Evaporative Emissions from On-road 

Vehicles in MOVES2014 
Evaporative Emissions from On-road 


Vehicles in MOVES2014
 

Assessment and Standards Division 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

NOTICE 

This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or 

positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data 

that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to 

facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of 

technical developments. 

EPA-420-R-14-014
 

September 2014
 
Contents

1 Background 3
 

2 Test Programs and Data Collection 7
 

3 Design and Analysis 8
 

3.1 Fuel Tank Temperature Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
 

3.1.1 Fuel Tank Temperature for Hot and Cold Soaks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
 

3.1.2 Fuel Tank Temperature while Running . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
 

3.2 Permeation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 

3.2.1 Base Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
 

3.2.2 Temperature Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
 

3.2.3 Fuel Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
 

3.3 Tank Vapor Venting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
 

3.3.1 Altitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
 

3.3.2 Cold Soak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
 

3.3.3 Hot Soak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
 

3.3.4 Running Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
 

3.4 Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
 

3.4.1 Leak Prevalence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
 

3.5 Liquid Leaks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
 

3.6 Refueling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
 

4 Glossary of Terms 49
 

Appendices 50
 

Appendix A Notes on Evaporative Emission Data 50
 

Appendix B Peer Review Comments 52
 

Appendix C Relevant MOVES Evaporative Tables 67
 
5 References 103
 
1 Background

EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) has developed the Motor Vehicle Emission

Simulator (MOVES). The MOVES model estimates emissions for mobile sources covering a broad

range of pollutants and allows multiple scale analysis. MOVES currently estimates emissions from

cars, trucks and motorcycles.

Evaporative processes can account for a significant portion of gaseous hydrocarbon emissions from

gasoline vehicles. Volatile hydrocarbons evaporate from the fuel system while a vehicle is refueling,

parked or driving. MOVES does not include estimates for emissions from non-fuel sources such

as window washer fluid, paint, plastics, and rubber. Evaporative processes differ from exhaust

emissions because they don’t directly involve combustion, which is the main process driving exhaust

emissions. For this reason, evaporative emissions require a different modeling approach. In the

MOBILE models and certification test procedures, evaporative emissions were quantified by the

test procedures used to measure them:

Running Loss - Vapor lost during vehicle operation.
 

Hot Soak - Vapor lost after turning off a vehicle.
 

Diurnal Cold Soak - Vapor lost while parked at ambient temperature.
 

Refueling Loss - Vapor lost and spillage occurring during refueling.
 

For MOVES, a new approach has been adopted to model the underlying physical processes involved

in evaporation of fuels. This ”modal” approach characterizes the emissions by physical modes of generation. This improvement in MOVES is consistent with significant changes made in MOVES2010

when, for example, the model diverged from MOBILE6 speed bins to vehicle specific power (VSP)

bins. Likewise, evaporative emissions can be separated by different emissions generation processes,

each having its own engineering design characteristics and failure rates. This way, certain physical

processes can be isolated, for example, ethanol (EtOH) has a unique effect on permeation, which

occurs in all the above modes. The approach used in MOVES categorizes evaporative emissions

based on the evaporative mechanism, using the following processes:

Permeation - The migration of hydrocarbons through materials in the fuel system.
 

Tank Vapor Venting (TVV) - Vapor generated in fuel system lost to the atmosphere,
 

when not contained by evaporative emissions control system.
 

Liquid Leaks - Liquid fuel leaking from the fuel system, ultimately evaporating.
 

Refueling Emissions - Spillage and vapor displacement as a result of refueling.
 

These processes occur in each operating mode (Running Loss, Hot Soak, Cold Soak) used in the

MOVES model. Each emission process can be modeled over a user-defined mix of operating modes,

shown in Table 1. This makes for more accurate modeling of scenarios that do not replicate test

procedures. The emission processes used by MOVES and the operating modes used for evaporative

processes are shown in Table 2.

Figure 1 illustrates the evaporative emission processes. Permeation occurs continuously through

the tank walls, hoses, and seals. It is affected by fuel tank temperature and fuel properties. Vapor

3
 
Table 1: MOVES operatingMode Table
 

opModeID Operating mode description

150 Hot Soaking

151 Cold Soaking

300 Engine Operation

Table 2: MOVES emissionProcess Table
 

processID Emission process description

11 Evap permeation

12 Evap vapor venting losses

13 Evap liquid leaks

18 Refueling displacement vapor losses

19 Refueling fuel spillage

is generated by increasing tank temperature. These vapors are typically mitigated by a charcoal

canister. If the canister is saturated or there are leaks in the system, vapors can bypass the

emissions control system directly to the atmosphere. Liquid leaks can occur anywhere in the fuel

system. Moreover, refueling displaces the vapor in the tank and can also result in spillage.

Evaporative emissions are a function of many variables. In MOVES, these variables include:

• Ambient Temperature

• Fuel Tank Temperature

• Model year group (as a surrogate for technology an certification standard)

• Vehicle age

• Vehicle class

– Passenger Vehicle

– Motorcycle

– Short/Long-haul Trucks

• Fuel Properties

– Ethanol content

– Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)1

• Failure Modes

• Presence of inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs

Both ambient temperature and engine operation cause increases in fuel tank temperature. An

1The MOVES fuel supply table provides the characteristics of gasoline sold in each county and month. For vapor

venting calculations, the MOVES Tank Fuel Generator uses the fuel supply information to account for the effects of

”comingling” ethanol with non-ethanol gasoline and for the ”weathering” effect on RVP for in-use fuel.

4
 
Figure 1: Illustration of Evaporative Processes
 

increase in fuel tank temperature will generate more vapor in the tank. Activated charcoal canisters

are a control technology commonly used to adsorb the generated vapor. During engine operation,

the canister is purged periodically and the captured vapor is diverted to the engine and burned

as fuel. The emission certification standards for a vehicle (associated with model year and vehicle

class) influence the capacity of the canister system. When the generated vapor exceeds the capacity

of the canister, the vapor is vented to the atmosphere. This can occur when a fuel undergoes a large

ambient temperature increase, or if a fuel with higher volatility is used, or when a vehicle canister

collects vapor for many days without purging. MOVES accounts for co-mingling ethanol and nonethanol gasoline, and for RVP weathering of in-use fuel. Details on the Tank Fuel Generator are

provided in the MOVES Software Design and Reference Manual.

Fuel systems can develop liquid and vapor leaks that circumvent the vehicle emissions control

system. Some inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs explicitly intend to identify vehicles

in need of evaporative system repairs. Specific states also implement Stage II programs at gas

stations to capture the vapors released during refueling. These programs capture refueling vapor

with technology installed at the pump rather than internal to the vehicle.

The model year groups for evaporative emissions are shown in Table 3. They reflect evaporative

emission standards and related technological improvements. Early control saw the introduction of

activated charcoal canisters for controlling fuel vapor emissions. Later controls included fuel tanks

and hoses built with more advanced materials less prone to allowing permeation emissions. Also,

reduction of fittings and connections became an important consideration for vapor mitigation.

Evaporative emissions are not directly affected by the combustion process, thus hydrocarbons such

as methane that are not present in uncombusted fuels will not appear in evaporative emissions.

Table 4 contains a list of the evaporative pollutants calculated by MOVES.

As shown, MOVES produces aggregate species (e.g Total hydrocarbons, Volatile Organic Compounds) and specific hydrocarbon species (e.g. benzene, ethanol) which are important mobile-source

air toxics (MSATs). The MSAT emission rates are produced as ratios from the aggregate species

as documented in a separate MOVES2014 report [15] [17].

The data used for this evaporative analysis was collected on light-duty gasoline vehicles but will

also be applied to heavy-duty gasoline vehicles since heavy-duty gasoline data is not available.

5
 
Table 3: Model Year Groups in MOVES
 

Model year group Evaporative emissions standard or technology level

1971-1977 Pre-control

1978-1995 Early control

1996 80% early control, 20% enhanced evap

1997 60% early control, 40% enhanced evap

1998 10% early control, 90% enhanced evap

1999-2003 100% Enhanced evap

2004-2015 Tier 2, LEV II

2016-2017 40% Tier 3

2018-2019 60% Tier 3

2020-2021 80% Tier 3

2022+ Tier 3

Table 4: MOVES Pollutant IDs (pollutant table)
 

pollutantID pollutantName NEIPollutantCode shortName

1 Total FID Hydrocarbons HC THC

20 Benzene 71432 Benzene

21 Ethanol ETOH

22 Methyl tert-butyl ether 1634044 MTBE

40 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane 540841 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane

41 Ethyl Benzene 218019 Ethyl Benzene

42 Hexane 206440 Hexane

45 Toluene 85018 Toluene

46 Xylene 123386 Xylene

79 Non-Methane Hydrocarbons NMHC NMHC

80 Non-Methane Organic Gases NMOG NMOG

86 Total Organic Gases TOG TOG

87 Volatile Organic Compounds VOC VOC

185 Naphthalene gas 91203 Naphthalene Gas

6
 
For diesel vehicles, it is assumed that there are no evaporative emission losses except for refueling

spillage. Due to the low vapor pressure of diesel fuel, diesel evaporative losses are considered

negligible.

For compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles, we are not aware of any relevant evaporative emissions

data. CNG fuel systems and refueling procedures are significantly different from those of liquid

petroleum-based fuels. For the current release of MOVES, all evaporative emission rates for CNG

vehicles are set at zero.

We significantly updated the evaporative emission calculations and rates in MOVES2014 based

on updated emissions data, failure rates, and vehicle activity in MOVES2014. In the process

of updating the evaporative emissions, we discovered an error in the MOVES2010b evaporative

calculator that overestimated evaporative cold soak emissions by many times the intended value.

The updated evaporative data was expected to significantly increase the evaporative emissions in

MOVES2014 compared to MOVES2010b. However, due to the error in MOVES2010b, users may

observe a decrease in evaporative emissions in MOVES2014.

2 Test Programs and Data Collection

The modeling of evaporative emissions in MOVES is based on data from a large number of studies.

Over a decade of research has greatly modernized evaporative emissions modeling. New test procedures provide modal emissions data that greatly advance the state of the science. For example, the

CRC E-77 test programs [20] [23] [21] [22] measured permeation emissions separately from vapor

emissions. Implanted leak testing from these studies along with further field research has provided

the first large database regarding the prevalence and severity of evaporative leaks and other malfunctions. Discoveries from these studies are introduced in MOVES2014 with the explicit modeling

of vapor leaks. High evaporative emissions field studies used a portable test cell (PSHED) to measure in-use hot soak emissions on a large number of vehicles. The studies utilized an innovative

sampling design which recruited the higher end of emissions more heavily with the aid of infrared

ultraviolet remote sensing devices [12] [11].

Appendix A has a more detailed summary of these test programs.

7
 
Table 5: List of Research Programs
 

Program # of Vehicles

CRC E-9 Measurement of Diurnal Emissions from In-Use Vehicles [2] 151

CRC E-35 Measurement of Running Loss Emissions in In-Use Vehicles [19] 150

CRC E-41 Evaporative Emissions from Late-Model In-Use Vehicles [3] [4] 50

CRC E-65 Fuel Permeation from Automotive Systems [24] 10

CRC E-65-3 Fuel Permeation from Automotive Systems: E0, E6, E10, and E85 [25] 10

CRC E-77 Vehicle Evaporative Emission Mechanisms: A Pilot Study [20] 8

CRC E-77-2 Enhanced Evaporative Emission Vehicles [23] 8

CRC E-77-2b Aging Enhanced Evaporative Emission Vehicles [21] 16

CRC E-77-2c Aging Enhanced Evaporative Emission Vehicles with E20 Fuel [22] 16

High Evap field studies [12] [11] Thousands

Fourteen Day Diurnal study [28] 5

PI Leakage Study [5] Not Avail.

API Gas Cap Study [29] Not Avail.

EPA Compliance Testing [1] Thousands

3 Design and Analysis

Fuel tank temperature is closely correlated with permeation and vapor venting as observed in the

CRC E-77 pilot testing program [20]. This program tested ten vehicles in model years 1992 through

2007. The results showed that fuel temperature strongly influences evaporative emissions in all

testing regimes. Fuel tank temperature is dependent on the daily ambient temperature profile and

vehicle operation patterns. Modern vehicles (enhanced-evap, 1996 & later) do not recirculate fuel

from the engine to the fuel tank and therefore have a lower temperature rise than older vehicles

during operation. In Figure 2, the permeation emissions are plotted over a 3-day California diurnal

test (65-105◦F) as the low temperature range, and 85-120◦F as the high temperature range. Both

the effects of temperature and fuel volatility can be observed.

As emission standards have tightened, fuel system materials and connections have become more

efficient at containing fuel vapors. Purge systems and canister technologies have also advanced,

resulting in less vented emissions. Fuel tank temperature can be used in modeling permeation

and vapor emissions. However, liquid leaks occur regardless and therefore are not dependent on

temperature.

8
 
Figure 2: Permeation Temperature and RVP effects
 

3.1 Fuel Tank Temperature Generator

MOVES calculates fuel temperature (also referred to as fuel tank temperature) for a given ambient

temperature profile and vehicle trip schedule based on the vehicle type and model year. Different

equations are used depending on the operating mode of the vehicle: running, hot soak, or cold soak.

Fuel tanks are warmer during running operation than the ambient temperature. The routing of hot

exhaust, vehicle speed, and airflow can all affect tank temperature. Immediately after the engine

is turned off, the vehicle is in a hot-soak condition, and the fuel tank begins to cool to ambient

temperature. In cold soak mode, the vehicle has reached ambient temperature.

Input parameters for the fuel tank temperature generator are:

• Hourly ambient temperature profile (zoneMonthHour table)

• Key on and key off times (sampleVehicleTrip table)

• Day and hour of first KeyON (hourDay table)

• Vehicle Type (Light-duty vehicle, Light-duty truck, Heavy-duty gas truck)

• Pre-enhanced or enhanced evaporative emissions control system

3.1.1 Fuel Tank Temperature for Hot and Cold Soaks

Equation 1 is used to model tank temperature as a function of ambient temperature.

dTtank = k(Tair − Ttank) (1) dt

9
 
TTank is the fuel tank temperature, Tair is the ambient temperature, and k is a constant proportionality factor (k = 1.4 hr−1, reciprocal of time constant). The value of k was established from EPA

compliance data. Compliance data was available on 77 vehicles that underwent a 2-day diurnal test

and had a 1-hour hot soak (See Appendix A). No distinction was made between hot and cold soak

for this derivation. We assume that during any soak, the only factor driving change in the fuel tank

temperature is the difference between the tank temperature and the ambient temperature.

This equation only applies during parked conditions, which include the following time intervals:

•	 From the start of the day (midnight) until the first trip (keyON)

•	 From a keyOFF time until the next keyON time

•	 From the final keyOFF time until the end of the day

For more information on the activity data used to determine the time of keyOn and keyOff events,

see the MOVES technical report [16] and supporting contractor reports [32] [33]. The activity

information is in the process of being updated for the next version of MOVES.

Mathematical steps:

1. At time t0 = 0 or KeyOFF (start of soak), TTank = Ti. This value will either be the ambient

temperature at the start of the day, or the fuel tank temperature at the end of a trip.

2. Then, for all t	 >0 and KeyOFF, the next tank temperature is calculated by integrating

numerically2 over the function for temperature change, using Equation 2

(TTank)n+1 = TTank + k(Tair − TTank)Δt	 (2)

where:

TTank = Tank temperature

Tair = Ambient air temperature

t = Time

k = Temperature constant

Figure 3 demonstrates the Euler approximation for calculating the tank temperature based on

ambient temperature.

2Numerical integration is used to perform this step using the Euler method, one of the simplest methods of

integration. The smaller the time step Δt, the more accurate the solution. MOVES uses a Δt of 15 minutes, which

is accurate enough for our modeling purposes without causing tremendous strain on computing resources.

10
 
Figure 3: Example Day Modeled with Euler Method
 

3.1.2 Fuel Tank Temperature while Running

Vehicle trips are short compared to the length of the day. Therefore, we assume a linear temperature

increase during a trip to improve model performance with minimal compromise to accuracy.

In this algorithm, we initially calculate the tank temperature increases over a period of 4,300

seconds (1.19 hr), which is the duration of the certification running loss test. To determine ΔTtank,

tank temperature, we must first find ΔTtank95, the average increase in tank temperature during

a standard 4300 second, 95◦F running loss test. The algorithm models the increase in fuel tank

temperature using the tank temperature at KeyON time, the amount of running time, and the

vehicle type and technology. Newer technologies are able to reduce the heat transferred to the fuel

tank. The MOVES ΔTtank95 temperatures are as follows:

• If the vehicle is pre-enhanced (pre-1996), vehicle type affects ΔTtank95: [19]

LDV ΔTtank95 = 35◦F
 

LDT ΔTtank95 = 29◦F
 

• If the vehicle is evap-enhanced (1996+):

• ΔTtank95 = 24◦F

These values are used to calculate the ΔTtank for starting fuel tank temperatures using Equation

3.

ΔTTank = 0.352(95 − TTank,KeyON ) + ΔTTank95 (3)

The parameters in Equation 3 are derived from regression analyses of light-duty vehicles driving

the running loss drive cycle with varied starting temperatures [9]. The lower the initial tank temperature, the larger the increase over a given drive cycle. The average ratio of fuel temperature

11
 
Figure 4: Modeled Vehicle Tank Temperature During a Day of Operation
 

increase to initial fuel temperature is -0.352. This gives us the increase in tank temperature so we

can create a linear function that models fuel tank temperature for each trip.

ΔTTank TTank = (t − tkeyON ) + TTank,KeyON	 (4) 4300/3600

where:

TTank = Tank temperature
 

t = Time
 

tkeyON = Time of engine start
 

The 4300/3600 in the Equation 4 denominator converts seconds to hours (4300 seconds in the

running loss certification test), maintaining temporal consistency in the algorithm. The resultant

tank temperatures for an example temperature cycle are illustrated in Figure 4. Running operation

is shown as a red line, and hot soak operation is shown as a blue line.

Assumptions:

•	 The first trip is assumed to start halfway into the hour stated in the first trips HourDayID.

•	 The effect of a change in ambient temperature during a trip is negligible compared to the

temperature change caused by operation.

•	 The KeyON tank temperature is known from calculation of tank temperature from the previous soak.

12
 
3.2 Permeation

Permeation emissions are specific hydrocarbon compounds that escape through micro-pores in pipes,

fittings, fuel tanks, and other vehicle components (typically made of plastic or rubber). They differ

from leaks in that they occur on the molecular level and do not represent a mechanical/material

failure in a specific location. In MOVES, base permeation rates are estimated, and then adjusted

for non-standard tank temperature and fuel property conditions.

