## 1 

# APPENDIX C

DEMONSTRATION FOR MEETING THE M ODELING REQUIREMENTS OF U.S. EPA’S ALTERNATE LOW ENHANCED I/M PERFORMANCE STANDARD

1.0 Introduction

This document demonstrates that Wisconsin’s I/M program meets the modeling requirements for U.S. EPA’s Alternate Lo w Enhanced I/M Performance Standard, specified in 40 CFR 51.351(g). This section of the CFR specifies a model program which is to be compared by emissions modeling with the I/M program under consideration. The modeling requirements are specified in 40 CFR 51.351(g)(13) as follows:

40 CFR 51.351(g)(13) Evaluation date . Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the provisions of this para graph (g) shall be shown to obtain the same or lower emission levels as the model program de scribed in this paragraph by January 1, 2002 to within ±0.02 gpm [grams per mile]. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this level of emission reduction (or better) through their attainme nt deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s).

2.0 Description of the Modeling Demonstration

The demonstration involves a comparison of emission reductions from the U.S. EPA’s model program with those from Wiscons in’s actual program. The inputs to MOVES2010a for the model program and Wisc onsin’s actual program are provided in Tables B-1 and B-2 of Appendix B. Separate demonstrations are done for the two areas of: (a) the Six-Count y Milwaukee-Racine Nonattainm ent Area (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and Waukesh a Counties) and (b) the Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area. Since ozone is the pollu tant of concern, the pollutants modeled are the ozone precursors volatile organic com pounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx).

VOC and NOx reductions from both the U.S. EPA’s model program and Wisconsin’s actual program were modeled for January 1 

## of 2002 and for July of 2009, 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2022. Wisconsin’s I/M program meets the modeling requirements for a particular year if the VOC and NOx reducti ons from the I/M program for that year are greater than or equal to the reductions from the U.S. EPA’ s model program on January of 2002, with a tolerance of 0.02 grams per mile.

1 

### To maintain consistent fleet, fuel and meteorological inputs throughout this modeling demonstration, January of 2002 was modeled by taking the average of the modeling results for July of 2001 and July of 2002. (Ozone levels tend to be highest on hot summer days.)

## 2 3.0 Modeling Results

Tables C-1 through C-4 summarize the modeling resu lts. In all cases, Wisconsin’s actual I/M program achieves the emission reduction percentages required to meet the U.S. EPA’s Alternate Low Enhanced I/M Performance Standard.

Electronic copies of the MOVES2010a run spec ifications, input file s and databases (input and output) for the modeling summarized belo w are available from Christopher Bovee, Bureau of Air Management, Wisconsin Depart ment of Natural Resources, P.O Box 7921, Madison, WI, 53707, phone: 608/266-5542, email: christopher.bovee@wisconsin.gov.

## 3 Table C-1 IM Performance Standard Modeling Results

Area: Six County Milwaukee-Racine Nona ttainment Area (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and Waukesha Counties) Pollutant: VOC I/M Reductions per Hot Summer Day Emissions in Tons per Hot Summer Day U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisconsin’s Actual I/M ProgramTime VehicleMiles of Travel No I/M Program U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisc’s Actual I/M Program Tons gpm Pct. Tons gpm Pct.

July 2001 44,904,463 67.31 63.45 60. 69 3.86 0.078 5.7% 6.62 0.134 9.8% July 2002 46,144,359 64.53 60.91 58. 08 3.61 0.071 5.6% 6.45 0.127 10.0% Jan. 2002 45,524,411 65.92 62.18 59. 38 3.74 0.074 5.7% 6.54 0.130 9.9% Target 2.73 0.054 4.1% July 2009 49,249,051 37.48 35.34 34. 22 2.14 0.039 5.7% 3.26 0.060 8.7% July 2012 52,471,643 29.83 28.38 27. 71 1.46 0.025 4.9% 2.12 0.037 7.1% July 2015 54,394,979 22.70 21.69 21. 08 1.01 0.017 4.5% 1.62 0.027 7.1% July 2018 56,318,303 18.95 18.24 17. 61 0.71 0.011 3.7% 1.34 0.022 7.1% July 2022 58,096,319 17.16 16.57 15. 99 0.58 0.009 3.4% 1.17 0.018 6.8% ALEPS = Alternate Low Enhanc ed Performance Standard

NOTE: Results calculated on the numbers in this table may slightly differ from those shown because of rounding.



## The U.S. EPA model program’s reductions for January of 2002 are 0.074 grams per mile (gpm). Therefore, Wisconsin’s actual pr ogram needs to show reductions of 0.074 gpm – 0.020 gpm = 0.054 gpm (4.1%) to meet the modeling requirements. Since all of the reductions from Wisconsin’s actual program are greater than or equal to 4.1%, see rightmost column, Wisconsin’s program does meet the modeling requirements for the ALEPS for VOC in the Six County Milw aukee-Racine Nonattainment Area.

## 4 Table C-2 IM Performance Standard Modeling Results

Area: Six County Milwaukee-Racine Nona ttainment Area (Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and Waukesha Counties) Pollutant: NOx I/M Reductions per Hot Summer Day Emissions in Tons per Hot Summer Day U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisconsin’s Actual I/M ProgramTime VehicleMiles of Travel No I/M Program U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisc’s Actual I/M Program Tons gpm Pct. Tons gpm Pct.

