John R. Kaslch, Governor Mary Taylor, Lt. Governor Scott J. Nally, Director



### Ms. Susan Hedman Regional Administrator U.S. EPA, Region 5 77 West Jackson Blvd. R-19J Chicago, Illinois 60604-3507 

## SEP 29 2012 

# oct**a~** 

# ao'a.

Re: Request for Review and Approval of the Revised Cleveland-Akron-Lorain Area Maintenance Plan Approval for the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Standard

.Dear Administrator Hedman:

· l am ·Writing to formally request review and approval 

### of a revision to the maintenance

plan for the Ohio portion of the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area (Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, 

### Medina, Portage, 

### and· Summit Counties) 

### with respect to the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard. Ohio EPA submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for this area on March 17, 2009. U.S. EPA approved this requests on September 15,2009 (74 FR47414).

Ohio EPA is now requesting a revision to the maintenance plan to update mobile emission projections and conformity budgets based on emission rates generated from U.S. EPA's latest mobile emissions model, the Motor Vehicie Emission Simulation (MOVES) 2010. ln December 2009, MOVES replaced MOBILE6.2 as the U.S. EPA's official emission factor model. The area is still attaining and maintaining the 1997 8-hour

ozone standard and the point, area and non-road emissions have not changed significantly and did not need to be updated for this submittal.

lf you have any questions, please contact Jennifer Dines in our Division of Air Pollution Control at (614) 644-3696.
Sincerely,

# ~21y, Director

enclosures

cc: Bob Hodanbosi, DAPC Jennifer Dines, DAPC

50 West Town Street • Suite 700 • P.O. Box 1049 • Columbus, OH 43216-1049 www.epa.ohio.gov • (614) 644-3020 • (614} 644-3184 (fax)

# REDESIGNATION REQUEST AND MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE CLEVELAND-AKRON-LORAIN OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

Prepared by: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Air Pollution Control

March 2009 Revised October 2012

### This page left intentionally blanki 

## TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One Introduction .................................................................................................................. ................. 1 Background .................................................................................................................... ............... 1 Geographical description ...................................................................................................... ........ 2 Status of air quality ......................................................................................................... .............. 2

Chapter Two Requirements for redesignation ................................................................................................ .... 3

Chapter Three Ozone monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 6 Ambient data quality assured ........................................................................................................ 7 Three complete years of data .................................................................................................. ..... 8 Commitment to continue monitoring ........................................................................................... 1 0

Chapter Four Emission inventory ............................................................................................................ .......... 12 Base year inventory ........................................................................................................... ......... 12 Emission projections .......................................................................................................... ......... 12 Demonstration of maintenance .................................................................................................. . 18 Permanent and enforceable emissions reductions ..................................................................... 27 Provisions for future updates ................................................................................................. ..... 28

Chapter Five Control measures and regulations .............................................................................................. 30 Moderate area VOC RACT ........................................................................................................ . 30 Moderate area 15 percent reasonable further progress ............................................................. 31 Emission inventories/statements ............................................................................................... . 32 Implementation of past SIP revisions .......................................................................................... 32 New source review provisions ................................................................................................. .. 35 Assurance of continued controls ............................................................................................... .. 36

Chapter Six Contingency measures .......................................................................................................... ..... 37 Commitment to revise plan ..................................................................................................... .... 37 Commitment for contingency measures ..................................................................................... 37 Potential contingency measures ................................................................................................ . 38 List of VOC and NO x sources...................................................................................................... 40

Chapter Seven Public participation .......................................................................................................... ............ 41

Chapter Eight Conclusions ................................................................................................................... ............. 42ii FIGURES

Figure 1 Cleveland - Akron - Lorain Moderate Nonattainment Area .................................... 7

TABLES

Table 1 Monitoring Data for Cleveland - Akron - Lorain 2006 – 2008 ................................ 9 Table 2 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Ashtabula Co. ................ 16 Table 3 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Cuyahoga Co. ................ 16 Table 4 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Geauga Co. .................... 16 Table 5 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Lake Co. ......................... 17 Table 6 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Lorain Co. ...................... 17 Table 7 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Medina Co. ..................... 17 Table 8 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Portage Co. .................... 17 Table 9 Emission Estimations for On-road Mobile Sources for Summit Co. .................... 17 Table 10 Emission Estimations for On-road Total Cleveland -Akron -Lorain Sources ....... 17 Table 11 Mobile Vehicle Emission Budget ......................................................................... 18 Table 12 VOC Emission Inventory Ashtabula Co. .............................................................. 20 Table 13 VOC Emission Inventory Cuyahoga Co. ............................................................. 20 Table 14 VOC Emission Inventory Geauga Co. ................................................................. 21 Table 15 VOC Emission Inventory Lake Co. ...................................................................... 21 Table 16 VOC Emission Inventory Lorain Co. .................................................................... 22 Table 17 VOC Emission Inventory Medina Co. .................................................................. 22 Table 18 VOC Emission Inventory Portage Co. ................................................................. 22 Table 19 VOC Emission Inventory Summit Co. ................................................................. 23 Table 20 VOC Emission Inventory Cleveland - Akron - Lorain Total .................................. 23 Table 21 NO x Emission Inventory Ashtabula Co. ............................................................... 24 Table 22 NO x Emission Inventory Cuyahoga Co. ............................................................... 24 Table 23 NO x Emission Inventory Geauga Co. .................................................................. 24 Table 24 NO x Emission Inventory Lake Co. ....................................................................... 25 Table 25 NO x Emission Inventory Lorain Co. ..................................................................... 25 Table 26 NO x Emission Inventory Medina Co. ................................................................... 25 Table 27 NO x Emission Inventory Portage Co. .................................................................. 26 Table 28 NO x Emission Inventory Summit Co. ................................................................... 26 Table 29 NO x Emission Inventory Cleveland - Akron - Lorain Totals ................................. 26 Table 30 Projected Emission Estimates 2006-2020 Cleveland - Akron - Lorain ................ 27 Table 31 Combined Comparison of 2004 and 2006 On-road and EGU Totals .................. 28

APPENDICES

A Air Quality System (AQS) Data B Ohio 2002 SIP Base Year Inventory Discussion C NOACA Mobile Methodology and Results D LADCO Technical Support Document E Public Participation Documentationiii 

### This page left intentionally blank1 

### REDESIGNATION REQUEST AND MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE CLEVELAND-AKRON-LORAIN, OHIO OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA



## CHAPTER ONE

Introduction The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires areas failing to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone to develop State Implementation Plans (SIP’s) to expeditiously attain and maintain the standard. In 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) revised the air quality standard for ozone replacing the 1979 one-hour standard with an eight-hour ozone standard set at 0.08 par ts per million (ppm). The standard was challenged legally and upheld by the U.S. Supreme C ourt in February of 2001.

On April 30, 2004, U.S. EPA designated 134 nonatta inment areas for t he eight-hour ozone standard. Since that time, U.S. EPA has recla ssified nine of the 134 original nonattainment areas to the next lower classification. Sect ion 107(d)(3)(E) of the C AA allows states to request nonattainment areas to be redesignated to attainment pr ovided certain criteria are met. The following are the criteria that must be met in order for an ar ea to be redesignated from nonattainment to attainment:

i) A determination that the area has attained the eight-hour ozone standard. ii) An approved State Implementati on Plan (SIP) for the area under Section 110(k). iii) A determination that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and other f ederal requirements. iv) A fully approved maintenance plan under Section 175(A). v) A determination that all Section 110 and Part D requ irements have been met.

Background The Cleveland - Akron - Lorain nonattainment area includes the following Counties: Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lak e, Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit. As part of the 1990 CAA Amendments re-evaluation, the Counties within the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area were designated as moderate nonattainment fo r the one-hour ozone standard and, therefore, were subject to nonattainment area rulemakings. The Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area was redesignated to attainment with respect to the one-hour ozone standard on May 7, 1996 ( 61FR20458 ). As a result of the 2004 ozone designations, U.S. EPA designated the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area m oderate nonattainment for the eight-hour standard and Ohio EPA was required to devel op a plan to reduce volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NO x 

### ) emissions and to demonstrate that the area2 

### will meet the federal ei ght-hour air quality standard for ozone by June 15, 2010. As part of the requirement, a 15 percent Rate of Progr ess (ROP) Plan was also required showing emissions would be reduced by 15 percent by June 15, 2009.

This document is intended to support Ohio’s request that the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area be redesignated from nonattain ment to attainment for the eight-hour ozone standard. The Cleveland - Akron – Lorain area has recor ded three (3) years of complete quality assured ambient air quality monitoring dat a for the years 2006 -- 2008 demonstrating attainment of the eight -hour ozone standard.

Geographical Description The Cleveland - Akron - Lorain eight-hour ozone nonattainment area is located in northeastern Ohio and includes the Countie s of Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit . This area is shown in Figure 1 under Chapter Three.

Status of Air Quality Ozone monitoring data for the most recent three (3) years, 2006 through 2008, demonstrate that the air quality has met the NAAQS for ozone in this moderate nonattainment area. The NAAQS attainment, accompanied by decreases in emission levels discussed in Chapter Four, supports a redesi gnation to attainment for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area based on the requirement s in Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.3 

## CHAPTER TWO

Requirements for Redesignation U.S. EPA has published detailed gui dance in a document entitled Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment (redesignation guidance), issued September 4, 1992, to Regional Air Directors. The redesignation request and maintenance plan are based on the redesignation guidanc e, supplemented with additional guidance received from staff of U.S. EPA Region V.

Below is a summary of each redesignation cr iterion as it applies to the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area.

i.) Attainment of the standard: There are two components involved in ma king this demonstration. The first component relies on ambient air quality data. The data that are used to demonstrate attainment should be the pr oduct of ambient monitoring that is representative of the ar ea of highest concentrati on. The data should be collected and quality-assured in accor dance with 40 CFR 58 and recorded in the Air Quality System (AQS) in order for it to be available to the public for review.

The second component relies upon s upplemental U.S. EPA-approved air quality modeling. The s upplemental modeling is not required for ozone nonattainment areas seeking redesignat ion; however, in Appendix C and Appendix D the most recent modeling re sults showing future attainment and maintenance are provided. Chapter Th ree discusses this requirement in more detail and provides the attainment demonstration.

ii.) SIP approval: The SIP for the area must be fully approved under Section 110(k) and must satisfy all the requirement s that apply to the area. Ohio’s SIP was approved on May 9, 1994 (59FR23799), March 23, 1995 (60FR15235), and May 7, 1996 (61FR20458) and includes the Cleve land - Akron - Lorain area. Chapter Five discusses this requirement in more detail.

iii.) Permanent and enforceable im provement in air quality; The state must be able to reasonably a ttribute the improvement in air quality to emission reductions which are pe rmanent and enforceabl e. The state should estimate the percent reduction achieved from federal measures as well as control measures that have been adopted and implemented by the state.

The Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area was designated moderate nonattainment for ozone as part of the 1990 CAA Amendment s re-evaluation. As a result, Ohio has adopted and implem ented control measures for these Counties in4 

### that area beyond the federal measur es and the initia l 1979/1981 Statewide rules. Chapters Four and Five discuss this requirement in more detail.

iv.) Section 110 and Part D requirements: For purposes of redesignation, a state mu st meet all requirements of Section 110 and Part D that were applicable prio r to submittal of the complete redesignation request.

Part D consists of general requirem ents applicable to all areas which are designated nonattainment based on a violation of the NAAQS.

i.) Section 110(a) requirements Section 110(a) of Title I of the C AA contains the general requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provi des that the impl ementation plan submitted by a state must hav e been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and that, among other things, it must include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means or techniques nece ssary to meet the requirements of the CAA; provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures necessary to monitor ambient air quality; provide for im plementation of a source permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; include provisions for the implementation of Part C, prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and Part D, NSR permit programs; include criteria for stationary source emission c ontrol measures, monitoring, and reporting; include provisions for ai r quality modeling; and provides for public and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule development. In Ohio’s Dece mber 5, 2007 infrastructure SIP submission, Ohio verified that the State fulfills the requirements of Section 110(a)(2) of the Act.

ii.) Section 172(c) requirements This Section contains general r equirements for nonattainment plans. The requirements for reasonable further progress, identification of certain emissions increases, and other measures needed for attainment will not apply for redes ignations because they only have meaning for areas not attaining the standard. The r equirements for an emission inventory will be satisfied by the inventory requirements of the maintenance plan. Chapter s Four and Five discuss this requirement in more detail.

iii.) Conformity5 

### The state must work with U.S. EPA to show that its SIP provisions are consistent with Section 176(c)(4) conformity requirements. The redesignation request should include conformity procedures, if the state already has these procedures in place. If a state does not have conformity procedures in place at the time that it submits a redesignation request, the state mu st commit to follow U.S. EPA’s conformity regulation upon issuance, as applicable.

v.) Maintenance plans: Section 107(d)(3)(E) stipulates that for an area to be redesignated, U.S. EPA must fully approve a maintenance plan that meets the requirements of Section 175(A). The maintenance plan mu st constitute a SIP revision and must provide for maintenance of the rele vant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after redesignation. Section 175 (A) further states that the plan shall contain such additional measures, if any, as may be necessary to ensure such maintenance.

In addition, the maintenance plan shall contain such contingency measures as the Administrator deems necessary to ensure prompt correction of any violation of the NAAQS. At a mini mum, the contingency measures must include a requirement that the state will implement all measures contained in the nonattainment SIP prior to redesignation.

States seeking redesignat ion of a nonattainment ar ea should consider the following provisions:

a.) attainment inventory; b.) maintenance demonstration; c.) monitoring network; d.) verification of continued attainment; and e.) contingency plan.

Chapter Six discusses this requirement in more detail.6 

## CHAPTER THREE

OZONE MONITORING CAA Section107 (d)(3)(E)(i)

Requirement 1 of 4 A demonstration that the NAAQS for ozone, as published in 40 CFR 50.4, has been attained.

Background There are eleven monitors measur ing ozone concentrations in this nonattainment area. These monitors are operated by Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution Control, Northeast Distr ict Office, Cleveland Division of Air Quality, Lake County General Health District, and Akron Regional Air Quality Management District. A listi ng of the design values based on the three-year averages of the annual fourth highes t daily maximum eight-hour average ozone concentrations from 2006 through 2008 are shown in Table 1. The locations of the monitoring sites fo r this nonattainment area are shown on Figure 1.7 

### Demonstration

Figure 1 Map of the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain, OH nonattainment area and monitor locations.

Requirement 2 of 4 Ambient monitoring data quality assured in acco rdance with 40 CFR 58.10, recorded in the U.S. EPA air quality system (AQS) database, and available for public view.

Demonstration The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) has qualit y assured all data shown in Appendix A in accordance wit h 40 CFR 58.10 and the Ohio Quality Assurance Manual. Ohio EPA has recorded the data in the AQS database and therefore data are available to the public.8 

### Requirement 3 of 4 A showing that the three-year average of the fourth highest values, based on data from all monitoring sites in the area or its affected downwind environs, are below 85 parts per billion (ppb). (This showing must rely on three (3) co mplete, consecutive calendar years of quality assured data.)

Background The following information is taken from U.S. EPA's "Guideline on Data Handling Conventions for the eight-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)," U.S. EPA- 454/R-98-017, December 1998.

Three (3) complete years of oz one monitoring data are required to demonstrate attainment at a monitori ng site. The eight-hour primary and secondary ozone ambient air quality st andards are met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the three- year average of t he annual fourthhighest daily maximum eight-hour aver age ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. When this occurs, the site is said to be in attainment. Three (3) significant digits must be ca rried in the computations. Because the third decimal digit, in ppm , is rounded, 0.084 ppm is th e largest concentration that is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. Therefore, for the purposes of this request, the eight-hour standard is cons idered to be 0.085 ppm. Values below 0.085 ppm meet the standard, va lues equal to or greater than 0.085 ppm exceed the standard. These dat a handling procedures are applied on an individual basis at each monitor in t he area. An area is in compliance with the eight-hour ozone NAAQS i f, and only if, every monitoring site in the area meets the NAAQS. An individual site 's three (3)-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum eight- hour average ozone concentrations is also called the site's design value.

