065765.5 2.56 87.86

Urban Local 0.0127 0.4210 294557109 4.12 136.70

Urban Ramps 0.0126 0.4830 9832364.082 0.14 5.23

TOTAL 1,796,840,500 25.04 889.76
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 63

Knox County

2024

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0210 0.8570 338,950,928 7.85 320.20

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0133 0.4960 96,057,014 1.41 52.52

Rural Collector 0.0125 0.4350 136,824,947 1.89 65.61

Rural Local 0.0125 0.4350 126,733,784 1.75 60.77

Rural Ramps 0.0210 0.5960 1,868,596 0.04 1.23

Urban Interstate 0.0179 0.6840 2,177,456,087 42.96 1641.77

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0127 0.4510 1,318,995,321 18.47 655.73

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0127 0.4410 852,093,357 11.93 414.22

Urban Collector 0.0127 0.4330 442,333,902 6.19 211.13

Urban Local 0.0127 0.4220 1,326,639,812 18.57 617.12

Urban Ramps 0.0179 0.5550 108,237,737 2.14 66.22

TOTAL 6,926,191,485 113.19 4106.52

Loudon County

2024

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0227 0.9300 471282166 11.79 483.14

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0154 0.5420 125029258.7 2.12 74.70

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0154 0.5240 77098001.11 1.31 44.53

Rural Collector 0.0125 0.4390 133544543.8 1.84 64.62

Rural Local 0.0125 0.4390 39582954.45 0.55 19.15

Rural Ramps 0.0227 0.6190 5518627.189 0.14 3.77

Urban Interstate 0.0222 0.9140 35477396.33 0.87 35.74

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0146 0.4770 97985437.28 1.58 51.52

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0146 0.4610 21200555.86 0.34 10.77

Urban Collector 0.0127 0.4320 23504868.12 0.33 11.19

Urban Local 0.1270 0.4230 26649294.93 3.73 12.43

Urban Ramps 0.0222 0.6130 1930158.496 0.05 1.30

TOTAL 1,058,803,262 24.64 812.88
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 64

Roane County

2024

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0226 0.9270 28615492.65 0.71 29.24

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Collector 0.0125 0.4130 3864335.3 0.05 1.76

Rural Local 0.0125 0.4130 2347680 0.03 1.07

Rural Ramps 0.0226 0.6180 835382.8 0.02 0.57

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0124 0.4240 5564866.65 0.08 2.60

Urban Collector 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Local 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 41,227,757 0.90 35.24

C2.4. Analysis Year 2034:

Anderson County

2034

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0222 0.5930 404,595,570 9.90 264.47

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0123 0.3860 60,682,150 0.82 25.82

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0123 0.3930 51,573,061 0.70 22.34

Rural Collector 0.0121 0.3820 209,967,117 2.80 88.41

Rural Local 0.0121 0.3820 67,159,482 0.90 28.28

Rural Ramps 0.0220 0.4310 5,381,359 0.13 2.56

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0122 0.3760 314,353,148 4.23 130.29

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0122 0.3740 120,193,743 1.62 49.55

Urban Collector 0.0121 0.3730 35,516,731 0.47 14.60

Urban Local 0.0121 0.3520 67,021,263 0.89 26.01

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 1,336,443,623 22.46 652.34
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 65

Blount County

2034

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0123 0.3980 214330564.5 2.91 94.03

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0123 0.3790 73442786.24 1.00 30.68

Rural Collector 0.0121 0.3710 100757922.5 1.34 41.21

Rural Local 0.0121 0.3710 157476582.1 2.10 64.40

Rural Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Interstate 0.0122 0.4070 269140190.5 3.62 120.75

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0124 0.3830 460939390 6.30 194.60

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0124 0.3730 320358925.2 4.38 131.72

Urban Collector 0.0123 0.3670 181849873.4 2.47 73.57

Urban Local 0.0123 0.3530 346630454.6 4.70 134.88

Urban Ramps 0.0122 0.4180 12040211.63 0.16 5.55

TOTAL 2,136,966,901 28.97 891.39

Knox County 

2034

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0195 0.5420 401,464,448 8.63 239.86

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0128 0.4040 110,760,257 1.56 49.33

Rural Collector 0.0122 0.3700 167,902,830 2.26 68.48

Rural Local 0.0122 0.3700 147,297,553 1.98 60.08

Rural Ramps 0.0195 0.4260 2,338,197 0.05 1.10

Urban Interstate 0.0172 0.4760 2,503,876,467 47.47 1313.79

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0124 0.3800 1,496,378,366 20.45 626.80

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0124 0.3730 955,145,537 13.06 392.72

Urban Collector 0.0123 0.3720 491,353,966 6.66 201.49

Urban Local 0.0123 0.3530 1,491,226,481 20.22 580.26

Urban Ramps 0.0172 0.4240 120,207,869 2.28 56.18

TOTAL 7,887,951,970 124.62 3590.09
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix C

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 66

Loudon County

2034

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0211 0.5600 631627329 14.69 389.90

Rural Principal Arterial 0.0144 0.4140 148633895.8 2.36 67.83

Rural Minor Arterial 0.0144 0.4040 91268762.18 1.45 40.65

Rural Collector 0.0122 0.3720 159440493.3 2.14 65.38

Rural Local 0.0122 0.3720 50527712.96 0.68 20.72

Rural Ramps 0.0211 0.4280 6152259.275 0.14 2.90

Urban Interstate 0.0207 0.5600 46479300.06 1.06 28.69

Urban Principal Arterial 0.0138 0.3800 126911186.4 1.93 53.16

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0138 0.3680 24931827.68 0.38 10.11

Urban Collector 0.0123 0.3670 27918158.53 0.38 11.29

Urban Local 0.0123 0.3530 33821203.59 0.46 13.16

Urban Ramps 0.0207 0.4280 2326369.777 0.05 1.10

TOTAL 1,350,038,499 25.73 704.90

Roane County

2034

Facility Type

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

NOx Emission 

Factor 

(grams/mile)

Annual VMT 

(miles/year)

PM2.5 

(tons/year)

NOx 

(tons/year)

Rural Interstate 0.0210 0.5790 33901689.1 0.78 21.64

Rural Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Minor Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Rural Collector 0.0122 0.3520 4072940.1 0.05 1.58

Rural Local 0.0122 0.3520 2536020 0.03 0.98

Rural Ramps 0.0210 0.4320 936465.9 0.02 0.45

Urban Interstate 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Principal Arterial 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Minor Arterial 0.0121 0.3620 6097160.75 0.08 2.43

Urban Collector 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Local 0 0.00 0.00

Urban Ramps 0 0.00 0.00

TOTAL 47,544,276 0.98 27.08
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 67

Appendix D

Travel Demand Model and Land Use Allocation Model 

Development

D.1. Travel Demand Model Development

Background:

The following information related to the development of the Knoxville Regional Travel 

Demand Forecasting Model and associated planning assumptions is intended to fulfill the 

requirements under Section 93.105(c)(1)(i) of the Transportation Conformity Rule, which 

requires interagency review of the models and assumptions used in the regional emissions 

analysis.

Section 1 – Travel Demand Modeling Parameters:

I. General Information – A.) Validation Year: 2006

B.) Calibration Data: Household Travel Behavior Survey and External Travel 

 Survey conducted in year 2000 in Knox and Blount counties. Data also taken 

 from U.S. Census since it was conducted in 2000.

C.) Model Geographic Coverage: Eight Full Counties (Anderson, Blount, 

 Jefferson, Loudon, Knox, Roane, Sevier, Union) and part of Grainger County. 

 There are a total of 893 traffic analysis zones consisting of 864 internal and 29 

 external zones. This represents an increase of 146 TAZs in the “regional” 

 area of the model (those areas outside of Knox and Blount counties)

D.) Model Structure: Based on Traditional “Four-Step” Process of Trip 

 Generation, Trip Distribution, Mode Split and Traffic Assignment.

II. Model Components – A.) Trip Generation: The trip generation component consists of trip production 

 and trip attraction models for the several trip purposes and were estimated 

 using data from the 2000 Knoxville Household Travel Behavior Study. A 

 variety of statistical analyses were performed to identify how trip rates for 

 various trip purposes were linked to household attributes such as household 

 size, auto ownership, workers per household, students per household and 

 household income.

1.) Trip Production Model – The following six trip purposes were 

 identified from the survey data and cross classification techniques 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 68

 were used to determine number of trips produced for each given the 

 most appropriate socioeconomic predictor variable:

Home-Based Work (HBW)

Home-Based School (HBS)

Home-Based University (HBU)

Home-Based Other (HBO)

Non-Home-Based Work (NHBW)

Non-Home-Based Other (NHBO)

 In addition to the household based trips above, the model also 

 incorporates trips not associated with households such as from on-

 campus students that reside in group quarters and the short distance 

 truck trips such as mail and delivery trucks.

2.) Trip Attraction Model – The trip attraction model was based on a 

 regression analysis of geo-coded trip ends versus zonal socioeconomic 

 characteristics. The attractions were factored up so that total 

 attractions would approximately balance the productions in the base 

 year. Zonal level variables such as employment, population, 

 households and school enrollment formed the input to this model.

B.) Trip Distribution: The gravity model was used to distribute zonal trip 

 productions and attractions, which is the most widely used model for trip 

 distribution. The gravity model requires base year data on average trip 

 lengths and trip length distributions for each of the trip purposes which were 

 determined by the household survey. Friction factors were calibrated from 

 the trip length distribution data for each trip purpose which describe people’s 

 willingness to travel certain distances for different types of trips – for 

 example, people generally will tolerate longer travel times to their place of 

 employment rather than to the grocery store. Socioeconomic adjustment 

 factors, also known as “K-factors” were used to represent zone-to-zone 

 adjustments for selected zonal interchanges when necessitated by special 

 circumstances such as bridges or other perceived travel barriers.

C.) Mode Split: The trip distribution step yields tables of “person trips” by trip 

 purpose and time-of-day. The Knoxville model only assigns the trips that are 

 made by motor vehicles to the roadway network so the person trips were 

 converted to vehicle trips using data from the household travel survey. 

 Factors for vehicle occupancy were also developed and these were determined 

 to vary during different time periods throughout the day and incorporated into 

 the model.

D.) Time-of-Day Models: The Knoxville model allows analyses to be performed 

 for four major time periods – 24-hour (daily), morning peak (6:00 – 9:00 am), 

 afternoon peak (3:00 – 6:00 pm) and off peak (all times other than morning or 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 69

 afternoon peak). The time-of-day model was accomplished using data 

 collected from the household behavior survey on hourly distributions of trips 

 by purpose.

E.) External Models: Trips with at least one trip end outside the study area are 

 considered external trips. The Knoxville model has 29 external stations where 

 traffic can enter or exit the model’s roadway network. A consultant 

 performed an external origin-destination survey for the old two-county 

 Knoxville model area in 2000 and an updated study for the interstate stations 

 and one other high volume station was conducted in September 2007. The 

 external-external volumes at the station locations from this survey were used 

 in validating the assignment of the external-external trip table developed for 

 the expanded model area.

