# Appendix A

- 1 Air Quality System (AQS) DataUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

QUICKLOOK CRITERIA PARAMETERS

Oct. 13, 2011 Report Request ID: 919382 Report Code: AMP450

Selection Criteria Page 1 User ID: GYE

State County City

Site Parameter POC AQCR UAR CBSA CSA EPA

Region Method Duration Begin Date End Date

39

54

54 081

009

029 GEOGRAPHIC SELECTIONS

PROTOCOL SELECTIONS

Parameter

Classification Parameter Method Duration

QUICK LOOK 88101

SELECTED OPTIONS

EVENTS PROCESSING

MERGE PDF FILES

WORKFILE DELIMITER Option Type Option Value

EXCLUDE REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENTS

YES

, SORT ORDER

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 Order Column

PARAMETER_CODE

STATE_CODE

COUNTY_CODE

SITE_ID

POC

DATES

EDT_ID

GLOBAL DATES

2008 Start Date End Date

2010 Tribal

Code

APPLICABLE STANDARDS

Standard Description

PM25 24-hour 2006

PM25 Annual 2006Oct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 1 of 6 EXCEPTIONAL DATA TYPES

EDT DESCRIPTION

0

1

2

5 NO EVENTS

EVENTS EXCLUDED

EVENTS INCLUDED

EVENTS WITH CONCURRENCE EXCLUDEDOct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 2 of 6 PM2.5 - Local Conditions (88101) Ohio Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)

SITE ID P

O

C PQAO CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR METH #OBS 4TH

MAX CERT EDT

39-081-0017

39-081-0017

39-081-0017

39-081-1001

39-081-1001

39-081-1001

39-081-1001

39-081-1001

39-081-1001 1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2 0809

0809

0809

0809

0809

0809

0809

0809

0809 Steubenville

Steubenville

Steubenville

Mingo

Junction

Mingo

Junction

Mingo

Junction

Mingo

Junction

Mingo

Junction

Mingo

Junction Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson

Jefferson 618 LOGAN ST.

618 LOGAN ST.

618 LOGAN ST.

501

COMMERICAL

501

COMMERICAL

501

COMMERICAL

501

COMMERICAL

501

COMMERICAL

501

COMMERICAL 2008

2009

2010

2008

2009

2010

2008

2009

2010 120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120 45.6

38.6

35.3

39.5

23.5

25.9

38.2

23.1

28.2 Y

Y

Y 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 24-HOUR

98TH

PERCENTILE

VALUE

35.2

24.7

29.8

35.0

23.3

25.1

38.2

22.5

26.3 106

112

108

57

58

55

48

52

52 1ST

MAX 2ND

MAX 3RD

MAX

36.4

25.1

33.3

35.0

23.3

25.1

33.5

22.5

26.3 35.2

24.7

29.8

30.9

22.9

23.3

26.6

22.4

25.2 34.8

24.0

29.1

27.7

22.5

22.5

26.1

21.1

23.6 14.28*

12.11

12.68

14.05

11.22

12.64

13.57*

10.69*

13.01* WTD

ARITH

MEANOct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 3 of 6 PM2.5 - Local Conditions (88101) West Virginia Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)

SITE ID P

O

C PQAO CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR METH #OBS 4TH

MAX CERT EDT

54-009-0005

54-009-0005

54-009-0005

54-009-0011

54-009-0011

54-009-0011

54-009-0011

54-009-0011

54-009-0011

54-029-1004 1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1 1150

1150

1150

1150

1150

1150

1150

1150

1150

1150 Follansbee

Follansbee

Follansbee

Weirton

Weirton

Weirton

Weirton

Weirton

Weirton

Weirton Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Brooke

Hancock FOLLANSBEE -

MAHAN LANE

FOLLANSBEE -

MAHAN LANE

FOLLANSBEE -

MAHAN LANE

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON -

MARLAND

HEIGHTS

ELEMENTARY

WEIRTON - OAK

ST AND OWINGS

ST (BETWEEN 2008

2009

2010

2008

2009

2010

2008

2009

2010

2008 145

145

145

145

145

145

145

145

145

145 39.8

38.3

32.6

37.4

48.6

38.0

38.4

48.4

37.6

39.4 Y

Y

Y

Y 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 24-HOUR

98TH

PERCENTILE

VALUE

38.9

23.2

29.8

34.9

26.3

31.6

38.4

48.4

37.6

35.8 117

122

122

121

118

122

29

32

29

119 1ST

MAX 2ND

MAX 3RD

MAX

39.5

24.4

32.0

35.9

29.3

36.3

37.5

25.7

30.0

37.3 38.9

23.2

29.8

34.9

26.3

31.6

34.7

25.0

29.2

35.8 35.6

23.1

29.7

34.5

24.7

30.8

31.4

19.2

21.5

30.9 14.68

12.15

14.14

13.79

11.88

13.48

15.48

11.86

14.37

13.33 WTD

ARITH

MEANOct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 4 of 6 PM2.5 - Local Conditions (88101) West Virginia Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)

SITE ID P

O

C PQAO CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR METH #OBS 4TH

MAX CERT EDT

54-029-1004

54-029-1004 1

1 1150

1150 Weirton

Weirton Hancock

Hancock DEAD ENDS)

WEIRTON - OAK

ST AND OWINGS

ST (BETWEEN

DEAD ENDS)

WEIRTON - OAK

ST AND OWINGS

ST (BETWEEN

DEAD ENDS) 2009

2010 145

145 29.6

34.4 0

0 24-HOUR

98TH

PERCENTILE

VALUE

25.2

31.2 122

122 1ST

MAX 2ND

MAX 3RD

MAX

28.7

33.1 25.2

31.2 22.9

30.7 11.25

12.58 WTD

ARITH

MEANOct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 5 of 6 88101

88101 120

145 Andersen RAAS2.5-300 PM2.5 SEQ w/WINS

R & P Model 2025 PM-2.5 Sequential Air Sampler GRAVIMETRIC

Gravimetric PARAMETER METHOD

CODE COLLECTION METHOD ANALYSIS METHOD METHODS USED IN THIS REPORTOct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does

not satisfy summary criteria. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

AIR QUALITY SYSTEM

QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

Page 6 of 6 PQAOS USED IN THIS REPORT

PQAO AGENCY DESCRIPTION

0809

1150 Ohio EPA, Southeast District Office

West Virginia Air Pollution Control Commission

# Appendix A

- 2

SLAMS letter

# Appendix B

- 1

Ohio 2005 SIP Base Year Inventory Discussion

### 1 

# OHIO 2005 Base Year PM2.5 SIP Inventory

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

Lazarus Government Center 50 West Town Street, Suite 700

Columbus Ohio 43215

Prepared by Ohio EPA

Division of Air Pollution Control Emissions Inventory Unit February 2008

### 2 

# Table of Contents

Section Page

Introduc tion ................................................................................................. 3

1.0 Point Sources ............................................................................................. 4

2.0 Area S ources .............................................................................................. 8

3.0 Non Road Sources........................................................................15

4.0 On Road Sources.......

.................. .................. ................ ................ .............17

5.0 MAR Sources..............................................................................43

Table

2-1 Categories included in the 2005 area source Inventory.............................8

2-2 Emission Factors used for Wood Bu rners included in area sources............11

3-1 NMIM NCD Tables for Specific Years and States ........................................... 

### 16

4-1 Federal Functional Class Categories............................................................ 

### 23

4-2 DVMT Summary by County



### .................................................................. . 24

4-3 Speed by Federal Functional Class ............................................................. 

### 28

4-4 Link Group Codes & Associated BPR Curves

.......................................... 

### 29 4-5 Mobile6 Inputs.................................................................................31 4-6 LADCO Data Output............................................. .............39 4-7 County Summary Table of MPOs by County......................................... .40 5-1 Number of operations and LTOs for 2005.............................................. 45

5-2 EDMS Aircraft Emissions ..................................................................50

5-3 Fleet Emission Fa ctor Categories ........................................................51 5-4 Pollutant by County (Sample) ............................................................. 54

. Figure

1............................... ......... Speed Comparison Graphs.....................................27

### 3 

# 2005 Base Year PM2.5 SIP Inventory for Ohio

Introduction

The State of Ohio has a nu mber of counties with air quality data showing nonattainment for the following PM 2



### . 5 

### standard:

• 

### Annual Standard = 15.0 ug/m3

The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA A) requires all states to revise and submit State Implementation Plans (SIP) for areas which are classified as non-atta inment of the 1997 Fine Particle (PM 2



### . 5 

### ) National Ambient Air Quality St andards (NAAQS). The Federal Register ( Vol. 72, No. 79/ Wednesday, April 25, 2007) provides the emissions inventory rules and regulations for the PM 2



### . 5 

### Clean Air Fine Particle implementation rule. An

electronic version of the document can be found at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/2007/April/Day-25/a6347.pdf.



### As part of the designation of non-attainment areas for PM 2



### . 5 

### standards, a new

attainment demonstration SIP will be necessary. A key el ement in the overall SIP planning process is the need for an updated emissions inventory. This document presents the 2005 Base Year Pa rticulate SIP Emissions Inv entory for Ohio as required by the CAAA. It includes emissions for poi nt, area, on-road mobi le and non-road mobile

for the State of Ohio.

This technical report document s the procedures and the me thodologies that were used in the development of daily emissions for all counties in Ohio. This report describes the following:

1. Identification of st ationary and mobile sources included in the inventory; 2. Sources of data, and data collecti on methods used in the development of the inventory; 3. Methods and procedures used to estimate emissions; and 4. Assumptions considered in t he development of the emissions

inventories.

The intent of this report is to descri be how the inventory was prepared, and what information was considered in the inventory development.

This document is comprised of 5 sections , one section for each inventory type. The biogenic inventory is not being discussed in this document because Ohio EPA did not participate in the generation of this inventory. Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) ran EPA’s BEIS model in the Em ission Modeling System (EMS) to generate Summer Weekday emissions for VOC and NOx.

### 4 

## SECTION 1

POINT SOURCES

Emissions and source specific data for point sources are collected for the 2005 baseyear SIP inventory by the Ohio Envir onmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA.) The primary source of data for point sources is facility reported STARShip files. STARShip is a software package developed by Ohio EPA, Division of Ai r Pollution Control (DAPC), to assist the regulated community in prepar ing and submitting a variety of electronic permit applications and reports to the DAPC . These data are reported by the Title V facilities annually as part of the emission s fee/inventory process conducted by Ohio EPA and include emissions, process rates, oper ating schedules, emissions control data

and other relevant information.

The STARShip files are electr onically transferred to the DAPC and stored into the Division’s Oracle database, STARS. The f iles are reviewed by the local air agencies

and Ohio EPA district and central office staff. After review, the data are imported into

Excel and linked with an Access® database to further process the information into the federally approved National Em ission Inventory (NEI) database format in version 3.0. The files are quality assured ag ain using the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S.EPA) QA/QC so ftware for format and content. The data is finally submitted to LADCO for emissions processi ng through the Emissions Modeling System. The State provided inv entory for Electric Generating Un its (EGU) is replaced with the Federal EGU inventory. T he EGU inventory is compiled by U.S. EPA’s Acid Rain Program. It is based on facility report ed emissions as meas ured by continuous emissions monitors. In conclusion, the final point source inventory is a hybrid of the federal EGU inventory and the state provided non-EGU units.

A major distinction typically made in emissi ons inventories is t hat between point and

area sources. In this invent ory, point sources are sources for which individual records

are maintained for that source. Such records are maintained for all Ohio Title V facilities (706 facilities statewide). The area source inventory accounts for facilities from nonTitle V facilities and calculates emissions information using surrogate emissions factors based on energy usage, population, employment records, or other reliable data. A

more detailed discussion of t he area source inventory is pr ovided in Section 2. The point source inventory descr ibed herein is considered to be the most current and

accurate source of emissions data available for 2005.

1.1 Point Source Process Emissions

Ohio EPA defines point source process emissions as those which occur at an identifiable Title V stationary stack or vent. Point source emissions not emitted from discrete stacks or vents are termed fugitive emissions and are discussed in Section 1.2.

### 5 1.1.1 Source Identificati on and Data Collection

The sources to be included in the 2005 base year inventory are identified using the Title V STARS database. Facility production and emissions data are included in this

database. This information is fac ility-reported actual 2005 emissions.

1.1.2 Non-reactive VOC Emissions Adjustments

This section is primarily appl icable for VOC pollutants. S ources are required to identify emissions of photochemically non-reactive Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC.) Based upon this information, those emissions have been specifically excl uded from the 2005 base line inventory in accordance with U.S. EPA’s “Recommended Policy on the Control of Volatile Organic Co mpounds.” A complete list of the compounds that U.S. EPA has identified as being photochemically non -reactive, and therefore not included in the inventory, are listed below:

• Methane

• Ethane

• Methylene chloride

• Methyl chloroform

• Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)

• Dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12)

• Chlorodifluoromethane (CFC-22)

• Trifluoromethane (HFC-23)

• Chlorofluoromethance (HCFC-31)

• Difluoromethane (HFC-32)

• Decafluoropentane (HFC-43-10mee)

• Ethylfluoride (HFC-161)

• Trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113)

• Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (CFC-114)

• Chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115)

• 2,2-Dichloro-1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HCFC-123)

• 1,1,2-Trifluoroethane (HCFC-123a)

• 2-Chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124)

• Pentafluoroethane (HFC-125)

• 1,1,2,2,-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134)

• 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a)

• 1,1-Dichloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b)

• 1-Chloro-1,1,-difluoroethane (HCFC-142b)

• 1,1,1-Trifluoroethane (HFC-143a)

• Fluoroethane (HCFC-151a)

• 1,1-Difluoroethane (HFC-152a)

• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-225ca)

• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-225cb)

• Hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea)

• Hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa)

• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ca)

• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea)

• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb)

### 6 • Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245fa)

• Pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc)

• Parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF)

• Methoxybutane

• Nonaflourobutane

• Heptafluoropropane ((CF 3 

### ) 2 

### CFCF 2 

### OCH 3 

### )

• Heptafluoropropane ((CF 3 

### )CFCF 2 

### OC 2 

### H 5 

### )

• Perchloroethylene

• Cyclic, branched or linear completely methylated siloxanes

• Methyl acetate

• Volatile methyl siloxanes

• Acetone



### 1.1.3 Emissions Esti mation Methodologies

Since source reported actual annual emi ssions are used in the 2005 base year inventory, no estimation methods are necessary . The reports are provided to LADCO in National Emissions Inventory Input Format (NIF) 3.0 format. LADCO imported and processed the NIF files in EMS and applied temporal and spat ial profiles to the annual emissions to calculate weekday emissions rate s. The final point source inventory is split into two separate reports, the Electric Generating Units (EGU) which is the U.S. EPA inventory for electric generating units a nd the non-EGU which is the state inventory

minus the EGU units.

1.2 Point Source Fugitive Emissions

Another type of emissions data which is r equired to be filed from point sources is fugitive emissions. Before 1990, fugitive emissions were categorized as area sources

due to the lack of detailed information availa ble for fugitive sources. However, since

these emissions are now el ectronically reported in t he State’s ORACLE database, STARS, these emissions can be classified as point sources.

1.3 References
Getting Started: Emissions In ventory Methods for PM2.5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September, 1999.

Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implem entation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Qaulity Standards (N AAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations

, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Research, Triangle Park, NC. November

2005.

Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, Fourth Ed ition and Supplements, AP-42

. U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1985.

### 7 Preparing 2002 Regional PM2.5 Emissions QAQPS PM Inventory Conference Inventory Conference San Diego, 2003.

Documentation for the 2002 El ectric Generating Unit Nati onal Emissions Inventory (NEI) . Eastern research group, Inc., 1600 Peri meter Park Drive, Morrisville, NC 27560 and E.H. Pechan and Associates, Inc., 5528–B Hempstead Way

### 8 

## SECTION 2

AREA SOURCES

Area sources are sources which are typically small, indivi dual, numerous, and have not been inventoried as specific point, mobile, or biogenic sources. For inventory purposes, they are grouped with other like sources into categories that allow emissions to be calculated collectively usi ng one methodology. Since area sources are traditionally defined at the county level, most methods are designed to estimate area source emissions at the county level.

Ohio EPA has either used published Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) 6


### methodologies or selected other methodologies which are shared by other states. The decision of which methodology to use was lar gely based on Ohio’s data availability. Data which was not available on a county-lev el is estimated by assigning a percentage of the state’s total activity to each county based on the state’s popul ation or employment information. If Ohio county specific activity data is available throu gh Ohio EPA or other State Agencies, that data is us ed rather than allocating acti vity by percentage. Table 2-1

lists the sources which emit PM 2.5 

### , NO

x 

### and SO 2 

### along with the respective EFs used to calculate each pollutant.

Table 2-1 Categories in the 2005 PM 2


### . 5 

### SIP Area Source inventory

Area Source NO
x 

### PM 2.5 

### SO 2 

### Section

Commercial Natural

Gas Combustion 94 lb/MMSCF 7.6 lb/MMSCF 0.6 lb/MMSCF 2.1

Industrial Distillate Oil

Combustion 20 lb/E3gal fuel 0.25 lb/E3gal fuel 42.6 lb/E3gal fuel 2.2

Industrial Residual Oil

Combustion 55 lb/E3gal fuel 4.67 lb/E3gal fuel 157 lb/E3gal fuel 2.2

Industrial Natural Gas

Combustion 94 lb/MMSCF 7.6 lb/MMSCF 0.6 lb/MMSCF 2.2

Residential Coal

Combustion 9.1 Lb/Ton Coal 3.8 Lb/Ton Coal 31 Lb/Ton Coal 2.3

Residential Distillate

Oil Combustion 18 lb/E3gal fuel 0.83 lb/E3gal fuel 42.6 lb/E3gal fuel 2.3

Residential Natural

Gas Combustion 94 lb/MMSCF 7.6 lb/MMSCF 0.6 lb/MMSCF 2.3

Residential LPG

Combustion 13 lb/E3gal fuel 0.17 lb/E3gal fuel 0.1 lb/E3gal fuel 2.3

Human Cremation 1.01E+01 lb/Ton

cremated 0.0637 lb/Ton

cremated NA 2.4

Structure Fires 1.4 Lb/Ton

burned 10.8 Lb/Ton

burned NA 2.5

Outdoor Wood Boilers 2.8 Lb/Ton 2.76E+1 Lb/Ton 4 E-1 Lb/Ton 2.6

### 9 Residential Wood

Combustion

Non-Certified

Non-Catalytic

Catalytic 2.80E+00 lb/Ton

2.80E+00 lb/Ton

2.00E+00 lb/Ton 3.06E+01 lb/Ton

1.96E+01 lb/Ton

2.04E+01 lb/Ton 4.00E-01 lb/Ton

4.00E-01 lb/Ton

4.00E-01 lb/Ton 2.3

2.1 

### Commercial Natural Gas Combustion (SCC 2103006000)

The 2005 total state-level commercial sector energy consumption is obtained from the Energy Information Administration (EIA)’s State Energy Data System (SEDS), and apportioned per county based on population 4 

### . Emissions factors are given in table 2-1.

The area source emissions are calculated ba sed on an adjusted value by subtracting the emissions due to point sources.

2.2 Industrial Fuel Combustion

Industrial Distillate Oil Combustion (SCC 2102004000)

Ohio’s fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on the county’s population 4



### . The area source NO X 

### emissions are calculated and adjusted by subtracting the emissions due to point source s. A heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used and 84,408 thousand gallons are consumed in 2005. [MMBTU stand for Million British Thermal Units]. Emissions fact ors are given in table 2-1.

