91

The primary diagnostic analysis is source apportionment modeling with CAMx to provide more 

quantitative information on source region (and source sector) impacts (Baker, 2007b). 

Specifically, the model estimated the impact of 18 geographic source regions (which are 

identified in Figure 69) and 6 source sectors (EGU point, non-EGU point, on-road, off-road, 

area, and biogenic sources) at PM2.5 monitoring sites in the region.

 

Figure 69. Source regions (left) and key monitoring sites (right) for PM2.5 modeling analysis

Modeling results for 2012 (Base K) and 2018 (Base M) are provided in Appendix III for several 

key monitoring sites. For each monitoring site, there are two graphs: one showing sector-level 

contributions, and one showing source region and sector-level contributions in terms of absolute 

modeled values.

The sector-level results (see, for example, Figure 70) show that EGU sulfate, non-EGU-sulfate, 

and area organic carbon emissions generally have the largest contributions at the key monitor 

locations (> 15% each). Ammonia emissions are also important contributors (> 10%). The 

source group contributions vary by receptor location due to emissions inventory differences. 

Figure 70. Source-sector results for Detroit (left) and Cleveland (right) monitors – 2018 (Base M)

Cook County

Steubenville

Granite City

Detroit

Cincinnati

Cleveland
92

The source region results (see, for example, Figure 71) show that while nearby areas generally 

have the highest impacts (e.g., Detroit nonattainment counties contribute 40% to high sites in 

southeastern Michigan, and Cleveland nonattainment counties contribute 35% to high sites in 

northeastern Ohio), there is an even larger regional impact (i.e., contribution from other states).

Figure 71. Source-region results for Detroit (left) and Cleveland (right) monitors – 2018 (Base M)

Summary: Air quality modeling and other supplemental analyses were performed to estimate 

future year PM2.5 concentrations. Based on this information, the following general conclusions 

can be made:

• Existing (“on the books”) controls are expected to produce significant 

improvement in PM2.5 air quality.

• The choice of the base year affects the future year model projections. It is not 

clear how much of this is attributable to differences in meteorology, because, as 

noted in Section 3, PM2.5 concentrations are not as strongly influenced by 

meteorology as ozone.

• Most sites are expected to meet the current PM2.5 standard by the applicable 

attainment date, except for sites in Detroit, Cleveland, and Granite City.

• Current monitoring data show significant nonattainment in these areas (e.g., 

peak design values on the order of 16 – 17 ug/m3). It is not clear whether 

sufficient emission reductions will occur in the next couple of years to provide for 

attainment. States are conducting local-scale analyses for Detroit, Cleveland, 

and Granite City, in particular, to identify appropriate additional local controls.

• Attainment by the applicable attainment date is dependent (possibly) on actual 

future year meteorology and (more likely) on actual future year emissions (e.g., if 

the emission reductions associated with the “on the books” controls are 

achieved, then attainment is likely). On the other hand, if either of these 

conditions is not met (especially, with respect to emissions), then attainment may 

be less likely.
93

Section 5. Reasonable Progress Assessment for Regional Haze

Air quality modeling and other information were used to assess the improvement in visibility that 

would be provided by existing (“on the books”) controls and possible additional control 

programs. In determining reasonable progress for regional haze, Section 169A of the Clean Air 

Act and EPA’s visibility rule requires states to consider five factors:

• costs of compliance

• time necessary for compliance

• energy and non-air quality environmental impacts of compliance

• remaining useful life of any existing source subject to such requirements

• uniform rate of visibility improvement needed to attain natural visibility conditions 

by 2064

The uniform rate of visibility improvement requirement can be depicted graphically in the form of 

a “glide path” (see Figure 72).

Figure 72. Visibility “glide paths” for northern Class I areas (units: deciviews)

5.1 Class I Areas Impacted

EPA’s visibility rule requires a state to “address regional haze in each mandatory Class I 

Federal area located within the State and in each mandatory Class I Federal area located 

outside the State which may be affected by emissions from within the State.” (40 CFR Part 

51.308(d)) To meet this requirement, technical analyses conducted by the RPOs were 

consulted to obtain information on areas of influence and culpability for Class I areas in the 

eastern U.S. (MRPO, 2007). A summary of this information is provided in Table 1 (MRPO, 

2007). The table shows that every LADCO State impacts multiple Class I areas in the eastern 

U.S.

5

10

15

20

25

2004 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2064

Voyageurs Bounday Waters

Isle Royale Seney

Voyageurs Boundry Waters

20% best visibility days

20% worst visibility days

Baseline

Conditions

Baseline

Conditions

Natural

Conditions
94

Table 14. Draft List of Class I Areas Impacted by LADCO States

AREA NAME IL IN MI OH WI

81.401 Alabama.

Sipsey Wilderness Area (1) (1)

81.404 Arkansas.

Caney Creek Wilderness Area (2), (4) (2), (4) (2), (4)

Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area (1),(2),(4),(5) (2), (4) (2), (4) (2)

81.408 Georgia.

Cohotta Wilderness Area

Okefenokee Wilderness Area

Wolf Island Wilderness Area

81.411 Kentucky.

Mammoth Cave NP (1), (2), (5) (1), (2), (5) (1), (2) (1), (2), (5)

81.412 Louisiana.

Breton Wilderness Area

81.413 Maine.

Acadia National Park (3) (3) (3) (3)

Moosehorn Wilderness Area. (3) (3) (3) (3)

81.414 Michigan.

Isle Royale NP. (1), (2) (1), (2) (1), (2) (1), (2)

Seney Wilderness Area (1), (2) (1), (2) (1), (2) (1), (2) (1), (2)

81.415 Minnesota.

Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (2) (2) (2) (1), (2)

Voyageurs NP (2) (2) (1), (2)

81.416 Missouri.

Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area (2), (4), (5) (2), (4), (5) (2), (4) (2)

Mingo Wilderness Area (2), (4), (5) (2), (4), (5) (2) (2), (4) (2)

81.419 New Hampshire.

Great Gulf Wilderness Area (3) (3) (3) (1), (3)

Pres. Range-Dry River Wilderness Area.

81.42 New Jersey.

Brigantine Wilderness Area (3) (3) (1), (3) (1), (3)
95

81.422 North Carolina.

Great Smoky Mountains NP{1} (1) (1) (1)

Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Area{2}

Linville Gorge Wilderness Area.

Shining Rock Wilderness Area.

Swanquarter Wilderness Area

81.426 South Carolina.

Cape Romain Wilderness

81.428 Tennessee.

Great Smoky Mountains NP{1}. (1) (1) (1)

Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness{2}

81.431 Vermont.

Lye Brook Wilderness (2), (3) (2), (3) (2), (3) (1), (2), (3)

81.433 Virginia.

James River Face Wilderness. (2) (2) (2) (2), (5)

Shenandoah NP (2), (3) (1), (2), (3) (2), (3) (1),(2),(3),(5)

81.435 West Virginia.

Dolly Sods/Otter Creek Wilderness. (2), (3) (1), (2), (3) (1), (2), (3) (1),(2),(3),(5)

Key

(1) MRPO Back Trajectory Analyses

(2) MRPO PSAT Modeling

(3) MANE-VU Contribution Assessment

(4) Missouri-Arkansas Contribution Assessment

(5) VISTAS Areas of Influence
96

5.2 Future Year Modeling Results

For regional haze, the calculation of future year conditions assumed: 

• baseline concentrations based on 2000-2004 IMPROVE data, with updated 

(subsitituted) data for Mingo, Boundary Waters, Voyageurs, Isle Royale, and 

Seney (see Section 2.3);

• use of the new IMPROVE light extinction equation; and

• use of EPA default values for natural conditions, based on the new IMPROVE 

light extinction equation.

The uniform rate of visibility improvement values for the 2018 planning year were derived (for 

the 20% worst visibility days) based on a straight line between baseline concentration value 

(plotted in the year 2004 -- end year of the 5-year baseline period) and natural condition value 

(plotted in the year 2064 -- date for achieving natural conditions). Plots of these “glide paths” 

with the Base M modeling results are presented in Figure 73 for Class I areas in the eastern 

U.S. A tabular summary of measured baseline and modeled future year deciview values for 

these Class I areas are provided in Table 15 (2002 base year) and Table 16 (2005 base year)13.

The haze results show that several Class I areas in the eastern U.S. are expected to be greater 

than (less improved than) the uniform rate of visibility improvement values (in 2018), including 

those in northern Michigan and several in the northeastern U.S. Many other Class I areas in the 

eastern U.S. are expected to be less than (more improved than) the uniform rate of visibility 

improvement values (in 2018). As noted above, states should consider these results, along with 

information on the other four factors, in setting reasonable progress goals. 

An assessment of the five factors was performed for LADCO and the State of Minnesota by a 

contractor (EC/R, 2007). Specifically, ECR examined reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions 

from EGUs and industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) boilers; NOx emissions from mobile 

sources and reciprocating engines and turbines; and ammonia emissions from agricultural 

operations. The impacts of “on the books” controls were also examined to provide a frame of 

reference for assessing the impacts of the additional control measures.

The results of ECR’s analysis of the five factors are summarized below:

Factor 1 (Cost of Compliance): The average cost effectiveness values (in terms of $M 

per ton) are provided in Table 16. For comparison, cost-effectiveness estimates 

previously provided for “on the books” controls include:

CAIR SO2: $700 - $1,200, NOx: $1,400 – $2.600 ($/T)

BART SO2: $300 - $963, NOx: $248 - $1,770

MACT SO2: $1,500, NOx: $7,600

Most of the cost-effectiveness values for the additional controls are within the range of 

cost-effectiveness values for “on the books” controls.

 

13 Model results reflect the grid cell where the IMPROVE monitor is located.
97

Voyageurs Boundary Waters 

Isle Royale Seney

 

Mammoth Cave Upper Buffalo 

Figure 73. Visibility modeling results for Class I areas in eastern U.S.
98

Mingo Shenandoah

Dolly Sods Bringantine 

Lye Brook Acadia

Figure 73 (cont.) Visibility modeling results for Class I areas in eastern U.S.
Worst 20% 2018 2009 2012 2018 2018 2018

Site Baseline URP OTB OTB OTB

EGU2 

(5-state region)

EGU2 

(12-state region)

BOWA1 19.86 17.70 19.05 19.01 18.94 18.40 17.72

VOYA2 19.48 17.56 19.14 19.19 19.18 18.94 18.38

SENE1 24.38 21.35 22.98 22.71 22.38 21.26 20.63

ISLE1 21.59 19.21 20.46 20.28 20.04 19.09 18.64

HEGL1 26.75 22.76 24.73 24.34 23.85 23.01 22.04

MING1 28.15 24.08 25.18 24.67 24.01 22.53 21.45

CACR1 26.36 22.55 24.01 23.55 22.99 22.43 21.57

UPBU1 26.27 22.47 24.02 23.58 23.06 22.31 21.38

MACA1 31.37 26.14 28.06 27.03 25.52 24.27 22.57

DOSO1 29.04 24.23 24.86 23.59 22.42 21.60 20.15

SHEN1 29.31 24.67 24.06 22.79 21.57 20.43 19.42

JARI1 29.12 24.48 24.81 23.79 22.42 21.59 20.88

BRIG1 29.01 24.68 25.87 25.25 24.39 23.91 23.45

LYBR1 24.45 21.16 21.80 21.32 20.69 20.18 19.79

Best 20% 2018 2009 2012 2018 2018 2018

Site Baseline URP OTB OTB OTB

EGU2 

(5-state region)

EGU2 

(12-state region)

BOWA1 6.42 6.42 6.71 6.73 6.87 6.83 6.81

VOYA2 7.09 7.09 7.21 7.25 7.34 7.31 7.26

SENE1 7.14 7.14 7.19 7.19 7.23 7.06 6.91

ISLE1 6.75 6.75 6.57 6.51 6.47 6.20 6.06

HEGL1 12.84 12.84 12.61 12.62 12.61 12.43 12.02

MING1 14.46 14.46 13.96 13.93 13.94 13.74 13.33

CACR1 11.24 11.24 10.91 10.92 10.90 10.75 10.42

UPBU1 11.71 11.71 11.47 11.46 11.42 11.28 11.01

MACA1 16.51 16.51 16.06 15.91 15.54 15.18 14.75

DOSO1 12.28 12.28 11.72 11.45 11.19 10.93 10.67

SHEN1 10.93 10.93 9.73 9.53 9.17 9.05 8.90

JARI1 14.21 14.21 13.56 13.33 12.97 12.65 12.46

BRIG1 14.33 14.33 13.74 13.69 13.47 13.32 13.21

LYBR1 6.36 6.36 6.12 6.05 5.96 5.88 5.82

Table 15. Haze Results - Round 4 (Based on 2000-2004)
Worst 20% 2018 2009 2012 2018 2018

Site Baseline URP OTB OTB OTB OTB+Will DO

BOWA1 19.86 17.94 18.45 18.33 17.94 17.92

VOYA2 19.48 17.75 18.20 18.07 17.63 17.66

SENE1 24.38 21.64 23.10 23.04 22.59 22.42

ISLE1 21.59 19.43 20.52 20.43 20.09 20.13

ISLE9 21.59 19.43 20.33 20.22 19.84 19.82

HEGL1 26.75 23.13 24.72 24.69 24.22 24.17

MING1 28.15 24.27 25.88 25.68 24.74 24.83

CACR1 26.36 22.91 23.39 23.29 22.44 22.40

UPBU1 26.27 22.82 23.34 23.27 22.59 22.55

MACA1 31.37 26.64 27.11 27.01 26.10 26.15

DOSO1 29.05 24.69 24.00 23.90 23.00 23.04

SHEN1 29.31 25.12 24.99 24.87 23.92 23.95

JARI1 29.12 24.91 25.17 25.01 24.06 24.12

BRIG1 29.01 25.05 25.79 25.72 25.21 25.22

LYBR1 24.45 21.48 22.04 21.86 21.14 21.14

ACAD1 22.89 20.45 21.72 21.72 21.49 21.49

Best 20% 2018 2009 2012 2018 2018

Site Baseline Max OTB OTB OTB OTB+Will DO

BOWA1 6.42 6.42 6.21 6.19 6.14 6.12

VOYA2 7.09 7.09 6.86 6.83 6.75 6.76

SENE1 7.14 7.14 7.57 7.58 7.71 7.78

ISLE1 6.75 6.75 6.62 6.59 6.60 6.62

ISLE9 6.75 6.75 6.56 6.55 6.52 6.50

HEGL1 12.84 12.84 12.51 12.32 11.66 11.64

MING1 14.46 14.46 14.07 13.89 13.28 13.29

CACR1 11.24 11.24 10.88 10.85 10.52 10.52

UPBU1 11.71 11.71 11.13 11.08 10.73 10.74

MACA1 16.51 16.51 15.76 15.69 15.25 15.25

DOSO1 12.28 12.28 11.25 11.23 11.00 11.01

SHEN1 10.93 10.93 10.13 10.11 9.91 9.91

JARI1 14.21 14.21 13.38 13.38 13.14 13.14

BRIG1 14.33 14.33 14.15 14.08 13.92 13.92

LYBR1 6.37 6.37 6.25 6.23 6.14 6.15

ACAD1 8.78 8.78 8.86 8.86 8.82 8.82

Table 16. Haze Results - Round 5.1 (Based on 2000-2004)
101

Table 17. Estimated Cost Effectiveness for Potential Control Measures

Average Cost effectiveness ($/ton)

Emission category Control strategy Region SO2 NOX NH3

EGU EGU1 3-State 1,540 2,037

9-State 1,743 1,782

EGU2 3-State 1,775 3,016

9-State 1,952 2,984

ICI boilers ICI1 3-State 2,992 2,537

9-State 2,275 1,899

ICI Workgroup 3-State 2,731 3,814

9-State 2,743 2,311

3-State 538 Reciprocating engines 

emitting 100 tons/year or 

more 9-State 506

Reciprocating engines 

and turbines

3-State 754 Turbines emitting 100 

tons/year or more 9-State 754

3-State 1,286 Reciprocating engines 

emitting 10 tons/year or more 9-State 1,023

3-State 800 Turbines emitting 10 

tons/year or more 9-State 819

10% reduction 3-State 31 - 2,700 Agricultural sources

9-State 31 - 2,700

15% reduction 3-State 31 - 2,700

9-State 31 - 2,700

Mobile sources Low-NOX Reflash 3-State 241

9-State 241

MCDI 3-State 10,697

9-State 2,408

Anti-Idling 3-State (430) - 1,700

9-State (430) - 1,700

Cetane Additive Program 3-State 4,119

9-State 4,119

Cement Plants Process Modification Michigan -

Conversion to dry kiln Michigan 9,848

LoToxTM Michigan 1,399

Glass Manufacturing LNB Wisconsin 1,041

Oxy-firing Wisconsin 2,833

Electric boost Wisconsin 3,426

SCR Wisconsin 1,054

SNCR Wisconsin 1,094

Lime Manufacturing Mid-kiln firing Wisconsin 688

LNB Wisconsin 837

SNCR Wisconsin 1,210

SCR Wisconsin 5,037

FGD Wisconsin 128 - 4,828

Oil Refinery LNB Wisconsin 3,288

SNCR Wisconsin 4,260

SCR Wisconsin 17,997

LNB+FGR Wisconsin 4,768

ULNB Wisconsin 2,242

FGD Wisconsin 1,078
102

Factor 2 (Time Necessary for Compliance): All of the control measures can be 

implemented by 2018. Thus, this factor can be easily addressed.

Factor 3 (Energy and Non-Air Quality Environmental Impacts): The energy and other 

environmental impacts are believed to be manageable. For example, the increased 

energy demand from add-on control equipment is less than 1% of the total electricity 

and steam production in the region, and solid waste disposal and wastewater treatment 

costs are less than 5% of the total operating costs of the pollution control equipment. It 

should also be noted that the SO2 and NOx controls would have beneficial 

environmental impacts (e.g., reduced acid deposition and nitrogen deposition).

Factor 4 (Remaining Useful Life): The additional control measures are intended to be 

market-based strategies applied over a broad geographic region. It is not expected that 

the control requirements will be applied to units that will be retired prior to the 

amortization period for the control equipment. Thus, this factor can be easily addressed.

Factor 5 (Visibility Impacts): The estimated incremental improvement in 2018 visibility 

levels for the additional measures is shown in Figure 74, along with the costeffectiveness expressed in $M per deciview improvement). These results show that 

although EGU and ICI boiler controls have higher cost-per-deciview values (compared 

to some of the other measures), their visibility impacts are larger.
103

Visibility Improvement (dv)

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

SO2NOx NH3 SO2NOx NH3 SO2 NOx NH3 SO2 NOx NH3 SO2NOx NH3

Strategy 1 Strategy 2

EGUs ICI Boilers Rec.Eng. Mobile Ag

Cost Effectiveness ($M/dv)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

SO2 NOx NH3 SO2NOx NH3 SO2 NOx NH3 SO2 NOxNH3 SO2 NOx NH3

Strategy 1 Strategy 2

EGUs ICI Boilers Rec.Eng. Mobile Ag

Figure 74. Results of ECR analysis of reasonable progress factors – visibility improvement (Factor 

5) is on top, and cost effectiveness (Factor 1) is on bottom
104

5.3 Weight-of-Evidence Determination for Haze

The WOE determination for haze consists of the primary modeling and other supplemental 

analyses. A summary of this information is provided below.

Primary (Guideline) Modeling: The results of the guideline modeling are presented in Section 

4.1. Key findings from this modeling include:

• Base M modeling results show that the northern Minnesota Class I areas are close 

to the glide path, whereas the northern Michigan Class I areas are above the glide 

path in 2018. Other sites in the eastern U.S. are close to (or below) the glide path, 

except for Mingo (MO), Brigantine (NJ), and Acadia (ME).

• Base K modeling results show that the northern Minnesota and northern Michigan 

Class I areas are above the glide path in 2018. Other sites in the eastern U.S. are 

close to (or below) the glide path. 

• The difference in the two modeling analyses is due mostly to differences in future 

year emission projections, especially for EGUs (e.g., use of IPM2.1.9 v. IPM3.0).

• Base K and Base M modeling analyses are considered “SIP quality”, so the 

attainment demonstration for haze should reflect a weight-of-evidence approach, 

with consideration of monitoring based information.

Additional Modeling: Two additional modeling analyses were considered: (1) the primary 

modeling redone with different baseline values, and (2) modeling by the State of Minnesota 

which looked at different receptor locations in the northern Class I areas (MPCA, 2008). Each 

of these analyses is described below.

First, the primary modeling analysis (Base M) was revised using an alternative baseline value. 

Specifically, the data for the period 2000-2005 were used to calculate the baseline, given that 

the Base M modeling reflects a 2005 base year. The results of this alternative analysis (see 

Table 18) are generally consistent with the primary modeling (see Table 16).

Second, Minnesota’s modeling reflects a 2002 base year and much of the data developed by 

LADCO for its modeling. (Note, Minnesota conducted modeling for LADCO’s domain at 36 km, 

and for a statewide domain at 12 km.) The purpose of the 12 km modeling was to address local 

scale impacts on the northern Class I areas at several locations, not just the location of the 

IMPROVE monitor. Results for the Boundary Waters on the 20% worst days range from 18.3 –

19.0 dv, with an average value of 18.7 dv, which is consistent with Minnesota’s 36 km modeling 

results at the IMPROVE monitor. This variability in visibility levels should be kept in mind when 

reviewing the values presented in Tables 15, 16, and 18, which reflect results at the IMPROVE 

monitor locations.
Worst 20% 2009 2012 2018 2018

Site Baseline URP OTB OTB OTB OTB+Will DO

BOWA1 20.10 18.12 18.63 18.51 18.12 18.09

VOYA2 19.62 17.86 18.27 18.15 17.70 17.72

SENE1 24.77 21.94 23.44 23.39 22.94 22.77

ISLE1 21.95 19.71 20.84 20.76 20.41 20.44

ISLE9 21.95 19.71 20.65 20.55 20.15 20.13

HEGL1 27.45 23.67 25.30 25.27 24.79 24.73

MING1 28.92 24.86 25.88 25.68 24.74 24.83

CACR1 27.05 23.44 23.88 23.78 22.92 22.86

UPBU1 26.97 23.36 23.92 23.85 23.14 23.09

MACA1 31.76 26.93 27.42 27.32 26.39 26.44

DOSO1 29.36 24.92 24.20 24.11 23.19 23.23

SHEN1 29.45 25.23 25.06 24.94 23.98 24.01

JARI1 29.40 25.13 25.32 25.17 24.22 24.28

BRIG1 29.12 25.14 25.84 25.77 25.26 25.26

LYBR1 24.71 21.69 22.22 22.06 21.36 21.36

ACAD1 22.91 20.47 21.72 21.72 21.49 21.49

Best 20% 2009 2012 2018 2018

Site Baseline URP OTB OTB OTB OTB+Will DO

BOWA1 6.40 6.40 6.20 6.17 6.13 6.10

VOYA2 7.05 7.05 6.82 6.78 6.71 6.71

SENE1 7.20 7.20 7.60 7.61 7.73 7.80

ISLE1 6.80 6.80 6.67 6.64 6.65 6.66

ISLE9 6.80 6.80 6.62 6.61 6.57 6.55

HEGL1 13.04 13.04 12.71 12.51 11.85 11.82

MING1 14.68 14.68 14.07 13.89 13.28 13.29

CACR1 11.62 11.62 11.24 11.20 10.86 10.86

UPBU1 11.99 11.99 11.41 11.36 11.01 11.02

MACA1 16.64 16.64 15.88 15.82 15.37 15.38

DOSO1 12.24 12.24 11.21 11.19 10.96 10.97

SHEN1 10.85 10.85 10.04 10.02 9.82 9.83

JARI1 14.35 14.35 13.51 13.51 13.27 13.27

BRIG1 14.36 14.36 14.17 14.10 13.94 13.94

LYBR1 6.21 6.21 6.11 6.09 6.01 6.01

ACAD1 8.57 8.57 8.67 8.66 8.62 8.62

Table 18. Haze Results - Round 5.1 (Based on 2000-2005)
106

Observational Models and Diagnostic Analyses: The observation-based modeling (i.e., 

application of thermodynamic equilibrium models) is presented in Section 3. The key findings 

from this modeling are that PM2.5 mass is sensitive to reductions in sulfate, nitric acid, and 

ammonia concentrations. Even though sulfate reductions cause more ammonia to be available 

to form ammonium nitrate (PM-nitrate increases slightly when sulfate is reduced), this increase 

is generally offset by the sulfate reductions, such that PM2.5 mass decreases and visibility 

improves. Under conditions with lower sulfate levels (i.e., proxy of future year conditions), PM2.5

is more sensitive to reductions in nitric acid compared to reductions in ammonia.

As discussed in Section 2, thermodynamic equilibrium modeling based on data collected at 

Seney indicates that PM2.5 there is most sensitive to reductions in sulfate, but also responsive to 

reductions in nitric acid (Blanchard, 2004). An analysis using data from the Midwest ammonia 

monitoring network for a site in Minnesota (i.e., Great River Bluffs, which is the closest ammonia 

monitoring site to the northern Class I areas) suggested that reductions in sulfate, nitric acid, 

and ammonia concentrations will lower PM2.5 concentrations and improve visibility levels in the 

northern Class I areas.

Trajectory analyses for the 20% worst visibility days for the four northern Class I areas are 

provided in Figure 75. (Note, this figure is similar to Figure 34, but the trajectory results for each 

Class I area are displayed separately here.) The orange areas are where the air is most likely 

to come from, and the green areas are where the air is least likely to come from. Darker 

shading represents higher frequency. As can be seen, bad air days are generally associated 

with transport from regions located to the south, and good air days with transport from Canada. 
107

Seney Isle Royale

Boundary Waters Voyageurs

Figure 75. Trajectory analysis results for northern Class I areas on 20% worst visibility days

The primary diagnostic analysis is source apportionment modeling with CAMx to provide more 

quantitative information on source region (and source sector) impacts (Baker, 2007b). 

Specifically, the CAMx model was applied to provide source contribution information. 

Specifically, the model estimated the impact of 18 geographic source regions (which are 

identified in Figure 76) and 6 source se ctors (EGU point, non-EGU point, on-road, off-road, 

area, and ammonia sources) at visibility/haze monitoring sites in the eastern U.S.
108

 

Figure 76. Source regions (left) and key monitoring sites (right) for haze modeling analysis

Modeling results for 2018 (Base K and Base M) are provided in Appendix IV for several key 

monitoring sites (Class I areas). For each monitoring site, there are two graphs: one showing 

sector-level contributions, and one showing source region and sector-level contributions in 

terms of absolute modeled values.

The sector-level results (see, for example, Figure 77) show that EGU sulfate, non-EGU-sulfate, 

and ammonia emissions generally have the largest contributions at the key monitor locations. 

The source group contributions vary by receptor location due to emissions inventory differences. 

Figure 77. Source-sector results for Seney (left) and Boundary Waters (right) – 2018 (Base M)

The source region results (see, for example, Figure 78) show that emissions from a number of 

nearby states contribute to regional haze levels.
109

Figure 78. Source-region results for Seney (left) and Boundary Waters (right) – 2018 (Base M)

Table 19 provides a summary of the estimated state-level culpabilities based on the LADCO 

back trajectory analyses and the PSAT analyses for 2018.

Summary: Air quality modeling and other supplemental analyses were performed to estimate 

future year visibility levels. Based on this information, the following general conclusions can be 

made:

• Existing (“on the books”) controls are expected to improve visibility levels in the 

northern Class I areas.

• Visibility levels in a few Class I areas in the eastern U.S. are expected to be 

greater than (less improved than) the uniform rate of visibility improvement 

values in 2018, including those in northern Michigan and some in the 

northeastern U.S. 

• Visibility levels in many other Class I areas in the eastern U.S. are expected to 

be less than (more improved than) the uniform rate of visibility improvement 

values in 2018.
110

Table 19. State Culpabilities Based on PSAT Modeling and Trajectory Analyses

Boundary Waters Seney

LADCO -

Round 4 

PSAT

LADCO -

Round 5 

PSAT

MPCAPSATCENRAP -

PSAT

LADCO -

Traj. Analysis

LADCO -

Round 4 

PSAT

LADCO -

Round 5 

PSAT

CENRAP -

PSAT

LADCO -

Traj. Analysis

Michigan 3.4% 4.8% 3.0% 1.9% 0.7% 13.8% 18.1% 14.7%

Minnesota 30.5% 23.5% 28.0% 30.6% 37.6% 4.8% 1.6% 3.8%

Wisconsin 10.4% 10.9% 10.0% 6.4% 10.6% 12.6% 10.9% 8.4%

Illinois 5.2% 5.1% 6.0% 3.5% 2.7% 13.0% 14.3% 7.4%

Indiana 2.9% 3.9% 3.0% 1.8% 1.2% 9.6% 11.6% 2.2%

Iowa 7.6% 8.3% 8.0% 2.5% 7.4% 6.2% 3.8% 5.7%

Missouri 5.2% 3.4% 6.0% 2.1% 3.3% 6.5% 4.8% 3.2%

N. Dakota 5.7% 1.1% 6.0% 4.6% 5.9% 1.5% 0.1% 0.6%

Canada 1.9% 2.7% 3.0% 12.5% 15.1% 2.1% 1.2% 11.1%

CENRAPWRAP 10.9% 13.5% 4.2% 10.1% 13.1% 10.0% 7.0%

83.6% 77.2% 73.0% 70.2% 94.6% 83.3% 76.4% 64.1%

Voyageurs Isle Royale

LADCO -

Round 4 

PSAT

LADCO -

Round 5 

PSAT

MPCAPSATCENRAP -

PSAT

LADCO -

Traj. Analysis

LADCO -

Round 4 

PSAT

LADCO -

Round 5 

PSAT

CENRAP -

PSAT

LADCO -

Traj. Analysis

Michigan 2.0% 4.9% 2.0% 1.0% 1.6% 12.7% 13.4%

Minnesota 35.0% 20.2% 31.0% 31.5% 36.9% 14.1% 9.5%

Wisconsin 6.3% 7.9% 6.0% 3.7% 9.7% 16.3% 14.7%

Illinois 3.0% 7.1% 3.0% 1.8% 1.2% 7.0% 8.7%

Indiana 1.6% 4.6% 2.0% 0.8% 5.6% 5.2%

Iowa 7.4% 7.1% 7.0% 2.4% 10.2% 6.9% 8.3%

Missouri 4.3% 4.0% 4.0% 1.6% 0.3% 3.9% 4.6%

N. Dakota 10.3% 1.7% 13.0% 6.1% 7.1% 3.6% 0.3%

Canada 2.7% 3.3% 5.0% 17.2% 13.3% 2.2% 1.7%

CENRAPWRAP 10.2% 13.7% 6.1% 16.5% 12.5% 12.6%

82.7% 74.5% 73.0% 72.2% 96.8% 84.9% 79.0%
111

Section 6. Summary

To support the development of SIPs for ozone, PM2.5, and regional haze in the States of Illinois, 

Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, technical analyses were conducted by LADCO, its 

member states, and various contractors. The analyses include preparation of regional 

emissions inventories and meteorological modeling data for two base years, evaluation and 

application of regional chemical transport models, and review of ambient monitoring data. 

Analyses of monitoring data were conducted to produce a conceptual model, which is a

qualitative summary of the physical, chemical, and meteorological processes that control the 

formation and distribution of pollutants in a given region. Key findings of the analyses include:

Ozone

• Current monitoring data show about 20 sites in violation of the 8-hour ozone 

standard of 85 ppb. Historical ozone data show a steady downward trend over the 

past 15 years, especially since 2001-2003, due likely to federal and state emission 

control programs.

• Ozone concentrations are strongly influenced by meteorological conditions, with 

more high ozone days and higher ozone levels during summers with above normal 

temperatures.

• Inter- and intra-regional transport of ozone and ozone precursors affects many 

portions of the five states, and is the principal cause of nonattainment in some areas 

far from population or industrial centers

PM2.5

• Current monitoring data show 30 sites in violation of the annual PM2.5 standard of 15 

ug/m3. Nonattainment sites are characterized by an elevated regional background 

(about 12 – 14 ug/m3) and a significant local (urban) increment (about 2 – 3 ug/m3). 

Historical PM2.5 data show a slight downward trend since deployment of the PM2.5

monitoring network in 1999.

• PM2.5 concentrations are also influenced by meteorology, but the relationship is more 

complex and less well understood compared to ozone.

• On an annual average basis, PM2.5 chemical composition consists of mostly sulfate, 

nitrate, and organic carbon in similar proportions.

Haze

• Current monitoring data show visibility levels in the Class I areas in northern 

Michigan are on the order of 22 – 24 deciviews. The goal of EPA’s visibility program 

is to achieve natural conditions, which is on the order of 12 deciviews for these 

Class I areas, by the year 2064.

• Visibility impairment is dominated by sulfate and nitrate.

Air quality models were applied to support the regional planning efforts. Two base years were 

used in the modeling analyses: 2002 and 2005. EPA’s modeling guidance recommends using 
112

2002 as the baseline inventory year, but also allows for use of an alternative baseline inventory 

year, especially a more recent year. Initially, LADCO conducted modeling with a 2002 base 

year (i.e., Base K modeling, which was completed in 2006). A decision was subsequently made 

to conduct modeling with a 2005 base year (i.e., Base M, which was completed in 2007). 

Statistical analyses showed that 2002 and 2005 both had above normal ozone-conducive 

conditions, although 2002 was more severe compared to 2005. Examination of multiple base 

years provides for a more complete technical assessment. Both sets of model runs are 

discussed in this document. 

Basecase modeling was conducted to evaluate model performance (i.e., assess the model's 

ability to reproduce the observed concentrations). This exercise was intended to assess 

whether, and to degree, confidence in the model is warranted (and to assess whether model 

improvements are necessary). Model performance for ozone and PM2.5 was generally

acceptable and can be characterized as follows:

Ozone

• Good agreement between modeled and monitored concentration for higher 

concentration levels (> 60 ppb) – i.e., bias within 30%

• Regional modeled concentrations appear to be underestimated in the 2002 base 

year, but show better agreement (with monitored data) in the 2005 base year due to 

model and inventory improvements.

• Day-to-day and hour-to-hour variation in and spatial patterns of modeled 

concentrations are consistent with monitored data

• Model accurately simulates the change in monitored ozone concentrations due to 

reductions in precursor emissions.

PM2.5

• Good agreement in the magnitude of fine particle mass, but some species are 

overestimated and some are underestimated

• Sulfates: good agreement in the 2002 base year, but underestimated in 

the summer in the 2005 base year due probably to meteorological factors

• Nitrates: slightly overestimated in the winter in the 2002 base year, but 

good agreement in the 2005 base year as a result of model and inventory 

improvements

• Organic Carbon: grossly underestimated in the 2002 and 2005 base 

years due likely to missing primary organic carbon emissions

• Temporal variation and spatial patterns of modeled concentrations are consistent 

with monitored data

Future year strategy modeling was conducted to determine whether existing (“on the books”) 

controls would be sufficient to provide for attainment of the standards for ozone and PM2.5 and if 

not, then what additional emission reductions would be necessary for attainment. Traditionally, 

attainment demonstrations involved a “bright line” test in which a single modeled value (based 

on EPA guidance) was compared to the ambient standard. To provide a more robust 

assessment of expected future year air quality, other information was considered. Furthermore, 

according to EPA’s modeling guidance, if the future year modeled values are “close” to the 
113

standard (i.e., 82 – 87 ppb for ozone and 14.5 – 15.5 ug/m3 for PM2.5 ), then the results of the 

primary modeling should be reviewed along with the supplemental information in a “weight of 

evidence” (WOE) assessment of whether each area is likely to achieve timely attainment. Key 

findings of the WOE determination include:

• Existing controls are expected to produce significant improvement in ozone and 

PM2.5 concentrations and visibility levels.

• The choice of the base year affects the future year model projections. A key 

difference between the base years of 2002 and 2005 is meteorology. 2002 was 

more ozone conducive than 2005. The choice of which base year to use as the 

basis for the SIP is a policy decision (i.e., how much safeguard to incorporate).

• Most sites are expected to meet the current 8-hour standard by the applicable 

attainment date, except for sites in western Michigan and, possibly, in eastern 

Wisconsin and northeastern Ohio.

• Most sites are expected to meet the current PM2.5 standard by the applicable 

attainment date, except for sites in Detroit, Cleveland, and Granite City.

The regional modeling for PM2.5 does not reflect air quality benefits expected 

from local controls. States are conducting local-scale analyses and will use

these results, in conjunction with the regional-scale modeling, to support their 

attainment demonstrations for PM2.5.

• These findings of residual nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5 are supported by 

current (2005 – 2007) monitoring data which show significant nonattainment in 

the region (e.g., peak ozone design values on the order of 90 – 93 ppb, and peak 

PM2.5 design values on the order of 16 - 17 ug/m3). It is unlikely that sufficient 

emission reductions will occur in the next few of years to provide for attainment at 

all sites.

• Attainment at most sites by the applicable attainment date is dependent on actual 

future year meteorology (e.g., if the weather conditions are consistent with [or 

less severe than] 2005, then attainment is likely) and actual future year 

emissions (e.g., if the emission reductions associated with the existing controls 

are achieved, then attainment is likely). If either of these conditions is not met, 

then attainment may be less likely.

• The new PM2.5 24-hour standard and the new lower ozone standard will not be 

met at several sites, even by 2018, with existing controls.

• Visibility levels in a few Class I areas in the eastern U.S. are expected to be 

greater than (less improved than) the uniform rate of visibility improvement 

values in 2018 based on existing controls, including those in northern Michigan 

and some in the northeastern U.S. Visibility levels in many other Class I areas in 

the eastern U.S. are expected to be less than (more improved than) the uniform 

rate of visibility improvement values in 2018.
114

Section 7. References

Alpine Geophysics, 2007, “Emissions Inventory Assistance: 2005 Base Year Biogenic and 

Other (non-LADCO) State Emissions, Preparation and Delivery of Non-MRPO Emission Files< 

March 12, 2007.

AER, 2004, “Analysis of Recent Regional Haze Data”, Atmospheric and Environmental 

Research, Inc., August 2004.

Baker, K., “Hot Spot Test (Draft), Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, March 23, 2005

Baker, K. 2007a, “Ozone Source Apportionment Results for Receptors in Non-Attainment 

Counties in the Great Lakes Region”, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, October 2007.

Baker, K., 2007b, “Source Apportionment Results for PM2.5 and Regional Haze at Receptors in 

the Great Lakes Region”, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, November 2007.

Baker, K. and D. Kenski, 2007, “Diagnostic and Operational Evaluation of 2002 and 2005 8-

Hour Ozone to Support Model Attainment Demonstrations”, Lake Michigan Air Directors 

Consortium, October 2007.

Blanchard, C.L., and S. Tanenbaum, 2003, “VOC and NOx Limitation of Ozone Formation at 

Monitoring Sites in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin, 1998-2002”, 

Report to LADCO, February 2003..

Blanchard, C.L., and S. Tanenbaum, 2004, “The Effects of Changes in Sulfate, Ammonia, and 

Nitric Acid on Fine PM Composition at Monitoring Sites in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, 

Ohio, and Wisconsin, 2000-2002”, Report to LADCO, February 2004.

Blanchard, C.L., and S. Tanenbaum, 2005a, “Weekday/Weekend Differences in Ambient 

Concentrations of Primary and Secondary Air Pollutants in Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, DallasFort Worth, Denver, Houston, New York, Phoenix, Washington, and Surrounding Areas”, 

Prepared for National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL Project ES04-1, July 30, 2005.

Blanchard, C.L., and S. Tanenbaum, 2005b, “Analysis of Data from the Midwest Ammonia 

Monitoring Project”, Draft Final Technical Memorandum, March 31, 2005.

Breiman, L., J. Friedman, R. Olshen, and C. Stone, 1984, “Classification and Regression 

Trees”, Chapman & Hall (1984).

Camalier, L., Cox, W., Dolwick, P., 2007. The effects of meteorology on ozone in urban areas 

and their use in assessing ozone trends. Atmospheric Environment 41, 7127-7137

Cox, W.M, and S.-H. Chu, 1993, Meteorologically Adjusted Ozone Trends in Urban Areas: A 

Probabililistic Approach, Atmospheric Environment 27B(4):425-434 (1993).

DeBell, L.J., K. Gebhart, J. Hand, W. Malm, M. Pitchford, B. Schichtel, and W. White, 2006, 

“Spatial and Seasonal Patterns and Temporal Variability of Haze and its Constituents in the 

United States, Report IV”, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, November 

2006
115

DRI, 2005, “Source Apportionment Analysis of Air Quality Monitoring Data: Phase II”, Desert

Research Institute. March 2005

EC/R, Incorporated, 2004, “Fire Emissions Inventory Development for the Midwest Regional 

Planning Organization”, Final Report, September 30, 2004.

EC/R, Incorporated, 2007, “Reasonable Progress for Class I Areas in the Northern Midwest –

Factor Analysis”, Draft Final Technical Memorandum, July 18, 2007.

E.H. Pechan, 2004, “LADCO Nonroad Emissions Inventory Project – Development of Local 

Data for Construction and Agricultural Equipment”, Final Report, September 10, 2004

E.H. Pechan, 2005, “Development of Updated Growth and Control Factors for Lake Michigan 

Air Directors Consortium (LADCO)”, Draft Report, December 29, 2005.

E. H. Pechan, 2007, “Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and Control Factors for Lake 

Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO)”, Final Report, September 2007.

Environ, 2004, “LADCO Nonroad Emissions Inventory Project for Locomotive, Commercial 

Marine, and Recreational Marine Emission Sources, Final Report, December 2004.

Environ, 2007a, “Modeling Weekend and Weekday Ozone in Southeast Michigan”, Draft Final 

Report, Prepared for National Renewable Energy Laboratory, July 30, 2007.

Environ, 2007b, “LADCO 2005 Locomotive Emissions”, Draft, February 2007.

Environ, 2007c, “LADCO 2005 Commercial Marine Emissions”, Draft, March 2, 2007.

Environ, 2008, “LADCO On-Road Emission Inventory Development Using CONCEPT MV”, 

January 2008..