F.) Trip Assignment: The assignment of trips to the network is the last step of the 

 sequential modeling process. It provides the foundation for validating the 

 model’s performance in replicating base-year (2006) travel patterns. Once the 

 base year is validated, it is further used to forecast future traffic conditions on 

 the network and to evaluate any transportation improvements in the future.

 One feature to note of the trip assignment process in the Knoxville model is 

 that it is includes a feedback loop from the initial trip assignment back through 

 trip distribution, which runs until convergence is achieved. The reason a 

 feedback loop is made in this fashion is primarily to account for the fact that 

 people will sometimes take congestion into consideration in their decisions for 

 which destinations are chosen, therefore results from the initial assignment, 

 which produce congested speeds are fed back to the gravity model to 

 redistribute the person trips.

III. Model Roadway Network and Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Development – A.) Roadway Network Information: A substantial effort was undertaken to create 

 a TransCAD-based network that included all the necessary roadways 

 (arterials, collectors and significant local roads) along with appropriate 

 attributes to characterize them. A key resource was the Tennessee Roadway 

 Information System (TRIMS), which is a comprehensive database of roadway 

 attributes (number of lanes, pavement width, posted speed limit, etc) that is 

 maintained by the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). It should 

 be noted that there is significantly greater detail in terms of the number of 

 roadway links that are represented between the urbanized and rural portions of 

 the model study area. Traffic signals are included in the network as well for an 

 even greater level of precision in replicating traffic operations.

B.) Free-Flow Speed Estimation: A key input to the modeling of traffic on the 

 roadway network deals with correctly estimating the free flow speed on each 

 link. Typically travel demand models use the posted speed limit as a 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 70

 surrogate for the free flow speed however this can overstate the travel time 

 since many times vehicles are traveling at well above the posted speed limit in 

 when there are free flow conditions, i.e. when little or no traffic is present and 

 weather conditions are ideal. The Knoxville model incorporates an estimation 

 procedure borrowed from studies performed in Indiana which relate free flow 

 speed to roadway characteristics such as the area type, facility type, speed 

 limit and number of lanes. Nonlinear formulas were developed from actual 

 field observations of speed data and then used in the model.

C.) Capacity Estimation: Peak hour capacities of the roadway network were 

 estimated using Highway Capacity Manual 2000 procedures, which results in 

 much more precise estimates of capacity verses traditional methods used in 

 models that entail using a lookup table based on functional class and area 

 type.

D.) TAZ Development: The study area of the Knoxville regional model was 

 disaggregated into a number of traffic analysis zones (TAZ). The TAZ layer 

 of the model consists of a total of 893 zones. Demographic and employment 

 features of the Knoxville model area are reported for each of the 864 internal 

 zones for use in trip generation, the remaining 29 zones are external zones. 

 Each zone is characterized by 53 zonal attributes including population, 

 households, vehicle ownership, mean household income, school enrollment, 

 university enrollment and employment by the Standard Industrial Classification 

 (SIC) category. The 2000 Census provided much of the data for the base year 

 model, and projection data was purchased from Woods & Poole Economics, 

 Inc. to develop future TAZ attributes.

Section 2 – Model Validation:

I. Validation Criteria – Criteria for acceptable errors between observed and estimated traffic 

volumes vary by facility type, according to the magnitude of traffic volume. For example, 

higher volume roadways have stricter calibration guidelines than those with lower volumes. 

The error standards set for the Knoxville model were developed for use in Michigan by the 

Michigan Department of Transportation. These error standards meet or exceed the 

standards set by FHWA for model validation.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 71

Category Acceptable Error

The following table illustrates the Knoxville Model validation statistics:

II. Model Performance by Facility Type/HPMS Adjustment Factors – The model output of 

vehicle miles of travel (VMT) for the base year 2006 was compared against the actual 

highway performance monitoring system (HPMS) estimates of VMT by facility type in 

each county. Below is a table showing the comparison of the model to HPMS and the 

resulting adjustment factors that will need to be applied to the model VMT in future 

analysis years to ensure that all emissions will be accounted for. In general the model 

appears to be performing very well as most adjustment factors require less than 20% 

adjustment. Those factors that are outside of the 20% range have been highlighted in 

yellow and for the most part occur only on the lower-order Collector and Local facility 

types, which is not much of a concern. 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 72

III. Average Speed Calibration – In addition to calibrating the travel demand model so that 

it accurately replicates roadway traffic volumes according to validation criteria, the model 

was also calibrated to replicate observed average speeds for different time periods of the 

day. Average speed data that was collected from floating car studies in support of the 

regional congestion management system plan in the urbanized area was compared with 

outputs of post-processed speeds from the model. In general there was very good 

agreement between the model speeds and the actual speeds with good root mean square 

errors, however there are no national validation standards for average speeds.

D.2. Land Use Allocation Model Development

Background:

The ULAM planning package is designed to provide an automated process to allocate

future growth in the form of county-wide population and employment control totals at the

traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level producing files ready for input into most standard travel

demand forecasting models. The ULAM model is designed to utilize existing zonal data

data files to the maximum extent possible to reduce the need for duplication of data entry. 

The most important input variable to the ULAM model is the vacant acreage information by 

land use type which is developed from parcel level GIS data. The vacant land information is 

used to incorporate physical, environmental and policy constraints into the land use

allocation process, ensuring that growth is not allocated to areas already builtout and that

growth is not allocated to wetlands or other types of environmentally sensitive areas. By

separating vacant land by land use type, the model is able to reflect the current zoning
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization

Appendix D

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 73

restrictions and land use regulations. It ensures that the model does not allocate

unacceptable types of land uses in areas where that type of development is not permitted.

Control variables for individual traffic zones include: vacant buildable acreage by land use

type, allowable land use densities, approved development, population per dwelling unit, percentage of vacant or seasonal units, auto ownership information, variables for the life

style trip generation model, and other restrictions for each TAZ. 

A market index or desirability score for each TAZ and each type of land use is computed 

using approved development, historical trends and the real estate market information

designed to reflect unique local market conditions. The real estate market index is then used 

by the ULAM model in the allocation process to determine which TAZs will be developed

first for a particular type of land use.

The impacts of changes in the transportation network on future land development patterns

are reflected in the ULAM Real Estate Market Index. The model ranks each TAZ for

different types of development based upon travel time and accessibility to major land use

activity centers and based upon socio-economic conditions within a given travel time

around each traffic zone. As the transportation network is changed, the travel time on the

network changes which also changes the ranking of each TAZ for different types of

development. As an example if a new expressway is added to the network the travel time

from those TAZs around that expressway to major land use activity centers decreases

making those TAZs more accessible and giving them a higher ranking for most types of

development. In addition the market area based upon travel time has increased in size, meaning more population and employees are within that market area or drive time of that

TAZ. The larger market area population and employment of that TAZ makes that TAZ

more desirable for retail and other types of new development.

Knoxville ULAM Model Development:

The ULAM model was developed and tailored specifically to the Knoxville Region through 

a process involving input from several various sources. Data was collected for each county

in the modeling region in order to provide the necessary inputs to ULAM as described

above. A real estate market index charrette was conducted with local developers in order to 

determine the specific conditions affecting development decisions in this region. The

proposed roadway projects were fed into the travel demand model and a new market index

was generated based upon the improved accessibility of areas affected by roadway 

improvements. This information was then input to ULAM again in order to generate a new

land use input file for the travel demand forecasting model.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 74

Appendix E

Knoxville Urban Area

ULAM - Urban Land Use Allocation Model

Population and Employment Control Totals

Prepared for: The Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission

 Knoxville, Tennessee

 and: The Tennessee Department of Transportation

Prepared by: Transportation Planning Services, Inc.

 Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Nov. 2007
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 75

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose 

The Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) is beginning the update of the 2030 Long Range Transportation

Plan (LRTP). The updated plan will be extended to the year 2034 and will include any changes or modifications needed to the

Knoxville area transportation network to accommodate future growth. A key part of the technical analysis used to identify the need for 

future transportation improvements is the travel demand forecasting model used by TPO. One of the most importation inputs to the

travel demand model is the future year land use data. The 2035 population and employment by traffic analysis zone (TAZ) is a critical 

input that can significantly impact the projected traffic volumes and transit ridership generated by the travel demand model. 

The TPO has decided to use the ULAM (Urban Land Use Allocation Model) to develop the future year land use data by TAZ needed

for the travel forecasting effort. The ULAM model been used by a number of MPOs and other planning agencies in Florida since

1996. 

The ULAM land use model was used by the Nashville MPO for their 2030 LRTP and will be used again for their 2035 update. The

Nashville ULAM model was part of a special study conducted for TDOT in cooperation with University of Tennessee Center for

Transportation Research. In the 2030 Nashville study the ULAM model was used to evaluate the impact of various land use

alternatives designed to improve transit ridership for a number of commuter rail lines developed for the 2030 long range transportation 

plan.

1.2 The ULAM Model 

The ULAM planning package is designed to provide an automated process to allocate future growth in the form of county-wide 

population and employment control totals at the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level producing TAZ files for input into the transportation 

modeling system. The ULAM model is designed to utilize existing TAZ data files to the maximum extent possible to reduce the need

for duplication of data entry. An important feature of the model is its GIS interface which allows visual inspection of the model output 

as well as editing capabilities of the input files within an ArcView GIS environment. This GIS interface allows the model to be used as 

a land use visualization tool that can be used with other GIS coverages and applications.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 76

County-wide variables include the future year population and employment control totals, maximum percentage of any given zone that

can be developed, the ability to allocate only existing plus committed development, and the ability to restrict growth based on various

policy restrictions. Controls variables are also available for each individual land use category. These variables include the minimum

acreage required in each traffic zone for a particular type of land use, the maximum allowable growth for any zone, a gross-to-net 

acreage conversion process to subtract vacant land required for supporting uses (i.e.,Right-of-way, parks, schools, etc.), and, subtraction of vacant land for approved development. Future enhancements currently under development include the ability to select a

different land use allocation methodology for each land use type.

The most important input variable to the ULAM model is the vacant acreage information by land use type. The vacant land

information is used to incorporate physical, environmental and policy constraints into the land use allocation process, ensuring that

growth is not allocated to areas already built out and that growth is not allocated to wetlands or other types of environmentally

sensitive areas. By separating vacant land by land use type, the model is able to reflect the currently adopted Land Use Element of the

County's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Restrictions and Land Development Regulations. It ensures that the model does not allocate

unacceptable types of land uses in areas where that type of development is not permitted.

