### IDEM INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Mit chell E. D a niel s Jr. Governor T

h o m as W. Eas te rl y Commiss i oner



### Ms. Susan Hedman Regional Administrator We Pro te ct Hoo s ier s a nd Ou r Env ironme n t.



### December 13, 2012 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis , Indiana 46204 (317) 232 - 8603 Toll Free (800) 451-6027 www.idem

. IN

. gov



### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, IL 60604-3950 Dear Ms

. Hedman: Re: Request to Parallel Process the Draft MOBILE6.2 to MOVES MVEB Replacement Update to the Maintenance Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard for Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submits the enclosed MOBILE6.2 to Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) replacement update to the maintenance plan for the 1997 8- hour ozone standard for Lake and Porter counties, Indiana

. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U

. S. EPA) approved the Request for Redesignation and Maintenan ce Plan for Ozone Attainment in the 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area, Lake and Porter Counties , Indian a submitted by IDEM on June, 5, 2009, with an effective date of May 11 , 2010. IDEM requests that U.S. EPA parallel process this draft MVEB replacement submittal for approval into Indiana's State Implementation Plan. IDEM is providing an opportunity for a public hearing on the MVEB replacement update to the maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, if a public hearing request is received by January 14, 2012. A hearing has be e n sch e duled for January 23, 2013. If a request for a public hearing is not received by January 14 , 2012 , the hearing will be cancelled. IDEM is providing a 36 day comment period on this update, with the public comment period ending on January 25, 2013. The final submittal of the MVEB update for the maintenance plan for the 1997 8- hour ozone standard for Lake and Porter counties, Indiana will document the public review process, including a detailed summary of and response to substantive comments.

Recycled Pap e r 

### (i) A n E q u al Op p o r t u n ity E m p l oye r Pl ease Recycl e 

## 0

### Ms. Hedman Page 2 This MOBILE6.2 to MOVES MVEB replacement update incorporates onroad emission estimates and revised MVEBs using U.S. EPA's recently adopted MOVES model. The onroad emission estimates were calculated using the MOVES-based emission factors and data extracted from the Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, area's travel-demand model. MVEBs are being revised in anticipation of the mandatory use of the MOVES model in future transportation conformity determinations. Preliminary use of the new model indicates that emission estimates can be considerably different than similar calculations using MOBILE6.2, which was used to create the MVEBs in the original 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan. On road safety margins, established through the interagency consultation process, are included for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These onroad safety margins are allocated to onroad emission estimates in order to account for the wide array of assumptions that are factored into the calculation process. With the addition of on road safety margins applied to mobile sources, the Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, ozone maintenance area will continue to remain well below the overall safety margins for all sources. MVEBs are also constrained to ensure that total NOx and VOC emissions (i.e., all source categories) do not exceed attainment year emissions to ensure continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. This submittal consists of one (1) hard copy of the required documentation. An electronic version of the submittal in PDF format that is identical to the hard copy has been sent to Pamela Blakley, Chief of U.S. EPA Region 5's Control Strategies Section. IDEM respectfully requests that U.S. EPA proceed with preliminary review of the MOBILE6.2 to MOVES MVEB replacement update and revised transportation conformity budgets and approval into Indiana's State Implementation Plan for the Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, maintenance area under the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Scott Deloney, Chief, Air Programs Branch, at (317) 233-5694. Sincerely, 

# /..3 v<-**a._j~1** 

### Keith Baugues Assistant Commissioner Office of Air Quality KB/sad/sms Enclosures:

Recycled Paper 

### (j MOBILE6.2 to MOVES MVEB Replacement Update to the Request for Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Ozone Attainment in the 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area for Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana and Appendices. Electronic MOVES-based modeling input and output data files.

An Equal Opportunity Employer Please Recycle 

## O

### Ms. Hedman Page 3
cc: George Czerniak, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) John Mooney, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) Doug Aburano, U.S. EPA Region 5 (w/ enclosures) Steve Rosenthal, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) Ed Doty, U.S. EPA Region 5 (w/ enclosures)

Recycled Paper 

# ® Pat Morris, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) John Swanson, NIRPC (w/ enclosures) Bill Brown, NIRPC (w/ enclosures) Keith Baugues, IDEM-OAQ (no enclosures) Scott Deloney, IDEM (no enclosures) Christine Pedersen, IDEM (no enclosures) Shawn Seals, IDEM (w/ enclosures)

An Equal Opportunily Employer Please Recycle 

## O

# DRAFT Onroad Emissions MOBILE6.2 to

MOVES Replacement Submittal

...•

# ···~~~·~;**<::~;;~:];~;;;;,,** 

# For 

# the Lakell'atld

# 'P~r C s,

# Indianl11~aJ~l~\~ea under

the

# 19~~.**82rnaoriB· t0~6~e**  Standard

# 'Z~,,

•••••••••••••••••••••••••



# ember 2012

### This page intentionally left blank

### Introduction On June 5, 2009, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted a Request for Redesignation and Maintenance Planfor Ozone Attainment in the 8-Hour Ozone Nonallainment Area, Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana. 

### The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) subsequently approved the Indiana redesignation of Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard on May 11,2010 (75 FR 26113). Onroad emissions for the June 5, 2009, submittal were calculated using MOBILE6.2. U.S. EPA has encouraged mobile source stakeholders to transition to the new Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model as expeditiously as possible.**Therefq~lJ:,IDEM** 

### is providing this MOBILE6.2 to MOVES replacement update to the previously_s!i!imlhed 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Lake and Porter counties,

### Indiana,,,g~~~~''inaintenance area that incorporates MOVES-based onroad emissions.**,,:;:]'i!!:t~'''i!!!;** 

### Emission Inventory Table 4.1 was included without title in**Ap>peltldix·<:~f:** 

### ··<:·::,;:?•' ,, ...•- ·,

- _. <:;:· :::;:-. <:;:; ';:;
..

# ori1~in:al**Redesi~i{~~\J;ln.** Petition and

the**tabh;'iil'~lJJded** 

### in >•oo•vu 

### estimates**'1-'o~;:Pitrogen** 

### oxides 20 I 0, and 2020; it results in a Maintenance Plan. Table 4.1 -A (to be
. . . Appendix C) 

### has been revised to incmplJI(l.te updated · . (NOx) and volatile organic**compound~''(&;~~§)for** 

### the different overall safety margin for the 

## m'M';,;·•·••t:i•[•;:::::.;-.



# _, ; R. •

# '.~•.-.-, \

# i:,':~f:;~:i1.~:!~i-~i1 ''••········

.. Comparison of**2~Q~ilj:.stimat!t~•ilnd 2010~9d,~Y,~9'Prol~~t~~**  

### Errtission Estimates in Tons Per Summer Day,**E:~J~~-** 

### and**Piit!~~** 

### 1997**s:'ij~~~lhone** 

### N'ii'!Yahainment Area (MOBILE6.2-
<

### $(~;**)!!:~sed Onrii'~!J'~missions)**  "·'f<?,':- ... ·>'·> •• , <<<·:<\

1 ._•• 

### Sector

. I 

### Z006NOx ... 2010NOx

..···· . ··. . . .. · ; 

### ·.,.2020NOx

. ·. 

# <' • : :·······;;Geii •l•··· 6.45 6.59 6.77 iL Nonroad**'~** 

### 31.17 28.50 21.37 liiiii••::,.Onroad @,@**~** 

### -1+.9-7 

### i.\!J:lQint 126.15 110.49 114.75 

# filM 223.8(! 184.23 1S4.81i 

### Sector 2006VOC 2010VOC 202.0VOC .·



### Area ·•:.::•:•:: 32.47 28.80 29.24 Nonroad >: 17.14 14.11 12.22

Onroad**~ ~**  

### HlPoint 19.04 18.18 22.25 

### Total 83.S'7 

### '71.m 69AZ

1

### Table 4.1-A Comparison of 2006 and 2010 Estimated and 2020 Projected Emission Estimates in Tons Per Summer Day, Lake and Porter 1997 8-Hour· Ozone Maintenance Area (MOVES-based Onroad Emissions) Sector 2006 NOx 2010 NOx 2020 NOx

Area 6.45 6.59 6.77 Nonroad 31.17 28.50 21.37

Omoad 4 9.6 4 47.26 1 6.69

Point 126.15 110.49 114.75 

### Total 213.41 192
. 84 159.58 Sector 2006 

## voc 2010VOC 2020VOC

Area 32.47 28.80 29.24 Nomoad 17.14 14.11 12.22 Onroad 1 7
. 25 1 3.99 5.99

Point 19.04 18.18 22.25 

### Total 85.90 75
. 08 69
. 70

.............. .-;.·.··· ........ ·'•**-~·:·:·!·!·:·. §.·······~**  

### · ... ··.**··~~::: ~::** 

## :::::..**,.;:::~ :~:** **~: ~:~:i::::.** **'"~!::.:::: ~::.** :·. 

### Omoad

### emis~io? estimates in

### Table**ti: f.-**  were

### caf(**~tijrfM)i ing**  U.S. EPA's
. M GVES modelproduced em1sswn factors and data exti·acted from the aret.!: f: s . travel-demand model. The**·~·-·::!'** ···.:.:·:·.·,··,·...**~::·:·:·!·**.• 

### MOVES model implements a**significaQ't~{diffe~~.Qt** 

### approacl_ t;w .. emission s estimation than the previous model (MOBILE6.2).**Pr limin** **~b~ us** **{'(of,t he** **J'v fOVE** **S: fuo** **del** 

### indicates that emission estimates can be considerab)y.: different

### th1lri**': simila~** **c; aJ.** **wations \it** **iAg** MOBILE6.2, which was u sed to create the

## or~&**mKM\~iv ]i~~Jor**  the

## C~**. a~4** **. p5)H~** **~~~!~t] lnd** **iana,** 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.**::; :~** **g~neral** 

### su$:i:nary of tne}A
. QVES meth oo6logy used in this area can be 

### ·········'"· ·········· 

## '·

....... . found in Appendix A.**:rn c;ldition,** **MOVES** 

### in p ·

ur&nd output files are being provided ··•·········· . 

# . ......·.•**'~···** .\ 

### electronically with this stiofuitJ:al
.. 

## ::::.OiQw.t h

.and coiitt : ol strategy assumptions for non-mobile

......**~.~.....** •,•,•!-.•.·
.... •••••••• '·.·.· .· ..:·············'·'·. , •••. '!\

# ~~~~~£~:d~:~~£iJ:~:**~f ~~-=** **~~~~~~~o!~~ tJt~~~~** **~:~:e~~~:~:~~::~ ;:~:~** **~~:~~~ ~[** **~~~.** the faJ tqrs included in

## tn**.' l"iginafs4Jnnittal**  ma fp1·o ject more growth than will actually occur in the

### futur~**~~** a result,

### the**.' fi!** **:9 ~h** **aJ&:l q~trol**  strategy assumptions for the non-mobile so urces for the year s

### ~99.&• 2010,

### and**~~:~p contii{** **~~ ·**  to be valid and do not affect the overall conclusions of the plan.**'·;~;x:.::~., t~\** **~=:=::::r.~..** :::::;::;:!**··(~~*'"·~·****, ;::=;~:;:;**  

### Onroad safety**margin S,::** **~~zre Mjnc** **luded** 

### for onroad emission estimates to accommodate the wide array of

### assumption**~t)&** factored into the calculation process. Since assumptions change over time, it is**ne d~s** **~'i y**  

### to have an onroad safety margin that will accommodate the impact of refined assumptions in the process. The plan continue s to meet all app licable Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements as the revised emission inve ntories clearly illustrate that total NOx and VOC emissions in the Lake and Porter counties, Indiana , 1997 8-hour ozone main tenance area will continue to decline leading to local reductions between 2006 (base year) and 2010 (maintenance plan interim budget year) , as well as 2006 (base year) and 2020 (maintenance plan hori zo n budget year).