Hollander, M. and D. Wolfe, 1973, “Nonparametric Statistical Methods”, John Wiley & Sons, 

New York (1973).

Hopke, P. K., 2005, Analyses of Midwest PM-Related Measurements, Report to LADCO, March 

2005.

Kenski, D.M., 2004, Quantifying Transboundary Transport of PM2.5: A GIS Analysis, Proc. 

AWMA 97th Annual Conf., Indianapolis, June 2004.

Kenski, D.M., 2007a, “CART Analysis for Ozone Trends and Meteorological Similarity”, May 10, 

2007.

Kenski, D.M., 2007b, “Impact of Missing Data on Worst Days at Midwest Northern Class 1 

Areas”, Donna Kenski, Midwest RPO, March 12, 2007 (revised 6/19/07).

Kenski, D.M., 2008a, “Updated Cox Trends Analysis”, February 2008.

Kenski, D.M. 2008b, “Updated CART Analysis for Ozone through 2007”, January 30, 2008.
116

LADCO, 2005, “Meteorological Modeling Performance Summary for Applications to 

PM2.5/Haze/Ozone Modeling Projects”, February 18, 2005.

LADCO, 2006a, “Base K/Round 4 Strategy Modeling” Emissions”, May 16, 2006.

LADCO, 2006b, “Base K/Round 4 Modeling: Summary”, August 31, 2006.

LADCO, 2007a, “Modeling Protocol: 2002 Basecase Technical Details”, October 17, 2007

LADCO, 2007b, “Modeling Protocol: 2005 Basecase Technical Details”, October 19, 2007

LADCO, 2007c, “An Evaluation of an Annual 2005 MM5 Simulation to Support Photochemical 

and Emissions Modeling Applications”, January 10, 2007.

LADCO, 2007d, “Base M/Round 5 Modeling: Summary (DRAFT), October 10, 2007

LADCO, 2008a, “Base M Strategy Modeling: Emissions (Revised)”, February 27, 2008

LADCO, 2008b, “Critique: Modeled Attainment Probability (i.e., Bob Lopez’ analysis)”, January 

10, 2008

Lopez, 2007, “Assessing the Site-Specific and Region-wide Probability of Attainment Level 

Ozone Air Quality under varying seasonal conditions using the results of 2002 (Round 4) and 

2005 (Round 5) Regional Modeling”, Draft 2, Bob Lopez, WDNR, December 12, 2007

Mansell, G, Z. Wang, R. Zhang, J. Fadel, T. Ramsey, H. Xin, Y. Liang, and J. Arogo, 2005, “An 

Improved Process-Based Ammonia Emissions Model for Agricultural Sources – Emission 

Estimates”

MPCA, 2008, “Technical Support Document for the Minnesota State Implementation Plan for 

Regional Haze”, Draft, March 4, 2008.

MRPO, 2001, “Principles for Regional Planning”, March 9, 2001.

MRPO, 2007, “Draft List of Class I Areas Located Within (or Impacted by) Midwest RPO 

States”, June 26, 2007.

MRPO, 2008, “Regional Haze in the Upper Midwest: Summary of Technical Information”, 

Version 2.2, February 22, 2008.

Millstein, D.E., R.A. Harley, and S.V. Hering, 2007, “Weekly cycles in fine particulate matter”, 

Atmospheric Environment (2007), doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.10.010.

Poirot, R. L.; Wishinski, P. R.; Hopke, P. K.; Polissar, A. V.; Comparative Application of Multiple 

Receptor Methods To Identify Aerosol Sources in Northern Vermont, Environ. Sci. Technol.,

36(4); 820-820 (2002).

Sheesley, R.J., J.J. Schauer, E. Bean, and D. Kenski, Trends in Secondary Organic Aerosol at 

a Remote Site in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, Env. Sci. and Tech. 38(24); 6491-6500 (Oct 

2004).
117

STI, 2004, “Data Processing and Analysis of Aloft Air Quality Data Collected in the Upper 

Midwest”, Executive Summary, STI-903470-2568-ES3, Sonoma Technology, Inc, August 5, 

2004.

STI, 2006a, “Integration of Results for the Upper Midwest Urban Organics Study”, Final Report, 

STI-903520-2942-FR, Sonoma Technology, Inc. March 31, 2006.

STI, 2008, “Data Analysis and Source Apportionment of PM2.5 in Selected Midwestern Cities”, 

Final Report, STI-907018.03-3264-DRF, Sonoma Technology, Inc., February 2008.

EPA, 1999, Regional Haze Regulations, 64 FR 35714, July 1, 1999.

EPA, 2003, “Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions Under the Regional Haze 

Rule”, EPA-454/B-03-005, September 2003.

EPA, 2002, “Recommended Approach for Performing Mid-Course Review of SIPs to Meet the 

1-Hour NAAQS for Ozone”, January 2002.

EPA, 2005, Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 

70 FR 71612, November 29, 2005

EPA, 2006, “Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards”, September 2006 (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html#ria2007)

EPA, 2007a, "Guidance for on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating 

Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze”, EPA-454/B07-002, April 

2007. 

EPA, 2007b, “Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed Revisions to the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards”, EPA-452/R-07-008, July 2007

(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html#ria2007)

EPA, 2007c, Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007

Zhang, R, T. Ramsey, J. Fadel, J. Arogo, Z. Wang, G. Mansell, and H. Xin, 2005, “An Improved 

Process-Based Ammonia Emissions Model for Agricultural Sources – Model Development”

Web Sites:

http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basem/canada/index.htm

http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basek/BaseK_Reports.htm

http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/r5/round5_reports.htm

http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/views/
118

APPENDIX I

Ozone and PM2.5 Modeling Results
Key Sites 2005 BY 2002 BY

'03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03-'05 '04-'06 '05-'07 Average Average RRF Round 5

Lake Michigan Area Lake Michigan Area

Chiwaukee 550590019 88 78 93 79 85 86 83 85 84.7 98.3 0.968 82.0 Chiwaukee

Racine 551010017 82 69 95 71 77 82 78 81 80.3 91.7 0.966 77.6 Racine

Milwaukee-Bayside 550190085 92 73 93 73 83 86 79 83 82.7 91.0 0.963 79.6 Milwaukee-Bayside

Harrington Beach 550890009 99 72 94 72 84 88 79 83 83.3 93.0 0.960 80.0 Harrington Beach

Manitowoc 550710007 92 74 95 78 85 87 82 86 85.0 87.0 0.957 81.3 Manitowoc

Sheboygan 551170006 93 78 97 83 88 89 86 89 88.0 97.0 0.959 84.4 Sheboygan

Kewaunee 550610002 97 73 88 76 85 86 79 83 82.7 89.3 0.954 78.9 Kewaunee

Door County 550290004 93 78 101 79 92 90 86 90 88.7 91.0 0.956 84.8 Door County

Hammond 180892008 81 67 87 75 77 78 76 79 77.7 88.3 0.971 75.4 Hammond

Whiting 180890030 64 88 81 88 76 77 85 79.3 0.971 77.0 Whiting

Michigan City 180910005 82 70 84 75 73 78 76 77 77.0 90.3 0.964 74.2 Michigan City

Ogden Dunes 181270020 77 69 90 70 84 78 76 81 78.3 86.3 0.967 75.7 Ogden Dunes

Holland 260050003 96 79 94 91 94 89 88 93 90.0 94.0 0.951 85.6 Holland

Jenison 261390005 91 69 86 83 88 82 79 85 82.0 86.0 0.950 77.9 Jenison

Muskegon 261210039 94 70 90 90 86 84 83 88 85.0 90.0 0.951 80.8 Muskegon

Indianapolis Area Indianapolis Area

Noblesville 189571001 101 75 87 77 84 87 79 82 82.7 93.7 0.944 78.0 Noblesville

Fortville 180590003 92 72 80 75 81 81 75 78 78.0 91.3 0.948 73.9 Fortville

Fort B. Harrison 180970050 91 73 80 76 83 81 76 79 78.7 90.0 0.951 74.8 Fort B. Harrison

Detroit Area Detroit Area

New Haven 260990009 102 81 88 78 93 90 82 86 86.0 92.3 0.962 82.7 New Haven

Warren 260991003 101 71 89 78 91 87 79 86 84.0 90.0 0.982 82.5 Warren

Port Huron 261470005 87 74 88 78 89 83 80 85 82.7 88.0 0.956 79.0 Port Huron

Cleveland Area Cleveland Area

Ashtabula 390071001 99 81 93 86 92 91 86 90 89.0 95.7 0.954 84.9 Ashtabula

Geauga 390550004 97 75 88 70 68 86 77 75 79.3 99.0 0.954 75.7 Geauga

Eastlake 390850003 92 79 97 83 74 89 86 84 86.3 92.7 0.959 82.8 Eastlake

Akron 391530020 89 77 89 77 91 85 81 85 83.7 93.3 0.948 79.3

Cincinnati Area Cincinnati Area

Wilmington 390271002 96 78 83 81 82 85 80 82 82.3 94.3 0.945 77.8 Wilmington

Sycamore 390610006 93 76 89 81 90 86 82 86 84.7 90.3 0.965 81.7 Sycamore

Lebanon 391650007 95 81 92 86 88 89 86 88 87.7 87.0 0.954 83.6 Lebanon

Columbus Area Columbus Area

London 390970007 90 75 81 76 83 82 77 80 79.7 88.7 0.946 75.4 London

New Albany 390490029 94 78 92 82 87 88 84 87 86.3 93.0 0.954 82.4 New Albany

Franklin 290490028 84 73 86 79 79 81 79 81 80.3 86.0 0.958 77.0 Franklin

St. Louis Area St. Louis Area

W. Alton (MO) 291831002 91 77 89 91 89 85 85 89 86.3 90.0 0.954 82.4 W. Alton (MO)

Orchard (MO) 291831004 90 76 92 92 83 86 86 89 87.0 90.0 0.958 83.3 Orchard (MO)

Sunset Hills (MO) 291890004 88 70 89 80 89 82 79 86 82.3 88.3 0.966 79.5 Sunset Hills (MO)

Arnold (MO) 290990012 82 70 92 79 87 81 80 86 82.3 84.7 0.956 78.7 Arnold (MO)

Margaretta (MO) 295100086 90 72 91 76 91 84 79 86 83.0 87.7 0.962 79.8 Margaretta (MO)

Maryland Heights (MO) 291890014 88 84 94 88 86 88 87.3 0.967 84.5 Maryland Heights (MO)

4th High 8-hour Value Des. Values (truncated) 2008 - OTB
Key Sites 2005 BY 2002 BY

'03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03-'05 '04-'06 '05-'07 Average Average RRF Round 5 Round 4 RRF Round 5

Lake Michigan Area Lake Michigan Area

Chiwaukee 550590019 88 78 93 79 85 86 83 85 84.7 98.3 0.972 82.3 92.0 0.971 82.2 Chiwaukee

Racine 551010017 82 69 95 71 77 82 78 81 80.3 91.7 0.965 77.5 84.9 0.964 77.4 Racine

Milwaukee-Bayside 550190085 92 73 93 73 83 86 79 83 82.7 91.0 0.965 79.8 84.9 0.964 79.7 Milwaukee-Bayside

Harrington Beach 550890009 99 72 94 72 84 88 79 83 83.3 93.0 0.961 80.1 85.4 0.960 80.0 Harrington Beach

Manitowoc 550710007 92 74 95 78 85 87 82 86 85.0 87.0 0.951 80.8 78.9 0.949 80.7 Manitowoc

Sheboygan 551170006 93 78 97 83 88 89 86 89 88.0 97.0 0.955 84.0 88.9 0.953 83.9 Sheboygan

Kewaunee 550610002 97 73 88 76 85 86 79 83 82.7 89.3 0.945 78.1 81.0 0.943 78.0 Kewaunee

Door County 550290004 93 78 101 79 92 90 86 90 88.7 91.0 0.946 83.9 81.8 0.945 83.8 Door County

Hammond 180892008 81 67 87 75 77 78 76 79 77.7 88.3 0.971 75.4 86.6 0.970 75.3 Hammond

Whiting 180890030 64 88 81 88 76 77 85 79.3 0.971 77.0 0.970 77.0 Whiting

Michigan City 180910005 82 70 84 75 73 78 76 77 77.0 90.3 0.960 73.9 86.5 0.959 73.8 Michigan City

Ogden Dunes 181270020 77 69 90 70 84 78 76 81 78.3 86.3 0.965 75.6 82.8 0.964 75.5 Ogden Dunes

Holland 260050003 96 79 94 91 94 89 88 93 90.0 94.0 0.948 85.3 83.4 0.947 85.2 Holland

Jenison 261390005 91 69 86 83 88 82 79 85 82.0 86.0 0.940 77.1 77.6 0.939 77.0 Jenison

Muskegon 261210039 94 70 90 90 86 84 83 88 85.0 90.0 0.947 80.5 81.5 0.945 80.3 Muskegon

Indianapolis Area Indianapolis Area

Noblesville 189571001 101 75 87 77 84 87 79 82 82.7 93.7 0.945 78.1 83.7 0.946 78.2 Noblesville

Fortville 180590003 92 72 80 75 81 81 75 78 78.0 91.3 0.947 73.9 83.8 0.948 73.9 Fortville

Fort B. Harrison 180970050 91 73 80 76 83 81 76 79 78.7 90.0 0.955 75.1 83.7 0.956 75.2 Fort B. Harrison

Detroit Area Detroit Area

New Haven 260990009 102 81 88 78 93 90 82 86 86.0 92.3 0.947 81.4 85.3 0.947 81.4 New Haven

Warren 260991003 101 71 89 78 91 87 79 86 84.0 90.0 0.968 81.3 83.3 0.969 81.4 Warren

Port Huron 261470005 87 74 88 78 89 83 80 85 82.7 88.0 0.937 77.5 79.1 0.938 77.5 Port Huron

Cleveland Area Cleveland Area

Ashtabula 390071001 99 81 93 86 92 91 86 90 89.0 95.7 0.937 83.4 82.7 0.941 83.7 Ashtabula

Geauga 390550004 97 75 88 70 68 86 77 75 79.3 99.0 0.942 74.7 88.8 0.945 75.0 Geauga

Eastlake 390850003 92 79 97 83 74 89 86 84 86.3 92.7 0.949 81.9 82.8 0.954 82.4 Eastlake

Akron 391530020 89 77 89 77 91 85 81 85 83.7 93.3 0.934 78.1 81.4 0.935 78.2

Cincinnati Area Cincinnati Area

Wilmington 390271002 96 78 83 81 82 85 80 82 82.3 94.3 0.941 77.5 83.5 0.942 77.6 Wilmington

Sycamore 390610006 93 76 89 81 90 86 82 86 84.7 90.3 0.967 81.9 84.7 0.968 82.0 Sycamore

Lebanon 391650007 95 81 92 86 88 89 86 88 87.7 87.0 0.947 83.0 79.0 0.948 83.1 Lebanon

Columbus Area Columbus Area

London 390970007 90 75 81 76 83 82 77 80 79.7 88.7 0.941 75.0 78.4 0.942 75.0 London

New Albany 390490029 94 78 92 82 87 88 84 87 86.3 93.0 0.947 81.8 82.6 0.948 81.8 New Albany

Franklin 290490028 84 73 86 79 79 81 79 81 80.3 86.0 0.945 75.9 76.5 0.948 76.2 Franklin

St. Louis Area St. Louis Area

W. Alton (MO) 291831002 91 77 89 91 89 85 85 89 86.3 90.0 0.938 81.0 85.2 0.932 80.5 W. Alton (MO)

Orchard (MO) 291831004 90 76 92 92 83 86 86 89 87.0 90.0 0.942 82.0 82.2 0.939 81.7 Orchard (MO)

Sunset Hills (MO) 291890004 88 70 89 80 89 82 79 86 82.3 88.3 0.956 78.7 81.9 0.954 78.5 Sunset Hills (MO)

Arnold (MO) 290990012 82 70 92 79 87 81 80 86 82.3 84.7 0.938 77.2 77.4 0.937 77.1 Arnold (MO)

Margaretta (MO) 295100086 90 72 91 76 91 84 79 86 83.0 87.7 0.955 79.3 83.4 0.955 79.3 Margaretta (MO)

Maryland Heights (MO) 291890014 88 84 94 88 86 88 87.3 0.955 83.4 0.954 83.3 Maryland Heights (MO)

4th High 8-hour Value Des. Values (truncated) 2009 - OTB 2009 - Will Do
Key Sites 2005 BY 2002 BY

'03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03-'05 '04-'06 '05-'07 Average Average RRF Round 5 Round 4 RRF Round 5

Lake Michigan Area Lake Michigan Area

Chiwaukee 550590019 88 78 93 79 85 86 83 85 84.7 98.3 0.956 80.9 90.3 0.900 76.2 Chiwaukee

Racine 551010017 82 69 95 71 77 82 78 81 80.3 91.7 0.947 76.1 82.9 0.886 71.2 Racine

Milwaukee-Bayside 550190085 92 73 93 73 83 86 79 83 82.7 91.0 0.944 78.0 82.3 0.880 72.7 Milwaukee-Bayside

Harrington Beach 550890009 99 72 94 72 84 88 79 83 83.3 93.0 0.939 78.3 82.9 0.870 72.5 Harrington Beach

Manitowoc 550710007 92 74 95 78 85 87 82 86 85.0 87.0 0.925 78.6 76.3 0.853 72.5 Manitowoc

Sheboygan 551170006 93 78 97 83 88 89 86 89 88.0 97.0 0.930 81.8 86.4 0.857 75.4 Sheboygan

Kewaunee 550610002 97 73 88 76 85 86 79 83 82.7 89.3 0.918 75.9 79.1 0.845 69.9 Kewaunee

Door County 550290004 93 78 101 79 92 90 86 90 88.7 91.0 0.919 81.5 79.3 0.843 74.7 Door County

Hammond 180892008 81 67 87 75 77 78 76 79 77.7 88.3 0.960 74.6 86.3 0.922 71.6 Hammond

Whiting 180890030 64 88 81 88 76 77 85 79.3 0.960 76.2 0.922 73.1 Whiting

Michigan City 180910005 82 70 84 75 73 78 76 77 77.0 90.3 0.942 72.5 85.4 0.884 68.1 Michigan City

Ogden Dunes 181270020 77 69 90 70 84 78 76 81 78.3 86.3 0.951 74.5 82.0 0.904 70.8 Ogden Dunes

Holland 260050003 96 79 94 91 94 89 88 93 90.0 94.0 0.920 82.8 81.0 0.846 76.1 Holland

Jenison 261390005 91 69 86 83 88 82 79 85 82.0 86.0 0.909 74.5 75.5 0.838 68.7 Jenison

Muskegon 261210039 94 70 90 90 86 84 83 88 85.0 90.0 0.918 78.0 79.4 0.846 71.9 Muskegon

Indianapolis Area Indianapolis Area

Noblesville 189571001 101 75 87 77 84 87 79 82 82.7 93.7 0.914 75.6 82.0 0.831 68.7 Noblesville

Fortville 180590003 92 72 80 75 81 81 75 78 78.0 91.3 0.916 71.4 82.1 0.835 65.1 Fortville

Fort B. Harrison 180970050 91 73 80 76 83 81 76 79 78.7 90.0 0.931 73.2 82.4 0.879 69.1 Fort B. Harrison

Detroit Area Detroit Area

New Haven 260990009 102 81 88 78 93 90 82 86 86.0 92.3 0.932 80.2 83.5 0.885 76.1 New Haven

Warren 260991003 101 71 89 78 91 87 79 86 84.0 90.0 0.961 80.7 81.9 0.924 77.6 Warren

Port Huron 261470005 87 74 88 78 89 83 80 85 82.7 88.0 0.913 75.5 77.0 0.858 70.9 Port Huron

Cleveland Area Cleveland Area

Ashtabula 390071001 99 81 93 86 92 91 86 90 89.0 95.7 0.910 81.0 80.2 0.844 75.1 Ashtabula

Geauga 390550004 97 75 88 70 68 86 77 75 79.3 99.0 0.916 72.7 86.2 0.848 67.3 Geauga

Eastlake 390850003 92 79 97 83 74 89 86 84 86.3 92.7 0.932 80.5 80.6 0.883 76.2 Eastlake

Akron 391530020 89 77 89 77 91 85 81 85 83.7 93.3 0.903 75.6 78.5 0.821 68.7 Akron

Cincinnati Area Cincinnati Area

Wilmington 390271002 96 78 83 81 82 85 80 82 82.3 94.3 0.910 74.9 81.1 0.830 68.3 Wilmington

Sycamore 390610006 93 76 89 81 90 86 82 86 84.7 90.3 0.948 80.3 82.9 0.881 74.6 Sycamore

Lebanon 391650007 95 81 92 86 88 89 86 88 87.7 87.0 0.921 80.7 77.0 0.846 74.2 Lebanon

Columbus Area Columbus Area

London 390970007 90 75 81 76 83 82 77 80 79.7 88.7 0.911 72.6 76.5 0.832 66.3 London

New Albany 390490029 94 78 92 82 87 88 84 87 86.3 93.0 0.922 79.6 80.2 0.845 73.0 New Albany

Franklin 290490028 84 73 86 79 79 81 79 81 80.3 86.0 0.923 74.1 74.7 0.859 69.0 Franklin

St. Louis Area St. Louis Area

W. Alton (MO) 291831002 91 77 89 91 89 85 85 89 86.3 90.0 0.911 78.6 84.0 0.868 74.9 W. Alton (MO)

Orchard (MO) 291831004 90 76 92 92 83 86 86 89 87.0 90.0 0.919 80.0 80.4 0.876 76.2 Orchard (MO)

Sunset Hills (MO) 291890004 88 70 89 80 89 82 79 86 82.3 88.3 0.937 77.1 80.6 0.897 73.9 Sunset Hills (MO)

Arnold (MO) 290990012 82 70 92 79 87 81 80 86 82.3 84.7 0.918 75.6 75.8 0.874 72.0 Arnold (MO)

Margaretta (MO) 295100086 90 72 91 76 91 84 79 86 83.0 87.7 0.939 77.9 82.5 0.896 74.4 Margaretta (MO)

Maryland Heights (MO) 291890014 88 84 94 88 86 88 87.3 0.936 81.7 0.894 78.1 Maryland Heights (MO)

4th High 8-hour Value Des. Values (truncated) 2012 - OTB 2018 - OTB
2005 BY 2002 BY

Key Site County Site ID '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03 - '05 '04 - '06 '05 - '07

Average 

w/ 2007

Average

Round 5 Round4 Key Site

Chicago - Washington HS Cook 170310022 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.2 15.7 15.6 14.8 15.3 15.2 15.9 14.1 14.8 Chicago - Washington HS

Chicago - Mayfair Cook 170310052 15.9 15.3 17.0 14.5 15.5 16.1 15.6 15.7 15.8 17.1 14.4 15.8 Chicago - Mayfair

Chicago - Springfield Cook 170310057 15.6 13.8 16.7 13.5 15.1 15.4 14.7 15.1 15.0 15.6 13.9 14.5 Chicago - Springfield

Chicago - Lawndale Cook 170310076 14.8 14.2 16.6 13.5 14.3 15.2 14.8 14.8 14.9 15.6 13.8 14.5 Chicago - Lawndale

Blue Island Cook 170312001 14.9 14.1 16.4 13.2 14.3 15.1 14.6 14.6 14.8 15.6 13.7 14.5 Blue Island

Summit Cook 170313301 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.8 14.8 15.6 15.0 15.2 15.2 16.0 14.2 14.8 Summit

Cicero Cook 170316005 16.8 15.2 16.3 14.3 14.8 16.1 15.3 15.1 15.5 16.4 14.4 15.3 Cicero

Granite City Madison 171191007 17.5 15.4 18.2 16.3 15.1 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.7 17.3 15.1 16.0 Granite City

E. St. Louis St. Clair 171630010 14.9 14.7 17.1 14.5 15.6 15.6 15.4 15.7 15.6 16.2 14.1 14.9 E. St. Louis

Jeffersonville Clark 180190005 15.8 15.1 18.5 15.0 16.5 16.5 16.2 16.7 16.4 17.2 13.8 15.5 Jeffersonville

Jasper Dubois 180372001 15.7 14.4 16.9 13.5 14.4 15.7 14.9 14.9 15.2 15.5 12.4 13.8 Jasper

Gary Lake 180890031 16.8 13.3 14.5 16.8 15.1 14.9 15.6 13.0 Gary

Indy-Washington Park Marion 180970078 15.5 14.3 16.4 14.1 15.8 15.4 14.9 15.4 15.3 16.2 12.8 14.5 Indy-Washington Park

Indy-W 18th Street Marion 180970081 16.2 15.0 17.9 14.2 16.1 16.4 15.7 16.1 16.0 13.4 Indy-W 18th Street

Indy- Michigan Street Marion 180970083 16.3 15.0 17.5 14.1 15.9 16.3 15.5 15.8 15.9 16.6 13.4 14.8 Indy- Michigan Street

Allen Park Wayne 261630001 15.2 14.2 15.9 13.2 12.8 15.1 14.4 14.0 14.5 15.8 13.0 14.5 Allen Park

Southwest HS Wayne 261630015 16.6 15.4 17.2 14.7 14.5 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.9 17.3 14.2 15.8 Southwest HS

Linwood Wayne 261630016 15.8 13.7 16.0 13.0 13.9 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.5 13.1 14.1 Linwood

Dearborn Wayne 261630033 19.2 16.8 18.6 16.1 16.9 18.2 17.2 17.2 17.5 19.3 15.8 17.7 Dearborn

Wyandotte Wayne 261630036 16.3 13.7 16.4 12.9 13.4 15.5 14.3 14.2 14.7 16.6 13.1 15.1 Wyandotte

Middleton Butler 390170003 17.2 14.1 19.0 14.1 15.4 16.8 15.7 16.2 16.2 16.5 13.5 14.2 Middleton

Fairfield Butler 390170016 15.8 14.7 17.9 14.0 14.9 16.1 15.5 15.6 15.8 15.9 13.1 13.5 Fairfield

Cleveland-28th Street Cuyahoga 390350027 15.4 15.6 17.3 13.0 14.5 16.1 15.3 14.9 15.4 16.5 13.5 14.4 Cleveland-28th Street

Cleveland-St. Tikhon Cuyahoga 390350038 17.6 17.5 19.2 14.9 16.2 18.1 17.2 16.8 17.4 18.4 15.2 16.1 Cleveland-St. Tikhon

Cleveland-Broadway Cuyahoga 390350045 16.4 15.3 19.3 14.1 15.3 17.0 16.2 16.2 16.5 16.7 14.4 14.6 Cleveland-Broadway

Cleveland-E14 & Orange Cuyahoga 390350060 17.2 16.4 19.4 15.0 15.9 17.7 16.9 16.8 17.1 17.6 15.0 15.3 Cleveland-E14 & Orange

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave Cuyahoga 390350065 15.6 15.2 18.6 13.1 15.8 16.5 15.6 15.8 16.0 16.2 14.0 14.1 Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave

Columbus - Fairgrounds Franklin 390490024 16.4 15.0 16.4 13.6 14.6 15.9 15.0 14.9 15.3 16.5 12.9 14.6 Columbus - Fairgrounds

Columbus - Ann Street Franklin 390490025 15.3 14.6 16.5 13.8 14.7 15.5 15.0 15.0 15.1 16.0 12.7 14.1 Columbus - Ann Street

Columbus - Maple Canyon Franklin 390490081 14.9 13.6 14.6 12.9 13.1 14.4 13.7 13.5 13.9 16.0 11.7 14.0 Columbus - Maple Canyon

Cincinnati - Seymour Hamilton 390610014 17.0 15.9 19.8 15.5 16.5 17.6 17.1 17.3 17.3 17.7 14.5 15.5 Cincinnati - Seymour

Cincinnati - Taft Ave Hamilton 390610040 15.5 14.6 17.5 13.6 15.1 15.9 15.2 15.4 15.5 15.7 12.8 13.6 Cincinnati - Taft Ave

Cincinnati - 8th Ave Hamilton 390610042 16.7 16.0 19.1 14.9 15.9 17.3 16.7 16.6 16.9 17.3 14.0 14.6 Cincinnati - 8th Ave

Sharonville Hamilton 390610043 15.7 14.9 16.9 14.5 14.8 15.8 15.4 15.4 15.6 16.0 12.9 13.6 Sharonville

Norwood Hamilton 390617001 16.0 15.3 18.4 14.4 15.1 16.6 16.0 16.0 16.2 16.3 13.4 14.2 Norwood

St. Bernard Hamilton 390618001 17.3 16.4 20.0 15.9 16.1 17.9 17.4 17.3 17.6 17.3 14.7 15.2 St. Bernard

Steubenville Jefferson 390810016 17.7 15.9 16.4 13.8 16.2 16.7 15.4 15.5 15.8 17.7 12.8 16.3 Steubenville

Mingo Junction Jefferson 390811001 17.3 16.2 18.1 14.6 15.6 17.2 16.3 16.1 16.5 17.5 13.5 15.5 Mingo Junction

Ironton Lawrence 390870010 14.3 13.7 17.0 14.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.2 15.7 12.8 14.2 Ironton

Dayton Montgomery 391130032 15.9 14.5 17.4 13.6 15.6 15.9 15.2 15.5 15.5 15.9 13.2 13.7 Dayton

New Boston Scioto 391450013 14.7 13.0 16.2 14.3 14.0 14.6 14.5 14.8 14.7 17.1 12.1 15.4 New Boston

Canton - Dueber Stark 391510017 16.8 15.6 17.8 14.6 15.9 16.7 16.0 16.1 16.3 17.3 14.0 15.0 Canton - Dueber

Canton - Market Stark 391510020 15.0 14.1 16.6 11.9 14.4 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.7 12.6 13.6 Canton - Market

Akron - Brittain Summit 391530017 15.4 15.0 16.4 13.5 14.4 15.6 15.0 14.8 15.1 16.4 13.0 14.4 Akron - Brittain

Akron - W. Exchange Summit 391530023 14.2 13.9 15.7 12.8 13.7 14.6 14.1 14.1 14.3 15.6 12.3 13.6 Akron - W. Exchange

Annual Average Conc. Design Values 2009 Modeling Results
2005 BY 2002 BY

Key Site County Site ID '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03 - '05 '04 - '06 '05 - '07

Average 

w/ 2007

Average

Round 5 Round4 Key Site

Chicago - Washington HS Cook 170310022 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.2 15.7 15.6 14.8 15.3 15.2 15.9 14.0 14.6 Chicago - Washington HS

Chicago - Mayfair Cook 170310052 15.9 15.3 17.0 14.5 15.5 16.1 15.6 15.7 15.8 17.1 14.2 15.5 Chicago - Mayfair

Chicago - Springfield Cook 170310057 15.6 13.8 16.7 13.5 15.1 15.4 14.7 15.1 15.0 15.6 13.8 14.3 Chicago - Springfield

Chicago - Lawndale Cook 170310076 14.8 14.2 16.6 13.5 14.3 15.2 14.8 14.8 14.9 15.6 13.7 14.3 Chicago - Lawndale

Blue Island Cook 170312001 14.9 14.1 16.4 13.2 14.3 15.1 14.6 14.6 14.8 15.6 13.6 14.3 Blue Island

Summit Cook 170313301 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.8 14.8 15.6 15.0 15.2 15.2 16.0 14.0 14.6 Summit

Cicero Cook 170316005 16.8 15.2 16.3 14.3 14.8 16.1 15.3 15.1 15.5 16.4 14.3 15.1 Cicero

Granite City Madison 171191007 17.5 15.4 18.2 16.3 15.1 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.7 17.3 14.9 15.8 Granite City

E. St. Louis St. Clair 171630010 14.9 14.7 17.1 14.5 15.6 15.6 15.4 15.7 15.6 16.2 13.9 14.7 E. St. Louis

Jeffersonville Clark 180190005 15.8 15.1 18.5 15.0 16.5 16.5 16.2 16.7 16.4 17.2 13.7 15.0 Jeffersonville

Jasper Dubois 180372001 15.7 14.4 16.9 13.5 14.4 15.7 14.9 14.9 15.2 15.5 12.2 13.5 Jasper

Gary Lake 180890031 16.8 13.3 14.5 16.8 15.1 14.9 15.6 12.8 Gary

Indy-Washington Park Marion 180970078 15.5 14.3 16.4 14.1 15.8 15.4 14.9 15.4 15.3 16.2 12.6 14.2 Indy-Washington Park

Indy-W 18th Street Marion 180970081 16.2 15.0 17.9 14.2 16.1 16.4 15.7 16.1 16.0 13.2 Indy-W 18th Street

Indy- Michigan Street Marion 180970083 16.3 15.0 17.5 14.1 15.9 16.3 15.5 15.8 15.9 16.6 13.1 14.9 Indy- Michigan Street

Allen Park Wayne 261630001 15.2 14.2 15.9 13.2 12.8 15.1 14.4 14.0 14.5 15.8 12.8 14.1 Allen Park

Southwest HS Wayne 261630015 16.6 15.4 17.2 14.7 14.5 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.9 17.3 13.9 15.3 Southwest HS

Linwood Wayne 261630016 15.8 13.7 16.0 13.0 13.9 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.5 12.8 13.7 Linwood

Dearborn Wayne 261630033 19.2 16.8 18.6 16.1 16.9 18.2 17.2 17.2 17.5 19.3 15.5 17.1 Dearborn

Wyandotte Wayne 261630036 16.3 13.7 16.4 12.9 13.4 15.5 14.3 14.2 14.7 16.6 12.8 14.7 Wyandotte

Middleton Butler 390170003 17.2 14.1 19.0 14.1 15.4 16.8 15.7 16.2 16.2 16.5 13.2 13.7 Middleton

Fairfield Butler 390170016 15.8 14.7 17.9 14.0 14.9 16.1 15.5 15.6 15.8 15.9 12.9 12.9 Fairfield

Cleveland-28th Street Cuyahoga 390350027 15.4 15.6 17.3 13.0 14.5 16.1 15.3 14.9 15.4 16.5 13.2 13.8 Cleveland-28th Street

Cleveland-St. Tikhon Cuyahoga 390350038 17.6 17.5 19.2 14.9 16.2 18.1 17.2 16.8 17.4 18.4 14.8 15.4 Cleveland-St. Tikhon

Cleveland-Broadway Cuyahoga 390350045 16.4 15.3 19.3 14.1 15.3 17.0 16.2 16.2 16.5 16.7 14.0 14.0 Cleveland-Broadway

Cleveland-E14 & Orange Cuyahoga 390350060 17.2 16.4 19.4 15.0 15.9 17.7 16.9 16.8 17.1 17.6 14.6 14.7 Cleveland-E14 & Orange

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave Cuyahoga 390350065 15.6 15.2 18.6 13.1 15.8 16.5 15.6 15.8 16.0 16.2 13.6 13.5 Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave

Columbus - Fairgrounds Franklin 390490024 16.4 15.0 16.4 13.6 14.6 15.9 15.0 14.9 15.3 16.5 12.6 14.0 Columbus - Fairgrounds

Columbus - Ann Street Franklin 390490025 15.3 14.6 16.5 13.8 14.7 15.5 15.0 15.0 15.1 16.0 12.4 13.5 Columbus - Ann Street

Columbus - Maple Canyon Franklin 390490081 14.9 13.6 14.6 12.9 13.1 14.4 13.7 13.5 13.9 16.0 11.4 13.4 Columbus - Maple Canyon

Cincinnati - Seymour Hamilton 390610014 17.0 15.9 19.8 15.5 16.5 17.6 17.1 17.3 17.3 17.7 14.3 14.8 Cincinnati - Seymour

Cincinnati - Taft Ave Hamilton 390610040 15.5 14.6 17.5 13.6 15.1 15.9 15.2 15.4 15.5 15.7 12.6 13.0 Cincinnati - Taft Ave

Cincinnati - 8th Ave Hamilton 390610042 16.7 16.0 19.1 14.9 15.9 17.3 16.7 16.6 16.9 17.3 13.8 14.0 Cincinnati - 8th Ave

Sharonville Hamilton 390610043 15.7 14.9 16.9 14.5 14.8 15.8 15.4 15.4 15.6 16.0 12.7 13.0 Sharonville

Norwood Hamilton 390617001 16.0 15.3 18.4 14.4 15.1 16.6 16.0 16.0 16.2 16.3 13.2 13.6 Norwood

St. Bernard Hamilton 390618001 17.3 16.4 20.0 15.9 16.1 17.9 17.4 17.3 17.6 17.3 14.4 14.6 St. Bernard

Steubenville Jefferson 390810016 17.7 15.9 16.4 13.8 16.2 16.7 15.4 15.5 15.8 17.7 12.5 15.9 Steubenville

Mingo Junction Jefferson 390811001 17.3 16.2 18.1 14.6 15.6 17.2 16.3 16.1 16.5 17.5 13.2 15.0 Mingo Junction

Ironton Lawrence 390870010 14.3 13.7 17.0 14.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.2 15.7 12.5 13.7 Ironton

Dayton Montgomery 391130032 15.9 14.5 17.4 13.6 15.6 15.9 15.2 15.5 15.5 15.9 12.9 13.2 Dayton

New Boston Scioto 391450013 14.7 13.0 16.2 14.3 14.0 14.6 14.5 14.8 14.7 17.1 11.9 14.8 New Boston

Canton - Dueber Stark 391510017 16.8 15.6 17.8 14.6 15.9 16.7 16.0 16.1 16.3 17.3 13.6 14.3 Canton - Dueber

Canton - Market Stark 391510020 15.0 14.1 16.6 11.9 14.4 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.7 12.3 13.0 Canton - Market

Akron - Brittain Summit 391530017 15.4 15.0 16.4 13.5 14.4 15.6 15.0 14.8 15.1 16.4 12.7 13.6 Akron - Brittain

Akron - W. Exchange Summit 391530023 14.2 13.9 15.7 12.8 13.7 14.6 14.1 14.1 14.3 15.6 12.0 13.0 Akron - W. Exchange

Annual Average Conc. Design Values 2012 Modeling Results
2005 BY 2002 BY

Key Site County Site ID '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03 - '05 '04 - '06 '05 - '07

Average 

w/ 2007

Average Round 5

OTB

Round 5

Will Do Round4 Key Site

Chicago - Washington HS Cook 170310022 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.2 15.7 15.6 14.8 15.3 15.2 15.9 13.9 13.8 14.4 Chicago - Washington HS

Chicago - Mayfair Cook 170310052 15.9 15.3 17.0 14.5 15.5 16.1 15.6 15.7 15.8 17.1 13.9 13.8 15.0 Chicago - Mayfair

Chicago - Springfield Cook 170310057 15.6 13.8 16.7 13.5 15.1 15.4 14.7 15.1 15.0 15.6 13.7 13.5 14.1 Chicago - Springfield

Chicago - Lawndale Cook 170310076 14.8 14.2 16.6 13.5 14.3 15.2 14.8 14.8 14.9 15.6 13.6 13.4 14.1 Chicago - Lawndale

Blue Island Cook 170312001 14.9 14.1 16.4 13.2 14.3 15.1 14.6 14.6 14.8 15.6 13.4 13.3 14.1 Blue Island

Summit Cook 170313301 15.6 14.2 16.9 13.8 14.8 15.6 15.0 15.2 15.2 16.0 13.9 13.8 14.4 Summit

Cicero Cook 170316005 16.8 15.2 16.3 14.3 14.8 16.1 15.3 15.1 15.5 16.4 14.2 14.0 14.9 Cicero

Granite City Madison 171191007 17.5 15.4 18.2 16.3 15.1 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.7 17.3 14.3 14.2 15.5 Granite City

E. St. Louis St. Clair 171630010 14.9 14.7 17.1 14.5 15.6 15.6 15.4 15.7 15.6 16.2 13.4 13.3 14.5 E. St. Louis

Jeffersonville Clark 180190005 15.8 15.1 18.5 15.0 16.5 16.5 16.2 16.7 16.4 17.2 13.4 13.4 14.4 Jeffersonville

Jasper Dubois 180372001 15.7 14.4 16.9 13.5 14.4 15.7 14.9 14.9 15.2 15.5 11.8 11.9 13.0 Jasper

Gary Lake 180890031 16.8 13.3 14.5 16.8 15.1 14.9 15.6 12.4 12.4 Gary

Indy-Washington Park Marion 180970078 15.5 14.3 16.4 14.1 15.8 15.4 14.9 15.4 15.3 16.2 12.0 12.1 13.7 Indy-Washington Park

Indy-W 18th Street Marion 180970081 16.2 15.0 17.9 14.2 16.1 16.4 15.7 16.1 16.0 12.6 12.7 Indy-W 18th Street

Indy- Michigan Street Marion 180970083 16.3 15.0 17.5 14.1 15.9 16.3 15.5 15.8 15.9 16.6 12.6 12.6 14.0 Indy- Michigan Street

Allen Park Wayne 261630001 15.2 14.2 15.9 13.2 12.8 15.1 14.4 14.0 14.5 15.8 12.4 12.4 13.3 Allen Park

Southwest HS Wayne 261630015 16.6 15.4 17.2 14.7 14.5 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.9 17.3 13.5 13.5 14.4 Southwest HS

Linwood Wayne 261630016 15.8 13.7 16.0 13.0 13.9 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.5 12.5 12.5 13.0 Linwood

Dearborn Wayne 261630033 19.2 16.8 18.6 16.1 16.9 18.2 17.2 17.2 17.5 19.3 15.1 15.1 16.1 Dearborn

Wyandotte Wayne 261630036 16.3 13.7 16.4 12.9 13.4 15.5 14.3 14.2 14.7 16.6 12.5 12.5 13.9 Wyandotte

Middleton Butler 390170003 17.2 14.1 19.0 14.1 15.4 16.8 15.7 16.2 16.2 16.5 12.8 12.8 13.1 Middleton

Fairfield Butler 390170016 15.8 14.7 17.9 14.0 14.9 16.1 15.5 15.6 15.8 15.9 12.5 12.6 12.2 Fairfield

Cleveland-28th Street Cuyahoga 390350027 15.4 15.6 17.3 13.0 14.5 16.1 15.3 14.9 15.4 16.5 12.7 12.9 12.9 Cleveland-28th Street