Table 1 shows the monitoring data for 2006 – 2008 that were retrieved from the U.S. EPA AQS. The air quality des ign value for the area is the highest design value among all sites in the area. Please note that the standard is measured in ppm while the commonly used unit is ppb. For the remainder of this document, ppb will be used.9 

### Demonstration

Table 1 Monitoring Data for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain, OH area For 2006 – 2008

Data source: U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/index.htm

1 s t 2 n d 3 r d 4 th 2006-2008

SITE ID COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR %OBS 8-HR 8-HR 8-HR 8-HR AVERAGE

39-007- 1001 Ashtabula Conneaut 2006 99 99 99 90 86

84 39-007- 1001 Ashtabula Conneaut 2007 99 98 95 92 92 39-007- 1001 Ashtabula Conneaut 2008 97 81 81 78 75 39-035- 0034 Cuyahoga Cleveland 2006 97 79 77 77 74

78 39-035- 0034 Cuyahoga Cleveland 2007 98 84 84 83 80 39-035- 0034 Cuyahoga Cleveland 2008 98 88 85 84 81 39-035- 0064 Cuyahoga Berea 2006 100 72 71 71 68

74 39-035- 0064 Cuyahoga Berea 2007 97 103 95 87 83 39-035- 0064 Cuyahoga Berea 2008 98 87 81 77 72 39-035- 5002 Cuyahoga Mayfield 2006 98 90 85 83 81

81 39-035- 5002 Cuyahoga Mayfield 2007 98 86 84 82 80 39-035- 5002 Cuyahoga Mayfield 2008 98 90 87 86 83 39-055- 0004 Geagua Cleveland 2006 100 76 72 71 70

73 39-055- 0004 Geagua Cleveland 2007 100 71 69 68 68 39-055- 0004 Geagua Cleveland 2008 100 88 83 82 82 39-085- 0003 Lake Eastlake 2006 98 88 84 83 83

78 39-085- 0003 Lake Eastlake 2007 98 79 76 75 74 39-085- 0003 Lake Eastlake 2008 99 84 84 84 78 39-085- 3002 Lake Painsville 2006 100 80 76 75 75 7610 1 s t 2 n d 3 r d 4 th 2006-2008

SITE ID COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR %OBS 8-HR 8-HR 8-HR 8-HR AVERAGE

39-085- 3002 Lake Painsville 2007 100 93 84 82 79 39-085- 3002 Lake Painsville 2008 100 81 77 77 76 39-093- 0018 Lorain Sheffield 2006 99 77 72 69 69

74 39-093- 0018 Lorain Sheffield 2007 99 84 82 79 78 39-093- 0018 Lorain Sheffield 2008 99 88 76 76 75 39-103- 0003 Medina Cleveland 2006 98 76 75 74 73

72 39-103- 0003 Medina Cleveland 2007 100 73 71 70 69 39-103- 0003 Medina Cleveland 2008 99 80 79 77 75 39-133- 1001 Portage Akron 2006 99 80 79 74 70

74 39-133- 1001 Portage Akron 2007 96 90 85 85 84 39-133- 1001 Portage Akron 2008 99 75 71 69 69 39-153- 0020 Summit Akron 2006 100 82 80 77 77

82 39-153- 0021 Summit Akron 2007 100 97 92 90 90 39-153- 0022 Summit Akron 2008 100 91 81 80 80 Highest Average 84 ppb



### The area's design values have tr ended downward as emissions have declined due to such factors as cleaner automobiles and fuels, and controls for EGUs, both regionally and locally.

Requirement 4 of 4 A commitment that once redes ignated, the state will conti nue to operate an appropriate monitoring network to verify the ma intenance of the attainment status.

Demonstration Ohio EPA commits to continue m onitoring ozone levels at the sites indicated in Figure 1. Ohio EPA will consult with U.S. EPA Region V prior to making changes to the existing monitoring network, should changes become necessary in the future. Oh io EPA will continue to quality assure the monitoring data to m eet the requirements of 40 CFR 58 and all other federal requirements. Connection to a central station and updates to the11 

### Ohio EPA web site 1 

### will provide real time av ailability of the data and knowledge of any exceedances. Ohio EPA will enter all dat a into AQS on a timely basis in accordance with federal guidelines.

1 www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/12 

## CHAPTER FOUR

EMISSION INVENTORY CAA Section107 (d)(3)(E)(iii)

U.S. EPA’s redesignation guidance requires the submittal of a comprehensive inventory of ozone precursor emissions (VOC and NO x 

### ) representative of t he year when the area achieves attainment of the ozone air quality st andard. Ohio also must demonstrate that the improvement in air quality between the year that violations occu rred and the year that attainment was achieved is based on perm anent and enforceable emission reductions. Other emission inventory related requirement s include a projection of the emission inventory to a year at leas t 10 years following redesignati on; a demonstration that the projected level of emissions is sufficient to maintain the ozone standard; and a commitment to provide future updates of t he inventory to enable tr acking of emission levels during the 10-year maintenance period.

Requirement 1 of 5 A comprehensive emission inventory of the precursors of ozone completed for the base year.

Background The point source data are taken fr om Ohio's annual emissions reporting program. The 2002 periodic inventor y has been identified as one of the preferred data bases for SIP development and coincides with nonattainment air quality in the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area.

Periodic inventories, which include em issions from all sectors - mobile, area, non-road, and point sources - are prepared every three (3) years.

Demonstration The 2002 inventory is us ed as the base year for the purpose of this submittal and was submitted to U. S. EPA on June 15, 2007 along with the attainment demonstration for this ar ea. The detailed emission inventory information for the Columbus area is pr ovided in Appendix B. Emissions of VOC and NOx for 2002 are i dentified under Requirement Three of this Chapter.

Requirement 2 of 5 A projection of the emission in ventory to a year at least 10 years following redesignation.

Background Ohio EPA prepared a comprehensive inventor y for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area including area, mobile, and point source s for precursors of ozone (VOCs and NO x 

### ) for base years 2002 and 2005. The 2002 in ventory was submitted to U.S. EPA on June 15, 2007 and then supplement ed on February 22, 2008 with the13 

### 2005 inventory, as part of the attainment demonstration for this area. The information below describes the procedur es Ohio EPA used to generate the 2002 base year inventory and to develop SIP -ready modeling inventories and future year projections (Pechan Report 2 

### ) based on a 2005 base year inventory. The report by Pechan generated future year es timates of annual emissions for each source sector using accepted growth su rrogates. The on-road mobile source sector was addressed by specific m odeling as addressed below. These inventories were provided to the Lake Mi chigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) and have been processed to develop summer day emissions for use in the air quality analyses. These processed mode ling inventories have been identified as the correct iteration of the inventory for use in the redesignati on. In this document, references to LADCO include the Mi dwest Regional Planning Organization.

• Area sources were taken from the Ohio 2005 periodic inventory submitted to U.S. EPA. These proj ections were made from the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) growth factors, with some updated local information.

• Mobile source emissions were calculated from MOVES2010 produced emission factors.

• Point source information was compiled from Ohio EPA’s 2005 annual emissions inventory dat abase and the 2005 U.S. EPA Air Markets acid rain database 3



### .

• Biogenic emissions are not included in these summaries.

• Non-road emissions were gener ated using U.S. EPA’s National Mobile Inventory Model (NMI M) 2002 application. To address concerns about the accuracy of some of the categories in U.S. EPA’s non-road emissions model, LA DCO contracted with two (2) companies to review the base data and make recommendations. One of the contractors also esti mated emissions for three (3) nonroad categories not included in U.S. EPA’s non-road model. Emissions were estimated for ai rcraft, commercial marine vessels, and railroads. Recreational moto rboat population and spatial surrogates (used to assign emi ssions to each county) were significantly updated. The populat ions for the construction equipment category were reviewed and updated based upon surveys completed in the midwes t, and the temporal allocation for agricultural sources also was updated.

2 http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/r5/reports/L ADCO%202005%20Base%20Yr%20Growth%20and%20Controls%20R eport_Final.pdf 3 http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/acidrain14 

### Demonstration

On-Road Emission Estimations In coordination with the Ohio Departm ent of Transportation (ODOT) and the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportati on Study (AMATS), the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA) utilizes a regional travel demand forecast model to simulate traffi c in the area and to forecast traffic flows for given growth ex pectations. The model is primarily used as a long range planning tool to evaluate t he transportation system including determination of locations where additi onal travel capacity may be needed and to determine the infrastructure r equirements necessary to meet that need. It is also used as a tool for ai r quality purposes to estimate the total emissions of pollution caused by vehicles in the area. The travel demand forecasting model is used to predict the total daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and a U.S. EPA co mputer program called MOVES2010 is used to calculate emissions rates. The product of these is the total amount of pollution emitted by the on-road vehicles for the area. In areas outside the regional travel demand model, traffi c counts and Cleveland-Akron-Lorain Ohio traffic growth rates are used for the HPMS-based VMT estimates.

Overview Broadly described, MOVES2010 is used to generate “emission factors”, which are the average emi ssions per vehicle-mile (grams/vehicle-mile) and the average emissions per vehicle-hour (grams/vehicle-hour) for the ozone precursors, NO x 

### and VOC. The MOVES2010 model includes a number of variables that affect the emission fa ctors. These variables have national default values, some of which require modification to reasonably reflect local conditions. Some of these vari ables are discussed here. The vehicle fleet (vehicles on the road) age and the source type have a major effect on the emission factors. The source types are traveling on road types (MOVES2010 road types are Rural Restri cted Access, Rural Unrestricted Access, Urban Restricted Access, and Urban Unrestricted Access). The vehicle speeds also affect the emissi on factor values. Meteorological conditions such as air temperature and humidity have a significant effect on emission factors. Emission fact ors produced by MOVES2010 can also include the effect of emission reduction strategies such as vehicle inspection and maintenance programs, r egulation of fuels, etc. These MOVES2010 inputs are estimated us ing the best available data.

These inputs are reviewed and agreed to by U.S. EPA and transportation agencies in a formal interagency consul tation process. Emission factors are multiplied by VMT from the travel demand model to estimate the total vehicle emissions.15 

### The emission factors from MOVES 2010 can be used with the travel demand model information by combining the disaggregate emission rates with VMT, and source type population for each road type, source type and hour of day, and then sum them up to get the total emissions for the area.

The method, used by ODOT, is to aggregate the emission rates by two source types (cars & trucks), then applying VMT and source type population, thereby reduci ng the intensive processe s. In the first step emission factors are broadly classified into total vehicles, cars and trucks by pollutant, by average speed, road ty pe and hour of day. Then the hourly link volumes generated from travel demand model are combined with emission factors for each network lin k for each hour. The on-road vehicle emissions for the area is the sum of all individual link-hour emissions. Vehicle-based emissions are obtained by the combination of corresponding emission factors and source type populat ion. Intrazonal emissions are computed using a separate method to acc ount for those trips that use local roads to travel within a zone. Intrazonal VMT is combined with corresponding emission factors to get in trazonal emissions. Total emissions are sum of on-road vehicle emi ssions, vehicle-based emissions and intrazonal emissions.

Automated programs, using FO RTRAN and CUBE scripting, were developed by ODOT to generate total em issions. 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 also handles the new er model network formats and MOVES2010 generated emission fa ctors. The Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area analysis uses an approach similar to ODOT’s.

MOVES2010 input and output files are provided in Appendix C.

Best Available Data Most current vehicle age distribution data, temperature data, fuel properties data, source type distribution data, and I/M data provided by ODOT’s ATRs and WIMs, NOAA, ODPS, and Ohio EPA were used by the ODOT for generating emission factors. Likewise, the most current transportation planning data available from NOACA and AMATS and most current ODOT count data were used by ODOT for the emissions estimates.

Analysis Years Analysis years for this redesignation request include 2002, 2006 (attainment year), 2012 (interim budget year), and 2020 to meet the requirements specified by the CAA and U.S. EPA. The travel demand model presents the transportation syst em conditions for each of these years. Model runs for each future analysis year contain the road network16 

### NOACA, AMATS, and ODOT of that year with corresponding socioeconomic forecasts for that year.

Local Road VMT Most local roads such as subdivision st reets are not explicitly modeled in a travel demand model. These local r oads are represented as fictitious roadways called centroid connectors. Local road traffic is captured as intra-zonal trips which travel dem and models usually do not assign to roadway segments. The ODOT post pr ocess includes these trips as local road VMT.

Emission Estimations Tables 2 through 9 contain the result s of the emissions analysis for the appropriate years.

Table 2 - Ashtabula County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources
2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 3,178,599 3, 075,258 3,177,975 3,399,487 VOC (tons/day) 5.00 4.17 2.59 1.38 NOx (tons/day) 11.29 9.04 5.20 2.28

Table 3 - Cuyahoga County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources

2002 2006 2012 2020
VMT (miles/day) 29,297,006 29,378,875 29,404,954 29,696,610 VOC (tons/day) 62. 92 48.61 26.65 13.60 NOx (tons/day) 128.84 104.67 61.07 33.73

Table 4 - Geauga County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources
2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 2,567,692 2, 698,563 2,775,615 2,996,643 VOC (tons/day) 6.06 5.10 2.88 1.74 NOx (tons/day) 13.47 11.85 7.63 5.3717 

### Table 5 - Lake County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources 2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 5,738,319 5, 889,045 5,965,888 6,212,829 VOC (tons/day) 13.28 10.87 6.33 3.42 NOx (tons/day) 29.59 25.93 16.62 10.62

Table 6 - Lorain County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources 2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 6,972,908 7, 088,351 7,121,863 7,338,790 VOC (tons/day) 16.56 13.59 8.02 4.28 NOx (tons/day) 34.23 29.89 19.15 12.01

Table 7 - Medina County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources
2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 5,888,243 6, 165,358 6,391,366 6,990,097 VOC (tons/day) 12.34 10.52 6.51 3.73 NOx (tons/day) 36.39 32.52 21.53 14.98

Table 8 - Portage County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources
2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 4,782,788 5, 186,076 5,494,912 5,872,599 VOC (tons/day) 8.26 6.95 4.39 2.37 NOx (tons/day) 17.17 14.83 8.81 3.89

Table 9 - Summit County Emission Estimations for On-Road Mobile Sources
2002 2006 2012 2020 VMT (miles/day) 15,788,738 16,213,278 16,501,142 18,086,124 VOC (tons/day) 30.58 21.78 13.53 7.02 NOx (tons/day) 60.43 45.49 24.57 11.35

Table 10 - Emission Estimation Totals for On-Road Mobile Sources for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain Area
2002 2006 2012 2020 VOC (tons/day) 155.00 121.59 70.90 37.54 NOx (tons/day) 331.41 274.22 164.58 94.2318 

### Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Table 11 contains the motor vehicle emissions budget for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area.

Table 11 - Mobile Vehicle Emissions Budget for the Cleveland - Akron – Lorain Area

2012 2020 VOC (tons/day) 81.54 43.17 NO x 

### (tons/day) 189.27 108.36

The above budget includes the emission estimates calculated for 2012 and 2020 with an additional 15 percent marg in of safety. The emission estimates are derived from t he Tranplan travel demand model and MOVES2010 as described above under t he expected NOACA and AMATS 2030 Long Range Plans and known projec ts in the areas not included within either MPO’s jurisdiction. T he additional 15 percent translates into an additional 5.63 tons/day for VOC and 14.13 tons/day for NOx for 2020.

All methodologies, the latest planning a ssumptions, and the safety margins were determined through the interagency consultation process described in the Transportation Conformity Me morandum of Understanding (MOU) among NOACA, AMATS, ODOT, and Ohio EPA.