SO 2 

### emissions were calculated us ing EF 42.6 Lb/1000 Gal. PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 1Lb/1000 Ga l and 0.25 Lb/1000 Gal respecti vely. All Factors are

obtained from AP-42 19



### Industrial Residual Oil Combustion (SCC 2102005000)

Ohio’s fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on the county’s population 4



### . The area source NO X 

### emissions are calculated and adjusted by subtracting the emissions due to point sour ces. 54,652 thousand gallons 14 

### are consumed in 2005 and a heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used. The SO 2 

### emissions are calculated using EF 157 Lb/1000 Gal. PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 7.17 Lb/1000 Gal and 4.67 Lb/1000 Gal respectively. All factors are obtained from AP-42 19



### Industrial Natural Gas Combustion (S CC 2102006000)

Ohio’s fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on the county’s population 4



### . The area source NO X 

### emissions are calculated and adjusted by subtracting the emissions due to point sources. 293,857 MMCF 14 

### are consumed in 2005. The SO 2

### 10 emissions are calculated usi ng EF 0.6 Lb/MMBTU. The PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 7.6 Lb/MMBTU. All factors were obtained from AP-42 19



### 2.3 Residential Fuel Combustion

Residential Coal Combustion (SCC 2104001000)

Ohio’s household consumption of coal is apportioned per county based on county population 4 

### . NO X 

### emissions are calculated using EF of 9.1 of coal. The SO 2 

### emissions are calculated using EF 31Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 6.2Lb/Ton and 3.8 Lb/Ton respectively . All factors were obtained from AP-42 19



### Residential Distillate Oil Combustion (SCC 2104004000)

Ohio’s household consumption of distillate oil is apportioned per county based on county population 4 

### . NO X 

### emissions are calculated us ing EF of 18 lb/1000 gallons distillate fuel respectively. A heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used. The SO 2 

### emissions are calculated using EF 42.6 Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 1.08Lb/1000 Gal and 0.83 Lb/1000 Gal respec tively. All factors are

obtained from AP-42 19



### Residential Liquid Petroleu m Gas Combustion (LPG) (SCC 2104007000)

Ohio’s household consumption of LPG is apportioned per county based on county population 4 

### . NO X 

### emissions are calculated using EF of 13 lb/1000 gallons LPG. The

SO 2 

### emissions are calculated usi ng EF 0.1 Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 0.17Lb/1000 Gal. All factors are obtained from AP-42 19



### Residential Natural Gas Combustion (SCC 2104006010)

Ohio’s household consumption of LPG is apportioned per county based on county population 4 

### . NO X 

### emissions are calculated using EF of 94 lb/MMSCF. MMSCF stands

for Million Standard Cubic Feet. This source also emits SO 2 

### emissions which are calculated using EF 0.6 Lb/MMBTU. The PM 10 

### and PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using 7.6Lb/MMBTU. All fact ors are obtained from AP-42 19



### Residential Wood Combustion

NO X 

### emissions from this area source are ca lculated for seven types of residential heating units that utilize wood for fuel. They are listed below with the appropriate SCC:

Fireplaces without inserts 2104008001 Fireplaces with inserts cataly tic (non-U.S. EPA cert) 2104008002 Fireplaces with inserts non -catalytic 2104008003 Fireplaces with inserts catalytic (U.S. EPA cert) 2104008004

Wood stoves – Conventional 2104008010 Woodstoves – Catalytic 2104008030 Wood stoves – Non catalytic 2104008050

### 11 The number of Ohio homes with fireplaces ar e adjusted for those t hat burn wood. The following assumptions are applie d to those adjusted homes:

92 percent of wood combust ed in non-certified units 5.7 percent of wood combusted in non-catalytic units 2.3 percent of wood combusted in catalytic units

A state consumption value is applied which is apportioned to each county based on its population 4 

### . Table 2-2 shows the EF used for each of the seven types of indoor wood burners which make-up this category:

Table 2-2 Emission Factors Used for Wood Burners

SCC 2104008002 210400 8003 2104008004

SCC 2104008010 210400 8050 2104008030

SCC 2104008001

RAPIDS Code Non-Certified N on-Catalytic Catalytic Units

SO 2 

### 4.00E-01 4.00E-01 4.00E-01 Lb/ton

NO X 

### 2.80E+00 2.80E+00 2.00E+00 Lb/ton

PM 2.5 

### 3.06E+01 1.96E+01 2.04E+01 Lb/ton

To avoid double counting of wood consumption for fuel, this category is adjusted by subtracting the wood consumption from OWB to allow this category to account only for indoor wood burning emissions.

Residential Wood combustion also emits SO 2 

### which is calculated using EF 0.4 Lb/Ton

EF. The PM 2.5 

### emissions are calculated using EF as shown in table 2-2. All factors are

obtained from AP-42 19



### 2.4 Human Cremation (SCC 2810060200)

Not all Ohio counties possess a crematory so only those counties with crematories are

used to calculate the number of cremations and their resulting NOx emissions. The

2005 cremation data is obtained fr om the Ohio Department of Health, Vital Statistics 17



### . It is estimated that 3% of deaths occur outsi de the State of Ohio with no available data to account for their disposition at the time this area source is being calculated. Therefore, those deaths are not accounted for in this category. The methodology does not offer an EF for NOx for this category nor is NOx required to

be calculated for this area source. Ohio f eels that it is a combustion source and NOx needs to be included in the inventory al ong with the other com bustion sources. Through its Permits-to-Install for human crem ation, Ohio has se lected a NOx EF of

10.13lb/ton cremated to calculate emi ssions from this area source.

### 12 This source also emits PM, PM 10 

### , and PM 2.5 

### emissions which are calculated using EF 0.1 Lb/Ton, 0.071Lb/Ton and, 0.0637 Lb/Ton respec tively. All factors are obtained from

AP-42 19



### 2.5 Structur e Fires (SCC 2810030000)

The Structure Fires category includes resid ential and commercial fires resulting from unintentional actions. Intentional fires, fo rest and wildfires, agricultural, and vehicle burning are not included in this area source

. The State Fire Marshall Office, Fire

Prevention Bureau 15 

### provided data on the number of st ructure fires per county in 2005.

This area source is consider ed a combustion source for NO X 

### emissions which are calculated using EF 1.4 lb/ton burned. The residential and commercial structures fires for each county are tabul ated and a fuel load ing of 1.15 Ton/fire is applied. This source also emits PM, PM 10 

### , and PM 2.5 

### emissions which are calculat ed using EF 10.8 Lb/Ton.

This factor was obtained from AP-42 19



### 2.6 Outdoor W ood Boilers (SCC 2104008070)

Outdoor Wood Boilers (OWB), are also known as outdoor water stoves and outdoor wood furnaces, are used as outdoor residenti al heaters. These boilers have wood burning fireboxes surrounded by a water reserv oir vented by a chimney stack. The

combustion of the wood in t he firebox heats the water in the surrounding reservoir and the heated water is pumped to the residence. OWB units can also supply residential hot water. The water capacit y ranges from 60 gallons to 764 gallons. The operational design creates long periods where the fire smolders and creosote is formed 13



### .

When the water circulating through the furn ace reaches an upper set point, the air supply to the fire is cut-off, cooling the fire so the water will not overheat. The furnace operates in this "idle" mode until the water te mperature hits a lower set point and the air supply is re-established. The OWB may be in idle mode far longer than in operating mode. This type of operating causes very poor combustion and heavy foul smoke. Most

of the smoke emitted is fi ne condensed organic material t hat does not burn under cool, oxygen starved conditions. In addition, many owners burn green wood full of moisture which also causes poor combustion 12



### . The smoke created from these outdoor wood burning units can contain severa l pollutants that are harmful to breathe, including fine particle pollution such as PM 2.5 11 

### in addition to NOx (research assisted by Deborah Lucas, DAPC intern, 2007)

This new area source category has many unknowns and variables associated with it and Ohio does not possess accurate OWB uni t sales data available to calculate emissions on the county level. Therefore, several assu mptions are made in agreement

with the Great Lake States in order to formulate a homogeneous inventory for the region.

### 13 The assumptions are as follows:

• 100% of wood combusted in non-certified units.

• OWB units to be 90% in rural counties and 10% in urban counties

• 11.68 cords of wood consumption per unit per year (includes heating efficiency of 30-40%)

• 5 months heating season = 3650 hours (24/7)

• PM 2.5 

### emissions factor (g/kg wood) =13.82 (Average of indoor and outdoor) or

27.64 lb/ton of wood

The agreed upon methodology requi res that total number of OWB sold in Ohio be apportioned to each county based on rural or urban designation while observing the 9:1 ratio in area sales. The guesstimated factor s (see above) are applied to calculate the

emissions from this outdoor wood burner. Total emissions obtained from this category

are subtracted from the Residential Wood Co mbustion category to allow for accurate emissions from the indoor wood burning units.

2.7 References

1. Documentation For the 2002 Non-Point S ource National Emission Inventory For

CAPS and HAPS . U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency. Emissions Factor and inventory Group. E.H Pe chan and Associates, Inc. January 2004.

2. United States Census Bureau. Population Division. http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/c ounties/tables/CO-EST 2002/CO-EST2002-01- 39.php (Accessed 2003)

3. United States Census Bureau. County Business Patterns. http://censtats.census.gov/cbpnaic/cbpnaic.shtml (Accessed 2003)

4. Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research. Population Projects by Age and Sex: 2005-2030. http://www.odod.ohio.gov /research/files/p200.htm (Accessed August 2006)

5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1999 Base Year Non-point Source National Emission Inventory for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Research Triangle Park, NC. September 28, 2001.

6 . Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). STAPPA-ALAP CO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Progr am (EIIP). Volume III - Area Sources Preferred and

Alternative Methods. November 1996.

7. Documentation for the Dr aft 1999 National Emissions In ventory (Version 3.0) for

Criteria Air Pollutants and Amm onia. Area Sources. E. H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. March 3, 2003

### 14 8. U.S. Environmental Pr otection Agency, STAPPA-ALAPC O-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), Volume III - Area Sources Preferred and Alternative Methods, Chapter 8. September 1997.

9. Spreadsheet formulation provided by “Buzz” David Asse lmeier, Air Quality Planning Section, Inventory Group, Springfield, Illinois.

10. Environmental Protection Agen cy (EPA). STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Progr am (EIIP). Volume III - Area Sources Preferred and Alternative Methods. May 1997.

11. (Environmental Chemistr y.com) viewed on Feb 8th, 2007. [http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi /environmental/200602out doorwoodfurnaces.ht

ml ]

12. (Washington State, Department of Ecology) viewed on Feb 8th, 2007 [http://www.ecy.wa.gov/progr ams/air/AOP_Permits/Boiler /Outdoor_Boilers_home.html]

13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agen cy. Reducing Pollution from Outdoor WoodFired Hydronic Heaters. Fact Sheet http://www.epa.gov/owhh/ pdfs/fact_sheet_1_29_07.pdf (Accessed 1/2007)

14. Industrial Sector E nergy Price and Expenditure Estimates, 1970-2001, Ohio. Energy Information Administration. U. S. Department of Energy. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/st ates/sep_prices/ind/pr_ind_oh.html http://www.eia.doe.gov/em eu/aer/pdf/pages/sec1_27.pdf (Accessed 2003)

15. State Fire Marshal Office. Fire Prevention Bureau, Columbus, Ohio. http://www.com.state.oh. us/odoc/sfm/firecont.htm (Accessed 2003)

16. Documentation for the Draft 1999 National Emissions In ventory (Version 3.0) For

Criteria Air Pollutants and Amm onia. Area Sources. E. H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. March 3, 2003

17. Ohio Department of Health, Vital Statistics

18. Environmental Protection Agency. STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Em ission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP). Volume X – Emissions Projections. December 1999. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/volume10/x01.pdf (Accessed 2/2007)

19. Environmental Protection Agency. AP-42. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/

### 15 

## SECTION 3

NON-ROAD SOURCES

The non-road inventory is gener ated regionally by running U. S. EPA’s Nati onal Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) model. The Wi sconsin Department of Natural Resources undertook the responsibility of customizing the NMIM input files and submitting the output file in NIF format to LADCO and U.S. EPA. LADCO process ed the NMIM files in their emissions model and generat ed daily emissions rates. Grant Heatherington from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Reso urces provided the following descriptions...

The National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) developed by USEPA was used to

estimate emissions for all other non-road m obile categories. NMIM consolidates nonroad mobile emissions and on-road emissions modeling into a singl e modeling system. Only the non-road emissions modeling portion of NMIM was used in the development of this emission’s inventory. NMIM uses the USEPA’s NONROAD model to calculate nonroad mobile emissions. The basic NONROAD algorithm for calculating emissions uses base year equipment populati ons, average load factors, available engine powers, activity hours and emission factors. Before NMIM was run, modifications and additions

were made to the NM IM input data.

a. Added emission factors for diesel ta mpers/rammers provided by E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. Diesel tampers/rammers are a type of construction equipment.

b. Revised PM 2.5 

### ratios in SCC table to correctly calculate PM 2



### . 5 

### diesel

emissions. This error was introduc ed with NMIM2005 and didn’t exist in

NMIM2004.

c. Revised gasoline parameter s using updates provi ded by the states and E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. Ga soline parameters include Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), oxygenate c ontent and sulfur content.

The NMIM NEI NIF files are on the LADCO ftp site at: ftp://ftp.airtoxics.org/in v2005/nonroad/NMIM /Base_L_ph2/2005/



## Revised NMIM2005 Input Data

Emission Factor Data

All States: Pechan revised the brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) emission factor data to include diesel tampers/rammers (2270002006). The revised NMIM file is saved as

revBSFC.EMF.

### 16 Population Data

For 26000.pop, replaced default file supplied with NMIM2005 with 26000_rev_NMIM05.pop that contains revised construction data missing from 26000.pop external file provided with NMIM2005. This Michigan construction data should have been added with the other LADCO

states modified construction data but was overlooked.



### SCC Data

The default SCC table of NCD20060201 is replaced by a version that contains corrections to the PM25fac field that earlier NCDs contained (i.e. changed from 0.92 to 0.97 for diesel non-road equipment) in NONROAD2004.



### Fuel Data

LADCO States: Pechan revised four tables (countyyear, countyyearmonth, datasource and gasoline) in the National County Database (NCD) used by NMIM to incorporate new fuel data. AIR revised gasoline characteristics per instructions from the states. Also, gasoline characteristic revisions for 2005 provided by states were incorporated. Additional revisions were incorporated into 2002 data for non-road Stage 2 controls. Depending on the year being modeled, different versions of the revised tables are used. Also, the countynrfile, countyyear and datasource tables were revised to reference the new activity, allocation, growth, population and seasonality files described above. NCD tables with names ending in “def” are default versions of the table. See table below for the appropriate versions of the tables for the selected

years.

Non-LADCO States: The countynrfile, countyyear and datasource tables were revised to reference the new activity, allocation and seasonality files described above. See table below for the appropriate versions of the tables for the selected years.



### Table 3-1 NMIM National County Database Tables for Specific Years and States

States

Years

1999 (WI only) 2002, 05, 07, 08, 09, 12 and 18

LADCO states countynrfile_NMIM05_rev, countyyear_NMIM05_rev, countyyearmonth_NMIM05_w
_05_12_18_rev, datasource_NMIM05_rev, gasoline_NMIM05_def SCC_NCD20060201_rev (used when NCD20060201 is used) countynrfile_NMIM05_rev, countyyear_NMIM05_rev , countyyearmonth_NMIM05_w_05_12_18_rev, datasource_NMIM05_rev, gasoline_NMIM05_w_05_12_18_rev SCC_NCD20060201_rev (used when NCD20060201 is used)

### 17 

## SECTION 4

ON-ROAD SOURCES

A mobile source of air pollution is a self-p ropelled or portable emi tter of air pollutants, and mobile source emissions are those genera ted by the engines or motors that power such sources. Most mobile sources, exce pt jet or turboprop ai rcraft, are powered by internal combustion (IC) piston engines, and nearly all use liquid fuels.

Gaseous fuels, such as compressed natur al gas (CNG) or li quefied petroleum gas (LPG), had only a very small fraction of the motor fuel market in Ohio in 2005. Solid fuels have not been used by mobile sources in significant amounts since railroads retired their coal-powered steam locomotives in the 1950s.

4.1 Categories of Mobile Sources

For inventory and planning pur poses, mobile sources ar e divided into two major categories.

1. On-highway mobile sources (usually referred to as on-road ), e.g., motor vehicles such as cars, vans, trucks, buses and motorcycles used for transportation of goods and pa ssengers on roads and streets

2. Off-highway (usually referred to as non-road ) mobile sources including:

• Modes of powered transportation that do not use roads, such as aircraft, trains, ships and boats, and motor vehicles used off-road.

• Self-propelled or portable motoriz ed machines or equipment not used for transportation, ranging from constructi on equipment and farm tractors to lawnmowers and hand-held power weed choppers.

Mobile Sources: All on-road mobile source s are self-propelled.

Non-road Mobile Sources: Some non-road mobile source s (e.g., farm tractors), are self-propelled, but many non-road sources ar e not. A gasoline-powe red chain saw is a familiar example of a non-self-pr opelled non-road mobile source.

Stationary Sources: Not all movable or portable emi ssion sources are mobile sources, however. A small truck-portable cement or hot-mix asphalt plant, for example, may be set up near a construction or road-building site . Such plants are classified as stationary sources, not mobile sources for two reasons: (1) they may operate for weeks or months at a single location, and (2) the trucks that move the plants do not supply power for

them.

### 18 NOTE: Not all Internal Combustion engines (IC) or turbine engines are mobile sources. Fixed IC engines, such as those that pow er pipeline compressors or standby generators in electricity plants and elsewhere, are al so classified as stationary sources.

4.1.1 Categories and Componen ts of Mobile Source Emissions

There are three categories of mobile source emissions:

• Exhaust or tailpipe emissions , which result from the combustion of fuel in the source’s engine

• Evaporative emissions , which result from evaporation of fuel from the engine or its fuel system

• Refueling emissions

Exhaust Emissions: Are the result of fuel combustion and occu r only when the engine is running.

Evaporative emissions: Are Volatile Organic Compou nd (VOC) based only and are continuously emitted from an engine’s fuel syst em, whether the engine is running or not. Gasoline is a very volatile fuel, so total VOC emissions from gasoline powered vehicles have a large evaporative component. Diesel and je t fuels are of very low volatility, so evaporative emissions from diesel and turbi ne engines are a much smaller part of their total VOC emissions. Evaporative emission s for CNG or LPG powered vehicles are negligible because their fuel tanks and systems are of necessity, sealed.

Evaporative and exhaust VOC emissions can be calculated separately for most mobile source categories. Evaporative emissions do not include VOC emissions that occur during refueling.

Refueling Emissions: These emissions are the third category of mobile source emissions. Refueling emissi ons are entirely VOC. Alth ough they result from the evaporation of fuel, they ar e distinct from, and not dire ctly related to, evaporative

emissions as defined above.

Refueling emissions have two subcomponents:

• Displacement emissions . These occur when new fuel is transferred into a partly

filled tank--be it a service station stor age tank, a portable fuel container (gas can), or a vehicle or engine’s fuel tank; displacing the air in the tank and forcing that vapor-rich air out the inlet pipe or other vent. There are two stages of displacement emissions:

o “ Stage I ” emissions occur when the underground storage tanks at a service station are being refilled;

### 19 o “ Stage II ” emissions occur when a motor vehicle (or gas can) is being

refueled.

NOTE: These emissions are covered in , “Area Sources,” section 3.6.

• Spill emissions . These occur when drops of fuel drip or splash on the ground during or after refueling and evaporate away.

4.2 Ohio On-Road Mobile Source Inventory

The inventory of on-road mobile source emissions was developed in conjunction with the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), Lake Michigan Air Director’s Consortium (LADCO), Unit ed States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and the Ohio EPA (OEPA). Estimates of the amounts of NOx and VO C are reported by county in tons per day. Emissions are repor ted for a typical ozone season weekday in

the summer of 2005.

4.2.1 Emission Inventories Developed with MOBILE6 Model

MOBILE6 Overview:

MOBILE6 is a computer program that es timates hydrocarbon (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NO
x 

### ), exhaust particulate matter (which consists of several components), tire wear particula te matter, brake wear particu late matter, sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ), ammonia (NH 3 

### ), six hazardous air pollutant (HAP), and carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) emission factors for gasoline-f ueled and diesel highway moto r vehicles, and for certain specialized vehicles such as natural-gas-fuel ed or electric vehicles that may replace them. The program uses the calculation procedures presented in technical reports posted on EPA's MOBILE6 Web page http ://www.epa.gov/otaq/models.htm.

MOBILE6 emission factor estimates depend on various conditions, such as ambient temperatures, travel speeds, operating modes, fuel volatility, and mileage accrual rates. Many of the variables affe cting vehicle emissions can be specified by the user.

MOBILE6 will estimate emission factors fo r any calendar year between 1952 and 2050,

inclusive. Vehicles from the 25 most re cent model years are considered to be in operation in each calendar year.

4.2.2 MOBILE6 Defaults:

MOBILE6 includes default values for a wide range of conditions that affect emissions. These defaults are designed to represent “ national average” input data values. Users who desire a more precise estimate of local emissions can substitute information that more specifically reflects local conditions. Use of local input data will be particularly

common when the local emission inventor y is to be constructed from separate

### 20 estimates of roadways, geographic areas, or ti mes of day, in which fleet or traffic conditions vary considerably.

A list of MOBILE6 input parameters is provi ded below. Most of these inputs are optional because the model will supply default values unless alternate data are provided.

4.2.3 MOBILE6 Input Parameters

• Calendar year

• Month (January, July)

• Hourly Temperature

• Altitude (high, low)

• Weekend/weekday

• Fuel characteristics (Reid va por pressure, sulfur content, oxygenate content, etc.)

• Humidity and solar load

• Registration (age) distribution by vehicle class

• Annual mileage accumulation by vehicle class

• Diesel sales fractions by vehicle class and model year

• Average speed distribution by hour and roadway

• Distribution of vehicle miles traveled by roadway type

• Engine starts per day by vehi cle class and distribution by hour

• Engine start soak time distribution by hour

• Trip end distribution by hour

• Average trip length distribution

• Hot soak duration

• Distribution of vehicle miles traveled by vehicle class

• Full, partial, and multiple diurnal distribution by hour

• Inspection and maintenance ( I/M) program description

• Anti-tampering inspection program description

• Stage II refueling emissions inspection program description

• Natural gas vehicle fractions

• HC species output

• Particle size cutoff

• Emissions factors for PM and HAP

• 

### Output format specific ations and selections

4.2.4 MOBILE6 References

The following publications prov ide much of the guidance fo r the preparation of the onhighway inventory.