3.2.1 Base Rates

Permeation base rates are developed using the mg/hour emission rate during the last six hours of

a 72-96-72◦F diurnal test (also known as cold soak/resting loss) The diurnal tests were measured

on the federal cycle (72F-96◦F) for the CRC E-9 and E-41 programs [2] [3] [4]. Together, these two

programs represent a total of 151 vehicles with model years ranging from 1971 to 1997. The final

six hours of the diurnal are the most appropriate times to isolate the effect of permeation since

the emission rate, ambient temperature, and fuel temperature are relatively stable or constant.

Permeation should be the only evaporative process occurring. The rates are developed for distinct

model year and age groups. Model years 1996-1998 are represented individually to reflect the

20/40/90% phase-in of enhanced evaporative emissions standards. Recent data from the E-65 and

E-77 programs were not significantly different from the previous findings and served to validate the

MOVES Tier 2 permeation base rates. Tier 3 standards will be introduced in 2018, and phase in over

model years 2018-2022. The Tier 3 permeation standard reflects a 40% reduction from the previous

standard and the introduction of 10% ethanol to the certification fuel. MOVES base rates exist

as if the fuel contains no ethanol. As will be explained later in the fuel effects section, with other

factors remaining constant, the presence of ethanol increases permeation emissions approximately

twofold, therefore the resultant 0% ethanol base rate is approximately 80% less than the previous

standard. Permeation base rates for are presented in Table 6.

13
 
Table 6: Base Permeation Rates at 72F
 

Model year group Age group Base permeation rate [g/hr]

1971-1977

10-14

15-19

20+

0.192

0.229

0.311

1978-1995

0-5

6-9

10-14

15-19

20+

0.055

0.091

0.124

0.148

0.201

1996

0-5

6-9

10-14

15-19

20+

0.046

0.075

0.101

0.120

0.163

1997

0-5

6-9

10-14

15-19

20+

0.037

0.059

0.079

0.093

0.125

1998

0-5

6-9

10-14

15-19

20+

0.015

0.018

0.022

0.024

0.029

1999-2015

2016-2017

2018-2019

2020-2021

2022+

All Ages

All Ages

All Ages

All Ages

All Ages

0.010

0.007

0.006

0.004

0.003

14
 
3.2.2 Temperature Adjustment

The E-65 permeation study found that permeation rates, on average, double for every 18◦F increase

in temperature. [24] This study tested 10 vehicle fuel systems (the vehicle body was cut away from

the fuel system, which remained intact on a frame) at 85◦F and 105◦F. The vehicles ranged in

model year from 1978-2001. In MOVES the base permeation rates are calculated at 72◦F, the same

temperature as the certification test.

Equation 5 is derived from this study and used to adjust the base permeation rate.

0.0385(TT ank−Tbase) Padj = Pbasee (5)

Where:

Pbase = Base Permeation Rate

TTank = Tank Temperature

Tbase = Base Temperature for a given cycle (e.g. 72◦ for a federal diurnal test)

3.2.3 Fuel Adjustment

Ethanol affects evaporative emissions from gasoline vehicles due to the increased permeation of

specific hydrocarbon compounds through tanks and hoses. This behavior highlights a key MOVES

feature to account for independent fuel effects for each unique emissions process.

Permeation fuel effects were developed from the CRC E-65 and E-65-3 programs, which measured

evaporative emissions from ten fuel systems that were removed from the vehicles and filled with E0,

E5.7, and E10 fuels. This method assures that the emissions measured are purely from permeation

(assuming the systems were not leaking). Additional data was provided from the CRC E-77-2 and

E-77-2b programs, which measured evaporative emissions from sixteen intact vehicles. For this

analysis, vehicles certified to enhanced-evaporative and Tier 2 standards are analyzed separately

from vehicles certified to earlier standards. Enhanced evaporative standards were phased in from

1996-1999 and imposed a 2.0 gram standard over a 24-hour diurnal test. Standards previously in

effect applied a 2.0 gram standard to a 1-hour simulated diurnal.

The ethanol effect is estimated with a mixed model developed in this report. The evaporative

certification level, ethanol content, and RVP were modeled as fixed effects and the particular vehicle

modeled as a random effect. The natural logarithm of the emission rates over the 65-105-65◦F

diurnal cycle provided a normally distributed dataset to the model. The dataset was not large

enough to find a significant effect for three ethanol levels within each evaporative certification bin.

Therefore, E5.7 and E10 test results were binned into one category of ethanol-containing fuel.

Ethanol was then seen to have a significant effect compared to E0 fuel. The percent difference

between the ethanol rate and the E0 rate is used in MOVES as the fuel adjustment. Due to the

enhanced-evaporative certification standards phase in from 1996-1999 (20/40/90/100%), the two

fuel adjustments must also be phased in for those model years. The fuel adjustment in MOVES is

based on a variable called fuelModelYearID. Table 7 lists the fuel adjustments used for E5 through

E85 for the fuelModelYearIDs used in MOVES.

15
 
Table 7: Ethanol effect for Permeation Emissions
 

Model Years Percent increase due to ethanol

1995 and earlier

1996

1997-2000

2001 and later

65.9

75.5

107.3

113.8

There is additional information regarding permeation emissions in the final releases of the CRC E77-2b and E-77-2c studies that may be used to update the permeation estimates in future versions

of MOVES.

3.3 Tank Vapor Venting

Vapor generated in the tank can escape to the atmosphere during a process labeled Tank Vapor

Venting (TVV). Hydrocarbons emitted by this process originate from a variety of sources. As tank

temperature rises and vapor is generated within the tank, the vapors are forced out of the tank

from increased pressure. Fully sealed gas tanks are rare as they must be constructed with metal to

prevent bloating. Using metal as a tank material can be expensive, heavy, and difficult to shape

into tightly packed modern vehicles. Instead, most vehicles are equipped with an activated charcoal

canister to adsorb the vapors as they are generated. Later, the vapors are consumed as they purge to

the engine (through the intake manifold) during vehicle operation. The canister is open (or vented)

to the atmosphere to prevent pressure from building within the fuel system. Consequently, if the

engine is not operated for a long period of time (several days), fuel vapors can diffuse through the

charcoal, or even freely pass through a completely saturated canister. Tampering, mal-maintenance,

and system failure can result in excess evaporative emissions. Inspection and maintenance (I/M)

programs can also influence how leaks and other problems are controlled over the life of a vehicle.

Integral to the understanding of Tank Vapor Venting (TVV) is the calculation of Tank Vapor

Generated (TVG). Tank vapor generated depends on the rise in fuel tank temperature (F), ethanol

content (vol.%), vapor pressure (RVP, psi) and altitude. Calculations in MOVES use the WadeReddy equation for vapor generation. [30]

CTx CT1 TV G = Ae ) B∗RV P (e − e (6)

Where:

T1 = Initial temperature

Tx = Temperature at time x

In Equation 6, coefficients A,B,C vary by altitude and fuel ethanol content. These coefficients are

shown in Table 8.

16
 
Table 8: TVG Constants for Equation 6
 

E0 Gasoline E10 Gasoline

Constant Sea Level Denver alt. Sea Level Denver alt.

A 0.00817 0.00518 0.00875 0.00665

B 0.2357 0.2649 0.2056 0.2228

C 0.0409 0.0461 0.0430 0.0474

The vapor venting emission process occurs during all three operation modes: running, hot soak,

and cold soak. While running, vapors are generated as the fuel system is warming and active.

During hot soak, vapor generation is caused by latent heat transfer due to fuel recirculation and

other convective processes. Cold soak vapor generation is concurrent with ambient temperature

increases.

3.3.1 Altitude

Evaporative vapor generation is affected by the lower ambient pressure at high altitudes. MOVES

accounts for this effect during the calculation of tank vapor generated. This process relies on the

coefficients found in the tank vapor generation equation (Equation 6) for differing altitudes: a high

altitude (Denver, CO) and a low altitude (Sea Level).

The MOVES database contains a binary flag for each county that determines which set of altitude

coefficients to use. This either contains L or H for low or high altitude. Characterizing altitude this

way creates a discontinuity in the calculation of evaporative emission rates.

In reality, evaporative vapor generation increases continuously as ambient pressure drops with increasing altitude. Counties with altitudes higher than sea level but lower than the cut-off for the

MOVES high altitude flag produce additional vapor not accounted for in MOVES2010, shown in

Figure 5.

Update to MOVES Altitude Correction The tank vapor generated process has been updated from MOVES2010b to calculate evaporative emissions at all altitudes. A linear interpolation

between sea level and Denver is performed to account for additional vapor generated between the

low and high altitude equations. For counties with an altitude greater than that of Denver, an

extrapolation is performed to calculate the additional vapor generation at higher altitude. This

interpolation and extrapolation is show in Figure 5.

17
 
Figure 5: Illustration of Vapor Generation by Altitude
 

3.3.2 Cold Soak

Cold soak vapor emissions occur while a vehicle is not operating and the engine and fuel system have

cooled to ambient temperature. Emissions occurring under these conditions are also referred to as

diurnal emissions. MOVES2014 introduces the modeling of multiple-day cold soaks and leaks. As a

vehicle sits through multiple diurnal cycles, the carbon canister accumulates vapor every day. It can

only adsorb vapor until it reaches its capacity; then it begins to vent to the atmosphere. A canister

with degraded/damaged carbon may have reduced capacity, and eventually every canister will vent

to the atmosphere once it reaches saturation. During cooling hours, a canister back purges to the

fuel tank and regains some capacity. Then, during the subsequent warming period the canister is

re-filled with vapor and any vapor generated beyond capacity will escape to the atmosphere.

The history of inventory quantification started with the measurement of emissions based on a standard regulatory test cycles. Examples included the FTP (tailpipe), 2 day diurnal/running loss test

procedures (evap) etc. Over the years, as the emissions levels over the test cycles became more

controlled with added technologies, there was concern over off-cycle emissions that occur outside

of the constraints of the test procedure. In MOVES2010, the model incorporated modal vehicle

specific power (VSP) rates based on physical and causal mechanisms for tailpipe emissions formation. The higher VSP bins in this load-based model were designed to capture off-cycle emissions.

In this updated model, we attempt to quantify the evaporative emissions from off-cycle evaporative

events, which we believe have the potential to significantly impact the emissions inventory. Off-cycle

evaporative emissions occur during deviations from certification temperature ranges or fuel RVP,

and also include multiple day diurnals emissions when a vehicle sits for longer than two or three

days.

18
 
Figure 6: Multiday Vapor Accumulation in Charcoal Canister
 

Figure 6 illustrates the dynamic behavior of vapor within a charcoal canister over three days of

continuous cold soaking. During the first day, vapor accumulates within but does not exceed the

canister capacity. During the cooling period of day 1, we observe backpurge when some of the fuel

vapors that were previously adsorbed to the charcoal flow back into the cooling tank. The fresh

air is drawn in through the canister vent while the vapor condenses in the tank during the cooling

portion of the cycle. During warming on day 2, we see generated fuel vapors that exceed the canister

capacity (though some canisters may be constructed to hold more than 2 days of vapor). These

emissions are lost to the atmosphere, and only what remains in the canister can be backpurged

during the subsequent cooling cycle. In day 3, more vapor is generated and consequently lost to the

atmosphere. Any additional days without engine purge during normal driving (i.e. inactivity) will

exhibit the same behavior as day 3. It should be mentioned that plug-in hybrid electric vehicles

that are mainly driven on short (electric only) trips, may also exhibit similar breakthrough over

time. However, modeling of these vehicles is beyond the scope of this effort at this time as the

penetration rates of these technologies are quite low, and we are not aware of any multi-day diurnal

data collected on PHEVs.

Modeling a fleet of vehicles involves a diverse population of canisters with differing capacities. A

given amount of vapor will be fully contained by some vehicles but exceed the canister capacity

in others. Figure 7 demonstrates the methodology for calculating the vapor vented (TVV) as a

function of the vapor generated (TVG). Several factors accommodate this modeling approach. The

importance of each variable will be explained along with relevant data sources and analysis. The

following variables are included in the MOVES default database in the ‘cumTvvCoeffs‘ table:

• Back Purge Factor

• Average Canister Capacity

• Tank Size

19
 
• Tank Fill Fraction

• Leak Fraction

• Leak Fraction IM

• TVV Equation

• Leak Equation

Back Purge Factor The back purge factor is the percent of hydrocarbon vapor that is desorbed

from a vehicle’s canister during cooling hours. Pressure decreases within the tank, drawing ambient

air in through the canister vent. In the real-world, this process occurs nightly as temperatures cool

and restore some canister capacity. In the Multiday Diurnal Study [28], test vehicles soaked for 14

consecutive 72◦F-96◦F diurnals (the Federal Test Procedure temperature cycle). During this time,

the vehicle canister mass was measured continuously. During the cooling period, the measured mass

of the vehicle canisters decreased. This cyclical effect can be observed in Figure 8.

An average value of 23.8% backpurge was developed from these results and is used in the MOVES

model. For example, a vehicle canister with 100 grams of hydrocarbons will backpurge 23.8 grams

and begin the next day with 76.2 grams. A more complex model for backpurge was considered

(similar to vapor generation), but would require a large computation demand and potentially slow

model performance considerably. As diurnal temperatures are more or less symmetrical, heavy

modeling on the front end (vapor generation) has already provided a high level of precision to the

back end, justifying a simpler model.

Average Canister Capacity The canister capacity reflects how much vapor generated in the

tank can be contained by the canister before breaking through. To calculate a sales-weighted average

canister size, we used sales data [6] and EPA evaporation certification data [1]. Certification data

includes the evaporative family code which contains the Butane Working Capacity (BWC) of the

canister. It is found in digits 7, 8 and 9 for enhanced evap vehicles, and in digits 5, 6 and 7 for

pre-enhanced vehicles. The BWC represents the ability of a canister to capture butane vapor, rather

than gasoline vapor, so it must be adjusted by a factor of 0.92 [26]. Exact matches between salesdata and cert-data are not possible for every vehicle make/model. Fortunately, canister size tends

to correlate closely to tank size as onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) also influences canister

design. Since tank size is much more readily available information, an average tank-to-canister ratio

for each model year is used for top-selling vehicle models with incomplete information.

Figure 7: Vapor Vented Curve

20
 
Figure 8: Vehicle X Canister Mass, 14-day Diurnal Test
 

0

50

100

150

0 5000 10000 15000 20000

Test Time (Minutes)

Vehicle Canister Mass (g)

Temperature (degF)

Legend

10 RVP fuel

9 RVP fuel

SHED Temperature

Table 9: Average Canister Capacity by Model Year
 

Model Year Group Average Canister Capacity (grams)

1960-1970 0

1971-1977 64.7

1978-1995 72.8

1996 78.7

1997 83

1998 115.4

1999-2003 122.9

2004 145

2005 150.7

2006 145.3

2007 142.9

2008 138.6

2009 136.2

2010+ 137.5

Data is only available for model years 1990-2010. For years beyond 2010, the 2010 average canister

capacity was used. Evaporative control was introduced in 1971, so for model years 1971-1989, a

linear extrapolation is drawn backwards to 1971 through model years 1996-1990. The calculated

average canister capacities for cars and trucks combined are listed in Table 9. A peak in average

21
 
Table 10: Sales-Weighted Average Fuel Tank Size
 

Model Year Group Tank Size (gal)

1960-1970 28

1971-1977 27.3

1978-1995 18.6

1996-1997 19.1

1998 19.5

1999-2003 19.9

2004 20.5

2005 20.3

2006 20

2007 19.7

2008 19

2009-2030 19.1

HD Vehicles 38

canister size at model year 2005 corresponds to greater sales of cars with larger fuel tanks.

Tank Size The average tank size for a given model year is an important facet of the vapor

generation calculation because a larger tank will have more space in which vapor can accumulate.

Both sales data [6] and tank size information [13] were required to calculated a sales-weighted

average tank size for model years 1990-2010. For this analysis, car and truck sales, and tank sizes

were combined. For vehicles with multiple styles (i.e. different cab sizes on pick-up trucks) with

different tank sizes, the average available tank size was used as sales information is unavailable

by style. Data sources only span from 1990-2010, so past and future values must be projected.

Vehicles in the 1990-2010 range have tanks with an average capacity of 1.25 times greater than a

calculated 300 mile range, so this ratio is applied. Fuel economy becomes sufficient to estimate tank

size, for which we have data to 1975 [14]. Vehicles pre-1975 use the 1975 fuel tank size. For future

vehicles, tank size is assumed to stay constant from 2010 on. It is also possible that manufacturers

will maintain range constant with a decreasing fuel tank, this will be updated in future versions to

account for changes in consumer behavior and vehicle production. The calculated sales-weighted

tank sizes are in Table 10.

Tank Fill Fraction The tank fill fraction is an important input used in calculating tank vapor

generation. The more vapor space above the liquid fuel, the more capacity there is for vapors to

accumulate. The average tank fill fraction used in the model is 40% fill. This is a typical fill level

for certification procedures and many of the test programs from which our data originates. It is

also a figure supported by existing research on tank filling behavior by consumers [8].

Leak Prevalence In order to accurately quantify emissions from leaking vehicles, one must not

only estimate emission rates from leaks of various sizes, but also the frequency of occurrence or the

22
 
prevalence of leaks in the fleet. This corresponds to an emissions rate and its corresponding activity.

Our estimates of leak prevalence are informed by the analysis of a field study which took place at

the Ken Caryl IM Station in Denver, CO during the summer of 2009 [11]. In this study, a remote

sensing device (RSD) was used to recruit high emitting vehicles which were then measured in a

Portable Sealed Housing for Evaporative Detection (PSHED). The vehicle’s hydrocarbon emissions

were measured over 15 minutes during hot-soak conditions, and vehicles were inspected to identify

the cause/source of the leaks when possible. The set of hot-soak measurement from individual

vehicles, with inverse-probability sampling weights and solicitation response weights applied to all

vehicles, allows the prevalence of leaks in the fleet to be estimated.

We have defined a vapor leaker as any vehicle that would fail the enhanced evaporative standard

of 2 grams. The standard sums the emissions from the worst day of a 3-day diurnal test and the

hot soak. To develop a surrogate standard for a 15-minute hot soak test, we used knowledge of

certification testing to attribute 0.4 grams (g) of the 2g standard to the hot soak portion, and 76%

of 0.4 g to the first 15 minutes of the hour-long hot soak test. This approach suggests that 0.3 g

can be taken as a surrogate standard for a 15 minute hot soak.

Figure 9: Prevalence of Vapor Leaks above a given Threshold in the 2009 Ken Caryl Fleet

0

25

50

75

100

Denver, CO 

 Sea Level

1 

 0.71

2 

 1.42

5 

 3.55

10 

 7.09

20 

 14.18

50 

 35.46

100 

 70.92

Vapor Leak Size

(g/15min)

Estimated Prevalence (%)

Model Year Group

1961−1970

1971−1980

1981−1995

1996−2003

2004−2010

Table 11 (Plotted in Figure 9) displays leak prevalence at various emission thresholds for what

constitutes a ”leak”. Observing the difference between any two points determines how many vehicles

fall into a particular range. Looking at Table 11, in model year group 1981-1995, 2.6% of vehicles are

leaking at more than 20 grams and 4.2% of vehicles are leaking at more than 10 grams. Subtracting

these two values yields that 1.6% of vehicles in the model year group have a leak between 10 and

20 grams.