Cleveland-St. Tikhon Cuyahoga 390350038 17.6 17.5 19.2 14.9 16.2 18.1 17.2 16.8 17.4 18.4 14.3 14.5 14.4 Cleveland-St. Tikhon

Cleveland-Broadway Cuyahoga 390350045 16.4 15.3 19.3 14.1 15.3 17.0 16.2 16.2 16.5 16.7 13.5 13.7 13.1 Cleveland-Broadway

Cleveland-E14 & Orange Cuyahoga 390350060 17.2 16.4 19.4 15.0 15.9 17.7 16.9 16.8 17.1 17.6 14.1 14.2 13.7 Cleveland-E14 & Orange

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave Cuyahoga 390350065 15.6 15.2 18.6 13.1 15.8 16.5 15.6 15.8 16.0 16.2 13.1 13.3 12.6 Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave

Columbus - Fairgrounds Franklin 390490024 16.4 15.0 16.4 13.6 14.6 15.9 15.0 14.9 15.3 16.5 12.0 12.1 13.0 Columbus - Fairgrounds

Columbus - Ann Street Franklin 390490025 15.3 14.6 16.5 13.8 14.7 15.5 15.0 15.0 15.1 16.0 11.9 11.9 12.5 Columbus - Ann Street

Columbus - Maple Canyon Franklin 390490081 14.9 13.6 14.6 12.9 13.1 14.4 13.7 13.5 13.9 16.0 10.9 11.0 12.5 Columbus - Maple Canyon

Cincinnati - Seymour Hamilton 390610014 17.0 15.9 19.8 15.5 16.5 17.6 17.1 17.3 17.3 17.7 13.8 13.9 14.0 Cincinnati - Seymour

Cincinnati - Taft Ave Hamilton 390610040 15.5 14.6 17.5 13.6 15.1 15.9 15.2 15.4 15.5 15.7 12.2 12.3 12.3 Cincinnati - Taft Ave

Cincinnati - 8th Ave Hamilton 390610042 16.7 16.0 19.1 14.9 15.9 17.3 16.7 16.6 16.9 17.3 13.4 13.4 13.2 Cincinnati - 8th Ave

Sharonville Hamilton 390610043 15.7 14.9 16.9 14.5 14.8 15.8 15.4 15.4 15.6 16.0 12.3 12.4 12.2 Sharonville

Norwood Hamilton 390617001 16.0 15.3 18.4 14.4 15.1 16.6 16.0 16.0 16.2 16.3 12.8 12.8 12.8 Norwood

St. Bernard Hamilton 390618001 17.3 16.4 20.0 15.9 16.1 17.9 17.4 17.3 17.6 17.3 14.0 14.1 13.8 St. Bernard

Steubenville Jefferson 390810016 17.7 15.9 16.4 13.8 16.2 16.7 15.4 15.5 15.8 17.7 12.7 12.7 16.2 Steubenville

Mingo Junction Jefferson 390811001 17.3 16.2 18.1 14.6 15.6 17.2 16.3 16.1 16.5 17.5 13.4 13.4 15.3 Mingo Junction

Ironton Lawrence 390870010 14.3 13.7 17.0 14.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.2 15.7 12.3 12.3 13.2 Ironton

Dayton Montgomery 391130032 15.9 14.5 17.4 13.6 15.6 15.9 15.2 15.5 15.5 15.9 12.4 12.5 12.3 Dayton

New Boston Scioto 391450013 14.7 13.0 16.2 14.3 14.0 14.6 14.5 14.8 14.7 17.1 11.6 11.6 14.2 New Boston

Canton - Dueber Stark 391510017 16.8 15.6 17.8 14.6 15.9 16.7 16.0 16.1 16.3 17.3 13.3 13.3 13.6 Canton - Dueber

Canton - Market Stark 391510020 15.0 14.1 16.6 11.9 14.4 15.2 14.2 14.3 14.6 15.7 11.9 12.0 12.2 Canton - Market

Akron - Brittain Summit 391530017 15.4 15.0 16.4 13.5 14.4 15.6 15.0 14.8 15.1 16.4 12.3 12.3 12.9 Akron - Brittain

Akron - W. Exchange Summit 391530023 14.2 13.9 15.7 12.8 13.7 14.6 14.1 14.1 14.3 15.6 11.5 11.6 12.2 Akron - W. Exchange

Annual Average Conc. Design Values 2018 Modeling Results
24-Hour PM2.5 Base Year

Key Site County Site ID '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '03-'05 '04-'06 '05-'07

Average

 w/ 2007 2009 2012 2018 Key Site

Chicago - Washington HS Cook 170310022 37.7 32.5 45.7 27.0 35.7 38.6 35.1 36.1 36.6 36 36 35 Chicago - Washington HS

Chicago - Mayfair Cook 170310052 37.3 38.8 48.3 31.6 39.4 41.5 39.6 39.8 40.3 36 36 36 Chicago - Mayfair

Chicago - Springfield Cook 170310057 36.4 33.1 46.5 27.7 38.9 38.7 35.8 37.7 37.4 32 32 31 Chicago - Springfield

Chicago - Lawndale Cook 170310076 32.6 39.7 45.1 29.0 37.2 39.1 37.9 37.1 38.1 35 35 34 Chicago - Lawndale

McCook Cook 170311016 43.0 39 39 38 McCook

Blue Island Cook 170312001 39.6 38.5 43.8 28.1 35.1 40.6 36.8 35.7 37.7 34 34 33 Blue Island

Schiller Park Cook 170313103 40.7 50.3 30.0 36.6 45.5 40.3 39.0 41.6 39 39 39 Schiller Park

Summit Cook 170313301 38.4 42.4 49.1 27.4 36.7 43.3 39.6 37.7 40.2 38 38 37 Summit

Maywood Cook 170316005 38.5 42.5 44.6 29.2 36.9 41.9 38.8 36.9 39.2 38 38 37 Maywood

Granite City Madison 171191007 40.8 35.4 44.1 36.3 36.0 40.1 38.6 38.8 39.2 33 33 32 Granite City

E. St. Louis St. Clair 171630010 32.6 30.2 39.6 29.2 33.1 34.1 33.0 34.0 33.7 28 28 28 E. St. Louis

Jeffersonville Clark 180190005 28.4 45.5 35.9 43.3 37.0 36.6 41.6 38.4 29 31 31 Jeffersonville

Jasper Dubois 180372001 39.5 30.0 41.2 31.6 39.5 36.9 34.3 37.4 36.2 28 29 28 Jasper

Gary - IITRI Lake 180890022 39.0 34 34 35 Gary - IITRI

Gary - Burr School Lake 180890026 39.0 33 34 32 Gary - Burr School

Gary Lake 180890031 38.7 27.1 36.2 38.7 32.9 34.0 35.2 24 24 27 Gary

Indy-West Street Marion 180970043 38.0 33 33 33 Indy-West Street

Indy-English Avenue Marion 180970066 38.0 32 32 32 Indy-English Avenue

Indy-Washington Park Marion 180970078 39.3 31.0 42.5 31.7 37.6 37.6 35.1 37.3 36.6 31 31 32 Indy-Washington Park

Indy-W 18th Street Marion 180970081 36.2 31.9 45.7 34.8 38.4 37.9 37.5 39.6 38.3 31 31 31 Indy-W 18th Street

Indy- Michigan Street Marion 180970083 36.7 31.3 40.3 33.5 37.2 36.1 35.0 37.0 36.0 28 28 29 Indy- Michigan Street

Luna Pier Monroe 261150005 34.7 35.0 49.3 32.6 32.2 39.7 39.0 38.0 38.9 32 32 31 Luna Pier

Oak Park Oakland 261250001 36.6 32.5 52.2 33.0 35.3 40.4 39.2 40.2 39.9 36 36 35 Oak Park

Port Huron St. Clair 261470005 37.2 32.2 47.6 37.9 36.3 39.0 39.2 40.6 39.6 34 34 33 Port Huron

Ypsilanti Washtenaw 261610008 38.8 31.5 52.1 31.3 34.5 40.8 38.3 39.3 39.5 35 35 34 Ypsilanti

Allen Park Wayne 261630001 40.5 36.9 43.0 34.1 35.9 40.1 38.0 37.7 38.6 35 34 33 Allen Park

Southwest HS Wayne 261630015 33.6 36.0 49.7 36.2 34.0 39.8 40.6 40.0 40.1 35 35 33 Southwest HS

Linwood Wayne 261630016 46.2 38.3 51.8 36.9 34.8 45.4 42.3 41.2 43.0 39 39 38 Linwood

E 7 Mile Wayne 261630019 37.1 35.0 52.3 36.2 33.0 41.5 41.2 40.5 41.0 38 38 37 E 7 Mile

Dearborn Wayne 261630033 42.8 39.4 50.2 43.1 36.6 44.1 44.2 43.3 43.9 40 40 39 Dearborn

Wyandotte Wayne 261630036 34.8 32.3 46.7 33.2 28.6 37.9 37.4 36.2 37.2 35 35 34 Wyandotte

Newberry Wayne 261630038 36.8 57.5 28.6 33.4 39.1 39.8 42.7 38 37 36 Newberry

FIA Wayne 261630039 43.9 32.4 34.8 37.0 39.7 33 33 31 FIA

Middleton Butler 390170003 38.6 37.2 47.6 30.2 37.1 41.1 38.3 38.3 39.3 28 28 27 Middleton

Fairfield Butler 390170016 34.8 32.2 43.4 35.2 34.5 36.8 36.9 37.7 37.1 27 28 27 Fairfield

Butler 390170017 34.6 34.3 44.9 37.9 39.6 40.8 29 29 28

Cleveland-28th Street Cuyahoga 390350027 41.3 40.9 35.7 31.5 39.0 39.3 36.0 35.4 36.9 32 32 31 Cleveland-28th Street

Cleveland-St. Tikhon Cuyahoga 390350038 47.3 42.5 51.2 36.1 39.7 44.9 47.0 42.3 44.2 36 35 34 Cleveland-St. Tikhon

Cleveland-Broadway Cuyahoga 390350045 42.2 36.1 46.2 29.5 37.0 41.5 37.3 37.6 38.8 31 30 29 Cleveland-Broadway

Cleveland-GT Craig Cuyahoga 390350060 45.5 42.2 49.5 31.0 38.7 45.7 40.9 39.7 42.1 37 37 35 Cleveland-GT Craig

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave Cuyahoga 390350065 39.1 36.1 47.9 27.8 39.1 41.0 37.3 38.3 38.9 31 30 30 Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave

Columbus - Fairgrounds Franklin 390490024 39.2 35.1 45.0 34.0 34.2 39.8 38.0 37.7 38.5 33 32 31 Columbus - Fairgrounds

Columbus - Ann Street Franklin 390490025 37.0 35.5 44.9 34.0 35.5 39.1 38.1 38.1 38.5 31 31 30 Columbus - Ann Street

Cincinnait Hamilton 390610006 45.0 33.3 34.7 37.7 40.6 27 28 27 Cincinnait

Cincinnati - Seymour Hamilton 390610014 37.8 42.0 38.5 35.2 38.1 39.4 38.6 37.3 38.4 26 25 24 Cincinnati - Seymour

Cincinnati - Taft Ave Hamilton 390610040 31.9 30.5 45.8 32.8 34.7 36.1 36.4 37.8 36.7 24 24 23 Cincinnati - Taft Ave

Cincinnati - 8th Ave Hamilton 390610042 33.8 31.9 44.4 34.5 35.9 36.7 36.9 38.3 37.3 28 28 27 Cincinnati - 8th Ave

Sharonville Hamilton 390610043 37.3 31.4 39.9 34.9 34.0 36.2 35.4 36.3 36.0 28 28 27 Sharonville

Norwood Hamilton 390617001 37.1 34.6 47.1 34.0 33.7 39.6 38.6 38.3 38.8 30 30 29 Norwood

St. Bernard Hamilton 390618001 35.8 33.9 51.4 36.1 35.4 40.4 40.5 41.0 40.6 30 30 29 St. Bernard

Steubenville Jefferson 390810016 39.6 43.8 43.8 32.1 43.5 42.4 39.9 39.8 40.7 29 28 28 Steubenville

Mingo Junction Jefferson 390811001 40.9 51.5 44.2 32.9 35.4 45.5 42.9 37.5 42.0 30 30 30 Mingo Junction

Dayton Montgomery 391130032 42.7 32.5 45.0 30.3 36.9 40.1 35.9 37.4 37.8 30 30 30 Dayton

Canton - Dueber Stark 391510017 34.2 36.3 47.6 32.2 33.4 39.4 38.7 37.7 38.6 28 28 27 Canton - Dueber

Akron - Brittain Summit 391530017 36.9 36.9 45.2 31.5 33.3 39.7 37.9 36.7 38.1 30 30 29 Akron - Brittain

Green Bay - Est High Brown 550090005 33.5 32.3 41.5 36.9 37.1 35.8 36.9 38.5 37.1 35 34 32 Green Bay - Est High

Madison Dane 550250047 32.0 31.9 40.1 33.4 44.3 34.7 35.1 39.3 36.4 32 31 29 Madison

Milwaukee-Health Center Milwaukee 550790010 33.2 38.4 38.7 40.7 40.6 36.8 39.3 40.0 38.7 35 34 33 Milwaukee-Health Center

Milwaukee-SER Hdqs Milwaukee 550790026 29.6 28.7 41.5 42.6 39.8 33.3 37.6 41.3 37.4 34 34 33 Milwaukee-SER Hdqs

Milwaukee-Virginia FS Milwaukee 550790043 39.2 41.4 37.1 44.0 38 39.2 40.8 39.7 39.9 36 36 36 Milwaukee-Virginia FS

Milwaukee- Fire Dept Hdqs Milwaukee 550790099 33.7 38.9 37.1 38.3 40.7 36.6 38.1 38.7 37.8 33 32 32 Milwaukee- Fire Dept Hdqs

Waukesha Waukesha 551330027 29.1 38.4 41.1 28.2 33.8 36.2 35.9 34.4 35.5 31 31 29 Waukesha

98th Percentile (24-hour) Design Values Round 5 Modeling Results
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

1703100521 IL Cook winter so4 0.1772 0.9342

1703100521 IL Cook winter no3 0.3099 1.0128

1703100521 IL Cook winter ocm 0.2147 0.9942

1703100521 IL Cook winter ec 0.0372 0.888

1703100521 IL Cook winter soil 0.0242 1.1674

1703100521 IL Cook winter nh4 0.1421 0.97

1703100521 IL Cook winter pbw 0.0947 0.9678

1703100521 IL Cook spring so4 0.32 0.8018

1703100521 IL Cook spring no3 0.0609 0.9385

1703100521 IL Cook spring ocm 0.2742 1.0629

1703100521 IL Cook spring ec 0.0501 0.8712

1703100521 IL Cook spring soil 0.0505 1.1796

1703100521 IL Cook spring nh4 0.1203 0.8619

1703100521 IL Cook spring pbw 0.0984 0.8492

1703100521 IL Cook summer so4 0.3089 0.725

1703100521 IL Cook summer no3 0 1.0124

1703100521 IL Cook summer ocm 0.1599 1.069

1703100521 IL Cook summer ec 0.0351 0.8683

1703100521 IL Cook summer soil 0.0318 1.204

1703100521 IL Cook summer nh4 0.0932 0.7354

1703100521 IL Cook summer pbw 0.094 0.7217

1703100521 IL Cook fall so4 0.1872 0.9151

1703100521 IL Cook fall no3 0.1628 0.9408

1703100521 IL Cook fall ocm 0.2389 1.0091

1703100521 IL Cook fall ec 0.0403 0.8623

1703100521 IL Cook fall soil 0.0284 1.1443

1703100521 IL Cook fall nh4 0.1062 0.9247

1703100521 IL Cook fall pbw 0.0614 0.9233

1711910071 IL Madison winter so4 0.213 0.9195

1711910071 IL Madison winter no3 0.2705 1.0306

1711910071 IL Madison winter ocm 0.2093 0.9289

1711910071 IL Madison winter ec 0.0434 0.9083

1711910071 IL Madison winter soil 0.0306 1.1782

1711910071 IL Madison winter nh4 0.1528 0.9513

1711910071 IL Madison winter pbw 0.0804 0.9243

1711910071 IL Madison spring so4 0.3194 0.7717

1711910071 IL Madison spring no3 0.0189 0.8611

1711910071 IL Madison spring ocm 0.2455 1.1103

1711910071 IL Madison spring ec 0.0564 1.0046

1711910071 IL Madison spring soil 0.0459 1.2252

1711910071 IL Madison spring nh4 0.1121 0.7894

1711910071 IL Madison spring pbw 0.1085 0.7783

1711910071 IL Madison summer so4 0.313 0.705

1711910071 IL Madison summer no3 0 0.884

1711910071 IL Madison summer ocm 0.153 1.1546

1711910071 IL Madison summer ec 0.0345 1.0513

1711910071 IL Madison summer soil 0.0302 1.2532

1711910071 IL Madison summer nh4 0.102 0.7409

1711910071 IL Madison summer pbw 0.1096 0.7133

1711910071 IL Madison fall so4 0.2058 0.9037

1711910071 IL Madison fall no3 0.1308 0.9426

1711910071 IL Madison fall ocm 0.259 1.0233

1711910071 IL Madison fall ec 0.0563 0.9248

1711910071 IL Madison fall soil 0.0549 1.1412

1711910071 IL Madison fall nh4 0.1073 0.9185

1711910071 IL Madison fall pbw 0.0655 0.918

PM2.5 RRFs by Species and Season (2009)
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

1803720011 IN Dubois winter so4 0.2669 0.8833

1803720011 IN Dubois winter no3 0.2548 0.9526

1803720011 IN Dubois winter ocm 0.1747 0.9374

1803720011 IN Dubois winter ec 0.0313 0.9319

1803720011 IN Dubois winter soil 0.0192 1.1349

1803720011 IN Dubois winter nh4 0.1646 0.9069

1803720011 IN Dubois winter pbw 0.0885 0.9006

1803720011 IN Dubois spring so4 0.4141 0.6808

1803720011 IN Dubois spring no3 0.0022 0.8106

1803720011 IN Dubois spring ocm 0.178 0.9997

1803720011 IN Dubois spring ec 0.0324 0.9083

1803720011 IN Dubois spring soil 0.0218 1.1284

1803720011 IN Dubois spring nh4 0.1432 0.7075

1803720011 IN Dubois spring pbw 0.1556 0.6916

1803720011 IN Dubois summer so4 0.3687 0.644

1803720011 IN Dubois summer no3 0 0.8029

1803720011 IN Dubois summer ocm 0.1174 1.0136

1803720011 IN Dubois summer ec 0.0207 0.913

1803720011 IN Dubois summer soil 0.0213 1.1988

1803720011 IN Dubois summer nh4 0.1168 0.6789

1803720011 IN Dubois summer pbw 0.1246 0.6613

1803720011 IN Dubois fall so4 0.2964 0.8232

1803720011 IN Dubois fall no3 0.138 0.8797

1803720011 IN Dubois fall ocm 0.2116 0.9861

1803720011 IN Dubois fall ec 0.0437 0.9019

1803720011 IN Dubois fall soil 0.03 1.1387

1803720011 IN Dubois fall nh4 0.1449 0.8444

1803720011 IN Dubois fall pbw 0.0941 0.8558

1809700811 IN Marion winter so4 0.2358 0.9192

1809700811 IN Marion winter no3 0.2729 0.9769

1809700811 IN Marion winter ocm 0.1851 0.9546

1809700811 IN Marion winter ec 0.0385 0.8647

1809700811 IN Marion winter soil 0.0239 1.0835

1809700811 IN Marion winter nh4 0.1561 0.9446

1809700811 IN Marion winter pbw 0.0877 0.944

1809700811 IN Marion spring so4 0.3745 0.6868

1809700811 IN Marion spring no3 0.0167 0.8082

1809700811 IN Marion spring ocm 0.2034 0.9881

1809700811 IN Marion spring ec 0.0447 0.8547

1809700811 IN Marion spring soil 0.0376 1.0625

1809700811 IN Marion spring nh4 0.1313 0.7182

1809700811 IN Marion spring pbw 0.1309 0.7056

1809700811 IN Marion summer so4 0.3582 0.6529

1809700811 IN Marion summer no3 0 0.8099

1809700811 IN Marion summer ocm 0.1231 1.0043

1809700811 IN Marion summer ec 0.03 0.8444

1809700811 IN Marion summer soil 0.0253 1.0918

1809700811 IN Marion summer nh4 0.1114 0.6854

1809700811 IN Marion summer pbw 0.1163 0.6674

1809700811 IN Marion fall so4 0.2751 0.8538

1809700811 IN Marion fall no3 0.149 0.9452

1809700811 IN Marion fall ocm 0.223 0.9648

1809700811 IN Marion fall ec 0.0525 0.8412

1809700811 IN Marion fall soil 0.0358 1.089

1809700811 IN Marion fall nh4 0.1378 0.8905

1809700811 IN Marion fall pbw 0.0865 0.8888
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

2616300331 MI Wayne winter so4 0.1587 0.9206

2616300331 MI Wayne winter no3 0.2394 0.9813

2616300331 MI Wayne winter ocm 0.3193 1.0781

2616300331 MI Wayne winter ec 0.0383 0.9279

2616300331 MI Wayne winter soil 0.0541 1.0206

2616300331 MI Wayne winter nh4 0.1188 0.9518

2616300331 MI Wayne winter pbw 0.0714 0.9566

2616300331 MI Wayne spring so4 0.3383 0.7398

2616300331 MI Wayne spring no3 0.0259 0.8787

2616300331 MI Wayne spring ocm 0.3543 1.0234

2616300331 MI Wayne spring ec 0.0504 0.8671

2616300331 MI Wayne spring soil 0.0915 1.0153

2616300331 MI Wayne spring nh4 0.1191 0.7818

2616300331 MI Wayne spring pbw 0.1126 0.7619

2616300331 MI Wayne summer so4 0.3311 0.6681

2616300331 MI Wayne summer no3 0 0.8431

2616300331 MI Wayne summer ocm 0.2297 1.0029

2616300331 MI Wayne summer ec 0.0362 0.8332

2616300331 MI Wayne summer soil 0.061 1.0177

2616300331 MI Wayne summer nh4 0.1027 0.6974

2616300331 MI Wayne summer pbw 0.1073 0.6754

2616300331 MI Wayne fall so4 0.1898 0.854

2616300331 MI Wayne fall no3 0.1075 0.9367

2616300331 MI Wayne fall ocm 0.3689 1.0607

2616300331 MI Wayne fall ec 0.0546 0.8862

2616300331 MI Wayne fall soil 0.1676 1.0317

2616300331 MI Wayne fall nh4 0.0866 0.8919

2616300331 MI Wayne fall pbw 0.0553 0.8821

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter so4 0.2117 0.8993

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter no3 0.2665 0.9856

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter ocm 0.2048 0.9716

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter ec 0.0413 0.8903

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter soil 0.0465 1.0959

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter nh4 0.1459 0.9416

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga winter pbw 0.0832 0.9541

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring so4 0.3334 0.7145

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring no3 0.0374 0.8393

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring ocm 0.2068 1.0899

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring ec 0.052 0.9362

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring soil 0.0697 1.0601

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring nh4 0.1256 0.7666

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga spring pbw 0.115 0.7761

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer so4 0.3241 0.6303

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer no3 0 0.89

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer ocm 0.1306 1.0998

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer ec 0.0419 0.9354

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer soil 0.0583 1.0906

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer nh4 0.1074 0.7038

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga summer pbw 0.1183 0.6674

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall so4 0.2055 0.8193

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall no3 0.1275 0.9189

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall ocm 0.2234 1.0245

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall ec 0.0499 0.8913

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall soil 0.0675 1.0927

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall nh4 0.1034 0.8615

3903500381 OH Cuyahoga fall pbw 0.0637 0.8564
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

3904900241 OH Franklin winter so4 0.2555 0.8622

3904900241 OH Franklin winter no3 0.2373 1.0002

3904900241 OH Franklin winter ocm 0.2082 0.974

3904900241 OH Franklin winter ec 0.0375 0.8537

3904900241 OH Franklin winter soil 0.0259 1.0844

3904900241 OH Franklin winter nh4 0.1495 0.9261

3904900241 OH Franklin winter pbw 0.0861 0.9274

3904900241 OH Franklin spring so4 0.3754 0.6615

3904900241 OH Franklin spring no3 0.0176 0.8436

3904900241 OH Franklin spring ocm 0.2069 1.062

3904900241 OH Franklin spring ec 0.0405 0.8678

3904900241 OH Franklin spring soil 0.0371 1.0551

3904900241 OH Franklin spring nh4 0.1296 0.7212

3904900241 OH Franklin spring pbw 0.128 0.6992

3904900241 OH Franklin summer so4 0.3703 0.622

3904900241 OH Franklin summer no3 0 0.9056

3904900241 OH Franklin summer ocm 0.1343 1.0654

3904900241 OH Franklin summer ec 0.0311 0.8565

3904900241 OH Franklin summer soil 0.0267 1.0667

3904900241 OH Franklin summer nh4 0.1142 0.7021

3904900241 OH Franklin summer pbw 0.1186 0.6614

3904900241 OH Franklin fall so4 0.2692 0.8119

3904900241 OH Franklin fall no3 0.1186 0.9099

3904900241 OH Franklin fall ocm 0.2489 1.019

3904900241 OH Franklin fall ec 0.0533 0.8371

3904900241 OH Franklin fall soil 0.0423 1.0924

3904900241 OH Franklin fall nh4 0.1217 0.8539

3904900241 OH Franklin fall pbw 0.0821 0.8519

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter so4 0.2685 0.8104

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter no3 0.2378 1.0886

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter ocm 0.19 0.961

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter ec 0.035 0.8969

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter soil 0.0229 1.4146

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter nh4 0.1583 0.9077

3906100141 OH Hamilton winter pbw 0.0874 0.8687

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring so4 0.3583 0.6331

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring no3 0.0025 1.0155

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring ocm 0.1986 1.0798

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring ec 0.0466 0.9228

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring soil 0.0289 1.3785

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring nh4 0.1215 0.6968

3906100141 OH Hamilton spring pbw 0.128 0.6307

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer so4 0.3722 0.577

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer no3 0 1.0923

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer ocm 0.121 1.082

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer ec 0.0309 0.9099

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer soil 0.0199 1.537

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer nh4 0.1178 0.6441

3906100141 OH Hamilton summer pbw 0.1261 0.5734

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall so4 0.2608 0.7754

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall no3 0.1184 0.9857

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall ocm 0.213 1.0235

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall ec 0.0512 0.8876

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall soil 0.0328 1.4007

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall nh4 0.1254 0.846

3906100141 OH Hamilton fall pbw 0.0828 0.8172
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter so4 0.2367 0.8217

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter no3 0.1709 1.0522

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter ocm 0.3288 0.8819

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter ec 0.0435 0.9091

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter soil 0.0272 0.4368

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter nh4 0.1199 0.8904

3908110011 OH Jefferson winter pbw 0.073 0.8583

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring so4 0.3508 0.6666

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring no3 0.0154 0.9156

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring ocm 0.3078 0.9995

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring ec 0.0395 0.9853

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring soil 0.0407 0.4844

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring nh4 0.114 0.7054

3908110011 OH Jefferson spring pbw 0.1095 0.6713

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer so4 0.3779 0.6156

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer no3 0 1.0837

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer ocm 0.2098 1.0145

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer ec 0.0308 0.9689

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer soil 0.0323 0.3632

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer nh4 0.1065 0.6428

3908110011 OH Jefferson summer pbw 0.1007 0.625

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall so4 0.2315 0.7694

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall no3 0.0702 1.0302

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall ocm 0.372 0.9312

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall ec 0.051 0.9086

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall soil 0.0344 0.4555

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall nh4 0.0859 0.8284

3908110011 OH Jefferson fall pbw 0.0629 0.7951

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter so4 0.2613 0.8598

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter no3 0.2407 1.029

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter ocm 0.1954 0.9442

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter ec 0.036 0.8746

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter soil 0.0259 1.1295

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter nh4 0.1531 0.9304

3911300321 OH Montgomer winter pbw 0.0876 0.9205

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring so4 0.3659 0.6606

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring no3 0.0163 0.8639

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring ocm 0.1895 1.0976

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring ec 0.0442 0.9417

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring soil 0.0253 1.0873

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring nh4 0.1313 0.7149

3911300321 OH Montgomer spring pbw 0.1326 0.6839

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer so4 0.375 0.6234

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer no3 0 0.9474

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer ocm 0.128 1.1047

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer ec 0.029 0.9496

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer soil 0.0205 1.1299

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer nh4 0.1114 0.6931

3911300321 OH Montgomer summer pbw 0.1114 0.6482

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall so4 0.3062 0.8033

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall no3 0.1012 0.9634

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall ocm 0.2221 1.0158

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall ec 0.0514 0.877

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall soil 0.028 1.1391

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall nh4 0.1352 0.8625

3911300321 OH Montgomer fall pbw 0.0982 0.8475
Site ID State County Season Species

Species Comp. of Ave. 

FRM (fraction) Species RRF

3915100171 OH Stark winter so4 0.2362 0.8558

3915100171 OH Stark winter no3 0.2234 1.0222

3915100171 OH Stark winter ocm 0.2478 0.9255

3915100171 OH Stark winter ec 0.0414 0.8866

3915100171 OH Stark winter soil 0.0334 1.099

3915100171 OH Stark winter nh4 0.1376 0.925

3915100171 OH Stark winter pbw 0.0802 0.9155

3915100171 OH Stark spring so4 0.3581 0.6834

3915100171 OH Stark spring no3 0.0236 0.855

3915100171 OH Stark spring ocm 0.221 1.0892

3915100171 OH Stark spring ec 0.0501 1.0017

3915100171 OH Stark spring soil 0.058 1.0528

3915100171 OH Stark spring nh4 0.1288 0.7264

3915100171 OH Stark spring pbw 0.1256 0.7009

3915100171 OH Stark summer so4 0.3621 0.6277

3915100171 OH Stark summer no3 0 0.8203

3915100171 OH Stark summer ocm 0.1483 1.0984

3915100171 OH Stark summer ec 0.0403 1.016

3915100171 OH Stark summer soil 0.037 1.0781

3915100171 OH Stark summer nh4 0.1157 0.6739

3915100171 OH Stark summer pbw 0.124 0.651

3915100171 OH Stark fall so4 0.2293 0.8041

3915100171 OH Stark fall no3 0.1262 0.9363

3915100171 OH Stark fall ocm 0.2722 1.0226

3915100171 OH Stark fall ec 0.0545 0.9202

3915100171 OH Stark fall soil 0.0461 1.0959

3915100171 OH Stark fall nh4 0.1105 0.8549

3915100171 OH Stark fall pbw 0.0706 0.8428

3915300171 OH Summit winter so4 0.2511 0.8771

3915300171 OH Summit winter no3 0.2376 1.0052

3915300171 OH Summit winter ocm 0.2185 0.9429

3915300171 OH Summit winter ec 0.0334 0.8677

3915300171 OH Summit winter soil 0.0255 1.0835

3915300171 OH Summit winter nh4 0.1489 0.9374

3915300171 OH Summit winter pbw 0.0851 0.945

3915300171 OH Summit spring so4 0.387 0.7046

3915300171 OH Summit spring no3 0.0072 0.8466

3915300171 OH Summit spring ocm 0.1901 1.0967

3915300171 OH Summit spring ec 0.035 0.9482

3915300171 OH Summit spring soil 0.0304 1.0524

3915300171 OH Summit spring nh4 0.1294 0.7521

3915300171 OH Summit spring pbw 0.1342 0.7384

3915300171 OH Summit summer so4 0.3694 0.6378

3915300171 OH Summit summer no3 0 0.8587

3915300171 OH Summit summer ocm 0.1417 1.1077

3915300171 OH Summit summer ec 0.0332 0.9506

3915300171 OH Summit summer soil 0.0198 1.0744

3915300171 OH Summit summer nh4 0.1121 0.6961

3915300171 OH Summit summer pbw 0.1146 0.6691

3915300171 OH Summit fall so4 0.2443 0.8074

3915300171 OH Summit fall no3 0.1175 0.9392

3915300171 OH Summit fall ocm 0.2636 1.0252

3915300171 OH Summit fall ec 0.0623 0.8883

3915300171 OH Summit fall soil 0.0494 1.086

3915300171 OH Summit fall nh4 0.109 0.8622

3915300171 OH Summit fall pbw 0.0723 0.8506
119

APPENDIX II

Ozone Source Apportionment Modeling Results

















120

APPENDIX III

PM2.5 Source Apportionment Modeling Results
Chicago (Cicero), Illinois

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Clark County, Indiana

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Dearborn, Michigan

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Cincinnati, Ohio

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Cleveland, Ohio

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Steubenville, Ohio

2005 (Round 5)

2012 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
121

APPENDIX IV

Haze Source Apportionment Modeling Results
Boundary Waters, Minnesota

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Voyageurs, Minnesota

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Seney, Michigan

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Isle Royale, Michigan

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Shenandoah, Virginia

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Mammoth Cave, Kentucky

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
Lye Brook, Vermont

2005 (Round 5)

2018 (Round 4)

2018 (Round 5)
1

Regional Air Quality Analyses for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze: 

Final Technical Support Document (Supplement), September 12, 2008

The purpose of this paper is to summarize a new modeling analysis performed by the Lake 

Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) to address the effect of the recent court decision 

vacating EPA’s Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). This new modeling is intended to supplement 

the LADCO Technical Support Document (“Regional Air Quality Analyses for Ozone, PM2.5, 

and Regional Haze: Final Technical Support Document”, April 25, 2008), which summarizes the 

air quality analyses conducted by LADCO and its contractors to support the development of 

State Implementation Plans for ozone, PM2.5, and regional haze in the States of Illinois, 

Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

Compared to the previous LADCO modeling (Round 5.1), the new modeling shows similar 

results for ozone, but much more nonattainment for PM2.5 and higher visibility levels for 

regional haze. Specifically, the new modeling shows:

Ozone: Attainment of the 0.08 ppm standard by 2009 everywhere in the region, except 

Holland, MI, and nonattainment of the 0.075 ppm standard through at least 2018.

PM2.5: Widespread nonattainment of annual (15 ug/m3) and daily (35 ug/m3) standards.

Haze: Higher visibility levels on the 20% worst visibility days in 2018 in Class I areas in 

the eastern U.S., resulting in most areas being above the glide path.

Background: On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. Circuit vacated EPA’s CAIR 

rule (cite). The reductions in NOx and SO2 emissions associated with this rule were a key part 

of the LADCO States’ attainment demonstrations for ozone and PM2.5 and the reasonable 

progress determinations for regional haze. LADCO’s previous modeling (Round 5.1) relied on 

EGU emission projections from EPA’s IPM3.0 analysis, which assumed implementation of 

Phases I and II of CAIR. For this new modeling, alternative EGU emission projections were 

developed, which did not rely on CAIR (or IPM).

Model Set-Up: The new modeling was performed consistent with LADCO’s previous modeling 

(Round 5.1):

Model Version: CAMx v4.50beta_deposition

Future Years: 2009, 2012, 2018

Runs: (a) Ozone: Summer 2005 meteorology with 12 km grids

(b) PM2.5 and haze: Full year 2005 meteorology with 36 km grids

Emission Scenarios: The new modeling assumed the same set of “on the books” controls as 

in LADCO’s previous modeling (Round 5.1) for all sectors, except EGUs. In light of the CAIR 

decision, three new EGU scenarios were prepared:
2

Scenario A: 2007 CEM-based emissions were projected for all states in the modeling domain 

based on EIA growth rates by state (NERC region) and fuel type. The assumed growth rates for 

the Midwest States were: MAIN (IL, IA, MO, WI): 8.8% (2007-2018); ECAR (IN, KY, MI, OH): 

13.5% (2007-2018); and MAPP (MN): 15.1% (2007-2018). No control was applied. The annual 

emissions were temporalized based on profiles derived from 2004-2006 CEM data. (Note, these 

are the same temporal profiles used in Round 5.1.)

Scenario B. Scenario A emissions for the LADCO States and select neighboring states (e.g., 

MN, IA, MO, KY, TN, and WV) were adjusted by applying legally enforceable controls (i.e., 

emission reductions required by a Consent Decree, state rule, or permit). Only those legally 

enforceable controls identified (and justified) by the States were applied. The States also 

supplied the appropriate control factors. A table summarizing the Scenario B controls is provided 

in Appendix I.

Scenario C. For the years 2009 and 2012, Scenario A emissions for all states were adjusted by 

applying all planned SO2 and NOx controls based on the July 10 CAMD list (i.e., 90% reduction 

for scrubbers, 95% reduction for SCRs). Because the July 10 CAMD list only includes controls 

generally out to 2011, additional SO2 and NOx controls for the year 2018 were assumed for all 

BART-eligible EGUs in the five LADCO State plus MN, IA, MO, KY, TN, and MO list (i.e., 90% 

reduction for scrubbers, 95% reduction for SCRs).

1

 All Scenario B controls were included in 

Scenario C. A table summarizing the Scenario C controls is provided in Appendix II.

Table 1 and Figure 1 provide a summary of the 5-state regional NOx and SO2 emissions for 

each scenario and future year. (Note, the CAIR emissions included here are based on EPA’s 

IPM3.0 modeling.) Several comments on the emissions should be noted:

Summer NOx

• There is llittle difference between the three alternative scenarios and CAIR. This 

suggests that summer ozone concentrations for the alternative scenarios are 

likely to be similar to those predicted with CAIR (i.e., Round 5.1).

Annual NOx:

• There is a significant change in emissions between scenarios, mostly during the 

non-summer months.

• Scenario B reflects application of NOx controls in several states (e.g., IL,OH,WI).

• Because there are relatively few SCRs (in the LADCO States) on the CAMD list, 

Scenario C results in only a small emissions decrease compared to Scenario B.

• Assumed BART controls result in a significant emissions decrease.

Annual SO2

• There is a significant change in emissions between scenarios.

• Scenario B reflects application of SO2 controls in several states (e.g., IL,OH,WI).

• Because there are several FGDs (in the LADCO States) on the CAMD list, 

Scenario C results in a large emissions decrease compared to Scenario B.

• Assumed BART controls result in a significant emissions decrease (i.e., even 

lower emissions than the IPM-estimated CAIR emissions).

 

1

 A subsequent analysis was conducted with the following inventory changes: (a) 95% reduction for 

scrubbers, 90% redcuction for SCRs (consistent with EPA’s default assumptions for IPM), and (b)

revisions provided for a few plants in Indiana and Minnesota. The changes resulted in a relatively small 

difference in the regioinal NOx and SO2 emissions (e.g., about a 2% NOx increase and about a 1-2% 

decrease in SO2). To assess the impact of the changes, PM2.5 modleing was conducted with the new 

Scenario B and Scenario C emissions for 2012. The modeling showed little change in the predicted 

PM2.5 concentrations.
3

Figure 1. Regional NOx and SO2 Emissions

Summer NOx Emissions

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

20052007

2009A

2009B2009C

2009CAIR

2012A

2012B2012C

2012CAIR

2018A

2018B2018C

2018BART

2018CAIR

Annual NOx Emissions

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

20052007

2009A

2009B2009C

2009CAIR

2012A

2012B2012C

2012CAIR

2018A

2018B2018C

2018BART

2018CAIR

Annual SO2 Emissions

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

20052007

2009A

2009B2009C

2009CAIR

2012A

2012B2012C

2012CAIR

2018A

2018B2018C

2018BART

2018CAIR
4

Table 1. Regional NOx and SO2 Emissions

Summer NOx Emissions (TPD)

2005 2007 2009 A 2009 B 2009 C

2010 

CAIR 2012 A 2012 B 2012 C

2012 

CAIR 2018 A 2018 B 2018 C

2018 CBART2018 

CAIR

IL 305 305 311 311 311 275 340 236 236 266 333 227 227 219 224

IN 393 393 376 376 374 384 393 393 390 368 410 386 383 292 264

MI 393 393 350 350 350 242 366 366 366 229 377 377 377 260 243

OH 408 408 395 355 335 285 423 351 351 290 431 366 366 230 290

WI 413 413 167 160 160 238 184 170 170 177 183 168 168 168 177

1,912 1,912 1,599 1,552 1,530 1,424 1,706 1,516 1,513 1,330 1,734 1,524 1,521 1,169 1,198

Annual NOx Emissions (TPY)

2005 2007 2009 A 2009 B 2009 C

2010 

CAIR 2012 A 2012 B 2012 C

2012 

CAIR 2018 A 2018 B 2018 C

2018 CBART2018 

CAIR

IL 126,786 121,006 124,917 124,917 124,917 83,224 137,438 81,989 81,989 82,248 135,983 79,771 79,771 63,590 69,958

IN 214,727 203,493 203,776 203,776 201,947 133,188 212,790 212,790 210,877 125,541 221,950 212,805 210,810 177,027 90,415

MI 120,332 112,484 112,478 112,478 112,478 83,117 117,621 117,621 117,621 77,897 122,447 122,447 122,447 89,444 79,543

OH 255,554 240,351 240,016 173,071 164,911 94,346 251,065 172,514 172,514 97,679 261,644 179,737 179,737 125,762 95,678

WI 71,414 54,582 56,540 54,065 54,065 53,032 62,266 57,759 57,759 56,480 61,812 56,952 56,952 56,952 56,158

788,812 731,917 737,727 668,307 658,317 446,908 781,179 642,673 640,760 439,845 803,837 651,712 649,717 512,774 391,752

Annual SO2 Emissions (TPY)

2005 2007 2009 A 2009 B 2009 C

2010 

CAIR 2012 A 2012 B 2012 C

2012 

CAIR 2018 A 2018 B 2018 C

2018 CBART2018 

CAIR

IL 326,598 273,467 281,028 281,028 281,028 295,516 309,209 196,238 194,746 267,110 305,364 106,638 105,152 82,351 275,716

IN 866,964 722,301 721,252 721,252 619,486 374,335 754,323 754,323 558,567 379,144 786,551 764,065 559,945 426,695 359,915

MI 350,694 343,487 343,140 343,140 315,326 227,296 358,879 358,879 301,062 233,204 373,964 373,964 313,677 178,680 242,853

OH 1,100,510 960,820 959,466 959,466 693,438 427,145 1,003,633 897,099 572,807 370,532 1,045,945 819,770 481,623 333,740 315,560

WI 181,426 137,562 142,007 142,007 133,738 139,181 156,659 144,818 133,592 139,203 155,818 144,027 132,849 77,214 127,073

2,826,192 2,437,638 2,446,892 2,446,892 2,043,017 1,463,473 2,582,703 2,351,356 1,760,775 1,389,192 2,667,641 2,208,463 1,593,245 1,098,679 1,321,116
5

Modeling Results: Several tables summarizing the modeling results are provided:

Table 2 - future year ozone and PM2.5 concentrations for key monitors in the 

 LADCO region

Table 3 - number of monitoring sites greater than the National Ambient Air Quality 

 Standards (NNAQS)

Table 4 – visibility levels for Class I areas in the eastern U.S. 