EPA-450/4-81-026d (Revised), now EPA/450-R-92-009, Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation , Volume IV: Mobile Sources , December 1992. Hereafter,

“Procedures Vol. IV”. The 1992 vers ion is still the definitive document on

### 21 inventories. If a previous edition is referr ed to, the fact will be not ed as, for example, “the 1989 Procedures Vol. IV” or “Volume IV, 1989 edition”.

EPA420-R-03-010, User’s Guide to MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2: Mobile Source

Emission Factor Model

, August 2003. This is the User’s Guide for the official MOBILE6.2.03 on-highway mobile source em ission factor model and will usually be referred to as the M6.2 (or simply M6) User’s Guide (UG). The M6 model in its various versions was developed and publis hed by Assessment & Modeling Division (AMD) of the National Vehicle & Fuels Em issions Laboratory (NVFEL) in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The NVFEL is part of USE PA Office of Transportation & Air Quality (OTAQ), formerly the Office of Mobile Sources (OMS).

Technical Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation , August 2004. Hereafter, the M6 “Technical Guidance [Document]” or “TGD”. The TGD is the pr imary source of guidance on M6 inputs and an invaluable adjunct to the M6 User’s Guide.

USEPA document “Frequently Asked Questions on MOBILE6” , 16 January 2002. Hereafter, [M6] “FAQ”. This document was published along with the M6

TGD.

USEPA memo, “Policy Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for SIP Development and Transportation Conformity” , dated 18 January 2002, from John Seitz, Director of OAQPS, and Mar go Oge, Director of OTAQ, to Regional Air Division

Directors.

4.3 Ohio’s Alternate Data for MOBILE6

Alternative data is state-specif ic data that is used in the M obile6 runs. Using local data is preferred to using the default data in Mobi le6. Efforts are made to collect as much local data as possible.

4.3.1 Vehicle Registra tion Distribution by Age

Overview:

The vehicle age distribution determines the fr action of vehicles operating within each emissions control requirement standard and the deterioration of the emission control technology.

Emission rates vary widely between new and older vehicles. Thus, even small changes in fleet age, particularly for older vehicles , may result in large changes in emission

totals.

### 22 The MOBILE6 model requires esti mates of a distribution of r egistered vehicles by age and vehicle category for current and future years. MOBILE6 default values were developed using national level vehicle registration data by age and class for July 1, 1996. EPA developed a methodology to convert t he July 1, 1996 registration profile into a general registration distribut ion by age and by vehicle ca tegory for some 6 composite (gasoline and diesel) vehicle types plus motorcycles. To project future changes, EPA evaluated general sales growth and vehicle scrappage trends for the total light-duty vehicle in-use fleet and the total heavy-dut y vehicle in-use fleet, and made minor adjustments, where possible, to reflect some of the differences between vehicle categories.

Description: The MOBILE6 model requires estima tes of a distribution of registered vehicles by age and vehicle category for curr ent and future years. OEPA chose to use local vehicle registration data provided by the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) which was sent to the Lake Michigan Air Dir ectors Consortium (LADCO) to develop these inputs. LADCO then contracted with a subcontractor to breakout the age

distribution data from the Vehicle Identification Num bers (VIN).

Note: It was learned during the course of this inventory that there were some discrepancies in the age distribution data. But it was too large of a project to reevaluate the data prior to this invent ory. This will be corrected in the next inventory (2008).

Method Applicability: This approach is most applic able in areas where there are significant differences in the local vehicle fleet age distribution rela tive to the national

average.

Data Sources and Procedures: This approach involves using local vehicle registration data. This is typically available at the county level, but may also be applied using

statewide data from the stat e motor vehicle registration office. The fleet age should be representative of the vehicle fleet over the small urban or rural area under question.

Advantages:

• Uses locally specific registration data, which is likely more representative of the

local area than t he national default.

• Requires minimal additional resources, par ticularly if data is readily available at the county or local level fr om the State departm ent of motor vehicle registration.

• Recommended by EPA and generally is encouraged as a preferred approach over the national default approach.

### 23 4.3.2 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT)

Overview:

In coordination with Ohio Metropolitan Pl anning Organizations (MPOs), the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) provi ded Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT) data and travel demand model (TDM) data. TDM data will be covered in another section. Because TDM results are used by t he state and MPOs to fo recast traffic for a variety of reasons, undergo rigorous calibrati on and validation checks, and are sensitive to roadway capacity/travel time improvement s, the TDMs are considered the best tool for emissions forecasting. Therefore, the DVMT data discussed in this section is not used directly for all areas of Ohio. In countie s where it is not used directly it is used for making rough emissions estimates where model s do not exist or where time prohibits the use of TDMs. DVMT is a simple mechan ism to measure how much traffic is flowing along a roadway during an average 24 hour peri od. This simple formula multiplies Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) by the length of the roadway. For example; if a roadway is 2 miles in length and the AADT is 4000 vehicles per day the DVMT would be computed by multiplying 2* 4,000 =8,000 or 8,000 DVMT.

County-By-County DVMT is computed usin g the State of Ohio, Department of Transportation’s Roadway Information F iles and the annual Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) Summary Reports . DVMT’s are computed for all of the Federal Functional Class (FC) categories within each of Ohio’s 88 counties.

The AADT and Roadway length information prov ides a very accurate estimate of statewide total DVMT for The State Highway S ystem (Interstate, US and State Routes). County total DVMT are consistent and cons idered a good source of county level DVMT for countywide emissions estimates. For roadways that are not part of the State Highway System, various representative count s were used, such as: railroad crossing counts, HPMS Sample Section Counts, etc. All traffic count data that was not collected during the current year has had statewide growth factors applied to account for systematic growth.

Given the previously mentioned methodologies, the DVMT data is more accurate on roads functionally classified as collector or above.

Table 4-1 Federal Func tional Class Categories:

01 - Rural Interstate 02 - Rural Principal Arterial

06 - Rural Minor Arterial 07 - Rural Major Collector

08 - Rural Minor Collector

09 - Rural Local 11 - Urban Interstate 12 - Urban Freeway & Expressway 14 - Urban Principal Arterial

16 - Urban Minor Arterial

17 - Urban Collector

19 - Urban Local

### 24 Table 4-2 DVMT County Summary:

For PDF web based tables of 2005 DVMT by county see:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us /techservsite/availpro/Road_%20Infor/KDVMT/vmt2005.pdf

Disclaimer by ODOT:

The above PDF web based tables contain the State of Ohio's adjusted county DVMT's and road mileage for the years 1990 - 2005. Please be aware that the numbers are estimates only. The factoring process used annual, estimated, and statewide ADT (Average Daily Traffic) growth factors, deriv ed from the output of a limited number of traffic counting stations around the state. Although the growth factors are available by functional class, they are more reliable for major roads such as interstates or expressways, which are relatively well-sampl ed, than for local roads or collectors. The numbers also do no allow for periodic, large- scale functional reclassification actions

### 25 which reassign selected roads or road segm ents from one functional class to another.

The Ohio Department of Transportation t herefore does not warr ant the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of these estimates for your research. We also do not assume responsibility for any incorrectness that may occur.

4.3.3 VMT From Travel Demand Models (TDM)

Overview:

Travel demand forecast modeling is perform ed by the Ohio Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and ODOT for a multit ude of purposes including the preparation of regional emissions estimate s. The ODOT Office of Te chnical Services’ Modeling & Forecasting Section recommends that Ohio ’s TDMs and ODOT’s conformity analysis methods be used to establish the roadway mob ile source portion of Ohio’s SIP budget

to assure consistent methods are used for transportation conformity analysis and budgets. Therefore, ODOT provided both MPO regional TDM runs and statewide TDM

runs with associated data to OEPA and LADC O. The ODOT provided model run data for years 2002, 2005, 2009, 2012, and 2018.

Data provided included loaded networks in both CSV format and GIS shape files, trip end summaries, zone boundary GIS shape files, intra-zonal trip VMT estimates, and

VMT summaries for each of the loaded networ ks. Additional post processing data was provided including but not lim ited to metadata describing the loaded networks, Hourly distribution by functional cla ss, speed profiles, day of week / weekend / monthly car and truck traffic profiles, 2009 & 2018 VMT RPO data sets, state wide VMT growth rates for local traffic, and a 2005 VMT summary comparison spreadsheet. It should be noted that among other things, the loaded TDM Netw orks contain distance and daily volumes

from which VMT is computed.

Network volumes are post processed to esti mate VMT by hour of day. The hourly volumes and capacity, posted speed limi t, and type of roadway for each roadway segment are then used to estimate aver age hourly speeds needed for MOBILE6 based

emissions estimates. Modelin g by segment by hour of day in this way makes emissions

estimates more sensitive to the effects of roadway improvements. This allows transportation planners to evaluate the relati ve emissions affect of improvements to individual roadways as well as packages of improvements and the entire set of planned roadway improvement projec ts air quality impacts of construction programs.

### 26 4.3.4 Speed Di stribution Profiles

Overview:

ODOT provided speed distribution profiles to LADCO. A couple of different sets of speed distribution profiles were provided to OEPA and LADCO for their use, a table of space mean speeds by functional class for use with DVMTs and link group speed curves for post processing travel demand model traffic forecasts. Both sets of speed profiles are based on the same speed study c onducted by ODOT. The speed study is

documented in “Statewide Travel Time Study, May 2001 by Greg Giaimo, Ohio Department of Transportation ”. When OEPA asked for s peeds for use with MOBILE6 for development of CERR, ODOT provided a set of speeds based on that statewide travel time study. Those speeds are doc umented in a technical memorandum titled “Estimation of Average Speed by Functional Class for MOBILE6 Runs ” dated

5/27/2004. Readers should refer to those docum ents for the details. Here the contents of the technical memo, Estimated Average Speed by Functional Class, are summarized.

Space Mean Speeds by Functional Class for U se with County Level DVMT, HPMS:

The memo states that the s peeds which the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) had been using prior to that date, 2004, fo r air quality analysis estimates based on County DVMT summaries, were developed by a former ODOT employee for addressing the one (1) hour standards conformity ru les established due to 1990 emissions

exceedances. No documentation was found in ODOT’s files on the origin of these average speed values or how they were esti mated. In addition, EPA has requirements for using latest planning assumptions for ai r quality conformity analyses. Therefore,

ODOT believed that it was in the state’s best interest to use the mo st recent available data to provide a new set of estimated av erage speeds consistent with those used for

urban area travel demand models which were under development at that time. The memo contains comparisons of 2002 speed dat a obtained from traf fic count equipment, automatic traffic recorders (ATRs) which co llect data continuously throughout the year. It also contains comparisons of the new speeds with those used to address the one hour standard Gebhart’s. The graphs shown in figure 1, taken from the memo, illustrate the comparisons. The first graph compares time mean speeds from the ATRs with space mean speeds from ODOTs travel time study done in 2001and with the speeds used for addressing the one hour standard.

### 27 Figure 1 - Speed Comparison Graphs

Speeds Comparison

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

FC01 FC 0

6

F C0 8

F C1 1 FC1 4 FC1 7



### Functional ClassSpeed Average Speed

1990 Analysis Speeds

2001 Speed Study



## Speeds Comparison

0 20 40 60 80 100

FC 0

1 FC 06

F C08

F C11 FC14 FC 1

7

R

AMPS



### Functional ClassSpeed 

### Average Speed

Min. Avg Speed

Max. Avg. Speed

Gebhardt's Speeds

Spd Study Est Speeds

Spd Study Greg Est



### The following caution statem ent was taken from the Estimation of Average Speed by

Functional Class memo.

CAUTION 

## : It should be noted that speeds on facilities falling in any one of the federal functional classifications vary greatly bet ween roadways, between hour of the day, and day of the week. So these provide only very rough estimates of speed and should be used with caution. In addition, it is expec ted that these average statewide speeds are higher than the average speeds in t he non-attainment areas because the non-

### 28 attainment counties tend to be more popul ated and more congested. The document “Highway Vehicle Speed Es timation Procedures For Use in Emission Inventories”, September 1991 by Earl Ruiter of Cambridge Systematics Inc. is referenced by EPA’s documented procedures for emission inventor y preparation. This document suggests post processing travel demand model traffic assignment results to estimate average speeds.

Final space mean speeds that ODOT provi ded are summarized in the Table 1 below:

Table 4-3 Speed by Federal Functional Class

Functional Class 1990 Analysis 2001 Speed Study Speeds Speeds

FC01 57.3 64.0

FC02 45.3 53.0

FC06 39.9 53.0

FC07 35.1 43.1

FC08 30.5 43.1

FC09 28.0 43.1

FC11 46.3 61.6

FC12 43.3 61.6

FC14 18.9 29.3

FC16 19.6 29.3

FC17 19.6 29.2

FC19 19.6 23.8

It was decided by mutual agreement among individuals within the ODOT Office of

Technical Services that these new s pace mean speed based average speed estimates were reproducible and defensib le since they are well docu mented and should therefore be the speeds used with HPMS** VMT if any year 2002 emissions budget work is done using only the county level VMT summaries discussed in section 5.3.2 Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT).

** Note that HPMS VMT is a statewide VMT estimate and the county level DVMT

summaries are consistent with the HPMS VMT so the county level DVMT summaries are loosely referred to as HPMS VMTs even though in fact they are not.

4.3.5 Link Group Speed Curves:

The ODOT Modeling & Forecasting Section recommends that Ohio’s travel demand forecasting models and ODOT’s conformity anal ysis methods be used to establish the roadway mobile source portion of Ohio’s SIP budget for reasons already mentioned in

5.3.2 and to assure consistent methods are used for transportation conformity demonstration analyses and budget s. Therefore, ODOT pr ovided travel demand model runs and the speed curves by link group that ODOT uses for the speed estimates within

### 29 the post processing of travel demand model runs for estimating regional emissions. Table 2 shows these link group curves.

Table 4-4 Link Group Cod es & Associated BPR Curves

Link Group Facility Type Free Flow Speed Areatype a b

1 Freeway 75 Any 0.39 6.3 2 Freeway 70 Any 0.32 7.0 3 Freeway 65 Any 0.25 9.0 4 Freeway 60 Any 0.18 8.5 5 Freeway 55 Any 0.10 10.0

6 Multi-Lane 60 Rural 0.09 6.0

7 Multi-Lane 55 Rural 0.08 6.0

8 Multi-Lane 50 Rural 0.07 6.0

9 Multi-Lane 45 Rural 0.07 6.0 10 2 Lane Any Rural 0.34 4.0

10 Urban

Street 50 Suburban 0.34 4.0

11 Urban

Street 50 Urban 0.74 5.0

12 Urban

Street 50 CBD 1.16 6.0

13 Urban

Street 40 Suburban 0.38 5.0

14 Urban

Street 40 Urban 0.70 5.0

15 Urban

Street 40 CBD 1.00 5.0

16 Urban

Street 35 Suburban 0.96 5.0

17 Urban

Street 35 Urban 1.00 5.0

18 Urban

Street 35 CBD 1.40 5.0

19 Urban

Street 30 Suburban 1.11 5.0

20 Urban

Street 30 Urban 1.20 5.0

21 Urban

Street 30 CBD 1.50 5.0

Note: a and b are the BPR curv e parameters for the equation

T = T 0 

### {1 + a * (V/C)^b]

### 30 More complete details about emissions mode ling process employed by ODOT may be

found in ODOT documentations. The docum ent titled “Congestion Management & Air Quality Analysis (CMAQ) Program Docu mentation” dated December 2005 may be

obtained from the ODOT web site at www.dot.state.oh.us/urban/data/cmaq.doc (Microsoft Word document)

4.4 Mobile6 Inputs:

The following table contains the inputs s upplied to LADCO to process our mobile inventory.

4.4.1 Ohio’s 2005 MOBILE6 Inputs

The following tables are the result of a joint meeting between Ohio EPA, ODOT, and

MPOs from around the state. At that meeting Mobile6 inputs were discussed and efforts were made to verify the sources of data inputs for Moble6. Dialogue has continued between the parties.

For historical reference:

>>> Dave Moore <Dave.Moore1@dot.s tate.oh.us> 4/10/2006 2:13 PM >>>

All,

An air quality coordination meeting has been scheduled for April 27, 2006 at 10:00 AM at ODOT Central Office conference room GA. The primary purpose of this meeting is to discuss development of 2002 mobile source inventories for use in developi ng the Ohio 2007 8-Hour Ozone SIP Attainment Demonstrations. See meeting agen da below. OEPA is working to ward a June 15, 2006 schedule for submitting the 2002 invent ories to US EPA.

A key component of the meeting will be to review a nd confirm the MOBILE6.2 i nput parameters, by Ohio a/q area, for use in developing the 2002 mobile inve ntories. See draft templa te below. The Ohio MPO travel demand models will be used to generate t he 2002 VMT inputs to MOBILE. Thanks, DM

DM

### 31 IMPORTANT NOTICE: The following tables are not to be used for inventory purposes as the data is subject to change. For the cu rrent input table, contact Ohio EPA, Division

of Air Pollution Control.

Table 4-5 Mobile Inputs



## Cleveland-Akron 2005 Ozone M6.2 Inputs

Includes the following counties: Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, Summit



### State Programs

Input

Stage II Refueling 93/3/86/86

Anti-tampering Programs 96/78/50/22222/21111111/1/12/098./12111112

I/M Programs Yes Exclude Ashtabula County - No I/M program Program 1 2004 2050 2 T/O OBD I/M

Model Years 1 1996 2050

Vehicles 1 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 1 30.0
Compliance 1 98.0

Waiver Rates 1 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 1 25

Grace Period 1 4

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 2 2004 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD & GC

Model Years 2 1996 2050

Vehicles 2 22222 11111111 1 Stringency Compliance 2 98.0

Waiver Rates 2 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 2 25

Grace Period 2 4

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 3 2001 2003 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN

### 32 Model Years 3 1996 2003

Vehicles 3 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 3 30.0 Compliance 3 98.0

Waiver Rates 3 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 3 25

Grace Period 3 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 4 2001 2050 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN

Model Years 4 1975 1995

Vehicles 4 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 4 30.0
Compliance 4 98.0

Waiver Rates 4 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 4 25

Grace Period 4 4

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 5 1998 2000 2 T/O LOADED/IDLE

Model Years 5 1975 2000

Vehicles 5 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 5 30.0 Compliance 5 98.0

Waiver Rates 5 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 5 25

Grace Period 5 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 6 1996 1997 2 T/O IM240

Model Years 6 1975 1997

Vehicles 6 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 6 30.0
Compliance 6 98.0

Waiver Rates 6 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints 6 CUTPOINT.D
Exemption Age 6 25

Grace Period 6 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

### 33 Program 7 1996 2050 2 T/O GC

Model Years 7 1975 1995

Vehicles 7 22222 21111111 1 Stringency Compliance 7 98.0

Waiver Rates 7 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 7 25

Grace Period 7 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file



### Fuel Commands

Fuel Program 1

Oxygenated Fuels 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2

Fuel RVP 9



### Alternative Emission Regulati ons and Control Measures

Rebuild Effects 0.1



### External Conditions Commands

Calendar Year 2005

Evaluation Month 7

Min/Max Temperature National Climatic Data Center



### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands

Registration Distribution Variable

### 34 

## Cincinnati-Dayton-Springfield 2005 Ozone M6.2 Inputs

Includes the following counties:

Ohio : Butler, Clark, Clermont, Clinton, Greene, Hamilton, Miami, Montgomery,

Warren

Indiana : Lawrenceburg Twp., Dearborn County
Kentucky : Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties



### State Programs

Input

Note: Indiana and Kentucky inputs may not coincide with Ohio inputs

Stage II Refueling 93/3/86/86

Anti-tampering Programs 96/78/05/22222/21111111/1/12/098./12111112

I/M Programs Yes
Excludes Clinton Co. and Miami Co., OH, Dearborn County, IN - No I/M program Note: I/M inputs for Kentucky counties are not included Program 1 2004 2050 2 T/O OBD I/M

Model Years 1 1996 2050

Vehicles 1 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 1 30.0 Compliance 1 98.0

Waiver Rates 1 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 1 25

Grace Period 1 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 2 2004 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD & GC

Model Years 2 1996 2050

Vehicles 2 22222 11111111 1 Stringency
Compliance 2 98.0

Waiver Rates 2 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 2 25

Grace Period 2 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 3 2001 2003 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN

Model Years 3 1996 2003

Vehicles 3 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 3 30.0 Compliance 3 98.0

### 35 Waiver Rates 3 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 3 25

Grace Period 3 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 4 2001 2050 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN

Model Years 4 1975 1995

Vehicles 4 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 4 30.0
Compliance 4 98.0

Waiver Rates 4 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 4 25

Grace Period 4 4

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 5 1998 2000 2 T/O LOADED/IDLE

Model Years 5 1975 2000

Vehicles 5 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 5 30.0 Compliance 5 98.0

Waiver Rates 5 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 5 25

Grace Period 5 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 6 1996 1997 2 T/O IM240

Model Years 6 1975 1997

Vehicles 6 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 6 30.0
Compliance 6 98.0

Waiver Rates 6 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints 6 CUTPOINT.D
Exemption Age 6 25

Grace Period 6 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file

Program 7 1996 2050 2 T/O GC

Model Years 7 1975 1995

Vehicles 7 22222 21111111 1

### 36 Stringency Compliance 7 98.0

Waiver Rates 7 3.0 1.0 Cutpoints
Exemption Age 7 25

Grace Period 7 2

NO TTC Credits

Effectiveness

DESC file



### Fuel Commands

Fuel Program 1

Oxygenated Fuels 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2

Fuel RVP 9



### Alternative Emission Regulati ons and Control Measures

Rebuild Effects 0.1



### External Conditions Commands

Calendar Year 2005

Evaluation Month 7

Min/Max Temperature National Climatic Data Center



### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands

Registration Distribution Variable

### 37 

## Other Areas ( excluding NOACA/AMATS 

## and OKI/MVRPC 

## ) Ozone M6.2 Inputs

Includes the following counties:

Ohio : Belmont, Columbiana, Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Jefferson, Knox, Licking,
Lucas,Madison, Mahoning, Pickaway, Trumball, Wood



### Fuel Commands

Input

Fuel Program 1

Oxygenated Fuels 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2

Fuel RVP 9



### Alternative Emission Regulati ons and Control Measures

Rebuild Effects 0.1 (0.30 for 2018)



### External Conditions Commands

Calendar Year All

Evaluation Month 7

Min/Max Temperature National Climatic Data Center



### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands

Registration

Distribution Variable



### 4.5 Ohio’s Mobile Emission Data Processed by LADCO (Lake Michigan Air Director’s Consortium):

2005 TDM and Mobile6 input data were provided to LADCO for processing. The data was processed by LADCO with T3 to prepare it as an input into the ConCEPT model.