The current one-hour budget s will no longer be applicable either after the effective date of the approved redesignat ion or after the effective date of any U.S. EPA action approving a finding that the eight-hour conformity budget included in this submittal is adequate for transportation conformity purposes whichever date comes first.

Requirement 3 of 5 A demonstration that the project ed level of emissions is suffi cient to maintain the ozone standard.

Background In consultation with U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA selected the year 2020 as the maintenance year for this redesignati on request. This document contains projected emissions inventories for 2012 and 2020.

Emission projections for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area were performed using the following approaches:

• As performed by NOACA, mobile source emission projections are based on the U.S. EPA MOVES2010 model. The analysis is19 

### described in more detail in Appendix C. All projections were made in accordance with “Procedur es for Preparing Emissions Projections” U.S. EPA-45/4-91-019.

• Emissions inventories are required to be projected to future dates to assess the influence growth and futu re controls will have. LADCO has developed growth and control file s for point, area, and non-road categories. These files were used to develop the future-year emissions estimates used in this document. This was done so the inventories used for redesignati on are consistent with modeling performed in the future. Appendix D contains LADCO’s technical support document detailing the analysi s used to project emissions. The 2006 attainment year was grown from the 2005 LADCO modeling inventory using LADCO’s growth factors. The 2020 maintenance year was grown from the 2018 LADCO modeling inventory using LADCO’s growth factors.

The detailed inventory information for the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area for 2002 is in Appendix B. Emissi on trends are an important gauge for continued compliance with the ozone standard. Therefore, Ohio EPA performed an initial compar ison of the inventories for the base year and maintenance years. Mobile source em ission inventories are described in Section 5 of Appendix B.

Sectors included in the following tables are: Electrical Generating Unit (EGU-Point); Non-Electrical Generati ng Unit (Non-EGU); Non-road Mobile (Non-road); Other Area (Other); Ma rine; Aircraft; Rail (MAR); and On-road Mobile (On-road).

Maintenance is demonstrated when t he future-year (2020) projected emission totals are below the 2006 attainment year totals.

The emissions data in the tables below are based on the following data

sources:

All On-Road Data source: NOACA Transportation and Modeling Department

All Other Data source: Midwest Regional Planning Organization (MRPO) and Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) Web site (2002 from Base K and all other years from Base M): http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/20 

### Demonstration

VOC

Table 12 Ashtabula County VOC Em ission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non-EGU 5.50 0.94 0.96 1.15 Non-road 9.53 8.94 6.40 6.40 Other 3.31 5.89 5.09 4.66 MAR 0.24 0.25 0.19 0.11 On-road 5.00 4.17 2.59 1.38
TOTAL 23.66 20.19 15.23 13.70 6.49

Table 13 Cuyahoga County VOC Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 Non-EGU 2.13 3.68 4.28 5.26 Non-road 39.01 39.70 30.24 30.24 Other 46.90 44.14 37.04 35.21 MAR 0.94 0.92 0.84 0.72 On-road 62.92 48.61 26.65 13.60
TOTAL 151.96 137.05 99.05 85.03 52.0221 

### Table 14 Geauga County VOC Emissi on Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Non-road 3.98 4.87 3.48 3.48 Other 8.26 9.96 10.03 11.15 MAR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On-road 6.06 5.10 2.88 1.74
TOTAL 18.30 19.93 16.39 16.38 3.55

Table 15 Lake County VOC Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 0.31 0.02 0.02 0.01 Non-EGU 0.18 0.80 0.86 0.95 Non-road 13.22 10.97 8.30 8.30 Other 9.01 9.06 7.43 6.83 MAR 0.13 0.16 0.12 0.05 On-road 13.28 10.87 6.33 3.42
TOTAL 36.13 31.88 23.06 19.56 12.3222 

### Table 16 Lorain County VOC Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 0.33 0.22 0.21 0.18 Non-EGU 2.11 2.96 3.20 3.53 Non-road 13.21 12.79 9.51 9.51 Other 11.96 11.45 9.91 9.51 MAR 0.25 0.24 0.18 0.10 On-road 16.56 13.59 8.02 4.28
TOTAL 44.42 41.25 31.03 27.11 14.14

Table 17 Medina County VOC Emissi on Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 0.20 0.79 0.88 1.00 Non-road 3.90 5.24 3.58 3.85 Other 6.18 7.40 6.49 6.32 MAR 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 On-road 12.34 10.52 6.51 3.73
TOTAL 22.68 24.00 17.50 14.93 9.07

Table 18 Portage County VOC Emissi on Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 0.61 0.95 1.12 1.39 Non-road 4.98 7.36 5.10 5.10 Other 6.45 6.19 5.19 4.78 MAR 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.10 On-road 8.26 6.95 4.39 2.37
TOTAL 20.42 21.58 15.90 13.74 7.8423 

### Table 19 Summit County VOC Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 1.13 1.27 1.38 1.58 Non-road 9.01 12.21 8.91 8.91 Other 18.61 18.17 15.00 14.17 MAR 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.09 On-road 30.58 21.78 13.53 7.02
TOTAL 59.47 53.58 38.95 31.77 21.81

Table 20 Cleveland - Akron – Lorai n Area VOC Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) VOC 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin Ashtabula 5.00 4.17 2.59 1.38 Cuyahoga 62.92 48.61 26.65 13.60 Geauga 6.06 5.10 2.88 1.74 Lake 13.28 10.87 6.33 3.42 Lorain 16.56 13.59 8.02 4.28 Medina 12.34 10.52 6.51 3.73 Portage 8.26 6.95 4.39 2.37 Summit 30.58 21.78 13.53 7.02 COMBINED VOC TOTAL 155.00 121.59 70.90 37.54 84.05

NOx24 

### Table 21 Ashtabula County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 10.69 3.87 3.91 3.91

Non-EGU 0.77 0.65 0.83 1.16 Non-road 1.96 3.47 2.71 1.79 Other 0.51 0.85 0.86 0.86 MAR 7.03 5.24 4.12 3.01 On-road 11.29 9.04 5.20 2.28
TOTAL 32.25 23.12 17.63 13.01 10.11

Table 22 Cuyahoga County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 5.13 5.88 6.50 6.50 Non-EGU 5.63 7.68 7.08 7.79 Non-road 26.39 26.15 19.00 11.12 Other 5.90 13.83 14.01 14.09 MAR 13.89 10.46 8.79 7.04 On-road 128.84 104.67 61.07 33.73
TOTAL 185.78 168.67 116.45 80.27 88.40

Table 23 Geauga County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day)

Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-road 2.07 2.58 1.81 0.97 Other 0.44 1.01 1.01 1.00 MAR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On-road 13.47 11.85 7.63 5.37
TOTAL 15.98 15.44 10.45 7.34 8.1025 

### Table 24 Lake County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 71.16 36.33 33.99 27.74 Non-EGU 1.20 1.15 0.82 0.83 Non-road 4.55 6.01 4.59 3.06 Other 0.97 2.30 2.32 2.33 MAR 3.72 2.98 2.40 1.72 On-road 29.59 25.93 16.62 10.62
TOTAL 111.19 74.70 60.74 46.30 28.40

Table 25 Lorain County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point 56.94 25.00 23.92 21.04 Non-EGU 1.74 2.31 2.01 2.40 Non-road 6.93 8.05 5.86 3.63 Other 0.77 2.66 2.69 2.70 MAR 6.67 4.79 3.88 2.81 On-road 34.23 29.89 19.15 12.01
TOTAL 107.28 72.70 57.51 44.59 28.11

Table 26 Medina County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 0.08 0.26 0.15 0.16 Non-road 2.69 4.13 2.92 1.40 Other 0.76 1.57 1.58 1.59 MAR 1.33 0.89 0.76 0.56 On-road 36.39 32.52 21.53 14.98
TOTAL 41.25 39.37 26.94 18.69 20.68

Table 27 Portage County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day)26 

### Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a Non-EGU 0.00 0.22 0.19 0.23 Non-road 3.07 3.84 2.70 1.33 Other 0.77 1.52 1.53 1.53 MAR 2.61 2.41 2.06 1.49 On-road 17.17 14.83 8.81 3.89
TOTAL 23.62 22.82 15.29 8.47 14.35

Table 28 Summit County NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) Sector 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin
EGU Point n/a n/a n/a n/a

Non-EGU 3.64 3.23 1.68 1.64 Non-road 9.31 9.30 6.30 2.85 Other 2.37 5.51 5.58 5.61 MAR 2.22 2.03 1.75 1.28 On-road 60.43 45.49 24.57 11.35
TOTAL 77.97 65.56 39.88 22.73 42.83

Table 29 Cleveland - Akron – Lorain Area NO x 

### Emission Inventory Totals for Base Year 2002, Estimated 2006, and Projected 2012 and 2020 (tons per day) NO x 

### 2002 Base 2006 Attainment 2012 Interim 2020 Maintenance Safety Margin Ashtabula 11.29 9.04 5.20 2.28 Cuyahoga 128.84 104.67 61.07 33.73 Geauga 13.47 11.85 7.63 5.37 Lake 29.59 25.93 16.62 10.62 Lorain 34.23 29.89 19.15 12.01 Medina 36.39 32.52 21.53 14.98 Portage 17.17 14.83 8.81 3.89 Summit 60.43 45.49 24.57 11.35 COMBINED NOx TOTAL 331.41 274.22 164.58 94.23 179.9927 

### Table 30 Cleveland - Akron – Lorain Area Comparison of 2006 attainment year and 2020 projected emission estimates (tons per day, summer) 2006 2020 Projected Decrease VOC 121.59 37.54 84.05 NO x 

### 274.22 94.23 179.99

As shown in the table above, VOC em issions in the nonattainment area are projected to decrease by 84.05 tons/ day. Point sources show a slight increase due to expectations that t he population will grow in this area; however, cleaner vehicles and fuels are expected to be in place in 2009 and 2018 and they cause an overall drop in VOC emissions.

NO x 

### emissions in the nonattainment ar ea are projected to decrease by 179.99 tons/day. Again, area source emissions and point sources, show a slight increase due to expectations that the population will grow in this area. Decreases from U.S. EPA rules coveri ng Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements 4 

### , Highway HeavyDuty Engine Rule 5 

### , Non-Road Diesel Engine Rule 6 

### , and the Clean Air Interstate Rule 7 

### are factored into the changes.

As identified in Table 11 above, an additional 15 percent margin of safety is being requested for mobile emissions. The additional 15 percent translates into an additional 5.63 tons/day for VOC and 14.13 tons/day for NOx for 2020. U.S. EPA’s conformity regulations allow for allocation, through a revision to the SIP, all or some portion of the overall area’s safety margin (emission reductions from 2006 to 2020) to the mobile emissions budgets for fu ture conformity. Ohio chose to allocate 5.63 tons/day of the 84.05 tons/day safety margin for VOC and 14.13 tons/day of the 179.99 tons/ day safety margin for NOx as a mobile emissions budget 15% safety margin.

Requirement 4 of 5 A demonstration that improvement in air qualit y between the year violations occurred and the year attainment was achieved is based on permanent and enforceable emission reductions and not on temporary adverse ec onomic conditions or unusually favorable meteorology.

4 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR /2000/February/Day-10/a19a.htm 5 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-A IR/1997/October/Day-21/a27494.htm
6 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR /1998/October/Day-23/a24836.htm

7 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-A IR/2005/May/Day-12/a5723a.pdf28 

### Background Ambient air quality data from all monitoring sites indicate that air quality met the NAAQS for ozone in 2006-2008. U. S. EPA’s redesignation guidance (p 9) states: “A state may generally demons trate maintenance of the NAAQS by either showing that future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment invent ory, or by modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emissions ra tes will not cause a violation of the NAAQS.”

Demonstration Permanent and enforceable reductions of VOC and NOx emissions have contributed to the attainment of t he eight-hour ozone st andard. Some of these reductions were due to the applicat ion of tighter feder al standards on new vehicles. Also, Titl e IV of the CAA and the NO x 

### SIP Call required the reduction of NOx emissions from utility sources. Reductions achieved are discussed in greater detail under Chapter Five.

Table 31 Cleveland - Akron – Lorain Area Combined Comparison of 2002 base year and 2006 attainment year on-road and EGU reductions

All On-Road Data source: NOACA Transpor tation and Modeling Department

All Other Data source: Midwest R egional Planning Organization (MRPO) and Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) Web site (Base M): http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/

2002 2006 On-road VOC 155.00 121.59 On-road NO x 

### 331.41 274.22 EGU NO x 

### 143.92 71.08

Requirement 5 of 5 Provisions for future annual updates of the in ventory to enable tracking of the emission levels, including an annual emission st atement from major sources.

Demonstration In Ohio, major point sources in all counties are required to submit air emissions information annually, in acco rdance with U.S. EPA’s Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR). Ohio EPA prepares a new periodic inventory for all ozone precursor emissi on sectors every three (3) years. These ozone precursor inventories will be prepared for future years as necessary to comply with the inventor y reporting requirements established in the CFR. Emissions information will be compared to the 20 02 base year and29 

### the 2020 projected maintenance year inv entories to assess emission trends, as necessary, and to assure conti nued compliance with the ozone standard.30 

## CHAPTER FIVE

CONTROL MEASURES AND REGULATIONS CAA Section107 d)(3)(E)(ii), 107(d)(3)(iv) & 107(d)(3)(E)(v)

Requirement 1 of 6 Section 182(b) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments requires st ates with moderate nonattainment areas to implement RACT under Section 172(c)(1).

Background Section 182(b) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments requires states with moderate nonattainment areas to impl ement RACT under Section 172(c)(1) with respect to the following:

i.) Each category of VOC sources in the area covered by a Control Technology Guideline (CTG) document issued between November 15, 1990, and the date of attainment;

ii.) All VOC sources in the area covered by any CTG issued before November 15, 1990; and

iii.) All other major stationary sources of VOCs that are located in the

area.

Demonstration As required under the 1-hour ozone standard, Ohio EPA submitted VOC RACT rules covering the second and third categories. The U.S. EPA approved Ohio's VOC RACT rule s on April 25, 1996 (61 FR 18255), September 7, 1994 (59 FR 46182), and Oc tober 23, 1995 (60 FR 54308). With respect to the first category, EPA issued CTGs for five source categories in September 2006 and three additional source categories in September 2007. Areas classified as moderate and above were required to submit VOC RACT for the source ca tegories covered by these CTGs, by September 2007 and September 2008, res pectively. Ohio EPA is in the process of adopting all VOC RACT requirements under OAC Chapter 3745- 21 as required under the fi rst category as part of a rulemaking that will be finalized and submitted as a SIP re vision in conjunction with this redesignation request.

RACT requirements are incorporated into permits along with monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting necessary to ensure ongoing compliance. Ohio EPA also has an active enforcement program to address violations31 

### discovered by field office staff. T he Ohio RACT rules are found in OAC Chapter 3745-21 8



### . Requirement 2 of 6 CAA Section 182(b) requires plan provisions for reasonable further progress for moderate nonattainment areas that include a 15 percent reduction in VOC and NOx emissions.

Background Section 182(b)(1) requires reductions as part of a 15 percent rate of progress (ROP) demonstration. The requirement for NOx emission reductions can be waived if it is determined to not contri bute to attainment. However, it was determined that NOx emission reductions would be necessary for Ohio.

As explained in a memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standar ds, entitled “Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” dated May 10, 1995, U.S. EPA interprets the provisions regarding attainment demonstrations to not require SIP submittals if an ozone nonattainment area subject to those requirements is monitoring attainment of the oz one standard. The Clevel and-Akron-Lorain area is monitoring attainment; however, Ohio EPA submitted an attainment demonstration on June 15, 2007 (supplemented February 22, 2008) which is summarized below.