2

### Transportation Conformity Budgets Table 5
. 1 was included on Page 24 of the original Redesignation Petition and Maintenance Plan for the Lake and Porter counties, Indiana, 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area. Table 5.1 -A (to be considered a replacement of Table 5.1) has been revised to incorporate U.S. EPA's MOVES model-produced emission factors and data extracted from the region's travel-demand model. Table 5.1 Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources for the Lake and Porter 1997 8-Hour Ozone**Non~tt~inment AI** **J:~J ~OBILE6.2-based**  

### Onroad Emissions) ..(;·:::::::::::: :·· 

# /: :

:f}{l?: ·· Lake & 

### Porter VMT (miles/day) 19,141

## .~**§8: ~~~** **~ 1**  '194,9'2 2 J i :: } 4 , 958,812 VOC (tons/day) NOx (tons/day)

2020 12.16 5.21 NO x

### tMiS/.**day )::** **~[t1h** 49.64 41.09 14.52

# A~i!;fi1:=~~**ii~ l{t~~~~==='::..** **=· \i]~** **~ll ~il~~~~©** **::: :::** **~. ;~** **w>!= =~** **:-; ,**  

# \th Table

### 5.**f: ~s** **:· aiso** **indu ~~** **:~: ~** **Pa~ j]** **~~ ,** **o~the ··** **1t:W?.)Re designation** **~etition** and Maintenance Plan for t qe ::Lake and Porter
..**C:o unties** **~: mdiana,**  

### 1997 · 8-hour ozone mamtenance area. Table 5.2-**~;::::·:~ ·.-,..**  · ..;;::!· ••**~.~** ··:·:::· : ::·..... 

### A (to be coriM:Jered a replacetneb.t of**Taij} 5..2)**  

### has been revised to incorporate MVEBs calculated ··:**·~·!·!·~** "\···;· *··. •. ;. : • •**--~· .·.**  

### using U.S.**EP A:** **·: MOVES** **model 'produce** **'i:l;::~ mission**  

### factors and data extracted from the region's 

### , ......·•·.·**\"~·"** ' · ' 

### travel-demand**()i;l~l. as**  

### detailed**iJi able**  

### 5.1

- A.**··~········** 

### . ..........**·~:::::::--.; .** **;!:~:-:;:; :** **:::::_:~~:...,, i::::~:;** **i** 

### Table 5.2**~i-~- <';::::~:~i'** **''(:~:;;;-.., .·** **1::~:;:::;) ·=;;;jt** **~~ptor** 

### Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Lal{e and Porter 1997 s :;: .ffo ur Ozone Nonattainment Area (MOBILE6.2-based Onroad Emissions) Lake & 

### Porter 2010 2020 VOC (tons/day)**~ ~**  

### NO x (tons/day) 4{).;6**~**



### 3

### Table 5.2- A Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Lal<e and Porter 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area (MOVES-based Onroad Emissions) Lake & 

### Porter 2010 2020 

### VOC (tons/day) 13.99 5.99 NOx (tons/day) 47.26 16.69

, 

## .. TlU'ough the interagency consultation process, it was

# deterll}**4"i ~~** **Wa t**  a maintenance plan interim year budget of20 10 and a horizon year budget of2020 ,**'Y~:P.1l:J ·;** **p~ ~ppropr** **ate.** 

### The interagency

··· · ···, · ··y- •,•.·.•.w. 

### consu lt ation group approved omoad margins**ofsafet:x of:Jtfieen** **:~ nt**  

### (15%) for both VOC and NOx omoad emission estimates for the years 2010 ar(d**~020.** 

### A suffifu.m·y of thi s interagency consultation discussion can be found in Appendjx1f ;; .These revised

## e'fu=J.;**~~~ 9n**  inventories clearly illustrate that omoad VOC and NO x emissions 

## 1Q. 

## tlie Lake and Porter**coi :i'i1;U~:5,**  

### Indiana , 1997 8- h our ozone maintenance area will continue to

### decli~e**~eading** tq ) ocal

### redu**cW~:iJ .**  between 2006 (base year) and 2010 (maintenance plan interim budge
. t year) 1

### ::**Ji ell**  

### as 2006**·· ~b~~~**  

## .. yea r) and 2020 (maintenance plan horizon budget**yeaf b~:** **..** 

### ····<:=· 

## ::="=t::i)/**··=:::~:>·**

## ;~=~~lt~~{iltil:;:;:;.~. 

# ··=:::.:f{
... Furthermore, when compared to the**ovd~U: safetY:;** **;m~rg in** **as a~** **f!~ed** 

### in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 93.101, it**~:y jden** **fiJ)~ ;:** **Q.) y:oad** **ii: f~(y** **·** 

### p-targin allocation i s
, ...**·~** . 0. '• '
...**~** ..... . .• 

### reasonable and appropriate
.; :::'

¥q!e specificaHY. :;). even**~ithW~~ :·** **?llodit~9h** 

### of an omoad safety margin to mobile

## sour~es,**~mW. ~f~fis~** **ill ~?** **tinue** to

## i=~ffi~~mf¥§J**-~ 8~** **~it~Jf: ~** **erall** safety

## marg~n**~or** all sources as detailed m**~!? l~**  

### 4.1

- A\. ¥,\'EBs**ar~ :~** **S?:l;~) ti·amed**  

### to ·· ensure that the total emis sw ns (i.e., all source**categories }:** **~o** 

### .not**ex ~e~** **d** 

### the 200o ; J( tainment year emissions of either VOC or NO x, thereby

## ~g~~~jp.g**con If** **~~ diD:ai9** **t~ panqe** **oftll ~}Q** **97** 8-hour ozone standard.

# Conclus**q1 ·~:~;j@';iM)\t;i~~~** **•·::;:~~il:)** This**~OBI.L ij** **?:}** 

### to**M_OVES ::i~f.** **J.?:J~ce~e t** **u~date** 

### to**~he pre~iously**  

### s ubmitted 

### Request for. Redeszgnatwn**r!U 4}** **1azntenance {f}{.~** **n** 

### for**'O¢~rze** 

### Attaznment zn the 8-How

- Ozon e Nonattaznment Area, Lake and 

### P of:r er Counties, 1naiana incorporates onroad emis sio n estimates and a revised '<·!·:+:

.. :·=· · ,**t:·:·:·:·~\** 

### MVEB using U.S. 

### EP.A:!:s**recently, :~** **&opted** 

### MOVES model. MVEBs have been revised in anticipation of the

## m~:a_**~~Q ~·y** **u~~ %fit** **he** MOVES model in future transportation conformity determinations. The

### om6**~&emH~ib n**  estimates were calculated using the MOVES-based emission**~** ..... ·.;.•.-,•,·.y 

### factors and data extracted fr 8fu)n e area's travel-demand model. Omoad safety margins for VOCs and NO x , estab lished through the interagency consultation process, are included in order to account for the wide array of assumptions that are factored into the calculation process. MVEB s are also constrained to ensure that total VOC and NOx emissions (i.e., all so urc e categories) do not exceed attainment year (2006) e mi ss ion s to ensure continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. With the addition of MOVES-based onroad safety margins applied to mobile sources, the Lake and Porter counties, Indi ana, ozone maintenance area will continue to remain well below the overall safety margins for all sources into the future. As such, the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for Lake and Porter counties , Indiana, continues to meet all applicab l e CAA requirements. 

### 4

# Appendix A
Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana, Maintenance Area MOVES Methodology

### This page left intentionally blank

# Lake and Porter Counties MOVES2010a Input Data and Parameters INDOT Planning Contract 

# Final Report October 2, 2012



# CDMth SmlTable of Contents Overview

.............................................................................................................................. 1 Vehicle Age Distribution

....................................................................................................... 1 Vehicle Population

................................................................................................................ 2 Meteorological Data

.............................................................................................................. 4 Default VMT Distributions

..................................................................................................... 4 Default Hourly Distributions

.................................................................................................. 5 Default Daily and Monthly Distributions

................................................................................ 6 Ramp Fractions

.................................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: MOVES2010a Source Type Codes

............................................................................. 1 Table 2: MOVES2010a Road Type Codes

................................................................................ 1 Table 3: Distribution of MOBILE 6.2 Light Duty Trucks into MOVES Source Types

................... 3 Table 4: Inventory of Permanent Count Stations

....................................................................... 5 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A- MOVES2010a Input Settings and Assumptions Appendix B- Vehicle Age Distributions for Lake and Porter Counties Appendix C- Vehicle Populations for Lake and Porter Counties Appendix D- Meteorological Data for Lake and Porter Counties Appendix E- Default Statewide Factors Appendix F- Statewide Default Hourly Distribution Factors Appendix G - Statewide Default Daily Distribution Factors Appendix H -Statewide Default Monthly Distribution Factors Appendix 

### 1- Ramp Fractions

### Overview: This report is being written to document the input parameters for a set of MOVES201 Oa runs for the Lake and Porter Counties 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area and the Lake and Porter Counties PM 2.5 non-attainment area. This report contains a discussion on the intended input settings used in MOVES201 Oa and the development of the input datasets. These MOVES2010a runs are intended to develop a default set of emission rates that can be used for conformity determination and is part of a statewide effort being conducted by the Indiana Department of Transportation (IN DOT). Throughout this report references are made to MOVES 201 Oa codes for two types of data. The values for the source type codes are shown in Table 1. The values for the road type codes are shown in Table 2. MOVES2010a input settings and assumptions for this effort are shown in Appendix A. 

### Table 1: MOVES201 Oa Source Type Codes sourcetypeid Description 11 Motorcycles 

### 21 Passenger Car 

### 31 Passenger Truck 

### 32 Light Commercial Truck 

### 41 Intercity Bus 

### 42 Transit Bus 

### 43 School Bus 

### 51 Refuse Truck 

### 52 Single Unit Short-haul Truck 

### 53 Single Unit Long-haul Truck 

### 54 Motor Home 

### 61 Combination Short-haul Truck 

### 62 Combination Long-haul Truck 

### Table 2: MOVES2010a Road Type Codes roadtypeid



### Vehicle Age Distribution: 1 2 3 4 5 Description Off Network Rural Restricted Access Rural Unrestricted Access Urban Restricted Access Urban Unrestricted Access



### The vehicle age distributions for MOVES source types 21, 31, and 32 (cars, passenger trucks, and light commercial vehicles respectively) were developed through an analysis of Indiana's 2009 vehicle registration data. The analysis was performed by Eastern Research Group (ERG) under contract to the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO). ERG was provided with vehicle identification numbers (VIN) for vehicles in Indiana.