T3 and ConCEPT are described as follows.

### 38 4.5.1 T3--Development of Link-Level Mobile Source Emission Inventories:

Highly resolved emission inventories for on- road mobile sources are needed for air quality modeling to develop the necessary technical support for new State Implementation Plans (SIPs) fo r regional haze, fine particles , and ozone. Emissions for on-road motor vehicles are estimated using vehi cle miles traveled, tr ip starts and ends, speed, and other activity data developed by State Agencies and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) using transportati on demand models (TDMs), and emission

factors from EPA's MOBILE6 model. To s upport this modeling in the upper Midwest, ENVIRON, working with LADCO, State DOTs, and local MPOs, has developed a software tool (the TDM Transformation Tool, or "T3") that takes TDM output from approximately twenty transportation networ ks using a variety of models, applies appropriate data transformations , and outputs link- and county-le vel activity data in a uniform format for input to the CONCEPT emissions processing model (a new emissions processing model also developed wit h funding from LADCO). In a parallel effort, analyses of extensive automatic tra ffic recorder (ATR) dat a collected by State DOTs were conducted to develop temporal profiles (hour of day , day of week, and month of year) of vehicle counts and vehicl e mix by roadway type for developing the

detailed on-road emissi on inventories.

T3 provides a conduit from the projections of traffic demand model ers regarding vehicle types, road networks, and vehicle activity to the activity data required by emissions modelers. The primary goals of T3 are to provide an easy mechanism for incorporating TDM model outputs in as "raw" a format as possible, while simult aneously providing a great degree of flexibility in representing t he TDM projections in terms acceptable to most air quality models. These goal s have been achieved through the use of a dimensional transformation approach, w here the dimensions of the various

transformations are user-defined - hence the name of the tool.

By Stella Shepard, Alison K. Pollack, John Haasbeek, ENVIRON International

Corporation, 101 Rowland Way, Su ite 220, Novato, CA. 94945
& Mark Janssen, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO ), 2250 E. Devon Avenue # 250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, janssen@ladco.org

4.5.2 ConCEPT--Consolidated Community Emissions Processing Tool an OpenSource Tool for the Emi ssions Modeling Community:

The new CONCEPT (CONsolidated Communi ty Emissions Processing Tool)

Emissions Processor is now available for use by the emissions modeling community. Developed as joint project between Alpine Geophysics, LLC and ENVIRON Corporation, with Midwest RPO and joint RPO funding, the CONCEPT model combines the best attributes of current emissions modeling syste ms into an open source model highlighting the following features:

• Open Source. Writt en primarily in PostgreSQL, th e software required for running

### 39 CONCEPT is in the public dom ain. The model itself is GNU Public License (GPL) compliant and users are encouraged to make additions and enhancements to the modeling system.

• Transparent. The database structur e of the model makes the system easy to understand, and the modeling codes themselv es are extremely well documented to encourage user participation in the customizing the system for specific modeling requirements.

• Quality Control. The CONCEPT model structure an d implementation allows for multiple levels of QA analysis during every step of the emissions calculation process. Using the database structures, an emissions modeler can easily trace a process or facility and review the calculat ion procedures and assumptions for any emissions value.

The CONCEPT model includes modules for the major emissions source categories: area source, point source, on-ro ad motor vehicles, non-road motor vehicles and biogenic emissions, as well as a num ber of supporting modules, including spatial allocation factor development, speciation pr ofile development, growth and control for point and area sources, and CEM point sour ce emissions handling. The emissions modeling community has alr eady begun development of addi tional CONCEPT support modules including CEM preproce ssing software, graphical QA tools, and an interface to

the traffic demand models for on-road mo tor vehicle emissions estimation.

By Cyndi Loomis, James G. Wilkinson, Alpine Geophysics, LLC, & John Haasbeek, Alison Pollack, ENVIRON Corporation. & Mark Janssen, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO), 2250 E. Devon Av enue # 250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, janssen@ladco.org

4.5.3 LADCO Ohio Data Outputs for 2005:

The following LADCO outputs and documents can be found at: www.ladco.org/tech/e mis/net05/index.html

Table 4-6 LADCO Data Output

Sta

te Network T3 Descripti

on DOC M6 Inpu

ts VM

T vs

HP

MS

Exc

el Average Day

VMT (this

should

match

conformi

ty inventory
) Co

unt

y
Em

issi

on

s
Re

por

t All

Pollut

ants

After Speci

ation Dropped

VMT M6

Run

Summ

ary Pollut

ant

T otals (Short ) Raw

Summ

ary (pol,ve

h, etype) Hourly Tempo

ral

Summ

ary Hourly

Veh

Mix

Summ

ary Hourly Speed

Summ

ary (with

volum

e/ capaci ty)

OH AKRON AKRON OH OH AKRON 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

### 40 OH CANTON CANTON OH OH CANTON 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH CINCI CINCI OH OH CINCI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH CLEVE CLEVE OH OH CLEVE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH COLUMB

US COLUMB

US OH OH COLUMB

US 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH SPRING

FLD SPRING

FLD OH OH SPRING

FLD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH TOLEDO TOLEDO OH OH TOLEDO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH YNGSTO

WN YNGSTO

WN OH OH YNGSTO

WN 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OH STATEW

D STATEW

D OH OH STATEW

D 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1



### Additional Documents on LADCO Web Page:

“Comparison to EPA's Default Model NMIM”

“How we Build the 2005 Vmt/Networks”

“Spreadsheet/Graphics on Vehicle Mix”

“Background on the T3 Tool “

4.6 MPO Contact Table

Table 4-7 County Summary Ta ble of MPOs by County

FIPS County Model Network MPO Contact Person

39001 Adams Statewide

39003 Allen Statewide Lima Allen County Regional Planning Commission Tom Mazur

39005 Ashland Statewide

39007 Ashtabula Statewide

39009 Athens Statewide
39011 Auglaize Statewide

39013 Belmont Statewide Bel-O-Mar Regional Council and Interstate Planning

Commission Rakesh Sharma

39015 Brown Statewide

39017 Butler Cincinnat/Dayton Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of

Governments Andy Reser

39019 Carroll Statewide
39021 Champaign Statewide

39023 Clark Springfield Coordinating Committee of the Clark County-Springfield Eric Ottoson

### 41 Transportation Study

39025 Clermont Cincinnat/Dayton Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of

Governments Andy Reser

39027 Clinton Statewide

39029 Columbiana Statewide

39031 Coshocton Statewide

39033 Crawford Statewide

39035 Cuyahoga Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Bill Davis

39037 Darke Statewide

39039 Defiance Statewide

39041 Delaware Columbus Mid-Ohio Regional Planning

Commission Nick Gill

39043 Erie Statewide

39045 Fairfield Statewide
39047 Fayette Statewide

39049 Franklin Columbus Mid-Ohio Regional Planning

Commission Nick Gill

39051 Fulton Statewide

39053 Gallia Statewide

39055 Geauga Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Bill Davis

39057 Greene Cincinnat/Dayton Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission Ana Ramirez

39059 Guernsey Statewide

39061 Hamilton Cincinnat/Dayton Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of

Governments Andy Reser

39063 Hancock Statewide

39065 Hardin Statewide

39067 Harrison Statewide
39069 Henry Statewide
39071 Highland Statewide
39073 Hocking Statewide

39075 Holmes Statewide

39077 Huron Statewide

39079 Jackson Statewide

39081 Jefferson Statewide Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson Transportation Study Policy

Committee Mike Proprocki

39083 Knox Statewide

39085 Lake Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Bill Davis

39087 Lawrence Statewide KYOVA Interstate Planning

Commission

39089 Licking Columbus Licking County Area Transportation Study Matthew Hill

39091 Logan Statewide

39093 Lorain Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis

### 42 Coordinating Agency

39095 Lucas Toledo Toledo Metropolitan Area

Council of Governments Sujatha Mohanakrishnan

39097 Madison Statewide

39099 Mahoning Youngstown Eastgate Regional Council

of Governments R.P. Samulka

39101 Marion Statewide

39103 Medina Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Bill Davis

39105 Meigs Statewide

39107 Mercer Statewide

39109 Miami Cincinnat/Dayton Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission Ana Ramirez

39111 Monroe Statewide

39113 Montgomery Cincinnat/Dayton Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission Ana Ramirez

39115 Morgan Statewide

39117 Morrow Statewide
39119 Muskingum Statewide

39121 Noble Statewide

39123 Ottawa Statewide
39125 Paulding Statewide
39127 Perry Statewide
39129 Pickaway Statewide

39131 Pike Statewide

39133 Portage Akron Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study Jason Segedy

39135 Preble Statewide

39137 Putnam Statewide

39139 Richland Statewide Richland County Regional Planning Commission John Adams

39141 Ross Statewide
39143 Sandusky Statewide

39145 Scioto Statewide

39147 Seneca Statewide
39149 Shelby Statewide

39151 Stark Canton Stark County Regional Planning Commission Dan Slicker

39153 Summit Akron Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study Jason Segedy

39155 Trumbull Youngstown (partial county model

coverage) Eastgate Regional Council

of Governments R.P. Samulka

39157 Tuscarawas Statewide

39159 Union Statewide

39161 Van Wert Statewide

39163 Vinton Statewide

39165 Warren Cincinnat/Dayton Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of

Governments Andy Reser, OKI

+

### 43 + Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission Ana Ramirez, MVRPC

39167 Washington Statewide Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate Planning

Commission
39169 Wayne Statewide

39171 Williams Statewide

39173 Wood Toledo Toledo Metropolitan Area

Council of Governments Sujatha Mohanakrishnan

39175 Wyandot Statewide 

### NOTE: Complete MPO information can be found at, www.dot.state.oh.us/urban/mpomap.htm and at www.dot.state.oh.us/urban/mpolist.htm#Cleveland

.



## SECTION 5

MARINE, AIRCRAFT and RAIL (MAR) SOURCES

MAR sources are non-road sour ces which are significant enoug h in terms of emissions to be considered separately from the rest of the non-road sources. The MAR inventory consists of commercial marines, aircraft and locomotive sources. The marine and locomotive inventory is generated by Environ 1 

### under contract with LADCO and the aircraft inventory is generated by Ohio EPA.

5.1 Marine Vessel Sources

The approach to commercial marine emi ssion estimates needed to be flexible because the activity data was available in many fo rmats. Emission esti mates were determined either by multiplying engine power, load factor, hours per ye ar of operation, or on the basis of the number of gall ons of fuel consumed.

Emissions were determined for ten subclasses of vessel types: Deep draft vessels (DDV) at port, DDV mid-late, push boats (rivers /lakes), tugs, ferries, other special (excursion) vessels, support vessels, dredges, commercial fishing, and military vessels (Coast Guard). These were linked to various Ohio lakes and rivers.

Because of the large variety of methodologie s employed, inventory tables for the ten subcategories are detailed in the comp lete inventory prepared and published by

ENVIRON Internati onal Corporation: LADCO 2005 COMMERCIAL MARINE

EMISSIONS , by Christian E. Li ndhjem, March, 2007.

Emission totals produced by ENVIRON were provided to LADCO to submit to EPA for Ohio’s State Implementation Plan (SIP).

### 44 5.2 Rail Sources

The primary activity unit used to determine em issions is gallons of fuel consumed.

Emission rates were derived from EPA doc uments provided as support documentation

for the 1997 locomotive emission standards (EPA, 1997). Gallons of fuel consumed were based on rail activity.

Rail activity was broken down into four Source Category Codes (SCC). Class I, linehaul rail: Large interstate railroad companies like Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. Class I,II, III, switching rail: Yard operations. Class II, III line haul: Regional and local railroads. And Passenger rail: AMTRAK.

Class I, line-haul represents 84.3% of fuel used and the larges t emission’s category. The complete emission’s inventory was prepared and published by ENVIRON International Corporation: LADCO 2005 LOCOMOTIVE EMISSIONS , by Christian E. Lindhjem, February, 2007.

Emission totals produced by ENVIRON were provided to LADCO to submit to EPA for Ohio’s State Implementation Plan (SIP).

EPA. 1997: "Locomotive Emission Standards." Regulatory Support Document, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, O ffice of Mobile Sources, April. And EPA 1997, Emission Factors for

Locomotives," Environmental Protecti on Agency, EPA420-F-97-051, December.



### 5.3 Aircraft Sources

INTRODUCTION:

The aircraft emission’s inventory is derived by taking the number of Landings and Take Offs (LTOs) per year and multiplying by an emission fact or. In the Ohio inventory when specific aircraft models and engine type emission factors are known they were used. For the rest of the inventory the emission factors came from USEPA’s fleet average emissions data. Those results are t hen compiled as tons per year per pollutant by county. The following de scribes the components, met hodology, and concludes with a description of an Access based aircraft emission calculator.

COMPONENTS:

I. Ohio Airports: A list of both towered and non-towered airpor ts in Ohio is obtained from the Ohio Department of Transportation. See: www.dot.state.oh.us/aviation/ In conversation

with ODOT two individuals stated that the 16 4 airports listed covered over 90% of the airports in Ohio. See Table 1.

### 45 II. Number of Operations/LTOs by Airport/County:

The ODOT list contained the number of operations a year per airport. An operation is either a landing or a take-off. A Landing and Take Off (LTO) is required for

FAA EDMS calculations. LTOs were deriv ed simply by dividing the number of operations by two. These were totaled by county.

Table 5-1 Number of operations and LTOs for 2005

County Airport Name ID Total Operations LTOs/Year

Adams Alexander Salamon AMT 5210 2605

Allen Allen County AOH 32500 16250

Ashland Ashland County 3G4 49240 24620

Ashtabula Ashtabula County HZY 16886 8443

Ashtabula Germack 7D9 840 420

Athens Ohio University UNI 51600 25800

Auglaize Neil Armstrong AXV 29456 14728

Belmont Barnesville-Bradfield 6G5 10150 5075

Belmont Alderman 2P7 6150 3075

Brown Brown County GEO 5157 2578.5

Butler Butler County Regional HAO 61687 30843.5

Butler Hook Field Municipal MWO 40050 20025

Butler Miami University OXD 16708 8354

Carroll Carroll County -Tolson TSO 34950 17475

Carroll Parsons 5D6 2674 1337

Champaign Grimes Field I74 23480 11740

Champaign Weller 38I 300 150

Clark Springfield-Beckley Municipal SGH 64033 32016.5

Clark Mad River I54 15350 7675

Clermont Clermont County I69 35741 17870.5

Clinton Airborne Airpark ILN 52000 26000

Clinton Clinton Field I66 29360 14680

Clinton Hollister Field 2B6 161 80.5

Columbiana Columbiana County Ø2G 31146 15573

Columbiana Koons 8G8 2546 1273

Coshocton Richard Downing I4Ø 19550 9775

Coshocton Tri-City 8ØG 8085 4042.5

Crawford Port Bucyrus 17G 24871 12435.5

Crawford Galion Municipal GQQ 5216 2608

Cuyahoga Burke Lakefront BKL 97100 48550

Cuyahoga Cleveland-Hopkins International CLE 234356 117178

Cuyahoga Cuyahoga County CGF 79774 39887

Darke Darke County VES 9238 4619

Defiance Defiance Memorial DFI 9130 4565

Delaware Delaware Municipal DLZ 39300 19650

Delaware Packer 5E9 3181 1590.5

Erie Hinde 88D 1350 675

Erie Kelleys Island 89D 25495 12747.5

Erie Griffing-Sandusky SKY 112100 56050

### 46 Erie Wakeman I64 17324 8662

Fairfield Miller's Farm 7B4 360 180

Fairfield Fairfield County LHQ 43066 21533

Fayette Fayette County I23 29405 14702.5

Franklin Ohio Stat e University OSU 134459 67229.5

Franklin Port Columbus International CMH 218438 109219

Franklin Rickenbacker International LCK 96200 48100

Franklin Bolton Field TZR 69149 34574.5

Franklin Columbus Southwest Ø4I 11833 5916.5

Franklin Darby Dan 6I6 11260 5630

Fulton Fulton County USE 21123 10561.5

Gallia Gallia-Meigs Regional GAS 12200 6100

Geauga Gates 7D8 4200 2100

Geauga Geauga County 7G8 5350 2675

Greene Greene County - Lewis A. Jackson I19 37400 18700

Greene Bloom 14I 100 50

Guernsey Cambridge Municipal CDI 6040 3020

Hamilton Lunken LUK 129430 64715

Hamilton Blue Ash ISZ 35000 17500

Hamilton Cincinnati West I67 30197 15098.5

Hancock Bluffton 5G7 71980 35990

Hancock Findlay FDY 19800 9900

Hancock Priebe 7D5 3850 1925

Hardin Ada ØD7 331 165.5

Hardin Hardin County I95 6562 3281

Hardin Elliott's Landing O74 1560 780

Harrison Harrison County 8G6 11900 5950

Henry Henry County 7W5 15637 7818.5

Highland Highland County HOC 18325 9162.5

Holmes Holmes County 1ØG 21400 10700

Huron Huron County 5A1 10100 5050

Huron Willard 8G1 2715 1357.5

Jackson James A. Rhodes I43 6053 3026.5

Jefferson Jefferson County Airpark 2G2 15969 7984.5

Jefferson Eddie Dew Memorial 1G8 3540 1770

Knox Knox County 4I3 20150 10075

Knox Wynkoop 6G4 4691 2345.5

Lake Concord Airpark 2G1 4510 2255

Lake Willoughby Lost Nation Municipal LNN 45085 22542.5

Lawrence Lawrence County Airpark HTW 41910 20955

Licking Newark-Heath VTA 12457 6228.5

Logan Bellefontaine Regional EDJ 8325 4162.5

Lorain Columbia 4G8 5150 2575

Lorain Elyria 1G1 14300 7150

Lorain Lagrange 92D 1155 577.5

Lorain Lorain County Regional LPR 62000 31000

Lorain Reader-Botsford Airfield 67D 18700 9350

Lucas Toledo Express TOL 94600 47300

### 47 Madison Madison County UYF 41410 20705

Mahoning Salem Airpark 38D 16920 8460

Mahoning Tri-City 3G6 10555 5277.5

Mahoning Elser Metro 4G4 49232 24616

Mahoning Lansdowne Ø4G 750 375

Marion Marion Municipal MNN 42650 21325

Medina Medina Municipal 1G5 79685 39842.5

Medina Wadsworth Municipal 3G3 41025 20512.5

Medina Weltzien Skypark 15G 79130 39565

Mercer Lakefield CQA 16212 8106

Miami Hartzell Field I17 10200 5100

Miami Troy Skypark 37I 4264 2132

Miami Waco Field 1WF 0 0

Monroe Monroe County 4G5 3324 1662

Montgomery Brookville Air-Park I62 29359 14679.5

Montgomery James M. Cox Dayton Intl DAY 134524 67262

Montgomery Dayton Wright Brothers MGY 89045 44522.5

Montgomery Moraine Airpark I73 12938 6469

Montgomery Dahio Trotwood I44 1853 926.5

Montgomery Phillipsburg 3I7 68000 34000

Morgan Morgan County I71 5725 2862.5

Morrow Morrow County 4I9 19108 9554

Muskingum Zanesville Municipal ZZV 33312 16656

Muskingum Parr 42I 16150 8075

Noble Noble County - Mike Brienza Field I1Ø 5950 2975

Ottawa Middle Bass-East Point 3W9 1300 650

Ottawa Middle Bass Island 3T7 6500 3250

Ottawa North Bass Island 3X5 1000 500

Ottawa Carl R. Keller Field PCW 20890 10445

Ottawa Put-In-Bay 3W2 15140 7570

Paulding Paulding 2H8 2100 1050

Perry Crooksville I84 400 200

Perry Perry County I86 4550 2275

Pickaway Pickaway County CYO 35450 17725

Pickaway Clarks Dream Strip Ø3I 2770 1385

Pike Pike County EOP 2012 1006

Portage Freedom Air Field 7D6 1623 811.5

Portage Farview 86D 3353 1676.5

Portage Mills 7E3 1050 525

Portage Portage County 29G 9621 4810.5

Putnam Ruhe's R47 13250 6625

Putnam Putnam County OWX 11910 5955

Putnam Ohio Dusting Co. 6C2 2995 1497.5

Richland Mansfield Lahm Regional MFD 57518 28759

Richland Shelby Community 12G 2012 1006

Ross Ross County RZT 50150 25075

Sandusky Fremont 14G 37450 18725

Sandusky Sandusky County Regional S24 6148 3074

### 48 Scioto Greater Portsmouth Regional PMH 45830 22915

Seneca Bandit Field 5D9 140 70

Seneca Fostoria Metropolitan FZI 7900 3950

Seneca Weiker 82D 320 160

Seneca Seneca County 16G 60165 30082.5

Shelby Sidney Municipal I12 20500 10250

Stark Barber 2D1 13750 6875

Stark Miller Airport 4G3 8000 4000

Stark Beach City 2D7 6112 3056

Summit Akron Fulton International AKR 26000 13000

Summit Akron-Canton Regional CAK 120441 60220.5

Summit Mayfield 1D4 450 225

Summit Kent State University 1G3 72500 36250

Trumbull Braceville 41N 425 212.5

Trumbull Warren 62D 14738 7369

Trumbull Youngstown-W arren Regional YNG 98298 49149

Tuscarawas Harry Clever Field PHD 54880 27440

Union Union County MRT 31886 15943

Van Wert Van Wert County VNW 20516 10258

Vinton Vinton County 22I 5225 2612.5

Warren Warren County I68 24951 12475.5

Warren Red Stewart Airfield 4ØI 16800 8400

Wayne Wayne County BJJ 96520 48260

Williams Williams County ØG6 10010 5005

Wood Wood County 1GØ 27405 13702.5

Wood Bordner 3D8 2200 1100

Wood Deshler Municipal 6D7 2000 1000

Wood Metcalf TDZ 90700 45350

Wyandot Wyandot County 56D 7410 3705



### III. Aircraft Models and Number of LTO/yr:

Specific aircraft models by airport (generally t he larger airports) is obtained from “Table 7” provided by the United States Departm ent of Transportation, Office of Airline Information. This provided the number of LTO’s for each aircraft model per year per airport.