1.3 Knoxville ULAM Data 

Figure 1 shows the counties that will be included in the Knoxville 2034 Long Range Transportation Plan update. Table 1 shows the

land use variables that will be projected for each of those nine counties by TAZ for 2035 as well as for a number of interim years

using the ULAM model. 

As indicated in the previous section, the ULAM model is an allocation model that allocates population and employment control totals

from the county level down to TAZ level. To do this the population and employment control totals must be provided as one of the

inputs to the model. The remaining chapters of this technical memorandum describe the population and employment control totals that 

been developed for input into ULAM model with an overview of the methodology used to develop those projections. Appendix A

shows the control totals and other land use variables by county.

 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 77

Figure 1 Land Use Modeling Study Area 

Knox

Sevier

Blount

Roane

Union

Anderson

Grainger

Jefferson

Loudon N W E

S Land Use Modeling

Study Area
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 78

Table 1 Travel Demand Model Land Use Variables

Input Name Description Additional Information

TOTPOP Total Population

HHPOP Population in Households

HHPOP Number of Households

AVGHHSIZE Average Persons per Household

AVG_MEDHHINC Average Median Household Income

WRKR_PER_HH Workers per Household

VEH_PER_HH Vehicles per Household

STD_PER_HH Students per Household Population Ages 5 - 17

ENROLL_K12 School Enrollment (K -12)

UNIV_STDNTS UT Students by Residence

UNIV_ENROLL University Enrollment

EMPCAT_A Agriculture Employment SIC 01 - 09

EMPCAT_B Mining Employment SIC 10 - 14

EMPCAT_C Construction Employment SIC 15 - 17

Basic

EMPCAT_D Manufacturing Employment SIC 20 - 39

EMPCAT_E

Transportation/Communication/Utilities 

Employment SIC 40 - 49

EMPCAT_F Wholesale Trade Employment SIC 50 - 51

Industrial

EMPCAT_G Retail Trade Employment SIC 52 - 59 Retail

EMPCAT_H Finance/Insurance/Real Estate Employment SIC 60 - 67

EMPCAT_I Services Employment SIC 70 - 89

EMPCAT_J Public Sector Employment SIC 91 - 97

Service

EMP_TOT Total Employment
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 79

2.0 Control Total Background Information

2.1 Sources of Control Total Data

As noted previously, ULAM requires county-level control totals for demographic data that are then allocated to the smaller traffic

analysis zone level. Different sources of control totals of future demographic projections were evaluated for use in this project –

population data from the Center for Business and Economic Research (CBER) affiliated with the University of Tennessee, employment projections developed by TDOT and data that was purchased from Woods & Poole Economics, Incorporated. The

following sections discuss these sources in more detail and a recommendation is provided for which source should be used for input to 

ULAM.

2.2 CBER Population Projection Data

The CBER is a department within the College of Business Administration at the University of Tennessee which conducts research on

national and state economic trends. The CBER published a report titled “Population Projections for the State of Tennessee: 2005 –

2025” in December 2003, which included population projections for each county in the state. The Tennessee Department of

Transportation adopted the CBER population projections and extrapolated the population projections out to the year 2030 using

regression techniques.

2.3 TDOT Employment Projections

A consultant working to develop a statewide travel demand model for TDOT developed employment projections using linear

regression techniques applied to historical data (1969 – 2000) that was obtained from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). The

data was projected out to the year 2030.

2.4 Woods & Poole Data

Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. is an independent firm that specializes in long-term county economic and demographic projections. Woods & Poole maintains a database for every county in the U.S. containing projections through 2030 for more than 900 variables

and is updated each year with new historical data. The TPO purchased datasets for each county in the study area in September 2007.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 80

2.4 Recommendation for Control Total Data Source

There are some limitations in using the CBER and TDOT data for the 2034 LRP update. Most notably the projections do not include

many of the variables needed by the Knoxville travel demand model. Also, since the data were published in 2003 they are already

four years old at the current time. Finally, the Woods & Poole dataset has the advantage of being consistent within itself rather than

relying on two separate sources/methodologies for forecasting population and employment.

For these reasons it is recommended that the Woods & Poole data be used for the ULAM model control total input as part of the

preparation of the 2034 LRTP.

3.0 County Control Totals

Based on using the 2005 – 2030 Woods & Poole data as recommended in the previous chapter, a summary of the projections for each

of the nine counties in the study area is presented here. Since the Woods & Poole data only went out to the year 2030 the TPO staff

used a forecasting software package known as “Forecast Pro” to project the data to the necessary future year of 2035. Table 2 on the following page provides a summary of the projections. As seen in Table 2 the population growth is projected to occur

in Knox, Blount and Sevier counties. The largest employment growth is anticipated in Knox, Sevier and Anderson counties. Note the

‘Percent” column represents percent growth for each county from 2005 to 2035 and the “Regional” column indicates what percentage

of the 2005 to 2035 regional growth is associated with each county. 

Figure 2 is a bar graph that shows the projected growth of population and employment for each county from 2005 to 2035. Figure 3

shows the percent increase of population and employment, Figure 4 shows percentage of the regional growth by county and Figure 5

shows the rate of population growth projected for each county over time.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 81

Table 2 2005 – 2035 Population and Employment

Population

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Growth Percent Regional

Anderson 72,518 77,265 81,787 86,430 91,245 96,365 100,972 28,454 39% 6%

Blount 115,616 130,131 144,913 159,908 175,243 191,209 209,924 94,308 82% 20%

Grainger 22,188 23,804 25,466 27,166 28,921 30,775 32,609 10,421 47% 2%

Jefferson 48,261 53,120 57,746 62,456 67,295 72,369 77,453 29,192 60% 6%

Knox 405,355 433,507 459,953 487,076 515,178 545,005 574,950 169,595 42% 36%

Loudon 43,411 49,124 54,766 60,488 66,339 72,429 79,010 35,599 82% 7%

Roane 52,753 54,615 56,209 57,885 59,673 61,650 63,669 10,916 21% 2%

Sevier 79,339 93,234 107,940 122,803 137,938 153,595 170,928 91,589 115% 19%

Union 19,005 20,088 21,319 22,580 23,888 25,275 26,525 7,520 40% 2%

Region 858,446 934,888 1,010,099 1,086,792 1,165,720 1,248,672 1,336,041 477,595 56% 100%

Employment

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Growth Percent Regional

Anderson 52,693 59,663 66,646 73,635 80,625 87,616 93,715 41,022 78% 12%

Blount 58,293 65,161 72,026 78,888 85,749 92,602 98,613 40,320 69% 12%

Grainger 7,358 7,951 8,541 9,131 9,721 10,307 10,670 3,312 45% 1%

Jefferson 18,754 20,496 22,238 23,980 25,720 27,461 29,007 10,253 55% 3%

Knox 293,068 324,410 355,716 386,994 418,237 449,450 481,664 188,596 64% 54%

Loudon 18,720 20,419 22,114 23,807 25,501 27,189 28,861 10,141 54% 3%

Roane 21,420 22,596 23,793 25,019 26,279 27,575 27,926 6,506 30% 2%

Sevier 49,918 57,498 65,084 72,680 80,277 87,875 95,939 46,021 92% 13%

Union 4,780 4,982 5,205 5,437 5,677 5,931 6,074 1,294 27% 0%

Region 525,004 583,176 641,363 699,571 757,786 816,006 872,469 347,465 66% 100%
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 82

Figure 2 2005 – 2035 Projected Growth

2005 - 2035 Projected Growth

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

Anderson Blount Grainger Jefferson Knox Loudon Roane Sevier Union 

Population Employment
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 83

Figure 3 2005 – 2035 Percent Increase 

2005 - 2035 Percent Increase

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Anderson Blount Grainger Jefferson Knox Loudon Roane Sevier Union 

Population Employment
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 84

Figure 4 Percentage of Regional Growth 

Percentage of Regional Growth

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Anderson Blount Grainger Jefferson Knox Loudon Roane Sevier Union 

Population Employmnet
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 85

Figure 5 Projected Population Growth Rate 

Projected Population Growth Rate

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Anderson Blount Grainger Jefferson Knox Loudon Roane Sevier Union
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix E

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 86

4.0 Summary

The county-wide projections identified in this report will be used to identify net growth in population and employment for each of the

nine counties in the land use modeling study area. The net change will be distributed throughout the county down to traffic zone level

using the ULAM land use model. The allocation will be based upon the availability of vacant buildable land in each traffic zone. 

With population in the region projected to increase by almost 480,000 people over the next 30 years it expected that the travel demand 

model will show a significant increase in traffic volumes on many of the major roads in the area. 

 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 87

Appendix F

MOBILE6 Input Description

F.1. Background:

For the Ozone and PM2.5 emissions analyses the TPO is basing the MOBILE6 inputs 

largely on those which have been previously agreed to by the IAC partners as part of the 

original 8-Hour Ozone Standard and PM2.5 conformity determinations.

The MOBILE6.2 program runs in MSDOS and the user supplies an input file with the 

parameters set to represent the conditions of the region where it is being applied. If inputs 

are not specifically called out then the software has built in default values that will be used. 

This section describes the inputs that were used for both the Ozone and PM2.5 analysis for 

the Knoxville Nonattainment Area within the travel demand model coverage area.

The MOBILE6.2 file consists of three sections – Header, Run and Scenario. The Header 

and Run sections are the same for all program runs and the Scenario section is used to 

change inputs for the different roadway types being modeled.

F.2. Final IAC Agreed Upon MOBILE6 Input Assumptions:

Unless otherwise noted, the term “technical guidance” in the explanation of the input values 

given below refers to the EPA guidance document – Technical Guidance on the Use of 

MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation, U.S. EPA Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality, Jan 2002.

1.) Calendar Year of Evaluation:

(Ozone and PM2.5) – The analysis years have previously been established by the IAC as: 

2009 (Knox County Ozone Analysis Only), 2014, 2024 and 2034. In addition, the year 

2002 must be evaluated since the TPO is using the No Greater than Baseline Year 2002 

emission test to demonstrate conformity.

2.) Month of Evaluation:

(Ozone) – Use “7” (July) as it is most appropriate for ozone season analysis. (PM2.5) – Use “7” (July) as recommended when using the “Single-Run Approach” by EPA 

guidance document “Guidance for Creating Annual On-Road Mobile Source Emission 

Inventories for PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas for Use in SIPs and Conformity”, August 

2005.

3.) Temperature:

(Ozone) – The IAC group has previously agreed to use 66/96 as the MIN/MAX

temperature input for the ozone analysis. This is based on the requirement to remain 

consistent with the temperature input that was used in the Knox County 1-Hour 

Maintenance Plan.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 88

(PM2.5) – The 2002 annual emissions inventory inputs that were prepared by the 

University of Tennessee Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering (UTCEE) are 

proposed for use by the TPO. The following table taken from the UTCEE report 

documents the meteorological and fuel RVP data for the Knoxville area. The 

meteorological data was taken from the National Climatic Data Center and the Knoxville 

McGhee-Tyson Airport weather station was selected to represent the entire region.