I

### There were approximately 6.37 million VINs in the statewide data set. Out of these, approximately 1.3 million returned errors. Of these, approximately 200,000 errors were deemed non-critical. This means that the model year and vehicle type assigned to the records were most likely correct despite there being an error in the VIN decoding. These records were included in ERG's analysis. The remaining errors were considered critical enough to call into question the accuracy of the model year and vehicle types. These critical errors were excluded from ERG's analysis. In all, approximately 5.2 million VINs from around the state were used in the analysis. Each VIN was associated to a specific county. ERG then developed age distributions for each county in the state along with seven combination areas comprised of two or more counties each. Additional information on the methodology used to develop the vehicle age distributions can be found in a May 28, 2010 report written by ERG for LADCO titled MOBILE6 and MOVES Registration Distribution Calculations for Indiana Registration Data. Each set of age distributions was provided in both MOBILE6 and MOVES formats. The MOVES formatted data will be used for these MOVES2010a runs. Due to limitations in ERG's VIN decoder, it was not possible to develop vehicle age distributions for any source types other than 21, 31, and 32 from the vehicle registration data. For all other source types, MOVES201 Oa default vehicle age distributions specific to each source types were used. This includes motorcycles and all heavy vehicles. Vehicle age distributions for all source types were kept constant for all future years. The vehicle age distributions for Lake and Porter Counties as a combined area are shown in Appendix B of this report. Vehicle Population: 

### The vehicle populations for source types 21, 31, and 32 were developed directly from the vehicle registration data. All valid records that were identified from the vehicle registration data set were used to determine the number of vehicles for each of these three source types. The VIN decoded data provided to INDOT contained vehicle types according to MOBILE6.2 vehicle categories. There is a direct correlation between MOVES source type 21 (cars) and the MOBILE6.2 vehicle type LDV. All valid LDV records (those records not excluded from the vehicle age distribution analysis due to errors as was described in the section on Vehicle Age Distribution in this report) were counted in the vehicle population. There is not a direct correlation between MOVES source types 31 (passenger trucks) and 32 (light commercial vehicles) and the MOBILE6.2 light truck vehicle types (LDT1, LDT2, LDT3, and LOT 4). All valid records from the vehicle registration data set for MOBILE6.2 light duty trucks were counted in the vehicle populations. The light duty trucks were distributed between MOVES source types 31 and 32 as per the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance documented in Table A.1 of the appendix of the Technical Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for Emission Inventory Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity. The guidance provides two sets of factors for distributing MOBILE6.2 light trucks between MOVES source types 31 and 32. These are based on fuel type and are shown in Table 3.

2Table 3: Distribution of MOBILES 2 Light Duty Trucks into MOVES Source Types Source Types Fuel 

### 31 32 Gas 78% 22% Diesel 42% 58% As per ERG's assumption documented in MOBILE6 and MOVES Registration Distribution Calculations for Indiana Registration Data, all light duty trucks that did not have a fuel type identified were counted as diesel trucks. This was to prevent an underestimation of diesel trucks and their related emissions. Since only valid records from the vehicle registration data were used to calculate vehicle populations for source types 21, 31, and 32, it is reasonable to assume that some of the erroneous records that were discarded from the analysis actually belonged to these source types. The nature of these errors is not that the vehicle does not exist. Rather, it is that the vehicle could not be properly identified with any sense of certainty. It was therefore necessary to adjust the vehicle populations calculated from vehicle registration data to compensate for these discarded records. Based on an analysis of the error rate reported by ERG, vehicle populations for source types 21, 31, and 32 were increased by 5.8 percent. Vehicle populations were not able to be developed directly from the vehicle registration data for some source types. This was due to the limitations in the VIN decoder used by ERG to process the vehicle registration data. Vehicle populations for all other source types (motorcycles and heavy vehicles) were derived by applying the Mileage Accumulation Rate (MAR) method documented in EPA's Technical Guidance on the Use of MOVES201 0 for Emission lnventorv Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity, Section 3.3 Source Type Population. The default MARs were extracted from MOVES by running MOVES for a single pollutant and a single year for all vehicles, fuels, months, days, and hours. The activity output was set to report both distance and population. A ratio of population to vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) was calculated from these outputs. The ratios were calculated for each source type. The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC), which is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for Lake and Porter Counties, provided VMT by MOVES road types extracted from their travel demand model's base year. Since the default MARs in MOVES vary by year (but not by location), the MOVES run that was executed to extract the MARs was run for a year consistent with the travel demand model's base year. This resulted in MARs that could be applied directly to the validated VMTs reported by the travel demand model. The travel demand model VMTs were converted into annual VMT and distributed by vehicle types using statewide default VMT distribution factors documented in this report in the section on Default VMT Distributions. The MARs were then applied to the annual vehicle type VMTs. The result was an estimated vehicle population for each source type for the travel demand model's base year. Since the vehicle populations for source types 21, 31, and 32 were developed directly from the vehicle registration data, the population estimates derived for those

3

### source types using the MAR method were discarded and the observed data were used instead. Future year vehicle populations were developed base on socioeconomic growth rates for the maintenance area. The MPO provided base year and horizon year population and employment data for the area. Annual growth rates were calculated for population growth and employment growth individually. Population growth rates were then used to grow the light vehicle populations (source types 11, 21, 31, and 32). Employment growth rates were used to grow the heavy vehicle populations (source types 41, 42, 43, 51, 52, 53, 54, 61, and 62). Vehicle populations were calculated for every year from 2008 to 2040. These vehicle populations for Lake and Porter Counties as a combined area are shown in Appendix C. Meteorological Data: 

### The default set of hourly temperatures and hourly relative humidity was developed using EPA's data converters for changing MOBILE6.2 minimum 

### I maximum temperatures and absolute humidity to the MOVES equivalent formats. The values for the MOBILE6.2 inputs were taken from the Air Quality Conformity Determination Between the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, the Fiscal Year 2012 to 2015 Transportation Improvement Program, and the Indiana State Implementation Plan for Air Quality, Appendix E, developed by NIRPC in June, 2011. Meteorological data reflect average annual conditions for the PM 2.5 runs. The MOBILE6.2 meteorological input data for each of the twelve months of the years were averaged together to create average annual temperatures and humidity. These were then passed through the data converters. The data reflect summer conditions for ozone using MOBILE6.2 inputs for July. The MOVES formatted meteorological data for Lake and Porter Counties as a combined area are presented in Appendix D of this report. Default VMT Distributions: 

### As part of this effort, INDOT developed a default set of VMT distribution factors by Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) vehicle type and by MOVES road type. These distribution factors were developed by analyzing four consecutive years of continuous traffic count data ending in 2010 for twenty permanent traffic count stations throughout Indiana. The stations were selected to provide a spread of locations corresponding to each of the four MOVES road types. Furthermore, these stations were selected from among sites that were concentrated in nonattainment and maintenance areas. In some cases, data from the requested site were either partially or completely unavailable. An inventory of the sites used to develop the distributions is shown in Table 

### 4. The vehicle counts reported at each station were provided by vehicle class. These were aggregated into the six basic HPMS vehicle types: motorcycle, passenger car, light truck, bus, single-unit heavy truck, and combination heavy truck. The distribution of VMT by vehicle type was calculated for each road type by taking each vehicle type's percentage of total traffic. These default statewide factors are shown in Appendix E.

4SiteiD 3000 3200 3300 4000 4500 5600 6100 0105 0201 0210 0303 0327 0403 0501 0502 0507 0602 0603 0608 1315 Table 4: Inventor of Permanent Count Stations City County Location Road Data Quality T pe MUNCIE DELAWARE SR332 RM0.5 3 .Closed since 9/26/2006. No data. CARMEL HAMILTON US 31 RM 125.7 5 Good INDY WEST MARION 1465 MM 10.0 4 Closed since 911/10 GARY LAKE I 80 /I 94 MM 6.0 4 Only 2010 data passed QC LAPORTE LAPORTE SR2 RM65.2 3 Good SELLERSBURG CLARK 165 MM 8.0 4 Bad sensors. Not usable. EVANSVILLE GIBSON 1.64MM 27.9 2 Good TERRE HAUTE VI GO US 41 RM 104.2 3 Good-closed 11/13/08- 5/13/09 MIDDLEBURY ELKHART SR 120 RM 13.9 3 Good- closed 8/3/10-12/6/10 FORT WAYNE ALLEN 1-69 0.53 mi N of 4 Good SR3 MUNCIE DELAWARE US 35 RM 44.5 5 Good DALEVILLE DELAWARE 169 MM 31.4 2 Good-built in 12/10/2007 SOUTH BEND ST. JOSEPH US 20 RM 77.1 4 Good INDY SOUTH MARION SR 37 RM 143.5 5 Good-closed 5/22/09-6/1/09 MARTINSVILLE MORGAN SR 67 RM 

### 80:6 3 Good SEYMOUR JACKSON 165 MM 47.0 2 Good HAZLETON GIBSON SR 56 RM 0.6 3 Good DUBOIS DUBOIS SR 56 RM 53.3 3 Good- closed 10/16/08- 3/20/09 EVANSVILLE VANDERBURGH SR66 RM 23.5 5 Good 170 MARION 170 MM 83.5 4 Closed 5/17/06-3/24/08 Default Hourly Distributions: The same set of twenty permanent traffic count locations discussed in the section on Default VMT Distributions was analyzed to develop a set of hourly distribution factors. These factors were calculated by road type, by HPMS vehicle type. Hourly factors were only calculated for the average weekday. The hourly distribution pattern for each traffic count location was reviewed. Any data that appeared to reflect either an error in the data or an outlier of behavior were removed to prevent bias in the data. The following data were excluded from the analysis:
• Bus data from count stations 0105 and 0603 were excluded due to abnormal midnight peaks in the data; • An abnormal relationship between passenger cars and light duty trucks at count station 4500 prompted the exclusion of all data from this location due to questions of reliability; • Peak spreading behavior observed at count station 4000 from traffic related to Chicago was considered to be too unique to be included in a default statewide data set; and, • Combination truck traffic from station 3200 was excluded due to too much overnight traffic when compared to other vehicles and other stations.

5Furthermore, traffic patterns reported by those count stations corresponding to road type 3 (3000, 4500, 0105, 0201, 0502, 0602, and 0603) had a tendency to over represent long distance travel. This was most likely the result of statewide permanent count stations focusing primarily on higher order facilities. Rural collectors and local streets are less likely to reflect long distance travel. The hourly distributions for road type 3 (rural unrestricted access) were adjusted to better account for traffic behavior on lower order facilities in rural areas. A sample of traffic count data from Morgan County, IN was used to introduce more local traffic behavior in the road type 3 hourly distributions. An analysis of the Morgan County data showed a pattern more consistent with AM and PM peaking characteristics reflecting local commuting traffic on collectors and local streets for passenger cars and light duty trucks. The Morgan County data for passenger cars and light duty trucks on collectors and local streets were weighted and added to the road type 3 data set. This analysis assumed that rural collectors and local streets accounted for 20 percent of all VMT for road type 3. The statewide default hourly distribution factors are presented in Appendix F. Default Daily and Monthly Distributions: Default daily and monthly distribution factors were calculated from IN DOT's official count adjustment factors which are more commonly used to develop AADT from raw traffic counts. These factors are based on the set of daily traffic counts collected from all permanent count stations throughout the state. The daily distribution factors determine what percentage of VMT is occurring on weekdays and what percentage is occurring on weekends. The monthly distribution factors determine what percentage of annual VMT is occurring in each month of the year. The statewide default daily distribution factors are shown in Appendix G. The statewide default monthly distribution factors are shown in Appendix H. Ramp Fractions: The ramp fractions represent the percentage of vehicle-hours-traveled (VHT} for road types 2 (rural restricted access) and 4 (urban restricted access) occurring on the ramps associated with those road types. These fractions were calculated based on the percentage of VHT occurring on ramps reported by the base year travel demand model. These ramp fractions are reported in Appendix I.