Note, given that Scenario B and BART controls were only applied in an 11-state Midwest 

region, the validity of the results for other Class I areas in the eastern U.S. may be 

questionable. The Scenario C controls, on the other hand, cover all states and are, thus, 

likely valid in other Class I areas.

Spatial plots of the future year ozone and PM2.5 concentrations are provided in Figures 2 – 4. 

Based on these results, the following key findings should be noted:

Ozone 

• There is little change from the previous LADCO modeling (Round 5.1 with CAIR)

• The modeling shows attainment of the 0.08 ppm (85 ppb) standard by 2009, 

except Holland. (Note, Holland does meet this standard by 2012.)

• The modeling shows nonattainment of the 0.075 ppm (75 ppb) standard through 

2018.

PM2.5 - Annual

• There is a significant change from the previous LADCO modeling (Round 5.1 

with CAIR)

• The modeling shows extensive nonattainment of the annual standard.

PM2.5 - Daily 

• There is a significant change from the previous LADCO modeling (Round 5.1 

with CAIR)

• The modeling shows extensive nonattainment of the daily standard.

Haze 

• There is a significant change from the previous LADCO modeling (Round 5.1 

with CAIR)

• The modeling shows higher visibility levels in 2018 for the 20% worst visibility 

days (average about 0.5 deciviews for the northern Class I areas). The resulting 

visibility levels in the northern Class I areas (except Voyageurs) are above the 

glide path.
2005

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Site Site ID Base Year Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen.C-BART

Lake Michigan Area

Chiwaukee 550590019 84.7 82.2 82.2 82.0 82.3 81.1 80.8 80.6 80.9 77.2 77.2 77.0 76.0 76.2

Racine 551010017 80.3 77.8 77.8 77.5 77.5 76.6 76.2 76.1 76.1 72.9 72.3 72.1 71.1 71.2

Milwaukee-Bayside 550890085 82.7 79.9 79.9 79.7 79.8 78.5 78.0 78.0 78.0 74.3 73.6 73.4 72.4 72.7

Harrington Beach 550890009 83.3 80.1 80.1 79.9 80.1 78.6 78.1 78.0 78.3 73.9 73.2 73.1 72.2 72.5

Manitowoc 550710007 85.0 80.8 80.8 80.7 80.8 79.0 78.5 78.4 78.6 73.9 73.2 73.1 72.0 72.5

Sheboygan 551170006 88.0 84.1 84.0 83.9 84.0 82.2 81.7 81.5 81.8 76.9 76.0 75.9 74.8 75.4

Kewaunee 550610002 82.7 78.2 78.2 78.0 78.1 76.4 75.9 75.7 75.9 71.3 70.7 70.5 69.4 69.9

Door County 550290004 88.7 84.1 84.1 83.9 83.9 82.0 81.4 81.3 81.5 76.5 75.6 75.5 74.2 74.7

Hammond 180892008 77.7 76.2 76.2 76.0 75.4 75.6 75.3 75.2 74.6 73.2 72.7 72.6 71.7 71.6

Whiting 180890030 79.3 77.8 77.8 77.7 77.0 77.2 76.9 76.8 76.2 74.8 74.3 74.2 73.2 73.1

Michigan City 180910005 77.0 74.5 74.5 74.3 73.9 73.3 72.9 72.8 72.5 69.7 69.2 69.1 68.1 68.1

Ogden Dunes 181270020 78.3 76.3 76.3 76.2 75.6 75.5 75.1 75.0 74.5 72.9 72.3 72.1 71.2 70.8

Holland 260050003 90.0 85.7 85.7 85.5 85.3 83.5 83.1 82.9 82.8 78.2 77.5 77.3 76.0 76.1

Jenison 261390005 82.0 76.8 76.8 76.7 76.0 75.1 74.6 74.5 74.5 70.2 69.6 69.5 67.9 68.7

Muskegon 261210039 85.0 80.6 80.6 80.5 80.5 78.6 78.2 78.1 78.0 73.5 72.8 72.8 71.5 71.9

Indianapolis Area

Noblesville 189571001 82.7 78.3 78.3 78.1 78.1 76.1 75.9 75.7 75.6 70.2 69.9 69.8 68.9 68.7

Fortville 180590003 78.0 74.1 74.1 73.9 73.9 71.9 71.8 71.7 71.4 66.7 66.5 66.3 65.4 65.1

Fort B. Harrison 180970050 78.7 75.4 75.3 75.2 75.1 73.8 73.6 73.6 73.2 70.6 70.3 70.2 69.3 69.1

Detroit Area

New Haven 260990009 86.0 82.4 82.3 82.1 81.4 81.4 81.2 81.1 80.2 78.1 77.8 77.7 76.5 76.1

Warren 260991003 84.0 82.4 82.3 82.2 81.3 82.1 81.8 81.7 80.7 79.7 79.4 79.3 78.0 77.6

Port Huron 261470005 82.7 78.2 78.2 78.1 77.5 76.5 76.3 76.2 75.5 72.6 72.5 72.3 70.9 70.9

Cleveland Area

Ashtabula 390071001 89.0 84.2 84.1 83.9 83.4 82.0 81.8 81.6 81.0 76.8 76.5 76.4 74.8 75.1

Geauga 390550004 79.3 75.8 75.8 75.6 74.7 74.0 73.8 73.7 72.7 69.5 69.2 69.1 67.6 67.3

Eastlake 390850003 86.3 83.1 83.1 82.9 81.9 81.8 81.6 81.5 80.5 78.2 78.0 77.8 76.5 76.2

Akron 391530020 83.7 79.1 79.1 79.0 78.1 76.9 76.7 76.6 75.6 70.9 70.6 70.4 68.7 68.7

Cincinnati Area

Wilmington 390271002 82.3 77.3 77.4 77.1 77.5 75.3 75.2 74.8 74.9 70.1 69.9 69.5 67.1 68.3

Sycamore 390610006 84.7 81.5 81.4 81.1 81.9 80.4 80.2 79.8 80.3 76.4 76.0 75.7 73.5 74.6

Lebanon 391650007 87.7 82.8 82.8 82.4 83.0 80.8 80.7 80.3 80.7 75.4 75.1 74.8 72.6 74.2

Columbus Area

London 390970007 79.7 75.0 75.0 74.8 75.0 73.0 72.8 72.7 72.6 68.1 67.8 67.6 65.9 66.3

New Albany 390490029 86.3 82.1 82.1 81.9 81.8 80.2 80.0 79.9 79.6 74.7 74.3 74.2 73.3 73.0

Franklin 290490028 80.3 76.7 76.6 76.5 75.9 75.1 74.9 74.8 74.1 70.5 70.2 70.1 70.2 69.0

St. Louis Area

W. Alton (MO) 291831002 86.3 81.1 81.2 81.1 81.0 80.0 79.9 79.9 78.6 76.9 76.8 76.7 74.2 74.9

Orchard (MO) 291831004 87.0 82.1 82.1 82.0 82.0 80.9 80.8 80.7 80.0 77.7 77.6 77.4 75.2 76.2

Sunset Hills (MO) 291890004 82.3 79.2 79.2 79.1 78.7 78.3 78.1 78.1 77.1 75.3 75.2 75.1 73.0 73.9

Arnold (MO) 290990012 82.3 77.8 77.8 77.7 77.2 76.7 76.6 76.5 75.6 73.6 73.4 73.4 71.3 72.0

Margaretta (MO) 295100086 83.0 79.8 79.8 79.7 79.3 78.8 78.7 78.6 77.9 75.7 75.6 75.5 73.7 74.4

Maryland Heights (MO) 291890014 87.3 85.4 85.4 85.3 84.0 84.3 84.1 84.0 81.7 81.1 80.9 80.8 78.4 78.1

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR

Table 2a. Ozone Modeling Results

2009 2012 2018
2005

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Site Site ID Base Year Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen.C-BART

Illinois

Chicago - Washington HS 170310022 15.2 14.9 14.8 14.5 14.1 14.8 14.7 14.2 14.0 15.0 14.6 14.2 13.7 13.9

Chicago - Mayfair 170310052 15.8 15.1 15.1 14.8 14.4 15.1 14.9 14.5 14.2 15.1 14.7 14.3 13.7 13.9

Chicago - Springfield 170310057 15.0 14.6 14.6 14.3 13.9 14.6 14.4 14.0 13.8 14.8 14.4 14.0 13.4 13.7

Chicago - Lawndale 170310076 14.9 14.5 14.5 14.2 13.8 14.5 14.3 13.9 13.7 14.7 14.3 13.9 13.3 13.6

Blue Island 170312001 14.8 14.4 14.4 14.0 13.7 14.4 14.2 13.8 13.6 14.5 14.1 13.7 13.2 13.4

Summit 170313301 15.2 14.9 14.9 14.6 14.2 14.9 14.7 14.3 14.0 15.0 14.6 14.3 13.7 13.9

Cicero 170316005 15.5 15.1 15.1 14.8 14.4 15.1 14.9 14.5 14.3 15.2 14.9 14.4 13.9 14.2

Granite City 171191007 16.7 16.3 16.2 15.9 15.1 16.1 16.0 15.3 14.9 15.9 15.6 14.9 14.2 14.3

E. St. Louis 171630010 15.6 15.2 15.2 14.8 14.1 15.0 14.9 14.3 13.9 14.9 14.6 14.0 13.3 13.4

Indiana

Jeffersonville 180190005 16.4 15.8 15.7 14.8 13.8 15.8 15.6 14.5 13.7 16.0 15.5 14.3 13.7 13.4

Jasper 180372001 15.2 14.3 14.2 13.4 12.4 14.2 14.0 13.0 12.2 14.3 13.9 12.8 12.1 11.8

Gary 180890031 15.6 13.9 13.9 13.5 13.0 13.8 13.6 13.1 12.8 13.7 13.4 12.9 12.3 12.4

Indy-Washington Park 180970078 15.3 14.4 14.4 13.6 12.8 14.3 14.2 13.2 12.6 14.3 13.9 12.9 12.2 12.0

Indy-W 18th Street 180970081 16.0 15.1 15.1 14.3 15.0 14.9 13.9 15.0 14.6 13.5 12.8

Indy- Michigan Street 180970083 15.9 15.0 15.0 14.2 13.4 14.9 14.8 13.8 13.1 14.9 14.5 13.5 12.8 12.6

Michigan

Allen Park 261630001 14.5 11.0 14.0 13.5 13.0 14.0 13.8 13.2 12.8 13.9 13.6 13.0 12.4 12.4

Southwest HS 261630015 15.9 15.3 15.3 14.8 14.2 15.2 15.0 14.4 13.9 15.1 14.8 14.1 13.5 13.5

Linwood 261630016 14.6 14.1 14.1 13.6 13.1 14.0 13.9 13.3 12.8 13.9 13.6 13.0 12.5 12.5

Dearborn 261630033 17.5 17.0 17.0 16.4 15.8 16.9 16.7 16.0 15.5 16.8 16.4 15.7 15.1 15.1

Wyandotte 261630036 14.7 14.2 14.1 13.6 13.1 14.1 13.9 13.3 12.8 14.0 13.7 13.0 12.4 12.5

Ohio

Middletown - Bonita 390170003 16.2 15.3 15.2 14.3 13.5 15.2 15.0 13.9 13.2 15.2 14.8 13.7 13.0 12.8

Fairfield 390170016 15.8 15.1 15.0 14.1 13.1 15.1 14.9 13.7 12.9 15.2 14.7 13.5 12.8 12.5

Cleveland-28th Street 390350027 15.4 14.9 14.9 14.3 13.5 14.7 14.5 13.9 13.2 14.6 14.2 13.5 12.8 12.7

Cleveland-St. Tikhon 390350038 17.4 16.7 16.7 16.0 15.2 16.5 16.3 15.6 14.8 16.3 16.0 15.2 14.4 14.3

Cleveland-Broadway 390350045 16.5 15.9 15.8 15.2 14.4 15.6 15.5 14.8 14.0 15.5 15.1 14.4 13.6 13.5

Cleveland-GT Craig 390350060 17.1 16.5 16.4 15.8 15.0 16.3 16.1 15.4 14.6 16.1 15.7 15.0 14.2 14.1

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave 390350065 16.0 15.4 15.3 14.7 14.0 15.2 15.0 14.3 13.6 15.1 14.7 14.0 13.2 13.1

Columbus - Fairgrounds 390490024 15.3 14.6 14.5 13.7 12.9 14.4 14.1 13.2 12.6 14.2 13.8 12.8 12.2 12.0

Columbus - Ann Street 390490025 15.1 14.4 14.3 13.5 12.7 14.2 13.9 13.1 12.4 14.1 13.6 12.6 12.0 11.9

Cincinnati - Seymour 390610014 17.3 16.6 16.5 15.5 14.5 16.5 16.3 15.1 14.3 16.6 16.2 14.9 14.2 13.8

Cincinnati - Taft Ave 390610040 15.5 14.8 14.7 13.8 12.8 14.8 14.6 13.4 12.6 14.9 14.5 13.2 12.5 12.2

Cincinnati - 8th Ave 390610042 16.9 12.0 16.1 15.0 14.0 16.1 15.9 14.7 13.8 16.2 15.7 14.4 13.7 13.4

Sharonville 390610043 15.6 14.9 14.8 13.9 12.9 14.9 14.7 13.5 12.7 14.9 14.5 13.3 12.6 12.3

Norwood 390617001 16.2 15.5 15.4 14.4 13.4 15.4 15.2 14.0 13.2 15.5 15.1 13.8 13.1 12.8

St. Bernard 390618001 17.6 16.8 16.7 15.7 14.7 16.7 16.5 15.3 14.4 16.8 16.4 15.1 14.3 14.0

Steubenville 390810016 15.8 14.5 14.4 13.5 12.8 14.3 14.2 13.1 12.5 14.8 14.5 13.3 12.9 12.7

Mingo Junction 390811001 16.5 15.2 15.2 14.3 13.5 15.0 14.9 13.8 13.2 15.6 15.2 14.0 13.6 13.4

Ironton 390870010 15.2 14.8 14.6 13.6 12.8 14.6 14.4 13.2 12.5 14.8 14.1 12.8 12.4 12.3

Dayton 391130032 15.5 14.9 14.8 14.0 13.2 14.8 14.6 13.6 12.9 14.8 14.3 13.3 12.6 12.4

New Boston 391450013 14.7 12.0 14.0 13.0 12.1 14.1 13.8 12.5 11.9 14.2 13.6 12.2 11.7 11.6

Canton - Dueber 391510017 16.3 15.7 15.6 14.8 14.0 15.5 15.3 14.4 13.6 15.4 14.9 14.0 13.3 13.3

Canton - Market 391510020 14.6 11.0 14.1 13.3 12.6 13.9 13.7 12.9 12.3 13.9 13.5 12.6 12.0 11.9

Akron - Brittain 391530017 15.1 14.6 14.5 13.8 13.0 14.4 14.2 13.4 12.7 14.3 13.8 13.0 12.3 12.3

Akron - W. Exchange 391530023 14.3 13.7 13.7 13.0 12.3 13.6 13.3 12.6 12.0 13.4 13.0 12.2 11.6 11.5

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR

2009 2012 2018

Table 2b. PM2.5 Modeling Results (Annual)
2005

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Key Site County Site ID Base Year Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. C - BART

Illinois

Chicago - Washington HS Cook 170310022 36.6 36 36 36 36 36 36 37 36 37 36 37 37 35

Chicago - Mayfair Cook 170310052 40.3 37 37 37 36 37 36 37 36 38 37 37 37 36

Chicago - Springfield Cook 170310057 37.4 34 34 33 32 35 34 33 32 36 34 33 33 31

Chicago - Lawndale Cook 170310076 38.1 35 35 35 35 36 35 36 35 36 35 36 36 34

McCook Cook 170311016 43.0 39 39 39 39 40 39 40 39 40 40 41 40 38

Blue Island Cook 170312001 37.7 35 35 35 34 36 35 36 34 36 35 36 36 33

Schiller Park Cook 170313103 41.6 40 40 40 39 40 40 40 39 41 40 40 39 39

Summit Cook 170313301 40.2 38 38 39 38 39 38 39 38 39 38 39 39 37

Maywood Cook 170316005 39.2 38 38 38 38 38 38 39 38 39 38 39 39 37

Granite City Madison 171191007 39.2 36 36 35 33 36 35 34 33 36 35 35 33 32

E. St. Louis St. Clair 171630010 33.7 31 31 30 28 31 30 29 28 31 30 30 29 28

Indiana

Jeffersonville Clark 180190005 38.4 35 33 31 29 35 34 32 31 37 35 34 33 31

Jasper Dubois 180372001 36.2 32 32 30 28 32 32 30 29 33 31 31 30 28

Gary - IITRI Lake 180890022 39.0 35 35 35 34 35 34 35 34 36 36 36 35 35

Gary - Burr School Lake 180890026 39.0 34 34 34 33 34 34 35 34 34 34 34 34 32

Gary Lake 180890031 35.2 29 28 26 24 28 28 24 24 29 28 27 27 27

Indy-West Street Marion 180970043 38.0 34 34 33 33 35 35 34 33 36 35 34 34 33

Indy-English Avenue Marion 180970066 38.0 34 34 32 32 35 34 33 32 35 34 33 33 32

Indy-Washington Park Marion 180970078 36.6 33 33 32 31 33 33 32 31 34 33 32 32 32

Indy-W 18th Street Marion 180970081 38.3 33 33 31 31 33 33 32 31 34 33 32 32 31

Indy- Michigan Street Marion 180970083 36.0 32 32 29 28 32 31 29 28 32 31 29 29 29

Michigan

Luna Pier Monroe 261150005 38.9 34 34 32 32 34 34 32 32 34 33 32 31 31

Oak Park Oakland 261250001 39.9 38 38 37 36 38 37 37 36 38 37 37 36 35

Port Huron St. Clair 261470005 39.6 36 35 35 34 35 35 35 34 35 35 34 33 33

Ypsilanti Washtenaw 261610008 39.5 37 37 36 35 37 36 36 35 37 36 36 35 34

Allen Park Wayne 261630001 38.6 36 36 36 35 36 35 35 34 36 35 35 34 33

Southwest HS Wayne 261630015 40.1 36 36 36 35 36 35 35 35 36 35 35 34 33

Linwood Wayne 261630016 43.0 40 40 40 39 40 40 40 39 40 39 39 39 38

E 7 Mile Wayne 261630019 41.0 39 39 39 38 39 39 39 38 39 38 38 38 37

Dearborn Wayne 261630033 43.9 41 41 41 40 41 41 41 40 41 40 40 40 39

Wyandotte Wayne 261630036 37.2 36 36 36 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 34

Newberry Wayne 261630038 42.7 39 39 39 38 39 38 38 37 39 38 38 37 36

FIA Wayne 261630039 39.7 35 34 34 33 35 34 34 33 35 34 33 33 31

Ohio

Middleton Butler 390170003 39.3 33 32 29 28 33 33 29 28 34 32 29 28 27

Fairfield Butler 390170016 37.1 32 31 29 27 31 30 28 28 32 30 29 28 27

Butler 390170017 40.8 33 32 30 29 33 33 30 29 33 32 30 29 28

Cleveland-28th Street Cuyahoga 390350027 36.9 34 34 33 32 34 33 33 32 34 33 33 31 31

Cleveland-St. Tikhon Cuyahoga 390350038 44.2 40 40 37 36 40 39 36 35 40 38 36 35 34

Cleveland-Broadway Cuyahoga 390350045 38.8 35 35 33 31 35 34 32 30 35 34 31 29 29

Cleveland-GT Craig Cuyahoga 390350060 42.1 39 39 38 37 39 38 38 37 39 38 37 36 35

Newburg Hts - Harvard Ave Cuyahoga 390350065 38.9 35 35 33 31 35 34 32 30 36 35 32 31 30

Columbus - Fairgrounds Franklin 390490024 38.5 34 34 33 33 34 33 32 32 34 34 33 32 31

Columbus - Ann Street Franklin 390490025 38.5 34 33 31 31 33 33 31 31 34 33 31 31 30

Cincinnait Hamilton 390610006 40.6 33 33 30 27 33 32 29 28 34 32 29 28 27

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR

2009 2012 2018

Table 2c. PM2.5 Modeling Results (Daily)
2005

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Round 5 

with CAIR

Key Site County Site ID Base Year Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. A Scen. B Scen.C Scen. C - BART

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 without CAIR

2009 2012 2018

Table 2c. PM2.5 Modeling Results (Daily)

Cincinnati - Seymour Hamilton 390610014 38.4 33 33 28 26 33 32 27 25 33 31 29 25 24

Cincinnati - Taft Ave Hamilton 390610040 36.7 31 30 26 24 31 30 26 24 32 29 26 24 23

Cincinnati - 8th Ave Hamilton 390610042 37.3 32 32 30 28 32 31 29 28 33 31 29 28 27

Sharonville Hamilton 390610043 36.0 32 31 30 28 32 31 29 28 32 31 29 28 27

Norwood Hamilton 390617001 38.8 34 33 32 30 33 33 31 30 34 33 31 30 29

St. Bernard Hamilton 390618001 40.6 35 35 32 30 35 34 31 30 35 33 32 31 29

Steubenville Jefferson 390810016 40.7 36 35 32 29 35 34 30 28 37 35 31 29 28

Mingo Junction Jefferson 390811001 42.0 37 37 33 30 37 36 32 30 38 36 32 30 30

Dayton Montgomery391130032 37.8 34 33 31 30 33 33 31 30 34 33 31 31 30

Canton - Dueber Stark 391510017 38.6 33 32 30 28 33 31 30 28 33 30 29 28 27

Akron - Brittain Summit 391530017 38.1 33 33 31 30 33 32 31 30 33 32 30 29 29

Wisconsin

Green Bay - Est High Brown 550090005 37.1 35 34 35 35 34 35 35 34 33 33 33 32 32

Madison Dane 550250047 36.4 33 33 32 32 33 32 32 31 32 31 30 29 29

Milwaukee-Health Center Milwaukee 550790010 38.7 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 34 35 34 34 34 33

Milwaukee-SER Hdqs Milwaukee 550790026 37.4 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 33

Milwaukee-Virginia FS Milwaukee 550790043 39.9 37 37 37 36 37 36 37 36 36 36 37 36 36

Milwaukee- Fire Dept Hdqs Milwaukee 550790099 37.8 34 34 33 33 34 33 33 32 34 33 33 33 32

Waukesha Waukesha 551330027 35.5 32 32 32 31 32 32 32 31 32 31 31 30 29
10

Table 3. Modeling Results: Number of Sites > NAAQS

Ozone (85 ppb) Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 w/ CAIR

2009 Baseyear Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C Scen. C-BART

IL 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

IN 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

MI 3 1 1 1 ---- 1

OH 4 0 0 0 ---- 0

WI 2 0 0 0 ---- 0

Total 9 1 1 1 1

2012

IL 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

IN 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

MI 3 0 0 0 ---- 0

OH 4 0 0 0 ---- 0

WI 2 0 0 0 ---- 0

Total 9 0 0 0 0

2018

IL 0 0 0 0 0 0

IN 0 0 0 0 0 0

MI 3 0 0 0 0 0

OH 4 0 0 0 0 0

WI 2 0 0 0 0 0

Total 9 0 0 0 0 0

Ozone (75 ppb) Round 5 without CAIR Round5 w/ CAIR

2009 Baseyear Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C Scen. C-BART

IL 12 6 6 6 ---- 4

IN 26 10 9 8 ---- 5

MI 21 12 12 12 ---- 12

OH 45 27 25 24 ---- 21

WI 12 10 10 10 ---- 10

Total 116 65 62 60 ---- 52

2012

IL 12 3 3 3 ---- 1

IN 26 5 4 4 ---- 3

MI 21 9 8 8 ---- 6

OH 45 18 14 12 ---- 11

WI 12 10 9 9 ---- 9

Total 116 45 38 36 30

2018

IL 12 0 0 0 0 0

IN 26 0 0 0 0 0

MI 21 3 3 3 3 3

OH 45 3 3 2 1 1

WI 12 3 2 1 1 1

Total 116 9 8 6 5 5
11

PM2.5 - Annual Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 w/ CAIR

2009 Baseyear Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C Scen. C-BART

IL 7 4 4 1 ---- 1

IN 6 2 2 0 ---- 0

MI 2 2 2 1 ---- 1

OH 26 13 12 5 ---- 1

WI 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

Total 41 21 20 7 3

2012

IL 7 3 1 1 ---- 0

IN 6 1 1 0 ---- 0

MI 2 2 1 1 ---- 1

OH 26 12 9 4 ---- 0

WI 0 0 0 0 ---- 0

Total 41 18 12 6 1

2018

IL 7 3 1 0 0 0

IN 6 1 1 0 0 0

MI 2 2 1 1 1 1

OH 26 13 8 2 0 0

WI 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 41 19 11 3 1 1

PM2.5 - Daily

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 w/ CAIR

2009 Baseyear Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C Scen. C-BART

IL 16 7 7 6 ---- 6

IN 13 0 0 0 ---- 0

MI 14 10 9 9 ---- 5

OH 31 4 3 2 ---- 2

WI 8 1 1 1 ---- 1

Total 82 22 20 18 ---- 14

2012

IL 16 9 6 8 ---- 6

IN 13 0 0 0 ---- 0

MI 14 8 6 6 ---- 5

OH 31 3 3 2 ---- 1

WI 8 1 1 1 ---- 1

Total 82 21 16 17 13

2018

IL 16 10 6 8 8 5

IN 13 4 1 1 0 0

MI 14 8 6 6 5 4

OH 31 5 3 2 1 0

WI 8 1 1 1 1 1

Total 82 28 17 18 15 10
12

Table 4. Modeling Results: Future Year Visibility Levels

Worst 20% 2018

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 w/ CAIR

Site

Baseline

(2000-2004) 2018 URP Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C

Scen. CBART 

BOWA1 19.86 17.94 19.09 18.87 18.54 18.02 17.94

VOYA2 19.48 17.75 18.60 18.44 18.17 17.77 17.63

SENE1 24.38 21.64 24.02 23.58 23.03 22.38 22.59

ISLE1 21.59 19.43 21.05 20.86 20.62 20.22 20.09

ISLE9 21.59 19.43 20.83 20.58 20.38 19.84 19.84

HEGL1 26.75 23.13 26.24 25.83 24.87 24.23 24.22

MING1 28.15 24.27 27.51 26.98 25.81 24.93 24.74

CACR1 26.36 22.91 25.32 24.80 23.57 22.97 22.44

UPBU1 26.27 22.82 25.31 24.79 23.50 22.79 22.59

MACA1 31.37 26.64 30.11 29.08 27.06 26.24 26.10

DOSO1 29.05 24.69 27.88 26.96 24.36 23.74 23.00

SHEN1 29.31 25.12 28.38 27.65 25.24 24.69 23.92

JARI1 29.12 24.91 28.06 27.21 25.00 24.48 24.06

BRIG1 29.01 25.05 28.10 28.07 26.57 26.25 25.21

LYBR1 24.45 21.48 24.06 23.86 22.58 22.30 21.14

ACAD1 22.89 20.45 22.88 22.76 22.31 22.16 21.49

Best 20% 2018

Round 5 without CAIR Round 5 w/ CAIR

Site

Baseline

(2000-2004) 2018 Max Scen. A Scen. B Scen. C

Scen. CBART

BOWA1 6.42 6.42 6.20 6.17 6.16 6.12 6.14

VOYA2 7.09 7.09 6.87 6.83 6.81 6.78 6.75

SENE1 7.14 7.14 7.80 7.78 7.81 7.77 7.71

ISLE1 6.75 6.75 6.77 6.76 6.72 6.67 6.60

ISLE9 6.75 6.75 6.63 6.61 6.58 6.53 6.52

HEGL1 12.84 12.84 12.17 12.20 12.07 11.63 11.66

MING1 14.46 14.46 13.78 13.77 13.70 13.37 13.28

CACR1 11.24 11.24 10.94 10.99 10.97 10.78 10.52

UPBU1 11.71 11.71 11.18 11.23 11.18 10.96 10.73

MACA1 16.51 16.51 16.32 16.21 15.76 15.34 15.25

DOSO1 12.28 12.28 12.02 11.84 11.27 11.03 11.00

SHEN1 10.93 10.93 10.98 10.91 10.25 10.16 9.91

JARI1 14.21 14.21 14.19 13.98 13.42 13.21 13.14

BRIG1 14.33 14.33 14.32 14.46 14.22 14.17 13.92

LYBR1 6.37 6.37 6.39 6.38 6.31 6.28 6.14

ACAD1 8.78 8.78 8.97 8.96 8.90 8.89 8.82
13

Figure 2. Ozone Modeling Results

2009 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2012 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2018 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR
14

Figure 3. PM2.5 Annual Modeling Results

2009 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2012 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2018 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR
15

Figure 4. PM2.5 Daily Modeling Results

2009 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2012 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR

2018 Round 5 – Scen. A Round 5 – Scen. B Round 5 – Scen. C Round 5 - CAIR
Appendix I

Scenario B (Legally Enforceable) Controls
NOx – 2009

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for NOX r6s1b_2009 Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2009

STID=17 CYID=57 fcid=057801AAA name=AES DUCK CREEK

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 57 057801AAA 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 0.8147 0.8416 0.8416 0.00 0.00 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=143 fcid=143805AAG name=AES ED EDWARDS STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 3.0515 3.1522 3.1522 0.00 0.00 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0003 01 10100202 NOX 6.9419 7.1708 7.1708 0.00 0.00 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0002 0004 01 10100202 NOX 2.1310 2.2013 2.2013 0.00 0.00 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 12.1244 12.5243 12.5243 

cyid 12.1244 12.5243 12.5243 

stid 12.9392 13.3659 13.3659 

STID=39 CYID=1 fcid=0701000007 name="DP&L, J.M. STUART GENERATING STATION"

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 1 0701000007 R1 B001 B001P1 10100202 NOX 6.9860 6.9756 2.3252 0.85 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R2 B002 B002P1 10100202 NOX 3.6327 3.6273 1.2091 0.85 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R3 B003 B003P1 10100202 NOX 5.0133 5.0058 1.6686 0.85 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R4 B004 B004P1 10100202 NOX 7.8493 7.8376 2.6125 0.85 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.4814 23.4464 7.8155 

cyid 23.4814 23.4464 7.8155 

STID=39 CYID=167 fcid=0684000000 name=MUSKINGUM RIVER POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 167 0684000000 R1 B001 B001P1 10200501 NOX 0.0017 0.0017 0.0001 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P1 10100201 NOX 5.8167 5.8080 0.2904 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P2 10100501 NOX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P1 10100201 NOX 7.9017 7.8899 0.3945 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P2 10100501 NOX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100203 NOX 7.8775 7.8657 0.3933 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P2 10100501 NOX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P1 10100202 NOX 3.8586 3.8528 0.1926 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P2 10100501 NOX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 0.95 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 25.4561 25.4182 1.2709 

cyid 25.4561 25.4182 1.2709 

stid 48.9375 48.8646 9.0864 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007800 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER VALLEY STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year
STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007800 S11 B21 01 10100202 NOX 2.7972 2.8895 1.6470 0.00 0.43 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S11 B22 01 10100202 NOX 2.9073 3.0032 1.7118 0.00 0.43 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B23 01 10100202 NOX 2.3270 2.4038 1.2740 0.00 0.47 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B24 01 10100202 NOX 2.3427 2.4199 1.2826 0.00 0.47 SCR Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 10.3742 10.7164 5.9154 

cyid 10.3742 10.7164 5.9154 

STID=55 CYID=117 fcid=460033090 name=WP & L Alliant Energy - Edgewater Gen Station

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 117 460033090 S11 B23 01 10100203 NOX 1.6197 1.6731 1.0038 0.00 0.40 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 117 460033090 S11 B24 01 10100203 NOX 4.1072 4.2426 3.4789 0.00 0.18 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 117 460033090 S12 B25 01 10100221 NOX 5.6804 5.8677 4.9876 0.00 0.15 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 11.4072 11.7834 9.4703 

cyid 11.4072 11.7834 9.4703 

stid 21.7814 22.4997 15.3857 

 ======== ======== ==========

 83.6581 84.7302 37.8380 
NOx - 2012

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for NOX r6s1b_2012 Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2012

STID=17 CYID=33 fcid=033801AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 33 033801AAA 0005 0005 01 10100202 NOX 1.642 1.871 0.9357 0.00 0.500 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 33 033801AAA 0006 0006 01 10100202 NOX 2.116 2.413 1.2063 0.00 0.500 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 3.758 4.284 2.1420 

cyid 3.758 4.284 2.1420 

STID=17 CYID=57 fcid=057801AAA name=AES DUCK CREEK

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 57 057801AAA 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 0.815 0.929 0.9288 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=79 fcid=079808AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 79 079808AAA 0003 0003 01 10100202 NOX 6.735 7.678 7.6780 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 79 079808AAA 0012 0013 01 10100501 NOX 5.936 5.378 5.3781 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 12.671 13.056 13.0561 

cyid 12.671 13.056 13.0561 

STID=17 CYID=97 fcid=097190AAC name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 97 097190AAC 0016 0031 02 10100401 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=137 fcid=137805AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 137 137805AAA 0003 0003 01 10100202 NOX 5.356 6.106 6.1058 0.00 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=143 fcid=143805AAG name=AES ED EDWARDS STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 3.052 3.479 3.4789 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0003 01 10100202 NOX 6.942 7.914 7.9141 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0002 0004 01 10100202 NOX 2.131 2.429 2.4294 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 12.124 13.822 13.8224 

cyid 12.124 13.822 13.8224 
STID=17 CYID=167 fcid=167120AAO name=CITY WATER LIGHT & POWER

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0012 01 10100203 NOX 6.527 7.441 0.0074 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN added by LADCO

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0013 01 10100203 NOX 2.646 3.017 0.0030 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 9.173 10.458 0.0105 

cyid 9.173 10.458 0.0105 

STID=17 CYID=179 fcid=179801AAA name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0029 01 10100203 NOX 22.429 25.570 1.2785 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0031 01 10100203 NOX 38.993 44.454 2.2227 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 61.422 70.024 3.5012 

cyid 61.422 70.024 3.5012 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197809AAO name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197809AAO 0032 0033 02 10100604 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197810AAK name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197810AAK 0011 0016 02 10100222 NOX 5.731 6.534 3.9203 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0011 0016 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 02 10100223 NOX 8.598 9.802 0.0098 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 02 10100223 NOX 10.974 12.511 0.0125 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 25.303 28.847 3.9426 

cyid 25.303 28.847 3.9426 

stid 130.622 147.527 43.5096 

STID=27 CYID=61 fcid=2706100004 name=Minnesota Power Inc - Boswell Energy Ctr

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 001 10100226 NOX 13.661 14.142 2.8284 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 002 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 13.661 14.142 2.8284 

cyid 13.661 14.142 2.8284 

STID=27 CYID=109 fcid=2710900011 name=Rochester Public Utilities - Silver Lake

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 27 109 2710900011 SV003 EU004 001 10100202 NOX 2.079 2.152 1.2911 0.00 0.400 SNCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

stid 15.739 16.294 4.1195 

STID=39 CYID=1 fcid=0701000007 name="DP&L, J.M. STUART GENERATING STATION"

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 1 0701000007 R1 B001 B001P1 10100202 NOX 6.986 7.296 2.4319 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R2 B002 B002P1 10100202 NOX 3.633 3.794 1.2646 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R3 B003 B003P1 10100202 NOX 5.013 5.235 1.7452 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R4 B004 B004P1 10100202 NOX 7.849 8.197 2.7324 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.481 24.522 8.1740 

cyid 23.481 24.522 8.1740 

STID=39 CYID=31 fcid=0616000000 name=CONESVILLE POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 31 0616000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100212 NOX 20.852 21.776 1.0888 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=39 CYID=167 fcid=0684000000 name=MUSKINGUM RIVER POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 167 0684000000 R1 B001 B001P1 10200501 NOX 0.002 0.002 0.0001 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P1 10100201 NOX 5.817 6.074 0.3037 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P1 10100201 NOX 7.902 8.252 0.4126 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100203 NOX 7.877 8.227 0.4113 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P1 10100202 NOX 3.859 4.030 0.2015 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 25.456 26.584 1.3292 

cyid 25.456 26.584 1.3292 

stid 69.789 72.882 10.5920 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007690 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER OAK CREEK STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007690 S13 B25 01 10100202 NOX 4.755 5.421 3.0898 0.00 0.430 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S13 B26 01 10100202 NOX 3.277 3.736 2.2045 0.00 0.410 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S14 B27 01 10100212 NOX 3.333 3.800 2.8499 0.00 0.250 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S14 B28 01 10100212 NOX 3.384 3.857 2.9316 0.00 0.240 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 14.749 16.814 11.0757 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007800 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER VALLEY STATION
 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007800 S11 B21 01 10100202 NOX 2.797 3.189 1.8177 0.00 0.430 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S11 B22 01 10100202 NOX 2.907 3.314 1.8893 0.00 0.430 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B23 01 10100202 NOX 2.327 2.653 1.4061 0.00 0.470 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B24 01 10100202 NOX 2.343 2.671 1.4155 0.00 0.470 SCR Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 10.374 11.827 6.5285 

cyid 25.123 28.641 17.6042 

STID=55 CYID=117 fcid=460033090 name=WP & L Alliant Energy - Edgewater Gen Station

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 117 460033090 S11 B23 01 10100203 NOX 1.620 1.846 1.1079 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 117 460033090 S11 B24 01 10100203 NOX 4.107 4.682 3.8395 0.00 0.180 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 117 460033090 S12 B25 01 10100221 NOX 5.680 6.476 5.5045 0.00 0.150 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 11.407 13.005 10.4519 

cyid 11.407 13.005 10.4519 

stid 36.530 41.646 28.0562 

 ======== ======== ==========

 252.681 278.349 86.2773 
NOx 2018

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for NOX r6s1b_2018 Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2018

STID=17 CYID=31 fcid=031600AIN name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 31 031600AIN 0010 0013 01 10100226 NOX 2.283 2.592 1.5550 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 31 031600AIN 0010 0013 02 10100601 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 31 031600AIN 0012 0016 01 10100226 NOX 3.991 4.531 2.7184 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 31 031600AIN 0012 0016 02 10100601 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 6.274 7.122 4.2734 

cyid 6.274 7.122 4.2734 

STID=17 CYID=33 fcid=033801AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 33 033801AAA 0005 0005 01 10100202 NOX 1.642 1.863 0.9317 0.00 0.500 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 33 033801AAA 0006 0006 01 10100202 NOX 2.116 2.402 1.2012 0.00 0.500 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 3.758 4.266 2.1329 

cyid 3.758 4.266 2.1329 

STID=17 CYID=57 fcid=057801AAA name=AES DUCK CREEK

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 57 057801AAA 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 0.815 0.925 0.9249 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=79 fcid=079808AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 79 079808AAA 0003 0003 01 10100202 NOX 6.735 7.645 7.6453 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 79 079808AAA 0012 0013 01 10100501 NOX 5.936 3.984 3.9838 0.00 0.000 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 12.671 11.629 11.6291 

cyid 12.671 11.629 11.6291 

STID=17 CYID=97 fcid=097190AAC name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 97 097190AAC 0016 0031 02 10100401 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=137 fcid=137805AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 137 137805AAA 0003 0003 01 10100202 NOX 5.356 6.080 6.0798 0.00 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 
STID=17 CYID=143 fcid=143805AAG name=AES ED EDWARDS STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0001 01 10100202 NOX 3.052 3.464 3.4641 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0001 0003 01 10100202 NOX 6.942 7.880 7.8804 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

 17 143 143805AAG 0002 0004 01 10100202 NOX 2.131 2.419 2.4191 0.00 0.000 lnb LNB added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 12.124 13.764 13.7636 

cyid 12.124 13.764 13.7636 

STID=17 CYID=167 fcid=167120AAO name=CITY WATER LIGHT & POWER

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0012 01 10100203 NOX 6.527 7.410 0.0074 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN added by LADCO

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0013 01 10100203 NOX 2.646 3.004 0.0030 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 9.173 10.414 0.0104 

cyid 9.173 10.414 0.0104 

STID=17 CYID=179 fcid=179801AAA name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0029 01 10100203 NOX 22.429 25.462 1.2731 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0031 01 10100203 NOX 38.993 44.265 2.2132 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 61.422 69.726 3.4863 

cyid 61.422 69.726 3.4863 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197809AAO name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197809AAO 0032 0033 02 10100604 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197810AAK name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197810AAK 0011 0016 02 10100222 NOX 5.731 6.506 3.9036 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0011 0016 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 02 10100223 NOX 8.598 9.760 0.0098 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 02 10100223 NOX 10.974 12.458 0.0125 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 03 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.999 SHUTDOWN SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 25.303 28.724 3.9258 

cyid 25.303 28.724 3.9258 

stid 136.896 152.649 46.2263 
STID=18 CYID=147 fcid=00020 name=INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER-ROCKPORT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 18 147 00020 1 001 01 10100222 NOX 23.226 25.291 1.2646 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 18 147 00020 1 001 02 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.226 25.291 1.2646 

cyid 23.226 25.291 1.2646 

stid 23.226 25.291 1.2646 

STID=27 CYID=61 fcid=2706100004 name=Minnesota Power Inc - Boswell Energy Ctr

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 001 10100226 NOX 13.661 15.733 3.1466 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 002 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.800 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 13.661 15.733 3.1466 

cyid 13.661 15.733 3.1466 

STID=27 CYID=109 fcid=2710900011 name=Rochester Public Utilities - Silver Lake

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 109 2710900011 SV003 EU004 001 10100202 NOX 2.079 2.394 1.4363 0.00 0.400 SNCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

stid 15.739 18.127 4.5830 

STID=39 CYID=1 fcid=0701000007 name="DP&L, J.M. STUART GENERATING STATION"