The data only contain prevalence rates for PSHED measurements as low as 1.0g/15min. Failure

rates are extrapolated to 0.3g/15min. Using aggregate data from the Ken Caryl station, it is

found that 0.3g/15min PSHED measurements are 50% more prevalent than 1.0g/15min PSHED

measurements.

23
 
Table 11: Prevalence of Leaks above a given Threshold (g/15min)
 

Model Year Denver 100 50 20 10 5 2 1 0.3

Sea Level (MOVES) 70.9 35.5 14.1 7 3.6 1.4 .7 .2

1961 - 1970 0 0 0.53 0.53 0.68 0.68 1 1

1971 - 1980 0 0 0 0.3 0.85 1 1 1

1981 - 1995 0.004 0.004 0.026 0.042 0.083 0.22 0.26 0.39

1996 - 2003 0 0 0 0.02 0.021 0.029 0.033 0.064

2004 - 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Because the data used to estimate leak prevalence was collected in Denver, Colorado at an altitude

of 5,280 feet above sea level, measurements must be adjusted to sea level. At sea level, the amount

of vapor generated will be less due to higher atmospheric pressure. To determine the appropriate

correction factor, we performed the Wade-Reddy calculation and found that under identical conditions, the higher altitude will generate 41% more vapor. Colorado is a strategic location to perform

a leak quantification program because a given vapor leak will produce higher levels of emissions at

a higher altitude, therefore making it easier to detect. Each of the leak magnitude bins have been

corrected for altitude by this factor. For example, the prevalence of leaks at 1g-2g levels in Denver

will be the same prevalence of leaks at .71g-1.42g levels at sea level.

Because this was a cross-sectional study, many model year and age group combinations are not

possible to measure, yet must exist in the model. A set of linear regressions is used to model vapor

leak prevalence for ages and model years where data is not available. We divide model year groups

in years when new technologies or standards were introduced. Modeling is based on the assumption

that newer cars will have lower leak prevalence than older cars due to the advancing technology and

use of more durable materials. Therefore, data from the 1996-2003 model year group is used as a

surrogate for new vehicles in the 1971-1980 and 1981-1995 model year groups. However, because

vapor leaks also occur due to tampering and mal-maintenance, deterioration is not the only factor

involved in occurrence of vapor leaks. The regressions from the older model year show more rapid

vehicle deterioration rates than newer model years.

Figure 10 shows the vapor leak prevalence as the percent of the vehicle fleet with a leak larger

than 0.3g/15min. For model years 1996 and later, the estimate for leak prevalence at ages 0-3 was

developed with I/M data from five states. The analysis revealed that 1-2% of vehicles consistently

arrived at I/M stations with an evap Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) set. The vast majority of the

DTCs set specifically indicated a vapor leak detected. The green diamonds in the 1971-1980 and

1981-1995 model year groups are an assumption made based on the 1996-2003 data to describe these

vehicles’ leak rates when they were new. The slope of the 2004-2010 prevalence rates was developed

by applying the 5-10 year old 1996-2003 data point to the 10-15 year old 2004-2010 point.

Tier 3 and LEVIII Leak Prevalence To model the leak prevalence rates of LEVIII and Tier

3 vehicles, the effectiveness of improved OBD systems and the efficacy of vehicle leak testing were

quantified. In the above mentioned field study performed in Colorado, it was found that 70% of

evaporative leaks were due to deterioration of the evaporative system (e.g. corroded fuel lines, filler

24
 
Figure 10: Non-IM Vapor Leak Prevalence, Extrapolated from data
 

1961−1970 1971−1980 1981−1995 1996−2003 2004−2010 LEVIII Tier 3 ● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

0

25

50

75

100

5 10152025 5 10152025 5 10152025 5 10152025 5 10152025 5 10152025 5 10152025

Vehicle Age

Leak Prevalence (%)

Data Source

●

●

●

●

●

●

1961−1970

1971−1980

1981−1995

1996−2003

Age 4−5; 96−03 regression

OBD

neck, cracked hoses etc.) that could be improved with new design and material considerations. The

remaining 30% of evaporative leaks were beyond manufacturer control. (e.g. Improper maintenance,

tampering, missing gas caps, etc)

OBD effectiveness and OBD readiness are also important factors in the detection and repair of

leaks after they occur. OBD effectiveness refers to the ability of diagnostic systems to identify leaks

within the fuel system and alert the driver by illuminating a warning light. OBD readiness refers

to the time during which vehicle diagnostics are actively assessing the integrity of the vehicle fuel

system.

Our reference case assumes 40% OBD effectiveness and 95 percent OBD readiness. These numbers

are based on an assessment of vehicles with OBD-detectable leaks and whether or not the leak was

identified by the vehicle and the driver alerted via a check engine light. [36]

We estimate the implementation of LEVIII to immediately reduce the 70% of deterioration-caused

leaks by 33% simply due to the lower emissions standard. Longitudinally, we see reductions in

leak prevalence associated with lower emissions standards. We also estimate that due to improved

vehicle diagnostic systems, 80% of detectable leaks will be discovered and reported by the vehicle.

In addition, we are assuming with the increased rigor of requirements the readiness will increase to

99%.

We estimate the implementation of Tier 3 to immediately reduce the 70% of deterioration-caused

leaks by 66% due to the additional benefit of the Tier 3 leak standard. As in LEVIII estimates, we

also estimate that 80% of detectable leaks will be discovered and reported by tier 3 vehicles, as well

as an increase of 99% readiness.

These estimates result in an overall reduction of leak frequency of 26% for the LEVIII program and

49% for the Tier 3 program.

25
 
Table 12: Emission Program Factors
 

Base Inputs
 

# of Leaks >0.020” 100

% Mal-Repair 30%

% Durability 70%

Reference Case

OBD Ready % 95%

OBD Effectiveness 40%

LEVIII Control Case

% of ”durability” leaks prevented 33%

OBD Ready % 99%

OBD Effectiveness 80%

Tier 3 Control Case

% of ”durability” leaks prevented 66%

OBD Ready % 99%

OBD Effectiveness 80%

Figure 11: LEVIII, Tier 3 Leak PRevalence Estimates
 

26
 
Leak Emissions Equation In MOVES2014, leak vapor emissions are a distinct emissions mode,

separate from vapor emissions vented from the canister during normal operation. It is important

to characterize leaking emissions separately because they can potentially be orders of magnitude

higher than the other emissions modes described above. Unlike non-leak emissions, leak emissions

can be modeled as a linear function with vapor generation. In Figure 12, measured vapor emissions

are plotted on the y-axis against the calculated tank vapor generated. The average for four vehicles

is overlaid and is used as the representative leak emission rate in MOVES.

Vapor generated in the tank (TVG) is calculated using the Wade-Reddy equation, thus requiring

fuel RVP, fuel ethanol content, and temperature data. Two datasets containing this information

were used in developing leak emission rates. The E-77 suite of programs 8, 9, 10, 11 measured

high-emitting vehicles, with known fuel properties and artificially implanted leaks on the California

(65◦F-105◦F) diurnal cycle. In another effort, the Colorado Department of Public Health and

Environment (CDPHE) carried out a repair effectiveness program during the summer of 2010 in

collaboration with the Regional Air Quality Council (RAQC). This program [27] measured 16

vehicles with identified leaks. A 6-hour test was performed with a temperature increase of 72◦F96◦F. This effort was less resource-intensive than the full diurnal procedure and still provides the

necessary information to calculate TVG. The SHED measurements of Tank Vapor Vented (TVV)

and calculated TVG form the basis for a linear regression of TVV vs. TVG for each vehicle. The

resulting slope represents the mass of vapor vented per mass of vapor generated. The average of the

regressions becomes the leak rate for that severity bin. This approach can be observed in Figure 12.

Permeation and leak vapor emissions were indistinguishable using this testing procedure. However,

permeation for these vehicles is assumed to be negligible during the 6 hour test given the severity

of the leak emissions. In the E-77 program, TVV emissions were collected in a canister external to

the SHED. The external canister was connected to the vent on the vehicle canister. No permeation

was included in the measurement.

Because the emissions measured are highly variable, spanning several orders of magnitude, the

emissions data for leaking vehicles are binned by magnitude. Accordingly, both emission rates and

prevalence are calculated within these bins. As the leak prevalence estimates were measured at

high altitude in Denver, it is essential to develop adjustments to apply the binning process at lower

altitudes, such as sea level. Application of Equation 6 suggests that an E10 fuel in Denver generates

1.41 times as much vapor as at sea level. For example, a vapor leak at 0.3g/15min in Denver would

have an equivalent rate of 0.21g/15min at sea level. The bins used to categorize leak severity as

well as the average leak emission rate for that bin are listed in Table 13.

Each data point is binned by its hot soak measurement from the E-77 programs or PSHED (Portable

Table 13: Leak Emission Rates by Bin

Denver bins (g/15min) Sea Level bins (g/15min) Grams vented / Grams generated

0.3 - 2 0.2 - 1.4 0.12

2 - 5 1.4 - 3.6 0.27

5 - 10 3.6 - 7.1 0.65

>10 >7.1 1.33

27
 
Figure 12: SHED Leak Emissions for one Severity Bin
 

SHED) measurement from the Denver program. The PSHED tests are 15 minute hot soak measurements.

Figure 13 illustrates the leak emission rates for each leak severity bin. The average emission rate for

vehicles with 15-min hot soak measurements greater than 10g exceeds 1. It is possible to measure

more fuel vapor in the SHED than is calculated with Equation 6. It is known that the equation

is less reliable at higher temperatures. Also, complicated factors such as fuel sloshing and tank

geometry can influence vapor generation beyond the estimation capabilities of the Wade-Reddy

equation.

28
 
Figure 13: Leak Emission Rates by Leak Severity Bin
 

Tank Vapor Generated

Tank Vapor Vented

10

20

30

40

50

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Leak Severity

Bin (g/15min)

10+

5 − 10

2 − 5

0.3 − 2

Estimation of Tank Vapor Vented For normally operating non-leaking vehicles, tank vapor

vented (TVV) from the canister is calculated. This quantity of vapor is calculated with Equation

6 in g/gal-headspace. The model uses tank size and tank fill to calculate the headspace volume

for a given vehicle. This information allows calculating the total vapor generated inside the tank.

Equation 7 is the final calculation of TVG, where a, b, and c are the appropriate coefficients.

b(RV P)

(ect2 TV G = (ae − ect1)) ∗ (tankSize ∗ (1 − tankFill)) (7)

With TVG as an input, the TVV equation estimates the amount of vapor vented. During a model

run, MOVES2014 calculates vapor vented for consecutive days. The algorithm accounts for average

canister capacity (ACC) and backpurge factor. Daily backpurge removes fuel vapors from the

canister, increasing capacity to store vapor generated during successive days. Vapor generated

above the ACC is lost to the atmosphere, therefore backpurge only applies to what remains in the

canister.

IfXn < ACC,thenXn+1 = ((1 − backpurgeFactor) ∗ Xn) + TV G (8a)

IfXn ≥ ACC,thenXn+1 = ((1 − backpurgeFactor) ∗ ACC) + TV G (8b)

In Equation 8a, Xn represents the TVG on Day n. The conditions in Equation 8a will determine the

vapor generated for each day until n=5. To maintain model performance, emissions are calculated

for a maximum of five successive days. Beyond five days, the algorithm assumes that breakthrough

has occurred and that behavior over additional days has stabilized. The vapor emissions are fleet

averages by model year group. Emissions rise as more vehicles are exceeding their canister capacities

and begin venting fuel vapors. The development of the emission rates is covered in greater detail

in the DELTA report. [7]

29
 
Activity Vehicles in MOVES2010 have trip and soak activity data for one day. However, as we

have shown, diurnal evaporative emissions are dependent on the number of consecutive days soaking.

In order to properly account for these off-cycle emissions, MOVES must account for the different

emissions rates of short (several hours) and long (multiple day) soaks. Because MOVES2010 only

simulates activity for a single day, the fraction of vehicles soaking since midnight on a typical day

includes vehicles having soaked for one or more days. As vehicles begin starting throughout the

day, the soaking population dwindles until only a small fraction remains soaking at the end of the

day.

For any modeled day, there is a sub-population of vehicles exhibiting 1st, 2nd, 3rd, nth day diurnal

2nd 3rd th emissions. The fractional allocations for 1st, , , n day diurnals are calculated from the

sampleVehicleTrip and sampleVehicleDays tables in MOVES. SampleVehicleTrip assigns numbers

of first starts during each hour of the day. For the fraction of vehicles having soaked since at

least midnight, the first engine start ends the cold soak episode. SampleVehicleDay contains the

population of vehicles for each sourceTypeID. Combining information for both tables, it is simple

to calculate the fraction of vehicles having soaked since midnight at any given hour. For example,

at 1:00AM, some fraction of vehicles less than 100% have not yet started. The fraction continuously

decreases throughout the day as more and more vehicles start. At 12:00AM, the fraction only

represents vehicles that were not driven.

Once the fraction of vehicles soaking at a given hour has been calculated, it must be estimated

how many prior days each has been soaking. We classify vehicles as 1st day, 2nd day, 3rd day,

4th day, or 5+ days. We assume that after the 5th day, vehicles will exhibit repeat emissions

since the evaporative canister will either have broken through or be in conditions that will never

cause breakthrough. Via an activity study performed by Georgia Technological University [18] and

discussions with author Randall Guensler, it was found that 16% of vehicles drive less than 3,000

miles per year. The MOVES inputs are based on the conservative estimate that 50% of these

low-mileage vehicles, or 8% of all vehicles, have been soaking for more than 5 days on any given

day.

The sampleVehicleSoakingDayBasis table establishes the fraction of vehicles soaking for 5+ days.

It contains 5 values, one for each soak day. The value for SoakDayID 1 is the percentage of vehicles

soaking at the final hour of day 1. The product of SoakDayID=1 and SoakDayID=2 is the percent

of vehicles soaking at the final hour of day 2. The product of all five values is the percent of vehicles

soaking for five days or longer.

Figure 14 presents the fraction of soaking vehicles throughout the day. The majority of vehicles

have driven the previous day, and are on their first day soaking. The fractions of vehicles on 2nd

through 4th day soaking are developed from the remainder of 1st day soaking vehicles at hour 24.

The fraction of vehicles soaking for 5 days or longer is 8% at hour 24. This method models bimodal

vehicle usage, with most vehicles being driven almost daily and the remaining vehicles being driven

more intermittently.

30
 
Figure 14: Passenger Car soak Distribution
 

Hour of Day

Fraction of Vehicles Soaking 0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Weekend Weekday

Day Soaking

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th+

3.3.3 Hot Soak

Hot-soak vapor emissions begin immediately after a car ceases operation and continue until the fuel

tank reaches ambient temperature. In MOVES, the process of calculating hot-soak vapor emissions

is simpler than that for cold soak. Base rates exist for each model year and age group and are

expressed in units of grams per hour. They represent emissions at sea level with RVP assumed at

9.0 psi. In developing the rates, leak and non-leak rates are weighted together to form the base

rate, similar to cold soak.

Hot soak data comes from several programs with diverse testing procedures, vehicle model years

and technology, fuel ethanol/RVP, and altitude. These programs include three summer programs

in Colorado and the E-77-2 programs in Arizona.

There are many variables affecting hot soak emissions which need to be normalized into a uniform

set of conditions native to the MOVES emission rate database.

These measurements differ from the default MOVES rates by length of test, fuel volatility (RVP),

and altitude. Fifteen minute measurements need to be extrapolated to one hour totals. This

Table 14: Recent Hot soak Evaporative Test Programs

Program Location Hot Soak Length Fuel RVP Altitude (ft) No. Obs.

High Evap Lipan IM station, CO 15 min Fuel Supply 5130 100

High Evap Ken Caryl IM station, CO 15min Fuel Supply 5130 175

High Evap Denver IM station, CO 15min, 1 hour Fuel Supply 5130 100

E-77-2 Mesa, AZ 1 hour 7, 9, 10 1243 100

31
 
translation cannot be made using a simple 4 multiplier due to non-linear cooling of engines and

fuel systems. Measurements made on fuels with RVP higher or lower than 9.0 psi need appropriate

corrections to estimate equivalent base values at 9.0 psi. Finally, measurements made thousands of

feet above sea level need correction for the increased vapor generation occurring at higher altitudes.

The vehicles in Colorado that participated in the studies were recruited in-situ and therefore were

subject to a wide range of leak mechanisms. It was observed that some vehicles emitting more than

50 grams in 15 minutes in the PSHED had liquid leaks present. All vehicles with a calculated 15

minute measurement greater than 50g/15min were removed from vapor leak analysis.

Vehicles in the E-77 program were tested multiple times with different fuels, whereas each vehicle

in the Colorado population was tested once. In order to not over-represent the E-77 vehicles in our

sample, one measurement from each vehicle was selected with preference given to the measurements

on 9 RVP, E10 fuels (where available).

First, it is necessary to develop a correction factor to translate 15-minute measurements to 1-hour

equivalents and vice versa. Every datum requires a 15-minute mass and a one-hour mass. Base

rates in the MOVES input table must be expressed in grams per hour; however, our method for

distinguishing leaks from non-leaks uses the 15 minute rate. Furthermore, if a measurement is

designated as from a leaking vehicle, the 15 minute measurement is used to project its rate of

occurrence in the fleet.

Existing data is used to develop this correction factor. In the E-77 suite, the cumulative time

series data for hot-soak tests on a minute-by-minute scale is readily available, enabling estimation

of vapor emissions over 15 minutes. Each set of vehicle data also contains a permeation rate. The

permeation rate is subtracted from the 15 minute hot soak measurement. The result is the assumed

vapor emissions during 15 minutes of hot soak. Similarly, hourly permeation is subtracted from

the 1-hour hot soak measurement. After compiling the 15-min and 1-hour values, the fraction of

emissions occurring in the first 15 minutes can be calculated.

All of the Denver testing programs provide similar vehicle measurements to augment the E-77

dataset. A subset of the vehicles was transported to a lab to receive a Hot Soak test. Readings

were taken at both 15 and 60 minutes.

Figure 15 serves as an illustration of evaporative emissions occurring during a Hot Soak test. Vapor

emitted by permeation is assumed to accumulate at a linear rate while vapor emissions attributed

to the hot soak accumulate rapidly following engine shutoff but more slowly as the engine cools.

Using the combined data from E-77 and Denver testing, we developed the average fraction of

emissions in the first fifteen minutes following engine shutoff. At first, it was thought that this

fraction would vary among groups of vehicles certified to different evaporative standards. However,

analysis of test results by certification groups did not seem to yield notably different results. This

analysis resulted in a single fraction developed from all available data to be applied fleet-wide.