July 2001 44,904,463 160.26 157. 86 149.84 2.40 0.048 1.5% 10.42 0.211 6.5% July 2002 46,144,359 156.27 154.24 146. 44 2.04 0.040 1.3% 9.83 0.193 6.3% Jan. 2002 45,524,411 158.27 156. 05 148.14 2.22 0.044 1.4% 10.13 0.202 6.4% Target 1.21 0.024 0.8% July 2009 49,249,051 92.81 92.33 87. 54 0.49 0.009 0.5% 5.27 0.097 5.7% July 2012 52,471,643 74.08 73.83 70. 41 0.25 0.004 0.3% 3.67 0.063 4.9% July 2015 54,394,979 53.80 53.66 51. 34 0.13 0.002 0.2% 2.46 0.041 4.6% July 2018 56,318,303 41.26 41.20 39. 54 0.06 0.001 0.1% 1.72 0.028 4.2% July 2022 58,096,319 33.24 33.20 31. 99 0.04 0.001 0.1% 1.25 0.020 3.8% ALEPS = Alternate Low Enhanc ed Performance Standard

NOTE: Results calculated on the numbers in this table may slightly differ from those shown because of rounding.



## The U.S. EPA model program’s reductions for January of 2002 are 0.044 grams per mile (gpm). Therefore, Wisconsin’s actual pr ogram needs to show reductions of 0.044 gpm – 0.020 gpm = 0.024 gpm (0.8%) to meet the modeling requirements. Since all of the reductions from Wisconsin’s actual program are greater than or equal to 0.8%, see rightmost column, Wisconsin’s program does meet the modeling requirements for the ALEPS for NOx in the Six County Milw aukee-Racine Nonattainment Area.

## 5 Table C-3 IM Performance Standard Modeling Results

Area: Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area Pollutant: VOC I/M Reductions per Hot Summer Day Emissions in Tons per Hot Summer Day U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisconsin’s Actual I/M ProgramTime VehicleMiles of Travel No I/M Program U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisc’s Actual I/M Program Tons gpm Pct. Tons gpm Pct.

July 2001 3,100,569 4.86 4.56 4. 45 0.30 0.087 6.1% 0.41 0.120 8.4% July 2002 3,146,207 4.59 4.31 4. 20 0.28 0.080 6.0% 0.39 0.113 8.6% Jan. 2002 3,123,388 4.72 4.44 4. 32 0.29 0.084 6.1% 0.40 0.117 8.5% Target 0.22 0.064 4.6% July 2009 3,025,045 2.60 2.45 2. 38 0.15 0.044 5.6% 0.22 0.065 8.3% July 2012 3,949,496 2.83 2.70 2. 64 0.13 0.030 4.6% 0.19 0.044 6.8% July 2015 4,060,788 2.17 2.08 2. 02 0.09 0.020 4.1% 0.14 0.032 6.7% July 2018 4,172,095 1.84 1.78 1. 72 0.06 0.013 3.3% 0.12 0.025 6.3% July 2022 4,320,678 1.71 1.67 1. 62 0.05 0.010 2.8% 0.10 0.021 5.8% ALEPS = Alternate Low Enhanc ed Performance Standard

NOTE: Results calculated on the numbers in this table may slightly differ from those shown because of rounding.



## The U.S. EPA model program’s reductions for January of 2002 are 0.084 grams per mile (gpm). Therefore, Wisconsin’s actual pr ogram needs to show reductions of 0.084 gpm – 0.020 gpm = 0.064 gpm (4.6%) to meet the modeling requirements. Since all of the reductions from Wisconsin’s actual program are greater than or equal to 4.6%, see rightmost column, Wisconsin’s program does meet the modeling requirements for the ALEPS for VOC in the Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area.

## 6 Table C-4 IM Performance Standard Modeling Results

Area: Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area Pollutant: NOx I/M Reductions per Hot Summer Day Emissions in Tons per Hot Summer Day U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisconsin’s Actual I/M ProgramTime VehicleMiles of Travel No I/M Program U.S. EPA’s ALEPS Model Program Wisc’s Actual I/M Program Tons gpm Pct. Tons gpm Pct.

July 2001 3,100,569 12.36 12.17 11. 73 0.18 0.054 1.5% 0.62 0.182 5.0% July 2002 3,146,207 11.82 11.66 11. 24 0.15 0.044 1.3% 0.57 0.165 4.8% Jan. 2002 3,123,388 12.09 11.92 11. 49 0.17 0.049 1.4% 0.60 0.174 4.9% Target 0.10 0.029 0.8% July 2009 3,025,045 5.94 5.91 5. 63 0.03 0.009 0.5% 0.32 0.095 5.3% July 2012 3,949,496 6.29 6.27 5. 99 0.02 0.005 0.3% 0.30 0.069 4.8% July 2015 4,060,788 4.52 4.51 4. 32 0.01 0.002 0.2% 0.20 0.045 4.4% July 2018 4,172,095 3.49 3.49 3. 36 0.00 0.001 0.1% 0.14 0.030 4.0% July 2022 4,320,678 2.88 2.88 2. 78 0.00 0.001 0.1% 0.10 0.021 3.5% ALEPS = Alternate Low Enhanc ed Performance Standard

NOTE: Results calculated on the numbers in this table may slightly differ from those shown because of rounding.



## The U.S. EPA model program’s reductions for January of 2002 are 0.049 grams per mile (gpm). Therefore, Wisconsin’s actual pr ogram needs to show reductions of 0.049 gpm – 0.020 gpm = 0.029 gpm (0.8%) to meet the modeling requirements. Since all of the reductions from Wisconsin’s actual program are greater than or equal to 0.8%, see rightmost column, Wisconsin’s program does meet the modeling requirements for the ALEPS for NOx in the Sheboygan County Nonattainment Area.