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 1 0701000007 R1 B001 B001P1 10100202 NOX 6.986 7.607 2.5358 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R2 B002 B002P1 10100202 NOX 3.633 3.956 1.3186 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R3 B003 B003P1 10100202 NOX 5.013 5.459 1.8197 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 1 0701000007 R4 B004 B004P1 10100202 NOX 7.849 8.547 2.8491 0.85 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.481 25.570 8.5232 

cyid 23.481 25.570 8.5232 

STID=39 CYID=31 fcid=0616000000 name=CONESVILLE POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 31 0616000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100212 NOX 20.852 22.706 1.1353 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

STID=39 CYID=167 fcid=0684000000 name=MUSKINGUM RIVER POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 167 0684000000 R1 B001 B001P1 10200501 NOX 0.002 0.002 0.0001 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 
 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P1 10100201 NOX 5.817 6.334 0.3167 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P1 10100201 NOX 7.902 8.604 0.4302 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100203 NOX 7.877 8.578 0.4289 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P1 10100202 NOX 3.859 4.202 0.2101 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P2 10100501 NOX 0.000 0.000 0.0000 0.00 0.950 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 25.456 27.720 1.3860 

cyid 25.456 27.720 1.3860 

stid 69.789 75.996 11.0445 

STID=54 CYID=39 fcid=0006 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - KANAWHA RIVER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 39 0006 012 001 99 10100202 NOX 4.829 5.258 2.6291 0.00 0.500 SCR Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 39 0006 012 002 99 10100202 NOX 4.921 5.359 2.6794 0.00 0.500 SCR Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 9.750 10.617 5.3085 

cyid 9.750 10.617 5.3085 

stid 9.750 10.617 5.3085 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007690 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER OAK CREEK STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007690 S13 B25 01 10100202 NOX 4.755 5.398 3.0766 0.00 0.430 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S13 B26 01 10100202 NOX 3.277 3.720 2.1951 0.00 0.410 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S14 B27 01 10100212 NOX 3.333 3.784 2.8378 0.00 0.250 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007690 S14 B28 01 10100212 NOX 3.384 3.841 2.9191 0.00 0.240 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 14.749 16.743 11.0285 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007800 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER VALLEY STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007800 S11 B21 01 10100202 NOX 2.797 3.175 1.4289 0.00 0.550 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S11 B22 01 10100202 NOX 2.907 3.300 1.4852 0.00 0.550 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B23 01 10100202 NOX 2.327 2.642 1.1887 0.00 0.550 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 79 241007800 S12 B24 01 10100202 NOX 2.343 2.659 1.1967 0.00 0.550 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 10.374 11.777 5.2995 

cyid 25.123 28.519 16.3281 

STID=55 CYID=117 fcid=460033090 name=WP & L Alliant Energy - Edgewater Gen Station

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 117 460033090 S11 B23 01 10100203 NOX 1.620 1.839 1.1032 0.00 0.400 SCR SCR added by LADCO 
 55 117 460033090 S11 B24 01 10100203 NOX 4.107 4.662 3.8232 0.00 0.180 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

 55 117 460033090 S12 B25 01 10100221 NOX 5.680 6.448 5.4811 0.00 0.150 SCR SCR added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 11.407 12.949 10.4074 

cyid 11.407 12.949 10.4074 

stid 36.530 41.469 26.7355 

 ======== ======== ==========

 291.931 324.149 95.1624 
SO2 – 2009

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for SO2 r6s1b_2009 1

Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2009

STID=19 CYID=115 fcid=58-07-001 name=MIDAMERICAN ENERGY CO. - LOUISA STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 19 115 58-07-001 117487 147281 99 10100222 SO2 33.664 34.774 3.4774 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=21 CYID=161 fcid=2116100009 name=EAST KY POWER COOP

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 21 161 2116100009 1 001 99 10100202 SO2 42.166 42.103 4.2103 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 21 161 2116100009 2 002 99 10100212 SO2 55.385 55.303 5.5303 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 97.551 97.406 9.7406 

cyid 97.551 97.406 9.7406 

stid 97.551 97.406 9.7406 

STID=27 CYID=141 fcid=2714100004 name=NSP - Sherburne Generating Plant

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU001 001 10100222 SO2 16.765 16.987 3.6401 0.3 0.85 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU002 001 10100222 SO2 22.549 22.848 4.8959 0.3 0.85 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 39.314 39.834 8.5360 

cyid 39.314 39.834 8.5360 

stid 39.314 39.834 8.5360 

STID=54 CYID=51 fcid=0005 name=OHIO POWER - MITCHELL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 51 0005 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 17.775 17.748 1.7748 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 51 0005 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 5.689 5.680 0.5680 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.463 23.428 2.3428 

cyid 23.463 23.428 2.3428 

STID=54 CYID=53 fcid=0009 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - MOUNTAINEER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 53 0009 001 001 99 10100202 SO2 11.196 11.179 1.1179 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=54 CYID=79 fcid=0006 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - JOHN E AMOS PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 54 79 0006 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 79.635 79.516 7.9516 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 79 0006 003 003 99 10100202 SO2 139.377 139.169 13.9169 0.0 0.90 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 219.012 218.685 21.8685 

cyid 219.012 218.685 21.8685 

stid 253.671 253.293 25.3293 

 ======== ======== ==========

 424.200 425.307 47.0832 
SO2 – 2012

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for SO2 r6s1b_2012 1

Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2012

STID=17 CYID=31 fcid=031600AMI name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 31 031600AMI 0007 0010 01 10100226 SO2 16.13 18.39 1.839 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=17 CYID=97 fcid=097190AAC name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 97 097190AAC 0018 0033 01 10100226 SO2 24.14 27.52 2.752 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 97 097190AAC 0021 0036 01 10100226 SO2 19.23 21.92 2.192 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 97 097190AAC 0016 0031 01 10100203 SO2 4.59 5.24 0.005 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 47.96 54.68 4.950 

cyid 47.96 54.68 4.950 

STID=17 CYID=125 fcid=125804AAB name=DYNEGY MIDWEST GENERATION INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 125 125804AAB 0019 0023 01 10100202 SO2 22.34 25.47 3.821 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=17 CYID=127 fcid=127855AAC name=ELECTRIC ENERGY INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 127 127855AAC 0001 0001 01 10100222 SO2 11.83 13.48 13.482 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0001 0002 01 10100222 SO2 11.48 13.09 13.085 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0002 0003 01 10100222 SO2 10.25 11.68 11.680 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0002 0004 01 10100222 SO2 12.04 13.73 13.731 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0003 0006 01 10100222 SO2 12.68 14.46 14.456 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 58.27 66.43 66.435 

cyid 58.27 66.43 66.435 

STID=17 CYID=135 fcid=135803AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 135 135803AAA 0001 0001 01 10100203 SO2 32.99 37.61 3.761 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 135 135803AAA 0001 0003 01 10100203 SO2 72.92 83.13 8.313 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 105.91 120.74 12.074 

cyid 105.91 120.74 12.074 
STID=17 CYID=157 fcid=157851AAA name=DYNEGY MIDWEST GENERATION INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 157 157851AAA 0001 0001 01 10100203 SO2 25.14 28.66 4.299 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 157 157851AAA 0002 0002 01 10100203 SO2 25.79 29.41 4.411 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 157 157851AAA 0013 0013 01 10100202 SO2 27.79 31.68 4.752 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 78.72 89.75 13.462 

cyid 78.72 89.75 13.462 

STID=17 CYID=167 fcid=167120AAO name=CITY WATER LIGHT & POWER

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0012 01 10100203 SO2 44.20 50.39 0.050 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0013 01 10100203 SO2 16.40 18.70 0.019 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 60.61 69.10 0.069 

cyid 60.61 69.10 0.069 

STID=17 CYID=179 fcid=179801AAA name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0029 01 10100203 SO2 25.35 28.90 2.890 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0031 01 10100203 SO2 41.57 47.39 4.739 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 66.91 76.29 7.629 

cyid 66.91 76.29 7.629 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197810AAK name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 03 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 02 10100223 SO2 15.33 17.48 0.017 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 03 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 15.33 17.48 0.017 

cyid 15.33 17.48 0.017 

stid 472.19 538.32 110.295 

STID=19 CYID=115 fcid=58-07-001 name=MIDAMERICAN ENERGY CO. - LOUISA STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 19 115 58-07-001 117487 147281 99 10100222 SO2 33.66 38.38 3.838 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=21 CYID=161 fcid=2116100009 name=EAST KY POWER COOP

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 21 161 2116100009 1 001 99 10100202 SO2 42.17 44.03 4.403 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 21 161 2116100009 2 002 99 10100212 SO2 55.39 57.84 5.784 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 97.55 101.87 10.187 

cyid 97.55 101.87 10.187 

stid 97.55 101.87 10.187 

STID=27 CYID=61 fcid=2706100004 name=Minnesota Power Inc - Boswell Energy Ctr

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 001 10100226 SO2 33.99 35.19 15.081 0.3 0.700 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 002 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.3 0.700 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 33.99 35.19 15.081 

cyid 33.99 35.19 15.081 

STID=27 CYID=109 fcid=2710900011 name=Rochester Public Utilities - Silver Lake

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 109 2710900011 SV003 EU004 001 10100202 SO2 7.86 8.13 1.220 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=27 CYID=141 fcid=2714100004 name=NSP - Sherburne Generating Plant

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU001 001 10100222 SO2 16.76 17.36 3.719 0.3 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU002 001 10100222 SO2 22.55 23.34 5.002 0.3 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 39.31 40.70 8.721 

cyid 39.31 40.70 8.721 

stid 81.16 84.02 25.023 

STID=39 CYID=13 fcid=0607130015 name=R. E. BURGER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 13 0607130015 R6 B011 B011P1 10100202 SO2 29.83 31.15 3.115 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 13 0607130015 R7 B012 B012P1 10100202 SO2 34.77 36.31 3.631 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 64.60 67.46 6.746 

cyid 64.60 67.46 6.746 

STID=39 CYID=31 fcid=0616000000 name=CONESVILLE POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 31 0616000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100212 SO2 316.00 330.00 33.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

stid 380.60 397.46 39.746 

STID=47 CYID=1 fcid=0009 name=TVA BULL RUN FOSSIL PLANT
 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 1 0009 S-1 001 99 10100212 SO2 130.81 133.01 13.301 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=47 CYID=73 fcid=0007 name=TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 73 0007 S-1A 001 99 10100212 SO2 20.15 20.49 2.049 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-1B 002 99 10100212 SO2 20.25 20.59 2.059 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-2A 003 99 10100212 SO2 19.62 19.95 1.995 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-2B 004 99 10100212 SO2 18.93 19.25 1.925 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 78.95 80.28 8.028 

cyid 78.95 80.28 8.028 

STID=47 CYID=85 fcid=0011 name=TVA JOHNSONVILLE FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 85 0011 S1-01 001 99 10100212 SO2 17.06 17.35 1.735 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 85 0011 S1-04 004 99 10100212 SO2 19.85 20.18 2.018 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 85 0011 S1-05 005 99 10100212 SO2 24.11 24.52 2.452 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 61.02 62.04 6.204 

cyid 61.02 62.04 6.204 

STID=47 CYID=145 fcid=0013 name=TVA KINGSTON FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 145 0013 S-1 001 99 10100202 SO2 12.68 12.89 1.289 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 002 99 10100202 SO2 14.00 14.24 1.424 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 003 99 10100202 SO2 13.80 14.04 1.404 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 004 99 10100202 SO2 12.24 12.44 1.244 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 005 99 10100202 SO2 19.57 19.90 1.990 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 006 99 10100202 SO2 18.92 19.24 1.924 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 007 99 10100202 SO2 21.30 21.66 2.166 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 008 99 10100202 SO2 18.54 18.85 1.885 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 009 99 10100202 SO2 20.72 21.07 2.107 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 151.77 154.33 15.433 

cyid 151.77 154.33 15.433 

STID=47 CYID=165 fcid=0025 name=TVA GALLATIN FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 165 0025 S-01 001 99 10100212 SO2 13.91 14.14 1.414 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-01 002 99 10100212 SO2 14.87 15.12 1.512 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-02 003 99 10100212 SO2 16.33 16.60 1.660 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-02 004 99 10100212 SO2 20.39 20.73 2.073 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------
fcid 65.49 66.59 6.659 

cyid 65.49 66.59 6.659 

stid 488.04 496.25 49.625 

STID=54 CYID=51 fcid=0005 name=OHIO POWER - MITCHELL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 51 0005 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 17.77 18.56 1.856 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 51 0005 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 5.69 5.94 0.594 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.46 24.50 2.450 

cyid 23.46 24.50 2.450 

STID=54 CYID=53 fcid=0009 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - MOUNTAINEER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 53 0009 001 001 99 10100202 SO2 11.20 11.69 1.169 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=54 CYID=79 fcid=0006 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - JOHN E AMOS PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 79 0006 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 79.63 83.16 8.316 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 79 0006 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 100.33 104.78 10.478 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 79 0006 003 003 99 10100202 SO2 139.38 145.55 14.555 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 319.35 333.50 33.350 

cyid 319.35 333.50 33.350 

stid 354.00 369.69 36.969 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007690 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER OAK CREEK STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007690 S13 B25 01 10100202 SO2 12.75 14.54 3.490 0.0 0.760 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S13 B26 01 10100202 SO2 8.68 9.89 2.473 0.0 0.750 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S14 B27 01 10100212 SO2 10.97 12.51 2.876 0.0 0.770 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S14 B28 01 10100212 SO2 11.28 12.86 2.958 0.0 0.770 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 43.68 49.80 11.797 

cyid 43.68 49.80 11.797 

stid 43.68 49.80 11.797 

 ======== ======== ==========

 1950.90 2075.80 287.480 
SO2 – 2018

Point Source Grown and Controlled Emissions by facility for SO2 r6s1b_2018 1

Base Year = 2002

Future Year = 2018

STID=17 CYID=31 fcid=031600AIN name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 31 031600AIN 0010 0013 01 10100226 SO2 10.92 12.39 1.239 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 31 031600AIN 0012 0016 01 10100226 SO2 17.69 20.08 2.008 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 28.61 32.48 3.248 

STID=17 CYID=31 fcid=031600AMI name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 31 031600AMI 0007 0010 01 10100226 SO2 16.13 18.31 1.831 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

cyid 44.74 50.79 5.079 

STID=17 CYID=79 fcid=079808AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 79 079808AAA 0003 0003 01 10100202 SO2 36.35 41.27 4.127 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 79 079808AAA 0012 0013 01 10100501 SO2 28.99 19.46 1.946 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 65.34 60.72 6.072 

cyid 65.34 60.72 6.072 

STID=17 CYID=97 fcid=097190AAC name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 97 097190AAC 0018 0033 01 10100226 SO2 24.14 27.40 2.740 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 97 097190AAC 0021 0036 01 10100226 SO2 19.23 21.83 2.183 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 97 097190AAC 0016 0031 01 10100203 SO2 4.59 5.22 0.005 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 47.96 54.45 4.928 

cyid 47.96 54.45 4.928 

STID=17 CYID=125 fcid=125804AAB name=DYNEGY MIDWEST GENERATION INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 125 125804AAB 0019 0023 01 10100202 SO2 22.34 25.36 3.805 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=17 CYID=127 fcid=127855AAC name=ELECTRIC ENERGY INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 17 127 127855AAC 0002 0003 01 10100222 SO2 10.25 11.63 11.630 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0002 0004 01 10100222 SO2 12.04 13.67 13.673 0.0 0.000 LNB LNB added by LADCO 

 17 127 127855AAC 0001 0001 01 10100222 SO2 11.83 13.42 1.342 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 127 127855AAC 0001 0002 01 10100222 SO2 11.48 13.03 1.303 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 127 127855AAC 0003 0005 01 10100222 SO2 11.72 13.31 1.331 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 127 127855AAC 0003 0006 01 10100222 SO2 12.68 14.39 1.439 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 70.00 79.46 30.719 

cyid 70.00 79.46 30.719 

STID=17 CYID=135 fcid=135803AAA name=AMEREN ENERGY GENERATING CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 135 135803AAA 0001 0001 01 10100203 SO2 32.99 37.45 3.745 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 135 135803AAA 0001 0003 01 10100203 SO2 72.92 82.77 8.277 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 105.91 120.22 12.022 

cyid 105.91 120.22 12.022 

STID=17 CYID=143 fcid=143805AAG name=AES ED EDWARDS STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 143 143805AAG 0002 0004 01 10100202 SO2 15.28 17.34 1.734 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=17 CYID=157 fcid=157851AAA name=DYNEGY MIDWEST GENERATION INC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 157 157851AAA 0001 0001 01 10100203 SO2 25.14 28.54 4.281 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 157 157851AAA 0002 0002 01 10100203 SO2 25.79 29.28 4.392 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 157 157851AAA 0013 0013 01 10100202 SO2 27.79 31.54 4.732 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 78.72 89.36 13.404 

cyid 78.72 89.36 13.404 

STID=17 CYID=167 fcid=167120AAO name=CITY WATER LIGHT & POWER

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0012 01 10100203 SO2 44.20 50.18 0.050 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 167 167120AAO 0010 0013 01 10100203 SO2 16.40 18.62 0.019 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 60.61 68.80 0.069 

cyid 60.61 68.80 0.069 

STID=17 CYID=179 fcid=179801AAA name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0029 01 10100203 SO2 25.35 28.77 2.877 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 179 179801AAA 0018 0031 01 10100203 SO2 41.57 47.19 4.719 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------
fcid 66.91 75.96 7.596 

cyid 66.91 75.96 7.596 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197809AAO name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197809AAO 0006 0009 01 10100203 SO2 15.89 18.04 1.804 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197809AAO 0016 0031 01 10100202 SO2 27.43 31.13 3.113 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197809AAO 0017 0033 01 10100202 SO2 23.13 26.26 2.626 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 66.45 75.44 7.544 

STID=17 CYID=197 fcid=197810AAK name=MIDWEST GENERATION LLC

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 17 197 197810AAK 0009 0014 02 10100222 SO2 11.64 13.21 1.321 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0011 0016 02 10100222 SO2 25.67 29.14 2.914 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0013 0010 03 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 02 10100223 SO2 15.33 17.40 0.017 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

 17 197 197810AAK 0007 0012 03 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.999 SHUTDOWN Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 52.64 59.75 4.252 

cyid 119.09 135.19 11.796 

stid 696.90 777.66 97.225 

STID=18 CYID=147 fcid=00020 name=INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER-ROCKPORT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 18 147 00020 1 001 01 10100222 SO2 66.42 72.32 7.232 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 18 147 00020 1 001 02 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 66.42 72.32 7.232 

cyid 66.42 72.32 7.232 

stid 66.42 72.32 7.232 

STID=19 CYID=115 fcid=58-07-001 name=MIDAMERICAN ENERGY CO. - LOUISA STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 19 115 58-07-001 117487 147281 99 10100222 SO2 33.66 38.22 3.822 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=21 CYID=127 fcid=2112700003 name=KENTUCKY POWER CO

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 21 127 2112700003 2 002 99 10100202 SO2 104.52 113.82 11.382 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=21 CYID=161 fcid=2116100009 name=EAST KY POWER COOP

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 21 161 2116100009 1 001 99 10100202 SO2 42.17 45.92 4.592 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 21 161 2116100009 2 002 99 10100212 SO2 55.39 60.31 6.031 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 97.55 106.23 10.623 

cyid 97.55 106.23 10.623 

stid 202.07 220.04 22.004 

STID=27 CYID=61 fcid=2706100004 name=Minnesota Power Inc - Boswell Energy Ctr

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 001 10100226 SO2 33.99 39.15 16.778 0.3 0.700 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 27 61 2706100004 SV003 EU003 002 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.3 0.700 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 33.99 39.15 16.778 

cyid 33.99 39.15 16.778 

STID=27 CYID=109 fcid=2710900011 name=Rochester Public Utilities - Silver Lake

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 109 2710900011 SV003 EU004 001 10100202 SO2 7.86 9.05 1.357 0.0 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=27 CYID=141 fcid=2714100004 name=NSP - Sherburne Generating Plant

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU001 001 10100222 SO2 16.76 19.31 4.138 0.3 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 27 141 2714100004 SV001 EU002 001 10100222 SO2 22.55 25.97 5.565 0.3 0.850 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 39.31 45.28 9.703 

cyid 39.31 45.28 9.703 

stid 81.16 93.48 27.838 

STID=39 CYID=13 fcid=0607130015 name=R. E. BURGER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 13 0607130015 R6 B011 B011P1 10100202 SO2 29.83 32.48 3.248 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 13 0607130015 R7 B012 B012P1 10100202 SO2 34.77 37.86 3.786 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 64.60 70.34 7.034 

cyid 64.60 70.34 7.034 

STID=39 CYID=31 fcid=0616000000 name=CONESVILLE POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 39 31 0616000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100212 SO2 316.00 344.11 34.411 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=39 CYID=167 fcid=0684000000 name=MUSKINGUM RIVER POWER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes
 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P1 10100201 SO2 65.07 70.85 7.085 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R2 B002 B002P2 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P1 10100201 SO2 94.58 103.00 10.300 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R3 B003 B003P2 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P1 10100203 SO2 81.64 88.90 8.890 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R4 B004 B004P2 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R5 B005 B005P1 10100203 SO2 97.22 105.87 10.587 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R5 B005 B005P2 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P1 10100202 SO2 113.96 124.10 12.410 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 39 167 0684000000 R6 B006 B006P2 10100501 SO2 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 452.48 492.72 49.272 

cyid 452.48 492.72 49.272 

stid 833.08 907.16 90.716 

STID=47 CYID=1 fcid=0009 name=TVA BULL RUN FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 1 0009 S-1 001 99 10100212 SO2 130.81 136.82 13.682 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

STID=47 CYID=73 fcid=0007 name=TVA JOHN SEVIER FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 73 0007 S-1A 001 99 10100212 SO2 20.15 21.07 2.107 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-1B 002 99 10100212 SO2 20.25 21.18 2.118 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-2A 003 99 10100212 SO2 19.62 20.52 2.052 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 73 0007 S-2B 004 99 10100212 SO2 18.93 19.80 1.980 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 78.95 82.57 8.257 

cyid 78.95 82.57 8.257 

STID=47 CYID=85 fcid=0011 name=TVA JOHNSONVILLE FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 85 0011 S1-01 001 99 10100212 SO2 17.06 17.84 1.784 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 85 0011 S1-04 004 99 10100212 SO2 19.85 20.76 2.076 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 85 0011 S1-05 005 99 10100212 SO2 24.11 25.22 2.522 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 61.02 63.82 6.382 

cyid 61.02 63.82 6.382 

STID=47 CYID=145 fcid=0013 name=TVA KINGSTON FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 145 0013 S-1 001 99 10100202 SO2 12.68 13.26 1.326 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 002 99 10100202 SO2 14.00 14.65 1.465 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO
 47 145 0013 S-1 003 99 10100202 SO2 13.80 14.44 1.444 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 004 99 10100202 SO2 12.24 12.80 1.280 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-1 005 99 10100202 SO2 19.57 20.47 2.047 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 006 99 10100202 SO2 18.92 19.79 1.979 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 007 99 10100202 SO2 21.30 22.28 2.228 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 008 99 10100202 SO2 18.54 19.39 1.939 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 145 0013 S-2 009 99 10100202 SO2 20.72 21.68 2.168 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 151.77 158.75 15.875 

cyid 151.77 158.75 15.875 

STID=47 CYID=165 fcid=0025 name=TVA GALLATIN FOSSIL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 47 165 0025 S-01 001 99 10100212 SO2 13.91 14.54 1.454 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-01 002 99 10100212 SO2 14.87 15.56 1.556 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-02 003 99 10100212 SO2 16.33 17.08 1.708 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 47 165 0025 S-02 004 99 10100212 SO2 20.39 21.32 2.132 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 65.49 68.50 6.850 

cyid 65.49 68.50 6.850 

stid 488.04 510.46 51.046 

STID=54 CYID=39 fcid=0006 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - KANAWHA RIVER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 39 0006 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 19.45 21.18 10.591 0.0 0.500 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 39 0006 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 20.94 22.80 11.399 0.0 0.500 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 40.39 43.98 21.990 

cyid 40.39 43.98 21.990 

STID=54 CYID=51 fcid=0005 name=OHIO POWER - MITCHELL PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 51 0005 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 17.77 19.36 1.936 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 51 0005 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 5.69 6.19 0.619 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 23.46 25.55 2.555 

STID=54 CYID=51 fcid=0006 name=OHIO POWER - KAMMER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 51 0006 013 001 99 10100203 SO2 47.06 51.25 5.125 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 51 0006 013 002 99 10100203 SO2 47.66 51.90 5.190 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 51 0006 013 003 99 10100203 SO2 41.94 45.67 4.567 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO
---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 136.67 148.82 14.882 

cyid 160.13 174.37 17.437 

STID=54 CYID=53 fcid=0001 name=APPALACHIAN POWER CO.-PHILIP SPORN PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 53 0001 014 001 99 10100202 SO2 18.65 20.31 2.031 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 53 0001 014 002 99 10100202 SO2 15.87 17.28 1.728 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 53 0001 014 003 99 10100202 SO2 21.46 23.36 2.336 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 53 0001 014 004 99 10100202 SO2 20.53 22.36 2.236 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 53 0001 005 005 99 10100202 SO2 46.82 50.98 5.098 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 123.33 134.30 13.430 

STID=54 CYID=53 fcid=0009 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - MOUNTAINEER PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 53 0009 001 001 99 10100202 SO2 11.20 12.19 1.219 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

cyid 134.53 146.49 14.649 

STID=54 CYID=79 fcid=0006 name=APPALACHIAN POWER - JOHN E AMOS PLANT

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 54 79 0006 012 001 99 10100202 SO2 79.63 86.72 8.672 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 79 0006 012 002 99 10100202 SO2 100.33 109.26 10.926 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 54 79 0006 003 003 99 10100202 SO2 139.38 151.77 15.177 0.0 0.900 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 319.35 347.75 34.775 

cyid 319.35 347.75 34.775 

stid 654.39 712.59 88.851 

STID=55 CYID=79 fcid=241007690 name=WIS ELECTRIC POWER OAK CREEK STATION

 Base Yr Grown Controlled Base Year Future Year

STID CYID fcid stkid dvid prid scc polid Tons/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Control EF Control EF ctrltype ctrldes

 55 79 241007690 S13 B25 01 10100202 SO2 12.75 14.48 3.475 0.0 0.760 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S13 B26 01 10100202 SO2 8.68 9.85 2.462 0.0 0.750 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S14 B27 01 10100212 SO2 10.97 12.45 2.864 0.0 0.770 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

 55 79 241007690 S14 B28 01 10100212 SO2 11.28 12.81 2.945 0.0 0.770 SCRUBBER Scrubber added by LADCO

---- -------- -------- ----------

fcid 43.68 49.59 11.746 

cyid 43.68 49.59 11.746 

stid 43.68 49.59 11.746 

 ======== ======== ==========

 3099.41 3381.52 400.481 
Appendix II

Scenario C Controls (CAMD List)
1

NOx Controls (SCRs, 2007 – 2013))

Plant Name UniqueID_Final State Name County

Capacity 

MW

On Line 

Year

SCR 

Online 

Year

Chesterfield 3797_B_4 Virginia Chesterfield 166 1960 2013

Chesterfield 3797_B_5 Virginia Chesterfield 310 1964 2012

Scherer 6257_B_3 Georgia Monroe 875 1987 2011

Chesterfield 3797_B_6 Virginia Chesterfield 658 1969 2011

Sandow No 4 6648_B_4 Texas Milam 545 1981 2011

Beech Hollow Power Project 82704_B_1 Pennsylvania Washington 272 2011 2011

Longview Power 82702_B_1 West Virginia Monongalia 695 2011 2011

Cliffside 2721_B_6 North Carolina Cleveland 800 2011 2011

AES Westover 2526_B_11 New York Broome 22 1943 2010

AES Westover 2526_B_12 New York Broome 22 1943 2010

AES Westover 2526_B_13 New York Broome 84 1951 2010

Iatan 2 6065_B_2 Missouri Platte 850 2010 2010

Southwest 6195_B_2 Missouri Greene 300 2010 2010

Trimble Station (LGE) 6071_B_2 Kentucky Trimble 732 2010 2010

Elm Road Generating Station 56068_B_2 Wisconsin Milwaukee 615 2010 2010

Clay Boswell 1893_B_3 Minnesota Itasca 350 1973 2009

Asheville 2706_B_2 North Carolina Buncombe 184 1971 2009

Conesville 2840_B_4 Ohio Coshocton 780 1973 2009

Marshall 2727_B_3 North Carolina Catawba 657 1969 2009

St Johns River Power Park 207_B_1 Florida Duval 626 1987 2009

Ghent 1356_B_2 Kentucky Carroll 469 1977 2009

Chalk Point LLC 1571_B_1 Maryland Prince George's 341 1964 2009

Chalk Point LLC 1571_B_2 Maryland Prince George's 342 1965 2009

San Juan 2451_B_2 New Mexico San Juan 320 1973 2009

Big Bend 645_B_BB01 Florida Hillsborough 411 1970 2009

Big Bend 645_B_BB02 Florida Hillsborough 391 1973 2009

Big Bend 645_B_BB03 Florida Hillsborough 414 1976 2009

Nebraska City Unit 2 6096_B_2 Nebraska Otoe 663 2009 2009

Cross 130_B_4 South Carolina Berkeley 652 2009 2009

Springerville 8223_B_4 Arizona Apache 400 2009 2009

Sandow 5 82010_B_5 Texas Milam 600 2009 2009

Oak Grove 82011_B_1 Texas Robertson 800 2009 2009

Oak Grove 82011_B_2 Texas Robertson 800 2009 2009

TS Power Plant 82013_B_1 Nevada Eureka 200 2009 2009

Plum Point Energy 82014_B_1 Arkansas Mississippi 665 2009 2009

Comanche 470_B_3 Colorado Pueblo 750 2009 2009

Elm Road Generating Station 56068_B_1 Wisconsin Milwaukee 615 2009 2009

Two Elk Generating Station 55360_B_1 Wyoming Campbell 300 2009 2009

J K Spruce 7097_B_BLR2 Texas Bexar 750 2009 2009

Dallman 963_B_34 Illinois Sangamon 200 2009 2009

AES Greenidge LLC 2527_B_4 New York Yates 27 1950 2008

AES Greenidge LLC 2527_B_5 New York Yates 27 1950 2008

AES Greenidge LLC 2527_B_6 New York Yates 106 1953 2008

Charles R Lowman 56_B_2 Alabama Washington 238 1979 2008

Charles R Lowman 56_B_3 Alabama Washington 238 1980 2008

Barry 3_B_5 Alabama Mobile 750 1971 2008

St Johns River Power Park 207_B_2 Florida Duval 626 1988 2008

Morgantown Generating Plant 1573_B_2 Maryland Charles 620 1971 2008
2

Bailly 995_B_7 Indiana Porter 160 1962 2008

San Juan 2451_B_1 New Mexico San Juan 322 1976 2008

San Juan 2451_B_3 New Mexico San Juan 495 1979 2008

Weston 4078_B_4 Wisconsin Marathon 519 2008 2008

AES Deepwater 10670_B_AAB001 Texas Harris 140 1986 2007

La Cygne 1241_B_1 Kansas Linn 724 1973 2007

Morgantown Generating Plant 1573_B_1 Maryland Charles 624 1970 2007

PSEG Hudson Generating Station 2403_B_2 New Jersey Hudson 583 1967 2007

San Juan 2451_B_4 New Mexico San Juan 506 1982 2007

Big Bend 645_B_BB04 Florida Hillsborough 457 1985 2007

Cross 130_B_3 South Carolina Berkeley 620 2007 2007

Wygen II 55479_B_4 Wyoming Campbell 90 2007 2007

Council Bluffs 1082_B_4 Iowa Pottawattamie 790 2007 2007

SO2 Controls (FGDs, 2007 – 2012)

Plant Name UniqueID_Final State Name County

Capacity 

MW

On Line 

Year

Scrubber 

Online 

Year

James H Miller Jr 6002_B_1 Alabama Jefferson 684 1978 2011

James H Miller Jr 6002_B_2 Alabama Jefferson 687 1985 2011

James H Miller Jr 6002_B_3 Alabama Jefferson 687 1989 2011

James H Miller Jr 6002_B_4 Alabama Jefferson 688 1991 2011

Cape Fear 2708_B_5 North Carolina Chatham 143 1956 2011

Baldwin Energy Complex 889_B_1 Illinois Randolph 624 1970 2011

Baldwin Energy Complex 889_B_2 Illinois Randolph 629 1973 2011

Baldwin Energy Complex 889_B_3 Illinois Randolph 629 1975 2011

Scherer 6257_B_3 Georgia Monroe 875 1987 2011

Milton R Young 2823_B_B1 North Dakota Oliver 250 1970 2011

W H Sammis 2866_B_6 Ohio Jefferson 630 1969 2011

W H Sammis 2866_B_7 Ohio Jefferson 630 1971 2011

PSEG Hudson Generating Station 2403_B_2 New Jersey Hudson 583 1967 2011

John Sevier 3405_B_1 Tennessee Hawkins 176 1955 2011

John Sevier 3405_B_2 Tennessee Hawkins 176 1955 2011

John Sevier 3405_B_3 Tennessee Hawkins 176 1956 2011

John Sevier 3405_B_4 Tennessee Hawkins 176 1957 2011

Beech Hollow Power Project 82704_B_1 Pennsylvania Washington 272 2011 2011

Longview Power 82702_B_1 West Virginia Monongalia 695 2011 2011

Cliffside 2721_B_6 North Carolina Cleveland 800 2011 2011

AES Greenidge LLC 2527_B_4 New York Yates 27 1950 2010

AES Greenidge LLC 2527_B_5 New York Yates 27 1950 2010

Barry 3_B_5 Alabama Mobile 750 1971 2010

E C Gaston 26_B_5 Alabama Shelby 861 1974 2010

Warrick 6705_B_4 Indiana Warrick 300 1970 2010

Coffeen 861_B_01 Illinois Montgomery 340 1965 2010

Coffeen 861_B_02 Illinois Montgomery 560 1972 2010

Cardinal 2828_B_3 Ohio Jefferson 630 1977 2010

Brandon Shores 602_B_1 Maryland Anne Arundel 643 1984 2010

Brandon Shores 602_B_2 Maryland Anne Arundel 643 1991 2010

Monroe 1733_B_4 Michigan Monroe 775 1974 2010

Cliffside 2721_B_5 North Carolina Cleveland 550 1972 2010

Crystal River 628_B_4 Florida Citrus 720 1982 2010

Bowen 703_B_1BLR Georgia Bartow 713 1971 2010
3

Crist 641_B_6 Florida Escambia 302 1970 2010

Crist 641_B_7 Florida Escambia 477 1973 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_1 Indiana Jefferson 217 1955 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_2 Indiana Jefferson 217 1955 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_3 Indiana Jefferson 217 1955 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_4 Indiana Jefferson 217 1955 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_5 Indiana Jefferson 217 1955 2010

Clifty Creek 983_B_6 Indiana Jefferson 217 1956 2010

Chalk Point LLC 1571_B_1 Maryland Prince George's 341 1964 2010

Chalk Point LLC 1571_B_2 Maryland Prince George's 342 1965 2010

Dickerson 1572_B_1 Maryland Montgomery 182 1959 2010

Dickerson 1572_B_2 Maryland Montgomery 182 1960 2010

Dickerson 1572_B_3 Maryland Montgomery 182 1962 2010

R E Burger 2864_B_7 Ohio Belmont 156 1955 2010

R E Burger 2864_B_8 Ohio Belmont 156 1955 2010

Kyger Creek 2876_B_1 Ohio Gallia 217 1955 2010

Kyger Creek 2876_B_2 Ohio Gallia 217 1955 2010

Kyger Creek 2876_B_3 Ohio Gallia 217 1955 2010

Kyger Creek 2876_B_4 Ohio Gallia 217 1955 2010

Kyger Creek 2876_B_5 Ohio Gallia 217 1955 2010

Cheswick 8226_B_1 Pennsylvania Allegheny 580 1970 2010

PSEG Mercer Generating Station 2408_B_1 New Jersey Mercer 315 1960 2010

PSEG Mercer Generating Station 2408_B_2 New Jersey Mercer 310 1961 2010

Silver Lake 2008_B_4 Minnesota Olmsted 61 1969 2010

Kingston 3407_B_1 Tennessee Roane 135 1954 2010

Kingston 3407_B_2 Tennessee Roane 135 1954 2010

Kingston 3407_B_3 Tennessee Roane 135 1954 2010

Kingston 3407_B_4 Tennessee Roane 135 1954 2010

Kingston 3407_B_5 Tennessee Roane 177 1955 2010

Kingston 3407_B_6 Tennessee Roane 177 1955 2010

Kingston 3407_B_7 Tennessee Roane 177 1955 2010

Kingston 3407_B_8 Tennessee Roane 177 1955 2010

Kingston 3407_B_9 Tennessee Roane 178 1955 2010

Sioux 2107_B_1 Missouri St. Charles 497 1967 2010

Sioux 2107_B_2 Missouri St. Charles 497 1968 2010

Chesterfield 3797_B_5 Virginia Chesterfield 310 1964 2010

Yorktown 3809_B_1 Virginia York 159 1957 2010

AES Westover 2526_B_11 New York Broome 22 1943 2010

AES Westover 2526_B_12 New York Broome 22 1943 2010

AES Westover 2526_B_13 New York Broome 84 1951 2010

Iatan 2 6065_B_2 Missouri Platte 850 2010 2010

Southwest 6195_B_2 Missouri Greene 300 2010 2010

Trimble Station (LGE) 6071_B_2 Kentucky Trimble 732 2010 2010

Elm Road Generating Station 56068_B_2 Wisconsin Milwaukee 615 2010 2010

Cholla 113_B_3 Arizona Navajo 271 1980 2009

Mayo 6250_B_1A North Carolina Person 362 1983 2009

Mayo 6250_B_1B North Carolina Person 362 1983 2009

Conesville 2840_B_4 Ohio Coshocton 780 1973 2009

G G Allen 2718_B_1 North Carolina Gaston 162 1957 2009

G G Allen 2718_B_2 North Carolina Gaston 162 1957 2009

G G Allen 2718_B_3 North Carolina Gaston 260 1959 2009
4

G G Allen 2718_B_4 North Carolina Gaston 275 1960 2009

G G Allen 2718_B_5 North Carolina Gaston 265 1961 2009

H L Spurlock 6041_B_1 Kentucky Mason 315 1977 2009

Crystal River 628_B_5 Florida Citrus 717 1984 2009

Deerhaven Generating Station 663_B_B2 Florida Alachua 228 1981 2009

Bowen 703_B_2BLR Georgia Bartow 718 1972 2009

Wansley 6052_B_2 Georgia Heard 892 1978 2009

E W Brown 1355_B_1 Kentucky Mercer 94 1957 2009

E W Brown 1355_B_2 Kentucky Mercer 160 1963 2009

E W Brown 1355_B_3 Kentucky Mercer 422 1971 2009

Ghent 1356_B_2 Kentucky Carroll 469 1977 2009

Fayette Power Project 6179_B_1 Texas Fayette 598 1979 2009

Fayette Power Project 6179_B_2 Texas Fayette 598 1980 2009

Morgantown Generating Plant 1573_B_1 Maryland Charles 624 1970 2009

Morgantown Generating Plant 1573_B_2 Maryland Charles 620 1971 2009

PPL Brunner Island 3140_B_1 Pennsylvania York 321 1961 2009

PPL Brunner Island 3140_B_2 Pennsylvania York 378 1965 2009

Keystone 3136_B_1 Pennsylvania Armstrong 850 1967 2009

Keystone 3136_B_2 Pennsylvania Armstrong 850 1968 2009

Bull Run 3396_B_1 Tennessee Anderson 881 1967 2009

Bay Shore 2878_B_4 Ohio Lucas 215 1968 2009

Hatfields Ferry Power Station 3179_B_1 Pennsylvania Greene 530 1969 2009

Hatfields Ferry Power Station 3179_B_2 Pennsylvania Greene 530 1970 2009

Hatfields Ferry Power Station 3179_B_3 Pennsylvania Greene 530 1971 2009

Nebraska City Unit 2 6096_B_2 Nebraska Otoe 663 2009 2009

Cross 130_B_4 South Carolina Berkeley 652 2009 2009

Springerville 8223_B_4 Arizona Apache 400 2009 2009

Sandow 5 82010_B_5 Texas Milam 600 2009 2009

Oak Grove 82011_B_1 Texas Robertson 800 2009 2009

Oak Grove 82011_B_2 Texas Robertson 800 2009 2009

TS Power Plant 82013_B_1 Nevada Eureka 200 2009 2009

Plum Point Energy 82014_B_1 Arkansas Mississippi 665 2009 2009

Comanche 470_B_3 Colorado Pueblo 750 2009 2009

Elm Road Generating Station 56068_B_1 Wisconsin Milwaukee 615 2009 2009

Two Elk Generating Station 55360_B_1 Wyoming Campbell 300 2009 2009

J K Spruce 7097_B_BLR2 Texas Bexar 750 2009 2009

Dallman 963_B_34 Illinois Sangamon 200 2009 2009

Charles R Lowman 56_B_1 Alabama Washington 86 1969 2008

John E Amos 3935_B_1 West Virginia Putnam 800 1971 2008

John E Amos 3935_B_2 West Virginia Putnam 800 1972 2008

Cholla 113_B_4 Arizona Navajo 380 1981 2008

Roxboro 2712_B_1 North Carolina Person 369 1966 2008

Roxboro 2712_B_3A North Carolina Person 341 1973 2008

Roxboro 2712_B_3B North Carolina Person 341 1973 2008

Miami Fort 2832_B_7 Ohio Hamilton 500 1975 2008

Miami Fort 2832_B_8 Ohio Hamilton 500 1978 2008

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_2A Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2008