Demonstration The Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area implemented state rule s identified in their 1994 15 percent ROP demonstration as part of the one-time CAAA requirements. These measures include the region’s Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program (E-Che ck), Stage II vapor recovery from gasoline nozzles, enforcement cases, the original architectural coatings rule, and removal of the 100 ton per year cut-off for VOC RACT requirements in the rural portion of the nonattainm ent area (including Stage I Vapor Recovery). While the March 14, 1994, 15 percent ROP plan submittal was not explicitly approved, thes e rules were assumed to be in place as part of the maintenance plan approved as part of the one-hour redesignation on May 7, 1996.

In addition to the 1994 15 percent ROP, Ohio implemented NOx RACT rules 9 

### effective December 22, 2007. Ohio ’s rule has compliance dates of December 22, 2009 and Decem ber 22, 2010. These rule s were submitted to U.S. EPA for consideration as a re vision to the SIP on January 10, 2008.

8 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-21/3745_21.html

9 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-110/3745_110.html32 

### In addition to the above, Ohio also implemented the following control strategies as part of the attainment demonstration:

- Portable fuel containers 10 

### : Ohio’s rule has a compliance date of July 1, 2007. This rule was approved into the SIP on March 30, 2007.

- Architectural and industria l maintenance (AIM) coatings 11 

### : Ohio’s rule has a compliance date of Januar y 1, 2009. This rule was not submitted for SIP approval due to impending changes to the corresponding federal rules, per agreement with U.S. EPA.

- Consumer and commercial products 12 

### : Ohio’s rule has compliance dates of March 15, 2008 and January 1, 2009. These rules were submitted to U.S. EPA for considerat ion as a revision to the SIP on October 4, 2007.

Requirement 3 of 6 Section 182(a)(3)(B) requires states to submit emissions statements.

Background Section 182(a)(3)(B) requires states to submit emissions statements within two years of the enactment of the Cl ean Air Act Amendments and then every three years thereafter.

Demonstration Ohio EPA submitted its emissions st atement SIP on Ma rch 18, 1994 which was approved by U.S. EPA on October 13, 1995 (59 FR 51863). As discussed in Chapter Four (Requirem ent Four), Ohio EPA submits, and commits to submit, emission inventorie s (statements) every three years.

Requirement 4 of 6 Evidence that control meas ures required in past ozone SIP revisions have been fully implemented.

Background In addition to the historic RACT requirements and those mentioned above, the U.S. EPA NO x 

### SIP Call required 22 states to pass rules that would result in significant emission reductions from large EGUs, industrial boilers, and cement kilns in the eastern United States . Ohio passed this rule in 2001. NOx

10 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-21/21_17.pdf

11 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-113/3745_113.html

12 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-112/3745_112.html33 

### SIP Call requirements are incorporated into permits along with monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting necessary to ensure ongoing compliance. Ohio EPA also has an active enforcement program to address violations discovered by field office staff. Co mpliance is tracked through the Clean Air Markets data monitoring program. Beginning in 2004, this rule accounts for a reduction of approximatel y 31 percent of all NO x 

### emissions statewide compared to previous uncontrolled year s. The other 21 states also have adopted these rules.

On March 10, 2004, the U.S. EPA prom ulgated the CAIR. Beginning in 2009, U.S. EPA’s CAIR rule requires EGUs in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia to significantly reduce emissions of NOx. CAIR will replace the NOx SIP Call for EGUs. National NO x 

### emissions will be cut from 4.5 million tons in 2004, to a cap of 1.5 million tons by 2009, and 1.3 million tons in 2018 in 28 states. States were required to submit a CAIR SIP as part of this effort. Ohio submitted a CAIR SIP which was approved by U.S. EPA on February 1, 2007. U.S. EPA projects that in 2009 emissions of NOx will decrease from a baseline of 264,000 tons per year to 91,000 tons per year within Ohio 13



### . Section 182(b) contains additional provisions applicable to moderate nonattainment areas. Section 182(b)(3 ) requires gasoline vapor recovery systems for gasoline dispensing stati ons in the area and section 182(b)(4) requires motor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs.

Demonstration U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA performed modeling that indicated this area would attain the eight-hour ozone standard with the implement ation of the NO x 

### SIP Call. Controls for EGUs formally commenced May 31, 2004. Emissions covered by this program have been gener ally trending downward since 1998 with larger reductions occurring in 2002 and 2003. Data taken from the U.S. EPA Clean Air Markets web site, quantify the gradual NO x 

### reductions that have occurred in Ohio as a result of Title IV of the 1990 CAA Amendments and the beginning of the NO x 

### SIP Call Rule. Ohio developed the NO x 

### Budget Trading Program rules in OAC Chapter 3745-14 14 

### in response to the SIP Call. OAC Chapter 3745-14 regulates EGUs and cert ain non-EGUs under a cap and trade program based on an 85 percent reduction of NOx emissions from EGUs and a 60 per cent reduction of NO x 

### emissions from non-EGUs, compared to historical levels. This cap will stay in place through 2008, at which time the CAIR program will supersede it as discussed above.

13 http://www.epa.gov/cair/pdfs/0053-2228.pdf

14 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-14/3745_14.html34 

### On April 21, 2004, U.S. EPA published Phase II of the NO x 

### SIP Call that establishes a budget for large (great er than 1 ton per day emissions) stationary internal combustion engi nes. Ohio EPA’s OAC rule 3745-14-12 addresses stationary internal combus tion engines, all used in natural gas pipeline transmissions. U.S. EPA approved th is revision to the SIP on April 4, 2008. An 82 percent NO x 

### reduction from 1995 leve ls is anticipated. Completion of the compliance pl an occurred by May 1, 2006 and the compliance demonstration began May 1, 2007. The 2007 controlled NO x 

### emissions is 599 tons statewide for the ozone season.

Section 182(b)(3) requires states to s ubmit Stage II vapor recovery rules no later than November 15, 1992. The U.S. EPA partially approved and partially disapproved Ohio's SIP revision for im plementation of Stage II on October, 20, 1994 (59 FR 52911). As stated in that rulemaking action, with the exception of paragraph 3745-21-09 (DDD)(5 ), U.S. EPA considers Ohio's Stage II program to fully satisfy the crit eria set forth in the September 17, 1993, U.S. EPA guidance document for such programs entitled "Enforcement Guidance for Stage II Vehicle Refueling Control Programs." Furthermore, the September 17, 1993, guidance memorandum states that once onboard vapor recovery regulations are promulgated, the Stage II regulations are no longer applicable for moderate ozone nonatta inment areas. The U.S. EPA promulgated onboard vapor recovery ru les in February 1994. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(6) of t he CAA, Stage II would no longer be required.

The U.S. EPA's final I/M r egulations in 40 CFR Part 85 require the states to submit a fully adopted I/M program by November 15, 1993. U.S. EPA approved Ohio's enhanced I/M program (E -Check), on April 4, 1995 (60 FR 16989) and January 6, 1997 (62 FR 646).

The E-check program and Stage I and Stage II requirements are still being implemented.

Tier II Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards In February 2000, U.S. EPA finalized a f ederal rule to significantly reduce emissions from cars and light trucks, in cluding sport utility vehicles (SUVs). Under this proposal, automakers will be required to sell cleaner cars, and refineries will be required to make cleaner, lower sulfur gasoline. This rule will apply nationwide. The federal rules will phase in between 2004 and 2009. U.S. EPA has estimated that NO x 

### emission reductions will be approximately 77 percent for passenger cars, 86 percent for smaller SUVs, light trucks, and minivans, and 65 to 95 percent reductions for larger SUVs, vans, and heavier trucks. VOC emissi on reductions will be approximately 12 percent for passenger cars, 18 percent for smaller SUVs, light trucks, and minivans, and 15 percent for larger SUVs, vans, and heavier trucks.35 

### Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines In July 2000, U.S. EPA issu ed a final rule for Highway Heavy Duty Engines, a program which includes low-sulfur di esel fuel standards, which will be phased in from 2004 through 2007. This rule applies to heavy-duty gasoline and diesel trucks and buses. This rule will result in a 40 percent reduction in NO x 

### from diesel trucks and buses, a large sector of the mobile sources NO x 

### inventory.

Clean Air Non-road Diesel Rule In May 2004, U.S. EPA issued the Clean Air Non-road Diesel Rule. This rule applies to diesel engines used in industrie s such as construction, agriculture, and mining. It also contains a cleaner fuel standard similar to the highway diesel program. The new standards will cut emissions from non-road diesel engines by more than 90 percent. N on-road diesel equipment, as described in this rule, currently accounts for 47 per cent of diesel particulate matter (PM) and 25 percent of NO x 

### from mobile sources nation wide. Sulfur levels will be reduced in non-road diesel fuel by 99 percent from current levels, from approximately 3,000 parts per million ( ppm) now to 15 ppm in 2009. New engine standards take effect, based on engine horsepower, starting in 2008. Together, these rules will substantially reduce local and regional sources of ozone precursors.

Requirement 5 of 6 Acceptable provisions to provide for new source review.

Background Ohio has a long standing and fully impl emented New Source Review (NSR) program. This is addressed in OAC Chapter 3745-31 15 

### . The Chapter includes provisions for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting program in OAC rules 3745- 31-01 to 3745-31-20. Ohio's PSD program was conditionally approved on Oc tober 10, 2001 (66 FR 51570) and received final approval on January 22, 2003 (68FR 2909) by U.S. EPA as part of the SIP.

Demonstration Any facility that is not lis ted in the 2002 emission invent ory, or for the closing of which credit was taken in demonstrat ing attainment, will not be allowed to construct, reopen, modify, or reconstr uct without meeting all applicable NSR requirements. Once the area is r edesignated, Ohio EPA will implement NSR through the PSD program.

15 http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dapc/regs/3745-31/3745_31.html36 

### Requirement 6 of 6 Assure that all existing control measures will re main in effect after redesignation unless the State demonstrates through phot ochemical modeling that t he standard can be maintained without one (1) or more control measures.

Demonstration Ohio commits to maintaining the af orementioned control measures after redesignation. Ohio hereby commits that any changes to its rules or emission limits applicabl e to VOC and/or NO x 

### sources, as required for maintenance of the ozone standard in t he Cleveland - Akron - Lorain area, will be submitted to U.S. EPA for approval as a SIP revision.

Ohio, through Ohio EPA’s Legal secti on, has the legal authority and necessary resources to actively enforce any violations of its rules or permit provisions. After redesignation, it int ends to continue enforcing all rules that relate to the emission of ozone precur sors in the Cleveland - Akron - Lorain

area.37 

## CHAPTER SIX

CONTINGENCY MEASURES CAA Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)

Requirement 1 of 4 A commitment to submit a revised plan eight (8) years after redesignation.

Demonstration Ohio hereby commits to review its maintenance plan eight (8) years after redesignation, as required by Section 175(A) of the CAA

. Requirement 2 of 4 A commitment to expeditiously enact and im plement additional contingency control measures in response to exceeding specified pr edetermined levels (triggers) or in the event that future violations of the ambient standard occurs.

Demonstration Ohio hereby commits to adopt and ex peditiously implement necessary corrective actions in the following circumstances:

Warning Level Response: A warning level response shall be prompted whenever an annual (1-year) fourth high monitored va lue of 88 ppb occurs in a single ozone season within the maintenance area. A warning level response will consist of a study to determine whether the ozone value indi cates a trend toward higher ozone values or whether emissions appear to be increasing. The study will evaluate whether the trend, if any, is likely to c ontinue and, if so, t he control measures necessary to reverse the trend taking in to consideration ease and timing for implementation as well as econom ic and social considerations. Implementation of necessary controls in response to a warning level response trigger will take place as expediti ously as possible, but in no event later than 12 months from the conclusion of the most recent ozone season (September 30).

Should it be determined through the warn ing level study that action is necessary to reverse the noted trend, the procedures for control selection and implementation outlined under action level response shall be followed.

Action Level Response:

An action level response shall be pr ompted whenever a two-year average fourth high monitored value of 85 parts per billion (ppb) or greater occurs within the maintenance area. A violati on of the standard (t hree-year average fourth high value of 85 ppb or greater) shall also prompt an action level38 

### response. In the event that the action level is triggered and is not found to be due to an exceptional event, malfuncti on, or noncompliance with a permit condition or rule requirement, Ohio EPA in conjunction wit h the metropolitan planning organization or regional c ouncil of governments, will determine additional control measures needed to a ssure future attainment of the NAAQS for ozone. In this case, meas ures that can be implemented in a short time will be selected in order to be in place within 18 months from the close of the ozone season t hat prompted the action leve l. Ohio EPA will also consider the timing of an action leve l trigger and determine if additional, significant new regulations not current ly included as part of the maintenance provisions will be implemented in a timely manner and will constitute our response.

Control Measure Sele ction and Implementation

Adoption of any additional control meas ures is subject to the necessary administrative and legal process. This process will include publication of notices, an opportunity for public heari ng, and other measures required by Ohio law for rulemaking.

If a new measure/control is already promulgated and scheduled to be implemented at the federal or State level, and t hat measure/control is determined to be sufficient to addre ss the upward trend in air quality, additional local measures may be unnec essary. Furthermore, Ohio will submit to U.S. EPA an analysis to dem onstrate the proposed measures are adequate to return the area to attainment.

Requirement 3 of 4 A list of potential contingency measures t hat would be implemented in such an event.

Demonstration Contingency measures to be c onsidered will be selected from a comprehensive list of measures deemed appr opriate and effective at the time the selection is made. The select ion of measures will be based on costeffectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social considerations or other factors that Ohio EPA deems appropriate. Ohio EPA will solicit input from all interested and affected persons in the maintenance area prior to selecting appropriate cont ingency measures. Because it is not possible at this time to determine what control measure will be appropriate at an unspecified time in the future, the list of contingency measures outlined below is not exhaustive.39 

### 1) Lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline program.

2) Tighten RACT on existing source s covered by U.S. EPA Control Technique Guidelines issued in response to the 1990 CAA.

3) Apply VOC RACT to smaller existing sources.

4) One or more transportation control measures sufficient to achieve at least half a percent reduction in actual areawide VOC emissions. Transportation measures will be sele cted from the following, based upon the factors listed above after consultation with affected local governments:

a) trip reduction programs, includi ng, but not limited to, employerbased transportation management plans, areawide rideshare programs, work schedule changes, and telecommuting;

b) traffic flow and transit improvements; and

c) other new or innovative trans portation measures not yet in widespread use that affect s local governments deemed appropriate.

5) Alternative fuel and diesel re trofit programs for fleet vehicle operations.

6) Require VOC or NO x 

### emission offsets for new and modified major

sources.

7) Require VOC or NO x 

### emission offsets for new and modified minor

sources.

8) Increase the ratio of emission offsets required for new sources.

9) Require VOC or NO x 

### controls on new minor sources (less than 100 tons).

10) Adopt NOx RACT for existing combustion sources.

No contingency measure shall be implemented without providing the opportunity for full public participation during which the relative costs and benefits of individual measures, at the ti me they are under consideration, can be fully evaluated.40 

### Requirement 4 of 4 A list of VOC and NO x 

### sources potentially subject to future additional control requirements.

Demonstration The following is a list of VOC and NO x 

### sources potentially subject to future controls.

NO x 

### RACT

• EGUs

• asphalt batching plants

• industrial/commercial and institutional boilers

• process heaters

• internal combustion engines

• combustion turbines

• other sources greater than 100 tons per year

VOC RACT

• architectural and industrial maintenance coatings

• automobile refinishing shops

• cold cleaner degreasers

• synthetic organic compound manufacturing

• organic compound batch processes

• wood manufacturing

• industrial wastewater

• aerospace industry

• bakeries

• plastic parts coating

• volatile organic liquid storage

• industrial solvent cleaning

• offset lithography

• industrial surface coating

• other sources greater than 50 tons per year41 

## CHAPTER SEVEN

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Ohio published notification for a public hear ing and solicitation for public comment concerning the draft redesi gnation petition and maintenance plan in a widely distributed newspaper in the area.