6

### Appendix A Number of Runs:

Input Item Ozone PM 2

. 5 Years 2006, 2010, 2008, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2015 , 2020, 2025,2030, 2025 , 2030, 2035,2040 2035 , 2040 Pollutants/ Volatile PM 2

. 5 with a ll Processes Organic subspecies; Compound NO x (VOC), NO x, and supporting Meteorology Summer Average Annual #of MOVES 8 8 runsGeneral Parameters: MOVES Input Item Screen Ozone PM 2.5 Description Description User Choice Scale Domain/Scale County Calculation Type Emission Rate Time Spans Time Hour Hour Aggregation Level Year 2004, 2010, 2008, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2015, 2020, 2025,2030, 2025,2030, 2035,2040 2035,2040 Months July April Days Weekday Weekday Hours Select All Select All Geographic Geographic Lake County* Lake County* Bounds Bounds Vehicles Vehicles All Gas and Diesel Combinations Road Type Road Type Select All Pollutants/ Pollutants/ VOC, NOx, and PM 2.5 with all Processes Processes supporting subspecies; NOx General Database Name LakePorter LakePorter PM Output Ozone Units Select "Grams" and "Miles" and "Million BTU" Activity Distance, Population Output On Road Select "Source Use Type" and "Road Emissions Type" Detail

* Represents both Lake and Porter Counties

.

### C t D t M 

# • County Data Excel Sheet Tab Manager Input Name
Source (Vehicle) sourceTypeYear Type Population

Vehicle Type HPMSVTypeYear VMT (by 13 MOVES Vehicle Types) Ozone PM 2

. 5 Local Registration for Source Types 21 1 31 1 and 32; Estimated population using default MOVES mileage accumulation rates and local VMT for all other source types
. Future year vehicle populations based on population growth rates for source types 11 1 21 I 31 I and 32. Employment growth used for all other source types
. Statewide default vehicle distributions across road types developed by INDOT using an analysis of permanent count station data from a statewide data set. MonthVMTFraction Statewide default monthly fractions developed by INDOT using an analysis of permanent count station data from a statewide data set. DayVMTFraction Statewide default daily fractions developed by IN DOT using an analysis of permanent count station data from a statewide data set. HourVMTFraction Statewide default hourly fractions developed by INDOT
Average Speed avgSpeed Distribution (% Distribution of VHT in each 5 mph s peed bin) Road Type roadType Distribution Distribution (VMT by 5 MOVES Road Typ es ) Age Distribution sourceTypeAge (Vehicle Distribution Population by Age of Vehi c le) Ramp Fraction RoadType Meteorology ZoneMonthHour Data
Fuel (% of FueiFormulation Market Share by Fuel Type) FueiSupply
JIM Program IMCoverage using an analysis of permanent count station data from a statewide data set. National defaults.

Calculated from local VMT data. Use travel demand model base y e ar distributions for all years.

Lo c al age distributions developed from vehicle registration data for source types 21 I 31 I and 32

. Default MOVES age distributions for a ll other source types
. Based on lo c al travel demand model. MOBILE6 Summer Met Data MOBILE6 12 month Met Converted to MOVES form at Data Converted to MOVES format and averaged to annual meteorology MOVES Defaults Lake County MOVES Lake County MOVES Defaults for Summer (check Defaults for annual (check if if**~aries** among c ounties) varies among counties) Consistent with current local liM ProgramAppendix 8 Vehicle Age Distributions tor Lake and Porler Counties: Source Types ageid 11 21 31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 54 61 62 0
... 0.2_109690540 .,.0.026737_09.4_1' o.o1_45o6H43 (},0355;12237]'_ _-**0_.(}64_302$~-~?** .. _**0.0545743{).7_~"** 0.0622220543**--~0.04_:9:424:0!_90.** . 0.0588526168 0.0787_54f1027__: o.o615095870.:'.:.o
..**~634660** ·, 9,0,6:70.8.45256' 1 0.1921154969 0.0530181832 0.0500664299 0.0734065149 0.0626728412 0.0531913309 0.0606452875 0.0481716155 0.0573612230 0.0767586735 0.0599508636 0.0535634660 0.0670845256

. 2 ·········**_0.157-3471_5~5** __**0.066_~5~~3_21.._** _ 0.058207_47_'81 .0.**o78_~7oo_1** s _ '0.0624853859: _0.053032232_?, o. 0604638952 0.048027_'5345 0.05718965_19 0.07652908_2:? o._Q59TI1.5_492 0.0541045093
. -_0.0,6(76_21447 3
..... 0.1359771.581-- _0.0_6103247_1_4_

...**o._q5_~-~-~~7_618** 0.0656648868**0:062~229593** 0.0529!92497 o.p60:4034894 0.0479795509 0.0571325186 0.0764526251 0.0597118340 0.0575579884 0.0720873878 4
..**0.1058.~735_** 0.065980,1258
__ ._0.0780550961

- 0.07_936,1,6134 :0.061i:369906 _D.0523970,560 (}.Oq9739_7:14_0
___ _0.0;47:4523026
_ : o:os-65046834--_ 0.07561_247_'85 :..0.0590556596
_ ..**0.0564_1_823~.2 -:;:·o~07_66s'9~92th**  5

.... _0.0_7_50,9091_42**0.0~456_271** _02,
__ 0.0733914482

.. o_.q7_3287_4129 0.0559170498 0.0474575929 0.0541080614
___O.Q429!89_7_69
__**0.05_1_17_7995~.** 0.0684845018
__ 0.0534884926
___ 0.0489290859
__ __ O,:D_61_28p2835

.. 6 0.0476805323 O.OS08386692- -o.0747132670 0.064771_6220**o:04~365056** 0.039";7508_123 0.0453212873 0.0359994879 0.0428670388 0.0573630896 0.0448023279 0,0366034411 .0-0458432683 7

.... _ 0.033_1026886
___0.0649389143
___**0.0806~8410** . __**0.07_2_1_55~42** __ o._o_425!_86:431 0.036137094_1
___**0_.04:~201_1_709** __ 0.0_:327268079
___ 0.0389700355 0:0521_4826_60
_ 0.0407293873 0.0340742206
___ 0.0_4_26_75.5959

... B 0.0197278356 0.06499971.50 0.0643827445 0.0597693392 '0.0468268516**0.0397426~24** 0.0453119367
. 0.0_35_9920640 0.0428582007 o:o573512681_ /0.0447930981 0.0358093100 0.0448486759 9 0.0118473747 0.0677129448 0.0689108213 0.0689004903 0.0534377006 0.0453533365 0.0517089150 0.0410733035 0.0489087688 0.0654479137 0.0511168252 0.0526288382 0.0659139597
... 10
. 0.oo53251m 0.060'7512683 0.064803015.1 0.05881_65234 o·.0'532712252 0.0452120443 0.0515478328 0.0409453420 0.0487564067 " 0.00524<1-0247_ :0.0509575859**0_.06245201~** _0.0?8216_8041 11 0.0025378610**0.05243677~8** 0.0558146471 0.05107_48953 0.0407951886 0.0536203440 0.0411075833 0.0313560350 0.0391491717 0.052388,1_23_9 0.0302729398, 0.0478258601 0.0598985955**0.056~1_38798** ...**--.6~04873541_79** 12 0.001301_1.470 _0.0529801828 0._0_424003017 0.0331924560 0_._04_899364";72 0.0382933197

. 0.0255124310 : -.0.029:4:483_1_31 -:.0.039406560;:,

--**0.0466;0~866_.,** :o.0389.1'2855_Q 13 0.0006124019 0.0425262678 0.0386377810 0.0326140898 0.0277347637 0.0456089741 0.0333751020 0.0545980574 0.0316399801 0.0194774783 0.02_91673253 0.0325145854 0.0462990441 .14 0 V0.0002:476898,
...O.CJ:448138930_ : 0.0390038231 -_ ·a._Ds_3o5_0t97o_;
_**0.03~?94_706 o.03:VH66_8~**  0.0430863640 '0_.06_326;5_6_49'8 0.036_4:4$97_25.**0.0~** 94691.525_ ,0.03;47.89:4_437

. _0.042707}':41,9 

## --:-**o_._Q4~zttmas** 15 o.ooo1s2nos_
__ _0.0327297600 '0.0357704509
.. 0.02_8286?181 -" 0.028351_1969 0.0332950401 0.0210164622 0.0395649332 0.0357887614 0.0311848083 0.0335202065 0.0332372597 0.0300_4:44032 16

..... 0.0000668536
__**.0_._0~.70.600977_** __0.0244095876'**0,01J~67J.~56 0.0235~84296** **_0.02791:3~1.62,** 0.0253_671:498

.. 0.0341566540
. 6'.0259987277**0.()230~_~6849-~-** 0.023315107_5" 0.0276536739**0_.02305_24_49_~'** 17
.... 0.0000299603

. _0.0_19745q1_72

.... 0.0162482037 0.0135180737 p.0175637_04_4_ 0.0244970846

... 0.0206833627 0.0146346390 0.0197956396 0.0052258132 0.0206748599
___ 0.0205906442

. __**0.0~ _384_5_22~7_**  ---_·q;o1os794.76i'**·o_,~Oi9SSsM** .. 18
..**0.0000~27:409_;** . 0.0_157207129.
___**o._o~_29944958** ;.0.0201192241_
__**0.02504806_fj~** ",0.0266888558
.. . ,0.0193('402,8S,-- _d.0037212.t5fl ,0.01_55464_8_1_6 0.0235865809 -. -O_.Oj00066:4_60
__ 19
... 0.0000055369 0.0109327203 0.0097340094 0.00833,7__1380 0.0225790392 0.0366610768 0.0301447753 0.0342277190 0.0227335396

. _0.017_5!_754!7_ 0.0203628520 0.0264703224 0.0098603738 20. 0,0000022027_ 0.0097;167069' 0.0096594452

. 0.007,8607301' 0.0226407923 0.0281971934, 0,0173882093 0.0270681845 o:o289395633 0.0183874556

- '0.026594457.5**---O.o2sS427~_sS** _0.00_95?_55112 21 0.00000_1 0015 0.0060838669 0.0075445351

...**0.00535.~5887** ___ 0.0212965445 _o.02244_1_3685 0.0209032932**0.0~67:4:3058_9** , ..0.0255089927
_ 0.0121624816_