From the above table, the average annual MIN/MAX temperature is 50.1/70.0. 4.) Absolute Humidity:

(Ozone) – There was much discussion for the Humidity input by the IAC group during the 

previous conformity analysis, and ultimately it was determined to use the MOBILE6.2 

default value of 75 grains/lb primarily in order to remain consistent with the Maintenance 

Plan which also used the default value for humidity.

(PM2.5) – The above table from the UTCEE 2002 emissions inventory report includes an 

annual average value of 62.57 grains/lb for Absolute Humidity, however it was determined 

that this value would cause a relative humidity of greater than 100% in part of the 

MIN/MAX temperature range. Based on discussions with EPA, FHWA and TDEC it was 

determined to use the highest absolute humidity value that would not exceed 100% relative 

humidity throughout the temperature range – this value was determined to be 52 grains/lb. 5.) Vehicle Age Distribution:

(Ozone and PM2.5) –The TPO used the vehicle age distribution that was developed by 

UTCEE for Knoxville region, which was used for the 2002 emissions inventory 

development. The vehicle age distributions are only available for the light duty vehicle and 

light duty truck categories at a local level, the MOBILE6.2 defaults are used for the others. 

The EPA guidance strongly recommends using local data for this input where available.

Monthly

Avg. Min

Temp (F)

Relative

Magnitude

Monthly

Avg. Max

Temp (F)

Relative

Magnitude

Absolute

Humidity

(gr/lb)

Relative

Magnitude

RVP

(psi)

Relative

Magnitude

JAN 31.6 0.63 51.4 0.73 28.16 0.45 15 1.25

FEB 30.8 0.62 51.8 0.74 22.90 0.37 13.5 1.13

MAR 38.9 0.78 61.8 0.88 37.83 0.60 13.5 1.13

APR 51.4 1.03 73.9 1.06 55.61 0.89 13.5 1.13

MAY 54.1 1.08 76.4 1.09 68.97 1.10 9 0.75

JUNE 65.4 1.31 87.7 1.25 93.12 1.49 9 0.75

JULY 70.2 1.40 88.0 1.26 113.31 1.81 9 0.75

AUG 68.0 1.36 89.8 1.28 101.34 1.62 9 0.75

SEP 64.9 1.30 84.8 1.21 92.83 1.48 10.25 0.86

OCT 55.6 1.11 70.2 1.00 73.05 1.17 13.5 1.13

NOV 37.6 0.75 55.1 0.79 36.03 0.58 13.5 1.13

DEC 32.1 0.64 49.2 0.70 27.70 0.44 15 1.25

Average 50.1 70.0 62.57 11.98
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 89

6.) Vehicle Activity:

(Ozone) – The TPO forecasted future vehicle activity using a travel demand forecasting 

model in the entire nonattainment area except for the portion in Cocke County. 

Another component that the technical guidance notes is that of developing appropriate 

HPMS factors in order to match the model outputs to the actual observed vehicle miles 

traveled data that was observed in the calibration or “base year” of the model. Since the 

TPO model was calibrated to a base year of 2006 the outputs for each functional 

classification in each nonattainment county are compared with the HPMS estimates to 

derive a correction factor. This is necessitated because the model does not include every 

roadway facility in the region, especially the lower classified roadways such as locals and 

collectors in the regional area.

The VMT on local roadways is projected using an off-model technique due to the small 

number included in the travel demand model in all counties outside of Knox County. The 

methodology used in this analysis differs from previous conformity analyses. Instead of 

developing a growth rate based on historical trend data reported for local roadway VMT, 

the TPO determined that a more appropriate surrogate would be to calculate the percentage 

of Local VMT to the other classifications in each County and assume that the percentage 

would hold constant in the future. This methodology was deemed more appropriate given

that a historical trend growth rate may not be consistent with the projected growth rate 

whereby Local VMT could be under or over represented in the future. The TPO used historical traffic volume and visitation data to determine a growth factor to 

apply to existing VMT estimates for Cocke County roadways within the partial-county 

nonattainment area. Updated traffic counts through year 2008 were obtained for the three 

roadways included in the Cocke County nonattainment area and updated growth factors 

were computed.

For ramp facilities the methodology recommended by the technical guidance is to assume 

that the HPMS data for Freeway facilities can be broken out as 92% VMT on the actual 

freeway and the other 8% on ramps. Since the model network was expanded to include all 

ramps in the study area the actual model output values were used rather than the default 

percentage breakdown.

(PM2.5) – Basically the same as above with the ozone analysis, however, the Roane 

County portion of the nonattainment area which was previously outside of the travel 

demand model coverage area has now been included with the recent model update such that 

model VMT was used rather than the off-model technique used previously.

7.) VMT by vehicle classification:

(Ozone and PM2.5) – The VMT by vehicle classification is available from TDOT vehicle 

classification data. The TDOT data has to be further disaggregated to the several vehicle 

types recognized by MOBILE6.2 from the three major classifications that TDOT uses. 

Updated classification data from the year 2006 was obtained which was used for this 

analysis. The VMT by vehicle classification for future years was computed based on the 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 90

national vehicle mix distributions from MOBILE6. The future Interstate VMT mix was 

modified based on the projections from several sources that heavy duty diesel truck traffic 

will increase as a proportion of the overall traffic due to growth in freight movement. This 

is documented separately in the CDR.

8.) VMT by functional classification:

(Ozone and PM2.5) – The TPO model allocates estimates of VMT into the appropriate 

functional classification as defined by TDOT. There are four driving cycles used by 

MOBILE6.2, the following table shows the Driving Cycle proposed for each FHWA 

functional classification category:

FHWA Highway Functional System MOBILE6.2 Driving Cycle

Rural Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Rural Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector*

Rural Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Rural Major Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Minor Collector Arterial/Collector

Rural Local Arterial/Collector

Urban Interstate Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Freeways Freeway and Freeway Ramp

Urban Other Principal Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Minor Arterial Arterial/Collector

Urban Collector Arterial/Collector

Urban Local Local Roadway

* The technical guidance recommends the Freeway and Freeway Ramp driving cycle for 

the Rural Other Principal Arterial class; however the arterial/collector cycle seems to be 

more appropriate in this region due to the lack of access control on these types of facilities.

9.) VMT Fraction by Average Speed by Hour of the Day: 

(Ozone and PM2.5) – The TPO travel demand model has three time periods - AM Peak (6 - 9 am), PM Peak (3 - 6 pm) and the rest of the day. Therefore an average speed can be 

developed for each of these time periods, by direction of travel in order to capture the 

peaking effect on speed. The SPEED VMT command was used and it has a single VMT

distribution for the AM peak three-hour period, a single VMT distribution for the PM peak 

three-hour period and one for the other 18 hours of the day. Separate scenarios were run for

Interstates, Arterials and Collectors which are handled with setting the appropriate field in 

the VMT BY FACILITY command to 1.0. 10.) Weekday and Weekend Day Activity:

(Ozone) – The technical guidance states that “for most purposes, EPA will not expect 

States to develop local estimates that vary by day of the week”. There is no mention of 

season variation factors although it is fairly standard practice to apply a seasonal adjustment 

factor (SAF) to account for differences in travel during the summer months since the HPMS 

data and travel demand model VMT estimates are normalized to an average annual daily 
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 91

traffic volume. Seasonal variation factors are available from TDOT which were used to 

develop an appropriate SAF. (PM2.5) – Since the PM2.5 analysis is based on computing annual emissions and the travel 

demand model was calibrated to match the HPMS estimates of daily vehicle miles of travel 

the emissions were calculated first at the daily level and then converted to an annual 

amount by multiplying by 365.

11.) Gasoline Volatility:

(Ozone) – A Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) value of 9.0 was used since that is the type of fuel 

that is distributed in the Knoxville region during the ozone season months.

(PM2.5) – From the table included under #3 above the average annual RVP value is 11.98. 12.) Diesel Sulfur Content:

(Ozone) – The diesel sulfur content is only applicable to Particulate Matter modeling and 

was not used.

(PM2.5) – The technical guidance states that in the absence of survey data EPA 

recommends that past data be taken from an EPA spreadsheet called “Diesel Sulfur Levels 

by County” located at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/m6.htm. This spreadsheet was reviewed for 

the counties located in the Knoxville PM2.5 nonattainment area for the 2002 Analysis Year – the Annual Diesel Sulfur Level Average was the same for each county and was calculated 

to be 358 ppm based on the information in the spreadsheet.

Beginning in the 2006 calendar year more stringent sulfur levels are phased in going from 

the current level of 500 ppm to 15 ppm. The technical guidance recommends using the 

following values which were used for the 2014, 2024 and 2034 analysis years as applicable:

Period Highway Diesel Sulfur Level (ppm)

June, 2006 – May, 2010 43

June, 2010 – 2015 11

E.3. Input Structure for Ozone and PM2.5 Analysis for Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, 

Knox, Loudon and Sevier Counties for Urban and Rural Interstate, Arterial and 

Collector facility types:

Header Section:

Input Command Value/Description

MOBILE6 INPUT FILE Identifies input file beginning

PARTICULATES Enables computation of PM emissions (PM2.5 Only)

POLLUTANTS (NOX) Calculates and reports emissions factors for NOx only in 

PM2.5 analysis. Not used in ozone analysis.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix F

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 92

Run Section:

Input Command Value/Description

RUN DATA Identifies beginning of Run section

NO REFUELING Omits refueling emissions

MIN/MAX TEMP (66. 96.) for Ozone; (50.1 70.0) for PM2.5

ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY Not used for Ozone; (52.0) for PM2.5

REG DIST (Knreg.d) for both Ozone & PM2.5 – Calls external file with 

local vehicle registration data.

FUEL RVP (9.0) for Ozone; (11.98) for PM2.5

Scenario Section:

Input Command Value/Description

SCENARIO REC Label to identify Scenario being run

CALENDAR YEAR (2002, 2009, 2014, 2024 or 2034)

EVALUATION MONTH (7) 

PARTICULATE EF Used for PM analysis only – calls several data files that contain 

particulate emission factors, used default files provided by EPA – PMGZML.CSV, PMGDR1.CSV, PMGDR2.CSV, 

PMDZML.CSV, PMDDR1.CSV, PMDDR2.CSV 

PARTICLE SIZE (2.5) Used for PM analysis only – specifies particle size

DIESEL SULFUR (358) for Analysis Year 2002, (11) for Analysis Years 2014, 

2024 and 2034. Used in PM analysis only.

VMT BY FACILITY (Fi.def) for Freeway facility type scenario modeling, (Fa.def) 

for Arterial facility type scenario modeling

SPEED VMT (Sxyz.def) where x = first initial of county, y = first letter of 

urban or rural, z = first initial of facility type. Calls external data 

file with Average Speed by hour.