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_2B Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2008

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_2C Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2008

J M Stuart 2850_B_1 Ohio Adams 585 1971 2008

J M Stuart 2850_B_2 Ohio Adams 597 1970 2008
5

J M Stuart 2850_B_3 Ohio Adams 597 1972 2008

J M Stuart 2850_B_4 Ohio Adams 597 1974 2008

Monroe 1733_B_3 Michigan Monroe 795 1973 2008

Belews Creek 8042_B_1 North Carolina Stokes 1,115 1974 2008

Belews Creek 8042_B_2 North Carolina Stokes 1,115 1975 2008

Bowen 703_B_3BLR Georgia Bartow 902 1974 2008

Bowen 703_B_4BLR Georgia Bartow 929 1975 2008

Hammond 708_B_1 Georgia Floyd 112 1954 2008

Hammond 708_B_2 Georgia Floyd 112 1954 2008

Hammond 708_B_3 Georgia Floyd 112 1955 2008

Hammond 708_B_4 Georgia Floyd 510 1970 2008

Wansley 6052_B_1 Georgia Heard 891 1976 2008

Harding Street 990_B_70 Indiana Marion 435 1973 2008

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_1A Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2008

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_1B Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2008

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_1C Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2008

Ghent 1356_B_4 Kentucky Carroll 478 1984 2008

Council Bluffs 1082_B_3 Iowa Pottawattamie 690 1978 2008

PPL Brunner Island 3140_B_3 Pennsylvania York 749 1969 2008

PPL Montour 3149_B_1 Pennsylvania Montour 774 1972 2008

PPL Montour 3149_B_2 Pennsylvania Montour 766 1973 2008

Comanche 470_B_1 Colorado Pueblo 366 1973 2008

Comanche 470_B_2 Colorado Pueblo 370 1975 2008

Cayuga 1001_B_2 Indiana VermilIon 473 1972 2008

Winyah 6249_B_1 South Carolina Georgetown 295 1975 2008

Winyah 6249_B_2 South Carolina Georgetown 295 1977 2008

Winyah 6249_B_3 South Carolina Georgetown 295 1980 2008

Chesterfield 3797_B_6 Virginia Chesterfield 658 1969 2008

Brayton Point 1619_B_1 Massachusetts Bristo 243 1963 2008

Brayton Point 1619_B_2 Massachusetts Bristo 244 1964 2008

Weston 4078_B_4 Wisconsin Marathon 519 2008 2008

Gorgas 8_B_10 Alabama Walker 690 1972 2007

Gorgas 8_B_8 Alabama Walker 165 1956 2007

Gorgas 8_B_9 Alabama Walker 175 1958 2007

John E Amos 3935_B_3 West Virginia Putnam 1,300 1973 2007

Mountaineer 6264_B_1 West Virginia Mason 1,300 1980 2007

Cardinal 2828_B_1 Ohio Jefferson 600 1967 2007

Cardinal 2828_B_2 Ohio Jefferson 600 1967 2007

Roxboro 2712_B_2 North Carolina Person 639 1968 2007

Roxboro 2712_B_4A North Carolina Person 343 1980 2007

Roxboro 2712_B_4B North Carolina Person 343 1980 2007

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_1A Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2007

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_1B Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2007

Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corp 10071_B_1C Virginia Portsmouth 19 1988 2007

Killen Station 6031_B_2 Ohio Adams 615 1982 2007

Marshall 2727_B_2 North Carolina Catawba 378 1966 2007

Marshall 2727_B_3 North Carolina Catawba 657 1969 2007

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_2A Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2007

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_2B Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2007

Cogentrix Hopewell 10377_B_2C Virginia Hopewell (city) 18 1987 2007

Ghent 1356_B_3 Kentucky Carroll 478 1981 2007
6

Louisa 6664_B_101 Iowa Louisa 700 1983 2007

Allen S King 1915_B_1 Minnesota Washington 571 1968 2007

Mitchell 3948_B_1 West Virginia Marshall 800 1971 2007

Gibson 6113_B_1 Indiana Gibson 630 1975 2007

Gibson 6113_B_2 Indiana Gibson 628 1975 2007

Winyah 6249_B_4 South Carolina Georgetown 270 1981 2007

Pleasant Prairie 6170_B_2 Wisconsin Kenosha 617 1985 2007

Cross 130_B_3 South Carolina Berkeley 620 2007 2007

Wygen II 55479_B_4 Wyoming Campbell 90 2007 2007

Council Bluffs 1082_B_4 Iowa Pottawattamie 790 2007 2007

Assumed BART Facilities and Units

State County Fac ID Facility Name Unit ID

MI Bay B2840 CE - KARN/WEADOCK EU00036

MI Bay B2840 CE - KARN/WEADOCK EU00037

MI Eaton B4001 LAN. BW&L ERICKSON EU00007

MI Houghton B6553 UP POWER CO / PORTAGE EU00008

MI Huron B2815 DTE - HARBOR BEACH EU00009

MI Ingham B2647 LAN. BW&L Eckert RG00023

MI Ingham B2647 LAN. BW&L Eckert RG00023

MI Ingham B2647 LAN. BW&L Eckert RG00023

MI Ingham B2647 LAN. BW&L Moores Park RG00021

MI Marquette B4261 WE-ENERGIES EU00029

MI Marquette B4261 WE-ENERGIES EU00030

MI Marquette B4261 WE-ENERGIES EU00031

MI Marquette B4261 WE-ENERGIES EU00032

MI Marquette B4261 WE-ENERGIES EU00033

MI Monroe B2816 DTE - MONROE EU00062

MI Monroe B2816 DTE - MONROE EU00068

MI Monroe B2816 DTE - MONROE EU00063

MI Monroe B2816 DTE - MONROE EU00064

MI Ottawa B2835 CE – CAMPBELL EU00062

MI Ottawa B2835 CE – CAMPBELL EU00061

MI Saint Clair B2796 DTE - ST. CLAIR / BELLE RIVER EU00111

MI Saint Clair B6145 DTE – GREENWOOD EU00009

MI Wayne B2132 WYANDOTTE EU00036

MI Wayne B2185 DETROIT PLD, MISTERSKY EU00014

MI Wayne B2811 DTE – TRENTON EU00035

OH Lake 0243160009 CEI., EASTLAKE PLANT B005

OH 0247030013 Orion Power Midwest B012

OH 0285010188 Dept of Public Utilities, City of Orrville B001

OH 0285010188 Dept of Public Utilities, City of Orrville B004

OH 0448020006 Toledo Edison Co., Bay Shore B003

OH 0448020006 Toledo Edison Co., Bay Shore B004

OH 0616000000 Conesville Power Plant B003

OH 0616000000 Conesville Power Plant B004

OH 0616000000 Conesville Power Plant B007

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B001

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B002
7

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B003

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B004

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B008

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B009

OH 0641050002 Cardinal Power Plant B009

OH Jefferson 0641160017 W. H. SAMMIS PLANT B011

OH Jefferson 0641160017 W. H. SAMMIS PLANT B012

OH Jefferson 0641160017 W. H. SAMMIS PLANT B013

OH 0684000000 Muskingum River Power Plant B006

OH Adams 0701000007 DP&L, J.M. Stuart Generating Station B001

OH Adams 0701000007 DP&L, J.M. Stuart Generating Station B002

OH Adams 0701000007 DP&L, J.M. Stuart Generating Station B003

OH Adams 0701000007 DP&L, J.M. Stuart Generating Station B004

OH 0701000060 DP&L, Killen Station B001

OH 1409040243 City of Hamilton Dept of Public Utilities B002

OH 1409040243 City of Hamilton Dept of Public Utilities B008

OH 1409040243 City of Hamilton Dept of Public Utilities B009

OH 1413100008 CG&E W. C. BECKJORD B005

OH 1413100008 CG&E W. C. BECKJORD B006

OH 1431350093 CG&E MIAMI FORT STATION B015

IL Peoria 856 Ameren – Edwards 2

IL Sangamon 963 CWLP – Dallman 31

IL Sangamon 963 CWLP – Dallman 32

IL Christian 876 Dominion – Kincaid 1

IL Christian 876 Dominion – Kincaid 2

WI COLUMBIA 111003090 Alliant Energy-Columbia Generating B20

WI COLUMBIA 111003090 Alliant Energy-Columbia Generating B21

WI COLUMBIA 111003090 Alliant Energy-Columbia Generating B22

WI GRANT 122014530 Alliant Energy, Nelson Dewey B22 (unit 2)

WI MILWAUKEE 241007690 We Energies-Oak Creek Station B26 (Unit 6)

WI MILWAUKEE 241007690 We Energies-Oak Creek Station B27 (Unit 7)

WI MILWAUKEE 241007690 We Energies-Oak Creek Station B28

WI MILWAUKEE 241007800 We Energies-Valley Station B21

WI MILWAUKEE 241007800 We Energies-Valley Station B23

WI MILWAUKEE 241007800 We Energies-Valley Station B24

WI BROWN 405031990 WI Public Service Corp - JP Pulliam B27 (unit 8)

WI SHEBOYGAN 460033090 WP & L Alliant Energy – Edgewater B24 

WI BUFFALO 606034110

Dairyland Power Coop Alma Station 

(J.P. Madgett boilers) B25 (+B26)

WI BUFFALO 606034110 Dairyland Power Coop Alma Station B27

WI VERNON 663020930 Dairyland Power Coop Genoa Station B20

WI VERNON 663020930 Dairyland Power Coop Genoa Station B25

IN Porter 995 Bailly 7

IN Porter 995 Bailly 8

IN Vermillion 1001 Cayuga 1

IN Vermillion 1001 Cayuga 2

IN Montgomery 1024 Crawfordsville 6

IN Warrick 1012 Culley 2
8

IN Warrick 1012 Culley 3

IN Gibson 6113 Gibson 1

IN Gibson 6113 Gibson 2

IN Cass 1032 Logansport 6

IN Sullivan 6213 Merom 1

IN Sullivan 6213 Merom 2

IN LaPorte 997 Michigan City 12

IN Lake 996 Mitchell 11

IN Pike 994 Petersburg 1

IN Pike 994 Petersburg 2

IN Pike 994 Petersburg 3

IN Pike 1043 Ratts 1

IN Pike 1043 Ratts 2

IN Wayne 7335 RPL 2

IN Jasper 6085 Schahfer 14

IN Jasper 6085 Schahfer 15

IN Lake 981 Stateline 4

IN Marion 990 Stout 70

IN Dearborn 988 Tanners Creek 4

IN Vigo 1010 Wabash River 6

IN Warrick 6705 Warrick 4

IA 07-02-005 Cedar Falls Utilities Unit #7 (EU10.1A)

IA 88-01-004

Central Iowa Power Cooperative 

(CIPCO) – Summit Lake Station

CombTurbines (EU 

1/1G, EU2/2G)

IA 70-08-003

Central Iowa Power Cooperative 

(CIPCO) – Fair Station

Unit # 2 (EU 2 & 

EU 2G)

IA 85-01-006 City of Ames - Steam Electric Plant Boiler #7 (EU 2)

IA 29-01-013 Interstate Power & Light - Burlington Main Plant Boiler.

IA 03-03-001 Interstate Power & Light - Lansing

Boiler #4. Sixteen 

units in total.

IA 23-01-014 Interstate Power & Light - ML Kapp

Boiler #2. Six units 

in total.

IA 57-01-042 Interstate Power & Light - Prairie Creek

Boiler #4. Fourteen 

units in total.

IA 78-01-026 MidAmerican Energy Co - Council Bluffs Boiler #3 (EU003)

IA 97-04-010 MidAmerican Energy Co - Neal North

Boilers #1-3 

(EU001 - EU003)

IA 97-04-011 MidAmerican Energy Co - Neal South Boiler #4 (EU003)

IA 70-01-011 Muscatine Power and Water Boiler #8

IA 63-02-005 Pella Municipal Power Plant Boilers #6-8

MN 2709900001 Austin Utilities NE Power Station EU001

MN 2713700027 Hibbing Public Utilities EU003

MN 2703100001 MN Power, Taconite Harbor EU003

MN 2706100004 MN Power, Boswell Energy Center EU003

MN 2701500010 New Ulm Public Utilities EU003 - Boiler 4

MN 2711100002 Otter Tail Power Hoot Lake EU003

MN 2710900011 Rochester Public Utilities, Silver Lake EU003

MN 2710900011 Rochester Public Utilities, Silver Lake EU004

MN 2713700028 Virginia Public Utilities EU003 - Boiler 9

MN 2714100004 Xcel Energy, Sherco EU001, EU002

MN 2716300005 Xcel Energy, Allen S King EU001 - Boiler 1
9

MN 2705300015 Xcel Energy, Riverside EU003 - Boiler 8

MO 290710003 Ameren -Labadie B1, B2, B3, B4

MO 291830001 Ameren - Sioux B1, B2

MO 290990016 Ameren - Rush Island B1, B2

MO 290950031 Auila - Sibley B3 - 5C

MO 291430004 Assoc. Electric - New Madrid

B1(EP-01), B2 

(EP-02)

MO 290770039 City Utilities Springfield - Southwest B1 (E09)

MO 290770005 City Utilities Springfield - James River EO7, EO8

MO 290970001 Empire Distric Electric - Asbury B7

MO 290830001 KC Power and Light - Montrose EP08

MO 290210004 Aqula - Lake Road EP06

MO 291750001 Assoc. Electric - Thomas Hill EP01, EP02

MO 290950021 Trigen - Kansas City B1A

MO 290190002 City of Columbia Municipal Power Plant EP02

MO 291950010 Marshall Munipal Utilities EP05

MO 290950050 Independence Power & Light-Blue Valley B3 (EP05)

WV 3943 Fort Martin

WV 6004 Pleasants

WV 3948 Mitchell

WV 3935 Amos

WV 6264 Mountaineer

WV 3944 Harrison

TN 3396 TVA Bull Run

TN 3399 TVA Cumberland

KY 1363 Cane Run

KY 1364 Mill Creek

KY 6041 Spurlock

KY 1384 John Sherman Cooper

KY 1353 Big Sandy

KY 1356 Ghent

KY 1355 Brown

KY 1374 Owensboro Municipal

KY 1372 Henderson Municipal

KY 1378 Paradise

KY 1361 Coleman

KY 1382 Reid/Henderson 2

KY 6639 Green
Public Notice 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the Ohio Portion of the CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Annual PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 

Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren Counties 

Notice is hereby given that the Director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 

(Ohio EPA) is requesting that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. 

EPA) revise the current air quality designation for the Ohio portion of the CincinnatiHamilton area, including Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren counties to attainment 

with respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). 

Air quality monitoring data collected between 2007 and 2009 in the region demonstrate 

attainment of the NAAQS and there is evidence that the improved air quality is due to 

permanent, enforceable emission reductions. In addition, existing requirements are 

sufficient to maintain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard in this area at least ten years into 

the future. 

Computer models show that existing state and federal emission reduction requirements 

are sufficient to attain and maintain the NAAQS in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. 

Therefore, Ohio EPA proposes to utilize existing emission inventory information and 

projections of future emissions as the demonstration of the ability to maintain the 

NAAQS in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area in the future. 

The Cincinnati-Hamilton area is currently designated as nonattainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard. As part of an acceptable maintenance plan, Ohio EPA is 

required to develop a contingency plan to provide for additional emission reductions if a 

violation of the NAAQS is monitored after the area has been redesignated. The plan 

which Ohio EPA is proposing to USEPA as part of this redesignation contains 

reductions which will help alleviate the ambient problem until a revised SIP can be 

developed. 

The State of Ohio proposes to: 

1. Request the U.S. EPA redesignate the Cincinnati-Hamilton area to attainment 

with respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and revise the maintenance plan. 

This request will document that existing enforceable control measures are 

responsible for the observed improvement in air quality. 

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

3. Commit to the proposed contingency plan. 

These actions must be noticed to allow public comment and to satisfy USEPA 

requirements for public involvement in SIP related activities. This notice addresses Ohio 
EPA’s reliance on the emission projections as evidence of attainment and maintenance 

and the commitment to institute contingency measures if ambient exceedances or 

violations trigger the contingency plan requirements. Written comments will be received 

on or before November 29, 2010 at the following address: 

E-mail: Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us

Mailing address: Carolina Prado 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, DAPC 

Lazarus Government Center 

P.O. Box 1049 

Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 

Phone: (614)- 728-1743 

Pursuant to Section 119.03 of the Ohio Revised Code, a public hearing on this 

redesignation request will be conducted as follows: November 29, 2010 at 2:30 P.M., at 

Hamilton County Department of Environmental Services located at 250 William Howard 

Taft Road, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

All interested persons are entitled to attend or be represented 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 November 30, 2010 will be considered by Ohio EPA prior to 

final action on this redesignation. Written statements submitted after November 30, 

2010 may be considered as time and circumstances permit, but will not be part of the 

official record of the hearing. 

This redesignation and maintenance request is available on Ohio EPA DAPC’s Web 

page for electronic downloading. The URL is: 

http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/SIP/annual.aspx. Questions regarding accessing the web 

site should be directed to Arunee Niamlarb at 614-728-1342; other questions or 

comments about this document should be directed to either Carolina Prado, (614)-644-

2310, Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us or Jennifer Hunter at (614) 644-3696, 

Jennifer.Hunter@epa.state.oh.us or mailed to Carolina Prado or Jennifer Hunter at the 

above address. 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

PUBLIC HEARING 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

OHIO EPA REQUESTS 

RECOGNITION OF IMPROVED 

AIR QUALITY XN CINCINNATI 

PUBLIC HEARING HELD AT THE 

HAMILTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

SERVICES, 250 WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT ROAD, CINCINNATI, 

OHIO, ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2010, BEGINNING AT 

2:37 P.M., REPORTED BY MARY A. SCHWEINHAGEN, RPR, 

RMR. AND CRR. 

DAYTON - (937) 228-3370 CINCINNATI - (513) 651-3370 
MS. MCCARRON: My name is Mary 

McCarron. I am the public involvement coordinator, 

and I'll be presiding over the hearing today. 

Thank you for taking the time to 

attend this hearing. It's to gather any comments 

from interested parties regarding Ohio EPA's 

proposed action. 

Ohio EPA is planning to ask U.S. 

EPA to revise the current air quality designation 

for the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area to attainment with respect to the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard. The 

proposed redesignation request affects Butler, 

Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren counties. 

Comments can be submitted until 

the close of business on November 30th, 2010, to 

Carolina Prado at Carolina.prado@epa.ohio.gov. 

All interested persons are 

entitled to attend or to 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, as I 

WWW.BRITTONANDASSOCIATES.COM 

DAYTON - (937) 228-3370 CINCINNATI - (513) 651-3370 
said earlier, by November 30th, 2010. These 

comments can be filed with me today or e-mailed to 

the address mentioned earlier. All written 

comments submitted for the record receive the same 

consideration as any oral testimony given today. 

Written comments submitted after 

November 30th may be considered as time and 

circumstances permit but won't be part of the 

official record. 

At this point I am going to read 

the names of the folks who have registered at the 

hearing today, and if you don't want to speak just 

go ahead and say pass. 

The first person who registered is 

Dick Brewer. 

MR. DICK BREWER: Pass. 

MS. MCCARRON: And Andy Reser? 

MR. ANDY RESER: Pass. 

MS. MCCARRON: I think at this 

point there is nobody else who is signed in to 

present testimony, and so we will go off the record 

until 3 p.m. 

(WHEREUPON, the parties went off 

the record. ) 

MS. MCCARRON: At this time is 

~ 

WWW.BRITTONANDASSOCIATES.COM 

DAYTON - (937) 228-3370 CINCINNATI - (513) 651-3370 
there anybody else who would wish to testify for 

the hearing? Okay. Seeing none, we are going to 

go ahead and close out this hearing. 

I remind you that written comments 

can be submitted through November 30th. 

The time is now 3:06, and this 

hearing is adjourned. 

(Hearing adjourned at 3:06 p.m.) 

DAYTON - (937) 228-3370 CINCINNATI - (513) 651-3370 
CERTIFICATE 

I, Mary A. Schweinhagen, a Registered 

Merit Reporter and Certified Realtime Reporter do 

hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true 

and correct transcript of my notes taken in the 

above-styled case and thereafter transcribed by me. 

-nV+ \ -2?&L-.&Q~ 

Mary A. Schweinhagen') RMR, CRR 

WWW.BRITTONANDASSOCIATES.COM 

DAYTON - (937) 228-3370 CINCINNATI - (513) 651-3370 
Division of Air Pollution Control 

Response to Comments 

PM2.5 redesignation request for the 1997 PM2.5 Annual Standard 

for the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area 

Agency Contact for this Package

Division Contact: (Carolina Prado, Division of Air Pollution Control, 614-644-2310, 

Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us) 

Ohio EPA held a public hearing in Cincinnati, OH on November 29, 2010, regarding the 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the Cincinnati-Hamilton PM2.5

Nonattainment Area. This document summarizes the comments and questions received 

at the public hearing and during the associated comment period, which ended on 

November 30, 2010. Ohio EPA reviewed and considered all comments received during 

the public comment period. 

By law, Ohio EPA has authority to consider specific issues related to protection of the 

environment and public health. 

In an effort to help you review this document, the questions are grouped by topic and 

organized in a consistent format. The name of the commenter follows the comment in 

parentheses. 

General/Overall Concerns

Comment 1: The final submission should include electronic copies of the 

RunSpec files, the user-supplied input database(s), and the 

output databases(s) produced for the analysis. The inclusion 

of post-processing scripts in Section 4.6 and 5 is very helpful 

(Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA - Region 5). 

Response 1: The RunSpec files, input and output databases, SQL postprocessing scripts, and the revised documentation have been 

saved to CDs and 2 copies will be provided to U.S. EPA. 

Comment 2: Table 3 in the unnumbered section at the beginning of the 

document includes a summary of the RunSpec parameters 

used in this analysis. The Appendix, which starts on 

numbered page 11, includes a more detailed description of 

the RunSpec parameters and user inputs. There are some 

discrepancies between Table 3 and the Attachment text 
which are listed in order below (Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA – 

Region 5). 

Response 2: The text discrepancies between Table 3 and Appendix C have 

been corrected as indicated. 

Comment 3: The default database version listed in Table 3 (“MOVES 

default database 2010615111524”) does not exist. The 

documentation needs to accurately refer to the version of the 

database used (Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA – Region 5). 

Response 3: We have correctly identified the version in the final document. 

Comment 4: For calculating annual PM2.5 emissions, OKI used a single 

daily temperature profile that was based on annual average 

temperatures (Table 3 and Section 1.3). PM emissions in 

MOVES are sensitive to temperature, and the use of a single 

day temperature profile to represent the entire year may not 

accurately reflect the impact of seasonal temperature 

changes on PM emissions form motor vehicles. For a PM 

inventory that is going to be used for air quality modeling in 

an attainment demonstration, seasonal, monthly, or even 

daily temperatures may be needed, depending on the 

detailed circumstances of the analysis. Given that this 

analysis is not being used for an attainment demonstration, 

the use of an average annual temperature profile is 

acceptable, but approval of this approach should be taken as 

a general approval of the use of a single daily temperature 

profile for all uses (Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA - Region 5). 

Response 4: It is our understanding that the use of one set of annual averages 

is acceptable for developing a motor vehicle emissions budget 

and for transportation conformity. This methodology is similar to 

what OKI used for MOBILE. We agree that MOVES assumptions 

used for different state implementation purposes may need to 

vary. OKI will be experimenting with a four season approach to 

annual emissions. When MOVES is used for attainment 

demonstrations purposes we will discuss further the appropriate 

assumptions to use with all parties involved. 

Comment 5: Section 1.3 of the Appendix says, “Ozone season daily 

analysis is done using July temperatures.” What is the 

purpose of this analysis in the context of this submission? 
There doesn’t seem to be any other reference to this in the 

document (Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA - Region 5). 

Response 5: OKI's MOVES runs generated additional information (i.e. July 

emission rates) that was not required for this PM2.5 SIP. 

Document references to an ozone season analysis and July 

temperatures have been deleted. 

Comment 6: Table 3 says that all roads types including off-network were 

included. Section 1.6 says, “There are five types of road 

types available in MOVES, since OKI travel demand model 

could not predict the VMT in parking lots (off network) only 

four road types is used to assign activity for vehicles starts 

and for evap emissions while vehicles are parked. It does not 

apply to VMT parking lots. Given that start emissions were 

calculated, the entry in Table 3 seems to be the correct one, 

but the document should be clarified (Patricia Morris, U.S. 

EPA - Region 5). 

Response 6: We have included the appropriate clarification in the final 

document.

Comment 7: Table 3 says that all PM2.5 categories were selected in the 

Pollutants and Processes panel, but Section 1.7 says that 

"total PM2.5 emissions are selected in addition of (sic) sulfur 

dioxide." If that is accurate, the inventory would not include 

brake-wear and tire-wear emissions which are calculated 

separately from "Total PM2.5" which only includes exhaust 

emissions. Given that the inventories include brake and tire 

wear, Table 3 seems to have the correct information, but the 

documentation should be clarified (Patricia Morris, U.S. EPA 

- Region 5). 

Response 7: We have included the appropriate clarification in the final 

document. 

Comment 8: Table 3 and Section 2.2 indicate that for the Ohio counties, 

local populations were used for all source types except 41, 

61, and 62. However, in the Kentucky counties, default data 

were also used for the light truck categories (31 - passenger 

trucks and 32- light commercial trucks). We are concerned 

about the use of default data for the light truck categories. 

Our technical guidance is very clear on the importance of 
local information for source type population. While it may be 

reasonable to use national defaults for some of the heavy 

duty categories as was done in the Ohio counties, OKI 

should be able to develop local data for the light duty 

categories. If Kentucky has local data for passenger cars, 

they should also have local data for light trucks (Patricia 

Morris, U.S. EPA - Region 5). 

Response 8: The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) decoded VINs and 

provided the results by HPMS source type to OKI. 

Inconsistencies were found in the results and could not be 

corrected in time for OKI's analysis. It was decided that a 

combination of the KYTC VIN data and MOVES default data 

would provide the most accurate results. KYTC continues to try to 

correct the VIN decoding errors. 

End of comments 
LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

Redesignation Petition and Maintenance Plan 

In Association with the Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) Standard 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana

Notice is hereby given under 40 CFR 51.102 that the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) will hold a public hearing on January 5, 2011. The 

purpose of this hearing is to receive public comment on the Draft Redesignation Petition 

and Maintenance Plan in association with the Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) Standard, for 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana. The meeting will convene at 5:30 

p.m. (local time) at the Lawrenceburg Public Library, Ewbank Meeting Room 1 and 2, 

150 Mary Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana 47025. All interested persons are invited and 

will be given opportunity to express their views concerning the draft documents. 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana is part of the CincinnatiHamilton OH-KY-IN Fine Particle Nonattainment Area. This area was designated as 

nonattainment for the annual fine particle standard and subject to the requirements of 

Section 172 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). One of the compliance requirements mandated 

by Section 172(c) of the CAA, is the development of a plan demonstrating that the area 

will continue to meet the annual standard for fine particles. This Redesignation Petition 

and Maintenance Plan is being drafted and submitted consistent with United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) guidance. 

Copies of the draft documents will be available on or before December 5, 2010 to 

any person upon request and at the following locations: 

 Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of Air Quality, Indiana 

Government Center North, 100 North Senate, Room N1003, Indianapolis, Indiana. 

 Lawrenceburg Public Library, 150 Mary Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana. 

 Lawrenceburg City Building, 230 Walnut Street, Lawrenceburg, Indiana. 

The draft documents will also be available on the following Web page: 

http://www.in.gov/idem/4658.htm

Oral statements will be heard, but for the accuracy of the record, statements 

should be submitted in writing. Written statements may be submitted to the attendant 

designated to receive written comments at the public hearing. 

IDEM will also accept written comments through January 7, 2010. Mailed 

comments should be addressed to: 
Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana Fine Particle 

(PM2.5) Redesignation Petition and Maintenance Plan 

Scott Deloney, Chief 

Programs Branch 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

Office of Air Quality MC 61-50 

100 North Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, IN 46206-2251 

A transcript of the hearing and all written submissions provided at the public 

hearing shall be open to public inspection at IDEM and copies may be made available to 

any person upon payment of reproduction costs. Any person heard or represented at the 

hearing or requesting notice shall be given written notice of actions resulting from the 

hearing. 

For additional information contact Ms. Sarah Raymond, at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Air Programs Branch, Office of Air Quality, 

Room 1001, Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis 

or call (317) 232-8449 or (800) 451-6027 ext. 2-8449 (in Indiana). 

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

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this hearing 

should contact the IDEM Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) coordinator at:

Attn: ADA Coordinator 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management – Mail Code 50-10 

100 North Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 

Or call (317) 233-1785 (voice) or (317) 232-6565 (TDD). Please provide a minimum of 

72 hours notification.
REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION AND 

MAINTENANCE PLAN 

UNDER THE ANNUAL NATIONAL 

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 

STANDARD FOR FINE PARTICLES 

For the Indiana Portion 

of the 

Cincinnati – Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area for Fine Particles

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, 

Indiana

Prepared By: 

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

 November 2010
This page intentionally left blank

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1 

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................1 

1.2 Geographical Description ..........................................................................................................2 

1.3 Status of Air Quality ..................................................................................................................3 

2.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR REDESIGNATION ......................................................................3 

2.1 General .......................................................................................................................................3 

2.2 Fine Particles Monitoring ..........................................................................................................4 

2.3 Emission Inventory ....................................................................................................................4 

2.4 Modeling Demonstration ...........................................................................................................4 

2.5 Controls and Regulations ...........................................................................................................5 

2.6 Corrective Actions for Potential Future Violations of the Fine Particles Standard ...................5 

3.0 FINE PARTICLES MONITORING .....................................................................................5 

3.1 Fine Particles Monitoring Network ...........................................................................................5 

3.2 Ambient Fine Particles Monitoring Data ...................................................................................7

3.3 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................................10 

3.4 Continued Monitoring ..............................................................................................................10 

4.0 EMISSION INVENTORY ....................................................................................................10 

4.1 Emission Trends .......................................................................................................................11 

4.2 Base Year Inventory ................................................................................................................22 

4.3 Emission Projections ................................................................................................................23 

4.4 Demonstration of Maintenance ................................................................................................29 

4.5 Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions ..................................................................29 

4.6 Provisions for Future Updates .................................................................................................30 

5.0 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS BUDGET ......................................................................30 

5.1 Onroad Emission Estimates .....................................................................................................30 

5.2 Overview ..................................................................................................................................30 

5.3 Emission Estimates ..................................................................................................................31 

6.0 CONTROL MEASURES AND REGULATIONS ..............................................................33 

6.1 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) ...............................................................33 

6.2 Implementation of Past SIP Revisions .....................................................................................33 

6.3 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Rule ....................................................................................................33 

6.4 Measures Beyond Clean Air Act SIP Requirements ...............................................................34 

6.5 Controls to Remain in Effect ...................................................................................................38 

6.6 New Source Review Provisions ...............................................................................................38 

iii 
7.0 MODELING AND METEOROLOGY................................................................................39 

7.1 Summary of Modeling Results to Support Rulemakings ........................................................39 

7.2 LADCO’s Round 5 Particulate Source Apportionment Results ..............................................43 

7.3 Summary of Existing Modeling Results ..................................................................................46 

7.4 Meteorological Analysis for Southeastern Indiana ..................................................................46 

7.4.1 Surface Air Conditions Present during High Fine Particles Concentrations Days ...............46 

7.4.2 Upper Air Conditions Present during High Fine Particles Concentration Days ...................47 

7.4.3 Analyses of Atmospheric Conditions for Fine Particles Build-Up .......................................47 

7.5 Summary of Air Quality Index Days in Southeastern Indiana ................................................48 

7.6 Summary of Meteorological Analysis for Southeastern Indiana .............................................49 

8.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ...................................................................................................49 

8.1 Commitment to Revise Plan ....................................................................................................49 

8.2 Commitment for Contingency Measures .................................................................................49 

8.3 Contingency Measures .............................................................................................................50 

9.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ................................................................................................51 

10.0 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................51 

FIGURES

Figure 3.1 Cincinnati Basic Nonattainment Area ............................................................................6 

CHARTS

Chart 7.1 Regional/Emission Sector PSAT Results at Murray Road in Hamilton County ...........44 

Chart 7.2 Species Modeled Contributions to Murray Road PM2.5 Monitor ..................................45 

Chart 7.3 Species Modeled Contributions to Seymour & Vine St. PM2.5 Monitor .......................45 

Chart 7.4 Species Modeled Contributions to 101 West 8th Street PM2.5 Monitor .........................45 

Chart 7.5 Species Modeled Contributions to University College PM2.5 Monitor..........................46 

Chart 7.6 Distribution of PM2.5 Concentration Days on the AQI Levels of Health Concern ........48 

iv 
TABLES

Table 1.1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Fine Particles ............................................2 

Table 3.1 Monitoring Data for the Cincinnati Area (Annual Average and 2007 – 2009 

Design Values ..................................................................................................................................7 

Table 4.1 Comparison of 2008 Estimated and 2021 Projected Emission Estimates 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana (Tons Per Year) .........................................28 

Table 4.2 Comparison of 2008 Estimated and 2021 Projected Emission Estimates 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area (Tons Per Year) ...........................29 

Table 5.1 Emission Estimations for Onroad Mobile Sources for the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

OH-KY-IN PM2.5 Nonattainment Area ..........................................................................................31 

Table 5.2 Mobile Source Emission Budgets for the Ohio and Indiana Portions of the 

Cincinnati PM2.5 Nonattainment Area ............................................................................................31 

Table 6.1 Trends in EGU NOx Emissions Statewide in Indiana....................................................34 

Table 7.1 Transport Rule Modeling Results from U.S. EPA - 2010 .............................................40 

Table 7.2 LADCO’s Round 6 Modeling Results for the Cincinnati Area .....................................42 

Table 7.3 Ranking and Percentage of Highest Number of Days at AQI Levels of Health 

Concern ..........................................................................................................................................49 

GRAPHS

Graph 3.1 Design Values for the Cincinnati Area for Fine Particles, 2003 through 2009 .............9 

Graph 3.2 Cincinnati Area Annual Fine Particles Trends, 2005 through 2009 ...............................9 

Graph 4.1 Dearborn County, IN NOx Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 .................11 

Graph 4.2 Dearborn County, IN SO2 Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 ..................12 

Graph 4.3 Dearborn County, IN PM2.5 Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 ...............12 

Graph 4.4 Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area NOx Point 

Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 .......................................................................................13

Graph 4.5 Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area SO2 Point 

Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 .......................................................................................13

Graph 4.6 Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area Direct PM2.5 

Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 .............................................................................14 

Graph 4.7 NOx Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 2005 and 

2008-With CAIR ............................................................................................................................16 

Graph 4.8 SO2 Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 2005 and 

2008-With CAIR ............................................................................................................................16 

Graph 4.9 Direct PM2.5 Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 2005 

and 2008-With CAIR .....................................................................................................................17 

Graph 4.10 NOx Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, 

OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR ......................................................17 

v 
Graph 4.11 SO2 Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, 

OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR ......................................................18 

Graph 4.12 Direct PM2.5 Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, 

OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-Without CAIR .................................................18 

Graph 4.13 Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana NOx Emissions from 

EGUs, 1999 to 2009 .......................................................................................................................20 

Graph 4.14 Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area NOx Emissions 

from EGUs, 1999 to 2009 ..............................................................................................................21 

Graph 4.15 Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana SO2 Emissions from 

EGUs, 1999 to 2009 .......................................................................................................................21 

Graph 4.16 Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area SO2 Emissions 

from EGUs, 1999 to 2009 ..............................................................................................................22 

Graph 4.17 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected NOx Emissions, 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR ................................................24 

Graph 4.18 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2 Emissions, 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR ................................................25 

Graph 4.19 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected Direct PM2.5 Emissions, 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR ................................................25 

Graph 4.20 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2, NOx and Direct 

PM2.5 Emissions, Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn county, Indiana-With CAIR ....................26 

Graph 4.21 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected NOx Emissions for the 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-With CAIR ..................................26 

Graph 4.22 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2 Emissions for the 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-With CAIR ..................................27 

Graph 4.23 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected Direct PM2.5 Emissions 

for the Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-Without CAIR .................27 

Graph 4.24 Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2, NOx and Direct 

PM2.5 Emissions for the Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment 

Area-(NOx and SO2 With CAIR, PM2.5 Without CAIR) ...............................................................28 

Graph 7.1 PM2.5 Design Value Trends for Cincinnati Area: 1999 - 2009 .....................................41 

Graph 7.2 Modeling Results (without CAIR) for the Cincinnati Area PM2.5 Monitors ................43 

vi 
APPENDICES

A Air Quality System (AQS) and Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

(IDEM) Monitor Data Values for the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN Nonattainment 

Area (2000-2009) 

B Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) and Direct Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

Point Source Emissions (2005 and 2008) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area 

C Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) and Direct Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

(2005 and 2008) Emission Trends, All Sources, Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area 

D Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) Emissions from Electric Generating 

Units, Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana and Entire CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area 

E 2008 Base Year Emissions Inventory and 2015 and 2021 Projected Emissions Inventory 

for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Dioxides (SO2) and Direct Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area 

F Mobile Source Input/Output Calculation Files 

G Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) Area Source Inventory 

Standard Operating Procedure 

H Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium Emission Estimates Technical Support 

Document 

I Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) Round 5 Modeling Technical 

Support Document (Round 5 Photochemical Modeling Based on “Base M” Emissions 

inventory, revised version of “Base K”) 

J Public Participation Process Documents 

vii 

1 

REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN 

UNDER THE ANNUAL NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR 

QUALITY STANDARD FOR FINE PARTICLES 

CINCINNATI-HAMILTON OH-KY-IN AREA 

1.0 INTRODUCTION

 

This document supports Indiana’s request that Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, 

Indiana, which is part of the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN fine particles nonattainment area 

(herein referred to as the Cincinnati area), be redesignated from nonattainment to attainment of 

the 1997 annual standard for fine particles. There are no monitors for fine particles in the 

Indiana portion of the Cincinnati area. However, because the Cincinnati area has recorded three 

years of quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the years 2007 through 2009, 

demonstrating attainment with the annual standard for fine particles, the Indiana portion of the 

Cincinnati area is eligible for redesignation. 

Section 107 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes specific requirements to be met in order for 

an area to be considered for redesignation, including: 

(a) A determination that the area has attained the annual standard for fine particles. 

(b) An approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the area under Section 110(k). 

(c) 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 federal requirements.

(d) A fully approved maintenance plan under Section 175A. 

(e) A determination that all Section 110 and Part D requirements have been met. 

A maintenance plan provides for the continued attainment of the air quality standard by an area 

for a period of ten years after the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 

has formally redesignated the area to attainment. The plan also provides assurances that even if 

there is a subsequent exceedance of the air quality standard, measures in the maintenance plan 

will prevent any future occurrences through contingency measures that would be triggered. 

This document addresses each of these requirements, and provides additional information to 

support continued compliance with the annual standard for fine particles. 

1.1 Background

The CAA requires states with areas designated nonattainment of the applicable National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter to develop SIPs to expeditiously 

attain and maintain the standard. In 1997, U.S. EPA set daily and annual air quality standards 

for fine particles (PM2.5), as shown in Table 1.1. The standards were legally challenged and 

upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in February of 2001. In 1999, Indiana began monitoring for 
2 

fine particle concentrations. The U.S. EPA designated areas in Indiana under the fine particle 

standards on December 17, 2004, as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable, with an 

effective date of April 5, 2005. 

Table 1.1 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Fine Particles 

Annual 24-Hour 

1997 Fine Particles 

Standard (PM2.5) 

15 μg/m3

Annual arithmetic mean, 

averaged over three years 

65 μg/m3

24-hour average, 98th percentile, 

averaged over three years 

2006 Fine Particles 

Standard (PM2.5) 

15 μg/m3

Annual arithmetic mean, 

averaged over three years 

35 μg/m3

24-hour average, 98th percentile, 

averaged over three years 

Note: The Cincinnati area meets the 1997 and 2006 24-hour NAAQS for fine particles. Since this area is 

solely designated nonattainment under the 1997 annual standard for fine particles, this document only 

addresses the annual standard. 

On December 17, 2004, based on 2001 through 2003 monitoring data, U.S. EPA designated the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN area as nonattainment of the annual standard for fine particles, 

and subject to CAA, Part D, Title 1, Section 172 of Subpart 1 requirements, including the 

development of a plan to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and direct PM2.5

emissions and a demonstration that the area will meet the annual standard for fine particles by 

April 5, 2010. In order to satisfy these requirements, Indiana submitted an attainment 

demonstration to U.S. EPA on April 3, 2008, demonstrating that with the combination of clean 

air measures and the implementation of local and federally required control measures, air quality 

in the nonattainment area would meet the annual NAAQS for fine particles by April 5, 2010, and 

provide for an ample margin of safety. The Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN area monitors have 

met the annual NAAQS for fine particles since the end of 2009. 

There were no monitors in the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN fine particles nonattainment area 

that violated the 1997 24-hour standard for fine particles and or currently violates the 2006 24-

hour standard for fine particles. As a result, the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN fine particles 

nonattainment area was designated nonattainment solely under the 1997 annual standard. 

Therefore, this document pertains only to the 1997 annual standard for fine particles. 

 The Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN fine particles nonattainment area, as defined in Section 1.2, 

has not previously been subject to nonattainment area rulemakings for fine particles. However, 

the area had been subject to nonattainment area rulemakings under the 1-hour and the 8-hour 

ozone standards. The 1-hour ozone standard was revoked on June 15, 2005, and the Cincinnati 

area was redesignated to attainment of the 1997 ozone standard on May 11, 2010. 