. . 0.0238465850 0.0249667984 0.0083402541**O.o2i~3665n:** .. --·:.·-- '--

------ 22 0.0000005320 0.0047196519**0.0_0~586128** _0-.00317_60526 o:o207614938 _0.0211741003 0.029424_1579 0.021,1707159 0.0029207200 _- 0.023291'6866 0.0259516972 0.0021970287 23 0.0000002372 0.0034656381 0.0032604864 0.0028187467 0.0187753208 0.0176845935 0.0186862600 0.0367365508 0.0255742899 0.0006595597 0.0173635700 0.0220110680 0.0022815392 24 o.oo6ooo1 012 .0.0034048375 _0.0028063230
. 0.0021239852 0.0_1_65801584 0.0153441-343 _0.0162223474 0.0_195371739 _0.0_1'8_1341022_**0~0013228019** 0.0186391-363 0.019437_5881 .0.0028947085 25 0.0000000515
___0.0020672227_ 0.0018979963**0.00~4292237** 0.0130464803 0.0_1_196_13578_ 0.0125269842 0.0202862884 0.0101534224
___ 0.001325_5722 0.0189070134 0.0152949162 0.0014963357 'o·:oo520666ci6
_ · _ o:oo462761-61 

### .. .... 26 0.0000000201 ' 0.0015238168 o:oo1o1ooo52 0.0009_1:31151 O.D11.4707358 0.0058785937**O;-Q158244798~** . 0.0000000000
. 0.0123859355 _D.00610397_75·_,:**0~0003051544** 27 0.0000000084 0.0007410082 0.0008269841 0.0008535641 0.0044375500 0.0062552616 0.0034269422 0.0066192300 0.0082431519 0.000585_31 _1_3 0.0073123264 0,0052023202 0.0002365920 o:_oo'38534093: .. 28

__ , 0. OOOOOOOQ46 0.0008208o90**_o.oo_o~QZ4.1.~-** ,,_0.0006550608 0.0027153367

.**o.OO~_o227JM** o_:oei_SS648852**0.00_78¥!_5~** ...**0.0004_22_~~-0_9** __**_o,0040J~9~56_** __ ()_,0!)_-:\-!?17?()71 ;---0.0007539156 29 •.·.· 0.0000000027

.. 0.0007486082 0.0002846994 0.0002382039 0.0050202650 0.0073813428 0.0039557847

...**0.00~4702211** . 0_.09_82_91**0~52** 0.0000000000

.. 0.0005297241 0.0058854602 0.0002483418 30 0.0000000060 0.0106363170 0;0052872753 -,--o:o046449769. · 0.0041641999 0.0025473919 -o.0046291194 0.0021486392 0.0093642209 0.0005969550 ·o.006972:00S9 ·o;Oo4s8185s3·-:--o.ooo2641-37 4·
Source: Quality assured vehicle registration data for the combined Lake County and Porter County area for source types 21, 32, and 32, MOVES2010a default distributions for all other source types.Appendix C Lake and Porter Counties Vehicle Po ulations: Vehicle Populations _Annual Populations**2008~** 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015**20_16.~** 2017 2018, 2019 278,418 280,318 282,231
__ _ 284,156 ''" 286,095

288,0:48_. 160,301_ 161,395

__ 162,496 _163,605 164,721' 165,845
__ 49,078 49,413

_ 49,751 so;o9o 50,432 50,776 __ .. 30_1_, 303 306 --· 308 12,584 1'2,670 12,757**12,8~-** 290,013_ 166,977 51,122 311**--·~---·,29t,992** ___ "

__ .. __ .**_:1.§~.11** __ 6
....**~ -~~1,_41L** **"---·------3J.~--~--~**

_ 12,931 293,984_ .13,020____ _._295,990
__ 51,822**~J?QA1JL-.** : ____ 52,1_7_6
____ _ 52,532
__ _ 316 __31_9_:,
.... 322 _2020
__ 2021_
.. _13,288
........ __ 302,091
________**1_('3,9~1-** ______**53,2~1--** 327

. ..13,3_7_9
__, .::**~--** -"304,1.52
... :. ...**JZ5,~J.Z-** ....**-~** ..... 53,61_5
_____________ ;330_,
___ _ 159 160 161

__ _ 163 164 166 1_67_d 170

_ __ _.:tit

173

____ JI4. 175

--- 177_ _2.021
_________ sa 2,038 59 2,055 2,072

____ 2,089

2,107 ' 2,124

2,_1_60
__ _

_____

2,1_78

--- _2,196

--

.......... 2,21.4:. 60 61 61 62 63 63**:·~-64-.-:-** 3,725
. 3,756 3,788 3,819 3,851

_**-~3,S_83_**

3,9_15 ,,3,9_48 3,981

...**~.o,:H_** ___ 437
__ :441
_ .:4:45

... 448 452

__ __ 456 460'

_ __463
___ 467

__ 47:1 54

'867 ''874 '"
_______ 881

__ ___**_,8_8~** ... 896

____ 9_03
__ _ 475
____________ 9_1_1
__**~47$:** . .-:.9.113
___ ' _2,233
__ _ 64

-- -------**---~·0:4_8_** 483 926 _2,251 ·.: 65
__ 4_,08_1_______
_ .A8Z
__ __ ____ -934__

. 2022
.. ,_,.,_ 2023 _2024_,
__ 2025 2026_ 2027 2028 2029 2030
__ • 2031 2032 2033 2034_ 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 .**-~3,4(0** 13,562 13,654 13,748-_ 13,841 13,936.:**-~306,228~** _____**176,312~----53,981 -------~32......**  178 ----· ---------- 2,2(0
____ --··---- ___ 66_ _4,_11_5 "

-- - ______ 491 _!:!42 949 957 965 -973-- 982**~--** 30'8,317___
.. -- "" 17_7_,51_6,

-- 54,34_9.

_ ___ 310,421 178,727 "'""""**54,~20** -: _312,539_,_._.
___ 1_7:9,946:
__ - ____

- _ ____:_55,093
__ 314,672_

__ 3_16,819 181,_1(4: J82,410 14,031
___ 318,981 183,655 14.12i_-_:-_
. :J2M_5_8
.......... J§.4}398
__ _ ___ 55,469- 55,848

-- __56,229_ 14,223 J4,320_ 14,418
__**~4.5.16** : 14,6_15
__ 14,715_ 14,815 14,916_ 1!),0_18_ 1:S,121 '323,349

- .:325,556.

____ 327,777__

330,0_14_ 332,265' 334-,533 339,11.4 186,170 1_87,440
__ _**_1_88,71_~------·** __190,007 19_1_,304
__ __ _t92,60S: 195,247_**-----~~,428_ ~~------~-96,57~----**  :343,751 1-97;920 .!5.6,6,1,2
__ __ 56,999 57,388
__

- 5_7,779
__ _-58,1.74
.. 58,571_- -58,970 59,TI8

_____**60,~_86**

60,596 ___335
_____ ....... _JSO
___ . _______ 2,289 66

_____ $?8_

34) 344

. 346**~-** 34_9
__

352 355 .3:58_ 361 364' 367 370

- ____ 373
__ _ 376 181 "' 183
....

_184-- _186_ _187 ,189
__ 191 -' _192
..**~** 194 195.- 197 199; 2,308

- 2,327
.. 2,347 '2,366

2,386 2,406:: 2,426 2,44.6:: 2,46_7
__ 2,487

___ 2,508
__ __ 2,529' _20_0

---- --- -- ______ 2,550
__ . 202 2,57_1 __2,59_3
___ 2,£14 67 67

____ 68

68

..69, 69 70 71 71 :--?·2, 72 73 74 74 75 75 _4,150 495 4,184_--- 4,219 4,254- 4,290_ 4,325 .4.36_1 4,398 .4.43_4. 4,47_1

. 4;509

--**-~·546** _

4,584 4,622 4,661

..4.700

-- 4,739 499 504 508 512 516

. 521 525

___ 529_

534

-- 538

.

543 547 552
... 556 561 566 __ __ 990 _998 1,006 f,01_:5
__ 1,023
__ : 1,032
__ 1,040 1,049 _1_,058
___ _ 1,066_

----- ----- _1,075 1,084 61

6,759 6,816

___ 6,872

-- _6,930
_

6,9_87_ _7,046

_______ 7' 1 04 ].1.63_ 62

___ ,,,,8,039
__ __**----~8,106** 8,174 7,223 8,242**-----~** 7:,283
_____ ,. _________ 8,3:1_1
__________**-~·--**

______**7.~-** 7.405

- 7,467

.. ,7,529

7_,592- 7,655 _7,719 _7,783 7,848 (,91_3, 7_,97_9**,.8,046~'** 8,113 8,181 ...8.249--

8,3F 8,387_" 8,457 8,380 _8,450

__ 8,S20
__ 8,591 8,6_63_ 8,735 8,8_08 _8,881
__ 8,955 9,030_ _9,105**_9,1_8~.**

... ____

9,257
__ , 9,334

... __ 9,412
__ __ 9,490 9,S70 9,849 Source: Quality assured vehicle registration data for the combined Lake County and Porter County area for source types 21, 32, and 32, MOVES201 Oa default mileage accumulation rates for all other source types. Population growth factors are taken from local socioeconomic data forecasts.Appendix D 

### Lake and Porter 

# c f oun 1es Meteorological Data: Ozone PM2.5 monthiD zoneiD HouriD temperature reiHumidity monthiD zoneiD HouriD temperature reiHumidity 7 180890 1 67.0 88.0 4 180890 1 43.7 100.0 7 180890 2 65.8 91.8 4 180890 2 42.5 100.0 7 180890 3 64.9 94.9 4 180890 3 41.6 100.0 7 180890 4 64.2 97.2 4 180890 4 41.0 100.0 7 180890 5 63.6 99.0 4 180890 5 40.5 100.0 7 180890 6 63.0 100.0 4 180890 6 39.9 100.0 7 180890 7 62.5 100.0 4 180890 7 39.4 100.0 7 180890 8 62.9 100.0 4 180890 8 39.8 100.0 7 180890 9 65.5 92.6 4 180890 9 42.3 100.0 7 180890 10 69.7 80.2 4 180890 10 46.2 97.2 7 180890 11 74.0 69.4 4 180890 11 50.3 83.5 7 180890 12 77.7 61.4 4 180890 12 53.8 73.5 7 180890 13 80.9 55.3 4 180890 13 56.8 65.8 7 180890 14 82.6 52.2 4 180890 14 58.5 62.0 7 180890 15 83.2 51.2 4 180890 15 59.0 60.7 7 180890 16 83.4 50.9 4 180890 16 59.2 60.3 7 180890 17 83.0 51.6 4 180890 17 58.8 61.2 7 180890 18 81.7 53.7 4 180890 18 57.6 63.8 7 180890 19 79.7 57.5 4 180890 19 55.7 68.6 7 180890 20 77.0 62.9 4 180890 20 53.1 75.3 7 180890 21 74.3 68.8 4 180890 21 50.5 82.7 7 180890 22 71.9 74.5 4 180890 22 48.3 89.9 7 180890 23 70.3 78.8 4 180890 23 46.7 95.4 7 180890 24 68.6 83.4 4 180890 24 45.2 100.0 Source: Mobile 6.2 reported meteorological data from Air Quality Conformity Determination Between the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, the Fiscal Year 2012 to 2015 Transportation Improvement Program, and the Indiana State Implementation Plan for Air Quality, Appendix E, developed by NIRPC in June, 2011 converted using EPA data converter.Appendix E Indiana Default VMT Distributions by Vehicle Type and Road Type:

Road Light Duty Single Unit Combination Type Motorcycle Passenger Car Truck Bus Truck Truck 2 0.007033832 0.506408086 0.163786651 0.004174166 0.007773053 0.310824213 3 0.001733929 0.659751199 0.225767175 0.000793168 0.010963315 0.100991214 4 0.004429643 0.424581084 0.299243052 0.005271096 0.008735204 0.257739921 5 0. 002785022 0. 702754695 0.245240087 0.001402085 0.009764356 0.038053756 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data for all road types except for Road Type 4. Distributions for Road Type 4 taken specifically from 1-80 in Gary (count station 4000) as per ICG consensus to represent higher than average truck traffic in Gary.Appendix F Indiana Default Hourlv Distribution Factors for Road Tvoe 2- Rural Restricted Access: Source Types Hour 11 21 31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 54 61 62 1

.....**_0.01_259032~?** .. 0.0101219844

- .0.0084967341 _Q.0084967341 :_0.0254_913340**0.02~9,1,33_40_ ().()_2.?4.9.1~40_**  .**_O.Q~_266077:89** .. 0.0_12660?789 _0.0126607_7_89_- o.012660n89

. 