VMT FRACTIONS County-specific VMT fractions for each of the 16 combined 

vehicle types.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix G

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 93

Appendix G

REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE SCREENING CRITERIA

Background:

This document is intended to serve as a tool for assisting with determining whether a 

roadway facility in the Knoxville Region is “Regionally Significant” with respect to the air 

quality conformity requirements found in the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Part 

93). The purpose is to provide pertinent information to the Interagency Consultation (IAC) 

group on the characteristics that would normally be used to consider the regional 

significance of a transportation project and in particular one that is on a roadway facility 

classified as a Minor Arterial or lower. The IAC will make the final determination of 

regional significance on a case-by-case basis as needed, and additional criteria beyond what 

is being presented in this document may be used at the IAC’s discretion. 

Federal Conformity Rule Definition of Regional Significance:

Regionally significant project means a transportation project (other than an exempt project) 

that is on a facility which serves regional transportation needs (such as access to and from 

the area outside of the region, major activity centers in the region, major planned 

developments such as new retail malls, sports complexes, etc., or transportation terminals 

themselves) and would normally be included in the modeling of a metropolitan area’s 

transportation network, including at a minimum all principal arterial highways and all fixed 

guide way transit facilities that offer an alternative to regional highway travel.

Proposed Regional Significance Screening Criteria Interrogatories:

1.) What are the Exempt status and Functional Classification of the roadway project?

A non-exempt project on a roadway facility classified as a Principal Arterial or 

higher will generally be considered Regionally Significant.

A project determined to be Exempt under 40 CFR 93.126 or 93.127 will 

generally be considered Non-Regionally Significant unless the IAC group 

determines that it will have regional impacts for any reason.

2.) Is the facility either included in the Regional Travel Demand Forecasting Model, or 

would it be if it does not currently exist?

It is the practice of the Knoxville TPO to include most “major” roadways (most 

major collectors and above) in order to improve model performance so if a 

roadway is not modeled it can generally be considered to be Non-Regionally 

Significant.

3.) Does the facility provide direct connection between two roadways classified as a 

Principal Arterial or higher?
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix G

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 94

Direct connections between major principal arterials and in particular 

connections to the Interstate can generally be considered Regionally Significant. 

4.) Does the facility provide the primary regional connectivity to a “Major Activity 

Center”?

This is a criterion listed in the federal Regional Significance definition; however 

there can be different interpretations as to what constitutes a major activity 

center. In the Knoxville Region the following are suggested as general types of 

major activity centers, with specific locations to be determined on a case-by- case basis:

Major Hospitals and Regional Medical Centers

Central Business Districts of cities with greater than 5,000 population

Major Regional Retail Centers and Malls (greater than 1,000,000 sf)

Major Colleges and Universities

Tourist Destinations 

Airports

Freight Terminals and Intermodal Transfer Centers

Sports Complexes

5.) Does the project add significant vehicular capacity?

A project adding general purpose through lanes will typically be more 

significant than one that is adding “auxiliary” lanes or a continuous center turn 

lane or other projects that do not add significant roadway capacity.

6.) What is the length of the roadway segment being improved and what is the overall 

corridor length?

Projects extending (or completing) long sections (typically greater than 1 mile) 

will tend to be more regionally significant.

If the corridor is lengthy and there is an absence of other principal arterials in 

the vicinity then the roadway will tend to be more regionally significant. 

7.) What is the current Average Daily Traffic of the roadway segment?

This is less important in determining Regional Significance although it will 

provide additional information to be considered along with the above criteria. 

Obviously high traffic segments will tend to be more correlated with the 

increased regional significance of a roadway.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 95

Appendix H – Highway Project List

H.1. List of Primary Project Types and Exempt Status:

1.) Construct new roadway (any number of lanes) – Non-exempt Project, Entails constructing a 

roadway on new location.

2.) Modify Interchange – Exempt Project, Entails ramp modifications such as realignment, relocation, 

etc...

3.) Widen roadway from x lanes to y lanes – Non-exempt Project, Entails addition of capacity 

through construction of additional through travel lanes on an existing roadway. Multilane facilities 

will generally include either a non-traversable median or a center turn lane. The final design will 

usually determine the median configuration, and a project calling for a center turn lane in the project 

list may end up with a non-traversable median or vice versa, however there is no difference between 

the two in terms of air quality impacts or treatment in the travel demand forecasting model.

4.) Install traffic signal – Exempt Project, Entails addition of traffic signal at a single intersection, 

may also involve additional improvements at the intersection such as realignment of approaches or 

additional turn lanes to maximize efficiency of the traffic signal.

5.) Reconstruct 2-lane road – Exempt Project, Entails the improvement of an existing 2-lane roadway 

to bring it up to modern standards in terms of lane widths and geometric design chiefly to enhance 

the safety of the roadway, it may also involve the construction of turn lanes at major intersections. 

There are numerous roadways in the region that were not designed to accommodate the type an 

amount of suburban development that is occurring, which leads to unsafe operating conditions.

6.) Replace Bridge – Exempt Project, Entails the replacement of an existing bridge that has been 

determined to be structurally deficient. The new bridge may include safety enhancements such as 

wider lanes and shoulders, but will not have more through lanes than the previous structure had.

7.) Install Street Lighting – Exempt Project, Entails the addition of overhead lighting to enhance night 

time visibility and improve safety.

8.) Intersection improvements – Exempt Project, Entails the modification of a single intersection to 

include the addition of separate turn lanes or realignment of approaches to improve safety.

9.) Signal Coordination – Can be either exempt or non-exempt depending on scope, Entails retiming 

traffic signals to optimize traffic flow.

10.) Add Center Turn Lane – Entails addition of a two way left turn lane on an undivided roadway of 

two or more lanes, also usually involves reconstructing the roadway to modern design standards for 

lane width and geometric design. In previous conformity analyses this type of project has been 

determined to be “Exempt”, however it has since been determined that these projects will be 

considered “Non-Exempt” if they involve turn lanes at more than one intersection or greater than one 

quarter mile in length.
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 96

H.2. Regional Highway Projects 

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

102 SR 29

Pine Ridge Rd

to SR 61

Harriman/Ro

ane County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- exempt Yes

200 Cusick Road

Alcoa Hwy

(SR 115) (US

129) to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

Alcoa

Add center turn

lane

2014 Non- exempt No

201

East

Bessemer

Street

Intersection w/

E Watt St Alcoa

Realign

intersection

2014 Exempt No

202

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #2 - Robert C. Jackson Dr

Extension

Middlesettleme

nts Rd to

Louisville Rd

(SR 334)

Alcoa

New 4-lane road

w/center turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt No

203

Old

Knoxville

Hwy (SR 33)

Hunt Rd (SR

335) to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

Alcoa

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane w/center

turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

204

Pellissippi

Place Access

Road

Connect Old

Knoxville Hwy

(SR 33) to

Wildwood Rd

through

Pellissippi

Place Research

Park

Alcoa

Construct new 2

and 4-lane road

w/center turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

205 Topside Road

(SR 333)

East of Old

Topside Rd to

Wrights Ferry

Rd

Alcoa

Phase I & II

signalization and

intersection

realignment

2014 Exempt No

206

US 129

Bypass (SR

115)

Intersection

with Louisville

Rd (SR 334)

Alcoa

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

207 Wrights Ferry

Road

Topside Rd

(SR 333) to

Airbase Rd

(SR 429)

Alcoa

Add center turn

lane

2014 Non- exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 97

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

208

Improve

Streetscapes

& Pavement

Locations

throughout

Blount County

Alcoa/

Maryville/

Blount

County

Improve

streetscapes and

repair pavement

2014 Exempt No

209 Ellejoy Road

River Rd to

Jeffries Hollow

Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

210

Jeffries

Hollow Road

Ellejoy Rd to

Sevier County

Line

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

211 Morganton

Road Phase 1

Foothills Mall

Dr to William

Blount Dr (SR

335)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

212

Old

Knoxville

Hwy (SR 33)

Wildwood Rd

to McArthur

Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

213 Old Niles

Ferry Road

Maryville City

Limit to

Calderwood

Hwy (SR 115)

(US 129)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

214

Sevierville

Rd (SR 35)

(US 411)

Washington St

(SR 35) to

Everett High

Rd

Maryville

Construct 2-lane

road w/center turn

lane along

existing and new

alignment

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

237

E. Broadway

Avenue (SR

33)

Intersection

with Brown

School Rd

Maryville

Realign and

install traffic

signal

2014 Exempt No

301 Chucky Pike

Intersection at

US 11E (SR

34)

Jefferson

City

Intersection

improvement- add turn lanes and

modify signal

2014 Exempt No

302 E. Main St/N. Chucky Pk

Intersection at

Old AJ Hwy

Jefferson

City

Realign

Intersection

2014 Exempt No

303 Municipal Dr

Intersection at

Old AJ Hwy

Jefferson

City

Add left and right

turn lanes

2014 Exempt No

304 Old AJ

Highway

Intersection at

Chucky Pk

Jefferson

City

Add left and right

turn lanes

2014 Exempt No

305 Odyssey Rd

Intersection at

US 11E (SR

34)

Jefferson

City

Add left and right

turn lanes

2014 Exempt No

306 Odyssey Rd

US 11E (SR

34) to Norfolk

Southern RR

Jefferson

City

Add center turn

lane

2014 Non- exempt No

307 Old AJ

Highway

Railroad

Crossing

Jefferson

City

Replace bridge 2014 Exempt No

308

Old AJ

Highway (SR

92)

Main St to

Overlook Rd

Jefferson

City

Add center turn

lane and

sidewalks

2014 Non- exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 98

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

309 Old AJ

Highway

Intersection at

SR 92

Jefferson

City

Signalize

Intersection

2014 Exempt No

310 Old AJ

Highway

Intersection at

Mountcastle St

Jefferson

City

Signalize

Intersection

2014 Exempt No

311 Rittenhouse

Rd/Slate Rd

Ritenhouse Rd

to Slate Rd

Jefferson

City

New 2 lane road

connection

2014 Non- Exempt No

312 US 25E (SR

32)

In White Pine White Pine

Replace

"Reduced Speed

Limit" Signs

2014 Exempt No

313 SR 66

Relocation

North of I-81

at SR 341 to

SR 160

Jefferson

County

Construct new 4-

lane road

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

314 SR 92 Bridge in

Dandridge

Dandridge Replace Bridge 2014 Exempt No

315 SR 92

US 11E to

Hinchey

Hollow Rd

Jefferson

City

Install street

lighting

2014 Exempt No

316 SR 92

Intersection at

Old AJ Hwy

Jefferson

City

Add left and right

turn lanes

2014 Exempt No

317 US 11E (SR

34)

Intersection w/

George Ave

Jefferson

City

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

318 US 11E (SR

34)

Intersection w/

Russell Ave

Jefferson

City

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

319 US 11E (SR

34)

SR 92 to

Morristown

City Limit

Jefferson

City

Install street

lighting

2014 Exempt No

320 US 11E (SR

34)

All signalized

intersections

Jefferson

City

LED signal head

replacements

2014 Exempt No

321 US 11E (SR

34)

SR 92S to

Hicks Rd

Jefferson

City

Install Pedestrian

Signals and

Pushbutton

Activation

2014 Exempt No

322 US 11E (SR

34)

SR 92S to

Odyssey Rd

Jefferson

City

Signal

Coordination

2014 Exempt No

323 US 11E (SR

34)

Intersection at

Pearl Ave and

at Harrington

St

Jefferson

City

Intersection

improvement- add left turn lanes

2014 Exempt No

324 US 411/ US

25W (SR 35)

Grapevine

Hollow Rd to

4-lane section

of SR 9

Jefferson

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

400 Harrison

Road

From Kingston

St to Lenoir

City Limits

(approx. 7,000

ft.)