It was estimated that 54% of emissions from a one-hour hot soak occur in the first 15 minutes.

Conversely, emissions from a 15 minute hot soak must be multiplied by 1.85 to estimate an hours

emissions.

Another correction must be applied to each measurement so that emission rates values are expressed

as though measured using fuel with a vapor pressure of 9.0 psi. This value is simply the base level

32
 
Figure 15: Hot Soak and Permeation Illustration
 

used as a reference in MOVES. Also, fuel effects for Hot Soak emissions are developed and applied

on the assumption that the base rates reflect a fuel vapor pressure of 9.0 psi.

Results in the available datasets were measured at varying levels of RVP. Some programs recorded

RVP, while other data has no explicit RVP information. Our first step is to estimate the RVP for

all measurements that do not contain this information.

The majority of the data with unknown RVP was gathered in the summer months in locations

with available fuel survey data. The mean RVP for June through August 2010 in Denver was 8.40

RVP (standard deviation 0.20 RVP), and this value was assumed for all vehicles tested from May

through September. For non-summer months, RVP information was collected with a small subset

of the vehicle measurements. In the case of a non-summer measurement without RVP information,

the mean of all non-summer months is assumed. The mean RVP for non-summer vehicles is 10.67

(standard deviation 1.75 RVP). The testing at the Lipan station was all performed in the summer,

so the RVP of the Lipan dataset is assumed to be 8.4.

Associating an RVP value with every measurement enables calculation of corrections for altitude.

All vehicles were tested either in Colorado (Elev. = 5,130 ft) or Mesa, AZ (Elev. = 1,243 ft). Both

locations are far enough above sea-level that it would be erroneous to assume their emissions are

representative of sea-level emissions. Our approach is to solve Equation 9a for RVP (Equation )9b)

and calculate the equivalent RVP at sea level that would generate the same amount of emissions.

The E10 coefficients were used for this analysis.

Bhigh∗RV Pmeas (eChigh∗T1 Chigh∗T0 TV Ghigh = Ahighe − e ) (9a)

 1 TV Ghigh RV PSeaLevel = ∗ ln (9b) Blow Alow ∗ (eClow∗T1 − eClow∗T0 )

This application requires the assumption that vapor emissions will increase/decrease proportionally
 

to vapor generation. As a rule, to generate the same amount of vapor at high altitude as generated
 

33
 
 

 

at sea level, a fuel will have a lower RVP. Temperature values were also chosen arbitrarily for this

calculation. However, after a monte-carlo analysis of varying starting and ending temperatures, the

effect of either was found to be negligible within the conditions these vehicles are likely to experience

during testing. Therefore, temperatures T0 = 60◦F and T1 = 65◦F were chosen for this analysis.

The Wade-Reddy equation provides no coefficients for Mesa, AZ elevation so the adjustment is a

simple linear interpolation between Sea Level and Denver elevations. For example, to solve for the

TVGhigh used in Equation 9a corresponding to Mesa, Equation 10 was used.

ElevationMesa TV GMesa = TV GL + (TV GH − TV GL) ∗ (10) ElevationDenver

At this point in the analysis, every measurement is paired with an RVP value that would generate

the same emissions at sea level. The next step is to estimate the equivalent result as though

measured on fuel with 9.0 psi.

In order to calculate an adjustment for each measurement, the same assumptions were employed

as above. Using the same temperature values, vapor generated at the sea level RVP and at 9.0

RVP was calculated. The ratio between these two values was applied to the original emissions

measurement, in Equation 11a, and becomes the base MOVES emission rate.

TV GmeasRV P = ASeaLeveleBSeaLevel∗RV Pmeas (eCSeaLevel∗T1 − eCSeaLevel∗T0 ) (11a)

TV GMOV ES = ADenvereBDenver∗9.0(eCDenver∗T1 − eCDenver∗T0 ) (11b)

HotSoakMOV ES = HotSoakMeasured ∗

TV GmeasRV P

TV GMOV ES

(11c)

At this point, for each measurement we have an emission rate for both 15 minutes and 60 minutes,

at sea level, and with 9 RVP fuel. There were some necessary QA steps to be performed at this

point. The result of our 15 minute emissions to 60 minute conversion and the results are plotted in

Figure 16.

As expected, the estimated hourly emissions (red circles) from the 15 minute measurements model

the measurements (blue triangles) where data at both test lengths were available.

Quality assurance checks were also performed on the emissions values before and after calculating

their equivalences at Sea Level and 9.0 psi fuel. As expected, the tests measured with higher RVP

fuels at high altitude were reduced by wider margins under the influence of the two corrections.

34
 
Figure 16: Hot Soak Measurement Test Length

15 minute Measurement (g)

1 hour Measurement (g)

10−2

10−1

100

101

102

●●●●●● ●●●

●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●

● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●

●

●● ●●●●●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

10−2 10−1 100 101

Legend

● 1 hour estimated

Data available for both lengths

Figure 17: Hot Soak Measurement Normalization to 9.0 RVP

Normalized Emissions (g)

Measured Emissions (g)

0

10

20

30

40

●

● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●

●

●●

●●● ● ● ●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●●●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●● ●

● ● ●

●

●

●●●

●

●●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●●

●●

●●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

●● ●●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

●

●●

● ●

●

●

●● ●● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

●

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

RVP

● 8

● 9

● 10

● 11

● 12

● 13

● 14

● 15

After normalizing the complete dataset, it was imported into the MOVES database. In the MOVES

emission rates tables, emission rates must exist for all model year and age group combinations. As

with most cross-sectional datasets, this requires additional modeling. For example, there is no data

for 20 year old, model year 2010 vehicles, or brand new 1980 vehicles. To address this problem, we

extrapolated the emission rate values. Table 15 describes the data.

In ranges where no data could be collected, leak and non-leak measurements are extrapolated from

similar MY/age groups. In MY/age groups where very small amounts of data were collected, the

measurements are combined with similar MY/age groups. Figure 18 illustrates how to populate

35
 
Table 15: Hot Soak Measurements by Model Year and Age
 

Leak?

0-3

N Y

4-5

N Y

Age Group

6-7

N Y

8-9

N Y

10­

N

14

Y

15­

N

19

Y

20+

N Y Total

1961-1970

ar

5 5

Model Ye

p

1971-1980 8 8

ou

1981-1995 6 15 46 55 8 39 169

Gr

1996-2003 1 26 6 36 6 53 30 158

2004-2010 12 3 26 2 5 48

Total 12 3 27 2 31 6 36 6 59 45 46 55 8 52 388

Figure 18: Measurement Averaging
 

(a) Non-Leak	 (b) Leak

model year and age group emission rates where there is no data.

•	 A darker shaded cell represents a bin where data is present.

•	 An enclosed area represents one rate. The rate is calculated by averaging all enclosed

data.

For example, one non-leak rate exists for model years 1996-2003, ages 0-7. The rate is calculated by

averaging available data, which only exists at age 6-7. For every model year and age group, there is

a leaking rate and non-leaking rate. The two rates, weighted by leak prevalence, form the average

hourly hot soak emission rate for a given bin. Figure 19 demonstrates how leak rates and non-leak

rates are combined to form a final weighted rate for a given model year and age combination.

For every model year and age group combination, the calculation outlined in Figure 19 is performed.

Figure 20 compares the MOVES2014 rates to the rates in MOVES2010b. The inclusion of leaking

vehicles has resulted in higher emissions, particularly for older model years where leaks are more

prevalent.

36
 
Figure 19: Calculate Weighted Evaporative Emissions
 

Figure 20: Hot Soak Emission Base Rates (9.0 RVP at Sea Level)
 

1961−1970 1971−1980 1981−1995 1996−2003 2004−2010

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ●

●

● ●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ●

● ●

●

● ●

●

● ● ●

●

●

●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

0

5

10

15

20

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

Vehicle Age

Hot Soak Emissions (g/hr)

Model Version

●●

MOVES2010

MOVES2014

37
 
3.3.4 Running Loss

Pre Tier 2 Emission Rates Running Loss emissions consist of vapor venting during vehicle

operation. Data used to develop running loss emission rates for Pre-tier 2 vehicles is from CRC

E-35 [19] and CRC E-41 [3] [4]. These two programs tested 200 vehicles with model years ranging

from 1971-1997.

For each vehicle, fuel tank temperature is calculated at the end of the running loss test using the

fuel tank temperature algorithm (See Section 3.1). The running loss test performed in E-41 was

the federal test procedure LA-4 NYCC NYCC LA-4 drive schedule, with two minute idle periods

following the first LA-4, the second NYCC, and the final LA-4.

The data is filtered/reduced such that each test meets the following requirements:

• Non-liquid-leakers (emissions <137.2 g/hour323)

• As received vehicles (no retests)

• Fuel system pressure test result must be pass, fail, or blank

The average tank temperature is calculated by assuming a linear increase in temperature. Thus,

the average is calculated by averaging the start temperature of the test and the final temperature.

The average temperature is used to estimate the permeation rate using default permeation rates

and the permeation temperature adjustment.

Gram/hour rates are calculated by dividing total emissions by the duration of the running loss test

(4300 seconds). Permeation is subtracted for each hour to segregate tank vapor venting (TVV)

emissions. After analysis of TVV data, running loss TVV rates are separated by model year only.

Table 16 shows the results of the analysis.

An I/M effect is not observable from this data so the running loss TVV rates for I/M and non-I/M

rates are the same.

Tier 2 & Later Emission Rates Running loss emission rates for Tier 2 and later vehicles were

developed from a 2014 study on 5 Tier 2 vehicles. [34] In this study, vehicles were tested at two

fuel RVP levels (7.51psi and 10.33psi) with and without implanted vapor leaks. Vapor leaks were

installed at either the canister or top of fuel tank, and at either 0.020” or 0.040” diameters, for a

3M6.EVP.009, Section 2.4, Table 2-1

Table 16: Pre-Tier 2 Running Loss Emission Rates by Model Year and Age

Model year group TVV mean [g/hr]

Pre-1971 12.59

1971-1977 12.59

1978-1995 11.6

1996-2003 0.72

38
 
Figure 21: Tier 2 & Tier 3 Running Loss Rates
 

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

● ● ● ● ●

●

●

MOVES2010b rate

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0 5 10 15 20

Vehicle Age

MOVES Emission Rate (g/hr)

● IM

non−IM

Certification

Tier 2

Tier 3

Tier 2 & Tier 3 Running Loss Rates

total of 4 possible leak configurations. The canister and fuel tank locations were chosen due to their

high rate of occurrence in the fleet. [27]

MOVES running loss emission rates are expressed in grams per hour and with a fuel vapor pressure

of 9 psi. Results from this testing are expressed in grams per test (4300 seconds) and at two fuel

vapor pressures (7.51 and 10.33). Therefore, the reported results must be normalized to MOVES

dimensions.

Similarly to the development of Pre-Tier 2 emission rates, gram/hour rates are calculated by dividing

total emissions by the duration of the running loss test (4300 seconds). The measurements are

then adjusted to a 9-RVP equivalent emissions measurement using the equations and coefficients

described in Section 3.3.4

Because our determination of a given vapor leak’s rate of occurrence among all vapor leaks is

based on it’s hot soak emissions, each running loss test was immediately followed by a standard

one hour hot soak procedure. Using the same process as in Section 3.3.3, the hour hot soak

results are multiplied by .54 to estimate the emissions at the 15 minute point. With this result,

each measurement is binned as in Table 17 and the weighted average leak emissions rate can be

determined.

Using the average non-leak value, the weighted average leak value, and the leak prevalences from

Figure 3.3.2, an average emissions rate is calculated. Tier 2 and later running loss emission rates

are the first running loss rates in MOVES to account for vapor leak emissions. The calculated rates

are shown in Figure 21.

39
 
Running Loss Fuel & Temperature Effects Running Losses are affected by both temperature and fuel Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP). The adjustments used in MOVES2014 are taken from

MOBILE6 and are applied to all model years and source types. MOBILE6 was run for a series of

temperatures and RVP levels for passenger cars. A linear model was fit to the MOBILE6 results.

The mean base emission rate for running losses in MOVES is located in the ‘EmissionRateByAge‘

table. Running loss rates were assumed to be measured at 9 RVP and 95◦F. The results from MOBILE6 were normalized to the MOVES emission rates as multiplicative adjustments to the mean

base rates. For example, a multiplicative adjustment of 1 would be applied to a 9 RVP fuel at 95◦F.

The running loss adjustments:

• Are multiplicative adjustments.

• Apply to all gasoline source types and model years.

• Are the same at temperatures below 40◦F as at 40◦F.

• Are applied as a function of both RVP and ambient temperature.

• Will use the 7 RVP coefficients for RVP values below 7 psi.

• Will use the 10 RVP coefficients for RVP values above 10 psi.

• Will not be applied for RVP at temperatures below 40◦F.

AdjustedRunningLoss = RunningLoss ∗ Adjustment(Temperature, RV P) (12)

The adjustment coefficients are in a table in the default MOVES database, so that they can be

changed without altering the MOVES code. The RVP adjustment range is dynamic; if new sets of

coefficients for RVP values greater than 10 or less than 7 are added to the table, MOVES will use

those values and set new minimum and maximum RVP values. Figure 22 illustrates the correction

to base rates at 9 RVP.

40
 
Figure 22: Running Loss Temperature and RVP Effect
 

3.4 Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program Effects

Inspection and Maintenance program efforts vary widely in their procedures for testing evaporative

emissions. Some locations use a fill pipe pressure check and gas cap check, while others use just a

scan of the onboard diagnostics (OBD), and others will use all three approaches. These types of

tests do not guarantee the detection of a vapor leak within a vehicle.

MOVES assumes tank vapor venting is the only evaporative process where I/M benefits are realized.

The types of evaporative tests performed in I/M programs do not affect permeation or liquid leaks.

I/M Factor An I/M factor describes the overall effectiveness of an I/M program and can be used

as a basis to compare two separate programs. A higher I/M factor indicates a more effective I/M

program. Data from four I/M programs were used in the development of MOVES I/M factors.

The Phoenix, AZ program contained the most extensive data, for which reason we have used it to

represent a reference condition, relative to which other programs can be assessed. Data from the

programs in Tucson, AZ, Colorado, and North Carolina were used to adjust the Phoenix numbers

for differences in I/M programs.

NOTE: In order to develop I/M factors, failure data was used from I/M. The failure

frequencies are only used to estimate the effectiveness of differing evaporative I/M

programs. They are not used to model the actual prevalence of evaporative leaks.

For information on the modeling of leak prevalence please see Section 3.3.2.

41
 
Table 17: Description of I/M Programs [31]
 

Gas Cap Test OBD Pressure test Frequency Network Years

Colorado

N. Carolina

Y

N

Advisory

Y

N

N

Biennial

Annual

Hybrid

Decentralized

2003-2006

2002-2006

Phoenix Y Y Y Biennial Centralized 2002-2006

Tucson Y Y N Annual Centralized 2002-2006

Table 18: OBD Evaporative Emission Trouble Codes
 

OBD Code Description

P0440 Evaporative Emission Control System Malfunction

P0442 Evaporative Emission Control System Leak Detected (small leak)

P0445 Evaporative Emission Control System Purge Control Valve Circuit Shorted

P0446 Evaporative Emission Control System Vent Control Circuit Malfunction

P0447 Evaporative Emission Control System Vent Control Circuit Open

P1456 EVAP Emission Control System Leak Detected (Fuel Tank System)

P1457 EVAP Emission Control System Leak Detected (Control Canister System)

The Phoenix evaporative I/M program performed gas-cap tests on all vehicles, OBD scans on OBDequipped vehicles, and fill-pipe pressure tests on pre-OBD vehicles. The OBD codes used to assign

evaporative failures are listed in Table 18 for all vehicle makes and additionally P1456 and P1457

for Honda and Acura vehicles. Vehicles with one or more of these faults were flagged as failing

vehicles, analogous to pre-OBD vehicles that failed the pressure test. Very few vehicles failed both

the gas cap test and the pressure/OBD test. Therefore, the total number of failures is the sum of

gas cap and pressure/OBD failures.

The I/M failure frequencies are developed from the Phoenix data using initial and final results for

a vehicle in a given I/M cycle. For passing vehicles, the initial and final tests are the same. The

initial and final failure frequencies were averaged to develop an I/M failure frequency for each model

year and age group. Using the initial failure frequencies alone would neglect the required repairs

occurring on most failing vehicles, and using only final failure frequencies would neglect the prior

existence of failing vehicles. To develop non-I/M failure frequencies, the sample is restricted to

vehicles registered in states that do not have any I/M programs.

The Tucson data was used to determine the effect of I/M program frequency (annual vs. biennial). For OBD-equipped vehicles, Tucson performs gas-cap and OBD tests annually, while

Phoenix performs them biennially. Therefore, we were able to develop for the effectiveness ratio of

Annual/Biennial programs by analyzing the Tucson data.

The North Carolina data was used to estimate the effectiveness of using the OBD scan as the

sole test in a program. In North Carolina, expansion of I/M program boundaries has led to many

vehicles being tested for the first time. These vehicles were effectively non-I/M until their first

42
 
test. Vehicles were flagged as non-I/M tests if they were tested before the official start of the I/M

program or were registered in a new I/M county.

Failure frequencies of the non-I/M vehicles were compared to vehicles tested in I/M areas. The

I/M effectiveness of an OBD only I/M program is estimated to be a 63% reduction in failures or a

non-I/M to I/M failure ratio of 1.6. This ratio was then applied to Phoenix OBD and pressure test

failure frequencies to determine non-I/M failure frequencies.

The Colorado data was used to determine the effectiveness of gas cap tests. In Colorado, the I/M

data is primarily from the Denver and Boulder metropolitan areas. However, many residents are

new to this area, having moved from non-I/M counties and states. These vehicles were effectively

non-I/M until their first test. Vehicles were flagged as non-I/M if they were registered in a state

without an I/M program, or in a non-I/M county within Colorado. Colorado OBD data was not

used, because OBD in Colorado is only advisory and does not pass or fail a vehicle.

The failure rates of the non-I/M vehicles were compared to those in the I/M fleet. The effectiveness

of a gas cap only I/M program is estimated to be a 45% reduction in failures or a non-I/M to

I/M failure ratio of 1.2. This was then applied to gas cap failure frequencies to determine non-I/M

failure frequencies.

The I/M factor in MOVES adjusts emission rates depending on the characteristics of a given

county’s I/M program. Our reference program, Phoenix, has an IM factor of 1. Non-I/M areas

have an IM factor of 0. The failure frequencies from the other counties are used to calculate I/M

factors for the diverse types of evaporative I/M procedures. The I/M factor is assumed to have

a linear relationship with failure frequency. Figure 23 illustrates how the I/M factor varies with

different I/M programs. Different programs fall on the line as determined by the analysis from

above, based on specific evaporative tests performed. For the vehicles in Figure 23, Tucsons OBD

and gas cap tests are annual, compared to Phoenixs biennial requirement, which gives Tucson a

lower failure frequency, thus a higher I/M factor. Colorados frequency is biennial, but their OBD

test is non-enforcing. As a result, their data shows a higher failure frequency, resulting in a lower

I/M factor.