### .**0.0~_97906895** 0.019'Z906895 2 0.0104070951 0.0069241973 0.0066421955 0.0066421955 0.0269500431 0.0269500431 0.0269500431 0.0114617645 0.0114617645 0.0114617645 0.0114617645 0.0212124099 0.0212124099

...... 3 0.0098043179 0,0056567534 0.0061275627
. ___0._0_06_12756_27
.. ..0.0231103443 0.0231103443 0.0231103443 0,0107741_94_1 "" 0.0107_7_4_1_941**0.0~.07741941** 

### . ..**0.0107J4.~_9f1.** .. 0,()20_1622890 0.0201622890' 4 0.0140329469 0.0069658232 0.0084286563 0.0084286563 0.0234460042 0.0234460042 0.0234460042 0.0128724692 0.0128724692 0.0128724692 0.0128724692 0.0213065902 0.0213065902 5 ......•. 0,01652124_0_5_d 0.0100941552 p.Ot34Q26652
__ , 0.0134026652 0.0244090660

... -0.0244090660- 0.0244090660 0.01741_957_88 0.0_174:1 95788

- 0,0174195788 '"" 0.0_1.74195788 0.0250478552 0.0250478552 6 0.0312047458

.. 0.0241732202

... 0.03_16_55_1_3)_5
.....**o~o_3_1_655:J** _3_1_ 5
___ 0.0322923692 0.0322923692 0.0322923692 0.0261005783 0.0261005783 0.0261005783 0.0261005783 0.0304976568 0.0304976568

. . 7 0.0399082603 0.0390974746 0.0481531313 0.0481531313 0.0302344914 0.0302344914 .0.0302344914 _Q.0420450_985 0.0420450985 _0,0420450985 0.0420450985 0.0339947725 o.o33994n25 8 0.0482861956 0.0528758381 0.0535145983
_ _D.05351_45983

. ___**0.03_8~0?_1681** ... 0.038607.1681

.. 0.038607.1681

- _0.05561_19122 0.0556119122 0.0556119122 0.055611_91_22 0.0383435322 _0.0383_435322

.. 9 0.0472316355 0,0493101459 '0,0541_442978 0.0541442978 0.0454144773 0.045414:4-W. 0.0454144773 0.0647383083 0.0647383083 0.0647383083

.. 0.0647383083 0.0447350945 0.0_447_350945 10 0.0521292001 0.0488627065 0.0570682751 0.0570682751 0.0533197396 0.0533197396 0.0533197396 0.0711110358 0.0711110358 0.0711110358 0.0711110358 0.0517738130 0.0517738130_


### ... 11 0.0559204481 -0,0513700269 0,057585:4739
____ 0.0575854739 0.0576707709 0.0576707709 0.0576707709 0.0730230234 0.0730230234 0.0730230234 0.07.30230234 o.o55n12484 0.0557712484 12 0.0572822100 0.0533048469 0.0582753930 0.0582753930 0.0549541212 0.0549541212 0.0549541212 0.0731872952 0.0731872952 0.0731872952 0.0731872952 0.0571435296 0.0571435296

.. 13

. 0.0592008057 .0.0551586141 0.0599414146 0.0599414146 0.0541541840**0.054154~840 0.054~541840**  0.0739324454 0.0739324454 0.0?39324454' 0.0739324454 0.0567014536 0.0567_01_4536 14 0.0615145144 0.0595500442 0.0635019874 0.06_35019874 ' 0.0570747392 0.0570747392 0.0570747392 0.0746488056 0.0746488056 0.0746488056 0.0746488056 0.0567500887 0.0567500887 15
.... 0.0647'J83324 0.0862?:12693_"
__**0.0_§_838~7966** _. 0.0_683_8979_66

-- 0.0551925339 0.0551925339 0.0551925339

.. 0.0704234655 0.0?04234655

. .. 0.070423:'1-655 _!).0704234655 0
. .0578234055 0.05?'823:4055 16 0.0713500739 0.0764876319 0.0772110428 0.07_72_1_10428 0.0551956709 0.0551956709 0.0551956709 0.0628601912 0.0628601912 0.0628601912 0.0628601912 0.0577540296 0.0577540296 .17..-. ""

- 0.07_549?84-25
. ,o_.o8_4Z1_60034-
.. 0.0792545794**·o.0792~5794** o:os57979755

... ,0.0557_979766 _0.055_79?'9766

.. 0.0534712990 0.0534712990**0~0534712990** 0.0534712990,; 0.056291081_4
_ _._ 0.056291081,4- 18 0.0693763461 0.0821220539 0.0693254052

... 0_._06_93_25:4:052_**,,_0.050101_~6_85_-** 0.0501011685 0.0501011685 0.0436895095 0.0436895095 0.0436895095 0.0436895095 0.0527021980 0.0527021980 _19'. ,0.0542187052-' o·.o620082513 0.052_1_045300**o:o52~_045300** 0.04596_65909
__ 0.0459665909
.. - _0.0459665909_ 0.0363413126 0.0363413.126, 0.0363413126 0.0363413126 -0.0502215100 -"**_0.050221_5~,00** 20 0.0432143461 0.0459015588

. _0.0390794599

... 0.0390_79_459_9
___ 0.0462959768 0.0462959768 _0.0462959768 0.0312048570 0.0312048570 0.0312048570 0.0312048570 0.0467116534 0.0467116534 21 0.03581378_60 0.0372595462 0.03110152'84**0.0311_01528~** .. 0.041'8602483_

-**0.~1.8602463,'** ·.,0.041.8602_463_ .0.026124287_7. 0.0261242877. 0.026124287_7 o.o2612428n 0.0421311043 0.0421311043 22 _D.0294294934_
.. 0.031_27_4497_8
__ ... 0.0249803003

---- 0.0249803003

... 0.0366496745

... 0.0366496745

.. 0.0366496745 0.0215822587 0.0215822587**0.02~5822587** 0.0215822587 0.0381387483 _0.038_1387483 23 0.0223450238 0.02357346S6 0.0182964081 0.0182964081 0.034751,7842--- 0.034'?_517842
.. 0.0347517842 0.0189759266**0~0~89759266** 0.0189759266 -- -ci.ll18s7592s6 0.034232S572 0.0342326572 24 0.0179418099 0.0169198902 0.0133194323 0.0133194323 0.0310595247 0.0310595247 0.0310595247 0.0157396039 0.0157396039 0.0157396039 0.0157396039 0.0307625891 0.0307625891 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.Indiana Default Hourlv Distribution Factors for Road Tvoe 3- Rural Unrestricted Access: Source Types Hour 11 21 31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 54 61 62 1
...... 0.0040299464 0.0073183989 0.0054636028 0.0054636028 '0.00$6998387., 0.0036998387 0.0036998387 0.0043986387. 0.0043986387 0.0043986387 0.0043986387 0.01641.6087:9**0.0:1641~0879** 2

...... 0.0040299464 0.0041131835 0.0034619242 0.0034619242 0.0045536477 0.0045536477,**~** 0.0045536477_ 0.0041872686 0.0041872686 0.0041872686 0.0041872686 0.0167510731 0.0167510731 .3 0.0041817017 0.0032797517 0.003069,1885··.**_0_.00306_~~** 885 0.0046485153 : 0.00464B5153: _0.0046485153 0.0073497934 0.0073497934**:~·0.0_07349~9~"** '0_.0()7:34\37,934:
.. 0.01,65479051 0.0165479051;

### ~~···.········· 0.0053114356 0.0057247729 0.0048082254 0.0048082254 0.0039844417 0.0039844417 0.0039844417 0.0084039684 0.0084039684 0.0084039684 0.0084039684 0.0195836328**"_0.019~836328** ······· 0._01:4:096381.5_ ,,0.0151258840

...0.0143177758

- 0.0143177758

- 0.0082534864 0.0082534864 0.0082534864 '
__**0.01_53f7:~38** ·- _'0.0_1_53176438_
.. 0.0153176438 0.0153176438 0.0258467673 0.0258467673 6

..... 0.0292719118 0.0316782840 0.0354335195 0.0354335195 0.0293141068 0.0293141068 0.0293141068 0.0299744215 0.0299744215 0.0299744215 0.0299744215 0.0344245617 0.0344245647 7. '0.03£)759.889.4-- ,0.0468485516 v. {).05,1_6314034 : ,0.0516314034

- 0.0496157860 0.0496157860' 0.0496157860

..0.055?7.7:62'1:9
... 0.055777627,9 : 0.0557776279.
. ·o.0557776279 .0.0440469233 o:o440469233 8**_0..04~81_8~995** 0.063_39_10409
___ 0.06362608!8_

... 0.0636260878 0.0768428043 0.0768428043 0.0768428043 0.0778885464 0.0778885464 0.0778885464 0.0778885164 0.0512793380 0.0512793380

.. 9 0.0370114322 0.0460357746 0.0558633273**0~05586332?:3** 0.1049236315 .0.1049236315 0.1049236315 0.0853025536 0.0853025536 0.0853025536 0.0853025536 ,0.0568238265 o:o568238265 10 ······ 0.0416989849

... 0.0427840868
___ O.OS47_852386
___ 0.0547852386_

--·- 0.1065363817 0.1065363817 '0.1065363817 0.0879727734

. .. 0..0879_72773_4
____ 0.087_97_27_734_,

. . 0.0879727734 O.OS99756501
..**0.059_975650~** '

. 1.1
......... 0.0509391967 0.0444183487**0.056~2?_5** _0.0568454275**_0.~186794422** ,0._1_18679_4422-**0.1~_-8679:¥22.** _0.08863363_94; c - _0_.08,8,633639_4 0.0886336394 0.0886335394 0.0633505956 

### .. 0.0633505956 ' 12 0.0563855259 0.0512966366 0.0618918527 0.0618918527 0.1154539418 0.1154539418 0.1154539418 0.0859045570 0.0859045570 0.0859045570 0.0859045570 0.0635864154 ,0.0635864154 ..13

..**'o:o6387~it209.** 0.0537246907,**:-:6~oo1** 081.82_1,-i. · ,_ ,O.OSJOS_1.821.1 0.0999,905:132**,0.0999905~32** ·**:_o.o~9~i9o_S~i2-- 0.08~B537212**  0.0858537212 

### · jl.Oss853721-z .' 'O.Ci858537,212 -:: .. .Cl-Cl6¥D.99.7j:J _0.06:44.09,9711' : 14
... .... 0.0708697265


### . .0.0545001954 0.0632013074 0.0632013074 0.0864244379 0.0864244379 0.0864244379 :**~.,0,8S21_9_~fq~-** 0._0852_1_96_1 09 _0.0_852_1,96109" 0.0852196109 0.0637040231 0.0637040231 ""'' ' ' .. .. 