Lenoir City

Intersection

improvements

and reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

401 Improve RR

Crossings

Various

locations in

Lenoir City

Lenoir City

Improve at-grade

RR crossings

2014 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 99

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

402

Improve

Streetscapes

and Pavement

Various

locations in

Loudon

County

Loudon

County

Improve

streetscapes and

repair pavement

2014 Exempt No

403

Improve

Streetscapes

and Pavement

Various

locations in

Greenback

Greenback

Improve

streetscapes and

repair pavement

2014 Exempt No

404 Unitia Rd Unitia Rd

Bridge

Loudon

County

Replace Bridge 2014 Exempt No

405 US 11 (SR 2)

Intersection w/

Shaw Ferry Rd

Loudon

County

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

406 US 11 (SR 2)

Intersection w/

US 70 (SR 1)

Loudon

County

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

407 US 11 (SR 2)

Intersection w/

Loudon H.S. Entr. Loudon

Intersection

improvements

2014 Exempt No

408 US 321 (SR

73)

I-75

Interchange to

US 11 (SR 2)

Lenoir City

Intersection

Improvements

from Corridor

Study

2014 Exempt No

409 US 321 (SR

73)

US 11 (SR 2)

to east of Little

Tennessee

River

Loudon

County

Construct 4-lane

road on existing

and new

alignment

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

410 US 321 (SR

73)

Intersection w/

US 11 (SR 2) Lenoir City

Construct

Interchange

2014 Exempt No

411

Veteran's

Memorial

Bridge

Veteran's

Memorial

Bridge

Loudon Install lighting 2014 Exempt No

502

Dolly Parton

Pkwy (US

411) (SR 35)

Intersection w/

Veterans Blvd

(SR 449)

Sevierville

Improve

Intersection

2014 Exempt No

503

Old

Knoxville

Highway

Boyds Creek

Hwy (SR 338)

to US 411/441

(SR 71)

Sevierville

Widen 2-lane to

various 3 and 4

lane divided cross

sections

2014 Non- Exempt No

504

Veterans

Blvd (SR

449)

Extension

US 411 (SR

35) to SR 66 Sevierville

Construct new 4-

lane road

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

505

Birds Creek

Road (SR

454)

Glade Rd to

SR 416

Sevier

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2014 Exempt No

506 SR 66

North of

Nichols St to

Boyds Creek

Hwy (SR 338)

Sevierville/S

evier County

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

507 SR 66

Boyds Creek

Hwy (SR 338)

to I-40

Sevierville/S

evier County

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 100

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

508

Chapman

Hwy (SR 71)

(US 441)

Boyds Creek

Hwy (SR 338)

to Macon Ln

Sevier

County/Sey

mour

Add center turn

lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

509 Thomas Road

Connector

Teaster Lane to

Veterans Blvd

(SR 449) at

McCarter

Hollow Rd

Pigeon Forge

Construct new 4-

lane road

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

510 US 411 (SR

35)

Sims Rd to

Grapevine

Hollow Rd

Sevier

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

600 Watt Road

Extension

Old Stage Rd

to Kingston Pk

(SR 1) (US

11/70)

Farragut

Construct new 2-

lane road with

center turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt No

601 Campbell

Station Road

Jamestown

Blvd to

Parkside Dr/

Grigsby

Chapel Rd

Farragut

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane w/center

turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

602 Outlet Drive

Lovell Rd (SR

131) to

Campbell

Station Rd

Farragut/Kno

x County

Construct new 2-

lane road

w/center turn lane

along existing and

new alignment

2014 Non- Exempt No

603 Emory Road

(SR 131)

Clinton Hwy

(SR 9) (US

25W) to Gill

Rd

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane w/center

turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

604 Maynardville

Hwy (SR 33)

Temple Acres

Dr to Union

County Line

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

605 Schaad Road

Extension

Middlebrook

Pike (SR 169)

to west of Oak

Ridge Hwy

(SR 62)

Knox

County

Construct new 4-

lane road

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

607 Halls

Connector

Norris Fwy 

(SR 71) (US 

441), Emory 

Rd (SR 131), 

Maynardville 

Hwy (SR 33)

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

intersections and 

add SB thru lane 

on Norris Fwy 

from Emory Rd 

to Maynardville 

Hwy

2014 Non- Exempt No

608 Lovell Road

(SR 131)

Pellissippi 

Pkwy (SR 162) 

SB Ramps to 

Schaeffer Rd

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to 

4-lane w/center 

turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

609 Emory Rd

(SR 131)

Intersection 

w/Tazewell Pk 

(SR 331) 

Knox

County

Intersection 

improvement 2014 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 101

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

610

Western

Avenue (SR

62)

Texas Ave to

Major Ave

Knoxville

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

611

I-640/

Broadway

(SR 33) (US

441)

Interchange

Phase II

I-640/

Broadway (SR

33) (US 441)

Interchange

Knoxville

Construct

additional ramps

and access

improvements

2014 Non- exempt Yes

612

Western

Avenue (SR

62)

Schaad Rd to I- 640 Knoxville

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane w/center

turn lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

613

Cumberland

Avenue (SR

1) (US 11/70)

22nd St to 16th

St Knoxville

Pedestrian

Improvements

and Reduce from

4 lanes to 2 lanes

with center turn

lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

614

Henley Street

Bridge (SR

33/71) (US

441)

Bridge over

Tennessee

River

Knoxville

Rehabilitate

bridge & widen

5-lane to 6-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

615 Washington

Pike

I-640 to

Murphy Rd Knoxville

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

616

Pleasant

Ridge

Rd/Merchant

Dr Phase II

Knoxville City

Limits to

Merchant Dr /

Pleasant Ridge

Rd to

Wilkerson Rd

Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2014 Exempt No

617

South

Knoxville

Waterfront

Roadway

Improvement

s

Sevier Ave /

Blount Ave

from Scottish

Pk to James

White Pkwy

(SR 71)

Knoxville

Add turn lanes

where needed and

widen one-lane

underpass to two

lanes

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

618

I-275

Industrial

Park Access

Improvement

s

I-275 Corridor Knoxville

Improve railroad

underpasses and

make access

improvements

2014 Exempt No

619

Various

Railroad

Crossings

Various

Railroad

Crossing

Locations

Knoxville

Improve circuitry

on vehicle

protection devices

of at-grade RR

crossings

throughout

Knoxville

2014 Exempt No

620 Cessna Road

RR Crossing

Cesna Rd RR

crossing

Knoxville

Improve the at- grade RR

crossing at

Cessna Rd

2014 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 102

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

621 I-40/75

From I-140 to

Lovell Rd (SR

131)

Interchange

Westbound

Direction

Knoxville

Add full auxiliary

lane westbound

between

interchanges

(approx 2,700 ft)

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

622

I-40/75 at

Weigh

Station

Eastbound and

Westbound

Truck Weigh

Stations

Knoxville

Extend on and off

ramps at weigh

stations

2014 Exempt No

623

I-140

(Pellissippi

Pkwy)

I-40 to

Dutchtown Rd Knoxville

Restripe to add

one lane on

northbound I-140

and remove one

lane from the

ramp from I-40

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

624 Cedar Bluff

Road

Cross Park Dr

to Peters Rd Knoxville

Intersection and

Operational

Improvements

2014 Exempt No

625 Schaad Road

Oak Ridge

Hwy (SR 62)

to Pleasant

Ridge Rd

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

626

Chapman

Highway (SR

71) (US 441)

Blount Ave to

Boyd Creek

Hwy (SR 338)

in Sevier

County

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Operational and

Safety

Improvements

including turn

lanes at various

locations

2014 Exempt No

627

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Maloney Rd to

Woodson Dr

Knoxville

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

628

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Maloney Rd to

Blount/Knox

County Line

Knoxville

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

694

I-140

(Pellissippi

Pkwy)/Norths

hore Dr (SR

332)

Interchange

I-140 EB Off

Ramp to

Northshore Dr

(SR 332)

Knoxville

Construct new

slip ramp from

existing off ramp

to serve the

Northshore Town

Center

Development

2014 Non- Exempt Yes

101 Edgemoor Rd 

(SR 170)

Oak Ridge 

Hwy (SR 62) 

to Clinton Hwy 

(SR 9) (US 

25W)

Oak 

Ridge/Ander

son County

Widen 2-lane to 

4-lane 2024 Non- exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 103

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

103 Park Lane

Andersonville 

Hwy (SR 61) 

to End of 

Route

Anderson 

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section 2024 Exempt No

215

Airport

Access Road

to I-140

Airport

Terminus to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (I-140)

(SR 162)

Alcoa

Add new

interchange

ramps to service

airport cargo area

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

216

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Singleton

Station Rd to

Topside Rd

(SR 333)

Blount

County/

Alcoa

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane plus 2

auxiliary lanes (8

total lanes)

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

255

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Pellissippi

Pkwy (I-140)

(SR 162) to

Singleton

Station Rd

Blount

County/

Alcoa

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

256

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Topside Rd

(SR 333) to

Knox County

Line

Blount

County/

Alcoa

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

217

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Singleton

Station Rd to

Hunt Rd (SR

335)

Alcoa

Improve

intersections

including signals

and turn lanes

where warranted

(upon completion

of proposed

Bypass)

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

218

Alcoa

Highway

Bypass (SR

115) (US

129)

From Hall Rd

(SR 35)/Alcoa

Hwy (SR 115)

Interchange to

Proposed

Interchange

serving

McGhee Tyson

Airport

Alcoa

Construct 8-lane

freeway on

existing and new

alignment

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

257

Alcoa

Highway

Bypass (SR

115) (US

129)

From Proposed

Interchange

serving

McGhee Tyson

Airport to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

Alcoa

Construct new 8-

lane freeway (6

thru lanes plus 2

auxiliary lanes)

2024 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 104

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

258

Alcoa

Highway

Bypass (SR

115) (US

129)

From

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

to Near

Singleton

Station Rd

Alcoa

Construct new 8-

lane freeway (6

thru lanes plus 2

auxiliary lanes)