43
 
Figure 23: I/M Factor, MY 1999-2003, Age 4-5
 

3.4.1 Leak Prevalence

The I/M factor is applied to the leak prevalence rates developed in Section 3.3.2 Cold Soak. The leak

prevalence rates were developed from a test program in the Denver, CO area. The MOVES default

database contains non-IM and IM emission rates that represent I/M factors of 0 and 1. Because the

I/M factor for Denver is a value of neither 0 (no I/M program) nor 1 (the reference I/M program),

the Denver leak prevalence rates, as is, are not used as base prevalence rates in MOVES. From

Figure 23, the I/M failure frequency in Denver is 30% less than non-IM (I/M factor = 0) and 30%

higher than Phoenix (I/M factor = 1) so the leak prevalence rates developed from Denver data

are adjusted accordingly before being added to the MOVES database. This adjustment reflects the

analysis described in the previous section and can be observed in Figure 23. For example, during

a MOVES run for the Denver area, the Denver I/M factor will be applied and emissions will be

modeled with the same prevalence rates originally estimated for Denver.

44
 
Figure 24: Adjusting Denver Leak Prevalence Data
 

3.5 Liquid Leaks

Liquid leaks include any non-vapor form of fuel escaping the fuel system. The average leaking rate

is determined using the leaking vehicles excluded from the I/M analysis in section 3.4. Because the

testing methods used did not distinguish the different evaporative emission processes, permeation

and tank vapor venting are estimated using the calculation methods described in Section 3.2 and

Section 3.3 and subtracted from the total measurement. The remaining emissions after permeation

and vapor venting are subtracted are assumed to be caused by liquid leaks. Due to limitations

in the data quality and quantity, the measurements are averaged across all vehicles by the three

different modes, and shown in Table 19.

The liquid leak emission rates must be multiplied by the percentage of leakers in the fleet to get

an average liquid leaking emission rate. The studies by BAR [5] and API [29] provided this data.

Table 19: Liquid Leak Emission Rates (g/hr)

Operating Mode Liquid leak rate

Cold Soak 9.85

Hot Soak 19.0

Operating 178

45
 
Table 20: Percentage of Liquid Leaks by Age
 

Age group Percentage of leakers in fleet

0-9 0.09 %

10-14 0.25 %

15-19 0.77 %

20+ 2.38 %

The estimates of liquid leak prevalence are shown in Table 20. It is assumed that most leaks do not

occur until vehicles are 15 years or older.

Table 21 contains the fleet-weighted liquid leak rate. There is insufficient data to conclude that

these rates change with model year or are affected by I/M programs.

Table 21: Weighted Liquid Leak Emissions (g/hr)

Age group Cold soak Hot soak Operating

0-9 0.009 0.017 0.158

10-14 0.025 0.048 0.450

15-19 0.075 0.145 1.360

20+ 0.235 0.452 4.230

Similar to vapor leaks, we expect a reduction in the occurrence of liquid leaks due to improved system

design and integrity. We believe that remaining liquid leaks occurring in advanced evaporative

systems will be primarily caused by tampering and mal-maintenance. Therefore, we estimate Tier

3 to prevent half as many liquid leaks as vapor leaks.

Table 22: Weighted Tier 3 Liquid Leak Emissions (g/hr)

Age group Cold soak Hot soak Operating

0-9 0.007 0.013 0.123

10-14 0.019 0.037 0.342

15-19 0.058 0.113 1.054

20+ 0.180 0.348 3.258

3.6 Refueling

Refueling emissions are the displaced fuel vapors when liquid fuel is added to the tank. The

calculation of vapor losses includes any liquid fuel that is spilled during refueling and evaporates.

Refueling emissions are estimated from the total volume of fuel dispensed (gallons). This volume is

46
 
estimated from the average daily distance travelled (VMT) and estimated fuel consumption. Both

the spillage and the vapor displacement associated with refueling events are in terms of grams spilled

per gallon of fuel dispensed. Diesel vehicles are assumed to have negligible vapor displacement, but

fuel spillage is included in the refueling emissions.

Uncontrolled and unadjusted refueling emissions are the displaced grams of fuel vapor per gallon

of liquid fuel, plus the grams per gallon for spillage. AP-42 Volume I Section 5.2.2.3 [5] lists the

spillage as 0.7 lb/1000 gallons, which is 0.31g/gallon of dispensed fuel. The vapor displaced by

refueling is a function of temperature and gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) [10]:

E = −5.909 − 0.0949dT + 0.0884TDF + 0.485RV P (13)

Where:

E = Displaced Vapor (non-methane grams)

RVP = Reid Vapor Pressure (psi)

TDF = Dispensed gasoline temperature (degF)

TDF = 20.30 + 0.81*Tamb

dT = Temperature difference between tank and dispensed

dT = 0.418*TDF -16.6

Dispensed fuel temperature is the temperature of the fuel flowing from the pump. Based on a 2008

California study [35], this temperature is calculated as 20.30 + 0.81 * T, where T is the monthly

average temperature, computed from the zoneMonthHour table. The monthly average temperature

must be between 45 and 90 degrees Fahrenheit. For ambient temperatures beyond those limits, the

dispensed fuel temperature is set to the value calculated at the limit. Furthermore, the dT value

cannot be greater than 20 degrees. The dT equation is developed in an Amoco study. In that study,

the difference in temperature was never greater than 20 degrees.

Two emission control strategies exist to limit fuel lost during refueling. First, there are programs

designed to capture refueling vapors at the pump. These are often referred to as Stage II vapor control programs. Second, vehicles manufactured since 199823 have onboard refueling vapor recovery

(ORVR) systems that store refueling vapors in the vehicle’s evaporative emission canister.

The implementations of Stage II systems vary from area to area and affect the displaced fuel vapors

affected and the amount of reducing spillage. MOVES uses two factors to adjust the refueling losses

and account for this variation.

1. The refueling vapor program adjustment is a value between zero and one indicating the

percent reduction of total potential vapor losses by state or local programs (such as

Stage II recovery programs).

2. The refueling spill program adjustment is a value between zero and one indicating the

percent reduction of refueling spillage losses by state or local programs (such as Stage

II recovery programs).

These program adjustments in MOVES are applied by county. Each county has a unique value

47
 
Table 23: Phase-In of Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
 

Model Year Passenger Cars Light Trucks <6,000 Light Trucks 6,000- Heavy Duty Trucks

lbs GVWR 8,500 lbs GVWR

1998 40% 0% 0% 0%

1999 80% 0% 0% 0%

2000 100% 0% 0% 0%

2001 100% 40% 0% 0%

2002 100% 80% 0% 0%

2003 100% 100% 0% 0%

2004 100% 100% 40% 40%

2005 100% 100% 80% 80%

2006 and Newer 100% 100% 100% 100%

for vapor and spillage program adjustments. The program adjustment values for each county and

calendar year are stored in the default MOVES ‘CountyYear‘ table.

MOVES uses a separate factor to address the on-board refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) systems on

vehicles. MOVES applies a 98 percent reduction in refueling vapor losses and 50 percent reduction

in refueling spillage losses for ORVR equipped vehicles. The effects of ORVR technology is phased

in beginning in model year 1998.

1. The refueling tech adjustment is a number between zero and one which indicates the reduction in full refueling spillage losses that result from improvements in vehicle technology (such as the Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery rule). The technology adjustment

is applied the same in all locations.

The technology adjustment values are stored in the default MOVES ‘SourceTypeTechAdjustment‘

table.

MOVES applies both the program and technology adjustment to all model years. This means that

Stage II programs are assumed to affect vehicles not equipped with ORVR and additionally, any

refueling emissions that are not captured by the ORVR systems. MOVES does not account for

any interaction between ORVR systems and gasoline dispensing stations equipped with Stage II

equipment.

48
 
4 Glossary of Terms
 

backpurge - as the temperature decreases a vacuum is created in the fuel system which pulls

the hydrocarbons from the charcoal canister into the fuel tank, creating more space in the

canister for hydrocarbons to adhere during the next heating period

breakthrough - when the vapor generated by the fuel system overwhelms the charcoal canister and uncontrolled hydrocarbons are released into the atmosphere

canister - the device in an evaporative emission control system that captures and stores

evaporative emissions generated within the vehicle for later combustion by the engine; a

canister typically contains activated carbon as a storage medium

CRC - Coordinating Research Council, a consortium of auto and oil industry members which

sponsors common research programs

diurnal cold soak - Vapor lost while vehicles are parked at ambient temperature.

HC - hydrocarbon, an organic compound consisting entirely of hydrogen and carbon; a combustible fuel source which can be either gaseous or liquid

hot soak - Vapor lost in the time period immediately after turning off a vehicle.

I/M - Inspection and Maintenance program run by States to find and correct emissions

problems for vehicles registered in the State

light duty vehicle/LDGV - passenger cars

MOVES - MOtor Vehicle Emissions Simulator; official US EPA model for estimating emissions from national fleet of onroad vehicles

MSAT - Mobile Source Air Toxic rule which regulates toxic mobile source emissions such as

benzene and ethanol

permeation - the migration of hydrocarbons through materials in the fuel system

OBD - Onboard Diagnostics, an electronic automotive system with the ability to continually

track the functionality of emissions control and other components, and alerts the driver and/or

vehicle inspector when a problem is found

ORVR - Onboard refueling vapor recovery system which is designed to capture fuel vapors

at time of refueling

PSHED - portable SHED for evaporative emissions field measurements

purge - evaporative emissions control system that creates a vacuum in the fuel system to

pull the hydrocarbons from the charcoal canister while the engine is running for combustion

refueling loss - Vapor lost and spillage occurring during refueling

running loss - Vapor lost during vehicle operation.

RVP - Reid Vapor Pressure, a measure of volatility in the gasoline at 100 degrees Farenheit,

as determined by the test method ASTM-D-323

SHED - Sealed Housing for Evaporative emissions Determination; structure for evaporative

testing in a laboratory

Stage II - vapor control programs at refueling stations to recover fuel vapor losses from fuel

displacement at the refueling pump

tank vapor generated (TVG) - vapor generated in the fuel system as temperature rises

tank vapor vented (TVV) - vapor generated in fuel system lost to the atmosphere, when

not contained by evaporative emissions control systems

Tier 2 - vehicle emissions certification standards phased in from 2004 through 2007

Tier 3 - vehicle emissions certification standards will phase in from 2017 through 2025

49
 
Appendix A Notes on Evaporative Emission Data

Parameters: Vehicle Numbers, Test No., Ambient Temperature, RVP, Model Year, Fuel System,

Purge, Pressure, Canister, Gram HC, Retest

E-41 CRC Late Model In-Use Evap. Emission Hot Soak Study (1998)

•	 50 vehicles (30 passenger cars and 20 light duty trucks)

•	 Model years 1992 to 1997

•	 Average RVP: 6.5 psi

•	 Diurnal Temperature: 72 to 96◦F

•	 Fuel System: Port Fuel Injection, Throttle Body Injection

•	 Vehicle fuel tank drained and refilled to 40% of capacity with Federal Evaporative Emission

Test Fuel

•	 Driving schedule will be a full LA-4-NYCC-NYCC-LA4 sequence, with two minute idle periods

following the first LA-4, the second NYCC, and the final LA-4.

•	 Hydrocarbon readings will be taken continuously throughout the running loss test.

•	 Cumulative mass emissions will be reported at one minute intervals.

•	 Ambient Temperature in running loss enclosure: 95◦F

E-9 CRC Real Time Diurnal Study (1996)

•	 151 vehicles (51 vehicles MY 1971-1977, 50 vehicles MY 1980-1985, 50 vehicles MY 1986-1991)

•	 Odometers range from 39,000 to 439,000 miles

•	 Fuel tank volume was 15% of the rated capacity

•	 RVP: 6.62 psi (average sum of 47 vehicles)

•	 Diurnal temperature: 72 to 96◦F

•	 Fuel System: Port Fuel Injection, Carburetor, Throttle Body Injection

CRC E-35 Running Loss Study (1997)

•	 150 vehicles (50 vehicles MY 1971-1977, 50 vehicles MY 1980-1985, 50 vehicles MY 1986-1991)

•	 Ambient Temperature in running loss enclosure: 95◦F

•	 RVP: 6.8 psi

•	 Fuel System: Port Fuel Injection, Carburetor, Throttle Body Injection

EPA Compliance Data

•	 2-Day Test

•	 Length of the hot soak: 1 hour

•	 77 vehicles

•	 RVP: average 8.81 psi

•	 Ambient Temperature:

•	 Federal Standard (72 to 96◦F) Diurnal

•	 Cal. (65 to 105◦F) Diurnal

50
 
• Hot Soak: 81.67◦F

• Fuel System: Port Fuel Injection

MSOD (Mobile Source Observation Database):

Hot Soak 1 hour hot soak evaporative test

FTP Federal test procedure (19.53 mph), also referred to as the UDDP schedule

NYCC New York City Cycle Test (7.04 mph)

BL1A 1 hour Breathing Loss Evap. Test Gas Cap left On

BL1B 1 hour Breathing Loss Evap. Test Canister as recd.

ST01 Engine Start cycle test

4HD 4 hour Diurnal test

24RTD 24 Hour Real Time Diurnal

33RTD 33 Hour Real Time Diurnal

72RTD 72 Hour Real Time Diurnal

3Rest 3 Hour Resting Loss Evap. Emission Test (follows 1 HR Hot Soak)

CY6084 Real time diurnal temperature pattern: range 60 to 84 F

CY7296 Real time diurnal temperature pattern: range 72 to 96 F

CY8210 Real time diurnal temperature pattern: range 82 to 102 F

DIURBL Standard temperature rise for 1 hour diurnal or breathing loss evaporative emission test

F505 Bag 1 of federal test procedure (25.55 mph)

ASM Acceleration Simulation Mode Test Procedure

ATD Ambient Temperature diurnal evaporative Test, shed temp constant, vehicle begins 24

degree cooler

51
 
Appendix B Peer Review Comments
 

52
 
Peer Review 

1. Reviewers’ Responses to Charge Questions

1.1. Evaporative Emissions Report 

This section provides a verbatim list of peer reviewer comments submitted in response to the charge 

questions for the Evaporative Emissions Report. EPA responses are in bold italics below the comment.

1.1.1. Adequacy of Selected Data Sources 

Does the presentation give a description of selected data sources sufficient to allow the reader to form a 

general view of the quantity, quality and representativeness of data used in the development of emission 

rates? Are you able to recommend alternate data sources might better allow the model to estimate 

national or regional default values? 

1.1.1.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.1.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

New evaporative emissions data come largely from the extensive Coordinating Research Council studies 

reported in 2006-2010. These data, particularly quantification of permeation data, are a major 

improvement over the sparse data previously available. The report documents these data thoroughly 

and clearly. 

1.1.2. Clarity of Analytical Methods and Procedures 

Is the description of analytic methods and procedures clear and detailed enough to allow the reader to 

develop an adequate understanding of the steps taken and assumptions made by EPA to develop the 

model inputs? Are examples selected for tables and figures well chosen and designed to assist the reader 

in understanding approaches and methods?

1.1.2.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.2.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

Descriptions of methods and procedures are particularly good. Explanation of the operation of 

evaporative control systems and the nature and mechanism of emissions is excellent. The writing in this 

53
report is concise, direct, and clear. The use of graphics to show relationships, and agreement with 

experimental data as available are very well done. 

1.1.3. Appropriateness of Technical Approach 

Are the methods and procedures employed technically appropriate and reasonable, with respect to the 

relevant disciplines, including physics, chemistry, engineering, mathematics and statistics? Are you able 

to suggest or recommend alternate approaches that might better achieve the goal of developing 

accurate and representative model inputs? In making recommendations please distinguish between 

cases involving reasonable disagreement in adoption of methods as opposed to cases where you 

conclude that current methods involve specific technical errors. 

1.1.3.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.3.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

The estimation of fuel system evaporative emissions depends strongly upon the “fuel tank 

temperature”. The use of this term is a bit ambiguous. I believe that it refers the temperature of the fuel 

in the fuel tank. This should be made clear. 

Text was added to the definition of fuel tank temperature to make it clear that it is the 

temperature of the fuel in the tank itself that is referred to in MOVES and the documentation 

with the term “fuel tank temperature”. 

For hot and cold soaks, modeling of the change in fuel temperature based on the fuel temperature, air 

temperature, and a transfer coefficient (equation 1) is probably adequate for the purposes of the model, 

however it fails to capture difference in fuel tank design. “k” comes from EPA compliance test data. 

Reporting of the variability in “k” would give some sense of the adequacy of the model.

Similar questions arise in the use of equation 3 to model fuel tank temperature during running 

operation. Vehicle to vehicle variation is likely to be even larger and should be quantified. Note: MOVES 

projects fleet average emissions, which will change as vehicle designs change. Use of a fleet-average 

constant will not capture possible changes as older model years disappear from the fleet. A model-year 

or binned model year constant would be an improvement. 

The variability of the “k” values and the fuel tank temperatures is not readily available at this 

time. EPA plans on another major enhancement of the calculation of evaporative emissions 

that will make less use of averages and more use of distributions. This should improve the 

ability of the model to account for differences in design and technology across model years in 

future versions of MOVES. 

54
1.1.4. Appropriateness of Assumptions 

In areas where EPA has concluded that applicable data is meager or unavailable, and consequently has 

made assumptions to frame approaches and arrive at solutions, do you agree that the assumptions 

made are appropriate and reasonable? If not, and you are so able, please suggest alternative sets of 

assumptions that might lead to more reasonable or accurate model inputs while allowing a reasonable 

margin of environmental protection. 

1.1.4.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.4.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

Inadequate or missing data is always a problem. The assumptions used to deal with inadequate data are 

clearly stated. The use of current and projected emissions standards to project future vehicle fleet 

emissions has a history of underestimating emissions. 

The use of light-duty vehicle evaporative emissions composition data for non-existent heavy-duty 

gasoline vehicle data is reasonable. There is no reason to expect that differences in vehicle designs 

between these two categories of vehicles would affect evaporative emissions significantly. 

Linear interpolation and extrapolation for the estimation of altitude effects is reasonable. 

The assumption that fuel tank size will remain constant at the current level of 19 gallons over the 2009-

2030 period, page 21, is incorrect. With an improvement of fuel economy by nearly a factor of two over 

this period, than size will decrease by roughly the same factor, as occurred in the 1970s. 

It has been difficult to obtain accurate information about fuel tank size from existing sources. 

More effort will be needed to better document changes in the distribution of fuel tank sizes by 

model year. MOVES2014 has been designed to allow different model years to have different 

average fuel tank capacity, which should allow simple updates to the default data, once 

additional data becomes available. In addition, EPA plans on another major enhancement of 

the calculation of evaporative emissions that will make less use of averages and more use of 

distributions. This should improve the ability of the model to account for differences in design 

and technology across model years in future versions of MOVES. 