Table 2. Sample from “Table 7.” This is the all community total of aircraft models for the Akron/Canton area. “All Service” departure s were used as the number of LTOs per year for that model. Listed in the original table are airc raft model by airport and number

of services/LTOs.

### 49 **TOTAL DEPARTURES PERFORMD**

**Aircraft Scheduled Non-Sched All**

**Model Service Service Service**

A-318 1 1

A319 384 384

BOEING 717-200 3850 3850

BOEING 727-100 1 1

BOEING 727-200 5 5

BOEING 737-100/200 74 74

BOEING 737-200C 3 3 6

BOEING 737-300 2 2

BOEING 737-700/LR 212 212

BOEING 737-800 5 5

BOEING 757-200 4 4

BOEING 767-300/ER 4 4

CANADAIR RJ-100/ER 542 3 545

CANADAIR RJ-700 2881 2881

CONVAIR CV-580 3 3

DASSAULT FALCON 7 7

DHC8-100 DASH 8 2 2

DOUGLAS DC-9-15F 13 13

DOUGLAS DC-9-30 6 6

EMBRAER-145 144 144

RJ-200ER/RJ-440 5519 5519

SAAB-FAIRCHD 340/B 1804 1804

ALL TYPES 15342 130 15472

IV. Emission Factors: Where there was specific aircraft model data the emission factors were derived using the FAA’s Emission Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS). EDMS is a combined emissions and dispersion model for assessing ai r quality at civilian airports and military air bases. The model was developed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in cooperation with the Unit ed States Air Force (USAF). The model is used to produce an inventory of emissions generated by source s on and around the airport or air base, and to calculate pollutant concentrations in these environments.

### 50 Table 5-2 EDMS Aircraft Emissions Emissions provided by Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (The few

aircraft in Ohio not included in the table had emissions derived by EDMS 5.0 in-house.)

EDMS Aircraft Emissions/LTO by Aircraft Type
EDMS 4.5 Emissions Inventory Report of 2005 Aircraft Inventory Emissions Factors

Year 2005 Lbs Emitted Per LTO

Aircraft Type CO NOx HC VOC SO2 PM2.5 PM10

A- 318 19.8 18.7 4.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0

A-300-600/R/CF/RCF 27.1 56.4 2.0 2.2 4.0 0.2 0.2

A-300B/C/F-100/200 30.2 52.5 3.5 3.7 3.3 0.2 0.2

A-310-200C/F 32.6 52.5 7.3 7.9 3.3 0.2 0.2

A-319 19.8 18.7 4.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0

A320-100/200 13.7 19.8 1.3 1.3 1.8 0.2 0.2

A-321 16.8 36.8 3.1 3.3 2.2 0.0 0.0

A-330-200 29.8 61.5 0.4 0.4 4.4 0.2 0.2

AVROLINER RJ85 24.7 9.5 2.9 3.3 1.3 0.2 0.2

BAE-146-300 24.7 9.0 3.1 3.3 1.3 0.2 0.2

BEECH 1900 A/B/C 11.0 1.1 3.3 3.5 0.2 0.0 0.0

BEECH KINGAIR C90 1.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0

717-200 11.7 23.4 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0

727-100 21.4 23.1 4.6 5.1 2.9 0.4 0.4

727-100C/QC 44.5 19.8 4.6 5.1 2.4 1.1 1.1

727-200 19.6 27.3 2.9 3.1 3.3 1.1 1.1

737-100/200 14.1 16.1 2.2 2.4 2.0 0.7 0.7

737-200C 13.9 17.4 6.8 7.5 2.0 0.9 0.9

737-300 28.7 15.9 1.8 2.0 1.8 0.0 0.0

737-400 26.5 18.5 1.5 1.5 1.8 0.0 0.0

737-500 24.7 21.2 1.3 1.3 2.0 0.0 0.0

737-700/LR 17.6 20.1 2.0 2.0 1.8 0.4 0.4

737-800 15.7 27.1 1.5 1.8 2.0 0.7 0.7

737-900 15.7 27.1 1.5 1.8 2.0 0.7 0.7

747-100 252.6 108.5 106.7 116.8 7.1 0.4 0.4

747-200/300 60.6 104.7 7.1 7.7 6.8 0.7 0.7

747-400 67.0 105.6 5.7 6.4 7.3 0.7 0.7

757-200 24.7 35.7 2.0 2.2 2.6 0.4 0.4

757-300 27.1 33.1 0.4 0.4 3.1 0.2 0.2

767-200/ER 32.6 52.5 7.3 7.9 3.3 0.2 0.2

767-300/ER 32.0 62.2 2.6 2.9 4.0 0.4 0.4

777 32.8 85.1 5.1 5.7 4.4 0.4 0.4

CANADAIR RJ100/ER 16.3 4.9 1.5 1.8 0.7 0.0 0.0

CANADAIR RJ-700 12.6 9.3 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0

CESSNA 208 1.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

CONVAIR CV-580 36.2 0.9 8.8 9.5 0.7 0.0 0.0

DASSAULT FALCON 13.7 2.6 2.4 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.0

DHC8-100 DASH 8 5.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0

DORNIER 328 JET 1.3 6.6 11.9 12.6 0.7 0.0 0.0

DOUGLAS DC-10-10 102.5 76.7 38.6 42.1 4.2 0.0 0.0

DOUGLAS DC-10-30 45.4 78.7 5.3 5.7 5.1 0.4 0.4

### 51 DOUGLAS DC-10-40 131.8 81.8 30.2 33.1 6.0 0.7 0.7

DOUGLAS DC-8-63 263.5 25.6 219.1 239.9 4.2 5.1 5.1

DOUGLAS DC-8-71 53.6 34.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 0.0 0.0

DOUGLAS DC-8-73 53.6 34.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 0.0 0.0

DOUGLAS DC-9-10 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 1.8 0.2 0.2

DOUGLAS DC-9-15F 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 1.8 0.2 0.2

DOUGLAS DC-9-30 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 1.8 0.2 0.2

DOUGLAS DC-9-40 39.7 16.5 10.8 11.9 2.0 1.3 1.3

DOUGLAS DC-9-50 12.6 20.1 1.8 1.8 2.2 0.9 0.9

EMBRAER-135 12.8 5.5 1.1 1.3 0.7 0.0 0.0

EMBRAER-140 13.7 6.0 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.0 0.0

EMBRAER-145 6.4 6.8 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.0

EMBRAER-170 9.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0

F28-4000/6000 76.7 10.4 77.2 84.4 1.5 0.0 0.0

JETSTREAM 41 4.6 2.0 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0

L-101101/100/200 33.3 112.0 6.2 6.8 5.7 1.3 1.3

LEAR-25 75.2 0.7 7.9 8.4 0.2 0.0 0.0

LOCKHEED L100-30 48.7 9.9 19.6 21.4 1.8 0.0 0.0

MD-11 47.8 93.3 4.0 4.4 6.0 0.7 0.7

MD-80, 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 16.3 20.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.2 0.2

MD-90 12.1 23.8 0.2 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.2

RJ-200ER/RJ-440 16.3 4.9 1.5 1.8 0.7 0.0 0.0

SAAB-FAIRCHD 340/B 4.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0



### NOTE: Where specific aircraft model data was not available fleet emissions were used. EPA default fleet average emissi on factors were taken from “Documentation for Aircraft, Commercial Marine Vessel, ,Locomotive, and Other Non-road Components of the National Emissions Inventory. 2005, s ee Appendix A, Aircraft Emission Estimation Methodology.” Specific model LTOs were subtracted from county LTO totals to eliminate double counting those LTOs.

Table 5-3 Fleet Emissi on Factor Categories

Fleet emission factors were br oken down into three categories. Itinerant General, Local General, and Military.

Table 5-3a Fleet Average Emission Factor s for Itinerant General Aircraft.

(Taken from : Table A-5)
Pollutant Emission Factors (lbs/LTO)

HC 1.234

NOx 0.158

CO 28.13

SOx 0.015

PM10 0.60333

Note: Air taxi HC emissions * VOC/HC ( 0.9914) conversion factor = air taxi VOC estimate

### 52 Table 5-3b Fleet Average Emission Factor s for Local General Aircraft.

(Taken From: Table A-11)
Pollutant Emission Factors (lbs/LTO)

HC 0.394

NOx 0.065

CO 12.014

SOx 0.01

PM10 0.2367

Note: GA HC emissions * VOC/HC( 0.9708) conversion factor = GA VOC estimate

Table 5-3c Fleet Average Emission Fa ctors for Military Aircraft.

(Taken from: Table A-17)
Pollutant Emission Factors (lbs/LTO

HC 1.234

NOx 0.158

CO 28.13

SOx 0.015

PM10 0.60333

Note: Military HC emissions * VOC/HC( 1.1046) conversion factor = Military VOC estimate

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The following information was considered in the development of emission estimates:

1. Commercial scheduled and non-scheduled ai rcraft air carrier activity and commercial air freight activity by aircraft model types,

2. General aviation and air taxi annual loca l and itinerant operations for year 2005,

3. Military annual local and iti nerant operations for year 2005.

Due to the need to have aircraft operations in formation expressed as landing/take off (LTO) cycles, the following assumptions were made:

1. For commercial aircraft and commercial ai r freight activity, t he number of annual aircraft annual LTO cycles was assu med to be equal to the number of

### 53 departures. The daily LTO cycle frequency was then obtained by dividing the yearly LTO cycles by 365.

2. For general aircraft annual local and iti nerant airport operations, each respective operations total was divided by 2 to obt ain the corresponding year local and itinerant LTO cycles. The expected daily local and itinerant LTO cycles then were obtained by dividing these annual totals by 365.

3. For military annual local and itinerant operat ions, each respective operations total was divided by 2 to obtain the correspondi ng year local and itinerant LTO cycles. The expected military daily local and iti nerant LTO cycles then were obtained by dividing these annual totals by 365.

Airport LTO cycles were further categoriz ed into commercial aircraft by plane and engine type, general aviation itinerant aircraft of unknown aircraft type, general aviation

local aircraft of unknown aircraft type, and military aircraft. This was necessary in order to utilize the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Av iation Administration EDMS Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System . Commercial and air freight aircraft emission factors per LTO cycle were det ermined using EDMS for each commercial aircraft type models where possible were used at each towered airport. Default commercial aircraft engine type, and Enviro nmental Protection Agency (EPA) default time in mode values for takeoff, approach, and landing roll times were used in the

EDMS model simulations.

For those aircraft types that could not be determined using the EDMS emissions model, aircraft emission factors based upon EPA alter native fleet average procedures were

then used to estimate their emissions. These included general aviation and air taxi itinerant aircraft of unknown aircraft type, general aviation local aircraft of unknown aircraft type, and military aircraft. Conversion from total hydrocarbons to volatile organic compounds was performed and based upon the EPA guidance

.



### APPROACH

1. A list of more than 90% of the airports was obtained fr om the Ohio Department of Transportation. These were classed by airport, county, aircraft flight classification, and the total number of op erations per year.

2. The number of oper ations (a landing or a take off) were then divided by two giving the number of LTOs per year per airport. These airports were combined by county for the total number of LTOs per year, per county.

3. In dialog with ODOT it was determined that the following Ohio flight groups of aircraft be combined to match the three categorie s used by the USEPA in calculating

emissions.

### 54 Itinerant (General, air carrier, commuter, ai r taxi, general aviation itinerant)

Local (General aviation local)

Military (Military)

4. LTOs for specific models of aircraft per airport were ta ken from the FAA Table 7.

See Table 2 above. These were then combined to gi ve the number of LTOs per aircraft model per county. Specific model LTOs were subtracted from county totals to avoid double counting those LTOs.

5. Emission factors were det ermined from the FAA’s EDMS pr ogram for specific aircraft model and engine type. See IV. Emission factors above. The aircraft emission table provided by Michigan has the emission factors for most of the aircraft fl own in Ohio. . Where specific aircraft model data was not available USEPA average fleet emissions

were used.

6. Emission factors times LTOs by count y yielded tons per y ear per county.

Table 5-4 Pollutant by County (Sample)

County POLLUTANT ACTIVITY(LTOS/YEAR) ACTIVITY(LTOS/DAY) EMISSIONS(TON/YEAR)

ADAMS CO 2605 7.136986 24.552325

ADAMS HC 2605 7.136986 0.977285

ADAMS NOX 2605 7.136986 0.136045

ADAMS PM10-PRI 2605 7.136986 0.513114825

ADAMS PM25-PRI 2605 7.136986 0

ADAMS SOX 2605 7.136986 0.0157875

ADAMS VOC 2605 7.136986 0.96314234

ALLEN CO 16250 44.52055 147.945065

ALLEN HC 16250 44.52055 5.841097

ALLEN NOX 16250 44.52055 0.827189

ALLEN PM10-PRI 16250 44.52055 3.081191265

ALLEN PM25-PRI 16250 44.52055 0

ALLEN SOX 16250 44.52055 0.0984575

ALLEN VOC 16250 44.52055 5.769568254

ASHLAND CO 24620 67.45205 173.67794

ASHLAND HC 24620 67.45205 6.19414

ASHLAND NOX 24620 67.45205 0.94895

ASHLAND PM10-PRI 24620 67.45205 3.532515

ASHLAND PM25-PRI 24620 67.45205 0

ASHLAND SOX 24620 67.45205 0.1311

ASHLAND VOC 24620 67.45205 6.07175247

ASHTABULA CO 8863 24.28219 78.115087

ASHTABULA HC 8863 24.28219 3.042551

ASHTABULA NOX 8863 24.28219 0.431593

### 55 ASHTABULA PM10-PRI 8863 24.28219 1.623493455

ASHTABULA PM25-PRI 8863 24.28219 0

ASHTABULA SOX 8863 24.28219 0.0520325

ASHTABULA VOC 8863 24.28219 2.99420213

ATHENS CO 25800 70.68493 196.874985

ATHENS HC 25800 70.68493 7.267183

ATHENS NOX 25800 70.68493 1.081521

ATHENS PM10-PRI 25800 70.68493 4.037266335

ATHENS PM25-PRI 25800 70.68493 0

ATHENS SOX 25800 70.68493 0.1420925

ATHENS VOC 25800 70.68493 7.128180006



### 7. Emissions were then summed by pollut ants in each county by SCC aircraft category type so data could be provided to LADCO in the EPA prescribed NEI – NIF format.

DATA ERROR

The first aircraft emission inventory submitt ed to LADCO in April, 2007 contained an error. The inventory submitted in May, 2007 has the error corrected. The error was the result of a carry-over func tion in Access that picked up the number of operations as

instead of LTOs....which made the in ventory exactly twice as lar ge as what it really was.

ACCESS CALCULATOR

Introduction:

Our database programmer set up Access applic ation to calculate Ohio’s aircraft emission inventory, and export those results to Excel. His utility allows for easy

modification of the aircraft data to match futu re data scenarios. Ou tput to Excel also

allows for additional data manipulation and importation.

### 56 Interface:

Through this interface the following sets of data can be edited/updated: Airport activity, emission factors, specific airport emissi ons, state/county FIPS, detailed aircraft information, airport informati on, and aircraft SCCs. Once the final emissions have been calculated and summed, then the data can be expo rt via the export function on the Main

Menu

.

# Appendix C

- 1

Mobile Source Emissions Inventory for the

Steubenville

- Weirton PM2.5

Nonattainment Area

# B ROOKE 

# - H ANCOCK 

# - J EFFERSON



# T RANSPORTATION 

# S TUDY

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 201 1

- 1

Transportation Air Quality Analysis a nd Technical Documentation

For the Weirton

- Steubenville , WV

- OH

State Implementation Plan Inventory Mobile Emission Estimates

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 

## National Ambient Air Quality Standard

Submitted: May 2011 Revised: February 2012

### Production of t his Document paid for by funds from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Federal

Transit Administration, Ohio Department of Transportation, West Virginia Department of Transportation and dues from BHJ member governments.

Prepared By:

Brooke

- Hancock

- Jefferson Metropolitan Planning Commission

Th e Metropolitan Planning Organization for Steubenville, Ohio

- Weirton, WV Area 124 North Fourth Street, 2 nd 

### Floor Steubenville, OH 43952

740/282

- 3685

304/797

- 9666

740/282

- 1821 FAX

Email: mikepap@bhjmpc.org Website: www.bhjmpc.orgTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page i



### BROOKE

- HANCOCK

- JEFFERSON TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Transportation Air Quality Analysis and Technical Documentation

For the Weirton

- Steubenville, WV

- OH State Implementation Plan Inventory M obile Emission Estimates

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... Page 1

On Road Mobile Emission Summary

................................ ................................ ............................. Page 3

Latest Planning Assumptions

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... Page 5

Travel Demand Modeling

- Analysis Years

................................ ................................ ................... Page 5

Social

- Economic Demographics

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... Page 5

Emission Factor Generation

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ Page 9

Temperature and Relative Humidity

................................ ................................ ............................... Page 11

Ramp Fraction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . Page 12

Source Type Population

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. Page 12

Vehicle Age Distribution

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ Page 12

Road Type Distribution

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... Page 21

Post Process ing

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... Page 22

Appendix A

– Interagency Consultation DocumentationTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page ii 

### LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 BHJ Region On

- Road Mobile Emissions by State

................................ ................. Page 3

Table 2 BHJ Region On

- Road Mobile Emissions by County

................................ ............. Page 4

Table 3 BHJ Region Representative Social

- Economic Demographic Variables

By County 2005

- 2020

................................ ................................ ............................. Page 7

Table 4 Moves Inputs

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... Page 9

Table 5 Average Temperature and Relative Humidity Data

................................ ................ Page 11

Table 6 Ramp Fractions

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... Page 11

Table 7 Source Type Population for Year 2005

................................ ................................ .. Page 12

Table 8 Vehicle Age Distribution for Jefferson County, OH

................................ .............. P age 13

Table 9 Vehicle Age Distribution for Brooke/Hancock County, WV

................................ . Page 17

Table 10 Road Type Distribution for Brooke

- Hancock

- Jefferson Non

- Attainment Area

..... Page 21

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 BHJ Geographic Area Fine Particulate Matter Non

- Attainment A rea Boundary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . Page 2

Figure 2 BHJ Geographi c Area Covered by Travel Demand Model and Traffic Analysis Zone

Structure

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. Page 8Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page iii



## SELECTED ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS

BHJ

– B rooke

- Hancock

- Jefferson Metropolitan Planning Commission

CFR

– Code of Federal Regulations

FHWA

– F ederal Highway Administration ;

FTA

– F ederal Transit Admi nistration ;

LRTP

– Long Range Transportation Plan

MOBILE6

– Mobile Source Emission Factor

Model

MOU

– Memorandum of Understanding

MPO

– Metropolitan Planning Organization

MVEB

– Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

NAAQS

– National Ambient Air Quality

Standard

NO X 

### – Nitrogen Oxides

ODOT

– Ohio Department of Transportation

OEPA

– Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

PM

– Particulate Matter

PM 2.5 

### - Particulate Matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (often referred to

as Fine Partic ulate Matter) PM 10



### – Particulate Matter with an aerodynamic

diameter less than 10 microns

SIP

– State Implementation Plan

STIP

– Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program

TAZs

– Traffic Analysis Zones

TCM

– Transportation Control Measure

TDM

– Travel Demand Model

TIP

– Transportation Improvement Program in a Metropolitan Planning Area

USEPA

– United States Environmental Protection Agency

VMT

– Vehicle Miles of Travel

VOC

– Volatile Organic Compounds

WVDEP

– West Virginia Department of

Envir onmental Protection

WVDOT

– West Virginia Department of Transportation

### REVISION HISTORY

February 24, 2012

Edit Page 1 ; Introduction; Paragraph #1 Revise paragraph into two sentences.