 

 1.2 Geographical Description

The entire Cincinnati fine particles nonattainment area consists of: Lawrenceburg Township in 

Dearborn County, Indiana; Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren counties, Ohio; Boone, 

Campbell, and Kenton counties, Kentucky; and contains such cities as Cincinnati, Hamilton, and 
3 

Middletown, all in Ohio. This area is depicted in Figure 3.1. 

The agencies responsible for assuring the fine particles nonattainment area complies with the 

CAA requirements are: 

 The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA), which is responsible for 

Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton, and Warren counties, Ohio. 

 The Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, (KDEP) which is 

responsible for Boone, Campbell, and Kenton counties, Kentucky. 

 The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM), which is 

responsible for Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana. 

These three state agencies have worked cooperatively with U.S. EPA Regions IV and V to 

address attainment planning issues. 

Although the three agencies, in the three states, have worked together on a comprehensive plan 

for the multi-state nonattainment areas, each state is required to make a separate submittal for its 

portion of the planning components to U.S. EPA. Attainment demonstrations are SIP submittals 

and U.S. EPA action on them is taken separately. As such, this submittal only covers 

Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, Indiana. 

 1.3 Status of Air Quality

 Monitoring data for fine particles for the three years, 2007 through 2009, demonstrates that air 

quality has met the annual NAAQS for fine particles in the Cincinnati area. This fact, 

accompanied by the permanent and enforceable reductions in emission levels discussed in 

Section 4.0, justifies a redesignation to attainment for the Indiana portion of the CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area based on Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 

2.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR REDESIGNATION

2.1 General

Section 110 and Part D of the CAA list a number of requirements that must be met by 

nonattainment areas prior to consideration for redesignation to attainment. In addition, U.S. EPA 

has published detailed guidance in a document entitled Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment, issued September 4, 1992, to Regional Air Directors. This 

document is hereafter referred to as “Redesignation Guidance.” This Request for Redesignation 

and Maintenance Plan is based on the Redesignation Guidance, supplemented with additional 

guidance received from staff of the Air Planning and Maintenance Section of U.S. EPA Region 

V. The specific requirements for redesignation are listed below. 
4 

2.2 Fine Particles Monitoring 

1) A demonstration that the annual standard for fine particles, as published in 40 

CFR 50.13, has been attained. Fine particles monitoring data must show that 

violations of the annual ambient standard are no longer occurring. 

 

2) Ambient monitoring data quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR 58.15, 

recorded in the U.S. EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database, and available for 

public view. 

3) A showing that the three-year average of annual values, based on data from all 

monitoring sites in the area or its affected downwind environs, do not exceed 15.0 

micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3

). This showing must rely on three complete, 

consecutive calendar years of quality assured data. 

4) A commitment that, once redesignated, the state will continue to operate an 

appropriate monitoring network to verify the maintenance of the standard. 

2.3 Emission Inventory 

1) A comprehensive emission inventory of direct PM2.5 and the precursors of fine 

particles completed for the base year (2008 in this case). 

2) A projection of the emission inventory to a year at least ten years following 

redesignation. 

3) A demonstration that the projected level of emissions is sufficient to maintain the 

annual standard for fine particles. 

4) A demonstration that improvement in air quality between the year violations 

occurred and the year attainment was achieved is based on permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions and not on temporary adverse economic 

conditions or unusually favorable meteorology. 

5) Provisions for future annual updates of the inventory to enable tracking of the 

emission levels, including an annual emission statement from major sources. 

2.4 Modeling Demonstration 

While no modeling is required for redesignating nonattainment areas, IDEM has evaluated the 

results of federal control-case modeling to demonstrate that compliance with the standard will be 

maintained. 
5 

2.5 Controls and Regulations 

1) A U.S. EPA-approved SIP control strategy that includes Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) requirements for existing stationary sources covered 

by Control Technology Guidelines (CTG) and non-CTG RACT for all major 

sources. 

2) Evidence that control measures required in past SIP revisions have been fully 

implemented. 

 

3) Acceptable provisions to provide for new source review. 

4) Assurances that existing controls will remain in effect after redesignation, unless 

the state demonstrates through photochemical modeling that the standard can be 

maintained without one or more controls. 

5) If appropriate, a commitment to adopt a requirement that all transportation plans 

conform with and are consistent with the SIP. 

2.6 Corrective Actions for Potential Future Violations of the Fine Particles Standard

1) A commitment to submit a revised plan eight years after redesignation. 

2) A commitment to expeditiously enact and implement additional contingency 

control measures in response to exceeding specified predetermined levels 

(triggers) or in the event that future violations of the ambient standard occur. 

3) A list of potential contingency measures that would be implemented in such an 

event. 

4) A list of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) and direct PM2.5 sources 

potentially subject to future controls. 

3.0 FINE PARTICLES MONITORING

3.1 Fine Particles Monitoring Network

There are currently 12 Federal Reference Method monitors measuring fine particle 

concentrations for the Cincinnati area. Fine particle monitors are located in Campbell and 

Kenton counties in Kentucky and Butler, Clermont, Warren, and Hamilton counties in Ohio. 

There are no monitors for fine particles in the Indiana portion of the Cincinnati nonattainment 

area. The highest levels of fine particle concentrations have been typically monitored at the 

Seymour and Vine Street monitor (39-0061-0014) in Hamilton County, Ohio. The locations of 

the monitoring sites for the Cincinnati area are shown in Figure 3.1. A listing of the monitor 

readings from 2007 through 2009, is shown in Table 3.1 and Appendix A. The monitor readings 
6 

were retrieved from the U.S. EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS). 

The Wilwood and Winneste Ave. monitors in Ohio were discontinued on December 31, 2005. 

The Alexandria Park monitor in Kentucky was discontinued on December 31, 2006. The Hook 

Field Airport monitor in Ohio was discontinued on December 31, 2007. Therefore, these 

discontinued monitors are not shown in Figure 3.1. 

Figure 3.1 

Cincinnati Basic Nonattainment Area 

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

μ Date: 5/17/2010

Map Projection: UTM Zone 16 N

Map Datum: NAD83

0 10 5 mi

0 10 5 km

University College

ID# 21-117-0007

W. 8th St.

ID# 39-061-0042

Nilles Rd. 

ID# 39-017-0016

Southeast St. 

ID# 39-165-0007

Murray Rd.

ID# 39-061-8001

Howard Taft

ID# 39-061-0040

Grooms Rd. 

ID# 39-061-0006

Sherman Ave.

ID# 39-061-7001

Bonita & St. John

ID# 39-017-0003

Seymour & Vine St. 

ID# 39-061-0014

John Hill Rd.

ID# 21-037-3002

Clermont Dr.

ID# 39-025-0022

Legend

! PM 2.5 Monitors

State Boundary

Attainment Area

Nonattainment Area

Butler

Hamilton

Warren

Kenton

Lawrenceburg

Township Clermont

Boone Campbell
7 

3.2 Ambient Fine Particles Monitoring Data

The following information summarizes U.S. EPA's "Guideline on Data Handling Conventions 

for the annual fine particles NAAQS," U.S. EPA-454/R-99-008, April 1999. Three complete 

years of fine particles monitoring data are required to demonstrate attainment at a monitoring 

site. The annual ambient air quality standard for fine particles is met at an ambient air quality 

monitoring site when the three-year average of the annual average of fine particle concentrations 

is less than or equal to 15.0 μg/m3. When this occurs, the site is said to be in attainment. While 

calculating design values, three significant digits must be carried in the computations, with final 

values rounded to the nearest 0.1 μg/m3. Decimals 0.05 or greater are rounded up, and those less 

than 0.05 are rounded down, so that 15.049 μg/m3 is the largest concentration that is less than or 

equal to 15.0 μg/m3

. Values at or below 15.0 μg/m3meet the standard. Values equal to or 

greater than 15.1 μg/m3 exceed the standard. 

Data handling procedures are applied on an individual basis at each monitor in the area. An 

individual site’s three-year average of the annual average fine particles concentration is also 

called the site’s design value. An area is in compliance with the annual NAAQS for fine 

particles only if all monitoring sites meet the NAAQS. The air quality design value for the area 

is the highest design value among all sites in the area. Table 3.1 shows the annual fine particle 

values by site and the 2007 through 2009 design values for the 12 active fine particle monitoring 

sites in the Cincinnati area. 

Table 3.1 

Monitoring Data for the Cincinnati Area (Annual Average and 2007-2009 Design Values) 

SITE ID STATE COUNTY SITE NAME YEAR 

Annual 

Average 

(μg/m3) 

2007-2009 

Average 

(μg/m3) 

21-037-3002 Kentucky Campbell John Hill Rd. 2007 14.36 

12.51 

21-037-3002 Kentucky Campbell John Hill Rd. 2008 11.83 

21-037-3002 Kentucky Campbell John Hill Rd. 2009 11.34 

21-117-0007 Kentucky Kenton Univ. College 2007 14.20 

12.41 

21-117-0007 Kentucky Kenton Univ. College 2008 11.99 

21-117-0007 Kentucky Kenton Univ. College 2009 11.04 

39-017-0003 Ohio Butler Bonita & St. John 2007 15.41 

13.93 

39-017-0003 Ohio Butler Bonita & St. John 2008 13.69 

39-017-0003 Ohio Butler Bonita & St. John 2009 12.68 

39-017-0016 Ohio Butler Niles Rd. 2007 14.94 

13.92 

39-017-0016 Ohio Butler Niles Rd. 2008 13.75 

39-017-0016 Ohio Butler Niles Rd. 2009 13.08 

39-017-1004 Ohio Butler Hook Fld. Airport 2007 14.63 

N/A 

39-017-1004 Ohio Butler Hook Fld. Airport 2008 

39-017-1004 Ohio Butler Hook Fld. Airport 2009 

39-025-0022 Ohio Clermont Clermont Dr. 2007 14.01 

12.26 

39-025-0022 Ohio Clermont Clermont Dr. 2008 11.75 

39-025-0022 Ohio Clermont Clermont Dr. 2009 11.01 
8 

39-061-0006 Ohio Hamilton Grooms Rd. 2007 14.63 

13.07 

39-061-0006 Ohio Hamilton Grooms Rd. 2008 12.48 

39-061-0006 Ohio Hamilton Grooms Rd. 2009 12.11 

39-061-0014 Ohio Hamilton Seymour & Vine St. 2007 16.59 

15.04 

39-061-0014 Ohio Hamilton Seymour & Vine St. 2008 15.12 

39-061-0014 Ohio Hamilton Seymour & Vine St. 2009 13.40 

39-061-0040 Ohio Hamilton Howard Taft 2007 15.09 

13.48 

39-061-0040 Ohio Hamilton Howard Taft 2008 12.62 

39-061-0040 Ohio Hamilton Howard Taft 2009 12.73 

39-061-0042 Ohio Hamilton W. 8th St. 2007 15.90 

14.67 

39-061-0042 Ohio Hamilton W. 8th St. 2008 14.40 

39-061-0042 Ohio Hamilton W. 8th St. 2009 13.71 

39-061-0043 Ohio Hamilton Kemper Rd. 2007 14.85 

N/A 

39-061-0043 Ohio Hamilton Kemper Rd. 2008 13.32 

39-061-0043 Ohio Hamilton Kemper Rd. 2009 

39-061-7001 Ohio Hamilton Sherman Ave. 2007 15.09 

13.93 

39-061-7001 Ohio Hamilton Sherman Ave. 2008 13.74 

39-061-7001 Ohio Hamilton Sherman Ave. 2009 12.97 

39-061-8001 Ohio Hamilton Murray Rd. 2007 16.07 

14.64 

39-061-8001 Ohio Hamilton Murray Rd. 2008 14.40 

39-061-8001 Ohio Hamilton Murray Rd. 2009 13.44 

39-165-0007 Ohio Warren Southeast St. 2007 13.98 

12.53 

39-165-0007 Ohio Warren Southeast St. 2008 11.92 

39-165-0007 Ohio Warren Southeast St. 2009 11.70 

Value Above the Annual PM2.5 Standard 

Graph 3.1 visually demonstrates the 2003 through 2009 design values for the Cincinnati area. 

 
9 

Graph 3.1

Design Values for the Cincinnati Area for Fine Particles, 2003 through 2009 

Note: The AlexandriaPark monitor in Kentucky was discontinued on December 31, 2006. The Wilwood and Winneste Ave. 

monitors in Ohio were discontinued on December 31, 2005. The Hook Field Airport monitor in Ohio was discontinued on 

December 31, 2007. 

Graph 3.2 

Cincinnati Area Annual Fine Particles Trends, 2005 through 2009 

Note: The Alexandria Park monitor in Kentucky was discontinued on December 31, 2006. The Wilwood and Winneste Ave. 

monitors in Ohio were discontinued on December 31, 2005. The Hook Field Airport monitor in Ohio was discontinued on 

December 31, 2007. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Alexandria Pk. John Hill Rd. Univ. College

Bonita & St. John Nilles Rd. Wilwood

Hook Field Airport Clermont Dr. Grooms Rd.

Seymour & Vine St. Howard Taft Winneste Ave.

W. 8th St Kemper Rd. Sherman Ave.

μg/m3 0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

Alexandria Pk.

John Hill Rd.

Univ. College

Bonita

& St.

...

Nilles Rd.

Wilwood

Hook Field

...

Clermont Dr.

Grooms Rd.

Seymour

&

...

Howard Taft

Winneste Ave.

W. 8th St

Kemper Rd.

Sherman Ave.

Murray Rd.

Southeast St.

03‐05 04‐06 05‐07 06‐08 07‐09

μg/m3
10 

The design values for the Cincinnati area demonstrate that the annual NAAQS for fine particles 

has been attained. Refer to Appendix A for the complete fine particles monitoring data summary 

for the years 2000 to 2009. 

Graph 3.1 shows the trend in design values, while Graph 3.2 shows the trend for annual fine 

particles. A comprehensive list of the fine particles monitoring sites’ design values over this 

period is outlined in Appendix A. The area's design values have recently trended downward, as 

emissions have declined due to programs such as the Acid Rain program and cleaner 

automobiles and fuels both regionally and locally. U.S. EPA’s rule to control nitrogen oxides 

from specific source categories (40 CFR Parts 51, 72, 75 and 96, published on October 17, 1998 

and referred to as the “NOx SIP Call”) has significantly reduced emissions from large electric 

generating units (EGUs), industrial boilers, and cement kilns. Indiana's NOx SIP Call Rule was 

adopted into the Indiana Administrative Code on June 6, 2001 at 326 IAC 10-3 and 326 ICA 10-

4. The elevated fine particle values for 2005 are considered an abnormal occurrence. An 

analysis of meteorological conditions and monitoring values is included in Section 7.0 and 

supports the conclusion that attainment of the standard as of 2009 is not the result of unusually 

favorable meteorological conditions. It is expected that this downward trend will continue as the 

above programs continue and the U.S. EPA’s proposed Transport Rule is implemented. 

3.3 Quality Assurance

Kentucky and Ohio have quality assured all data shown in Appendix A in accordance with 40 

CFR 58.10 and recorded the data in the AQS database and, thus, the data is available to the 

public. 

3.4 Continued Monitoring

Ohio and Kentucky commit to continue monitoring concentrations of fine particles at the active 

sites indicated in Table 3.1 and Appendix A. There are no monitors in the Indiana portion of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area, however, IDEM will consult with U.S. 

EPA Region V staff should changes to the existing Indiana monitoring network become 

necessary in the future. 

4.0 EMISSION INVENTORY 

U.S. EPA Redesignation Guidance and Implementation Rules require the submittal of a 

comprehensive inventory of precursor emissions for fine particles (NOx, SO2, and direct PM2.5) 

representative of the year when the area achieved attainment of the annual NAAQS for fine 

particles (base year). IDEM is using 2008 as the base year. IDEM must also demonstrate that 

the improvement in air quality between the year that violations occurred and the year that 

attainment was achieved is based on permanent and enforceable emission reductions. Other 

requirements related to the emissions inventory include: a projection of the emission inventory to 

a year at least ten years following redesignation; a demonstration that the projected level of 

emissions is sufficient to maintain the annual standard for fine particles; and, a commitment to 

provide future updates of the inventory to enable tracking of emission levels during the ten year 
11 

maintenance period. Consistent with the implementation rule for fine particles, IDEM and U.S. 

EPA do not consider volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or ammonia (NH3) to be significant 

contributors to fine particles. The following subsections address each of these requirements. 

4.1 Emission Trends

Point Sources

Graphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 show that the trend in point source emissions of NOx, SO2, and direct 

PM2.5 respectively for Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana, generally correspond 

to the years of monitored values used in this redesignation petition. The point source data are 

taken from Indiana's emissions reporting program. While an increase in direct PM2.5 point 

source emissions for Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, Indiana is noted, the increase 

in direct PM2.5 emissions from 2005 to 2008 is due to previously unreported emissions from 

companies that did not submit their direct PM2.5 emissions data in 2005, but did submit direct 

PM2.5 data in the 2008 emissions inventory. Graphs 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 show the trend in point 

source emissions for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area. The entire 

Cincinnati area had a 14.6% reduction in NOx point source emissions, a 52.1% reduction in SO2 

point source emissions, and a 9.5% reduction in direct PM2.5 point source emissions. Point 

source data for the entire Cincinnati area is the combination of data from Indiana, Kentucky, and 

Ohio’s annual emissions reporting program. Graphs and data tables of emissions for the point 

source category can be found in Appendix B. 

Graph 4.1 

Dearborn County, IN NOx Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008

9,100

9,200

9,300

9,400

9,500

9,600

9,700

9,800

9,900

10,000

10,100

2005 2008

Tons per Year

NOX Year
12 

Graph 4.2 

Dearborn County, IN SO2 Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 

Graph 4.3 

Dearborn County, IN Direct PM2.5 Point Source Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008

‐

2,500

5,000

7,500

10,000

12,500

15,000

17,500

20,000

22,500

25,000

27,500

30,000

32,500

35,000

37,500

40,000

42,500

45,000

47,500

50,000

52,500

2005 2008

Tons per Year

SO2 Year

660

680

700

720

740

760

780

800

820

840

860

880

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Direct PM 2.5 Year
13 

Graph 4.4 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area NOx Point Source Emission 

Trends, 2005 and 2008 

Graph 4.5 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area SO2 Point Source Emission 

Trends, 2005 and 2008 

50,000

52,000

54,000

56,000

58,000

60,000

62,000

64,000

66,000

68,000

2005 2008

Tons per Year

NOX Year

50,000

70,000

90,000

110,000

130,000

150,000

170,000

190,000

210,000

230,000

250,000

2005 2008

Tons per Year

SO2 Year
14 

Graph 4.6 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area Direct PM2.5 Point Source 

Emission Trends, 2005 and 2008 

All Anthropogenic Sources

Periodic inventories, which include emissions from all sectors (mobile, area, nonroad, and point 

source), were prepared for 2005 and 2008. The 2008 data was extrapolated from the 2005 

emission inventory. Graphs 4.7, 4.8, and 4.9 show the trends for total NOx, SO2, and direct 

PM2.5 emissions for all anthropogenic source categories in Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn 

County, Indiana for 2005 and 2008. While an increase in direct PM2.5 anthropogenic source 

emissions for Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, Indiana is noted, the increase in 

direct PM2.5 emissions from 2005 to 2008 is due to previously unreported emissions from 

companies that did not submit their direct PM2.5 emissions data in 2005, but did submit direct 

PM2.5 data in the 2008 emissions inventory. Graphs 4.10, 4.11, and 4.12 show the trends for 

total NOx, SO2, and direct PM2.5 emissions for all anthropogenic source categories for the entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area for 2005 and 2008. These emissions trends 

roughly follow the years of monitored trends discussed in Section 3.0. There is a downward 

trend in NOx and SO2 emissions from 2005 to 2008. The decrease in NOx can be largely 

attributed to the impact of the NOx SIP Call. As can be seen by Graph 4.12, overall the direct 

PM2.5 anthropogenic source emissions for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

nonattainment area have substantially decreased. Graphs and data tables of emissions from each 

source category are available in Appendix C. 

2,900

3,000

3,100

3,200

3,300

3,400

3,500

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Direct PM 2.5 Year
15 

Mobile emissions inventories and projections for all counties were prepared by the OhioKentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) and is explained in further detail in 

Section 5.0. All 2005 data for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area is 

from the 2005 periodic inventory which has been identified as one of the preferred databases for 

SIP development. For the 2008 attainment year, emissions were extrapolated from the 2005 

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) modeling inventory, using LADCO’s 

growth factors, for all sections except point sources (electrical generating units and non-electrical 

generating units). Point source emissions for 2008 were compiled from Indiana, Kentucky, and 

Ohio’s annual emissions inventory databases. 

The emissions inventory development and emissions projection discussion below, with the 

exception of the mobile emissions inventory and projections, identify procedures used by Ohio 

EPA and LADCO regarding emissions from Ohio’s portion of the counties in the CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area that differ from procedures used by Kentucky and 

Indiana. Indiana and Kentucky emissions data were obtained through the LADCO emission 

inventory and projections which were prepared using similar methodologies. 

For Ohio, the 2005 and 2008 actual PM2.5 emissions data below generally contains filterable 

fraction emissions only and not the condensable fractions, because Ohio EPA did not have a 

consistent reporting requirement in those years. U.S. EPA Integrated Planning Model(IPM) 

modeling was used to generate future year EGU emissions with the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR) program. The IPM modeling added additional PM2.5 condensible emissions into future 

years. Therefore, comparing base and attainment year emissions with the future year predictions 

is not accurate in the IPM CAIR modeling. This step leads to a false perception of significant 

PM2.5 emissions increase. Modeling performed by LADCO, without CAIR, did not incorporate 

added condensable fraction emissions. Although Ohio EPA has stated that it is most appropriate 

to evaluate future year emissions that include the CAIR program, because of this flaw, it is more 

accurate and appropriate for the purposes of PM2.5 to evaluate future year emissions without the 

CAIR program. Therefore all numbers for Ohio for PM2.5 in this document are without CAIR, 

while all numbers for Ohio for NOx and SO2 are with CAIR. Both Indiana and Kentucky have 

used numbers for NOx, SO2, and PM2.5 with CAIR. Emissions tables and charts in this document 

are labeled accordingly and can also be found in Appendix C. 
16 

Graph 4.7 

NOx Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR 

Graph 4.8 

SO2 Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR

10,200

10,400

10,600

10,800

11,000

11,200

11,400

11,600

2005 2008

Tons per Year

NOX Year

‐

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Year SO2
17 

Graph 4.9 

Direct PM2.5 Emission Trends, All Sources in Dearborn County, IN, 

2005 and 2008-With CAIR 

Graph 4.10 

NOx Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR 

740

760

780

800

820

840

860

880

900

920

940

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Year Direct PM 2.5

135,000

140,000

145,000

150,000

155,000

160,000

165,000

170,000

2005 2008

Tons per Year

NOX Year
18 

Graph 4.11 

SO2 Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-With CAIR

Graph 4.12 

Direct PM2.5 Emission Trends, All Sources in Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

Nonattainment Area, 2005 and 2008-Without CAIR 

‐

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Year SO2

8,200

8,400

8,600

8,800

9,000

9,200

9,400

9,600

2005 2008

Tons per Year

Direct PM Year 2.5
19 

EGU Sources

Both NOx and SO2 emissions are decreasing substantially in response to national programs 

affecting all EGUs such as the Acid Rain program and the NOx SIP Call. Other sectors of the 

inventory also impact the formation of fine particles, but large regional sources such as EGUs 

have a substantial impact on the formation of fine particles. 

The data was taken from U.S. EPA's Clean Air Markets database1

. Data are available sooner for 

these units than other point sources in the inventory because of the NOx SIP Call budget and 

trading requirements. Information from 2003 is significant because some EGUs started 

operation of their NOx SIP Call controls in order to generate Early Reduction Credits for their 

future year NOx budgets. The first season of the NOx SIP Call budget period began May 31, 

2004. 

As part of the NOx SIP Call, the states were required to adopt into their rules a budget for all 

large EGUs. Indiana’s budget is referenced in 326 IAC 10-4. The budget represents a statewide 

cap on NOx emissions. Although each unit is allocated emissions based upon historic heat input, 

utilities can meet this budget by over-controlling certain units or purchasing credits from the 

market to account for overages at other units. To summarize, NOx emissions have dramatically 

decreased over the years represented on these graphs. 

These emissions, capped by the state rule, are expected to remain near these levels throughout 

the maintenance period covered by this request. The state cap for the NOx SIP Call remained in 

place through 2008, at which time the CAIR program superseded it. CAIR, issued in March 

2005, adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board on November 1, 2006, and 

implemented beginning in 2010, will continue to reduce regional EGU NOx emissions statewide 

by approximately another 17% by 2015 and 57% for EGU SO2 emissions by 2015. The D.C. 

Circuit court’s vacatur of CAIR in July of 2008 and subsequent remand without vacatur in 

December of 2008 directs U.S. EPA to revise the CAIR rule in the future. The proposed Clean 

Air Transport Rule (Transport Rule) (CAIR’s replacement rule) will result in similar or greater 

emission reductions than assumed within the current emission inventories once it is 

implemented. 

There is one EGU located in the Indiana portion (Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, 

Indiana) of the Cincinnati area: American Electric Power (AEP)- Tanner’s Creek. Graphs 4.13 

and 4.15 depict the trends in NOx and SO2 emissions from the EGU in Lawrenceburg Township, 

Dearborn County, Indiana for the years 1999 to 2009. AEP-Tanner’s Creek entered into a 

Consent Decree with U.S. EPA on October 9, 2007. For NOx, the Consent Decree calls for lowNOx burners and overfire air. Further, they installed Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction 

(SNCRs) on Units 1, 2, and 3 in 2008 to meet CAIR requirements. As a general rule, low NOx

burners are around 40% control and SNCRs are an additional 30%. AEP-Tanner’s Creek’s 

permit does not require operation of these units, but they need to operate the controls to meet 

CAIR allowances for now, and the proposed Transport Rule will control when it is effective. For 

SO2, the Consent Decree and the permit state AEP-Tanner’s Creek has to burn coal not 

exceeding 1.2% sulfur. With the Consent Decree in place these controls are, therefore, 

 

1

 http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets 
20 

considered permanent and enforceable and can be associated with the downward trend in NOx 

and SO2 emissions from AEP-Tanner’s Creek. Graphs 4.14 and 4.16 depict the trends in NOx

and SO2 emissions from the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area for the 

years 1999 to 2009. Graphs and data tables of emissions from the EGU source category can be 

found in Appendix D. 

Graph 4.13 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana NOx Emissions from EGUs, 1999 to 

2009 

0.0

5,000.0

10,000.0

15,000.0

20,000.0

25,000.0

30,000.0

35,000.0

40,000.0

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total NOx Emissions, tons / year
21 

Graph 4.14 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area NOx Emissions from EGUs, 

1999 to 2009 

Graph 4.15 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana SO2 Emissions from EGUs, 1999 to 2009 

0.0

20,000.0

40,000.0

60,000.0

80,000.0

100,000.0

120,000.0

140,000.0

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total NOx Emissions, tons / year

0.0

10,000.0

20,000.0

30,000.0

40,000.0

50,000.0

60,000.0

70,000.0

80,000.0

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total SO2 Emissions, tons / year
22 

Graph 4.16 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area SO2 Emissions from EGUs, 1999 

to 2009 

4.2 Base Year Inventory

IDEM prepared a comprehensive inventory for the Cincinnati area, including area, mobile, 

nonroad, and point sources for direct PM2.5 and precursors of fine particles (NOx and SO2) for 

2005 (the year with the most complete emissions inventory available at this time). The 2008 

data was extrapolated from the 2005 emission inventory to represent a base year for maintenance 

purposes. The 2007 implementation rule for the annual fine particles standard states that NOx, 

SO2, and direct PM2.5 are the regulated precursors of fine particles. Ammonia and VOCs are not 

required to be addressed unless the state or U.S. EPA makes a technical demonstration that 

emissions of these pollutants from sources in the state significantly contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in a given nonattainment area. U.S. EPA and Indiana have not determined 

ammonia or VOCs to be significant contributors to fine particles formation in the State of 

Indiana. Indiana’s 2008 base year inventory was determined by the following: 

 Area sources were extrapolated from the Indiana 2005 periodic inventory submitted to 

U.S. EPA. 

 Mobile source emissions were calculated from U.S. EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Simulator (MOVES) model-produced emission factors and data extracted from the 

region’s travel-demand model. These emissions were then interpolated as needed to 

determine 2008 base year values. 

0.0

50,000.0

100,000.0

150,000.0

200,000.0

250,000.0

300,000.0

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total SO2 Emissions, tons / year
23 

 Point source information was compiled from IDEM’s emissions statement database and 

U.S. EPA's Clean Air Markets acid rain database. 

 Biogenic emissions are not included in these summaries. 

 Nonroad emissions were extrapolated from the 2002 National Emissions Inventory 

(NEI). To address concerns about the accuracy of some of the categories in U.S. EPA’s 

nonroad emissions model, LADCO contracted with two companies to review the base 

data and make recommendations. One of the contractors also estimated emissions for 

two nonroad categories not included in U.S. EPA's nonroad model. Emissions were 

estimated for commercial marine vessels and railroads. The recreational motorboat 

population and spatial surrogates (used to assign emissions to each) were significantly 

updated. The populations for the construction equipment category were reviewed and 

updated based upon surveys completed in the Midwest and the temporal allocation for 

agricultural sources was also updated. A new nonroad estimation model was provided by 

U.S. EPA for the 2002 analysis. 

● The emissions data referenced for Kentucky’s portion of the nonattainment area were 

pulled from LADCO’s emissions inventory files. This inventory was prepared using 

similar methodologies. The 2008 data was extrapolated from the 2005 emission 

inventory to represent a base year for maintenance purposes. 

4.3 Emission Projections

In consultation with the U.S. EPA and other stakeholders, IDEM selected the year 2021 as the 

maintenance year for this redesignation request. This document contains projected emission 

inventories for 2015 and 2021. Emission projections were prepared for Dearborn County, 

Indiana, as well as for the entire nonattainment area. IDEM, with assistance from LADCO, 

prepared emission projections for 2015 and 2021 for the entire nonattainment area. 

The detailed 2015 and 2021 emissions inventory for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 

nonattainment area can be found in Appendix E. Emission trends are an important gauge for 

continued compliance with the annual standard for fine particles. Therefore, IDEM performed 

an initial comparison of the inventories for the base year (2008-extrapolated from the 2005 

emission inventory), interim year (2015-interpolated from 2009 emissions and 2018 emissions 

estimates) and maintenance year (2021-extrapolated from 2018 emission estimates) for Dearborn 

County, Indiana and the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN nonattainment area. 

For the 2008 attainment year, emissions were extrapolated from the 2005 LADCO modeling 

inventory, using LADCO’s growth factors, for all sections except point sources (electrical 

generating units and non-electrical generating units). Point source emissions for 2008 were 

compiled from Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio’s annual emissions inventory databases. The 2015 

interim year emissions were estimated based on the 2009 and 2018 LADCO modeling inventory, 

using LADCO’s growth factors, for all sectors. The 2021 maintenance year is based on 

emissions estimates from the 2018 LADCO modeling. 
24 

Graphs 4.17, 4.18, 4.19, and 4.20 visually compare 2008 (base year) NOx, SO2, and direct PM2.5 

estimated emissions with the 2015 and 2021 projected emissions for Lawrenceburg Township, 

Dearborn County, Indiana. Graphs 4.21, 4.22, 4.23, and 4.24 visually compare the 2008 (base 

year) NOx, SO2 and direct PM2.5 estimated emissions with the 2015 and 2021 projected emissions 

for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area. AEP-Tanner’s Creek 

accounts for over 80% of Lawrenceburg Township’s total emissions. However, Lawrenceburg 

Township accounts for a minor portion (14%) of the total nonattainment area emissions. While 

an increase can be seen in the projected emissions for Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn 

County, Indiana for NOx, SO2 and direct PM2.5, overall emissions in the entire CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area are decreasing substantially as can be seen in Graphs 

4.21, 4.22, 4.23 and 4.24. Mobile source emission inventories are further described in Section 

5.0. In addition to LADCO’s estimates, point source emissions were projected based upon the 

statewide EGU NOx budgets from the Indiana NOx rule. It should be noted that EGU emission 

estimates for 2015 and 2021 were projected utilizing the Department of Energy Information’s 

Annual Energy Outlook Supplemental tables for the year 2018. These tables were generated for 

the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 (AEO 2007) using the National Energy 

Modeling System. Future year actual emissions for Lawrenceburg Township may vary based 

upon the consent decree for AEP which includes Tanner’s Creek. Additionally, the SO2 and 

NOx allocations for AEP-Tanner’s Creek for 2014 and beyond within the proposed Transport 

Rule are less than 2008 actual emissions. Graphs and data tables of emissions from the EGU 

source category can be found in Appendix D. 

Graph 4.17 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected NOx Emissions, Lawrenceburg Township, 

Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR 

 Refer to Section 4.3 above for explanation of projected increase in emissions. 

‐

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

Year NOX
25 

Graph 4.18 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2 Emissions, Lawrenceburg Township, 

Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR 

 Refer to Section 4.3 above for explanation of projected increase in emissions. 

Graph 4.19 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected Direct PM2.5 Emissions, Lawrenceburg 

Township, Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR 

 Refer to Section 4.3 above for explanation of projected increase in emissions. 

‐

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

SO2 Year

860

880

900

920

940

960

980

1,000

1,020

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

Direct PM 2.5 Year
26 

Graph 4.20 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2, NOx and Direct PM2.5 Emissions, 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana-With CAIR 

Graph 4.21 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected NOx Emissions for the Entire CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-With CAIR 

‐

5,000.00

10,000.00

15,000.00

20,000.00

25,000.00

30,000.00

35,000.00

40,000.00

45,000.00

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

NOX SO2 Direct PM2.5

‐

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

Year NOX
27 

Graph 4.22 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2 Emissions for the Entire CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-With CAIR 

Graph 4.23 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected Direct PM2.5 Emissions for the Entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-Without CAIR 

‐

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

Year SO2

7,900

8,000

8,100

8,200

8,300

8,400

8,500

8,600

8,700

8,800

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

Direct Year PM 2.5
28 

Graph 4.24 

Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2021 Projected SO2, NOx and Direct PM2.5 Emissions for the 

Entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area-(NOx and SO2 With CAIR, 

PM2.5 Without CAIR) 

NOx emissions within the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN nonattainment area are 

projected to decline by 46.9% between 2008 and 2021. Emission reduction benefits from U.S. 

EPA rules covering the NOx SIP Call, Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline 

Sulfur Control Requirements, Highway Heavy-Duty Engine Rule, and Nonroad Diesel Engine 

Rule are factored into the changes. Additionally, due to implementation of the NOx SIP Call 

across the eastern United States, NOx and fine particle levels entering the Cincinnati area will 

also be decreased. SO2 emissions within the Cincinnati area are projected to decline by 24.3% 

between 2008 and 2021. Direct PM2.5 emissions from 2008 to 2021 are also projected to decline 

by 5.6% within the Cincinnati area, see Tables 4.1 and 4.2. 

Table 4.1 

Comparison of 2008 Estimated and 2021 Projected Emission Estimates Lawrenceburg 

Township, Dearborn County, Indiana (Tons Per Year) 

2008 2021 Change % Change 

NOx 10,621.35 13,767.56 3,146.21 29.6% 

SO2 27,164.52 38,261.63 11,097.11 40.9% 

Direct PM2.5 920.29 1,011.29 91.00 9.9% 

‐

20,000.00

40,000.00

60,000.00

80,000.00

100,000.00

120,000.00

140,000.00

160,000.00

2008 2015 2021

Tons per Year

NOX SO2 Direct PM2.5
29 

Table 4.2 

Comparison of 2008 Estimated and 2021 Projected Emission Estimates Entire CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area (Tons Per Year) 

2008 2021 Change % Change 

NOx 148,706.15 78,819.18 -69,886.97 -46.9% 

SO2 116,966.42 88,540.12 -28,426.30 -24.3% 

Direct PM2.5 8,687.22 8,202.63 -484.59 -5.6% 

4.4 Demonstration of Maintenance

Quality assured ambient air quality data from all the monitoring sites indicate that air quality in 

the Cincinnati area met the annual NAAQS for fine particles for the three-year period ending in 

2009. Furthermore, quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data from all monitoring sites 

within the Cincinnati area indicate that air quality met the NAAQS for fine particles for the 

three-year period ending in 2009. U.S. EPA’s Redesignation Guidance (Page 9) states, “A state 

may generally demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by either showing that future emissions 

of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory, or by 

modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emissions rates will not cause a violation of 

the NAAQS.” Emissions projections outlined in Section 4.0 of this document clearly illustrate 

that regional NOx and SO2 emissions in the area will continue to decline leading to local 

reductions between 2008 and 2021 (maintenance plan horizon). Section 7.0 further discusses the 

implications of these emission trends and provides an analysis to support these conclusions. 

In Indiana, major point sources in all counties are required to submit air emissions information 

once every three years, or annually, if the NOx or SO2 potential to emit is greater than 2,500 tons 

per year in accordance with the Emission Reporting Rule, 326 IAC 2-6. IDEM prepares a new 

periodic inventory for all precursor emission sectors every three years. These precursor emission 

inventories will be prepared for 2011, 2014, and 2017, as necessary, to comply with the 

inventory reporting requirements established in the CAA. Emissions information will be 

compared to the 2008 base year and the 2021 projected maintenance year inventories to assess 

emission trends, as necessary, to assure continued compliance with the annual standard for fine 

particles.

4.5 Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions

Permanent and enforceable reductions of NOx and SO2 have contributed to the attainment of the 

annual standard for fine particles. Some of these reductions were due to the implementation of 

the NOx SIP Call and some were due to the application of tighter federal standards on motor 

vehicles and fuels. 

Section 6.0 identifies the emission control measures specific to Dearborn County, Indiana, as 

well as the implementation status of each measure. 
30 

4.6 Provisions for Future Updates 

 

As required by Section 175A(b) of the CAA, Indiana commits to submit to the Administrator, 

eight years after redesignation, an additional revision of this SIP. The revision will contain 

Indiana's plan for maintaining the national primary fine particles air quality standard for ten years 

beyond the first ten-year period after redesignation. 

5.0 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSION BUDGETS

U.S. EPA requirements outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) stipulate that mobile source emissions 

budgets for PM2.5 and NOx be established as part of a SIP. The mobile source emissions budgets 

are necessary to demonstrate conformance of transportation plans and improvement programs 

with the SIP. 

The following is a summary of the detailed mobile input and output calculation files located in 

Appendix F. 

5.1 Onroad Emissions Estimates

The Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) is the Metropolitan 

Planning Organization (MPO) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN area which includes: 

Dearborn County in Indiana; Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren counties in Ohio; and, 

Boone, Campbell, and Kenton counties in Kentucky. This organization maintains a travel 

demand forecasting model that is used to simulate the traffic in the area and to predict what 

traffic would be in future years given growth expectations. The model is used mostly to identify 

where travel capacity will be needed and to determine the infrastructure requirements necessary 

to meet that need. It is also used to support the calculation of mobile source emissions. The 

travel demand forecasting model is used to predict the total daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 

and the U.S. EPA software program referred to as MOVES is used to produce emission factors to 

calculate the emissions per mile. The product of these two outputs, once combined, is the total 

amount of pollution emitted by onroad vehicles for the particular analyzed area. 

5.2 Overview

Broadly described, MOVES is used to generate “emission factors,” which are the average 

emissions per mile (grams/mile) for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors, including NOx and SO2. 

There are numerous variables that can affect the emission factors. The vehicle-fleet (vehicles on 

the road) age and the vehicle types have a major affect on the emission factors. The facility-type 

the vehicles are traveling on (MOVES facility-types are Freeway, Arterial, Local, and Ramp) 

and the vehicle speeds also affect the emission factor values. Meteorological factors such as air 

temperature and humidity affect the emission factors, as does fuel type, such as low Reid Vapor 

Pressure (RVP) gasoline. These data are estimated using the best available data to generate 

emission factors for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors, including NOx and SO2. After emission 

factors are generated, the emission factors must be multiplied by the VMT to determine the 

quantity of vehicle-related emissions. This information derives from the travel demand model 
31 

(TDM). 

It should be noted that each year analyzed will have different emission factors, volumes, speeds, 

and likely some additional links. MOVES input and output files can all be found in Appendix F. 

5.3 Emission Estimates

Table 5.1 outlines the onroad emission estimates for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the 

nonattainment area for the years 2005, 2008 (Attainment Year), 2015 (Interim Year), and 2021 

(Horizon Year). The following emission estimates are based on the actual TDM network runs for 

the years 2005, 2008, 2015, and 2021. 

Table 5.1 

Emission Estimates for Onroad Mobile Sources 

for the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 

Cincinnati-Hamilton OHKY-IN NA Area 2005 2008 2015 2021 

PM2.5 (tons/year) 2,272.50 2,034.23 1,598.67 1,128.35 

NOx (tons/year) 58,423.36 51,357.02 31,064.20 18,911.05 

Lawrenceburg Township 

(Dearborn County Indiana) 

subtotal 

 

PM2.5 (tons/year) 33.98 29.89 25.14 18.11 

NOx (tons/year) 865.46 748.81 482.33 297.95 

Lawrenceburg Township 

subtotal % 

PM2.5 (tons/year) 1.50 1.47 1.57 1.61 

NOx (tons/year) 1.48 1.46 1.55 1.58 

Table 5.2 contains the 2015 and 2021 regional mobile source emissions budgets for the Ohio and 

Indiana portions of the nonattainment area. 

Table 5.2 

Mobile Source Emission Budgets for the Ohio and Indiana Portions 

of the Cincinnati PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 

2015 2021 

PM2.5 (tons/year) 1,678.60 1,241.19 

NOx (tons/year) 35,723.83 21,747.71 
32 

Consistent with the federal implementation rule for fine particles, IDEM does not consider 

mobile SO2 to be a significant contributor to fine particles for this nonattainment area, as SO2 

constitutes less than one percent (<1%) of the area’s total anthropogenic emissions for the years 

2005, 2008, 2015, or 2021. 