1.1.5. Consistency with Existing Body of Data and Literature 

Are the resulting model inputs appropriate, and to the best of your knowledge and experience, 

reasonably consistent with physical and chemical processes involved in exhaust emissions formation and 

control? Are the resulting model inputs empirically consistent with the body of data and literature that 

has come to your attention? 

55
1.1.5.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.5.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

Model inputs are consistent with the goal of MOVES to be more data driven. However, major gaps 

remain in the available data. Particularly sparse are data on liquid running losses, Table 17. The 

methodology of subtracting modeled estimated vapor emissions from total measured vapor emissions 

from vehicles excluded from inspection and maintenance testing is suspect. 

Although comparing modeled vapor emissions to measurements cannot replace the need and 

desire to have a more detailed breakdown of measured vapor emissions, the technique of 

subtracting the modeled emissions from the total measured vapor emissions avoids double 

counting the non-leaking vapor emissions when the measurements are used in the model. 

EPA is planning to continue to investigate methods to better estimate the evaporative 

emissions from vehicles that allows a breakout of the sources of the vapors. 

Liquid spillage during refueling comes from AP-42 and data apparently dating from the 1970s. This is a 

major shortcoming of the MOVES2014 model and deserves attention in a future revision or updating. 

The effective regulation of other emissions increases the importance of unregulated or weakly regulated 

emissions. 

Additional information on the Wade-Reddy equation for vapor generation (equation 6) is needed as this 

relation is used extensively in the modeling. First, no reference is provided. Second, having a figure in 

which the data to which the equation was fitted with the coefficients of Table 7 would strengthen the 

rationale for the use of this empirical relation. I believe that this relation comes from work first 

published in the 1970s (perhaps: Wade et. al., “Mathematical Expressions Relating Evaporative 

Emissions from Motor Vehicles without Evaporative Loss-Control Devices to Gasoline Volatility,” SAE 

Paper 720700, 1972?) and has been cited extensively over the years in EPA publications on evaporative 

emissions. I have not reviewed the source paper. It is a reasonable mathematical curve-fit relation, but 

its original justification probably was with data of the 1970s. The data are modern and appropriate, but 

how well the model fits the data should be shown. 

Additional text was added to the description of the use of the Wade-Reddy equation in Section 

3.3, including a reference, which includes more descriptive material regarding the fit of the 

model.

1.1.6. Improvements in Proposed Methodology 

Compared to current methods, is the proposed methodology for estimating evaporative emissions a 

significant improvement? Would a simpler application of the ideas contained in this method be 

56
adequate? Are there other existing models for evaporative emissions that might be possible candidates 

for inclusion in MOVES? 

1.1.6.1. Chris Kite 

No response. 

1.1.6.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

Improvements in the treatment of evaporative emissions are substantial. The data base, the modeling of 

emissions, and their integration with fleet composition and activity all are significant improvements over 

the current MOVES model. Treatment of the addition of ethanol is straight forward, carefully done and 

presented, and an important addition. 

1.1.7. General/Catch-All Reviewer Comments 

Please provide any additional thoughts or review of the material you feel important to note that is not 

captured by the preceding questions. 

1.1.7.1. Chris Kite 

 Overall, the technical report is very informative and well written. While reviewing the report for 

areas in which I have some background, I came across many sections where I was less informed, so 

it was a very positive experience to learn more about evaporative emission processes and how the 

MOVES model treats them. 

 While reviewing, I noticed some minor grammatical issues that I noted with recommendations for 

correction, rewording, etc. These may be of help in preparing the final version of the report, but 

since such suggestions are rather minor and not essential for a peer review, they are highlighted 

with notes in the attached draft but not mentioned here. 

Appropriate modifications have been made to the text. 

 The report included a few references that may need to be corrected once the final version is 

prepared so that someone reading it a few years from now will not be confused: 

 The draft mentions a MOVES2014 version of the model. Will the evaporative emission impacts 

referenced in the report be included in the upcoming MOVES2013 version? If so, then just 

change the reference to MOVES2013. If not, is a MOVES2014 version of the model already 

under development that will include these impacts? Or, if there will not be a MOVES2014 

version of the model, just change this to MOVES2015, MOVES2016, etc. as needed. 

At the time the report was drafted, EPA had not yet announced the change in the naming of 

the next publically released version of the MOVES model. All references to MOVES2014 in 

the documentation refer to what was (then) publically known as MOVES2013. So, 

MOVES2013 and MOVES2014 are the same and there will not be a “MOVES2013” version 

released to the public by EPA. 

57
 The report draft was probably written when 2016 was being considered as a model year start 

for Tier 3 standards with a phase-in from 2016-2022. Based on the Tier 3 proposal from earlier 

this year, this should be changed to a 2017 model year start with a phase in from 2017-2025. In 

the event that Tier 3 implementation is delayed beyond 2017, then the report draft should be 

modified accordingly. 

The model and the report have been adjusted to reflect the correct final Tier3 Rule phase-in for 

evaporative standards, including the leak standard. See Table 3 and the discussion of leak 

prevalence in Section 3.3.3 “Hot Soak”. 

 The report draft mentions the Stage 2 program, but we recommend referring to it as Stage II since 

the latter is typically how the rule is typically referenced in the Clean Air Act and by EPA. 

The text has been updated in Section 3.6 “Refueling” to make this change to be consistent with the 

Clean Air Act. 

 In footnote #2 on page 9, a 15-minute time increment is referenced for hot and cold soak emission 

calculations. This time increment seems very reasonable, but I was left wondering how MOVES 

handles temperature figures for each 15-minute increment. Are they just linearly interpolated from 

the hourly MOVES model inputs? The manner in which I prepare MOVES temperature inputs are 

averages for the entire hour, so if data were collected at several meteorological stations from 7-8 

AM, then I would average all of these and associate the input with an hourID of 8 in the 

zonemonthhour table. Pretend I had a 7-8 AM figure of 70 F and an 8-9 AM figure of 74 F. Would 

the evaporative calculations put the 70 F and 74 F estimates right at the top of the hours, which 

would be 7 AM and 8 AM, respectively? Or, would these be put at the mid-point of the hours, which 

would be 7:30 AM and 8:30 AM, respectively? Assuming the latter, then would the evaporative 

calculations be based on a linear interpolation of 70 F at 7:30 AM, 71 F at 7:45 AM, 72 F at 8:00 AM, 

73 F at 8:15 AM, and 74 F at 8:30 AM? If this is documented elsewhere, then just reference that 

literature instead of including a full and rather tedious explanation in this report. 

Hot soaks occur at trip ends. If a trip ends at 7 AM, or at any time in the hour from 7:00 – 8:00, 

the temperature used for hot soak calculations is the temperature provided by the user to the hour 

from 7 AM – 8 AM. For cold soak MOVES takes the temperature at the beginning of the hour and 

looks at the temperature for the next hour and interpolates in 15 minute increments for the tank 

temperature calculation. The resulting hourly temperature is approximately an average of the two 

hourly temperatures input by the users. 

 

 The approach described on page 16 to vary evaporative effects by altitude (instead of “low” versus 

“high” categories) is excellent. With the MOVES county database table now include a numeric 

elevation field to perform this calculation? 

The MOVES database does not include a value to indicate elevation. Instead, each county has a 

value for average barometric pressure based on the meteorological measurements used to obtain 

temperature and humidity values. The equations can use the barometric pressure values directly. 

58
 The summary is very good about how MOVES handles diurnal emissions from vehicles parked for 

several days without initiating trips. Figure 13 on page 27 is particularly good at communicating the 

necessary points. I looked at the samplevehicleday and samplevehicletrip tables in the 

MOVES2010b database, and couldn’t figure out how to obtain the fractions of vehicles cold soaking 

for several consecutive days. The current tables look like they were designed for a sample vehicle 

on a single day. Perhaps these tables will be expanded for a future version of MOVES? If so, then I 

recommend including an extract of the expanded table(s) in Appendix B. Also, the 

samplevehiclesoakingday table referenced on page 27 is currently empty within the MOVES2010b 

database. Perhaps this contains the needed information to view multiple-day cold soak profiles? If 

so, then I recommend including an Appendix B extract of this table as well. Maybe only have these 

example extracts focus on the gasoline passenger car source use type to keep them small. 

Whatever approach is taken should make it very clear to the reader about how to connect all the 

tables together. I do not expect that many MOVES users will have their own multi-day soaking data 

for populating these tables (and will instead rely on defaults), but the necessary methodology 

should be outlined clearly in the event that users do want to provide their own information. 

MOVES2014 does not have sample vehicle trips for more than a single day. The Software Design 

and Reference Manual (SDRM) for MOVES describes in a step-by-step manner how the sample 

vehicle trips are converted to activity parameters (such as starts and parking). Vehicles soaking 

for more than one day cannot exceed the vehicles that did not drive in the previous day. MOVES 

calculates the vehicles soaking for more than one day as a fraction of the vehicles soaking in the 

previous day. 

 In Section 3.3.4 on page 36, it says that MOBILE6 was run to obtain the effects of temperature and 

gasoline RVP on running loss emissions. I understand that this may have been necessary in lieu of 

having superior data, but are there no newer data sets available that can be used for this purpose? 

To understand how MOBILE6 handles this, I came across a report entitled Estimating Running Loss 

Evaporative Emissions in MOBILE6, M6.EVP.008,EPA420-R-01-023, April 2001, which is on the 

MOBILE6 Technical Documentation site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/mobile6/r01023.pdf). 

Under Section 5, Conclusions, on page 7, it says: “EPA proposes, for MOBILE6, to use the MOBILE5 

model to estimate the running loss emissions from that portion of the fleet that does not contain 

vehicles that are gross liquid leakers." Is there justification available to indicate that the changes in 

vehicle technology over the last 20-25 years are not sensitive to the response of temperature and 

fuel RVP to running loss emission rates? If not, that should be emphasized in the report so that 

readers are aware that newer data of this sort be assigned appropriate priority for future research. 

MOBILE5 was released before the introduction of Tier 1 and LEV-I vehicles into the fleet, so it is 

likely that the raw data upon which the MOBILE5 running loss impacts were developed dates back to 

vehicles tested from 1980-1990. Assuming that some updates were done for estimating running 

loss emissions with MOBILE6, the test data then would have perhaps included Tier 1 and LEV-I 

vehicles that were available from 1990-2000. Since the current light-duty fleet is dominated by 

2004-and-newer Tier 2 activity, it would be ideal for MOVES to not rely on data of such vintage, 

particularly for a model that will be used to estimate future fleet emissions dominated by both Tier 

2 and Tier 3 vehicles. 59
EPA is just completing a study1

 on the effects of temperature on running losses utilizing an 

environmental chamber. This new information will provide EPA with the information needed to 

update the effects of temperature on running losses currently used by MOVES. However, the 

testing was not completed in time to provide enough time for proper quality assurance and 

analysis for use in MOVES2014. 

 In Section 3.6 on page 42, it says: “Refueling emissions are estimated from the total volume of fuel 

dispensed (gallons). This volume is estimated from the average daily distance travelled (VMT) and 

estimated fuel consumption.” Is this how MOVES performs the calculations “under the hood” for 

refueling? If MOVES2010b is run to obtain refueling emission rates, the three types of output are 

grams/mile, grams/start, and grams/hour for the respective activity types of miles traveled, number 

of starts, and number of extended idling hours for diesel-fuel combination long-haul trucks. These 

are the same emission process/rate combinations when estimating carbon dioxide (CO2) and energy 

consumption. I have not been able to obtain gallons pumped/consumed directly from MOVES 

output, and have instead relied on post-processing CO2 and/or energy consumption for these 

purposes. Will future versions of MOVES estimate gallons pumped/consumed directly or output 

refueling emission rates in units of grams/gallon? If not, then the report language referenced above 

about how MOVES calculates refueling emissions may need to be revised. 

MOVES is able to calculate gallons of fuel consumed internally by converting the estimate of 

energy consumption to fuel using the values of energy content contained in the default MOVES 

database. Most users have been converting the energy or CO2 in the output of MOVES to gallons 

as you describe. However, as typical fuels become more complex (such as ethanol blends), it will 

not be possible to accurately estimate fuel quantity without more detailed output from MOVES, 

either including results by fuel subtype or by direct output of MOVES fuel quantity estimates. This 

feature was not planned for MOVES2014, but could be considered for future updates to MOVES. 

 Could this report or some other MOVES documentation include options/recommendations about 

how specific evaporative emission processes should be matched to profiles from EPA’s SPECIATE 

database? Refer to slides 8 and 9 of the attached file entitled “mvs-custom-scc-and-speciationtceq.pdf” [See tables below, “slides 8 and 9 are Gasoline and Diesel Profile tables]. Based on the 

most recent information that we could obtain, this is how we are matching up evaporative emission 

processes to SPECIATE profiles. For example, evaporative permeation from running vehicles is 

matched to profile descriptions that begin with “dynamic permeation”. Off-network evaporative 

permeation from parked vehicles is matched to profile descriptions that begin with “static 

permeation”. Vapor/venting processes get matched to “headspace vapor”, while leaking/spillage 

profiles get matched to liquid fuel composition. This was the best matching I could come up with, 

but it took a lot of staff time to develop, and it will likely be very helpful for new MOVES users to 

have some guidance/direction about where to start in case they have similar questions. If you feel 

that these tables reflect a good starting point, feel free to use them. Prior to 2008, ethanol had not 

fully penetrated the fuel supply in Texas, so we are relying on gasoline profiles that have both 0% 

 

1

 M. Sabisch, S. Kishan, J. Stewart, G. Glinsky Fuel Tank Temperature Profile Development for Highway Driving, 

March 2014 60
and 10% ethanol. If you feel that we could take an improved approach with this matching, please 

let us know. 

MOVES2014 will apply the appropriate SPECIATE factors in order to generate some of the 

pollutants reported by MOVES. The mapping of the MOVES emission processes to the SPECIATE 

profiles is found in MOVES2014 Technical Report: Speciation of Total Organic Gas and Particulate 

Matter Emissions from On-road Vehicles in MOVES2014[17]. 

61
62
63
64
*Note: EPA has updated speciation mapping profiles, which make the above slides out of date. 

They are included here for completeness of the peer review comments. Please use the list in EPA 

documentation [17].

 Overall, excellent report and thanks for the opportunity to review. 

65
1.1.7.2. Dr. Robert Sawyer 

 The treatment of evaporative emissions in MOVES2014 is a significant improvement over the 

previous treatment. The incorporation of extensive new data, reorganization of the computation of 

total evaporative emissions, and integrating evaporative emissions with data on fleet composition 

and operating modes all contribute to this improvement. Non-tailpipe emission sources not treated 

include window washer fluid, paint, and plastics and rubber off-gassing. Some of these sources may 

not be significant, but for completeness they deserve recognition. 

Text was added to the description of evaporative emissions in Section I “Background”, to 

clearly indicate that these sources are not included in our estimates and may be a factor in 

overall emissions from vehicles. 

 Increasing skewness in evaporative emissions, as in tailpipe emissions, points to the importance of 

getting the high emitter effect correct. Both emissions rates and activity data require refinement. 

Model-year emissions in MOVES vary by a factor of 50 or more. 

Significant resources from the EPA and other sources have been spent in recent years specifically 

to address the issue of high emitters as they relate to evaporative emissions. It was those 

measurement efforts that allow the MOVES model to have an accounting for poorly performing 

evaporative control systems in the fleet. EPA intends to continue to investigate and refine our 

estimates for both current technologies and emerging technologies in the coming years with 

additional measurements. 

 A glossary would be useful. 

We added a glossary of terms to the document.

66
Appendix C Relevant MOVES Evaporative Tables

Table 24: MOBILE6 LDGV Running Losses (g/mi)

Temperature(F) 7 RVP (psi) 8 RVP (psi) 9 RVP (psi) 10 RVP (psi)

40 3.06 3.06 3.07 3.09

45 3.00 3.02 3.05 3.10

50 2.88 2.91 2.96 3.06

55 2.69 2.76 2.84 3.04

65 2.62 2.71 2.80 3.05

70 2.57 2.68 2.79 3.08

75 2.56 2.69 2.83 3.16

80 2.70 2.85 3.03 3.39

85 2.85 3.04 3.29 3.76

90 3.03 3.30 3.62 4.23

95 3.24 3.58 3.98 4.69

100 3.42 3.91 4.57 5.42

67
 
Table 25: MOVES Cumulative Tank Vapor Vented Table
 

RegClass MYG Age Bckpurge AvgCan TankGal FillFrac LeakEq LeakPct LeakPctIM

10 19711977 1519 0.24 0.00 3.00 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00 1.00

10 19781995 2099 0.24 0.00 3.00 0.40 0.814TVG 0.65 0.48

20 1996 3 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 1996 405 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 1996 607 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

20 1996 809 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

20 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

20 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

20 1997 3 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 1997 405 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 1997 607 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

20 1997 809 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

20 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

20 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

20 1998 3 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 1998 405 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 1998 607 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

20 1998 809 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

20 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

20 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

20 2004 3 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2004 405 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2004 607 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2004 809 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 2005 3 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2005 405 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2005 607 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2005 809 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 2006 3 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2006 405 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2006 607 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2006 809 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

68
 
20 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 20073 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2007 405 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2007 607 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2007 809 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 20083 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2008 405 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2008 607 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2008 809 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 20093 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2009 405 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2009 607 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2009 809 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 20103 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2010 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2010 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2010 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

20 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

20 20163 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2016 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

20 2016 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2016 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

20 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

20 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

20 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

20 20183 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

20 2018 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

20 2018 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2018 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

20 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

20 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

20 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

20 20203 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

20 2020 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

20 2020 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

69
20 2020 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

20 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

20 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

20 20223 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

20 2022 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

20 2022 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

20 2022 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

20 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

20 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

20 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

20 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 28.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

20 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.782TVG 0.54 0.40

20 19711977 1519 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.79TVG 0.78 0.57

20 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

20 197819953 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

20 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

20 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

20 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

20 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

20 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

20 199920033 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

20 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

20 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

20 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

20 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

20 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

20 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

30 19963 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 1996 405 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 1996 607 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

30 1996 809 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

30 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

30 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

30 19973 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 1997 405 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 1997 607 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

30 1997 809 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

30 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

30 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

30 19983 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 1998 405 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 1998 607 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

70
30 1998 809 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

30 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

30 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

30 20043 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2004 405 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2004 607 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2004 809 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20053 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2005 405 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2005 607 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2005 809 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20063 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2006 405 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2006 607 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2006 809 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20073 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2007 405 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2007 607 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2007 809 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20083 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2008 405 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2008 607 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2008 809 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20093 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2009 405 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2009 607 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2009 809 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

71
30 2010

3 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2010 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2010 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2010 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