The public hearing to receive comments on the redesignation request was held on October 23, 2012, at 3:30pm at 2110 East Aurora Road Twinsburg, Ohio. The public comment period closed on October 23, 2012. No co mments were received during the public comment period and no testimony was provided at the hearing. Appendix E includes a copy of the public notice and hearing transcript.42 

## CHAPTER EIGHT

CONCLUSIONS

The Cleveland - Akron – Lorain ozone nonattain ment area has attained the 1997 NAAQS for ozone and complied with the applicable provisi ons of the 1990 Amendments to the CAA regarding redesignations of ozone nonattainment areas. Document ation to that effect is contained herein. Ohio EPA has prepared a redesignation request and maintenance plan that meet the requirements of Sect ion 110 (a)(1) of the 1990 CAA.

Based on this presentation, the Cleveland - Akron – Lorain ozone nonattainment area meets the requirements for redesignation under the CAA and U.S. EPA guidance. Ohio has performed an analysis that shows the air quality improvements are due to permanent and enforceable measures. Furthermore, becaus e this area is subject to significant transport of pollutants, significant regional NO x 

### reductions will ensure continued compliance (maintenance) with the standard with an increasing margin of safety.

The State of Ohio hereby requests that the Cleveland - Akron – Lorain ozone nonattainment area be redesignated to attain ment simultaneously wit h U.S. EPA approval of maintenance plan provisions contained herein. In addition, the State of Ohio requests that this maintenance plan satisfy the r equirements of CAA Section 175A (b), for subsequent plan revisions required for areas redesignated for the one-hour ozone standard, as was the case with the Cleveland - Akron – Lorain ozone nonattainment area.

### This page left intentionally blank

## Technical Memorandum Northeast Ohio (AMATS, NOACA, Ashtabula) 1997 8-hr Ozone NAAQS Maintenance SIP Inventory Mobile Source Emissions (VOC and NOx)

September 2012

By AMATS, NOACA and ODOT

In Coordination with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

## Table of Contents

1. Overview ............................................................................................................... 1 2. Urban Travel Dema nd Models ............................................................................. 5 3. Emission Factor Generation ................................................................................. 5 4. Post Proce ssing ................................................................................................... 21 5. Multiple MPO Coordi nation Issu es .................................................................... 23

Appendix A Interagency Consulta tion Documentation Appendix B Post Processing Default Distributions1 

## 1. Overview

This memorandum is intended to document the USEPA MOVES based mobile source air quality analyses performed by the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for the Akron Metropolitan Area Tran sportation Study (AMATS) and Asht abula county areas, and by the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency for the counties of Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain and Medina in its area. These analyses were conducted in support of Ohio EPA’s intent to update State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance budgets for the 1997 8-hr Ozone NAAQS.

The designated maintenance area in northeast Ohio for the 1997 8-hr Ozone NAAQS includes the counties of Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage, and Summit; and Ashtabula. Ohio EPA intends to submit a SIP update to USEPA using the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES).

The inventories include county based, annual to tals of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC’s) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO X 

### ) for the base year 2002, attain ment year 2006, the interim budget year 2012, and the maintenance budget year 2020.

Latest Planning Assumptions

These ozone inventory runs meet the latest pl anning assumption requirement. As discussed in Section 2 of this report, the travel forecast mode ling processes used to develop vehicle miles of travel (VMT) for the AMATS and NOACA areas is calibrated using th e latest population and land use data available and are validated using corres ponding traffic count data. Currently, the travel demand models are validated to year 2005.

U.S. EPA’s most recent emissions software, M OVES, is used for all mobile source emission analyses with MOVES input and output needs being established at various interagency consultation meetings and e-mails be tween January 2012 and April 2012 (See Appendix A ). It was also established that annual emission estimate s would be based on a si ngle-season approach. The emissions estimates are expressed in tons per day.

Finally, the regional emissions analysis incl udes emissions for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO X 

### ).2On Road Mobile Source Emissions Inventory SummaryTables 1 to 4 present a summaryof emissions by county as well as the entire maintenance area for VOCs, and NOx for calendar years2002, 2006, 2012, and 2020. They also include average summer day VMT’s. The remainder of this document focuses on theassumptions behind the analyses.Table 1 – Northeast Ohio On-Road Mobile Source Emissions2002 BaseCOUNTY VOC (tons/day) NOx (tons/day) Daily VMT (miles/day)Ashtabula 5.00 11.29 3,178,599Cuyahoga 62.92 128.84 29,297,006Geauga 6.06 13.47 2,567,692Lake 13.28 29.59 5,738,319Lorain 16.56 34.23 6,972,908Medina 12.34 36.395,888,243Portage 8.26 17.174,782,788Summit 30.58 60.4315,788,738TOTAL 155.00 331.42 74,214,2933Table 2 – Northeast Ohio On-Road Mobile Source Emissions2006 AttainmentCOUNTY VOC (tons/day) NOx (tons/day) Daily VMT (miles/day)Ashtabula 4.17 9.04 3,075,258Cuyahoga 48.61 104.67 29,378,875Geauga 5.10 11.85 2,698,563Lake 10.87 25.93 5,889,045Lorain 13.59 29.89 7,088,351Medina 10.52 32.52 6,165,358Portage 6.95 14.83 5,186,076Summit 21.78 45.49 16,213,278TOTAL 121.59 274.21 75,694,804Table 3 – Northeast Ohio On-Road Mobile Source Emissions2012 InterimCOUNTY VOC (tons/day) NOx (tons/day) Daily VMT (miles/day)Ashtabula 2.59 5.20 3,120,712Cuyahoga 26.65 61.07 31,395,908Geauga 2.88 7.63 2,796,371Lake 6.33 16.62 6,329,046Lorain 8.02 19.15 7,294,998Medina 6.51 21.53 6,268,845Portage 4.39 8.81 5,108,060Summit 13.53 24.57 15,612,531TOTAL 70.90 164.56 77,926,4714Table 4 – Northeast Ohio On-Road Mobile Source Emissions2020 MaintenanceCOUNTY VOC (tons/day) NOx (tons/day) Daily VMT (miles/day)Ashtabula 1.38 2.28 3,335,613Cuyahoga 13.60 33.73 35,342,881Geauga 1.74 5.37 3,090,956Lake 3.42 10.62 7,227,239Lorain 4.28 12.01 8,238,155Medina 3.73 14.98 7,564,982Portage 2.37 3.89 5,499,263Summit 7.02 11.35 16,443,663TOTAL 37.55 94.22 86,742,7525 

## 2. Urban Travel Demand Models

NOACA maintains a PC-based regional travel demand forecasting model on the Citilabs CUBE platform for use in its urban transportation planning process. This model employs the traditional four step modeling process to project existing a nd future traffic volumes and travel patterns on the regional transportation networ ks. The four step process cons ists of trip generation, trip distribution, mode split, and route assignment. Out put from the model is link-by-link directional volumes for four time periods: AM peak, Midday, PM peak, and Night and is added together to create 24-hour traffic volumes for the existing or future regional transportation networks.

The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) holds the transportation model for the AMATS area. AMATS prepares and submits networks for its planning area to ODOT. ODOT prepares networks for Ashtabula County. ODOT's modeling is also run on a PC-based CUBE platform.

These models are uniquely suited to perform emission analyses. The modeling process identifies growth in vehicle miles of travel and changes in regional travel patter ns resulting from the projects that are proposed in these areas’ transportation plans and programs.

Detailed information about NOACA’s travel demand forecast model can be found here: http://www.noaca.org/traveldemandmemo.pdf

Landuse and Socio-economic Data

The areas’ socio-economic model variables reflect the current and expected future regional land uses as best known to staff.

Socio-economic variables were developed fo r all areas based on 2000 Census data and 2030 county-level Ohio Department of Development population projections. Minor adjustments to 2005 data have been made in an effort to have this data correspond to 2005 estimates released by the US Census Bureau.

Until new 2010 Census based projections are developed by the Ohio Department of Development (ODOD), the current data represen ts the best available for this effort.



## 3. Emission Factor Generation

Using MOVES, emission factor files were ge nerated for base year 2002, attainment year 2006, interim year 2012, and maintenance year 2020. A ssumptions for these runs include an I/M program in all but Ashtabula Township. Progr ams and corresponding MOVES parameters were developed in consultation with OEPA.6 

### Technical Details

Table 5 summarizes the settings used in th e MOVES run specification file and the MOVES County-Data Manager. All inputs for the region’s analyses are included in the CD provided to Ohio EPA as part of this document submittal. Fu rther information about specific inputs that are not using default values is also discussed below.

Table 5 – MOVES Inputs RunSpec Parameter Settings
MOVES Version 2010/08/26 Scale County MOVES Modeling Technique Emission Factor Method Rates per Distance Rates per Vehicle Time Span Time Aggregation: Hour 1 Month representing average annual temperatures All hours of day selected 16 speed bins Weekdays only Geographic Bounds Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, G eauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina, Portage and Summit Counties Vehicles/Equipment All related source ty pes, gasoline and diesel; CNG-Transit Buses for base year 2002 & attainment year 2006 Road Type All road types including off-network Pollutants and Processes Total Gaseous Hydrocarbons, Non-Methane Hydrocarbons, Volitile Organic Compounds, NO x 

### Strategies Alternative Vehicle Fuels and Technologies for interim year 2012, and maintenance year 2020 to offset impact of CNG General Output Units = grams, joules and miles Output Emissions Time = hour, Location =county, on-road emission rates by road type and source use type. Advance Performance None County Data Manager Sources Source Type Population Combinatio n of local and default data

Local BMV Vehicle Registration Total

Local BMV population for motorcycle (11), moped (11), bus (41, 42,43), mobile home ( 54), house vehicle (54)

MOVES default fractions for the rest (21,31,32,51,52,53,61,62)

Future year growth rate based on TFM’s household growth rates.7 

### Vehicle Type VMT Travel Demand Forecast Model’s daily VMT EPA annual VMT converter Hourly VMT fractions - ODOT Hourly Percentage I/M Program I/M program info rmation supplied by Ohio EPA Fuel Formulation Default Fuel Supply Default Metereology Data Local data obtained fr om NOAA National Climatic Data Center. Data will consist of monthly high and low temperatures and daily relative humidity for 2006. Ramp Fraction Travel Demand Forecast Model Road Type Distribution ODOT’s 2006 DVMT by FC Age Distribution Local data ODOT from 2009 moto r vehicle registration The same age distribution will be used for all analysis years Average Speed Distribution Default as a place holder Zone Activity Default with necessary modification as prescribed in MOVES userguide.8 

### Temperature and Relative Humidity

Temperatures used for the single season approach are representative of 12 months in 2006 based on NOAA data from the National Climate Data Center website. The month of July was used as the representative month. Data for Cleveland Ho pkins International Airport (CLE) was used for NOACA’s area. Data for Akron-Canton Airpor t (CAK) was used for AMATS and Ashtabula Areas. To get the correct fomat for MOVES, th e data was entered into a spreadsheet provided by EPA which was designed to convert Mobile6 data to MOVES. The average annual hourly temperature and relative humidity distribution profile for Cuya hoga, Lake, Lorain, and Medina Counties can be seen in Table 6a. Table 6b por trays the data for Portage and Summit Counties; and Ashtabula.

Table 6a – Temperature and Relative Humi dity Data for NOACA portion of area

Hour Average Temperature Average Relative Humidity
1 71.0 77.0 2 70.0 79.0 3 69.0 81.0 4 68.0 82.0 5 68.0 83.0 6 68.0 83.0 7 71.0 78.0 8 74.0 72.0 9 77.0 65.0 10 80.0 60.0 11 81.0 56.0 12 82.0 55.0 13 82.0 54.0 14 83.0 51.0 15 83.0 50.0 16 83.0 50.0 17 82.0 51.0 18 82.0 52.0 19 80.0 56.0 20 78.0 60.0 21 75.0 66.0 22 74.0 69.0 23 72.0 73.0 24 71.0 76.09 

### Table 6b – Temperature and Relative Humi dity Data for AMATS portion of area

Hour Average Temperature Average Relative Humidity
1 44.90333333 76 2 43.77166667 78 3 42.8825 79 4 42.23583333 81 5 41.75083333 82 6 41.185 83 7 40.7 82 8 41.10416667 79 9 43.52916667 74 10 47.40916667 71 11 51.37 68 12 54.765 63 13 57.75583333 61 14 59.3725 58 15 59.93833333 56 16 60.1 55 17 59.69583333 57 18 58.56416667 60 19 56.62416667 65 20 54.11833333 69 21 51.6125 71 22 49.43 73 23 47.89416667 7410 

### Ramp Fraction

Ramp fractions were derived using the base ye ar travel demand model VHT fractions. Ramp fractions can be seen in Table 7. Base year fractions were ke pt the same for future years.

Table 7 – Ramp Fractions County roadTypeID roadDesc rampFraction

Ashtabula 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.010
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.180

Cuyahoga 2 Rural Restricted Access 0
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.116

Geauga 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.061
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.061

Lake 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.092
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.092

Lorain 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.107
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.107

Medina 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.058
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.058

Portage 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.010
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.180

Summit 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.010
4 Urban Restricted Access 0.00911Source Type PopulationSource type population is based on a combination of local and MOVES default data. Localdata was obtained from ODPS Bureau ofMotor Vehicles Motor Vehicle Registrationsby county and vehicle type for the baseyear 2002 & attainment year 2006. The MOVESdefault source type population data was obtained from thenational level MOVES inventory runs for each county.OBMV’s vehicle registration data was usedas a control total for all source type population and a sub totalfor Intercity Bus (41),Transit Bus (42), and School Bus (43). The same data was also used to assign source type population of Motorcycle (11) and MotorHome (54). For the rest of source types 21, 31, 32, 51, 52, 53, 61 and62, the fraction of each source type from the MOVES defaultdata was used and adjusted to match up the control total for source type population. Future year source type growth rate is based ontravel demand model’s annual household growthrate from year 2005 to year 2022 for corresponding analysis years. Table 8 showssource type population for the analyzed counties in 2006.Table 8 – Source Type Population for year 2006sourceTypeID sourceTypeName CuyahogaGeaugaLake Lorain Medina Portage Summit Ashtabula11 Motorcycle 25,638 3,931 8,082 10,893 7,097 7,194 16,874 3,64521 Passenger Car 561,351 50,481 118,570 146,537 87,913 84,557 269,462 46,12631 Passenger Truck 367,186 35,709 78,318 97,335 60,304 60,467 185,435 33,20832 Light Commercial Truck 122,671 11,930 26,165 32,518 20,146 2,425 7,436 1,33241 Intercity Bus 377 14 65 32 16 33 135 6242 Transit Bus 208 8 36 17 9 17 71 3343 School Bus 2,595 95 446 217 113 199 826 38151 Refuse truck 307 47 72 91 72 64 150 3752 Single Unit Short-haul Truck 17,525 2,669 4,094 5,177 4,114 2,664 6,179 1,51653 Single Unit Long-haul Truck 1,894 288 442 559 445 340 789 19354 Motor Home 4,916 1,385 2,100 4,399 2,628 2,549 4,687 17761 Comb Short-haul Truck 3,781 496 1,058 1,098 1,358 1,289 2,229 72762 Comb Long-haul Truck 4,073 535 1,139 1,182 1,463 1,483 2,564 83612 

### I/M Program

I/M program information was supplied by Ohio EPA. The I/M program was applied to all analysis years for every geogra phy with the exception of Ashtabula County. The I/M program MOVES inputs reflect: 1) ASM 2525 Phase-in Cutpoints, for model years up to 1995 2) Evaporative Gas Cap Check, for model years up to 1995 3) Evaporative System OBD Check, for model years 1996 & newer 4) Exhaust OBD Check, for model years 1996 & newer

The compliance rate and failure rates are obtained from Ohio EPA and compliance factors are calculated. These are applied to Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lora in, Medina, Portage & Summit counties and for all model years.