Edit P a ge 3 ; On Road Emission Summary Paragraph #1 ; Insert Maintenance Year 2022 with 2025

Revise ; Table 1; BHJ Region on

- Road Mobile Emissions b y State ; Add Maintenance Year 2025

Revise Pag e 4 ; Table 2 ; BHJ Region on

- Road Mobile Emissions b y County ; Add Maintenance Year

2025

Revise Page 5 ; Travel Demand Modeling

- Analysis Years ; Add Analysis Year 2025

– Maintenance

Year

Revise Page 9; Emission Factor Generation ; Paragraph #1 Add 2025Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 1 

## Transportation Air Quality Analysis a nd Technical Documentation

For the Weirton

- Steubenville, WV

- OH State Implementation Plan Inventory Mobile Emission Estimates

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 

## National Ambient Air Quality Standard

INTRODUCTION

This memorandum document s the air quality analyses and underlying planning assumptions performed

for the Annual PM2.5 on

- road mobile source emission inv entories for the Weirton

- Steubenville, WV

OH Metropolitan area State Implementation Plan (SIP) . T he Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), Division of Transportation System Development

- Modeling and Forecasting Section and the

Brooke

- Hancock

- Jefferson Planning Commission (BHJM PC) completed these analyses in coordination with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP)

.

The BHJ Region is compr ised of the counties of Brooke and Hancock in the north panhandle of West Virginia and Jefferson in east

- central Ohio. On January 5, 2005, the USEPA designated all three counties within the BHJMPO Planning Area as non

- attainment for the PM 2.5 

### air quality standard. The designation became effective on April 5, 2005; 90 days after USEPA published action in the Federal
Registry

. Figure 1 displays the geographic extent of the Steubenville

- Weirton, OH

- WV non

- attainment

area

The BHJMPC serves as t he Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) . The MPO submitted the necessary Travel Demand Model networks along with all land use and social

- economic demographics. The ODOT Modeling and Forecasting section performed the MOVES runs to generate travel dema nd model based emission factors as well as the complete air quality analyses for t he metropolitan area

.Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 2 

### Figure 1

BHJ GEOGRAPHIC AREA

FINE PARTICULATE MATTER

NON

- ATTAINMENT AREA BOUNDARYTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 3 

### ON ROAD MOBILE EMISSION SUMMARY

The Table 1 and 2 below present a summary of the pollutant emissions including Fine Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 

### ) , Nitrogen Oxides (NO

x 

### ), Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 

### ) modeled for each county that make up the BHJ Region . The Model Years for the demonstration includes the Base Year 20 05, Attainment Year 2008 (a leap year)

, Interim Year 2015 , and Maintenance Year 202 5

.

Table 1

BHJ REGION ON

- ROAD MOBILE EMISSIONS BY STATETransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 4 

### Table 2

BHJ REGION O N

- ROAD MOBILE EMISSIONS BY COUNTYTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 5 

### LATEST PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS

The annual PM2.5 inventory runs meet the latest planning assumption requirement. This report will

present the latest population and land use data available that calibrated the modeling process used to

calculate the vehicle emissions for the mobile emissions budgets as well as the input values for U.S.

EPA’s most recent emissions software MOVES for this attainment demonstration.

A series of conference calls held in November 2010 and February 2011 by the Interagency Consultancy Group established two parameters. First, that this re

- designation effort will require the use of U.S.

EPA’s most recent emissions software MOVES for all mobile source emission analyses and second, the

annual emi ssion estimates will be based a single

- season app roach . The group also decided that s ince travel demand models produce average daily conditions, the daily emissions estimates are multiplied by 365 days to produce annual emissions estimates expressed in tons per year.

TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING

- ANALYSIS YEARS

A Travel Demand Model (TDM) is the traditional forecasting tool used to examine potential changes in future travel patterns for a specific study area, in this case the Brooke

- Hancock

- Jefferson Metropolitan Area. The BHJ MPO, with the assistance of ODOT Modeling & Forecasting, maintains a validated region

- wide TDM that employs a four

- step modeling process consisting of trip generation, trip distribution, mode choice, and route assignment performed with the Cube Voyager software package

. The model Ou tputs generated from the TDM are link

- by

- link directional 24

- hour traffic volumes for simulating Base Year and Horizon Year travel patterns generated by the LRTP transportation network.

The current BHJ TDM Validation Year is 2000. The model uses compar able Average Daily Traffic count data, updated social

- economic variables for each of the analysis years by either updating existing or known land use commitment for 2008, 2009, and 2014, or projected 2014 and 2020 variables based on a straight

- line extrapo lation between 2009 set of variables and the Horizon Year 2030 variables. These networks represent all planned federal

- aid projects as well as any regionally significant projects found in the BHJ TIP and LRTP expected to be open for traffic by the end of e ach respective analysis

year.

T he interagency consultation process, as previously discussed, established the following model years for

Brooke and Hancock counties , WV and Jefferson County, OH that reflected the most recent correspondence from the U.S. EPA :

Analysis Year 2005

– Baseline Emissions Analysis Year 20 08

– Attainment Year Analysis Year 2015

– Interim Year Analysis Year 2022

– Maintenance Year Analysis Year 2025

– Maintenance Year

SOCIAL

- ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHICS

Identifying projected growth centers and understanding urban and rural population changes are essential to determine future transportation needs in a given study area. Critical elements include an understanding of the past and anticipated future shifts in the region’s economy, population, land useTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 6 

### patterns, and other environmental factors over time. In turn, these factors are useful for predicting future transportation patterns and justify transportation improvements over the next twenty years.

Travel fo recasting procedures require the user delineate the TDM study area into geographic areas called Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs). Typically, TAZs are based on factors such as land use, area types (urban, suburban or rural), or political government units such as cities, villages, or townships. TAZs represent centers of travel generators or attractors based on a set of demographic variables. The BHJMPO collects and reviews the TDM independent variables that characterize current and future

estimates of the met ropolitan area’s social and economic activity that may influence land

- use development patterns. In all, there are 376 TAZs in the BHJ model represented by 60 TAZs for Brooke County, 78 TAZs for Hancock County, and 237 TAZs for Jefferson County. Figure 2 displays the BHJ

MPO geography covered by the Steubenville

- Weirton Travel Demand Model (the entire three

- county area) including the Traffic Analysis Zone structure. The computer

- based TDM for the Steubenville

Weirton Metropolitan Area highway network empl oys the following land use variables:

[ AREA_TYPE ] ≡ Area Type
[ AVG_PARK ] ≡ Average parking cost
[ ENROLL ] ≡ School en rollment classified by Private [ENROLL_PRIV], Public [ENROLL_PUB] and Post

- secondary [ENROLL_UNIV] schools
[ HOTEL_RM ] ≡ Hotel Rooms
[ MED_HHINC ] ≡ Median household income
[ POP ] ≡ Population
[ POP_18 ] ≡ Population 18 years or less
[ POP_GRP ] ≡ Population residing in Group Quarters
[ TOTEMP ] ≡ Total Employment grouped by the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
[ TOT_HH ] ≡ O ccupied housing
[ TOT_VEH ] ≡ Vehicles available per household
[ WORKERS ] ≡ Workers per household

Table 3 is a set of demographic variables developed for the most recent 2006 24

- Hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Weirton

- Steubenville, W V

- OH non

- attainment area compiled September 2010.Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 7 

### Table 3

BHJ REGION

REPRESENTATIVE SOCIAL

- ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHIC

VARIABLES BY COUNTY 2005

- 2020Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 8 

### Figure 2

BHJ GEOGRAPHIC AREA

COVERED BY TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL

AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE STRUCTURETransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 9 

### EMISSION FACTOR GENERATION

The MOVES model generated the emission factor files were for base year

- 2 005 and attainment year

2008 represent ing the transportation improvement programs implemented in the BHJ Region. The

model also generated emission factors for two future year scenarios 2015

, 2022 , and 2025

.

Table 4 summarizes the settings used in the MOVES run specification file and the MOVES County

Data Manager. The subsequent tables provide the specific inputs that a re not using the MOVES default

values

.

Table 4

MOVES INPUTSTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 10 

### Table 4 (continued)

MOVES INPUTS

TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY

The single season approach for temperature and relative humidity uses weather data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

. The data used in this report

, taken from the Pittsburgh International Airport collection center, is

rep resentative of 12 months in 2009

. Data entered into a spreadsheet provided by U.S. EPA convert ed

the Mobile6 to get the correct data for the MOVES model

. Listed in the table below are the average annual hourly temperature s and relative humidity distribution profile s for the Weir ton

- Steubenville,

WV

- OH metropolitan area

.Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 11 

### Table 5

AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY DATA

RAMP FRACTIO N

The Base Year Travel Demand Model used the V ehicles H our of T ravel (VHT) fractions to derive the
Ramp F ractions shown in Table 6

. The future year networks also used the b ase year fractions

.

Table 6

RAMP FRACTIONSTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 12 

### SOURCE TYPE POPULATION

A combination of local and MOVES default data is the Source Type P opulation for vehicle

classifications

. The MOVES default values provided the data for Source Type Population 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62 while local data from Ohio and West Virginia motor vehicle registration s accounted for all other Source Type Population needed to run the MOVES m odel. Table 7 shows the Source Type Population identifications, the corresponding Source Type Name, and the number of vehicles analyzed for Jefferson County, OH and Brooke/Hancock County, WV combined

.

Table 7

SOURCE TYPE POPULATION FOR YEAR 2005

VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION

A grouping of data from Ohio and West Virginia sources along with the MOVES model default s make up the Vehicle Age Distribution. MOVES default values included Vehicle Type ID 41, 42, 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62. Local data from Ohio and West Virginia motor vehicle registration s accounted for all other Vehicle Type ID. Table 8 and Table 9 show th e Vehicle Age Distribution for Jefferson County, OH and Brooke/Hancock County, WV respectively

.Transp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 13 

### Table 8
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 14 

### Table 8 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 15 

### Table 8 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 16 

### Table 8 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 17 

### Table 9

VEHICLE AGE DISTRIB UTION FOR BROOKE/HANCOCK COUNTY, WVTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 18 

### Table 9 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR BROOKE/HANCOCK COUNTY, WVTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 19 

### Table 9 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR BROOKE/HANCOCK COUNTY, WVTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 20 

### Table 9 (continued)
VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR BROOKE/HANCOCK COUNTY, WVTransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 21 

### ROAD TYPE DISTRIBUTION

The ODOT and WV Division of Highway county summary V ehicle Miles Traveled (V MT ) data categorized by federal functional class for the three county non

- attainment areas is the basis for Road Type Di stribution Fraction

. Table 10 illustrates Road Type Distribution

.

Table 10

ROAD TYPE DISTRIBUTION FOR BROOKE

- HANCOCK

- JEFFERSON

NON

- ATTAIN MENT AREATransp ortation Air Quality Analysis And Technical Documentation Weirton

- Steubenville

, WV

- OH

For the U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard May 2011 ; Revised February 2012 Page 22 

### POST PROCESSING

Several custom programs created by ODOT were computed the t otal emissions. The process uses data on daily and directional traffic distributions as well as more up to date volume/delay functions from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). This process, described below and illustrated in Figure 4, also

uses rewri tten code able to handle the newer model network formats and MOVES generated emission

factors.

The first step in the process involves running postcms.exe to calculate hourly link volumes based on the percentage of the daily volume (travel demand model output) determined by a link’s facility and area type. The analysis does not use the l ink speeds from the travel demand model. Using a link’s volume

to

- capacity ratio and link group code

, a post

- process to the model based on HCM methods estimates the

li nk speeds

.

The second step (mmoves.exe) uses a combination of the MOVES emission factors and the hourly link volumes that are output of the postcms.exe p rogram. The hourly volumes multiplied by the MOVES emission factor for the corresponding hour of d ay, speed bin, and road type ; calculate emissions for every network link for each hour. The final link on road vehicle emissions for the area is the sum of all

individual link

- hour emissions.

The third step, (vehcalm.exe), calculates vehicle

- based emis sions for each source type for each hour of the day. A combination of local and default data is the source for the vehicle source type . The final vehicle emissions for each county are the sum of all individual hourly emissions for all vehicle types.

Since the intrazonal trips are not loaded onto the network, the fourth step in the process requires a separate method to account for those trips that use local roads to travel within a zone. The intracalm.exe program uses intrazonal trips to estimate VMT using the area in square miles and intrazonal trips of each

zone. The computer program assumes that the zone is circular and uses the radius of the circle as the average trip length for these intrazonal trips. By combining MOVES generated emissions with

estimated intrazonal VMT , the i ntrazonal emissions are then calculated. The emission rates are the same

as those used to calculated link based emissions.

The final step is to summarize link, vehicle, and intrazonal emissions for each county, pollutant, and analyzed year, and to multiply annual average daily emissions by 365 to produce an annual estimate.

## APPENDIX A

INTERAGENCY CONSULTATION DOCUMENTATION

# Appendix D

- 1 LADCO Technical Support Document (Version IV, April 25, 2008, FINAL)

(available at http://www.ladco.org/reports/general/)

# Appendix D

- 2 LADCO Technical Support Document (Supplement, Without CAIR Modeling, September 12, 2008, FINAL)

(available at http://www.ladco.org/reports/general/)