30 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

30 20163 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2016 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

30 2016 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2016 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

30 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

30 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

30 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

30 20183 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

30 2018 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

30 2018 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2018 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

30 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

30 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

30 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

30 20203 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

30 2020 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

30 2020 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

30 2020 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

30 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

30 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

30 20223 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

30 2022 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

30 2022 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

30 2022 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

30 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

30 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

30 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

30 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 28.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

30 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.782TVG 0.54 0.40

30 19711977 1519 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.79TVG 0.78 0.57

30 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

30 197819953 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

30 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

30 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

30 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

30 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

30 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

72
30 19992003

3 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

30 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

30 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

30 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

30 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

30 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

30 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

41 19963 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 1996 405 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 1996 607 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

41 1996 809 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

41 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

41 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

41 19973 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 1997 405 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 1997 607 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

41 1997 809 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

41 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

41 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

41 19983 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 1998 405 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 1998 607 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

41 1998 809 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

41 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

41 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 19.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

41 20043 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2004 405 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2004 607 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2004 809 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 20.50 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20053 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2005 405 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2005 607 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2005 809 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 20.30 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20063 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2006 405 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2006 607 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2006 809 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

73
41 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 20.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20073 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2007 405 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2007 607 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2007 809 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 19.70 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20083 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2008 405 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2008 607 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2008 809 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 19.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20093 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2009 405 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2009 607 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2009 809 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20103 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2010 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2010 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2010 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

41 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

41 20163 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2016 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

41 2016 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2016 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

41 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

41 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

41 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

41 20183 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

41 2018 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

41 2018 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2018 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

41 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

41 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

41 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

41 20203 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

74
41 2020 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

41 2020 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

41 2020 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

41 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

41 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

41 20223 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

41 2022 405 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

41 2022 607 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

41 2022 809 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

41 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

41 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

41 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 19.10 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

41 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 28.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

41 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00

41 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 27.30 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

41 197819953 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

41 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

41 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

41 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

41 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

41 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 18.60 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

41 199920033 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

41 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

41 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

41 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

41 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

41 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

41 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 19.90 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

42 19963 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 1996 405 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 1996 607 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

42 1996 809 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

42 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

42 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

42 19973 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 1997 405 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 1997 607 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

42 1997 809 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

42 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

42 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

42 19983 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 1998 405 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

75
42 1998 607 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

42 1998 809 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

42 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

42 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

42 20043 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2004 405 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2004 607 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2004 809 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20053 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2005 405 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2005 607 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2005 809 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20063 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2006 405 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2006 607 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2006 809 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20073 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2007 405 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2007 607 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2007 809 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20083 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2008 405 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2008 607 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2008 809 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 2009

3 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2009 405 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2009 607 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2009 809 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

76
42 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20103 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2010 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2010 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2010 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

42 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

42 20163 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2016 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

42 2016 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2016 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

42 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

42 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

42 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

42 20183 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

42 2018 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

42 2018 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2018 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

42 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

42 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

42 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

42 20203 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

42 2020 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

42 2020 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

42 2020 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

42 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

42 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

42 20223 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

42 2022 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

42 2022 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

42 2022 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

42 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

42 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

42 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

42 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 38.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

42 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00

42 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

42 197819953 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

42 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

42 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

42 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

42 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

42 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

77
42 19992003

3 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

42 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

42 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

42 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

42 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

42 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

42 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

46 19963 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 1996 405 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 1996 607 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

46 1996 809 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

46 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

46 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

46 19973 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 1997 405 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 1997 607 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

46 1997 809 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

46 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

46 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

46 19983 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 1998 405 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 1998 607 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

46 1998 809 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

46 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

46 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

46 20043 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2004 405 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2004 607 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2004 809 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20053 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2005 405 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2005 607 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2005 809 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20063 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2006 405 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2006 607 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2006 809 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

78
46 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20073 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2007 405 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2007 607 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2007 809 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20083 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2008 405 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2008 607 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2008 809 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20093 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2009 405 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2009 607 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2009 809 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20103 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2010 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2010 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2010 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

46 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

46 20163 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2016 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

46 2016 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2016 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

46 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

46 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

46 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

46 20183 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

46 2018 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

46 2018 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2018 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

46 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

46 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

46 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

46 20203 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

79
46 2020 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

46 2020 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

46 2020 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

46 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

46 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

46 20223 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

46 2022 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

46 2022 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

46 2022 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

46 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

46 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

46 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

46 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 38.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

46 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00

46 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

46 197819953 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

46 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

46 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

46 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

46 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

46 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

46 199920033 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

46 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

46 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

46 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

46 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

46 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

46 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

47 19963 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 1996 405 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 1996 607 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

47 1996 809 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

47 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

47 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

47 19973 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 1997 405 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 1997 607 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

47 1997 809 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

47 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

47 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

47 19983 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 1998 405 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

80
47 1998 607 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

47 1998 809 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

47 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

47 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

47 20043 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2004 405 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2004 607 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2004 809 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20053 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2005 405 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2005 607 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2005 809 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20063 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2006 405 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2006 607 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2006 809 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20073 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2007 405 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2007 607 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2007 809 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20083 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2008 405 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2008 607 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2008 809 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 2009

3 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2009 405 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2009 607 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2009 809 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

81
47 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20103 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2010 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2010 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2010 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

47 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

47 20163 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2016 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

47 2016 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2016 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

47 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

47 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

47 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

47 20183 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

47 2018 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

47 2018 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2018 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

47 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

47 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

47 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

47 20203 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

47 2020 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

47 2020 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

47 2020 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

47 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

47 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

47 20223 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

47 2022 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

47 2022 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

47 2022 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

47 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

47 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

47 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

47 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 38.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

47 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00

47 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

47 197819953 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

47 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

47 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

47 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

47 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

47 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

82
47 19992003

3 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

47 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

47 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

47 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

47 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

47 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

47 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

48 19963 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 1996 405 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 1996 607 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

48 1996 809 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 1996 1014 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

48 1996 1519 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

48 1996 2099 0.24 78.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

48 19973 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 1997 405 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 1997 607 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

48 1997 809 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 1997 1014 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

48 1997 1519 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

48 1997 2099 0.24 83.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

48 19983 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 1998 405 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 1998 607 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

48 1998 809 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 1998 1014 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

48 1998 1519 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

48 1998 2099 0.24 115.40 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

48 20043 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2004 405 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2004 607 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2004 809 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2004 1014 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2004 1519 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2004 2099 0.24 145.00 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20053 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2005 405 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2005 607 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2005 809 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2005 1014 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2005 1519 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2005 2099 0.24 150.70 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20063 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2006 405 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2006 607 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2006 809 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

83
48 2006 1014 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2006 1519 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2006 2099 0.24 145.30 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20073 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2007 405 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2007 607 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2007 809 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2007 1014 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2007 1519 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2007 2099 0.24 142.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20083 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2008 405 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2008 607 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2008 809 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2008 1014 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2008 1519 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2008 2099 0.24 138.60 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20093 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2009 405 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2009 607 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2009 809 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2009 1014 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2009 1519 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2009 2099 0.24 136.20 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20103 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2010 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2010 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2010 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 2010 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 2010 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.08

48 2010 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.15 0.11

48 20163 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2016 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.02

48 2016 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2016 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.03

48 2016 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

48 2016 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.05

48 2016 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.12 0.08

48 20183 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.01

48 2018 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

48 2018 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2018 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

48 2018 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.03

48 2018 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.04

48 2018 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.06

48 20203 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

84
48 2020 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

48 2020 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

48 2020 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 2020 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.02

48 2020 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.03

48 2020 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.09 0.04

48 2022 3 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.01 0.00

48 2022 405 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

48 2022 607 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.02 0.01

48 2022 809 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.01

48 2022 1014 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.04 0.01

48 2022 1519 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.02

48 2022 2099 0.24 137.50 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.08 0.03

48 19601970 2099 0.24 0.00 38.00 0.40 0.952TVG 1.00 0.85

48 19711977 1014 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.814TVG 1.00

48 19711977 2099 0.24 64.70 38.00 0.40 0.796TVG 1.00 0.85

48 19781995 3 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 19781995 405 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.408TVG 0.12 0.09

48 19781995 607 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.388TVG 0.18 0.13

48 19781995 809 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.376TVG 0.23 0.17

48 19781995 1014 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.365TVG 0.32 0.24

48 19781995 1519 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.357TVG 0.45 0.33

48 19781995 2099 0.24 72.80 38.00 0.40 0.351TVG 0.66 0.48

48 19992003 3 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.03 0.02

48 19992003 405 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.05 0.04

48 19992003 607 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.06 0.04

48 19992003 809 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.07 0.05

48 19992003 1014 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.10 0.07

48 19992003 1519 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.13 0.10

48 19992003 2099 0.24 122.90 38.00 0.40 0.524TVG 0.18 0.14

Table 26: MOVES Cumulative Tank Vapor Vented Table (2)
 

RegCls MYG TankVaporVentingEquation

10 1996 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 1997 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 1998 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2004 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2005 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2006 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2007 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2008 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2009 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2010 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

85
 
-(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

10 2011 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2012 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2013 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2014 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2015 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2016 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2017 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2018 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2019 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2020 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2021 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2022 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2023 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2024 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2025 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2026 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2027 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2028 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2029 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 2030 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 19711977 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 19781995 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 19992003 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

10 20312050 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

20 1996 .8*(-(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25)+.2*(-(­

1.34x+115)+sqrt(((-1.34x+115)*(-1.34x+115))-(4*1.90)*(-0.125xx+2.70x+23)))/(2*1.90)))

20 1997 .6*(-(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25)+.4*(-(­

1.34x+115)+sqrt(((-1.34x+115)*(-1.34x+115))-(4*1.90)*(-0.125xx+2.70x+23)))/(2*1.90)))

20 1998 .1*(-(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25)+.9*(-(­

1.34x+115)+sqrt(((-1.34x+115)*(-1.34x+115))-(4*1.90)*(-0.125xx+2.70x+23)))/(2*1.90)))

20 2004 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2005 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2006 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2007 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2008 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2009 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2010 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2011 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2012 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2013 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2014 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2015 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2016 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2017 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2018 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2019

86
 
20 2020
 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2021 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2022 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2023 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2024 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2025 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2026 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2027 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2028 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2029 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 2030 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

20 19601970 -(-1x+85)+sqrt(((-1x+85)*(-1x+85))-(4*1.25)*(-0.25xx+.2x+70)))/(2*1.25))

20 19992003 -(-1.34x+115)+sqrt(((-1.34x+115)*(-1.34x+115))-(4*1.90)*(-0.125xx+2.70x+23)))/(2*1.90)

20 20312050 -(-1.21x+187)+sqrt(((-1.21x+187)*(-1.21x+187))-(4*1.15)*(-0.071xx+3.12x+20)))/(2*1.15)

Table 27: MOVES Permeation Rates
 

RegClass MYG AgeGroup MeanBaseRate MeanBaseRateIM

Doesn’t Matter 1970 and earlier 2099 0.31 0.31

Doesn’t Matter 1971 thru 1977 1014 0.19 0.19

Doesn’t Matter 1971 thru 1977 1519 0.23 0.23

Doesn’t Matter 1971 thru 1977 2099 0.31 0.31

Doesn’t Matter 1978 thru 1995 3 0.06 0.06

Doesn’t Matter 1978 thru 1995 607 0.09 0.09

Doesn’t Matter 1978 thru 1995 1014 0.12 0.12

Doesn’t Matter 1978 thru 1995 1519 0.15 0.15

Doesn’t Matter 1978 thru 1995 2099 0.20 0.20

Doesn’t Matter 1996 3 0.05 0.05

Doesn’t Matter 1996 607 0.08 0.08

Doesn’t Matter 1996 1014 0.10 0.10

Doesn’t Matter 1996 1519 0.12 0.12

Doesn’t Matter 1996 2099 0.16 0.16

Doesn’t Matter 1996 thru 2003 3 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 1997 3 0.04 0.04

Doesn’t Matter 1997 607 0.06 0.06

Doesn’t Matter 1997 1014 0.08 0.08

Doesn’t Matter 1997 1519 0.09 0.09

Doesn’t Matter 1997 2099 0.12 0.12

Doesn’t Matter 1998 3 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 1998 607 0.02 0.02

Doesn’t Matter 1998 1014 0.02 0.02

Doesn’t Matter 1998 1519 0.02 0.02

Doesn’t Matter 1998 2099 0.03 0.03

Doesn’t Matter 1999 thru 2003 3 0.01 0.01

87
 
Doesn’t Matter 2004

3 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20053 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20063 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20073 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20083 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20093 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20103 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20113 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20123 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20133 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20143 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20153 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20163 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20173 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20183 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20193 0.01 0.01

Doesn’t Matter 20203 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20213 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20223 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20233 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20243 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20253 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20263 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20273 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20283 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20293 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 20303 0.00 0.00

Doesn’t Matter 2031 thru 20503 0.00 0.00

MC 1980 and earlier3 0.12 0.12

MC 1981 thru 19823 0.12 0.12

MC 1983 thru 19843 0.12 0.12

MC 19853 0.12 0.12

MC 1986 thru 19873 0.12 0.12

MC 1988 thru 19893 0.12 0.12

MC 19903 0.12 0.12

MC 1991 thru 19933 0.12 0.12

MC 19943 0.12 0.12

MC 19953 0.12 0.12

MC 19963 0.12 0.12

MC 19973 0.12 0.12

MC 19983 0.12 0.12

MC 19993 0.12 0.12

MC 20003 0.12 0.12

MC 20013 0.12 0.12

MC 20023 0.12 0.12

MC 20033 0.12 0.12

88
 
MC 2004 3 0.12 0.12

MC 2005 3 0.12 0.12

MC 2006 3 0.12 0.12

MC 2007 3 0.12 0.12

MC 2008 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2009 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2010 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2011 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2012 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2013 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2014 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2015 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2016 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2017 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2018 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2019 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2020 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2021 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2022 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2023 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2024 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2025 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2026 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2027 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2028 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2029 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2030 3 0.01 0.01

MC 2031 thru 2050 3 0.01 0.01

Table 28: MOVES Hot Soak Rates
 

RegClass MYG AgeGroup MeanBaseRate MeanBaseRateIM

MC 1970 and earlier 2099 5.45 5.12

MC 1971 thru 1977 1014 3.10 2.96

MC 1971 thru 1977 1519 5.15 4.88

MC 1971 thru 1977 2099 5.45 5.12

MC 1978 thru 1995 3 0.63 0.61

MC 1978 thru 1995 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1978 thru 1995 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1978 thru 1995 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1978 thru 1995 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1978 thru 1995 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 1980 and earlier 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1981 thru 1982 3 8.53 8.53

89
 
MC 1983 thru 1984

3 8.53 8.53

MC 19853 8.53 8.53

MC 1986 thru 19873 8.53 8.53

MC 1988 thru 19893 8.53 8.53

MC 19903 8.53 8.53

MC 1991 thru 19933 8.53 8.53

MC 19943 8.53 8.53

MC 19953 8.53 8.53

MC 19963 8.53 8.53

MC 1996 thru 20033 0.63 0.61

MC 1996 thru 2003 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1996 thru 2003 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1996 thru 2003 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1996 thru 2003 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1996 thru 2003 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 19973 8.53 8.53

MC 19983 8.53 8.53

MC 19993 8.53 8.53

MC 1999 thru 20033 0.63 0.61

MC 1999 thru 2003 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1999 thru 2003 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1999 thru 2003 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1999 thru 2003 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1999 thru 2003 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 20003 8.53 8.53

MC 20013 8.53 8.53

MC 20023 8.53 8.53

MC 20033 8.53 8.53

MC 20043 8.53 8.53

MC 20053 8.53 8.53

MC 20063 8.53 8.53

MC 20073 8.53 8.53

MC 20083 8.67 8.67

MC 20093 8.67 8.67

MC 20103 8.67 8.67

MC 20113 8.67 8.67

MC 20123 8.67 8.67

MC 20133 8.67 8.67

MC 20143 8.67 8.67

MC 20153 8.67 8.67

MC 20163 8.67 8.67

MC 20173 8.67 8.67

MC 20183 8.67 8.67

MC 20193 8.67 8.67

MC 20203 8.67 8.67

MC 20213 8.67 8.67

90
 
MC 2022

3 8.67 8.67

MC 20233 8.67 8.67

MC 20243 8.67 8.67

MC 20253 8.67 8.67

MC 20263 8.67 8.67

MC 20273 8.67 8.67

MC 20283 8.67 8.67

MC 20293 8.67 8.67

MC 20303 8.67 8.67

MC 2031 thru 20503 8.67 8.67

LDV 1970 and earlier 2099 23.29 19.85

LDV 1971 thru 1977 1014 9.00 6.71

LDV 1971 thru 1977 1519 12.77 9.50

LDV 1971 thru 1977 2099 16.38 13.98

LDV 1978 thru 19953 0.82 0.66

LDV 1978 thru 1995 405 1.39 1.08

LDV 1978 thru 1995 607 1.76 1.36

LDV 1978 thru 1995 809 2.13 1.63

LDV 1978 thru 1995 1014 2.78 2.11

LDV 1978 thru 1995 1519 3.74 2.83

LDV 1978 thru 1995 2099 5.19 3.93

LDV 19963 0.29 0.24

LDV 1996 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1996 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1996 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1996 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1996 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1996 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 1996 thru 20033 0.29 0.24

LDV 1996 thru 2003 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1996 thru 2003 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1996 thru 2003 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1996 thru 2003 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1996 thru 2003 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1996 thru 2003 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 19973 0.29 0.24

LDV 1997 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1997 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1997 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1997 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1997 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1997 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 19983 0.29 0.24

LDV 1998 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1998 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1998 809 0.68 0.53

91
 
LDV 1998 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1998 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1998 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 1999 thru 20033 0.29 0.24

LDV 1999 thru 2003 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1999 thru 2003 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1999 thru 2003 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1999 thru 2003 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1999 thru 2003 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1999 thru 2003 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 20043 0.18 0.16

LDV 2004 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2004 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2004 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2004 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2004 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2004 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20053 0.18 0.16

LDV 2005 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2005 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2005 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2005 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2005 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2005 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20063 0.18 0.16

LDV 2006 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2006 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2006 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2006 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2006 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2006 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20073 0.18 0.16

LDV 2007 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2007 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2007 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2007 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2007 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2007 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20083 0.18 0.16

LDV 2008 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2008 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2008 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2008 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2008 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2008 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20093 0.18 0.16

92
 
LDV 2009 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2009 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2009 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2009 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2009 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2009 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20103 0.18 0.16

LDV 2010 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2010 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2010 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2010 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2010 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2010 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20113 0.18 0.16

LDV 2011 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2011 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2011 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2011 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2011 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2011 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20123 0.18 0.16

LDV 2012 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2012 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2012 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2012 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2012 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2012 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20133 0.18 0.16