Vehicle Age Distribution

Vehicle age distribution informa tion was derived using ODPS vehi cle registration data (2009). The data was given to OEPA who supplied a VIN decoder that allowed ODOT to create correctly formatted MOVES inputs. A different age distribution file is used for each county. Table 9 provides a sample dist ribution for Cuyahoga County. The distributions for other areas can be found in the electronic input submittals. The same age distributions were used for all analysis years.13 

### Table 9 – Vehicle Age Distribution for Cuyahoga County

yearid sourcetypei d ageid ageFractio

n
2006 11 30 0.106925

2006 11 29 0.018783

2006 11 28 0.026115

2006 11 27 0.014845

2006 11 26 0.011632

2006 11 25 0.01317

2006 11 24 0.014596

2006 11 23 0.00998

2006 11 22 0.007536

2006 11 21 0.009369

2006 11 20 0.009074

2006 11 19 0.008758

2006 11 18 0.010636

2006 11 17 0.013827

2006 11 16 0.017312

2006 11 15 0.021

2006 11 14 0.02272

2006 11 13 0.021951

2006 11 12 0.02582

2006 11 11 0.03761

2006 11 10 0.044965

2006 11 9 0.05413

2006 11 8 0.060081

2006 11 7 0.075515

2006 11 6 0.063725

2006 11 5 0.066418

2006 11 4 0.076963

2006 11 3 0.068658

2006 11 2 0.044852

2006 11 1 0.021362

2006 11 0 0.001675

2006 21 30 0.031927

2006 21 29 0.001002

2006 21 28 0.001082

2006 21 27 0.001608

2006 21 26 0.002483

2006 21 25 0.003053 2006 21 24 0.003691

2006 21 23 0.005082

2006 21 22 0.006714

2006 21 21 0.010246

2006 21 20 0.013223

2006 21 19 0.017294

2006 21 18 0.023152

2006 21 17 0.028475

2006 21 16 0.034352

2006 21 15 0.044328

2006 21 14 0.040195

2006 21 13 0.048119

2006 21 12 0.050547

2006 21 11 0.056333

2006 21 10 0.057401

2006 21 9 0.054497

2006 21 8 0.058427

2006 21 7 0.059745

2006 21 6 0.059884

2006 21 5 0.060329

2006 21 4 0.058016

2006 21 3 0.060513

2006 21 2 0.05262

2006 21 1 0.04119

2006 21 0 0.014472

2006 31 30 0.002999

2006 31 29 0.000209

2006 31 28 0.000285

2006 31 27 0.000524

2006 31 26 0.000797

2006 31 25 0.001189

2006 31 24 0.001723

2006 31 23 0.002477

2006 31 22 0.003177

2006 31 21 0.00491

2006 31 20 0.006233

2006 31 19 0.008686

2006 31 18 0.011764

2006 31 17 0.02159

2006 31 16 0.026281

2006 31 15 0.0328114 2006 31 14 0.031973

2006 31 13 0.036449

2006 31 12 0.043884

2006 31 11 0.049373

2006 31 10 0.053384

2006 31 9 0.052496

2006 31 8 0.068594

2006 31 7 0.073487

2006 31 6 0.079743

2006 31 5 0.092016

2006 31 4 0.082702

2006 31 3 0.07979

2006 31 2 0.07549

2006 31 1 0.04345

2006 31 0 0.011516

2006 32 30 0.006296

2006 32 29 0.000508

2006 32 28 0.000914

2006 32 27 0.001219

2006 32 26 0.002844

2006 32 25 0.002945

2006 32 24 0.002945

2006 32 23 0.004367

2006 32 22 0.005078

2006 32 21 0.008531

2006 32 20 0.010358

2006 32 19 0.009851

2006 32 18 0.014522

2006 32 17 0.024576

2006 32 16 0.03727

2006 32 15 0.054737

2006 32 14 0.036458

2006 32 13 0.043668

2006 32 12 0.041637

2006 32 11 0.048746

2006 32 10 0.055753

2006 32 9 0.040317

2006 32 8 0.038997

2006 32 7 0.03788

2006 32 6 0.029349

2006 32 5 0.029958 2006 32 4 0.086016

2006 32 3 0.091398

2006 32 2 0.13923

2006 32 1 0.063166

2006 32 0 0.030466

2006 41 30 0.002855

2006 41 29 0.001428

2006 41 28 0.001428

2006 41 27 0.001428

2006 41 26 0.000714

2006 41 25 0.00571

2006 41 24 0

2006 41 23 0.003569

2006 41 22 0.009279

2006 41 21 0.003569

2006 41 20 0.007852

2006 41 19 0.010707

2006 41 18 0.017131

2006 41 17 0.009993

2006 41 16 0.009279

2006 41 15 0.0207

2006 41 14 0.019986

2006 41 13 0.0207

2006 41 12 0.024982

2006 41 11 0.042827

2006 41 10 0.071378

2006 41 9 0.06424

2006 41 8 0.059957

2006 41 7 0.097787

2006 41 6 0.114918

2006 41 5 0.063526

2006 41 4 0.114918

2006 41 3 0.086367

2006 41 2 0.044254

2006 41 1 0.068522

2006 41 0 0

2006 42 30 0.010638

2006 42 29 0

2006 42 28 0

2006 42 27 0

2006 42 26 0.00531915 2006 42 25 0

2006 42 24 0

2006 42 23 0

2006 42 22 0

2006 42 21 0.005319

2006 42 20 0

2006 42 19 0

2006 42 18 0

2006 42 17 0

2006 42 16 0.021277

2006 42 15 0.005319

2006 42 14 0.010638

2006 42 13 0.005319

2006 42 12 0.047872

2006 42 11 0.079787

2006 42 10 0.026596

2006 42 9 0.058511

2006 42 8 0.079787

2006 42 7 0.079787

2006 42 6 0.079787

2006 42 5 0.074468

2006 42 4 0.170213

2006 42 3 0.074468

2006 42 2 0.12766

2006 42 1 0.037234

2006 42 0 0

2006 43 30 0.000585

2006 43 29 0

2006 43 28 0

2006 43 27 0.001171

2006 43 26 0.001171

2006 43 25 0.005855

2006 43 24 0.002342

2006 43 23 0.007611

2006 43 22 0.008197

2006 43 21 0.005855

2006 43 20 0.008197

2006 43 19 0.014052

2006 43 18 0.007611

2006 43 17 0.009368

2006 43 16 0.009953 2006 43 15 0.011124

2006 43 14 0.010539

2006 43 13 0.044496

2006 43 12 0.050937

2006 43 11 0.088993

2006 43 10 0.104801

2006 43 9 0.067916

2006 43 8 0.100703

2006 43 7 0.058548

2006 43 6 0.050351

2006 43 5 0.052693

2006 43 4 0.052693

2006 43 3 0.0726

2006 43 2 0.049766

2006 43 1 0.059719

2006 43 0 0.042155

2006 51 30 0.014851

2006 51 29 0.002475

2006 51 28 0

2006 51 27 0

2006 51 26 0

2006 51 25 0.002475

2006 51 24 0.00495

2006 51 23 0.012376

2006 51 22 0

2006 51 21 0.00495

2006 51 20 0.00495

2006 51 19 0.00495

2006 51 18 0.007426

2006 51 17 0.012376

2006 51 16 0.024752

2006 51 15 0.066832

2006 51 14 0.044554

2006 51 13 0.027228

2006 51 12 0.044554

2006 51 11 0.027228

2006 51 10 0.044554

2006 51 9 0.044554

2006 51 8 0.059406

2006 51 7 0.09901

2006 51 6 0.03217816 2006 51 5 0.071782

2006 51 4 0.128713

2006 51 3 0.071782

2006 51 2 0.094059

2006 51 1 0.04703

2006 51 0 0

2006 52 30 0.014851

2006 52 29 0.002475

2006 52 28 0

2006 52 27 0

2006 52 26 0

2006 52 25 0.002475

2006 52 24 0.00495

2006 52 23 0.012376

2006 52 22 0

2006 52 21 0.00495

2006 52 20 0.00495

2006 52 19 0.00495

2006 52 18 0.007426

2006 52 17 0.012376

2006 52 16 0.024752

2006 52 15 0.066832

2006 52 14 0.044554

2006 52 13 0.027228

2006 52 12 0.044554

2006 52 11 0.027228

2006 52 10 0.044554

2006 52 9 0.044554

2006 52 8 0.059406

2006 52 7 0.09901

2006 52 6 0.032178

2006 52 5 0.071782

2006 52 4 0.128713

2006 52 3 0.071782

2006 52 2 0.094059

2006 52 1 0.04703

2006 52 0 0

2006 53 30 0.096774

2006 53 29 0

2006 53 28 0

2006 53 27 0 2006 53 26 0.064516

2006 53 25 0.032258

2006 53 24 0.032258

2006 53 23 0.032258

2006 53 22 0.064516

2006 53 21 0.032258

2006 53 20 0.064516

2006 53 19 0.032258

2006 53 18 0

2006 53 17 0.032258

2006 53 16 0.064516

2006 53 15 0.032258

2006 53 14 0.193548

2006 53 13 0.096774

2006 53 12 0.064516

2006 53 11 0

2006 53 10 0

2006 53 9 0

2006 53 8 0

2006 53 7 0

2006 53 6 0.032258

2006 53 5 0

2006 53 4 0

2006 53 3 0

2006 53 2 0

2006 53 1 0

2006 53 0 0.032258

2006 54 30 0.155541

2006 54 29 0.007973

2006 54 28 0.012568

2006 54 27 0.014595

2006 54 26 0.023378

2006 54 25 0.021622

2006 54 24 0.02473

2006 54 23 0.024865

2006 54 22 0.026486

2006 54 21 0.028514

2006 54 20 0.023649

2006 54 19 0.017838

2006 54 18 0.023514

2006 54 17 0.02756817 2006 54 16 0.032432

2006 54 15 0.037838

2006 54 14 0.032973

2006 54 13 0.034054

2006 54 12 0.036351

2006 54 11 0.045

2006 54 10 0.045811

2006 54 9 0.032297

2006 54 8 0.034595

2006 54 7 0.037027

2006 54 6 0.038378

2006 54 5 0.039054

2006 54 4 0.039595

2006 54 3 0.034595

2006 54 2 0.028784

2006 54 1 0.014865

2006 54 0 0.003514

2006 61 30 0.026394

2006 61 29 0.001795

2006 61 28 0.001969

2006 61 27 0.0027

2006 61 26 0.004162

2006 61 25 0.005771

2006 61 24 0.007714

2006 61 23 0.007951

2006 61 22 0.01355

2006 61 21 0.017698

2006 61 20 0.017692

2006 61 19 0.018667

2006 61 18 0.023951

2006 61 17 0.030517

2006 61 16 0.044041

2006 61 15 0.043611

2006 61 14 0.038558

2006 61 13 0.047786

2006 61 12 0.044426

2006 61 11 0.056475

2006 61 10 0.062624

2006 61 9 0.052544

2006 61 8 0.054525

2006 61 7 0.065875 2006 61 6 0.064946

2006 61 5 0.065997

2006 61 4 0.06129

2006 61 3 0.052723

2006 61 2 0.042316

2006 61 1 0.018436

2006 61 0 0.003296

2006 62 30 0.001821

2006 62 29 0

2006 62 28 0

2006 62 27 0.00091

2006 62 26 0.000759

2006 62 25 0.002731

2006 62 24 0.001517

2006 62 23 0.001972

2006 62 22 0.00349

2006 62 21 0.005159

2006 62 20 0.0044

2006 62 19 0.003945

2006 62 18 0.007131

2006 62 17 0.016083

2006 62 16 0.021393

2006 62 15 0.028827

2006 62 14 0.034593

2006 62 13 0.025338

2006 62 12 0.059172

2006 62 11 0.080413

2006 62 10 0.107419

2006 62 9 0.075861

2006 62 8 0.04582

2006 62 7 0.047944

2006 62 6 0.099833

2006 62 5 0.090882

2006 62 4 0.057047

2006 62 3 0.112729

2006 62 2 0.017145

2006 62 1 0.038993

2006 62 0 0.00667618 

### Road Type Distribution

Road type distribution is base d on the ODOT’s 2006 daily vehicle miles of travel (DVMT) by functional classification (FC). Th ese inputs vary by county. A sa mple road type distribution input for Cuyahoga County can be seen in Ta ble 10. Cuyahoga County does not contain rural road types 2 and 3. The distributions for othe r areas can be found in the electronic input submittals.

Table 10 – Road Type Distribution for Cuyahoga County

sourceTypeI D roadTypeI D roadTypeVMTFract ion
11 1 0
11 2 0
11 3 0
11 4 0.47072
11 5 0.52928
21 1 0
21 2 0
21 3 0
21 4 0.47072
21 5 0.52928
31 1 0
31 2 0
31 3 0
31 4 0.47072
31 5 0.52928
32 1 0
32 2 0
32 3 0
32 4 0.47072
32 5 0.52928
41 1 0
41 2 0
41 3 0
41 4 0.47072
41 5 0.52928
42 1 0
42 2 0
42 3 0
42 4 0.47072
42 5 0.52928
43 1 0
43 2 0 43 3 0
43 4 0.47072
43 5 0.52928
51 1 0
51 2 0
51 3 0
51 4 0.47072
51 5 0.52928
52 1 0
52 2 0
52 3 0
52 4 0.47072
52 5 0.52928
53 1 0
53 2 0
53 3 0
53 4 0.47072
53 5 0.52928
54 1 0
54 2 0
54 3 0
54 4 0.47072
54 5 0.52928
61 1 0
61 2 0
61 3 0
61 4 0.47072
61 5 0.52928
62 1 0
62 2 0
62 3 0
62 4 0.47072
62 5 0.5292819 

### Vehicle Type VMT and VMT Fractions

VMT by MOVES vehicle types is subdivided into f our sections namely HPMS base year VMT, monthly VMT fractions, daily VMT fractions and hourly VMT fractions. For NOACA’s counties, HPMS base year VMT was derived by using the converter tool, US EPA’s AADVMT Calculator_HPMS.xls. The converter take s average annual daily VMT (AADVMT) and generates MOVES input data based on default factors. AADVMT is computed by using total daily VMT obtained from travel demand mode l and fractioning it with the MOVES default distance travelled by each source type to come up vehicle type VMTs. The same method was used to generate data for other analysis years.

ODOT uses weigh in motion (WIM) data to de velop inputs for the counties it models. The inputs for each geographic area can be seen in the supplied input files. Sample HPMS VMT for 2006 is provided in Table 11.

Table 11 – Yearly HPMS VMT for 2006

HPMS VType ID Cuyahoga Geauga Lake Lorain

10 36,279,066 3,579,545 7,368,124 8,813,331
20 5,393,830,829 465,757,651 1,063,615,481 1,285,052,331
30 3,355,271,802 313,217,056 667,810,586 811,206,625
40 13,433,997 2,917,998 3,199,949 4,083,872
50 207,639,389 30,311,606 45,080,548 55,677,744
60 308,438,715 38,801,503 79,624,414 81,166,499

HPMS VType

ID Medina Portage Summit Ashtabula

10 8,039,568 7,033,066 22,040,247 4,172,818
20 1,054,314,702 1,254,291,780 3,930,704,234 744,189,232
30 687,173,536 387,008,969 1,212,810,142 229,617,950
40 5,307,954 3,955,747 12,396,534 2,347,001
50 60,452,301 29,243,117 91,642,188 17,350,359
60 136,727,415 69,428,531 217,575,389 41,192,93920 

### Output Emission Factors

Table 12 shows the first record in a MOVES sample output (rate per distance) emission file for year 2006. For any given month, day of week, hour of the day, pollutant, and process; the rate per distance varies by road type, and speed bin. Rates per distan ce emissions are applied to link and intrazonal VMT.