### . .. 15 ······· 0,07745265_1_3_ _p.Q_65_E)S_f,l97,00

_**_-p.Q.68t~842!?7.** __**.P.QI3~13~2q?** .. __**Q.0.§\3_~.2~13?$** .. _

·**o_.Q~_(;)2,922:?7.3**.. ..**:.0._0592922$7~.** .Jl,0_7.(455J03_9_**_0.0~?_~551.0_3!;!_** --- 0,077:4_5$1039:

.**0_.07?.~~5:1.0.39:. ~.oqq9_~79~,3** **,a~oso9·6.~913** 16 0.0849155229 0.0775959037 0.0765115831 0.0765115831 0.0295038421 0..0295!)38421 0.0295038421 0.0663381066 0.0663381066 0.0663381066 0.0663381066 0.0570058311 0.0570058311 p
_ ,0.09_160_913,179
__**~ ·o:o8f1~9Q6'9_6·_-** **,,,Q._Cl7\3.6~_1:#.Q§_** ,.**-J)_,pJ..~f)_QH_~Q_§_** ____O,Q3t(S_Q§6.€!0:.

..**9.,():3~7.~()66$0** .. .**~~_(i3_17.&i5~60**.. _**o:~sas·227.5:4** __**_0.,04335.227,13~- _0_,~35227£4** _ '
__0_.()_43_3522]Ji:4
.. .**:o,O.~jZ:¥9~~2** -_-_Q
.**.o~1~?:#02,42** - 18

... 0.0855899909 0.085672_§4!_6

....**?~oz~_;:~-~-9** ..**1_?~** 0.0737419189 0.0184043260 0.0184043260 0.0184043260 0.0290727541 0.0290727541 0.0290727541 0.0290727541 0.0467760851 0.0467760851 ·; --- .. , .... ,,., ----**·::o:012048~_928 :·:-.o.a:·i2~·192a·** **:·::·o.ri1~fi#B:is·:::: p·:_0_1:8h~-1~:**  ...**··::::o::o;i-i.~ia_ssss** . .. ,.. _,_._._., .. .__._ ----- J9 '0.0685259502 .0.0656330958 : .. :.Q:P5:452?2t51 : ____ _o.0_$4527.275.1,**_,_.,0,0_1,20:4~t928h** :...**0.01,877~8~5** 

### .**_o:_Qi~i7¥8i5** ;0.04,1,31'86686 20 0.0503658989

---**0_.04.5!30_1_~9_2** ___**O.D3~0~~51)~----** 0.039D97541_3

.... 0.011_85.84575 0.01**~** 8584575 D.0118584575 0.0129711680 0.0129711680 0.0129711680 0.0129711680 0.0364127078 0.0364127078

.**2~.·--·'** --**_0.035~:42j239**... -.0.0400621,944 :: ___ 0.0294058.1.71

..... o_,o2_9:40S;SJZ.1
.. ,..0,0,0,9_67_650J3
___ ;_9.0096]65,0,1,3**::·~-o.009676.$Q13**

### ...**:-,0.01-oa·j-~656** 

### .. 0.0.1061_66656

. :o.0,1.os.1_6ss.5.6 ,.:_0_.01.0:6.1_66_656-**::·:o-.0~1.'~s29·~·5:·** ·_0:0:3.1,88829.15 ' 22

.. 0.0217853.168

·--- 0.0289018238 0.0218457686 0.0218457686 0.0061663979 0.0061663979 0.0061663979
__ 0_.00799?_2816

---**,~-_00~9JI72;8-~** 6 '" 0.0079972816

__**0.-90!9~?2.8_1_6** ___ 0.02_902B4;0_5S
_ '"**0_._02,9026~_0_55** ___ 23
.... 0.0119380838 d.riio5628665:-. ::o.D13673i86·s**·:-:;1.oj~67si8_6S:-** - :o:OQ483825.06·:· :·o.oo483a2566:· ' 0._004;8382506 0.0061564888 0.0061564888 ·o.o061564a8·8·-- .0.0061-564888 _0.025557434.11. .0.02555743_44

- 24 0.0061882440 0.0127827290 0.0079763402 0.0079763402 0.0035101034 0.0035101034 0.0035101034 0.0050809093 0.0050809093 0.0050809093 0.0050809093 0.0225579868 0.0225579868 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.Indiana Default Hourly Distribution Factors for Road Type 4 -Urban Restricted Access: Source Types Hour 11 21 31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 54 61 62 1

.... 0.01148386'30

.. 0.0104500369 0.0090397680 0.0090397680 0,018648857(_ 0.018648857,7 0.0186488577 0.0090968023 0.0090968023 0.0090968023 0.0090968023 0.0194173119 0.0194173119 2 0.0071800855 0.0062500477 0.0056304309 0.0056304309 0.0163411464 0.0163411464 0.01634_1_1464 0.0080102618 0.0080102618 0.0080102618 0.0080102618 0.0198708197 0.0198708197 3**0.006369~205** 

### ..**0.00496897_4~--** -**0_~094~_493622 0.0~493622**  0.0157775876

### .. 0.0157775876 0.0157775876**0.007836~983** .**9.007836~983** - .9-_007_8361_983 " O.O_O'f:836_1.983
. 0.0186489893 0.0186489893 4 0.0073777516 0.0058427101 0,0058801326 0.0058801326 0.0161766037 0.0161766037 0.0161766037 0.0086827231 0.008682?231 0.0086827231 0.0086827231 0.0198231326 0.0198231326

... 5**0.0~08139353** 0.0098545059 O.Q1 08999000

- ,.,0.'0108999000

.. 9.022:1330492 0.0221330492 _0.022_1_3304_92_ ' 0,_011_7 453229
.. 0.0117453229-

- 0.0_1_1_7:4:53229- '**0.0_1~7~3229** 0.0232515449
__ . 0.0232515449

- 6
.· 0.0235457656
___ 0.0231603609 0.0263517526 0.026351.7526_ 0.0299755654

... 0.0299755654 0.0299755654
___ 0.0204013312 0.0204013312

.. 0.020_10_13312 0.0204013312 0.0294638153 0.0294638153

.. 7 0.0461747881 ·_,_ 0.0495085217 0.0542414568 0.0542414568. 0.0393812372 0:0393812372 

### ..**0,03938~2372-** - _0.0435263184

..0.0435263184
__0.0435263184

- 0.0435263184

- 0.0375553768

.. 0.0375553768 8
.·.·. 0.0567226756

.. 0.0788353145 0.0674512195 0.0674512195 0.0503870867 0.0503870867 0.05038?_086_7 0.0659533819 0.06595338_1_9 0.0659533819 0.0659533819 0.0446175773 0.04_4617577_3 9 0.0493171440 0.0638279223 0.0614111771 .0.0614-:111771 0,0589556475 0.0589556475 0,0589556475' 0.0756333178 0.0758333178 0.0756333178 0.0756333178 0.05_15843704 0.0515843704 10 0.0406_1_4495'!

.. 0.0466481655
"" 0.0536303211
___0.053630321_1 0.0581555587

... 0.0581555567 0.0581555587
... 0.0790728466

... 0.0790728466 0.0790728466

. . 0.0790728466 0.0553194565

----- 0.0553194565 11

. 0.0415130748 0.0428102606'
. 0.0512594850 0.0512594850 0.0616027281 0.06:16027.28_1**0.06:16:02728~** 0.0824723032 '0,0824723032 0.0824('23032 0.0824723032 0.0583081277 0.0583081277 12 0.0465166969 0.045233_36:32 0.0529793024 0.0529793024 0.0644246353 0.0644246353 0.0644246353 0.08206406:79 0.08206:406:79**0.08206~06:79** 0.08206:40679 0.0589378233 0.0589378233

---- . -.-c--- . ·" 13 0.0517959830 0.047848('216" 0,0547982766 0.65479'82766 ·a.o_637M4078 0.0637644078**0~063764:4078** 0.0808088903 0.0808088903 -_0.0808088903 0.0808088903 0_.0575925555 0.0575925555 14 0.0566713893 0.0502151226


### ... 0.0576880799**0.057_6880_79_~** ... 0.0625591325 0.0625591325 0.0625591325 0.0811795580 0.0811795580 "" 0.0811795580 0.0811795580**0:057~_667797** 0.0571667797 15**_0.(167_18829_1~** 0.05803-84620 o:o656779S76

- _p.065S7Z9_67:6
_ ,_,_0,0_61_948:26_78 ()._0()1_9_4:8267_8.**_0.(16_1_9~_~§_?.'_8** . ...**9.()7.9'509_~_0** __**op~95_0_fl()~_so_** o_.(l!9!5_09_Q490_
. __**O_._D?.~_?(l9Q590_** . __**0_,0~.?:3:4296_7-4 o._O_??M2~.6~:4**  ___ 16 0.0810035452 0.0715596945 _0.0786905659 0_._07_86_905_65_9
__ 0.0609466141**0.0609_4~~-41** 0.0609466141 0.0727723312 0.0727723312
____ 0.0727723312 0.0727723312 0.0567213465 0.0567213465 17**0_.0_8~8.647~4** 0.0838541123 _O.OS21_37_1_57?_ 

### ..**0.082~37_1_~7_5** . ___**()_.O.§Z7256~_09** __ O_,OS_7.7.2f5_6_9Q_9_ .9.0.57J256909 0.0563364761

__**0.056336476~** ... 0.056336476:1**o;o~63:3c_6~I6_1** . _**o:o_S§J~1~_54:5** .. - _0.055_191_1_545
__ 18 ······ 0.0843264717 0.0874512168 0.0756929494**0.0756929_~94** 0.0510164625 0.0510164625 0.0510164625**9-_~_1'~_7,1_95_60** 0.0371719560

_____**o.,o~?J_7_~_95_~** 0.0371719560 0.0531125437 0.0531125437 19**_0,0~951265 0~0604364374'**  - ·:o.o54·367_37P0-- ;. o:0543673'j'OO

.....**0_.0_4509909,5~.** ---**'~:0450_9~6_958~** -**_0.0_-45.099~_58.;** ____**0,.024933_65~.8. _0.02493366~8**  - 0.024933661-8**-----6.02~gsi66j_a·:** ·o.o:.mz:,--993_o7:**:~::0.0487199367 ~:**  20**0.0~695_36991** ___ 0.0424749554 0.0373951308 0.0373951308 o.038192?_qss
____ 0.0384927066 0.0384927066 0.0188134711 0.0188134711 0.0_18_81347_1_1 0.0188134711 0.0432101938