LDV 2013 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2013 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2013 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2013 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2013 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2013 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20143 0.18 0.16

LDV 2014 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2014 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2014 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2014 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2014 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2014 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20153 0.18 0.16

LDV 2015 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2015 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2015 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2015 1014 0.63 0.48

93
 
LDV 2015 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2015 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20163 0.16 0.13

LDV 2016 405 0.23 0.16

LDV 2016 607 0.31 0.21

LDV 2016 809 0.38 0.26

LDV 2016 1014 0.51 0.34

LDV 2016 1519 0.70 0.46

LDV 2016 2099 1.01 0.65

LDV 20173 0.16 0.13

LDV 2017 405 0.23 0.16

LDV 2017 607 0.31 0.21

LDV 2017 809 0.38 0.26

LDV 2017 1014 0.51 0.34

LDV 2017 1519 0.70 0.46

LDV 2017 2099 1.01 0.65

LDV 20183 0.15 0.12

LDV 2018 405 0.20 0.13

LDV 2018 607 0.27 0.17

LDV 2018 809 0.34 0.21

LDV 2018 1014 0.46 0.27

LDV 2018 1519 0.62 0.37

LDV 2018 2099 0.89 0.52

LDV 20193 0.15 0.12

LDV 2019 405 0.20 0.13

LDV 2019 607 0.27 0.17

LDV 2019 809 0.34 0.21

LDV 2019 1014 0.46 0.27

LDV 2019 1519 0.62 0.37

LDV 2019 2099 0.89 0.52

LDV 20203 0.14 0.11

LDV 2020 405 0.18 0.10

LDV 2020 607 0.24 0.13

LDV 2020 809 0.30 0.16

LDV 2020 1014 0.40 0.21

LDV 2020 1519 0.54 0.27

LDV 2020 2099 0.77 0.38

LDV 20213 0.14 0.11

LDV 2021 405 0.18 0.10

LDV 2021 607 0.24 0.13

LDV 2021 809 0.30 0.16

LDV 2021 1014 0.40 0.21

LDV 2021 1519 0.54 0.27

LDV 2021 2099 0.77 0.38

LDV 20223 0.13 0.10

LDV 2022 405 0.16 0.08

94
 
LDV 2022 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2022 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2022 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2022 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2022 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20233 0.13 0.10

LDV 2023 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2023 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2023 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2023 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2023 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2023 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20243 0.13 0.10

LDV 2024 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2024 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2024 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2024 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2024 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2024 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20253 0.13 0.10

LDV 2025 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2025 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2025 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2025 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2025 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2025 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20263 0.13 0.10

LDV 2026 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2026 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2026 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2026 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2026 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2026 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20273 0.13 0.10

LDV 2027 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2027 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2027 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2027 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2027 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2027 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20283 0.13 0.10

LDV 2028 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2028 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2028 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2028 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2028 1519 0.46 0.18

95
 
LDV 2028 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 2029 3 0.13 0.10

LDV 2029 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2029 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2029 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2029 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2029 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2029 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 2030 3 0.13 0.10

LDV 2030 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2030 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2030 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2030 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2030 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2030 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 2031 thru 2050 3 0.13 0.10

LDV 2031 thru 2050 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2031 thru 2050 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2031 thru 2050 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2031 thru 2050 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2031 thru 2050 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2031 thru 2050 2099 0.65 0.24

Table 29: MOVES Running Loss Rates
 

RegClass MYG AgeGroup MeanBaseRate MeanBaseRateIM

MC 1970 and earlier 2099 5.45 5.12

MC 1971 thru 1977 1014 3.10 2.96

MC 1971 thru 1977 1519 5.15 4.88

MC 1971 thru 1977 2099 5.45 5.12

MC 1978 thru 1995 3 0.63 0.61

MC 1978 thru 1995 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1978 thru 1995 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1978 thru 1995 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1978 thru 1995 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1978 thru 1995 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 1980 and earlier 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1981 thru 1982 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1983 thru 1984 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1985 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1986 thru 1987 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1988 thru 1989 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1990 3 8.53 8.53

MC 1991 thru 1993 3 8.53 8.53

96
 
MC 1994

3 8.53 8.53

MC 19953 8.53 8.53

MC 19963 8.53 8.53

MC 1996 thru 20033 0.63 0.61

MC 1996 thru 2003 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1996 thru 2003 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1996 thru 2003 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1996 thru 2003 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1996 thru 2003 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 19973 8.53 8.53

MC 19983 8.53 8.53

MC 19993 8.53 8.53

MC 1999 thru 20033 0.63 0.61

MC 1999 thru 2003 607 1.45 1.43

MC 1999 thru 2003 809 1.47 1.46

MC 1999 thru 2003 1014 2.08 1.96

MC 1999 thru 2003 1519 3.49 3.22

MC 1999 thru 2003 2099 3.82 3.49

MC 20003 8.53 8.53

MC 20013 8.53 8.53

MC 20023 8.53 8.53

MC 20033 8.53 8.53

MC 20043 8.53 8.53

MC 20053 8.53 8.53

MC 20063 8.53 8.53

MC 20073 8.53 8.53

MC 20083 8.67 8.67

MC 20093 8.67 8.67

MC 20103 8.67 8.67

MC 20113 8.67 8.67

MC 20123 8.67 8.67

MC 20133 8.67 8.67

MC 20143 8.67 8.67

MC 20153 8.67 8.67

MC 20163 8.67 8.67

MC 20173 8.67 8.67

MC 20183 8.67 8.67

MC 20193 8.67 8.67

MC 20203 8.67 8.67

MC 20213 8.67 8.67

MC 20223 8.67 8.67

MC 20233 8.67 8.67

MC 20243 8.67 8.67

MC 20253 8.67 8.67

MC 20263 8.67 8.67

MC 20273 8.67 8.67

97
 
MC 2028

3 8.67 8.67

MC 20293 8.67 8.67

MC 20303 8.67 8.67

MC 2031 thru 20503 8.67 8.67

LDV 1970 and earlier 2099 23.29 19.85

LDV 1971 thru 1977 1014 9.00 6.71

LDV 1971 thru 1977 1519 12.77 9.50

LDV 1971 thru 1977 2099 16.38 13.98

LDV 1978 thru 19953 0.82 0.66

LDV 1978 thru 1995 405 1.39 1.08

LDV 1978 thru 1995 607 1.76 1.36

LDV 1978 thru 1995 809 2.13 1.63

LDV 1978 thru 1995 1014 2.78 2.11

LDV 1978 thru 1995 1519 3.74 2.83

LDV 1978 thru 1995 2099 5.19 3.93

LDV 19963 0.29 0.24

LDV 1996 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1996 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1996 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1996 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1996 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1996 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 1996 thru 20033 0.29 0.24

LDV 1996 thru 2003 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1996 thru 2003 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1996 thru 2003 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1996 thru 2003 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1996 thru 2003 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1996 thru 2003 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 19973 0.29 0.24

LDV 1997 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1997 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1997 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1997 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1997 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1997 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 19983 0.29 0.24

LDV 1998 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1998 607 0.57 0.45

LDV 1998 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1998 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1998 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1998 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 1999 thru 20033 0.29 0.24

LDV 1999 thru 2003 405 0.46 0.37

LDV 1999 thru 2003 607 0.57 0.45

98
 
LDV 1999 thru 2003 809 0.68 0.53

LDV 1999 thru 2003 1014 0.92 0.72

LDV 1999 thru 2003 1519 1.21 0.93

LDV 1999 thru 2003 2099 1.66 1.27

LDV 20043 0.18 0.16

LDV 2004 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2004 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2004 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2004 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2004 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2004 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20053 0.18 0.16

LDV 2005 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2005 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2005 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2005 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2005 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2005 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20063 0.18 0.16

LDV 2006 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2006 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2006 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2006 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2006 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2006 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20073 0.18 0.16

LDV 2007 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2007 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2007 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2007 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2007 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2007 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20083 0.18 0.16

LDV 2008 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2008 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2008 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2008 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2008 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2008 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20093 0.18 0.16

LDV 2009 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2009 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2009 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2009 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2009 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2009 2099 1.24 0.93

99
 
LDV 2010

3 0.18 0.16

LDV 2010 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2010 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2010 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2010 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2010 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2010 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20113 0.18 0.16

LDV 2011 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2011 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2011 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2011 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2011 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2011 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20123 0.18 0.16

LDV 2012 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2012 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2012 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2012 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2012 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2012 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20133 0.18 0.16

LDV 2013 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2013 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2013 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2013 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2013 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2013 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20143 0.18 0.16

LDV 2014 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2014 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2014 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2014 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2014 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2014 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20153 0.18 0.16

LDV 2015 405 0.27 0.21

LDV 2015 607 0.37 0.28

LDV 2015 809 0.46 0.35

LDV 2015 1014 0.63 0.48

LDV 2015 1519 0.86 0.65

LDV 2015 2099 1.24 0.93

LDV 20163 0.16 0.13

LDV 2016 405 0.23 0.16

LDV 2016 607 0.31 0.21

LDV 2016 809 0.38 0.26

100
 
LDV 2016 1014 0.51 0.34

LDV 2016 1519 0.70 0.46

LDV 2016 2099 1.01 0.65

LDV 20173 0.16 0.13

LDV 2017 405 0.23 0.16

LDV 2017 607 0.31 0.21

LDV 2017 809 0.38 0.26

LDV 2017 1014 0.51 0.34

LDV 2017 1519 0.70 0.46

LDV 2017 2099 1.01 0.65

LDV 20183 0.15 0.12

LDV 2018 405 0.20 0.13

LDV 2018 607 0.27 0.17

LDV 2018 809 0.34 0.21

LDV 2018 1014 0.46 0.27

LDV 2018 1519 0.62 0.37

LDV 2018 2099 0.89 0.52

LDV 20193 0.15 0.12

LDV 2019 405 0.20 0.13

LDV 2019 607 0.27 0.17

LDV 2019 809 0.34 0.21

LDV 2019 1014 0.46 0.27

LDV 2019 1519 0.62 0.37

LDV 2019 2099 0.89 0.52

LDV 20203 0.14 0.11

LDV 2020 405 0.18 0.10

LDV 2020 607 0.24 0.13

LDV 2020 809 0.30 0.16

LDV 2020 1014 0.40 0.21

LDV 2020 1519 0.54 0.27

LDV 2020 2099 0.77 0.38

LDV 20213 0.14 0.11

LDV 2021 405 0.18 0.10

LDV 2021 607 0.24 0.13

LDV 2021 809 0.30 0.16

LDV 2021 1014 0.40 0.21

LDV 2021 1519 0.54 0.27

LDV 2021 2099 0.77 0.38

LDV 20223 0.13 0.10

LDV 2022 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2022 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2022 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2022 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2022 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2022 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20233 0.13 0.10

101
 
LDV 2023 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2023 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2023 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2023 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2023 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2023 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20243 0.13 0.10

LDV 2024 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2024 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2024 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2024 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2024 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2024 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20253 0.13 0.10

LDV 2025 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2025 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2025 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2025 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2025 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2025 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20263 0.13 0.10

LDV 2026 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2026 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2026 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2026 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2026 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2026 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20273 0.13 0.10

LDV 2027 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2027 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2027 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2027 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2027 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2027 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20283 0.13 0.10

LDV 2028 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2028 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2028 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2028 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2028 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2028 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 20293 0.13 0.10

LDV 2029 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2029 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2029 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2029 1014 0.34 0.14

102
 
LDV 2029 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2029 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 2030 3 0.13 0.10

LDV 2030 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2030 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2030 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2030 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2030 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2030 2099 0.65 0.24

LDV 2031 thru 2050 3 0.13 0.10

LDV 2031 thru 2050 405 0.16 0.08

LDV 2031 thru 2050 607 0.21 0.10

LDV 2031 thru 2050 809 0.26 0.11

LDV 2031 thru 2050 1014 0.34 0.14

LDV 2031 thru 2050 1519 0.46 0.18

LDV 2031 thru 2050 2099 0.65 0.24

5 References

[1]	 EPA Certification Data. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm.

[2]	 CRC E-9 Measurement of Diurnal Emissions from In-Use Vehicles. http://www.crcao.com/

reports/emission/e9.htm, September 1998.

[3]	 CRC E-41-1 Real World Evaporative Testing of Late-Model In-Use Vehicles. http://www.

crcao.com/reports/emission/e41.htm, October 1999.

[4]	 CRC E-41-2 Evaporative Emissions from Late-Model In-Use Vehicles. http://www.crcao.

com/reports/emission/e41.htm, October 1999.

[5]	 Transportation And Marketing Of Petroleum Liquids. http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/

ch05/final/c05s02.pdf, June 2008.

[6] Wards Automotive Group.	 Summary Sales Data. http://http://wardsauto.com/keydata/

historical/UsaSa01summary.

[7] J.	 Brown. The DELTA Model: Improved Evaporative Emissions Modeling for EPA

MOVES. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/documents/faca-meeting-jan2013/

04-delta.pdf, 2011.

[8] P. Caffrey and P. Machiele. In-use Volatility Impact of Commingling Ethanol and Non-Ethanol

Fuels. http://papers.sae.org/940765/, 1994.

[9] T. Cam, K. Cullen, S. Baldus, and K. Sime.	 Running Loss Temperature Profiles. http:

//papers.sae.org/930078/, 1993.

103
 
[10] P.	 Cingle and D. McClement. Uncontrolled Automotive Refueling Emissions. http://www.

ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB88193099, January 1988.

[11] Timothy H. DeFries.	 Estimated Summer Hot-Soak Distributions for Denvers Ken Caryl IM

Station Fleet, 2013.

[12] Timothy H. DeFries, J. Lindner, S. Kishan, and C. Palacios.	 Investigation of Techniques for

High Evaporative Emissions Vehicle Detection: Denver Summer 2008 Pilot Study at Lipan

Street Station, 2009.

[13] Edmund’s. Vehicle Fuel Tank Data. http://www.edmunds.com/.

[14] U.S. EPA. MOBILE6 Emissions Model. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/m6.htm.

[15] U.S. EPA.	 Air Toxic Emissions from On-road Vehicles in MOVES2014. http://www.epa.

gov/otaq/models/moves/documents/420r14021.pdf, September 2014.

[16] U.S. EPA. Population and Activity of on-road vehicles in MOVES2014. http://www.epa.gov/

otaq/models/moves/documents/420d14002.pdf, 2014.

[17] U.S. EPA. Speciation of Total Organic Gas and Particulate Matter Emissions from On-road

Vehicles in MOVES2014. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/documents/420r14020.

pdf, September 2014.

[18] Randall Guensler and Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta Commute Vehicle Soak and

Start Distributions and Engine Starts per Day: Impact on Mobile Source Emission Rates.

http://transportation.ce.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/files/atlanta_commute_

vehucle_soak_and_start_time_distributions_and_engine_starts.pdf, April 2007.

[19] Harold M. Haskew and Associates Inc.	 CRC E-35 Measurement of Running Loss Emissions

from In-Use Vehicles. http://www.crcao.com/reports/emission/e35.htm, February 1998.

[20] Harold	 M. Haskew and Thomas F. Liberty. CRC E-77 Vehicle Evaporative Emission

Mechanisms: A Pilot Study. http://www.crcao.com/reports/recentstudies2008/E-77%

20Pilot%20Study/E-77%20Pilot%20Study%20Final%20Report%206.24.08.pdf, June 2008.

[21] Harold M. Haskew and Thomas F. Liberty.	 CRC E-77-2b Evaporative Emissions From In-use

Vehicles: Test Fleet Expansion. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/emission-factors-research/

420r10025.pdf, October 2010.

[22] Harold	 M. Haskew and Thomas F. Liberty. CRC E-77-2c Study to Determine Evaporative Emission Breakdown, Including Permeation Effects and Diurnal Emisisons Using E20 Fuels on Aging Enhanced Evaporative Emisisons Certified Vehicles. http://www.crcao.com/reports/recentstudies2011/E-77-2c/E-77-2c%20Final%

20Report%20for%20sure%201-28-11.pdf, December 2010.

[23] Harold M. Haskew	 and Thomas F. Liberty. CRC E-77-2 Enhanced Evaporative Emission

Vehicles. http://www.crcao.com/reports/recentstudies2010/E-77-2/E-77-2_Final_

Report__March_2010.pdf, March 2010.

104
 
[24] Harold M. Haskew, Thomas F. Liberty,	 and Dennis McClement. CRC E-65 Fuel Permeation from Automotive Systems. http://www.crcao.com/reports/recentstudies2004/E65%

20Final%20Report%209%202%2004.pdf, September 2004.

[25] Harold M. Haskew, Thomas F. Liberty, and Dennis McClement. CRC E-65-3 Fuel Permeation

from Automotive Systems: E0, E6, E10, E20, and E85. http://www.crcao.com/reports/

recentstudies2006/E-65-3/CRC%20E-65-3%20Final%20Report.pdf, December 2006.

[26] H.R. Johnson and R.S. Williams. Performance of Activated Carbon in Evaporative Loss Control

Systems. http://papers.sae.org/902119/, 1990.

[27] Jim Kemper.	 High Evaporative Emitter Repairs. http://www.sae.org/servlets/works/

upcomingmeetingResources.do?eventGenNum=10105, December 2010.

[28] J Linder and G Glinsky. Multi-Day Diurnal Testing, February 2012.

[29] E.M. Liston, American	 Petroleum Institute, and Stanford Research Institute. A Study of

Variables that Effect the Amount of Vapor Emitted During the Refueling of Automobiles. http:

//books.google.com/books?id=KW2IGwAACAAJ, 1975.

[30] S.R. Reddy and Society of Automotive Engineers.	 Prediction of Fuel Vapor Generation from

a Vehicle Fuel Tank as a Function of Fuel Reid Vapor Pressure and Temperature. http:

//books.google.com/books?id=J7vEHAAACAAJ, 1989.

[31] Sierra Research.	 United States Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs.

http://www.sierraresearch.com/ReportListing.htm, December 2005.

[32] Sierra Research. Development of Trip and Soak Activity Defaults for Passenger Cars and Trucks

in MOVES2006. http://www.sierraresearch.com/ReportListing.htm, March 2006.

[33] Sierra Research.	 Development of Trip and Soak Activity Defaults for Passenger Cars and

Trucks in MOVES. http://www.sierraresearch.com/ReportListing.htm, June 2007.

[34] M. Sabisch, S. Kishan, Inc. Eastern Research Group, J. Stewart, G. Glinsky, and SGS Environmental Testing Corporation. Running loss testing with implanted leaks, 2014.

[35] G. Schremp and California Energy Commission. Fuels & Transportation Division.	 Ab 868

: Fuel delivery temperature study staff report overview and findings: Committee workshop.

http://books.google.com/books?id=Md0JPwAACAAJ, 2008.

[36] M. Weatherby, M. Sabisch, and S. Kishan. Analysis of Evaporative On-Board Diagnostic (OBD)

Readiness and DTCs Using I/M Data, 2014.

105