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

219 Wright Road

Hunt Rd (SR

335) to Alcoa

Hwy (SR 115)

(US 129)

Alcoa

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

220

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #1- Home Ave

Extension

Home Ave to

Calderwood St

Alcoa/

Maryville

Reconstruct 2-

lane section, construct new

bridge, demolish

part of shopping

center

2024 Non- Exempt No

221 Burnett

Station Road

Sevierville Rd

(SR 35) (US

411) to

Chapman Hwy

(SR 71) (US

441)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

222 Carpenters

Grade Road

Raulston Rd to

Mint Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

223 Carpenters 

Grade Road

Cochran Rd to 

Raulston Rd Maryville Reconstruct 2-lane section 2024 Exempt No

224 Foothills

Parkway

Lamar

Alexander

Pkwy (SR 73)

(US 321) to

Sevier County

Line

Blount

County

Construct new 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

225 Hinkle Road

Sevierville Rd

(SR 35) (US

411) to Burnett

Station Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

226

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #5 - Ridge Rd

Extension

Ridge Rd to

Pleasant Hill

Rd

Blount

County

Construct new 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt No

227 Mentor Road

Louisville Rd

(SR 334) to

Wrights Ferry

Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

228 Mint Road Old Niles Ferry

to 4 miles east

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

229 Morganton

Road Phase 2

Willam Blount

Dr (SR 335) to

Walker Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 105

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

230 Nails Creek

Road

Wildwood Rd

to Burnett

Station Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

231

Old

Knoxville

Highway (SR

33)

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

to Knox

County Line

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

232

Pellissippi

Parkway (SR

162)

Old Knoxville

Hwy (SR 33)

to Lamar

Alexander

Pkwy (SR 73)

(US 321)

Blount

County

Construct new 4-

lane freeway

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

233 Proffitt

Springs Road

Louisville Rd

(SR 334) to

Hunt Rd (SR

335)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

234 Wildwood

Road

Maryville City

Limit to

Sevierville Rd

(SR 35) (US

411)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

235 Wilkinson

Pike

Maryville City

Limit to

Chilhowee

View Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

236 Brown 

School Rd

E. Broadway 

Ave (SR 33) to 

Sevierville Rd 

(SR 35) (US 

411)

Maryville Reconstruct 2-

lane section 2024 Exempt No

238

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #3 - Robert C. Jackson Dr

Extension

Lamar

Alexander

Pkwy (SR 73)

(US 321) to

Morganton Rd

Maryville

Construct new 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt No

239

Montvale

Road (SR

336)

Maryville

South City

Limits to

Lamar

Alexander

Pkwy (SR 73)

(US 321)

Maryville

Add center turn

lane

2024 Non- Exempt No

240 Sandy 

Springs Rd

Intersection w/ 

Montgomery 

Ln

Maryville Intersection 

Improvements 2024 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 106

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

241 Tuckaleechee 

Pk

Lamar 

Alexander 

Pkwy (SR 73) 

(US 321) to 

Grandview Dr

Maryville Reconstruct 2-

lane section 2024 Exempt No

242

W. Broadway

Avenue (SR

33) (US 411)

Old Niles Ferry

Rd to Lamar

Alexander

Pkwy (SR 73)

(US 321)

Maryville

Add center turn

lane

2024 Non- exempt Yes

243 Wilkinson Pk

Court St to 

Maryville City 

Limits

Maryville Reconstruct 2-

lane section 2024 Exempt No

244 Peppermint

Rd

Wildwood Rd

to Sevierville

Rd (SR 35)

(US 411)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

245

Sevierville

Rd (SR 35)

(US 411)

Dogwood Dr to

Peppermint Rd

Maryville/

Blount

County

Add center turn

lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

246

William

Blount Dr

Extension

(SR 335)

US 411 (SR

33) @ Wm. Blount Dr to

Old Niles Ferry

Rd

Maryville/

Blount

County

Construct new 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

325 I-40/ I-81

Interchange

I-40/ I-81

Interchange

Jefferson

County

Safety

Improvements to

increase length of

acceleration

ramps

2024 Exempt No

326 Old AJ

Highway

Mossy Creek

E. of Branner

Ave

Jefferson

City

Bridge

replacement

2024 Exempt No

412

Old Highway

95 (Kingston

Street)

Harrison Rd to

US 321 (SR

73)

Lenoir City

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

413 SR 72

US 11 (SR 2)

to Corporate

Park

Loudon

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

414 US 11 (SR 2)

Lenoir City

Limits to US

321 (SR 73)

Lenoir City

Streetscape

improvements, Potential "Road

Diet" (reduce

from 4-lane to 3-

lane)

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

415 US 11 (SR 2)

Blair Bend Rd

to Lenoir City

Limit

Loudon

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 107

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

416 US 11 (SR 2)

US 321 (SR

73) to US 70

(SR 1)

Lenoir City

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

511 Foothills

Parkway

Blount County

Line to US 321

(SR 73) in

Wears Valley

Sevier

County

Construct new 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

512 I-40/ SR 66

Interchange

Interchange at

SR 66 Sevierville

Modify

Interchange to

improve capacity

including addition

of new Interstate

access ramps

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

513 US 321 (SR

73)

Buckhorn Rd

(SR 454) to

east of Pittman

Center

Sevier

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

629

I-40/75 /

Campbell

Station Road

Interchange

Interchange w/

Campbell

Station Rd

Farragut

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

630 Virtue Road

Boyd Station

Rd to Kingston

Pike (SR 1)

(US 11/70)

Farragut Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

631 Turkey Creek

Road

Brixworth

Blvd to Boyd

Station Rd

Farragut

Construct new 2-

lane bridge and

approaches to

connect roads

2024 Non- Exempt No

632

Concord

Road (SR

332)

Turkey Creek

Rd to

Northshore Dr

(SR 332)

Farragut/

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

633 Parkside

Drive

Mabry Hood

Rd to Hayfield

Rd

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt No

634

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR

162)/ Hardin

Valley Road

Interchange

Hardin Valley

Rd Interchange

at Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

635 Karns

Connector

Westcott Blvd

to Oak Ridge

Hwy (SR 62)

Knox

County

Construct New 2-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt No

636 Emory Road

(SR 131)

Oak Ridge

Hwy (SR 62)

to Clinton Hwy

(SR 9) (US

25W)

Knox

County

Add center turn

lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 108

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

637 Lovell Road

(SR 131)

Schaeffer Rd to

Middlebrook

Pike (SR 169)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt

638

Oak Ridge

Highway (SR

62)

Schaad Rd to

Byington- Beaver Ridge

Rd (SR 131)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

639 Strawberry

Plains Pike

Gov. John

Sevier Hwy

(SR 168) to

Moshina Rd

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt No

640 Tazewell Pike

(SR 331)

Murphy Rd to

Emory Rd (SR

131)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

641 Tazewell Pike

(SR 131)

Emory Rd (SR

131) to Barker

Rd

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

642 Westland

Drive

Morrell Rd to

Ebenezer Rd

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

643 Emory Road

(SR 131)

Maynardville

Hwy (SR 33)

to Tazewell

Pike (SR 331)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

644

Gov John

Sevier

Highway (SR

168)

Alcoa Hwy

(SR 115) (US

129) to

Chapman Hwy

(SR 71) (US

441)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

645

Northshore

Drive (SR

332)

Morrell Rd to

Ebenezer Rd

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

646

Northshore

Drive (SR

332)

Pellissippi

Pkwy (I-140)

to Concord Rd

(SR 332)

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

647

Pellissippi

Parkway (SR

162)

Edgemoor Rd

(SR 170) to

Dutchtown Rd

Knox

County

Add auxiliary

lanes between

interchanges and

access control

including

frontage roads

where needed

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

648

Pellissippi

Parkway (SR

162)/ Lovell

Rd (SR 131)

Interchange

Lovell Rd (SR 

131) 

Interchange at 

Pellissippi 

Pkwy (SR 162)

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 109

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

649

Pellissippi

Parkway (SR

162)/ Oak

Ridge

Highway (SR

62)

Interchange

Oak Ridge 

Hwy (SR 62) 

Interchange at 

Pellissippi 

Pkwy (SR 162)

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

650

Byington- Beaver Ridge

Road (SR

131)

At One-Lane 

Railroad 

Underpass

Knox

County

Construct new

road or widen

railroad

underpass

2024 Non- Exempt No

651

I-40/75/ Watt

Road

Interchange

Watt Rd

Interchange at

I-40/75

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

652

I-75/ Emory

Road (SR

131)

Interchange

Emory Rd (SR

131)

Interchange at

I-75

Knoxville

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

653

Alcoa

Highway (SR

115) (US

129)

Woodson Dr to

Cherokee Trail Knoxville

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

654

I-640/ I-275/

I-75

Interchange

Interchange at

I-640 & I-75/I- 275Knoxville

Interchange

improvements to

include additional

through lanes on

I-75 north and

southbound

ramps

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

655 Millertown

Pike

Washington

Pike to I-640 Knoxville

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

656 Millertown

Pike

I-640 to Mill

Rd Knoxville

Widen 2-lane and

4-lane sections to

4-lane and 6-lane

sections

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

657 Washington

Pike

Millertown

Pike to I-640 Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2024 Non- Exempt No

658

Northshore

Drive (SR

332)

Intersection w/

Kingston Pike

(SR 1) (US

11/70)

Knoxville

Intersection

improvement

2024 Exempt No

659 Tazewell Pike

(SR 331)

Intersection w/

Old Broadway

& Greenway

Dr

Knoxville

Intersection

improvement

2024 Exempt No

660 Gleason

Drive

Montvue Rd to

Gallaher View

Rd

Knoxville

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 110

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

661

I-75/

Callahan Rd

Interchange

Callahan Rd

Interchange

Knoxville

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

662

I-75/

Merchant Dr

Interchange

Merchant Dr

Interchange

Knoxville

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2024 Exempt No

663

Northshore

Drive (SR

332)

Lyons View Pk

to Morrell Rd Knoxville

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2024 Exempt No

664

Broadway

(SR 33) (US

441)

Intersection

with Hall of

Fame Dr

Knoxville

Intersection

improvement

2024 Exempt No

665 Murphy Road

Extension

Washington

Pike to

Millertown

Pike

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Construct new 4-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

666

South

Knoxville

Boulevard

(SR 71)

Moody Ave to

Chapman Hwy

(SR 71) (US

441)

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Construct new 4-

lane road

2024 Non- Exempt Yes

667 Strawberry

Plains Pike

Moshina Rd to

south of I-40

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2024 Non- Exempt No

247 Sam Houston

School Road

Old Knoxville

Hwy (SR 33)

to Wildwood

Rd

Alcoa/

Blount

County

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

248 Topside Road

(SR 333)