Table 12 – Sample Emission File (Rate per Distance) for year 2006
Heading: MOVESScenarioID MOVESRunID yearID monthID dayID hourID Record: Cuyahoga 1 2006 7 5 1 Heading: linkID pollutantID processID sourceTypeID SCC fuelTypeID
Record: 9.9E+08 87 11 54 0 Heading: modelYearID roadTypeID avgSpeedBinID temperature relHumidity ratePerDistance

Record: 0 5 3 68 82 0.02331



### Table 13 shows the first record in a MOVES sample output (rate pe r vehicle) emission file for year 2006. The rate per vehicle varies for any co mbinations of month, da y of week, hour of the day, pollutant, and process. Rates per vehicle em issions are applied to the vehicle souce type population.

Table 13 – Sample Emission File (Rate per Vehicle) for year 2006

Heading: MOVESScenarioID MOVESRunID yearID monthID dayID Record: Cuyahoga 1 2006 7 5 Heading: hourID zoneID pollutantID processID sourceTypeID Record: 1 990180 1 2 11 Heading: SCC fuelTypeID modelYearID temperature ratePerVehicle
Record: 0 0 71 0.002892



### Table 14 shows the first record in a MOVES sample output (rate per profile) emission file for year 2006. The rate per vehicle varies for any comb inations of month, day of week, hour of the day, pollutant, and process. Rates per vehicle em issions are applied to the vehicle source type population.

Table 14 – Sample Emission File (Rate per Profile) for year 2006

Heading: MOVESScenarioID MOVESRunID yearID monthID dayID Record: Cuyahoga 1 9.9E+09 2006 5 Heading: hourID pollutantID processID sourceTypeID SCC
Record: 1 12 11 Heading: fuelTypeID modelYearID temperature ratePerVehicle
Record: 0 0 71 0.008215



### All output files are available in the electronic submittal.21 

## 4. Post Processing

Total emissions were computed with the aid of several custom programs by ODOT. The process uses data on daily and directiona l 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 rewritten code able to handle the newer model network formats and MOVES generated em ission factors.

First step (movessource.exe) aggregates the emi ssion factors. Rate per profile and rate per vehicle files are combined duri ng this process. The resultant emission factor files contain emission factors broadly classified into total vehicles, cars and trucks by pollutant, by average speed, road type and hour of day.

The second step in the the process involves ru nning ODOT postcms.exe to calculate hourly link volumes based on the percentage of the daily vo lume (travel demand mode l output) determined by a link’s facility and area type. Link speeds fro m the travel demand model are not used in the analysis. The speeds are estimated as a post-pr ocess to the model based on HCM methods using a link’s volume-to-capacity ratio and link group code. The daily to hourly volume conversion percentages and speed tables can be seen in Appendix B.

The third step (movesnet.exe) uses a combinati on of the MOVES emission factors and the hourly link volumes that are output of the postcms.exe program. The hourly volumes are multiplied by the MOVES emission factor for the correspondi ng hour of day, speed bin, and roadtype to 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 fourth step, (movesveh.exe), calculates ve hicle-based emissions for each source type for each hour of the day. The vehicle source type is based on a combination of local and default data. The final vehicle emissions for each count y are the sum of all individual hourly emissions for all vehicle types.

Intrazonal trips do not get loaded onto the networ k, so the fifth step in the process requires a separate method to account for those trips that us e local roads to travel within a zone. The movesintra.exe program uses intrazonal trips to estimate VMT using the area in square miles and intrazonal trips of each zone . The zone is assumed circular and th e radius of the circle is used as the average trip length for these intrazonal trips. Intrazonal emissions are then calculated by combining MOVES generated emissions with estim ated intrazonal VMT. The emission rates are the same as those used to calculated link based emissions.

The final step is to summarize link, vehicle, a nd intrazonal emissions for each county, pollutant, and analyzed year. Summary emissions for each pollutant, county, and scenario year in northeast Ohio were previously displayed in tables 1-4.22Figure 4 – Emission Calculation ProcessMOVESTFMODOTCMAQNOACAAQODOTMOVESNETODOTMOVESINTRAEmission FactorsRate/Vehicle24HR NETSpeedCalculatorLNKGRPCMAQ NETCMAQ ReportHOURLY.CSVIntrazonal Trips24HRVehicle Trips4 PeriodsVehicle TripMatrices4 PeriodsAssigned NETVHTVMT4 CongestedSPEEDTAZ Area (Sq.mi)2. ODOT’s CMAQ POST-PROCESSOR3. INTRASOZNAL TRIP CALCULATION4. ODOT’s MOVESPOST-PROCESSOR1. NOACA AQPOST-PROCESSORRamp FractionsAverageSpeed DistributionRoad TypeVMT fractionsVehicle TypeAnnual VMTsFuel supply &formulationI/M ProgramAge DistributionMeteorologyZone ActivitySource TypePopulationTons/dayOUTPUTEMISSIONSEmission FactorsRate/DistanceEmission FactorsRate/ProfileMOVESSOURCEODOTODOTMOVESVEHMOVESSOURCEODOT23 

## 5. Multiple MPO Coordination Issues

AMATS, NOACA, ODOT, and OEPA have a long hi story of working together in air quality issues. All parties have had an opportunity to review and approve th is summary document.

## Appendix A

Interagency Consultation DocumentationFrom: Brunello, Nino [ mailto:Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us ] Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 7:57 AM To: B Davis Cc: V Nemalapuri; E Kang Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

Yes, there is a way to adjust only the VMT. The Cube application GUI offers a growth factor selection of either 1.00 or 1.08. The application then generates a script to be executed where the adjustment factor is a variable. That variable can overwritten or hard-coded in the script.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nino Brunello, P.E. Modeling & Forecasting Section Division of Planning Ohio Department of Transportation (614) 752-5742

From: B Davis [ mailto:BDavis@mpo.noaca.org ] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:22 PM To: Durham, William F; krodi@eastgatecog.org ; Brunello, Nino; PJividen@AkronOhio.gov ; CBaker@akronohio.gov ; Jeff Dutton; NGILL@morpc.org ; aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Saleem Salameh; tmazur@lacrpc.com ; smapel@lcounty.com ; randy.durst@movrc.org ; sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; David Gedeon; rsharma@belomar.org Cc: Dines, Jennifer; Morris.Patricia@epamail.epa.gov ; Moore, Dave; Byram, Mark; John Getchey; Lisa Pompeo Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

NOACA concurs with the adjustment.

Any chance there is a way to adjust VMT without adjusting vehicle population? Excess evaporative emissions don’t belong in the photochemical grid models that are often one use for the outputs of these analyses. I guess the grid modelers could reduce evaporatives by 8% before they plug them in.

Bill Davis NOACA (216)-241-2414, Ext. 251

From: Durham, William F [ mailto:William.F.Durham@wv.gov ] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:48 PM To: Kathleen Rodi; Brunello, Nino; PJividen@AkronOhio.gov ; CBaker@akronohio.gov ; Jeff Dutton; B Davis; NGILL@morpc.org ; aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Saleem Salameh; tmazur@lacrpc.com ; smapel@lcounty.com ; randy.durst@movrc.org ; sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; David Gedeon; rsharma@belomar.org Cc: Dines, Jennifer; Morris.Patricia@epamail.epa.gov ; Moore, Dave; Byram, Mark; John Getchey; Lisa Pompeo Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

Nino: I don’t object to factoring the vehicle population up, but I’m not sure the factor should be as high as the one historically used for VMT. The ve hicle pop characterizes the vehicles operating in the domain, which relates to starts and diurnal/evap emissions. Factoring the vehicle pop up does seem to capture the increases in actual summer starts but it may also artificially inflate the evap emissions. That may be O.K. as long as we’re conscious of it. Fred From: Kathleen Rodi [ mailto:krodi@eastgatecog.org ] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:40 PMTo: Brunello, Nino; PJividen@AkronOhio.gov ; CBaker@akronohio.gov ; Jeff Dutton; Bill Davis; Nick Gill ( NGILL@morpc.org ); aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Saleem Salameh; Lima ( tmazur@lacrpc.com ); smapel@lcounty.com ; 'randy.durst@movrc.org' ( randy.durst@movrc.org ); sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; David Gedeon; rsharma@belomar.org Cc: Durham, William F; Dines, Jennifer; Patricia Morris ( Morris.Patricia@epamail.epa.gov ) ( Morris.Patricia@ epamail.epa.gov ); Moore, Dave; Byram, Mark; John Getchey; Lisa Pompeo Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

We concur with the adjustment. Kathleen

From: Brunello, Nino [ mailto:Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us ] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:30 PM To: PJividen@AkronOhio.gov ; CBaker@akronohio.gov ; Jeff Dutton; Bill Davis; Nick Gill ( NGILL@morpc.org ); aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Saleem Salameh; Lima ( tmazur@lacrpc.com ); smapel@lcounty.com ; 'randy.durst@movrc.org' ( randy.durst@movrc.org ); sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; David Gedeon; rsharma@belomar.org ; Kathleen Rodi Cc: Fred Durham; Dines, Je nnifer; Patricia Morris ( Morris.Patricia@epamail.epa.gov ) ( Morris.Patricia@ epamail.epa.gov ); Moore, Dave; Byram, Mark Subject: FW: Ozone Summer Day Factors

All:

After discussions with ODOT, OEPA, WVDEP, and USEPA, we are of the opinion that there needs to be an additional seasonal factor for summer when calculating ozone pollutants.

There is currently an adjustment for increasing aver age daily VMT (+ 8%) which was used in previously when using Moblie6 to generate emission factors. With MOVES, there is a vehicle component used in addition to VMT, so there needs to be an adjustment from average number of vehicles to the number of vehicles in summer day. We propose to use the same 8% increase.

We need to have an inter-agency agreement on this, and would prefer to do it via email (to make it easier on all of us). Please respond with your approval and/or questions.

Thanks,

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nino Brunello, P.E. Modeling & Forecasting Section Division of Planning Ohio Department of Transportation (614) 752-5742

From: Dines, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:04 AM To: Brunello, Nino; Durham, William F Cc: Moore, Dave Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

Nino and Fred, talked to Pat and sh e agrees that BOTH VMT and number of vehicles should have the 1.08 factor applied.

Pat suggested we should have consultation on this. I told her ODOT is taking the lead on this project and I’d let Dave know........she says email is fine.

Thanks,Jennifer Dines Manager, State Implementation Plan and Rulemaking Section Division of Air Pollution Control Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Wk (614) 644-3696 Fax (614) 644-3681

From: Brunello, Nino Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 12:59 PM To: Dines, Jennifer; Durham, William F Subject: RE: Ozone Summer Day Factors

Jennifer/Fred,

There is another item that needs to be discussed. Since we now calculate emission rates for both VMT and number of vehicles, does there need to be a summer adjustment factors for vehicles as well? This was not done with MOBILE, so we have nothing to follow. If I had to guess, I would think that there would be an increase, but I couldn’t guess as to how many or what factor to use. Maybe just use 1.08 in absence of anything better? Thoughts?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nino Brunello, P.E. Modeling & Forecasting Section Division of Planning Ohio Department of Transportation (614) 752-5742

From: Durham, William F [mailto:William.F.Durham@wv.gov] Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 8:50 AM To: Brunello, Nino Cc: Dines, Jennifer Subject: Ozone Summer Day Factors

Nino: I spoke with Jenn this morning and outlined the issue of Summer day VMT v. Average daily VMT. We agreed that Pat Morris may be able to shed some light on the question. Jenn & my calendars are open next Mon. and Tues. afternoon. Please give me a call & I’ll patch Jenn in. Fred

************************************************************************************** ************** From: E Kang Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:10 PM To: R Eckner; B Davis; G Grano Cc: V Nemalapuri Subject: Using truck vmts for MOVES post-processing

Needs for truck model improvement and validation followed by truck counts can be discussed in two different context: SIP/Conformity and freight planning.

1) OZONE SIPDuring a conference call with Nino last Friday, he notified us that ODOT’s MOVES post-processors are able to handle Vehicle class VMTs in two ways: 1) separate Auto and Truck VMTs, 2) combined VMTs as we did for PM SIP.

In terms of using separate VMTs, Nino asked me the confidence level of truck vmts from model and suggested to test both ways. This will be the fi rst time to test Truck VMTs with a purpose .

From: V Nemalapuri Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:16 AM To: nino.brunello@dot.state.oh.us Cc: B Davis; G Grano; E Kang Subject: FW: 8-Hour Ozone SIP Budget Revisions

Good Morning Nino,

We need to get started on ozone SIP budget revisions as mentioned in Dave Moore’s email. How about a kick off meeting? Let me know your availability.

Thanks, Vijay Krishna Nemalapuri Northeast Ohio Areawide C oordinating Agency (NOACA) 1299 Superior Ave., Cleveland OH 44114 (216) 241-2414 x321 vnemalapuri@mpo.noaca.org

From: Moore, Dave [ mailto:Dave.Moore1@dot.state.oh.us ] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 9:18 AM To: aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Andy Reser ; B Davis; Bob Muransky ; Curtis Baker ; Jeff Dutton ; krodi@eastgatecog.org ; Lamar Daniel; Leigh Oesterling ; mhill@lcounty.com1 ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; Nick Gill ; Phyllis Jividen ; Randy Durst; Saleem Salameh ( ssalameh@intelos.net ); sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; Thom Mazur ; henry@tmacog.org Cc: Dines, Jennifer; Oesterling, Leigh; Byram, Ma rk; Brunello, Nino; Giaimo, Greg; Phinney, Scott; Granato, Sam; Anderson, Rebekah Subject: 8-Hour Ozone SIP Budget Revisions

All,

The current Ohio Ozone SIP budgets were develo ped using US EPA’s MOBILE software. Effective March 2, 2012 US EPA’s AQ software of record will be MOVES. Post March 2 nd all new SIP and Transportation Conformity actions will be required to use MOVES. In order to assure ongoing positive Ohio MPO T-Plan/TIP conformity actions, the Ohio Ozone SIP budgets need updated to reflect MOVES outputs.

Updating the Ozone SIP budgets to MOVES requires new MOVES based mobile emission inventories for the SIP attainment year and budget y ears, consistent with the attached pdf. Please contact your ODOT CO travel demand modeling liaison to coordinate needed transportation network, modeling runs, and emission factor post processing to establish these new SIP mobile emission inventories. Our goal is to submit the new inventories and documentation to OEPA on or before April 1, 2012.

We have a working agreement with OEPA to establish SIP budgets, assuming sufficient safety margin is available, at 15% above the emission inventory. As you are developing the new MOVES based budgetyear inventories, it may be a good idea to compare the resulting inventories plus 15% to MOVES based TPlan interim and horizon year emissions as a check to assure positive future year conformity findings.Thanks DM

*************************************************************************************

-----Original Message----- From: Moore, Dave [ mailto:Dave.Moore1@dot.state.oh.us ] Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 1:30 PM To: Byram, Mark; Brunello, Nino; Giaimo, Greg; Granato, Sam; Dines, Jennifer; aramirez@mvrpc.org ; Andy Reser ; B Davis; Bob Muransky ; Curtis Baker ; Jeff Dutton ; krodi@eastgatecog.org ; Lamar Daniel; Leigh Oesterling ; mhill@lcounty.com1 ; mikepap@bhjmpc.org ; Nick Gill ; Phyllis Jividen ; Randy Durst; Saleem Salameh ( ssalameh@intelos.net ); sschmid@clarkcountyohio.gov ; Thom Mazur ; henry@tmacog.org Subject: FW: Ozone SIP updates

All,

See Pat Morris' message below regarding updating the Ohio Ozone SIP MOBILE based budgets to MOVES. Recall that MOVES is required to be used for SIP development and conformity determinations, effective March 2, 2012. A number of Ohio MPOs have quadrennial T-Plan/conformity determinations due in August, 2012. The existing Ozone SIP budgets need updated (US EPA Approval) to MOVES prior to initiating the conformity process on the Plan Updates.