..**_.o:_o~~.21 _o~** **~~a** 21

__0.03(37,81148_., 0_.0353280630: 

### :_·:·'0.0293181427."'**j)~02931-81:427 ..:.0.03223,1_8~71**  0.032231857,1 o.0322318R1 Q.01.62446774-- 

### -_0.0162#6774::·

. 0.0.1_62¥6774
__ ,_O,OJ6244:6774**o:o~9031.9248** - 0.0390319248- 22 ·•··.··· 0.0316564842**0.0313403~8?..** .. o.o2499D.3_os_ 0.0249971308

... 0.0282046747 0.0282046747 0.02820:4:674!-**~** . 0.0142456:6:00 0.0142456600

. .. 0.0_142456600 0.0142456600

.. 0.0355118446 0.0355118446 23 0.024_5992722' 0.0251562568_ _0.02035055¥ 0.0203505544 o.624.270o475**_o;o2~2i0647~: 0.02~27.00475** **o.o~:2447~~6s** .... 0.0124474209_
. 0.0_1,24474209 0.0124474209 '0.0317711657**o:o3177_1~S5:t** 24 0.0198157539 0.0189063955 0.0154623663 0.0154623663 0.0217813392 0.0217813392 0.0217813392 0.0110419727 0.0110419727 0.0110419727 0,0110419727 0.0278292477 0.0278292477 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.Indiana Default HourlyDistribution Factors for Road Type 5 Urban Unrestricted Access: Source Types Hour 11 21 31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 54 61 62 1 0.0092279794
. 0.0085268711 0.0060669694 0.0060669694 0.0126828270 _- _-_ 0.0126828270 0.0126828270" 0.0037158531 0.0037158531 0.0037158531 _0.0037158531 0.0106396358 0.0106396358 2 0.0055316691 0.0048527626 0.0037675180 0.0037675180 0.0099485186 0.0099485186 0.0099485186 0.0038117041 0.0038117041 0.0038117041 0.0038117041 0.0124309233 0.0124309233 3

........ 0.0047273286 ,._0.0037895_145_

- 0.0033129405 0.0033129405 0.0069482800 0.0069482800

.. 0.0069482800 0.0044165887**0,0()~16588_"? .9.00_4~-:1_65887_**  - _0.0()441_6_588_"?
____0.0121505035

-- (),1).1.:2.1.505035 :. 4 0.0047017359 0.0044201159 0.0042394230 0.0042394230 0.0113599945 0.0113599945 0.0113599945 0.0056282193 0.0056282193 0.0056282193 0.0056282193 0.0144699998 0.0144699998 5 0.0081859928
_____ 0.0079_4_16389_

--**0.0087:2~54~_0** ___o:oo87215410
__ 0.0153898606 0.0153898606 ; _0.0153898606

.. 0.0086545038 0.0086545038

- 0.0086545038--- 0.0086545038.

- 0.0210508569 0.0210508569 6
......... 0.0225361588

. _0.0203863353_ " 0.0238668712 0.0238668712 0.0256929528 0.0256929528 0.0256929528 0.0191822890 0.0191822890 0.0191822890 0.0191822890 0.0299165403 0.0299165403 7- ""- ··- _ o_.0435_1_S47Z_9
__ . _0.0_4782828_98
___ .. 0.054}9521_58_. 0.054_1_9521,58

-- o.0448331.1F' 0.0448331_117 0.0448331117 0.0418068371, 0.0418068371 0.04_1806837_1

- _0.04,80683_7_1 ·- 0.0436775030 0.0436775030_

- 8
.......... 0.0602_121_997
___ 0.0721456866 0.0675347974 0.0675347974 0.0691895946 0.0691895946

.. 0.0691895946_ 0.0731482386

... 0.0731482386

.....0.07}1_482386
.. ..**0.0!_3_1_~82386** . 0._05886_4;6976

.. _0.0588_646976_- 9 0.0556311148

-- 0.056701_3667
.. , 0.0643660182 0.0643660182 0.0747059425 0.0747059425 0.0747059425 '0.0880926125 0.0880926125 0.0880926_125 0.0880926125 0.0640862836 0.0040862836 10 ·········· 0.0485821670

- 0.04:664931_63
____ 0.0603283916 0.0603283916 0.0803995772 0.0803995772

... 0.0803995772

... 0.0921313810

----- 0.0921_3_1381 0

... 0.0921313810

-**0.092~31_38_10** .. 0.0680944168

.. 0.0680944168 11 0.0495985610 0.0468148434 0.0590657_789 0.0590657789 0.0774061573 0.077406157'3
____ 0.07_7:406157_3 0.0943973720 0.09:43973720 0.0943973720 0.0943973720 0.0703404942 0.0703404942 12 0.0573056055 0.0516032787 0.0615645883 0.0615645883 0.0753332651 0.0753332651 0.0753332651 0.0911430924 0.0911430924 0.0911430924 0.0911430924 0.0698309800 0.0698309800 13 •• 0.0607752380 0.0555323143 0.0626732860 0.0626732860 0.0739763390 0.0739763390 0.0739763390 0.0895629476 0.0895629476 0.0895629476 0.0895629476 0.0685413889**0.06854~3889** 14 0.0609214817 0.0562211160 0.0629887267 0.0629887267 0.0779993863 0.0779993863 0.0779993863 0.0912650000


### .. 0.0912650000 0.0912650000 0.0912650000 0.0671_175363 0.0671175363 15 _,_,,.,_ __0.0649907135 0_.060'"(579027 0.0667909366 0.0667909366 ,; 0.0761037810 0.0'('6_1_0378.1_0
___**_0.0_76_1_0378~0** _0.09,0:5'!26397_ 

### .. 0.0905726397
__**o:o_905J263~7** -. 0.0905726397,**0.065~260461** __0.065_1260:461 16 0.0724418316 0.0715477952 0.0751790074 0.0751790074 0.0728035185 0.0728035185 0.0728035185 0.0775387708 0.0775387708 0.0775387708 0.0775387708 0.0605241028 0.0605241028 17

.... o:o'('73519648 0.0803647:1_0_1
__ ' 0.0,757034489 " 0.0!57034489
__ 0.0526405510, 0.05264:0_55JO, _0.052f34_055JO
__ .P.-04:64337'395
...**0.04_~95** 0,04_643373_95_ -0.0464337395. 0.0557685235 0.0557685_235
__ 18 0.0770777578 0.0832250581 0.0684911688 0.0684911688 0.0347686748 0.0347686748 0.0347686748 0.0260342365 0.0260342365 0.0260342365 0.0260342365 0.0506461891 0.0506461891 .19 _0.0_6359774_20.,,
.. 0.0637_849687'
____0.0526386278 0.0526386278 0.0285090860 0.0285090860 _D.0285090860

.. 0.0173341336 _0.017_3$:41336--**o.·o:1.r33~1.33·6:::** _0,_012_3341:3$6

____**~** 0.04027' 4:7366_**-~** 0.04()2747366 '" 20 • 0.0483079600 0.0462284324 0.0372839274

.. 0.0372839274 0.0220585728 0.0220585728 0.0220585728
__**0.0112536~68** ___**0._0~_12536_~68_,,** .. 0.0112536468 , __ 0.01_1_2536468
. ____**p.03~_06677_1_2** 0.0310667712 21
.... "**--·~ _0.0383~_585_72_**  0.0386568_1g,7
......0.0292289942 0.0292289942
. .0.017,4082029**0.0~74082029_._** 0.017_4082029

-- 0.0076615624 o:oo76615_624
.. , _o_;o_Q7.6615624

- __ 0._007_66:15624:.

.. 0.026853336?: 0:0268533367
____ 22 0.0305027859 0.03251 07_827,, 0.0236169348 0.0236169348 0.0137_124544

...0.0137124544 0.0137_124544
__ . 0.0062358957

..**p.oo623_S~9-~** _____ o _**_.o_062~5895!** .. --. 0.0062358957 0.0231915644 0.0231915644 23

... _0.02_1_45029_91 0.02360f7:051__- _0.0170601049- 0.01]0601049 0.0139442910 0.0139442910 0.0-139442910 0.0053276381 0.00532'76381

-- 0_.0053276381. .0.0053276381 _0.0193751364 0.0193751364_ 24 0.0145073780 0.0159083752 0.0113147831 0.0113147831 0.0121850602 0.0121850602 0.0121850602 0.0046510979 0.0046510979 0.0046510979 0.0046510979 0.0159618330 0.0159618330 Source: Statewide average:;; developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.AppendixG 

### I d. 0 f. 

### I 0 ·1 

## o· .b 

## r F 

## t n 1ana e aut ally. 1stn u 1on ac ors: dayiD monthiD 2 5 1 0.2325411725 0.7674588275 2 0.2380547378 0.7619452622 3 0.2393402049 0.7606597951 4 0.2396052454 0.7603947546 5 0.2484757701 0.7515242299 6 0.2489743665 0.7510256335 7 0.2481153021 0.7518846979 8 0.2527028648 0.7472971352 9 0.2496078420 0. 7503921580 10 0.2462808693 0.7537191307 11 0.2439742406 0. 7560.257594 12 0.2258784720 0.7741215280 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.Appendix H Indiana Default Monthlv Distribution Factors: monthiD monthVMTFraction 1 0.0733424010 2 0.0693661929 3 0. 0827036024 4 0.0831789580 5 0.0891346903 6 0.0888150873 7 0.0907968617 8 0.0918542094 9 0.0854175366 10 0.0875162272 11 0.0812354405 12 0.0766387926 Source: Statewide averages developed from Indiana Department of Transportation traffic count data.Appendix I Lake and Porter Counties Ramp Fractions: Ramp Road Type Fraction 2 4 0.79% 6.66% Source: Analysis of VHT from the CMAP travel demand model.

# AppendixB
Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana, Maintenance Area Interagency Consultation Group Meeting Minutes/Summary

### This page left intentionally blank

### Interagency Consultation Group (ICG) Conference Call Minutes
For the MOBILE6.2 to MOVES MVEB Replacement Update Related to the Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana, Maintenance Area under the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard ICG Conference Call Date and Time • September 25, 2012 at I Oam Eastern ICG Attendees • Shawn Seals (IDEM), Linda McClure (IDEM), Patricia Manis (EPA), Steve Smith (INDOT), Greg Katter (INDOT), Larry Heil (FHW A), and Bill Brown (NlRPC) ICG Discussion Topics and Conclusions I. For the Ozone MVEB Replacement submittal, various mobile source margins of safety were discussed. A. After discussion, the consensus of the ICG was that as long as the a 15% mobile source margin of safety for VOC and NOx emissions does not result in an exceedance ofthe all sources margins of safety, it was reasonable and appropriate for inclusion in MVEB replacement submittal. 2. For the 

### PMz.s MVEB Replacement submittal, various mobile source margins of safety were discussed. A. 

### After discussion, the consensus of the ICG was that as long as the a 15% mobile source margin of safety for NOx and PM 2 . 5 

### emissions does not result in an exceedance of the all sources margins of safety, it was reasonable and appropriate for inclusion in MVEB replacement submittal.



### B-1