Alcoa Hwy

(US 129) (SR

115) to

Wrights Ferry

Rd

Alcoa

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

249 Montvale Rd

(SR 336)

Maryville City

Limits (near

Hill Ct) to Six

Mile Rd

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

250

Sevierville

Road (SR 35)

(US 411)

Peppermint Rd

to Chapman

Hwy (SR 71)

(US 441)

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

251 Topside Road

(SR 333)

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

to Louisville

Rd (SR 334)

Blount

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 111

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

252

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #4 - Cochran Rd

Extension

Carpenters

Grade Rd to

Montvale Rd

(SR 136)

Maryville/

Blount

County

Construct new 2-

lane road

2034 Non- Exempt No

253

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #6 - Old Glory Rd

Extension

S. Old Glory

Rd to William

Blount DR (SR

335)

Maryville/

Blount

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

254

Hunter

Growth Study

Corridor #7- Southern

Loop

Connector

US 321 (SR

73) @

proposed

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

extension to

Old Niles Ferry

Rd @ proposed

Wm Blount Dr

(SR 335)

extension

Maryville/

Blount

County

Construct 2-lane

road along

existing and new

alignment

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

417 SR 72

Corporate Park

to Stockton

Valley Rd

Loudon

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

418 SR 72 US 11 (SR 2)

to Vonore Rd

Loudon

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

419 SR 72

Vonore Rd to

Monroe

County Line

Loudon

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

420 Sugar Limb

Road

US 11 (SR 2)

to I-75 Loudon

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

421 US 11 (SR 2) SR 72 to Pond

Creek Rd Loudon

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

422 US 321 (SR

73)

US 11 (SR 2)

to I-75 Lenoir City

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

668

Kingston Pike

(SR 1) (US

11/70)

Smith Rd to

Campbell

Station Rd

Farragut Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

669 Everett Road

Proposed

Synder Rd

Extension to

Kingston Pk

(SR 1) (US

11/70)

Farragut Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

670 Snyder Road

Extension

Campbell

Station Rd to

Everett Rd

north of I-40

Farragut Construct new 2-

lane road

2034 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 112

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

671 Central

Avenue Pike

Beaver Creek

Dr to Emory

Rd (SR 131)

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

672 Dante Road

Central

Avenue Pike to

Dry Gap Pk

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

673

Oak Ridge

Highway (SR

62)

Byington- Beaver Ridge

Rd (SR 131) to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (SR 162)

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

674 Westland

Drive

Northshore Dr

(SR 332) to

Pellissippi

Pkwy (I-140)

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

675 Maryville

Pike (SR 33)

Gov. John

Sevier Hwy

(SR 168) to

Blount County

Line

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

676 Emory Road

(SR 331)

Tazewell Pike

(SR 131) to

Grainger

County Line

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

677

Gov John

Sevier

Highway (SR

168)

Chapman Hwy

(SR 71) (US

441) to

Asheville Hwy

Knox

County

Widen 2-lane to

4-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

678 Gleason

Drive

Gallaher View

Rd to Ebenezer

Rd

Knox

County

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

679

I-75/ Raccoon

Valley Rd

Interchange

Raccoon

Valley Rd

Interchange at

I-75

Knox

County

Reconfigure 

existing 

interchange to 

improve safety 

and operations

2034 Exempt No

680 Northshore

Drive

Concord Rd

(SR 332) to

Choto Rd

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

681

Raccoon

Valley Road

(SR 170)

Norris Frwy

(SR 71) (US

441) to I-75

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

682 Tazewell Pike

(SR 131)

Barker Rd to

Union County

Line

Knox

County

Reconstruct 2-

lane section

2034 Exempt No

683 McFee Road/

Harvey Road

McFee Rd to

Harvey Rd

over railroad

Knox

County/

Farragut

Construct new

road or widen

railroad

underpass

2034 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix H

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 113

LRMP

ID # Route Termini Jurisdiction Type ofImprovement

Proposed

Horizon Year Exempt

Status RegionallySignificant

684

Knoxville

Regional

Parkway (SR- 475)

I-40/75 in

Loudon

County to I-75

in Anderson

County

Knox/

Anderson/

Loudon

County

Construct new 4-

lane freeway

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

685 Vanosdale

Road

Buckingham

Rd to

Middlebrook

Pike (SR 169)

Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

686 Cedar Lane

East of Central

Avenue Pike to

Inskip Rd

Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

687 Moody

Avenue

Chapman Hwy

(SR 71) (US

441) to

Maryville Pike

(SR 33)

Knoxville

Construct new 2-

lane road w/

center turn lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

688 Morrell Road

Westland Dr to

Northshore Dr

(SR 332)

Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

689 Papermill

Road

Kingston Pike

(SR 1) (US

11/70) to

Weisgarber Rd

Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt No

690 Woodland

Avenue

Central St to

Huron St Knoxville

Add center turn

lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

691 I-40/75

I-40/I-75

Interchange to

Lovell Rd (SR

131)

Interchange

Knoxville/

Farragut/

Knox

County

Widen 6-lane to

8-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

692 I-75

Emory Rd (SR

131) to

Raccoon

Valley Rd (SR

170)

Interchange

Knoxville/

Knox

County

Widen 4-lane to

6-lane

2034 Non- Exempt Yes

693

I-40/ Gov

John Sevier

Hwy (SR

168)

Gov John 

Sevier Hwy 

(SR 168)/ 

Hammer Rd/ 

Oglesby Rd 

area

Knoxville/

Knox

County

New Interchange 2034 Non- Exempt Yes
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix I

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 114

Appendix I – Existing Plus Committed Projects List

Old

LRTP

# Pro je ct Jurisdiction Lo cation De s cription

56 I-40 Knoxville I-275 to Cherry St Widen 4-lane to 6-lane

613 I-275 Knoxville Baxter Ave to I-640 Widen 4-lane to 6-lane

614 I-640 Knoxville Interchange with I-75/ I- 275

Widen I-75 underpass and add 

eastbound through lane

71 Pleasant Ridge 

Road Knoxville Merchant Dr to I-640 Add center turn lane

51 Emory Road (SR 

131) Knox County Bishop Rd to Norris Frwy

Widen 2-lane to 4-lane w/ 

center turn lane

18 US 321 (SR 73) Loudon County East of Tennessee River 

to SR 95 Widen 2-lane to 4-lane

59 Lovell Road (SR 

131) Knox County Gilbert Rd to Pellissippi Pkwy

Widen 2-lane to 4-lane w/ 

center turn lane

12 Oak Ridge 

Turnpike (SR 95) Oak Ridge Westover Dr to Illinois Ave (SR 62) Add center turn lane
Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization Appendix J

2009 – 2034 Knoxville Regional LRMP Air Quality Conformity Determination 115

Appendix J – Updated Non-Exempt TIP/LRMP Project 

Number Reference

FY 2008 - 2011 

TIP ID# Project Name & Description Jurisdiction

New 2009 - 2034 

LRMP #

Old 2005 - 2030 

LRTP #

Horizon 

Year

2008-001

Alcoa Hy (SR-115/US-129), Woodson Dr to 

Bridge over TN River Knoxville 653 86 2024

2008-002

Alcoa Hy (SR-115/US-129), Pellissippi Pkwy to 

south of Little River Alcoa 255,216,256 88 2024

2008-003

Alcoa Hy (SR-115/US-129), North of bridge over 

Little River to Maloney Rd Knoxville 627 87 2014

2008-004

Alcoa Hy (SR-115/US-129) bypass, Airport Rd 

to Pellissippi Pkwy Alcoa 218,257,258 84 2024

2008-009 Blount/Sevier Rd Corridor improvements

City of 

Knoxville 617 E7 2014

2006-010 Boyd Station Rd Farragut 683 143 2034

2008-012 Campbell Station Rd, Jamestown to Parkside Dr Farragut 601 44 2014

2008-015 Concord Rd, Turkey Creek to Northshore Dr Knox County 632 46 2024

2008-017 Cumberland Av, Alcoa Hy to 16th Street

City of 

Knoxville 613 94 2014

2008-020 Harrison Rd, Kingston St to 1,000' west Lenoir City 400 65 2014

2008-023 I-640, Broadway modifications Knoxville 611 57 2014

2008-025 James White Parkway, Chapman to Moody Av Knoxville 666 105 2024

2008-029 Lovell Rd, Gilbert Rd to Shaeffer Rd Knox County 608 59 2014

2008-032 Millertown Pk, Washington Pk to I-640

City of 

Knoxville 655 64 2024

2008-033 Millertown Pk, Kinzel Way to Norfolk Southern Knoxville 656 64 2024

2008-039 Pellissippi Py, SR 33 to SR 73 Alcoa 232 70 2024

2008-040

Pleasant Ridge Rd, Knoxville City Limits to 

Merchant Rd Knoxville 616 71 2014

2008-046 SR-35, SR 338 to Macon Ln Sevier County 508 E18 2014

2008-052 Washington Pk, Millertown Pk to I-640 Knoxville 657 76 2024

2008-053 Washington Pk, Greenway Dr to Mill Rd

City of 

Knoxville 615 125 2014

2008-055 Watt Rd, Kingston Pk to Old Stage Rd Farragut 600 68 2014

2008-058 Western Av, Major Av to Texas Av Knoxville 610 78 2014

2008-059 Widen and improve SR-33 Knox County 604 60 2014
Appendix E – Onroad Mobile Source Summary
Onroad Summary

Onroad NOx Emissions Summary for the Knoxville 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Anderson 6.24 5.47 4.70 3.93 2.90 1.87

Blount 4.58 4.19 3.79 3.39 2.85 2.32

Cocke* 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01

Jefferson 10.87 9.42 7.96 6.51 4.57 2.63

Knox 33.81 29.76 25.71 21.66 16.27 10.87

Loudon 9.99 8.62 7.25 5.88 4.05 2.22

Sevier 6.32 5.62 4.93 4.23 3.30 2.37

Total 71.84 63.09 54.35 45.61 33.95 22.29

-12.2 -24.3 -36.5 -52.7 -69.0

*Only includes the area in the GSMNP.

Onroad VOC Emissions Summary for the Knoxville 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

2007 2010 2013 2016 2020 2024

Anderson 2.93 2.66 2.39 2.12 1.75 1.39

Blount 4.24 3.94 3.63 3.33 2.92 2.52

Cocke* 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01

Jefferson 2.74 2.49 2.25 2.00 1.68 1.35

Knox 19.32 17.61 15.90 14.19 11.91 9.63

Loudon 2.65 2.40 2.15 1.90 1.56 1.22

Sevier 4.87 4.41 3.95 3.49 2.88 2.27

Total 36.78 33.54 30.29 27.05 22.72 18.39

-8.8 -17.6 -26.5 -38.2 -50.0

*Only includes the area in the GSMNP.

--tons/day--

--tons/day--

Percent change in emissions 

from 2007

Percent change in emissions 

from 2007

County

County

Page 1 of 1