In order to provide sufficient lead time for OEPA and US EPA to complete their respective SIP Update processes and still provide plenty of time for the MPO conformity process, we collectively need get going, yesterday.

Thanks DM

-----Original Message----- From: Patricia Morris [ mailto:Morris.Patricia@epamail.epa.gov ] Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 11:18 AM To: Moore, Dave; Dines, Jennifer Subject: Ozone SIP updates

Dave and Jen,

Something that was helpful to Indiana was a table of years that need to be updated for each of the Indiana ozone areas. I can put together a table for the Ohio areas too.

There are several ways to update the ozone SIPs with MO VES budgets. One is to simply replace the MOBILE6 budgets with MOVES budgets in the old approved maintenance plan SIP. This requires that the monitored attainment year in the SIP and the b udget years are modeled and replaced with MOVES emissions. For example, I have looked at Canton's approved ozone SIP (it is on the OEPA website) and 2004 is the attainment year in the SIP and 2009 and 20 18 are budget years. These are the years that would need new MOVES emissions numbers. You need to have the 2004 attainment year included so that safety margin can be allocated to the budget years.

Question 7 of the Policy Guid ance on the Use of MOVES2010 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes (PDF) (17 pp, 148K, EPA-420-B-09-046, December 2009) gives details of what needs to be addressed in the SIP revision. This type of a revision could be processed at our office in about 90 days from formal submission.Another option is do the the full 8-year maintenance plan update required by the Clean Air Act. Eight years after formal redesignation to attainment, a new maintenance plan is needed to extend the maintenance time frame out another 10 years. This update would not only update the earlier budgets with MOVES but would provide for 10 more years of maintenance. It would need to examine and project point and area source emissions. OAQPS has guidance on maintenance plan updates. This type of submittal would take up to 18 months to process at our office.

I will start work on putting together a table of all the Ohio ozone areas and the years in the approved ozone maintenance plan, for each area, that will need to be modeled for the update to MOVES.

Pat

Patricia Morris Environmental Scientist USEPA Region 5 (312) 353-8656 morris.patricia@epa.gov

## Appendix B Post Processing Default DistributionsHOUR 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2021 22 23PCTADTURB FWY 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 2.2 5.2 7.3 6.4 5.2 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 6.1 7.2 8.0 7.9 5.8 4.2 3.42.9 2.2 1.5URB ART 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.5 3.5 5.7 5.5 5.1 5.3 6.2 6.5 6.4 6.8 7.6 8.2 8.1 6.2 4.8 4.03.0 1.9 1.3RUR FWY 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.3 2.2 3.7 5.2 5.4 5.4 5.6 5.6 5.7 6.0 6.5 7.1 7.5 7.0 5.6 4.5 3.83.2 2.5 2.0RUR ART 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 1.0 2.4 4.8 6.2 5.5 5.3 5.5 5.8 6.0 6.0 6.7 7.6 8.1 7.7 5.6 4.2 3.52.8 1.9 1.3PCTADT TRKURB FWY 2.1 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.4 3.0 3.9 4.6 5.3 6.0 6.3 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.3 5.8 5.2 4.6 4.1 3.7 3.43.1 2.8 2.4URB ART 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.3 3.9 5.9 6.9 6.7 7.1 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.4 7.2 6.0 5.0 3.7 2.8 2.31.9 1.5 1.3RUR FWY 2.6 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.1 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.1 5.6 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.6 5.3 4.9 4.6 4.3 4.03.8 3.5 3.1RUR ART 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.6 2.2 3.0 4.2 5.3 6.1 6.7 7.0 7.1 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.3 5.5 4.6 3.8 3.1 2.62.3 2.1 1.7PCTDIRURB FWY 38 40 40 46 56 64 70 70 68 62 58 52 52 52 50 46 38 38 46 52 4642 42 40URB ART 44 46 44 48 54 62 66 68 64 56 54 52 50 50 50 46 40 38 46 52 4846 46 46RUR FWY 44 46 48 54 60 68 68 64 58 54 52 50 50 52 52 48 42 40 44 48 4844 46 44RUR ART 40 42 44 48 58 66 72 68 60 56 54 50 50 50 50 46 40 38 46 50 4644 44 44LOS E VC 0 0.625 1.25 1.875 2.5 3.125 3.75 4.375 5 5.625 6.25 6.875 7.5 8.125 8.75 9.375 10 10.625 11.25 11.875 12.513.125 13.75 14.375SPEEDVCcurve1 75 75 75 75 75 75 74.9 74.8 74.6 74.2 73.5 72.3 70.5 67.8 64.2 59.5 54 47.7 41.2 34.9 28.923.7 19.2 15.5curve2 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 69.9 69.8 69.6 69.2 68.4 67.1 65.1 62.2 58.2 53 47 40.5 33.9 27.722.2 17.6 13.8curve3 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 64.9 64.8 64.4 63.8 62.6 60.5 57 52 45.4 37.8 29.9 22.716.7 12.1 8.6curve4 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59.9 59.8 59.6 59.1 58.2 56.7 54.3 50.8 46.1 40.3 33.8 27.321.3 16.2 12.2curve5 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 54.9 54.7 54.3 53.6 52.3 50 46.5 41.5 35.3 28.521.9 16.1 11.5curve6 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59.9 59.8 59.7 59.4 59.1 58.5 57.7 56.5 55 53.1 50.7 47.9 44.741.1 37.3 33.4curve7 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 54.9 54.9 54.7 54.5 54.2 53.8 53.1 52.2 50.9 49.3 47.3 44.9 42.139 35.7 32.2curve8 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 49.9 49.9 49.8 49.6 49.4 49 48.5 47.7 46.7 45.4 43.8 41.8 39.536.8 33.9 30.9curve9 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 44.9 44.8 44.7 44.4 44.1 43.6 43 42.1 40.9 39.4 37.6 35.533.1 30.5 27.8curve10 50 50 50 50 49.9 49.8 49.7 49.4 49 48.4 47.5 46.5 45.1 43.5 41.7 39.6 37.3 34.9 32.4 29.8 27.324.9 22.6 20.4curve11 50 50 50 50 50 49.9 49.7 49.4 48.9 48 46.7 44.9 42.5 39.6 36.2 32.6 28.7 25 21.4 18.2 15.312.9 10.8 9curve12 50 50 50 50 50 49.9 49.8 49.6 49.1 48.2 46.8 44.5 41.4 37.5 32.9 28 23.1 18.7 14.9 11.8 9.27.2 5.7 4.5curve13 40 40 40 40 40 40 39.9 39.8 39.5 39.2 38.6 37.8 36.7 35.3 33.5 31.4 29 26.4 23.7 21.1 18.516.1 13.9 12curve14 40 40 40 40 40 39.9 39.8 39.6 39.1 38.5 37.5 36.1 34.3 32.1 29.4 26.5 23.5 20.5 17.7 15.1 12.810.7 9 7.6curve15 40 40 40 40 40 39.9 39.7 39.4 38.8 37.9 36.5 34.7 32.3 29.5 26.4 23.2 20 17 14.3 11.9 9.98.2 6.8 5.6curve16 35 35 35 35 35 34.9 34.8 34.5 34 33.2 32.1 30.5 28.5 26.1 23.5 20.6 17.9 15.2 12.8 10.7 8.97.4 6.1 5.1curve17 35 35 35 35 35 34.9 34.7 34.4 33.9 33.1 32 30.3 28.3 25.8 23.1 20.3 17.5 14.9 12.5 10.4 8.67.2 5.9 4.9curve18 35 35 35 35 35 34.9 34.6 34.2 33.5 32.4 30.9 28.8 26.3 23.4 20.4 17.4 14.6 12.1 9.9 8.1 6.65.4 4.4 3.6curve19 30 30 30 30 30 29.9 29.8 29.5 29 28.2 27.1 25.6 23.7 21.5 19.1 16.6 14.2 12 10 8.3 6.85.6 4.6 3.8curve20 30 30 30 30 30 29.9 29.7 29.4 28.9 28.1 26.9 25.3 23.4 21.1 18.6 16.1 13.6 11.4 9.5 7.8 6.45.3 4.3 3.6curve21 30 30 30 30 30 29.9 29.7 29.3 28.7 27.7 26.2 24.4 22.1 19.6 17 14.4 12 9.9 8.1 6.6 5.44.4 3.6 2.9VC RATIO TO LOS CONVERSION (VALUE SHOWN IS LOWER LIMIT FOR THAT LOS)(URBAN ROADS USE SPEED BREAKS BELOW FOR LOS DETERMINATION)(ALL USE THE BASE VC'S TO DETERMINE EXCEEDANCE)BASE RUR2 FWYA 0.00 0.00 0.00B 0.30 0.00 0.25C 0.50 0.10 0.40D 0.70 0.30 0.60E 0.90 0.50 0.80F 1.00 1.00 1.00F+ 1.10 1.10 1.10F++ 1.30 1.30 1.30SPEED VC RATIO BREAKS FOR URBAN STREETS (HIGHEST SPEED FOR GIVEN LOS & FF SPEED)FFS B C D E F>47 42. 34. 27. 21. 16.>37 35. 28. 22. 17. 13.>32 30. 24. 18. 14. 10.<33 25. 19. 13. 9. 7.LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLD BY AREANUM LOS DEFINITION1 F CINCINNATI,CLEVELAND,COLUMBUS CENTRAL MPO COUNTIES (CUY,FRA,HAM)2 E OTHER TMA MPOS (AKRON,CANTON,DAYTON,TOLEDO,YOUNGSTOWN + NON-CENTRAL COUNTIES FROM 1)3 E OTHER MPOS & PARTS OF AREAS 1 & 2 OUTSIDE URBANIZED AREA4 E RURAL NON MPO COUNTIESPEAK SPREADING MODEL INFO (SET MAX ITERATIONS TO 0 TO DISABLE PEAK SPREADING)MAX VC RATIO FWY: 1.30MAX VC RATIO ART: 1.30MAX ITERATIONS : 1000TRUCK PCE: 2.0AQ SEASON FACTOR: 1.08MODEL CLASS PARAMETERS (MAX 4 CLASSES, HOURS 0-23 W/ NO OVERLAP IN CLASS, ALLOCATE ENTIRE CLASS AS TRUCK(1) OR NOT(0))CLS TRK 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0CLS BEG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0CLS END 23 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0CLS NUM 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0

### Public Notice Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for th e Ohio Portion of the Cleveland-AkronLorain Ozone Basic Nonattainment Area

Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lor ain, Medina, Portage, and Summit Counties

Notice is hereby given that the Director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, (Ohio EPA) is requesting that the United States Environment al Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) revise the current maintenance pl an for the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area, including Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, M edina, Portage, and Summit Counties, with respect to the 1997 eight -hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Ohio EPA s ubmitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for this area on March 7, 2009 Subsequently , U.S. EPA approved this requests on September 15, 2009. Air quality monitoring data collected in the region demonstrated attainment of the NAAQS and t here was evidence that the im proved air quality is due to permanent, enforceable emission reductions. In addition, existing requirements are sufficient to maintain the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard in this area throughout the maintenance period.

Ohio EPA is now requesting a revision to the maintenance plan to update mobile emission projections and conformity budget s based on emission rates generated from U.S. EPA’s latest mobile emissions model , the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulation (MOVES) 2010. In December 2009, MOVES r eplaced MOBILE6.2 as the U.S. EPA’s official emission factor model.

These actions must be noticed to allow public comment and to satisfy U.S. EPA requirements for public involvem ent in SIP related activities. This notice addresses Ohio EPA’s reliance on the emission projecti ons as evidence of attainment and maintenance and the commitment to institute contingen cy measures if ambient exceedances or violations trigger the cont ingency plan requirements. Written comments will be received on or before October 23, 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 Revised Code, a public hearing on this redesignation request will be conducted as fo llows: October 23 at 3:30 P.M., at Northeast Ohio Air Quality Agency located at 2110 East Aurora Road Twinsburg, Ohio.

### All interested persons are entit led to attend or be represent ed at the hearings and give written or oral comments on these changes. All oral comments presented at the hearing, and all written statements submitted at the hearing or to the above address by the close of business on October 23, 2012 will be considered by Ohio EPA prior to final action on this redesignation. Written statem ents submitted after October 23, 2012 may be considered as time and circumstances pe rmit, but will not be part of the official record of the hearing.

This redesignation and maintenance request is available on Ohio EPA DAPC’s Web page for electronic downloading at: http ://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/SIP/1997.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 either Erica Fetty, (614)-644-2310, Erica.Fetty@epa.state.oh.us or Jennifer Dines at (614) 644-3696, Jennifer.Dines@epa.state.oh.us or mailed to Erica Fetty or Jennifer Dines at the above address.1



### 2

3 

### OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

PUBLIC HEARING

4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



### 5 In re:



### 6 Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the 7 Ohio Portion of the Cleveland, Akron, Lorain Ozone Basic 8 Nonattainment Area

9 - - - - - - - - - - - -



### 10

11



### 12 Transcript of proceedings before the Ohio

13 Environmental Protection Agency, taken at the Ohio

14 EPA Office, 2110 E. Aurora Road, Twinsburg, Ohio,

15 on Tuesday, October 23, 2012, commencing at

16 3:30p.m.



### 17

18



### 19 APPEARANCES:

20 Mary McCarron, Ohio EPA Public Interest Center

21

22



### 23 riJ:":Uco V f'.\.;


### 24 

# OCT 2 f! 

# 2012
251



### 2

3

4

5



### 6

7

8



### 9



### 10

11



### 12

13

14

15



### 16

17

18



### 19

20

21

22

23

24



### 25 

### PROCEEDINGS

MS. McCARRON: My name lS 

### Mary

McCarron. I am the public involvement manager

for Ohio Environmental Protection Agency's

Public Interest Center. I will be presiding

over today's hearing.

The purpose of the hearing today is to

obtain comments from any interested person
regarding Ohio EPA's proposed action.

The State of Ohio is requesting that

U.S. EPA revise the current maintenance plan

for the Cleveland, Akron, Lorain area,
including Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake

Lorain, Medina, Portage and Summit Counties,

with respect to the 1997 eight-hour ozone

national ambient air quality standard.

Ohio EPA is now requesting a revision

to the maintenance plan to update mobile

emission projections and conformity budgets

based on emission rates generated from U.S.

EPA's latest mobile emissions model, the Motor

Vehicle Emission Simulation 2010. In December

2009, MOVES replaced MOBILE6.2 as the U.S.

EPA's official emission factor model.

All interested persons are entitled to1



### 2

3

4



### 5

6

7



### 8

9



### 10

11



### 12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19



### 20

21

22



### 23

24

25 

## P\Jbe3

attend or be represented, and to present oral

and/or written comments concerning the

proposed action. All written and oral

comments received as part of the official

record will be considered by the director of

Ohio EPA.

To be included in the official record,

written comments must be received by Ohio EPA

by close of business, today, October 23, 2012.

No one is present at this time. We

will go off the record until 4:00.

(Recess taken. )

MS. McCARRON: The time is now 4:00

and this hearing is adjourned.
(Hearing concluded at 4:00p.m.)

### 1 State of Ohio, SS: 2 

### County of Cuyahoga.

3

4

5

6

7



### 8

9



### 10

11



### 12

13

14



### 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



### 23

24



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

This certifies that the foregoing is a true

and correct transcript of the proceedings had

before the State of Ohio, Environmental

Protection Agency, taken at the Ohio EPA

Office, 2110 E. Aurora Road, Twinsburg,

Ohio,on Tuesday, October 23, 2012, commencing

at 3:30p.m.

In Re:
Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Ozone Basic Nonattainment Area, Cleveland, Akron, Lorain

COURT REPORTER

FINCUN-MANCINI COURT REPORTERS 1801 East Ninth Street Suite 1720 Cleveland, Ohio 44114 

### (216) 696-2272 (216) 696-2275 FAX