# Appendix D

- 3 WVDEQ Nonroad ModelingToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJANUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 01-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:42:20: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 5.05 80.54 0.72 0.87 1,251.92 0.570.0015.4454009Hancock County 4.44 60.40 0.54 0.66 813.50 0.280.009.2154029Jefferson County 13.58 149.65 1.07 0.91 1,260.34 0.440.0012.963908123.06 37.61 290.59 2.32 2.44 3,325.77Totals:1.290.00page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJANUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 01-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:42:20: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.056.210.16540090.03 0.09 0.150.12Hancock County 0.055.480.20540290.03 0.10 0.220.16Jefferson County 0.1416.210.67390810.14 0.59 0.320.340.23Totals:27.901.03 0.19 0.78 0.690.62page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONFEBRUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 02-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:53:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 5.04 80.65 0.72 0.87 1,251.92 0.570.0415.4354009Hancock County 4.44 60.52 0.54 0.66 813.50 0.280.069.2054029Jefferson County 13.56 150.01 1.07 0.91 1,260.34 0.440.1012.933908123.03 37.55 291.17 2.32 2.44 3,325.77Totals:1.290.21page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONFEBRUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 02-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:53:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.056.240.16540090.03 0.09 0.150.11Hancock County 0.055.530.20540290.03 0.10 0.220.16Jefferson County 0.1416.280.67390810.14 0.59 0.310.340.24Totals:28.061.03 0.19 0.78 0.670.61page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMARCH 2005 (WEIRTON 03-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:03:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1312.410.25540090.06 0.14 0.220.17Hancock County 0.1714.810.31540290.08 0.18 0.330.24Jefferson County 0.3433.920.96390810.33 1.28 0.470.510.64Totals:61.141.51 0.47 1.60 1.020.92page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMARCH 2005 (WEIRTON 03-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:03:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.48 116.66 0.88 0.98 1,457.56 0.570.3816.9154009Hancock County 12.69 110.91 0.75 0.78 1,087.96 0.270.5511.1154029Jefferson County 28.49 260.79 1.88 1.41 2,008.07 0.630.9019.233908151.67 47.25 488.36 3.51 3.16 4,553.58Totals:1.481.83page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAPRIL 2005 (WEIRTON 04-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:14:26: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.42 117.79 0.88 0.98 1,457.56 0.571.1616.7954009Hancock County 12.62 112.22 0.75 0.78 1,087.96 0.271.6510.9754029Jefferson County 28.29 264.52 1.88 1.41 2,008.07 0.632.7818.973908151.33 46.73 494.53 3.51 3.16 4,553.58Totals:1.485.59page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAPRIL 2005 (WEIRTON 04-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:14:26: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1613.360.25540090.06 0.14 0.340.26Hancock County 0.2016.180.31540290.08 0.18 0.500.37Jefferson County 0.4336.190.96390810.33 1.28 0.720.770.79Totals:65.721.51 0.47 1.60 1.561.40page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMAY 2005 (WEIRTON 05-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:25:05: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.38 118.70 0.88 0.98 1,457.56 0.570.6216.7054009Hancock County 12.57 113.29 0.75 0.78 1,087.96 0.270.8910.8754029Jefferson County 28.13 267.54 1.88 1.41 2,008.07 0.631.4818.783908151.07 46.35 499.53 3.51 3.16 4,553.58Totals:1.482.99page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMAY 2005 (WEIRTON 05-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:25:05: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1013.000.25540090.06 0.14 0.500.39Hancock County 0.1215.700.31540290.08 0.18 0.740.55Jefferson County 0.2635.290.96390810.33 1.28 1.071.150.48Totals:63.991.51 0.47 1.60 2.312.08page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJUNE 2005 (WEIRTON 06-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:36:14: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 20.70 168.34 1.19 1.18 1,798.35 0.580.8119.0954009Hancock County 28.33 185.63 1.14 1.00 1,546.21 0.281.1613.8454029Jefferson County 61.68 515.08 3.29 2.06 3,255.15 0.941.9327.4539081110.71 60.37 869.05 5.62 4.24 6,599.71Totals:1.803.91page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJUNE 2005 (WEIRTON 06-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:36:14: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2124.100.33540090.10 0.19 0.670.52Hancock County 0.2932.570.42540290.13 0.25 0.990.73Jefferson County 0.6573.041.80390810.69 2.38 1.431.541.15Totals:129.712.54 0.92 2.82 3.092.78page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJULY 2005 (WEIRTON 07-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:47:36: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 20.68 168.82 1.19 1.18 1,798.35 0.580.9419.0454009Hancock County 28.30 186.24 1.14 1.00 1,546.21 0.281.3413.7854029Jefferson County 61.57 517.22 3.29 2.06 3,255.15 0.942.2327.3339081110.55 60.15 872.28 5.62 4.24 6,599.71Totals:1.804.50page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJULY 2005 (WEIRTON 07-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:47:36: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2224.420.33540090.10 0.19 0.790.61Hancock County 0.3033.040.42540290.13 0.25 1.160.86Jefferson County 0.6973.801.80390810.69 2.38 1.681.811.22Totals:131.262.54 0.92 2.82 3.643.28page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAUGUST 2005 (WEIRTON 08-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:58:51: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 20.68 168.69 1.19 1.18 1,798.35 0.580.8919.0554009Hancock County 28.31 186.08 1.14 1.00 1,546.21 0.281.2813.7954029Jefferson County 61.60 516.65 3.29 2.06 3,255.15 0.942.1327.3639081110.59 60.21 871.42 5.62 4.24 6,599.71Totals:1.804.29page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAUGUST 2005 (WEIRTON 08-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:58:51: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2224.340.33540090.10 0.19 0.760.59Hancock County 0.3032.910.42540290.13 0.25 1.120.83Jefferson County 0.6873.591.80390810.69 2.38 1.631.751.20Totals:130.842.54 0.92 2.82 3.513.17page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 09-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:10:09: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.38 119.40 0.90 1.01 1,476.12 0.570.6816.8554009Hancock County 12.58 114.10 0.77 0.81 1,109.45 0.270.9711.0654029Jefferson County 28.03 268.88 1.87 1.39 1,996.25 0.631.6018.563908150.99 46.47 502.37 3.53 3.20 4,581.82Totals:1.483.25page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 09-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:10:09: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1013.210.25540090.06 0.14 0.580.45Hancock County 0.1316.000.31540290.08 0.18 0.850.63Jefferson County 0.2935.690.96390810.33 1.28 1.241.330.52Totals:64.891.51 0.47 1.60 2.672.41page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONOCTOBER 2005 (WEIRTON 10-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:20:58: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.44 118.37 0.90 1.01 1,476.12 0.571.3716.9554009Hancock County 12.64 112.89 0.77 0.81 1,109.45 0.271.9511.1654029Jefferson County 28.21 265.49 1.87 1.39 1,996.25 0.633.2918.773908151.28 46.88 496.75 3.53 3.20 4,581.82Totals:1.486.60page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONOCTOBER 2005 (WEIRTON 10-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:20:58: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1713.700.25540090.06 0.14 0.400.31Hancock County 0.2116.660.31540290.08 0.18 0.590.44Jefferson County 0.4536.920.96390810.33 1.28 0.850.920.84Totals:67.281.51 0.47 1.60 1.841.66page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONNOVEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 11-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:32:12: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 10.50 117.20 0.90 1.01 1,476.12 0.570.4517.0854009Hancock County 12.71 111.53 0.77 0.81 1,109.45 0.270.6411.3054029Jefferson County 28.42 261.64 1.87 1.39 1,996.25 0.631.0519.033908151.62 47.41 490.38 3.53 3.20 4,581.82Totals:1.482.13page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONNOVEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 11-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:32:12: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1412.530.25540090.06 0.14 0.240.19Hancock County 0.1714.980.31540290.08 0.18 0.360.27Jefferson County 0.3634.100.96390810.33 1.28 0.520.560.67Totals:61.621.51 0.47 1.60 1.121.01page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONDECEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 12-05)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:42:59: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 5.04 80.71 0.72 0.87 1,251.92 0.570.0315.4254009Hancock County 4.43 60.58 0.54 0.66 813.50 0.280.059.1954029Jefferson County 13.55 150.20 1.07 0.91 1,260.34 0.440.0812.923908123.02 37.53 291.48 2.32 2.44 3,325.77Totals:1.290.16page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONDECEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 12-05)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:42:59: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2005All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.056.270.16540090.03 0.09 0.170.13Hancock County 0.055.570.20540290.03 0.10 0.250.19Jefferson County 0.1516.350.67390810.14 0.59 0.360.390.25Totals:28.201.03 0.19 0.78 0.780.70page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJANUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 01-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:46:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 3.95 66.48 0.62 0.16 1,302.27 0.370.0012.3954009Hancock County 3.60 51.23 0.47 0.11 853.00 0.180.007.7054029Jefferson County 12.32 131.58 0.98 0.16 1,337.19 0.300.0011.183908119.87 31.27 249.29 2.07 0.43 3,492.46Totals:0.850.00page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJANUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 01-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:46:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.044.930.16540090.03 0.09 0.160.13Hancock County 0.054.590.20540290.03 0.11 0.230.19Jefferson County 0.1414.990.68390810.16 0.67 0.350.380.23Totals:24.511.04 0.21 0.87 0.740.70page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONFEBRUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 02-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:57:14: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 3.95 66.57 0.62 0.16 1,302.27 0.370.0512.3854009Hancock County 3.60 51.33 0.47 0.11 853.00 0.180.067.6954029Jefferson County 12.30 131.89 0.98 0.16 1,337.19 0.300.1111.153908119.85 31.22 249.78 2.07 0.43 3,492.46Totals:0.850.22page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONFEBRUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 02-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:57:14: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.054.970.16540090.03 0.09 0.160.13Hancock County 0.054.640.20540290.03 0.11 0.230.19Jefferson County 0.1515.070.68390810.16 0.67 0.340.370.24Totals:24.691.04 0.21 0.87 0.720.69page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMARCH 2008 (WEIRTON 03-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:08:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.23 96.60 0.75 0.18 1,514.99 0.360.4013.9554009Hancock County 10.15 93.64 0.64 0.14 1,135.80 0.170.579.7554029Jefferson County 25.99 228.58 1.74 0.25 2,139.07 0.420.9816.983908144.37 40.68 418.82 3.13 0.56 4,789.86Totals:0.961.95page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMARCH 2008 (WEIRTON 03-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:08:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1310.000.24540090.06 0.15 0.230.20Hancock County 0.1612.250.30540290.08 0.19 0.350.28Jefferson County 0.3631.660.97390810.38 1.48 0.510.560.65Totals:53.921.51 0.53 1.82 1.091.04page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAPRIL 2008 (WEIRTON 04-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:18:40: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.18 97.50 0.75 0.18 1,514.99 0.361.1913.8354009Hancock County 10.09 94.74 0.64 0.14 1,135.80 0.171.719.6154029Jefferson County 25.81 231.82 1.74 0.25 2,139.07 0.423.0416.723908144.08 40.16 424.05 3.13 0.56 4,789.86Totals:0.965.94page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAPRIL 2008 (WEIRTON 04-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:18:40: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1511.010.24540090.06 0.15 0.360.30Hancock County 0.2013.700.30540290.08 0.19 0.530.43Jefferson County 0.4534.190.97390810.38 1.48 0.780.850.80Totals:58.891.51 0.53 1.82 1.671.59page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMAY 2008 (WEIRTON 05-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:29:23: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.15 98.22 0.75 0.18 1,514.99 0.360.6413.7554009Hancock County 10.04 95.63 0.64 0.14 1,135.80 0.170.929.5154029Jefferson County 25.67 234.44 1.74 0.25 2,139.07 0.421.6216.523908143.86 39.78 428.29 3.13 0.56 4,789.86Totals:0.963.18page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMAY 2008 (WEIRTON 05-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:29:23: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.0910.680.24540090.06 0.15 0.530.45Hancock County 0.1213.250.30540290.08 0.19 0.780.64Jefferson County 0.2833.250.97390810.38 1.48 1.161.260.49Totals:57.171.51 0.53 1.82 2.472.35page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJUNE 2008 (WEIRTON 06-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:40:44: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 16.62 141.45 1.01 0.21 1,868.19 0.370.8416.2854009Hancock County 22.99 158.87 0.97 0.18 1,608.79 0.181.2012.7354029Jefferson County 56.09 454.68 3.05 0.37 3,469.04 0.632.1224.853908195.70 53.86 754.99 5.03 0.77 6,946.03Totals:1.174.15page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJUNE 2008 (WEIRTON 06-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:40:44: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2019.960.33540090.10 0.20 0.710.60Hancock County 0.2827.360.41540290.14 0.26 1.040.86Jefferson County 0.6968.151.83390810.79 2.77 1.551.691.17Totals:115.482.57 1.03 3.23 3.313.15page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJULY 2008 (WEIRTON 07-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 07 15:26:54: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 16.60 141.84 1.01 0.21 1,868.19 0.370.9616.2354009Hancock County 22.96 159.38 0.97 0.18 1,608.79 0.181.3812.6754029Jefferson County 55.99 456.55 3.05 0.37 3,469.04 0.632.4424.733908195.55 53.63 757.77 5.03 0.77 6,946.03Totals:1.174.79page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJULY 2008 (WEIRTON 07-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 07 15:26:54: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2120.320.33540090.10 0.20 0.840.71Hancock County 0.3027.870.41540290.14 0.26 1.231.01Jefferson County 0.7369.001.83390810.79 2.77 1.831.991.24Totals:117.192.57 1.03 3.23 3.903.71page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAUGUST 2008 (WEIRTON 08-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:03:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 16.61 141.74 1.01 0.21 1,868.19 0.370.9216.2454009Hancock County 22.97 159.24 0.97 0.18 1,608.79 0.181.3212.6954029Jefferson County 56.02 456.05 3.05 0.37 3,469.04 0.632.3324.763908195.59 53.69 757.03 5.03 0.77 6,946.03Totals:1.174.56page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAUGUST 2008 (WEIRTON 08-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:03:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2120.220.33540090.10 0.20 0.810.68Hancock County 0.2927.740.41540290.14 0.26 1.190.98Jefferson County 0.7268.771.83390810.79 2.77 1.771.921.22Totals:116.732.57 1.03 3.23 3.763.58page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 09-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:14:32: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.15 98.79 0.77 0.18 1,534.91 0.360.7013.8954009Hancock County 10.05 96.30 0.66 0.14 1,158.87 0.171.009.6754029Jefferson County 25.59 235.60 1.73 0.25 2,126.38 0.421.7616.323908143.79 39.88 430.69 3.16 0.57 4,820.16Totals:0.963.45page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 09-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:14:32: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1010.900.24540090.06 0.15 0.610.52Hancock County 0.1313.570.30540290.08 0.19 0.900.74Jefferson County 0.3033.700.97390810.38 1.48 1.341.460.53Totals:58.161.51 0.53 1.82 2.862.72page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONOCTOBER 2008 (WEIRTON 10-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:25:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.19 97.97 0.77 0.18 1,534.91 0.361.4113.9854009Hancock County 10.10 95.30 0.66 0.14 1,158.87 0.172.029.7854029Jefferson County 25.74 232.66 1.73 0.25 2,126.38 0.423.6016.533908144.04 40.29 425.93 3.16 0.57 4,820.16Totals:0.967.02page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONOCTOBER 2008 (WEIRTON 10-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:25:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1611.360.24540090.06 0.15 0.420.36Hancock County 0.2114.210.30540290.08 0.19 0.620.51Jefferson County 0.4835.010.97390810.38 1.48 0.921.000.85Totals:60.571.51 0.53 1.82 1.971.88page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONNOVEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 11-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:36:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.24 97.04 0.77 0.18 1,534.91 0.360.4614.1054009Hancock County 10.16 94.17 0.66 0.14 1,158.87 0.170.669.9254029Jefferson County 25.93 229.33 1.73 0.25 2,126.38 0.421.1416.793908144.33 40.81 420.54 3.16 0.57 4,820.16Totals:0.962.27page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONNOVEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 11-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:36:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.1310.130.24540090.06 0.15 0.260.22Hancock County 0.1712.430.30540290.08 0.19 0.380.31Jefferson County 0.3831.880.97390810.38 1.48 0.560.610.69Totals:54.441.51 0.53 1.82 1.201.14page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONDECEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 12-08)Date of Model Run: Nov 07 15:29:03: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 3.94 66.61 0.62 0.16 1,302.27 0.370.0312.3754009Hancock County 3.60 51.38 0.47 0.11 853.00 0.180.057.6854029Jefferson County 12.29 132.05 0.98 0.16 1,337.19 0.300.0911.143908119.83 31.19 250.04 2.07 0.43 3,492.46Totals:0.850.17page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONDECEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 12-08)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 07 15:29:03: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2008All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.055.000.16540090.03 0.09 0.180.15Hancock County 0.054.690.20540290.03 0.11 0.260.22Jefferson County 0.1515.150.68390810.16 0.67 0.390.430.25Totals:24.851.04 0.21 0.87 0.830.79page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJANUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 01-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:48:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.22 35.24 0.43 0.02 1,453.33 0.050.005.7554009Hancock County 2.37 34.75 0.33 0.01 962.47 0.030.004.0754029Jefferson County 9.56 108.39 0.78 0.02 1,534.97 0.080.006.563908114.16 16.38 178.38 1.54 0.05 3,950.76Totals:0.160.00page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJANUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 01-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:48:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.730.18540090.03 0.03 0.110.07Hancock County 0.053.020.22540290.03 0.04 0.170.10Jefferson County 0.1611.630.76390810.19 0.54 0.200.150.25Totals:17.391.16 0.25 0.62 0.480.32page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONFEBRUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 02-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:59:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.22 35.31 0.43 0.02 1,453.33 0.050.045.7454009Hancock County 2.37 34.83 0.33 0.01 962.47 0.030.064.0654029Jefferson County 9.55 108.67 0.78 0.02 1,534.97 0.080.116.543908114.14 16.35 178.80 1.54 0.05 3,950.76Totals:0.160.20page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONFEBRUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 02-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 13:59:22: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.770.18540090.03 0.03 0.110.07Hancock County 0.053.070.22540290.03 0.04 0.160.10Jefferson County 0.1711.730.76390810.19 0.54 0.200.140.26Totals:17.571.16 0.25 0.62 0.470.31page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMARCH 2015 (WEIRTON 03-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:10:08: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.08 57.27 0.52 0.02 1,687.48 0.040.347.1554009Hancock County 5.27 66.07 0.44 0.02 1,271.30 0.020.495.9854029Jefferson County 17.87 185.79 1.32 0.03 2,464.54 0.080.9710.563908127.22 23.69 309.12 2.28 0.07 5,423.31Totals:0.141.80page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMARCH 2015 (WEIRTON 03-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:10:08: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.125.240.26540090.07 0.06 0.170.10Hancock County 0.166.850.33540290.09 0.08 0.250.15Jefferson County 0.4022.731.09390810.47 1.35 0.300.220.68Totals:34.821.68 0.62 1.49 0.710.47page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAPRIL 2015 (WEIRTON 04-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:20:47: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.05 57.93 0.52 0.02 1,687.48 0.041.037.0854009Hancock County 5.24 66.91 0.44 0.02 1,271.30 0.021.485.8754029Jefferson County 17.75 188.54 1.32 0.03 2,464.54 0.083.0110.383908127.05 23.33 313.38 2.28 0.07 5,423.31Totals:0.145.52page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAPRIL 2015 (WEIRTON 04-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:20:47: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.156.070.26540090.07 0.06 0.250.15Hancock County 0.208.050.33540290.09 0.08 0.380.23Jefferson County 0.5025.031.09390810.47 1.35 0.460.330.85Totals:39.151.68 0.62 1.49 1.090.72page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONMAY 2015 (WEIRTON 05-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:31:38: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.03 58.47 0.52 0.02 1,687.48 0.040.557.0254009Hancock County 5.21 67.60 0.44 0.02 1,271.30 0.020.805.8054029Jefferson County 17.66 190.77 1.32 0.03 2,464.54 0.081.6010.243908126.91 23.06 316.84 2.28 0.07 5,423.31Totals:0.142.95page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMAY 2015 (WEIRTON 05-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:31:38: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.095.710.26540090.07 0.06 0.370.23Hancock County 0.127.560.33540290.09 0.08 0.560.35Jefferson County 0.3123.721.09390810.47 1.35 0.680.490.52Totals:36.991.68 0.62 1.49 1.611.07page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJUNE 2015 (WEIRTON 06-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:43:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.37 92.67 0.68 0.03 2,073.94 0.040.729.4154009Hancock County 11.80 117.80 0.63 0.03 1,784.67 0.021.048.9554029Jefferson County 37.32 377.42 2.30 0.05 3,992.38 0.122.0916.683908157.49 35.04 587.90 3.61 0.11 7,850.99Totals:0.193.85page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJUNE 2015 (WEIRTON 06-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:43:00: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2010.690.36540090.11 0.08 0.500.31Hancock County 0.2815.070.45540290.15 0.11 0.750.47Jefferson County 0.7647.492.05390810.95 2.62 0.910.661.24Totals:73.252.86 1.21 2.81 2.161.43page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONJULY 2015 (WEIRTON 07-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:54:17: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.36 92.97 0.68 0.03 2,073.94 0.040.839.3754009Hancock County 11.79 118.20 0.63 0.03 1,784.67 0.021.208.9054029Jefferson County 37.26 379.01 2.30 0.05 3,992.38 0.122.4116.593908157.41 34.87 590.18 3.61 0.11 7,850.99Totals:0.194.44page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJULY 2015 (WEIRTON 07-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 14:54:17: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2110.940.36540090.11 0.08 0.590.36Hancock County 0.3015.450.45540290.15 0.11 0.890.55Jefferson County 0.8148.072.05390810.95 2.62 1.070.771.32Totals:74.462.86 1.21 2.81 2.541.68page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONAUGUST 2015 (WEIRTON 08-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:05:36: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 8.36 92.89 0.68 0.03 2,073.94 0.040.799.3854009Hancock County 11.79 118.09 0.63 0.03 1,784.67 0.021.148.9254029Jefferson County 37.28 378.59 2.30 0.05 3,992.38 0.122.3016.613908157.43 34.91 589.57 3.61 0.11 7,850.99Totals:0.194.24page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAUGUST 2015 (WEIRTON 08-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:05:36: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.2110.870.36540090.11 0.08 0.570.35Hancock County 0.2915.340.45540290.15 0.11 0.860.53Jefferson County 0.7947.902.05390810.95 2.62 1.030.751.30Totals:74.112.86 1.21 2.81 2.461.62page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 09-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:16:40: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.04 58.89 0.53 0.02 1,710.61 0.040.607.1154009Hancock County 5.22 68.12 0.45 0.02 1,298.09 0.020.875.9054029Jefferson County 17.61 191.78 1.32 0.03 2,449.81 0.081.7410.113908126.87 23.12 318.78 2.30 0.07 5,458.51Totals:0.143.20page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 09-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:16:40: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.105.870.26540090.07 0.06 0.430.26Hancock County 0.137.790.33540290.09 0.08 0.650.40Jefferson County 0.3424.011.09390810.46 1.35 0.780.570.57Totals:37.671.68 0.62 1.49 1.871.23page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONOCTOBER 2015 (WEIRTON 10-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:27:38: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.06 58.28 0.53 0.02 1,710.61 0.041.217.1754009Hancock County 5.25 67.34 0.45 0.02 1,298.09 0.021.755.9854029Jefferson County 17.71 189.27 1.32 0.03 2,449.81 0.083.5610.253908127.02 23.41 314.89 2.30 0.07 5,458.51Totals:0.146.52page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONOCTOBER 2015 (WEIRTON 10-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:27:38: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.166.350.26540090.07 0.06 0.300.18Hancock County 0.218.450.33540290.09 0.08 0.450.28Jefferson County 0.5325.711.09390810.46 1.35 0.540.390.90Totals:40.511.68 0.62 1.49 1.290.85page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONNOVEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 11-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:38:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.09 57.59 0.53 0.02 1,710.61 0.040.407.2554009Hancock County 5.28 66.47 0.45 0.02 1,298.09 0.020.576.0854029Jefferson County 17.83 186.43 1.32 0.03 2,449.81 0.081.1310.433908127.20 23.77 310.49 2.30 0.07 5,458.51Totals:0.142.10page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONNOVEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 11-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:38:41: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.135.340.26540090.07 0.06 0.180.11Hancock County 0.176.990.33540290.09 0.08 0.270.17Jefferson County 0.4222.921.09390810.46 1.35 0.330.240.73Totals:35.251.68 0.62 1.49 0.780.52page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 11/18/2011WEIRTONDECEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 12-15)Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:49:31: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.22 35.34 0.43 0.02 1,453.33 0.050.035.7454009Hancock County 2.37 34.87 0.33 0.01 962.47 0.030.044.0654029Jefferson County 9.54 108.82 0.78 0.02 1,534.97 0.080.086.533908114.13 16.33 179.02 1.54 0.05 3,950.76Totals:0.160.16page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONDECEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 12-15)Today's Date: 11/18/2011Date of Model Run: Nov 03 15:49:31: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2015All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.780.18540090.03 0.03 0.130.08Hancock County 0.053.100.22540290.03 0.04 0.190.12Jefferson County 0.1711.760.76390810.19 0.54 0.230.170.26Totals:17.641.16 0.25 0.62 0.550.36page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONJANUARY 2025 (WEIRTON 01-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:16:27: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 1.99 32.23 0.26 0.02 1,724.31 0.010.003.6854009Hancock County 2.20 35.23 0.19 0.01 1,143.55 0.020.002.5454029Jefferson County 8.32 117.50 0.55 0.02 1,825.77 0.040.004.573908112.50 10.78 184.96 1.00 0.05 4,693.64Totals:0.070.00page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJANUARY 2025 (WEIRTON 01-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:16:27: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for January, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.400.21540090.03 0.03 0.050.04Hancock County 0.052.730.26540290.04 0.04 0.080.06Jefferson County 0.1810.310.89390810.20 0.55 0.080.050.27Totals:15.441.35 0.27 0.62 0.200.14page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONFEBRUARY 2025 (WEIRTON 02-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:18:39: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 1.99 32.30 0.26 0.02 1,724.31 0.010.033.6754009Hancock County 2.20 35.32 0.19 0.01 1,143.55 0.020.052.5354029Jefferson County 8.30 117.82 0.55 0.02 1,825.77 0.040.114.553908112.49 10.75 185.43 1.00 0.05 4,693.64Totals:0.070.19page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONFEBRUARY 2025 (WEIRTON 02-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:18:39: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for February, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.430.21540090.03 0.03 0.050.04Hancock County 0.052.770.26540290.04 0.04 0.070.05Jefferson County 0.1910.410.89390810.20 0.55 0.080.050.28Totals:15.611.35 0.27 0.62 0.200.14page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMARCH 2025 (WEIRTON 03-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:20:55: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.133.470.31540090.07 0.04 0.080.05Hancock County 0.184.370.39540290.10 0.05 0.110.08Jefferson County 0.4416.921.25390810.51 1.37 0.110.080.74Totals:24.761.95 0.68 1.47 0.300.21page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONMARCH 2025 (WEIRTON 03-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:20:55: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for March, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.50 53.67 0.30 0.02 1,991.17 0.000.284.7554009Hancock County 3.05 65.50 0.25 0.02 1,492.74 0.000.404.0854029Jefferson County 12.18 195.92 0.86 0.03 2,907.12 0.010.977.253908117.74 16.08 315.10 1.41 0.08 6,391.03Totals:0.021.65page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONAPRIL 2025 (WEIRTON 04-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:23:10: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.48 54.36 0.30 0.02 1,991.17 0.000.854.7054009Hancock County 3.03 66.39 0.25 0.02 1,492.74 0.001.214.0054029Jefferson County 12.07 198.93 0.86 0.03 2,907.12 0.013.017.093908117.58 15.79 319.69 1.41 0.08 6,391.03Totals:0.025.07page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAPRIL 2025 (WEIRTON 04-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:23:10: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for April, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.164.120.31540090.07 0.04 0.110.08Hancock County 0.215.290.39540290.10 0.05 0.170.13Jefferson County 0.5519.071.25390810.51 1.37 0.170.120.92Totals:28.471.95 0.68 1.47 0.460.33page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONMAY 2025 (WEIRTON 05-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:25:27: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.47 54.92 0.30 0.02 1,991.17 0.000.464.6654009Hancock County 3.00 67.11 0.25 0.02 1,492.74 0.000.653.9554029Jefferson County 11.99 201.37 0.86 0.03 2,907.12 0.011.606.963908117.46 15.58 323.40 1.41 0.08 6,391.03Totals:0.022.71page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONMAY 2025 (WEIRTON 05-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:25:27: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for May, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.093.740.31540090.07 0.04 0.170.12Hancock County 0.134.770.39540290.10 0.05 0.260.19Jefferson County 0.3417.501.25390810.51 1.37 0.260.170.57Totals:26.011.95 0.68 1.47 0.690.49page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONJUNE 2025 (WEIRTON 06-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:27:42: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.42 87.54 0.39 0.03 2,428.50 0.000.606.6154009Hancock County 5.90 114.67 0.34 0.03 2,069.02 0.000.856.5954029Jefferson County 23.82 397.00 1.49 0.06 4,670.23 0.012.0911.753908134.14 24.95 599.21 2.23 0.12 9,167.74Totals:0.023.54page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJUNE 2025 (WEIRTON 06-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:27:42: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for June, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.216.210.42540090.12 0.05 0.230.16Hancock County 0.308.420.53540290.17 0.07 0.340.25Jefferson County 0.8333.392.35390811.04 2.66 0.350.231.34Totals:48.023.29 1.33 2.78 0.920.65page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONJULY 2025 (WEIRTON 07-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:30:01: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.41 87.84 0.39 0.03 2,428.50 0.000.696.5954009Hancock County 5.89 115.07 0.34 0.03 2,069.02 0.000.986.5554029Jefferson County 23.76 398.72 1.49 0.06 4,670.23 0.012.4111.673908134.06 24.81 601.63 2.23 0.12 9,167.74Totals:0.024.08page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONJULY 2025 (WEIRTON 07-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:30:01: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for July, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.226.380.42540090.12 0.05 0.270.19Hancock County 0.328.660.53540290.17 0.07 0.400.30Jefferson County 0.8933.812.35390811.04 2.66 0.410.281.42Totals:48.843.29 1.33 2.78 1.080.76page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONAUGUST 2025 (WEIRTON 08-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:32:18: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 4.41 87.76 0.39 0.03 2,428.50 0.000.666.6054009Hancock County 5.89 114.96 0.34 0.03 2,069.02 0.000.936.5654029Jefferson County 23.78 398.27 1.49 0.06 4,670.23 0.012.3011.693908134.08 24.85 600.99 2.23 0.12 9,167.74Totals:0.023.89page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONAUGUST 2025 (WEIRTON 08-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:32:18: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for August, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.226.330.42540090.12 0.05 0.260.19Hancock County 0.318.590.53540290.17 0.07 0.390.29Jefferson County 0.8733.672.35390811.04 2.66 0.390.271.40Totals:48.593.29 1.33 2.78 1.040.74page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 09-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:34:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.103.840.31540090.07 0.04 0.200.14Hancock County 0.144.910.39540290.10 0.05 0.300.22Jefferson County 0.3717.691.25390810.51 1.37 0.300.200.62Totals:26.441.95 0.68 1.47 0.790.56page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONSEPTEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 09-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:34:34: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for September, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.47 55.31 0.31 0.02 2,018.87 0.000.504.7054009Hancock County 3.01 67.60 0.25 0.02 1,524.81 0.000.713.9954029Jefferson County 11.94 202.51 0.85 0.03 2,889.48 0.011.736.873908117.42 15.56 325.41 1.41 0.08 6,433.16Totals:0.022.93page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONOCTOBER 2025 (WEIRTON 10-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:36:49: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.49 54.68 0.31 0.02 2,018.87 0.001.014.7454009Hancock County 3.03 66.78 0.25 0.02 1,524.81 0.001.434.0554029Jefferson County 12.03 199.77 0.85 0.03 2,889.48 0.013.567.003908117.56 15.79 321.23 1.41 0.08 6,433.16Totals:0.026.00page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONOCTOBER 2025 (WEIRTON 10-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:36:49: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for October, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.174.320.31540090.07 0.04 0.140.10Hancock County 0.235.590.39540290.10 0.05 0.200.15Jefferson County 0.5919.671.25390810.51 1.37 0.210.140.98Totals:29.581.95 0.68 1.47 0.550.39page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONNOVEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 11-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:39:01: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 2.51 53.97 0.31 0.02 2,018.87 0.000.334.7954009Hancock County 3.06 65.87 0.25 0.02 1,524.81 0.000.474.1254029Jefferson County 12.14 196.66 0.85 0.03 2,889.48 0.011.137.173908117.72 16.09 316.50 1.41 0.08 6,433.16Totals:0.021.92page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONNOVEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 11-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:39:01: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for November, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.133.540.31540090.07 0.04 0.080.06Hancock County 0.194.470.39540290.10 0.05 0.120.09Jefferson County 0.4717.091.25390810.51 1.37 0.130.080.79Totals:25.101.95 0.68 1.47 0.330.23page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cToday's Date: 2/22/2012WEIRTONDECEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 12-25)Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:41:10: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyExhaustVOCExhaustNOxExhaustCOExhaustPM25ExhaustSO2ExhaustCO2CrankcaseVOCDiurnalVOCFIPSBrooke County 1.99 32.34 0.26 0.02 1,724.31 0.010.023.6754009Hancock County 2.19 35.36 0.19 0.01 1,143.55 0.020.042.5354029Jefferson County 8.30 117.98 0.55 0.02 1,825.77 0.040.084.543908112.48 10.74 185.68 1.00 0.05 4,693.64Totals:0.070.14page 1 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005cWEIRTONDECEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 12-25)Today's Date: 2/22/2012Date of Model Run: Nov 28 14:41:10: 2011Emission Totals by County and PollutantTotal for December, 2025All FuelsTons/MonthCountyVaporDisplacementVOCTotalVOCSpillageVOCFIPSHot SoakVOCRunningLoss VOCTankPermeationVOCHosePermeationVOCBrooke County 0.042.430.21540090.03 0.03 0.060.04Hancock County 0.052.780.26540290.04 0.04 0.090.06Jefferson County 0.1910.410.89390810.20 0.55 0.090.060.29Totals:15.621.35 0.27 0.62 0.230.16page 2 of 2Core Model ver 2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD ReportingUtility, Version 2005c