This document creates an interim year budget for 2015 and a horizon year budget for 2021 for 

the Ohio and Indiana portions of the nonattainment area. These budgets are based on the 2008 

onroad emission inventory used to support photochemical modeling for the same year, and has 

incorporated an appropriate safety margin as described below. A similar document was created 

for the Kentucky portion of the nonattainment area. 

Initial Base M (2005) Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extension (CAMx) modeling 

results indicated a worst case future design value in the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN 

nonattainment area of 84 ppb. In an effort to accommodate future variations in TDMs and 

vehicle miles traveled forecast when no change to the network is planned, IDEM consulted with 

the interagency consultation group, including U.S. EPA – Region 5, to determine a reasonable 

approach to address this variation. The interagency consultation group approved a five percent 

(5%) safety margin for PM2.5 mobile source emissions estimates for the year 2015, a ten percent 

(10%) safety margin for PM2.5 mobile source emissions estimates for the year 2021, and a fifteen 

percent (15%) safety margin for NOx mobile source emissions estimates for the years 2015 and 

2021. 

Safety margins are appropriate because: 1) there is an acknowledged potential variation in VMT 

forecast and potential estimated mobile source emissions due to expected modifications to TDM 

and mobile emissions models; and 2) the total decrease in emissions from all sources is sufficient 

to accommodate the safety margin allocations detailed above to mobile sources while still 

continuing to maintain total emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN area well below 

the 2008 attainment level of emissions. These safety margins were calculated by adding a 

straight-line percentage to the mobile source emission estimates for the years 2015 and 2021. 

Safety margin, as defined by the conformity rule, looks at the total emissions from all sources in 

the nonattainment area. The resulting 2015 and 2021 budgets for PM2.5 and NOx emissions 

remain well below the 2005 base year emissions referenced in Table 5.1. 

In summary, for all three states combined, the mobile budget safety margin allocation translates 

into: 

 An allocation of 98.49 tons/year for PM2.5 and 5,709.06 tons/year for NOx for 2015. 

 An allocation of 140.38 tons/year for PM2.5 and 3,799.82 tons/year for NOx for 2021. 

The federal rule at 40 CFR 93.101 defines safety margin as the amount by which the total 

projected emissions from all sources of a given pollutant are less than the total emissions that 

would satisfy the applicable requirement for reasonable further progress, attainment, or 

maintenance. When compared to the overall safety margin as defined by 40 CFR 93.101, it is 

evident this allocation to mobile sources is significantly below the total safety margin for all 

sources in the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN area as detailed in Table 4.2. 
33 

While IDEM believes that this is sufficient to support the requested increase, IDEM and its 

partners will be conducting additional air quality modeling which will include the adjusted onroad mobile emissions as well as any additional corrections and modifications that may be 

necessary due to the constant review and evaluation of the model inputs. 

All methodologies, latest planning assumptions, and margins of safety were determined 

appropriate through the interagency consultation process. 

6.0 CONTROL MEASURES AND REGULATIONS

This section provides specific information on the control measures that have been or will be 

implemented in Dearborn County, Indiana, including CAA requirements and additional state or 

local measures implemented beyond CAA requirements. 

6.1 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)

 As required by Section 172 of the CAA, Indiana in the mid-1990s promulgated rules requiring 

RACT for emissions of VOCs. There were no specific rules required by the CAA, such as 

RACT for existing sources, beyond statewide rules. Statewide RACT rules have applied to all 

new sources locating in Indiana since that time. The Indiana rules are found in 326 IAC 8. The 

following is a listing of applicable rules: 

 326 IAC 8-1-6 BACT for Non-Specific Sources 

326 IAC 8-2 Surface Coating Emission Limitations 

326 IAC 8-3 Solvent Degreasing Operations 

326 IAC 8-4 Petroleum Sources 

326 IAC 8-5 Miscellaneous Operation 

326 IAC 8-6 Organic Solvent Emission Limitations 

Since Dearborn County, Indiana, attained the annual NAAQS for fine particles prior to an 

Attainment SIP or RACT SIP being due, and since the Implementation Rule for fine particles 

stipulates that states are only required to draft and implement RACT rules for the precursor 

emission reductions necessary to attain the standard, no further RACT rules are required for this 

area. These Indiana rules are CAA requirements already in the SIP and provide secondary 

benefits for PM2.5. 

6.2 Implementation of Past SIP Revisions

The Cincinnati area was only recently designated nonattainment for the annual standard for fine 

particles and the area has attained the standard well in advance of its attainment deadline of 

2010. As a result, Indiana is no longer required to develop and submit an Attainment SIP or 

RACT SIP for this area under the annual NAAQS for fine particles. 
34 

6.3 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Rule

The U.S. EPA NOx SIP Call required twenty-two states to adopt rules that would result in 

significant emission reductions from large EGUs, industrial boilers, and cement kilns in the 

eastern United States. Indiana adopted this rule in 2001. Beginning in 2004, this rule accounted 

for a reduction of approximately thirty-one percent (31%) of all NOx emissions statewide 

compared to previous uncontrolled years. 

Twenty-one other states have also adopted these rules. The result is that significant reductions 

have occurred regionally and within the nonattainment area because of the number of affected 

units within the region. From Graphs 4.13 and 4.14, it can be seen that emissions covered by this 

program have been trending downward since 1999. Table 6.1, compiled from data taken from 

the U.S. EPA Clean Air Markets Web site, quantifies the gradual NOx reductions that have 

occurred in Indiana as a result of Title IV (Acid Rain) of the CAA and the NOx SIP Call Rule. 

The NOx SIP Call cap stayed in place through 2008, at which time the caps in the CAIR 

program superseded it. Since CAIR is a regional cap and trade program, it cannot be predicted at 

this time what effect this will have on EGU units located in the nonattainment area or other 

upwind counties. 

Further, U.S. EPA published Phase II of the NOx SIP Call that establishes a budget for large 

(emissions of greater than 1 ton per day) stationary internal combustion engines. In Indiana, the 

rule decreases emissions statewide from natural gas compressor stations by 4,263 tons during the 

ozone season (May through September). The Indiana Phase II NOx SIP Call Rule became 

effective February 26, 2006 and implementation began in 2007. 

Table 6.1 

Trends in EGU NOx Emissions Statewide in Indiana 

Year NOx Emissions (tons /year) 

1999 347,216.5 

2000 334,522.1 

2001 315,419.7 

2002 281,146.1 

2003 260,980.0 

2004 224,311.3 

2005 207,981.6 

2006 202,728.0 

2007 196,553.1 

2008 196,134.5 

2009 110,968.9 

Budget 2009-2014 108,935 

Budget 2015 and later 90,779 

6.4 Measures Beyond CAA SIP Requirements

Reductions in fine particles precursor emissions have occurred, or are anticipated to occur, as a 

result of local and federal programs. These additional control measures include: 
35 

 Tier 2 Vehicles Standards2

Federal Tier 2 motor vehicle standards require all passenger vehicles in a manufacturer’s 

fleet, including light-duty trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs), to meet an average 

standard of 0.07 grams of NOx per mile. Implementation began in 2004 and was 

completed in 2007. The Tier 2 standards also cover passenger vehicles over 8,500 

pounds gross vehicle weight rating (larger pickup trucks and SUVs), which are not 

covered by the current Tier 1 standards. For these vehicles, the standards were phased in 

beginning in 2008, with full compliance in 2009. The new standards require vehicles to 

be 77% to 95% cleaner than those on the road prior to the program. The Tier 2 standards 

also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm) beginning in 

January 2006. Most gasoline sold in Indiana prior to January 2006 had a sulfur content 

of about 500 ppm. Sulfur occurs naturally in gasoline, but interferes with the operation 

of catalytic converters on vehicles resulting in higher NOx emissions. Lower sulfur 

gasoline is necessary to achieve the Tier 2 vehicle emissions standards. 

Heavy-Duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicle Standards3

New U.S. EPA standards designed to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from heavy-duty 

gasoline and diesel highway vehicles took effect in 2004. A second phase of standards 

and testing procedures that began in 2007, reduced PM2.5 emissions from heavy-duty 

highway engines and also reduced highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm since the 

sulfur can damage emissions control devices. The total program is expected to achieve a 

90% reduction in direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in NOx emissions for these 

new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using higher sulfur 

content diesel. There will also be SO2 reductions from these rules. The U.S. EPA has 

not quantified the expected reductions. 

 Large Nonroad Diesel Engine Standards4

In May 2004, U.S. EPA promulgated new rules for large nonroad diesel engines, such as 

those used in construction, agricultural and industrial equipment, to be phased in between 

2008 and 2014. The nonroad diesel rules also reduce the allowable sulfur in nonroad 

diesel fuel by over 99%. Nonroad diesel fuel currently averages approximately 3,400 

ppm sulfur. This rule limits nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm in 2006 and 15 

ppm in 2010. The combined engine and fuel rules will reduce NOx and PM2.5 emissions 

from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90%, compared to current nonroad engines 

using higher sulfur content diesel. 

Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standards

This standard, effective in July 2003, regulates NOx, VOCs, and carbon monoxide (CO) 

for groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. The standard applies to all new 

engines sold in the United States and imported after the standards went into effect. The 

standard applies to large spark-ignition engines (forklifts and airport ground service 

equipment), recreational vehicles (off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles), and 

recreational marine diesel engines. The regulation varies based upon the type of engine 

and vehicle. 

2

 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/2000/February/Day-10/a19a.htm 3

 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1997/October/Day-21/a27494.htm 4

 http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1998/October/Day-23/a24836.htm
36 

The large spark-ignition engines contribute to ozone formation and ambient CO and 

PM2.5 levels in urban areas. Tier 1 of this standard was implemented in 2004 and Tier 2 

started in 2007. Like the large spark-ignition engines, recreational vehicles contribute to 

ozone and fine particles formation and ambient CO and PM2.5 levels. For model year 

2006 off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles, at least 50% of a manufacture’s 

fleet was required to meet the new exhaust emissions standard and 100% of the fleet was 

required to meet the standards in 2007. Recreational marine diesel engines over 37 

kilowatts are used in yachts, cruisers and other types of pleasure craft. Recreational 

marine engines contribute to ozone formation and PM2.5 levels, especially surrounding 

marinas. 

When all of the nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational engine standards are 

fully implemented, an overall 72% reduction in VOCs, 80% reduction in NOx, and 56% 

reduction in CO emissions are expected by 2020. 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine Standards5 

This new standard, effective in May 2010, regulates air toxics emissions from existing 

diesel powered stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines that meet specific 

siting, age, and size criteria. These engines are typically used at industrial facilities (e.g. 

power, chemical, and manufacturing plants) to generate electricity for compressors and 

pumps and to produce electricity to pump water for flood and fire control during 

emergencies. 

The standard applies to stationary diesel engines: (1) used at area sources of air toxics 

emissions and constructed or reconstructed before June 12, 2006; (2) used at major 

sources of air toxics emissions, having a site rating of less than or equal to 500 

horsepower, and constructed or reconstructed before June 12, 2006; and, (3) used at 

major sources of air toxics for non-emergency purposes, having a site rating of greater 

than 500 horsepower, and constructed or reconstructed before December 19, 2002. 

Operators of existing engines will be required to: (1) install emissions control equipment 

that would limit air toxics up to 70% for stationary non-emergency engines with a site 

rating greater than 300 horsepower; (2) perform emissions tests to demonstrate engine 

performance and compliance with rule requirements; and, (3) burn ultra-low sulfur fuel in 

stationary non-emergency engines with a site rating greater than 300 horsepower. 

When all of the reciprocating internal combustion engine standards are fully implemented 

in 2013, U.S. EPA estimates that emissions from these engines will reduce air toxics by 

approximately 1,000 tons per year (tpy), PM2.5 by 2,800 tpy, carbon monoxide by 14,000 

tpy, and volatile organic compounds by 27,000 tpy. 

 

5

 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/fr03mr10.pdf
37 

Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine Standards6

This new standard, effective in June 2010, promulgates more stringent exhaust emission 

standards for new large marine diesel engines with per-cylinder displacement at or above 

30 liters (commonly referred to as Category 3 compression-ignition marine engines) as 

part of a coordinated strategy to address emissions from all ships that affect U.S. air 

quality. These emission standards are equivalent to those adopted in the amendments to 

Annex VI to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 

(MARPOL Annex VI). The emission standards apply in two stages—near-term 

standards for newly built engines will apply beginning in 2011; long-term standards 

requiring an eighty percent (80%) reduction in NOX emissions will begin in 2016. 

U.S. EPA is adopting changes to the diesel fuel program to allow for the production and 

sale of diesel fuel with up to 1,000 ppm sulfur for use in Category 3 marine vessels. The 

regulations generally forbid production and sale of fuels with more than 1,000 ppm sulfur 

for use in most U.S. waters, unless operators achieve equivalent emission reductions in 

other ways. U.S. EPA is also adopting provisions to apply some emission and fuel 

standards to foreign-flagged and in-use vessels that are covered by MARPOL Annex VI. 

When this strategy is fully implemented in 2030, U.S. EPA estimates that NOx and PM 

emissions in the U.S. will be reduced by approximately 1.2 million tpy and 143,000 tpy, 

respectively. 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)

On May 12, 2005, the U.S. EPA promulgated the “Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of 

Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain 

Program; Revisions to the NOx SIP Call”; Final Rule. (40 CFR Parts 51, 72, 75 and 96) 

This rule established the requirement for states to adopt rules limiting the emissions of 

NOx and SO2 and provided a model rule for the states to use in developing their rules to 

meet federal requirements. The purpose of CAIR is to reduce interstate transport of 

precursors to fine particles and ozone. 

CAIR applies to: (1) any stationary fossil-fuel-fired boiler or stationary fossil-fuel-fired 

combustion turbine, a generator with nameplate capacity of more than 25 megawatt 

electrical (MWe) producing electricity for sale; and, (2) a unit that qualifies as a 

cogeneration unit during the 12-month period starting on the date that the unit first 

produces electricity and continues to qualify as a cogeneration unit, a cogeneration unit 

serving at any time a generator with a nameplate capacity of more than 25 MWe and 

supplying in any calendar year more than one-third of the unit’s potential electric output 

capacity or 219,000 MWh (megawatt hours), whichever is greater to any utility power 

distribution system for sale. 

6

 http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480ae43a6
38 

This rule provides annual state caps for NOx and SO2 in two phases, with the Phase I caps 

for NOx and SO2 starting in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Phase II caps become effective 

in 2015. The U.S. EPA is allowing the caps to be met through a cap and trade program if 

a state chooses to participate in the program. 

In response to U.S. EPA’s rulemaking, IDEM adopted a state rule in 2006 based on the 

model federal rule. IDEM’s rule includes an annual and seasonal NOx trading program 

and an annual SO2 trading program. This rule requires compliance effective January 1, 

2009. 

On March 10, 2005, the U.S. EPA finalized CAIR. SO2 emissions from power plants in 

the 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia covered by CAIR will be cut by 4.3 

million tons by 2009 and reduced by an additional 5.4 million tons in 2015. NOx

emissions will be cut by 1.7 million tons by 2009 and reduced by an additional 1.3 

million tons in 2015. The D.C. Circuit court’s vacatur of CAIR in July of 2008 and 

subsequent remand without vacatur of CAIR in December of 2008 directs U.S. EPA to 

revise/replace CAIR in order to properly address the deficiencies outlined by the court. 

Since the court’s opinion made it clear that CAIR is deficient and must be 

revised/replaced, the program cannot be defined as permanent and enforceable for SIP 

purposes. On July 6, 2010, U.S. EPA proposed the Clean Air Transport Rule to replace 

CAIR. The Transport Rule will result in even further benefits above and beyond CAIR 

than what is assumed within the emission inventories and modeling. 

Together, these rules will substantially reduce local and regional sources of fine particle 

precursors. The modeling analyses discussed in Section 7.0 include these rules and show the 

reductions in annual fine particle concentrations expected to result from the implementation of 

these rules. 

6.5 Controls to Remain in Effect

Indiana commits to maintain the control measures listed above after redesignation, or submit to 

U.S. EPA, as a SIP revision, any changes to its rules or emission limits applicable to NOx, SO2,

or direct PM2.5 sources as required for maintenance of the annual standard for fine particles in 

Dearborn County, Indiana. 

Indiana, through IDEM’s Office of Air Quality and its Compliance and Enforcement Branch, has 

the legal authority and necessary resources to actively enforce any violations of its rules or 

permit provisions. After redesignation, it intends to continue enforcing all rules that relate to the 

emission of fine particles and fine particle precursors in Dearborn County, Indiana. 

6.6 New Source Review Provisions

Indiana has a long standing and fully implemented New Source Review (NSR) program that is 

outlined at 326 IAC 2. The rule includes provisions for the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) permitting program in 326 IAC 2-2. Indiana's PSD program was 
39 

conditionally approved on March 3, 2003 (68 FR 9892) and received final approval on May 20, 

2004 (69 FR 29071) by U.S. EPA as part of the SIP. 

Any facility that is not listed in the 2005 emission inventory, or for which credit through the 

shutdown or curtailment was taken in demonstrating attainment, will not be allowed to construct, 

reopen, modify, or reconstruct without meeting all applicable permit rule requirements. The 

review process will be identical to that used for new sources. Once the area is redesignated, 

OAQ will implement NSR through the PSD program, which requires an air quality analysis to 

evaluate whether the new source will threaten the NAAQS. 

7.0 MODELING AND METEOROLOGY 

Although U.S. EPA Redesignation Guidance does not require modeling for nonattainment areas 

seeking redesignation, extensive modeling has been performed covering the Cincinnati, Ohio 

region to determine the effect of national emission control strategies on fine particle levels. 

These modeling analyses determined that the Cincinnati area, including Dearborn County in 

southeastern Indiana is significantly impacted by regional transport of fine particles and its 

precursors, and that regional SO2 and NOx reductions are an effective way to attain the annual 

standard for fine particles in this area. Future year modeled annual fine particle concentrations 

are expected to be reduced by 0.6 to 1.3 μg/m3. Examples of these modeling analyses are 

described below. 

7.1 Summary of Modeling Results to Support Rulemakings

U.S. EPA Modeling for Transport Rule, 2010

U.S. EPA performed modeling to support the emission reductions associated with the Transport 

Rule. U.S. EPA used Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extension (CAMx, Version 5), 

applied to the 2005 meteorology, as processed by the Mesoscale Model (MM5), Version 3.7.4. 

Emissions input into CAMx included SO2, NOx, volatile organic compounds (VOC), ammonia, 

and direct PM2.5 for 2005. The modeling was based on the annual fine particles design values 

calculated from 2003 through 2005, 2004 through 2006, and 2005 through 2007. Future year 

modeling was conducted, which included the Cincinnati area, and the future year design values 

for 2012 and 2014 were evaluated for attainment of the annual NAAQS for fine particles of 15 

μg/m3

, as shown in Table 7.1. Fine particle concentrations are accounted for by modeling both 

the base future year emissions and then the emissions reductions associated with the Transport 

Rule. U.S. EPA found model performance met suggested benchmark performance goals within 

or close to the ranges found in other comparable modeling applications (Technical Support 

Document for the Transport Rule – Air Quality Modeling). 

7 http://www.epa.gov/airquality/transport/pdfs/TR_AQModeling_TSD.pdf 
40 

Table 7.1 

Transport Rule Modeling Results from U.S. EPA – 2010 

County Monitor ID 

Design Value 

 2003-2007 

Future Design 

Value 

2012 Base 

Future Design 

Value 

2014 Base 

 (μg/m3

) (μg/m3) (μg/m3) 

Butler County 39-017-0016 15.74 15.25 14.76 

Butler County 39-017-0017 15.36 14.93 14.48 

Butler County 39-017-1004 14.90 14.51 14.06 

Hamilton County 39-061-0006 14.84 14.36 13.88 

Hamilton County 39-061-0014 17.29 16.69 16.14 

Hamilton County 39-061-0040 15.50 15.03 14.51 

Hamilton County 39-061-0042 16.85 16.33 15.80 

Hamilton County 39-061-0043 15.55 15.05 14.56 

Hamilton County 39-061-7001 16.17 15.65 15.12 

Hamilton County 39-061-8001 17.54 16.93 16.38 

Campbell County 21-037-0003 13.67 13.30 12.81 

Kenton County 21-117-0007 14.36 13.98 13.50 

Modeling results show that the base future year modeling with emission reductions from the 

Transport Rule accounts for approximately 0.4 to 0.6 μg/m3 decreases in concentrations for 2012 

and approximately 0.8 to1.2 μg/m3

 decreases in concentrations for 2014 in the Cincinnati area. 

While results of U.S. EPA’s Transport Rule modeling show modeled concentrations above the 

standard using base case emissions at several PM2.5 monitoring sites in Hamilton County, Ohio, 

it should be noted that base year design value used by U.S. EPA was taken from 2003 through 

2007 and considered higher than current 2005 through 2009 design values in the area. Graph 7.1 

shows the downward trend of the design values from 1999 through 2009 for the PM2.5 monitors 

in the Cincinnati area. The resulting decreases of the 2003 through 2007 design values to the 

2005 through 2009 design value at the Murray Road PM2.5 monitor is 1.75 μg/m3, the decrease at 

the Seymour and Vine Street monitor is 1.27 μg/m3 and 1.39 μg/m3 at the West 8th Street 

monitor. The results decrease from all the area monitors ranged from 1.05 μg/m3

 to 1.75 μg/m3. 

Therefore, U.S. EPA’s Transport Rule modeling, using current 2005 through 2009 design values, 

would show lower modeled concentrations approaching the annual fine particle standard of 15.0 

μg/m3. 
41 

Graph 7.1 

PM2.5 Design Value Trends for Cincinnati Area: 1999 - 2009

Results of the U.S. EPA Transport Rule modeling show that the Cincinnati area will approach 

the annual fine particles NAAQS in 2012 with modeled impacts reduced by 3% to 4%. The 

2014 projected design values will decrease by 6% to 7% from the 2003 through 2007 design 

values. If using current design values, U.S. EPA’s CAIR modeling would show the Cincinnati 

area would approach the current annual fine particles standard. 

LADCO Modeling for CAIR

LADCO conducted modeling to determine the impact of CAIR in the Midwest. LADCO’s 

modeling used the CAMx model applied to the year 2005 meteorology, as processed by the 

MM5. Emissions input into CAMx included SO2, NOx, VOC, ammonia, and direct PM2.5 for 

2005. The modeling was based on 2003 through 2007 design values. Future year modeling for 

2009, 2012, and 2018 was conducted and the future year design values were determined without 

the emission reductions associated with CAIR (Round 6), as shown in Table 7.2. 
42 

Table 7.2 

LADCO’s Round 6 Modeling Results for the Cincinnati Area 

Monitor ID 

Monitor 

Name County 

Design Value 

2003-2007 

Base-case 

2012 

Base-case 

2018 

 (μg/m3) (μg/m3) (μg/m3) 

390170003 Bonita & St. John Butler 16.0 15.0 14.7 

390170016 Nilles Rd Butler 15.7 14.9 14.7 

390170017 3300 Wilwood Butler 16.1 15.1 14.9 

390171004 Hook Field Airport Butler 14.9 14.0 13.7 

390250022 400 Clermont Dr Clermont 14.7 13.8 13.6 

390610006 Grooms Rd Hamilton 15.4 14.5 14.3 

390610014 Seymour & Vine St Hamilton 17.3 16.3 16.1 

390610040 Howard Taft Hamilton 15.5 14.6 14.4 

390610041 5300 Winneste Ave Hamilton 15.4 14.7 14.5 

390610042 101 W. 8th St Hamilton 16.9 15.9 15.7 

390610043 254 Kemper Rd Hamilton 15.5 14.6 14.5 

390617001 Sherman Ave Hamilton 16.2 15.2 15.0 

390618001 Murray Rd Hamilton 17.5 16.5 16.3 

210370003 Alexandria Park Campbell 13.3 13.2 13.0 

211170007 University College Kenton 14.4 13.5 13.4 

Results of the LADCO Round 6 modeling show that all but five of the fifteen monitors in the 

Cincinnati area continue to attain the annual NAAQS for fine particles of 15 μg/m3 in 2012. 

Modeled concentrations at the five fine particle monitors, Murray Road, Seymour & Vine Street, 

Wilwood, Sherman Avenue and West 8th Street were above the fine particles standard. Table 7.2 

shows future year modeled annual fine particle results without CAIR emission reductions. 

Concentrations for 2009 will be 5% to 6% lower than baseline annual fine particles design 

values, 6% to 8% lower in 2018. A graphical representation of the modeling results is shown in 

Graph 7.2. Modeled results for the Cincinnati area would approach the current annual fine 

particle standard would be lower if the current 2005 through 2009 design values, as shown in 

Graph 7.1, were used. 
43 

Graph 7.2 

Modeling Results (without CAIR) for the Cincinnati Area PM2.5 Monitors 

7.2 LADCO’s Round 5 Particulate Source Apportionment Results

Particulate Source Apportionment (PSAT) modeling was conducted by LADCO. The results of 

the PSAT Round 5 modeling shows the regional contributions by emission sectors on each 

monitor that was modeled. Chart 7.1 shows the PSAT modeling results for the Murray Road fine 

particles monitor in Hamilton County in southwest Ohio. Ohio was the biggest regional 

contributor to the Murray Road fine particles monitor with Indiana, Kentucky, the Visibility 

Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS) Regional Planning 

Organization (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians), 

the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) Regional Planning Organization 

(Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana), the 

Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Regional Planning Organization (Arizona, 

California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming) and Pennsylvania 

also contributing. 

The sector emissions are described as EGU, non-EGU, NH3 – ammonium emission sources, 

offroad emission sources including marine, air travel and railroad emission sources, onroad 

mobile emission sources, area, and boundary conditions. 

The PSAT modeling results show the majority of Indiana’s emission sector contributions come 

from EGUs, ammonium, onroad, offroad (including marine, aircraft and railroad), non-EGU, and 

area sources. Other contributions resulted mainly from EGU, non-EGU, and ammonium 

emissions from other regional areas. 

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

2003-2007 D.V. 2009 2012 2018

Concentratins (ug/m3)

Future Year 

Bonita & St. John Nilles Rd 3300 Wilwood

Hook Field Airport 400 Clermont Dr Grooms Rd

Seymour & Vine St Howard Taft 5300 Winneste Ave

101 W. 8th St 254 Kemper Rd Sherman Ave

Murray Rd Alexandria Park University College
44 

Chart 7.1 

Regional/Emission Sector PSAT Results at Murray Road in Hamilton County 

The following pie charts depict the species contributions to fine particle concentrations at the 

Cincinnati area monitors. The pie charts include both the observed 2005 contributions and future 

year 2009 modeled contributions for each monitor. Since the monitors are in close proximity of 

each other, results are fairly similar in the distribution of species concentrations among the 

monitors. Charts 7.2 through 7.5 cover the three fine particle monitors in southwestern Ohio and 

one fine particles monitor in northern Kentucky with the highest concentrations used to 

determine compliance with the annual fine particles NAAQS of 15 μg/m3

. 

The speciation listed in the pie charts include SO4 – sulfate mass, NO3 – nitrate mass, OC – 

organic carbon mass, EC – elemental carbon mass, Soil – crustal material mass, NH4 – 

ammonium mass, PBW – particles bound water mass, BLAN – passively collected mass. 
45 

Chart 7.2 

Species Modeled Contributions to Murray Road PM2.5 Monitor 

 

Chart 7.3 

Species Modeled Contributions to Seymour & Vine St. PM2.5 Monitor 

 

Chart 7.4

Species Modeled Contributions to 101 West 8th Street PM2.5 Monitor 

 

Observed 2005 Contributions at Murray Road PM2.5 Monitor

so4

33%

no3

8%

oc

26%

ec

4%

soil

2%

nh4

13%

pbw

11%

blan

3%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

2009 Modeled Contributions at Murray Road PM2.5 Monitor

so4

37%

no3

oc 7%

22%

ec

3%

soil

2%

nh4

14%

pbw

13%

blan

2%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

Observed 2005 Contributions at Seymour & Vine St. PM2.5 Monitor

so4

34%

no3

8%

oc

25%

ec

4%

soil

2%

nh4

13%

pbw

11%

blan

3%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

2009 Modeled Contributions at Seymour & Vine St. PM2.5 Monitor

so4

37%

no3

oc 7%

22%

ec

3%

soil

2%

nh4

14%

pbw

13%

blan

2%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

Observed 2005 Contributions at 101 West 8th St. PM2.5 Monitor

so4

34%

no3

8%

oc

25%

ec

4%

soil

2%

nh4

13%

pbw

11%

blan

3%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

2009 Modeled Contributions at the 101 West 8th St. PM2.5 Monitor

so4

39%

no3

oc 6%

21%

ec

3%

soil

2%

nh4

14%

pbw

13%

blan

2%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan
46 

Chart 7.5

Species Modeled Contributions to University College PM2.5 Monitor 

 

Results of the Round 5 PSAT modeling for the Cincinnati area fine particle monitors show the 

highest pollutant contributors to base case and future year fine particle concentrations are sulfate, 

organic carbon, ammonium and nitrate. Future year modeling shows decreases in organic 

carbon, nitrates and elemental carbon. The future year modeling did show increases in sulfates, 

particles bound water and ammonium from the base-case modeled concentrations. 

7.3 Summary of Existing Modeling Results

U.S. EPA and LADCO modeling for future year design values have consistently shown that 

existing national emission control measures will help the Cincinnati area approach attainment of 

the annual NAAQS for fine particles standard of 15 μg/m3. Emission control measures to be 

implemented in the next several years will help air quality meet the standard in the future. U.S. 

EPA future year modeling of national emission control strategies, based on current design 

values, showed the Cincinnati area will approach the annual NAAQS for fine particles. Future 

national and local emission control strategies will ensure that the Cincinnati fine particles

nonattainment area will maintain the lower fine particle concentrations. 

7.4 Meteorological Analysis for Southeastern Indiana

Meteorological conditions are one of the most important factors that influence development and 

transport of fine particles. Stagnant surface conditions and upper air ridging during any time of 

the year provides conducive conditions for development and transport of fine particles. 

Ultimately, passage of surface cold fronts with a clean air mass change will lower fine particle 

readings in the Cincinnati area. 

7.4.1 Surface Air Conditions Present during High Fine Particles Concentrations Days

Higher annual concentrations of fine particles tend to correlate with warmer temperatures and 

lighter wind speeds, although high fine particle episodes can occur in the summer fall, winter or 

spring. It should be noted that higher annual fine particle concentrations are driven by individual 

days with higher fine particle concentrations throughout the monitored year. Therefore, it is 

difficult to attribute higher fine particle concentrations to annualized meteorological rankings. 

Review of several of the higher fine particles concentration episodes (days with concentrations 

Observed 2005 Contributions at University College PM2.5 Monitor

so4

34%

no3

8%

oc

23%

ec

4%

soil

3%

nh4

13%

pbw

11%

blan

4%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan

2009 Modeled Contributions at University College PM2.5 Monitor

so4

39%

no3

6% oc

20%

ec

3%

soil

2%

nh4

14%

pbw

13%

blan

3%

so4

no3

oc

ec

soil

nh4

pbw

blan
47 

over 35 μg/m3

) over the past few years shows conditions were hot in the summer with 

temperatures in the middle 80o

 Fahrenheit or higher and average wind speeds were fairly light. 

Fall and winter high fine particles concentration days had near normal temperatures but very 

light wind speeds with higher humidity. Surface conditions present for higher fine particle days 

had a high pressure system east of the Cincinnati area with a front located either north or west of 

the area. 

Analysis of the Murray Road PM2.5 monitor data on the higher concentration days showed over 

60% occurred with maximum temperatures above 80o

 F and only 5% of the high concentration 

days occurred at maximum temperatures below 40o

 F. The location of this monitor is considered 

downwind of the urban center of Cincinnati so the urban emissions are transported to the 

monitor. However, surface meteorological conditions would also play a large role in increased 

fine particle readings at the monitor. 

7.4.2 Upper Air Conditions Present during High Fine Particles Concentrations Days

Upper air ridges and more stagnant surface wind conditions predominately affect development 

and build up of fine particles. Slow moving upper air ridges can effectively suppress mixing 

within the many levels of the atmosphere and cause pollutants to build up over time. Inversions 

or increases in temperature with a rise in altitude will prevent mixing with air from the upper 

atmosphere. These conditions can occur at any time of the year and are evident in elevated fine 

particle episodes in spring, summer, fall and winter months. Review of upper air features present 

during higher concentration days in the Cincinnati area during the summer showed generally a 

ridge over the area with fairly light winds in the upper atmosphere and warm air advection. The 

upper air features present during higher concentration days in the fall and winter were upper air 

troughs with extremely light winds and moderate temperatures. 

Review of surface and upper air features of higher fine particles concentration days showed 

stagnant surface conditions and upper air ridges existed on those days. These conditions help in 

the buildup of fine particle concentrations in the Cincinnati area. 

7.4.3 Analyses of Atmospheric Conditions for Fine Particles Build-Up

Analyses have been conducted to determine the atmospheric conditions that are most prevalent 

during higher fine particles concentration days in Indiana. LADCO applied a Classification and 

Regression Tree (CART) analysis to data from Indiana that correlated different levels of fine 

particle concentrations to meteorological conditions from 1999 through 2004. (Donna Kenski, 

2005). This type of analysis looks at the meteorological conditions, such as temperature, 

pressure, wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity and dew point temperatures at the 

surface, as well as lower morning and evening mixing heights in the upper atmosphere which 

were present when higher concentrations of fine particles were monitored. Results of this CART 

analysis indicated factors that played a larger role in fine particle concentrations in the southern 

portion of the Midwest were warm-weather conditions with high dew points, southwest winds 

and low evening mixing heights as well as the previous day’s concentrations of fine particles. 
48 

Fine particles are made up of several constituents, including direct PM2.5, sulfates, nitrates, 

ammonium, organic carbon and elemental carbon. Depending on the time of the year, 

concentrations of particulate constituents vary, with nitrates being more prevalent in the winter 

and sulfates more prevalent in the summer. Sulfates and nitrate emission reductions have the 

biggest impact on lower future year fine particle concentrations. 

7.5 Summary of Air Quality Index Days in Southeastern Indiana

An analysis was conducted to review the daily fine particle concentrations over a year to 

determine the Air Quality Index (AQI) trends. Chart 7.6 shows by year (2000 through 2009), the 

percentage number of days during which fine particle concentrations reached the AQI ranges for 

“Good” (0 to 15.3 μg/m3), “Moderate” (15.4 μg/m3 to 40.4 μg/m3) and “Unhealthy for Sensitive 

Groups (USG)” (40.5 μg/m3 to 65.4 μg/m3) at the Murray Road PM2.5 monitor in Hamilton 

County in Ohio. There were no days which the fine particle levels reached the “Unhealthy” level 

of 65.5 μg/m3 to 150.4 μg/m3 or above. 

Chart 7.6 

Distribution of PM2.5 Concentration Days on the AQI Levels of Health Concern

Table 7.3 shows the rankings, by year, for the three AQI ranges. The year 2009 had the most 

“Good” concentration days during the 10-year period analyzed (2000 through 2009) at 61%. 

The year 2005 had the most “Moderate” concentrations days at 60% and “Unhealthy for 

Sensitive Group” concentration days at 8%. As can be seen, weather plays a large role in fine 

particle concentrations development and transport as 2000, 2001, 2004 and 2005 were conducive 

to PM2.5 development which translated to moderate and unhealthy for sensitive group levels of 

air quality over 50% of the time. 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

USG

Moderate

Good
49 

Table 7.3 

Ranking and Percentage of Highest Number of Days 

at AQI Levels of Health Concern 

Ranking Good Moderate 

Unhealthy for 

Sensitive Group 

1st 2009 – 61% 2005 – 60% 2005 – 8% 

2nd 2008 – 60% 2000 – 58% 2000 – 7% 

3rd 2006 – 58% 2004 – 52% 2008 – 6% 

4th 2007 – 56% 2001 – 49% 2001 – 5% 

5th 2002 – 51% 2003 – 46% 2003 – 3% 

6th 2003 – 51% 2002 – 45% 2002 – 3% 

7th 2001 – 46% 2007 – 41% 2007 – 3% 

8th 2004 – 46% 2006 – 39% 2006 – 3% 

9th 2000 – 35% 2009 – 39% 2004 – 2%

10th 2005 – 32% 2008 – 35% 2009 – 0% 

7.6 Summary of Meteorological Analysis for Southeastern Indiana

Annual fine particle concentrations in the Cincinnati area are driven by higher fine particles 

concentration days that can occur during any time of the year. Conditions that are most 

prevalent during higher fine particle concentration days are lighter winds, higher relative 

humidity and above average maximum temperatures in the summer and lighter winds, higher 

relative humidity and normal temperatures in the fall, winter or spring. Upper air weather 

patterns generally include ridging over the area with stagnant conditions at the surface caused by 

lower mixing heights and stable conditions for summer episodes and ridging or troughs over the 

area in the fall, winter or spring episodes. Surface winds from any direction can transport 

pollutants from surrounding areas into the Cincinnati area. Nitrates are bigger contributors to 

fine particle concentrations in the winter and sulfates are bigger contributors to fine particle 

concentrations in the summer. 

8.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 

8.1 Commitment to Revise Plan

As noted in Section 4.6 above, Indiana commits to review and revise as appropriate its 

Maintenance Plan eight years after redesignation, as required by Section 175A of the CAA. 

8.2 Commitment for Contingency Measures

IDEM will monitor fine particle concentrations to determine whether trends indicate higher 

values or whether emissions appear to be increasing. If it is determined that fine particle levels 

and emissions are increasing and action is necessary to reverse that trend, IDEM will take action 

to reverse the noted trend, prior to a violation of the standard occurring. 
50 

Indiana commits to adopt and expeditiously implement necessary corrective action in the 

following circumstance: 

Action Level Response

An Action Level Response shall be prompted whenever a violation of the standard (three 

year average annual arithmetic mean value of 15.1 μg/m3

 or greater) occurs. In the event 

that the Action Level is triggered and is not found to be due to an atypical unfavorable 

meteorological condition, exceptional event, malfunction or noncompliance with a permit 

condition or rule requirement, IDEM will determine additional control measures needed 

to assure future attainment of the annual NAAQS for fine particles. In this case, 

measures that can be implemented in a short time will be selected in order to be in place 

within eighteen months from the close of the fine particles season that prompted the 

Action Level. 

Control Measure Selection and Implementation

Adoption of any additional control measures is subject to the necessary administrative 

and legal processes. This process will include publication of notices, an opportunity for 

public hearing and other measures required by Indiana law for rulemaking by state 

environmental boards. 

If a new measure or control is already promulgated and scheduled to be implemented at the 

federal or state level, and that measure or control is determined to be sufficient to address the 

upward trend in air quality, additional local measures may be unnecessary. Furthermore, IDEM 

will submit to U.S. EPA an analysis to demonstrate the proposed measures are adequate to return 

the area to attainment. 

8.3 Contingency Measures

Contingency measures to be considered will be selected from a comprehensive list of measures 

deemed appropriate and effective at the time the selection is made. Listed below are example 

measures that may be considered. The selection of measures will be based upon costeffectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social considerations, or other factors 

that IDEM deems appropriate. IDEM will solicit input from interested and affected persons in 

the maintenance area prior to selecting appropriate contingency measures. All of the listed 

contingency measures are potentially effective or proven methods of obtaining significant 

reductions of fine particles precursor emissions. 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 comprehensive. IDEM anticipates that if 

contingency measures should ever be necessary, it is unlikely that a significant number (i.e., all 

those listed below) will be required. 

1) Vehicle inspection and maintenance program. 

2) Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle operations. 

3) Require NOx or SO2 emission offsets for new and modified major sources. 
51 

4) Require NOx or SO2 emission offsets for new and modified minor sources. 

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

6) Require NOx or SO2 controls on new minor sources (less than 100 tons). 

7) Wood stove change-out program. 

8) Require increased recovery efficiency at sulfur recovery plants. 

9) Various emissions reduction measures or dust suppressant for unpaved roads and/or parking 

lots. 

10) Idling Restrictions. 

11) Broader geographic applicability of existing measures. 

12) One or more transportation control measures sufficient to achieve at least a half a percent 

(0.5%) reduction in actual area-wide precursor emissions. Transportation measures will be 

selected from the following, based upon the factors listed above, after consultation with 

affected local governments: 

a) Trip reduction programs, including, but not limited to, employer-based transportation 

management plans, area wide rideshare programs, work schedule changes and 

telecommuting. 

b) Transit improvements. 

c) Traffic flow improvements. 

d) Other new or innovative transportation measures not yet in widespread use that affect 

state and local governments deemed appropriate. 

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 time they 

are under consideration, can be fully evaluated. 

9.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

This section will be finalized upon completion of the public hearing and public comment period. 

10.0 CONCLUSIONS 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana, has attained the annual NAAQS for fine 

particles and does not significantly contribute to violations outside its portion of the CincinnatiHamilton OH-KY-IN nonattainment area. This petition demonstrates that Lawrenceburg 

Township, Dearborn County, Indiana, has complied with the applicable provisions of the CAA 

regarding redesignation of nonattainment areas for fine particles. IDEM has prepared a State 

Implementation and Maintenance Plan that meets the requirement of Section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA. 

Indiana has performed an analysis that shows the air quality improvements are due to permanent 

and enforceable measures and that additional significant regional NOx and SO2 reductions 

following implementation of Phase II NOx SIP Call and CAIR and/or its replacement rule or 

program will ensure continued compliance (maintenance) with the standard. Furthermore, 

emission projections indicate that NOx and SO2 emissions will continue to decline, thus ensuring 
52 

that the area continues to maintain compliance with the standard and provide for an increasing 

margin of safety. Based on this presentation, Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, 

Indiana, meets the requirements for redesignation under the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)) and U.S. 

EPA guidance for fine particles. 

Consistent with the authority granted to the U.S. EPA, the State of Indiana requests that 

Lawrenceburg Township, Dearborn County, Indiana, be redesignated to attainment for the 

annual fine particles standard simultaneously with U.S. EPA approval of this Indiana State 

Implementation and Maintenance Plan provisions contained herein.
APPENDIX A 

Air Quality System (AQS) and Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management 

(IDEM) Monitor Data Values for the CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN Nonattainment Area 

(2000-2009) 
This page left intentionally blank.