# Appendix E

- 1

Public Notice

### Public Notice
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the Ohio Portion of the
Steubenville-Weirton, WV-OH

24- Hour PM 2.5 

### Nonattainment Area

Jefferson County, Ohio

Notice is hereby given that the Director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) is requesting that the United States Environm ental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) revise the current air quality designation for the Ohio portion (Jefferson County) of the Steubenville-Weirton, WV-O H area, to attainment with respect to the 2006 24-Hour

PM 2.5 

### national ambient air qualit y standard (NAAQS). This redesignation should not be

confused with Ohio EPA’s rece nt request to U.S. EPA fo r redesignation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standards for which a separate hearing was held recently. Air quality monitoring data collected bet ween 2008 and 2010 in the regi on demonstrate attainment
of the NAAQS and there is ev idence that the improved ai r quality is due to permanent,

enforceable emission reductions. In addition, existing requirements are sufficient to

maintain the 2006 24-Hour PM 2.5 

### standard in this area at leas t ten years into the future.

Computer models show that existing state and federal emi ssion reduction requirements

are sufficient to attain and maintain t he NAAQS in the Steubenv ille-Weirton area. Therefore, Ohio EPA proposes to utilize existing emissi on inventory information and projections of future emissions as the dem onstration of the ability to maintain the
NAAQS in the Steubenville-We irton area in the future.

The Steubenville-Weirton area is currently designated as nonattainment for the 2006

24-Hour PM 2.5 

### standard. As part of an acceptabl e maintenance plan, Ohio EPA has developed, as required, a cont ingency plan to provide for addi tional emission reductions
if a violation of the NAAQS is monito red after the area has been redesignated.

The State of Ohio proposes to:

1. Request the U.S. EPA redes ignate the Ohio portion of the Steubenville-Weirton,

WV-OH area to attainment with respect to the 2006 24-Hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS and revise the maintenance plan. This re quest will document that existing enforceable control measures are respons ible for the observed improvement in air quality.

2. Designate existing controls as sufficient to maintain the NAAQS into the future.

3. Commit to the proposed contingency plan.

These actions must be noticed to allo w public comment and to satisfy USEPA requirements for public involvement in SIP-rela ted activities. This notice addresses Ohio

### EPA’s reliance on the emission projections as evidence of attain ment and maintenance and the commitment to institute contingen cy measures if ambient exceedances or violations trigger the contingency plan requ irements. Written comm ents will be received on or before May 16, 2012 at the following address:

E-mail: erica.fetty@epa.state.oh.us

Mailing address: Erica Fetty Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, DAPC

Lazarus Government Center

P.O. Box 1049 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Phone: (614) 644-2310

Pursuant to Section 119.03 of the Ohio Re vised Code, a public hearing on this redesignation request will be conduc ted as follows: May 16, 2012 at 3:00PM Steubenville Library – Schiap pa Branch, 4141 Mall Drive, Steubenville, OH 43952.

All interested persons are ent itled to attend or be repres ented at the hearing and give written or oral comments on these chang es. All oral comments presented at the hearing, and all written statem ents submitted at the hearing or to the above address by the close of business on May 16, 2012 will be considered by Ohio EPA prior to final action on this redesignation. Written stat ements submitted after May 16, 2012 may be considered as time and circumstances permit, but will not be part of the official record of the hearing.

This redesignation and maintenance request is available on Ohio EPA’s web page for electronic downloading at: http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/SIP/annual.aspx . Questions regarding accessing the web site should be directed to Arunee Niamlarb at 614-728- 1342; other questions or comments about this document should be directed to Erica Fetty at (614) 644-2310, Erica.Fetty@epa.state.oh.us or mailed to Erica Fetty at the

above address.

# Appendix E

- 2

Public Comments and Public Hearing Transcript

### BEFORE THE OHIO EPA

- - -

IN RE: :

: Redesignation 24-hour Particulate : Matter 2.5, Steubenville Area :

- - -

Audiotaped public hearing before

Moderator Darla Peele, taken at the Steubenville

Library - Sciappa Branch, 4141 Mall Drive,

Steubenville, Ohio, at 3:00 p.m. on May 16, 2012.

- - -

### P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

- - -

MODERATOR PEELE: This is the

introduction for the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency Redesignation 24-hour

Particulate Matter 2.5 for the Steubenville area

hearing held 5-16-12.

My name's Darla Peele. I'm a public

information officer for Ohio EPA. I will be

presiding over today's public hearing. Thank you

for taking the time to attend this hearing before

Ohio EPA.

The purpose of the hearing today is to

obtain comments from any interested person today

regarding Ohio EPA's proposed action.

The State of Ohio plans to ask U.S. EPA

to revise the current air quality designation for

Ohio, the Ohio portion of Jefferson County, of

the Steubenville-Weirton, West Virginia-Ohio area

to attainment with respect to 2006 24-hour PM2.5

national ambient air quality standard. This

redesignation should not be confused with Ohio

EPA's recent request to U.S. EPA for

redesignation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standards 2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

### for which a separate hearing was held recently.

Air quality monitoring data from 2008

through 2010 in the region demonstrated

attainment of the national ambient air quality

standard, and there is evidence that the improved

air quality is due to permanent enforceable

emission reductions.

In addition, existing requirements were

sufficient to maintain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard in this area for at least ten years into

the future.

Computer models show that existing state

and federal emission reduction requirements are

sufficient to attain and maintain the national

ambient air quality standard in the

Steubenville-Weirton area. Therefore, Ohio EPA

proposes to utilize the existing emission

inventory information and projections of future

emissions as a demonstration of the ability to

maintain the national ambient air quality

standard in the Steubenville-Weirton area.

Comments can be submitted until the

close of business today, May 16, 2012. You may

e-mail comments to erika.fetty@epa.ohio.gov. 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

### All interested persons are entitled to

attend or be represented and present oral and/or

written comments concerning the proposed action.

All written and oral comments received as a part

of the official record will be considered by the

director of Ohio EPA before a final decision is

made.

Statements submitted after the comment

period closes may be considered as time and

circumstances permit but will not be a part of

the official record of the hearing.

If you wish to present oral testimony at

the hearing today and have not already signed the

registration sheet, please do so at this time.

The sheet is available at the registration table.

Persons will be called in the order in which they

have registered.

There is no cross-examination of the

speakers or representatives of Ohio EPA in

hearings such as this. Ohio EPA hearings provide

citizens the opportunity to submit comments on

the official record. Therefore, we will not be

able to answer questions during the hearing.

However, Ohio EPA staff may ask clarifying 4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

### questions of the person testifying to ensure the

record is as complete and accurate as possible.

Seeing that there is no one who wishes

to provide testimony, we will go off record. It

is 3:05 p.m. on 5-16-12.

(Break taken until 3:30 p.m.)

MODERATOR PEELE: Back on record.

Seeing no further requests for

testimony, I will remind you that written

comments can be submitted through 5 p.m. on May

16, 2012.

Thank you for attending. No one did

attend. The time is now 3:30 p.m., and this

hearing is adjourned.

* * * 5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

### C E R T I F I C A T E

- - -

STATE OF OHIO :

SS:

COUNTY OF FRANKLIN :

I, Jennifer L. Parish, Registered

Professional Reporter, do hereby certify that the

foregoing is a true, correct, and complete

transcription of the above-mentioned cassette

tape before the Ohio Environmental Protection

Agency to the best of my ability.

DATED this 22nd day of May, 2012.

_________________________ JENNIFER L. PARISH, RPR

NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF OHIO

My Commission Expires: November 23, 2014. 6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

# HUMAKER**~** 100 0 Ja ckso n S t ree t

T

ol e d o, O h i o 436 0 4-5 5 73 4 1 9.24 1.900 0

41 9 .24 1. 6 89 4 f ax**htm1ak 1~**  

### Loop & 

### K e ndri ck, LLP 1\'W I I'.s lk

- l a w. com

OffiRI A. BUDZYN S KI

4 1 9.321.1332 cbudzyn s ki@ s lk-l a w

. c o m



### M a y16, 2012

Eric a Fetty

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, DAPC



### Lazarus Government Center

P

. O. Box 1049
Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 VIA EMAIL AND U.S. REGULAR MAIL



### Re: Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the Ohio Portion of the

Steubenville- Wehton, WV-OH 24- Hour 

## PM 2

. 5 

### Nonattainment Area

Oer 

## Fzle Na 043591

Dear Ms. 

### Fetty:

In April

, 2012, Ohio EPA provided public notice of its intention to request that U.S. EPA redesignate the Ohio portion of the Steubenville- Weirton, WV-OH 24-hour PM 2

. 5 

### nonattainment

area as "attainment." The following comments regarding this action are submitted on behalf of t he

Ohio Utility Group and its member companies (the "Utilities"V

Based on a review of the draft redesignation request, Ohio has met all applicable requirements for redesignation under the Oean 

## Air Act §107(d)(3)(E) and the Utilities support Ohio

EPA's redesignation request to attainment for the Ohio portion of the Steubenville- Weuton, WVOH 24-hour PM 2

. 5 

### National Ambient 

## All· Quality Standards ("NAAQS").

Section 107(d)(3)(E) sets fotth the requirements for redesignation to attamment. The

Utilities have reviewed the information contained in Ohio EPA's draft request for redesignation
("Ohio Request") and believe that it meets the requirements for redesignation. 2 

### Most notably, Ohio

EPA has indicated that the improvement in air quality is attributable to 

### implementation of the dean


## Air Interstate Rule and 

### NOx SIP Call Rules, rules that have a du

· ect impact on the Utilities. 3

1 

### The member companies include: Buckeye Power, Inc., The Dayton Power and Light G:>mpany,

Duke Energy Ohio, First Energy, Ohio Power G:>mpany (a uni t of AEP), and Ohio Valley Electric Cotporation.

2 

### Ohio EPA, Draft: Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the Ohio Portion of the

Steubenville-Weuton OH-WV 24-Hour PM2.5 Nonattainment Area

, Jefferson G:>unty, Ohio (April
2012), avail a ble a t http:/ /www

. epa.ohio

. gov/portals/27 /SIP/ Attain/PM2 

### 5 24hr/Steubenvill e

Wi e rton PM25 24-hr redesig DRAFT.pdf, last visited May 1 1

, 2012. Hereinafter "Ohio Request."

3 

## Id at 4-5.

C H A RL OTTE I CO LU M BU S 1 S A RASO TA 1 TAlv ll' A 1 TO LE DO

### Erica Fetty
May 16,2012
Page 2

Further, Ohio's Maintenance Plan does not revise or remove any existing emissions limit or control requirement and, thus, ensures attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM 2

. 5 

### NAAQS in the SteubenvilleWeirton area.



### A Ohio's 2008-2010 monitoring data demonstrate that the Steubenville- Weitton

area is in attainment of the 2006 24- 

### hour PM 2 • 5 

### NAAQS

Data from Ohio's and West Virginia's monitors demonstrate that the Steubenville- Weirton

area is attaining the 2006 24-hour PM 2

. 5 

### NAAQS. Tills 

## is based on quality assured air quality monitoring data for 2008-2010. The information provided in Ohio's Request demonstrates that

"there has been a clear downward trend in design values for all monitors in Ohio and West Virginia." 4 

### Based on these data, U.S. EPA made the final determination that the SteubenvilleWeirton area has attained the 24-hour PM 2

. 5 

### NAAQS, which was just published 

## in the Federal Register on May 14, 2012. 5



### B. Air quality improvement in the Steubenville- Weirton area is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions

Pursuant to dean 

### Air Act §107(d)(3)(E), Ohio EPA has demonstrated that the improvement 

## in air quality 

## is due to 

### permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. 

### As indicated in the redesignation request, many of these reductions are a result of regulations that directly impacted the

Utilities and required the installation of controls to reduce PM 2

. 5 

### and 

## its precursor pollutants. 6



### The regulations providing for permanent and enforceable reductions of these emissions are
the NO" SIP Call and 

### CAIR U.S. EPA has determined that the regulations developed in response

to both of these rules are permanent and enforceable because both cap the total emissions allotted

in each covered state and both imposed strict compliance deadlines. In addition, since U.S. EPA's

initial designations were made federally enforceable, "federal consent decrees required the

reductions of S0 2 

### and Nq, emissions from utility sources." 7



### C. Ohio EPA's maintenance plan is fully 

### approvable

Pursuant to dean 

## Air Act §107(d)(3)(E), Ohio EPA has developed a Maintenance Plan.

Ohio EPA's Maintenance Plan provides for maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM 2

_ 5 

### NAAQS. Ohio

EP 

### Ns Plan demonstrates maintenance by showing that current and future emissions of NOx, directly emitted PM 2

_ 5 , 

### and 50 2 

### for the area remain at or below attainment year emission levels. 8

1 

### Id at 10-16.

5 

### Approval and Promulgation of 

## Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Ohio;

Detennination of dean Data for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Standard for the SteubenvilleWeirton Area, 77 Fed. Reg. 28264 

## (May 14, 2012).

6 

### Ohio Request at 36.

7 

### !d.

8 

### !d. at 26-36.

SLK._ TOL: # 1951941vl

### Erica Fetty May16, 2012 Page 3

The Utilities also agree with Ohio EPA's reliance on CAIR to demonstrate that long-term

reductions are being achieved even though CAIR was remanded to U.S. EPA. While U.S. EPA

finalized a replacement (Ooss-State 

## Air Pollution Rule or "CSAPR") to CAIR in 2011, CSAPR was appealed and the rule was stayed in December 2011. In issuing the stay, CAIR was reinstated bythe

D.C. Circuit and remains in effect. Thus, Ohio EPA's reliance on CAIR is appropriate until the

final regulations replace CAIR.



## E

. U

. S. EPA has suspended other requirements necessaty for redesignation to

attainment

Finally, U.S. EPA issued its final 

## rule in which it detennined that the Steubenville- Weirton

Area is monitoring attainment based on 2008-2010 data. In making this determination, U.S. EPA suspended Ohio EPA's obligation to "submit

. . . attainment demonstrations, associated reasonably

available control measures 

## (RACM), reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures, and

other planning State Implementation Plans (SIPs) related to attainment of the 2006 PM 25 

### standard

... " 9 

### Because U.S. EPA has suspended these obligations, the Utilities believe that Ohio EPA met

the requirements for seeking redesignation of this area. Accordingly, the Utilities support Ohio

EPA's action of requesting that U.S. EPA approve Ohio EPA's redesignation request.

The Utilities appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule. 

### If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me.

Very truly yours,

# CJvMa

Cheri A. Budzynski

CAB\bd

9 

### 77 Fed. Reg. at 28264

.

SLK TOL: II 195194lvl