Mobile Source Emissions Modeling 

for Catoosa and Walker Counties 

PM2.5 Maintenance Plan 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 

1.0 Overview 

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) worked with the Georgia Department of 

Transportation (GDOT) and the Chattanooga-Hamilton County-North Georgia Transportation Planning 

Organization to develop mobile1 source emissions inventories for the purpose of establishing motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) for the 2025 maintenance year for the Catoosa-Walker Counties 

PM2.5 Maintenance State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, hereinafter called the Catoosa-Walker 

PM2.5 Maintenance Plan. 

Walker and Catoosa counties are part of the Chattanooga PM2.5 nonattainment area which also includes 

Hamilton County, Tennessee (TN). For the emissions modeling for the Chattanooga Metropolitan 

Planning Area (MPO), different methodologies are used to develop emission inventories for different 

subregions within the nonattainment area, depending on whether or not the subregion is included in the 

MPO travel model domain. The MPO travel model currently includes all of Hamilton County, TN, all of 

Catoosa County, GA, and the portion of Walker County, GA, within the MPO planning area. The travel 

demand model is used to estimate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and congested flow speeds needed 

to develop emission inventories for the subregions included in the travel model. VMT estimates 

derived from the travel model were adjusted based on Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) traffic count data from Tennessee and Georgia. 

Off-model, HPMS-based modeling techniques were used to calculate emissions for the “donut” portion 

of Walker County, Georgia, that falls outside of the MPO planning and travel modeling area. “Donut” is 

a term that refers to areas that fall outside of a metropolitan planning area, but inside the air quality 

nonattainment area. 

The 2025 mobile emissions were developed consistent with the single-run, annual-average-conditions 

approach described in EPA's August 9, 2005, Guidance for Creating Annual On-Road Mobile Source 

Emission Inventories for PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas for Use in SIPs and Conformity.

2

 Consistent with 

this guidance, once this budget is found adequate or approved by EPA, subsequent emissions analyses for 

transportation conformity will also use the same annual-average-conditions approach used to establish 

the MVEB. These inventories reflect the most recent planning assumptions and emission factor model 

available, and the use of an updated travel demand model. Output from the Chattanooga travel demand 

and emissions estimation modeling process was employed to estimate mobile source emission inventories 

to establish the MVEB for the Catoosa-Walker PM2.5 Maintenance Plan in a manner consistent with 

federal regulations for performing regional emissions analyses used in transportation conformity 

determinations. The alignment of methodologies for MVEB and transportation conformity emissions 

analyses reduces the possibility of spurious differences between motor vehicle emission budgets and 

transportation conformity analyses that must conform to those budgets. 

 

1

 The term "mobile" is used to describe emissions from on-road motor vehicles. 

2

 http://epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/420b05008.pdf 
Effective April 5, 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated the Chattanooga 

MPO nonattainment for the annual fine particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

which includes Walker and Catoosa counties in Georgia. The PM2.5 standard is subject to Subpart 1 of 

the Clean Air Act., the more general nonattainment area planning and control requirements of the Act. 

1.1 Planning Boundaries 

As the MPO for the Chattanooga urbanized area, the Chattanooga-Hamilton County-North Georgia 

Transportation Planning Organization is responsible for the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive 

metropolitan planning process required by Title 23 U.S.C. 134. Based on the 2010 Census, the 

Chattanooga MPO defined their planning boundary as all of Hamilton County in Tennessee, and part of 

Dade, Walker and Catoosa Counties in Georgia. The nonattainment area was originally defined as all of 

Hamilton County in Tennessee, part of Jackson County in Alabama and all of Walker and Catoosa 

Counties in Georgia as illustrated in Figure 1.1-1. However on June 18, 2010, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register a finding of insignificance for Jackson 

County, Alabama, as a result of the transportation conformity adequacy review process. As a result, 

conformity determination and emissions are no longer required for Jackson County, Alabama. 
Figure 1.1-1 

Chattanooga Nonattainment Area 

1.2 Emissions Analysis – Models and Assumptions 

In accordance with Section 93.105(b) of the Transportation Conformity Rule which requires interagency 

consultation for SIP development, a detailed listing of the procedures and planning assumptions used for 

the regional emissions analysis supporting development of the MVEB was distributed to the interagency 

consultation committee for review November, 2011. The assumptions used to develop Chattanooga's 

conforming Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program were also used to 

develop the network and emissions for the Catoosa-Walker PM2.5 Maintenance Plan MVEB, which 

required emissions for the year 2025. The 2025 emissions prepared for the recent 2012 conformity 

determination are used as the emissions for the SIP. Since emissions were not available for 2007, some 

of the input data sets were interpolated between 2002 and 2009 and then checked for reasonableness. 

The MOVES input files reflect all federal and state motor vehicle emission control programs. In addition, 

the input files were customized to reflect the specific weather conditions and vehicle registration data for 

the nonattainment area. 

2.0 Travel Demand Modeling Procedures 

The Chattanooga travel demand model and off-modelling procedures were used to develop the emissions 

for Catoosa and Walker Counties The Chattanooga travel demand model was used to estimate link-level 

VMT and congested flow speeds for the Georgia subregion of the nonattainment area included in the 

TPO travel model domain. The methodology to prepare the Catoosa-Walker emissions is listed below. 
1) Modeling Methodology 

a) Georgia 

i) Within TPO travel model (Catoosa County, portion of Walker County) 

(1) Estimate link-level VMT and congested flow speeds using Chattanooga TPO travel 

demand model for all of Catoosa County, GA, and the portion of Walker County, GA, 

within the TPO travel demand model domain 

(2) Extract VMT, congested speeds, and road type distribution from travel demand model 

(3) Develop VMT and congested flow speeds for each roadway link in the area 

(4) Adjust model VMT estimates at the link level based on HPMS VMT estimates 

(5) Develop emission factors for each roadway drive cycle and speed bin using the latest U.S. 

EPA approved emissions model (MOVES2010a) 

(6) Apply MOVES2010a emissions factors to the HPMS-adjusted, link-level VMT estimates 

based on the congested speed estimates, road type and source (vehicle) type to determine 

emissions 

ii) Outside of TPO travel model (donut portion of Walker County) (see Exhibit 7) 

(1) Estimate VMT for remaining portion of Walker County donut area outside of TPO travel 

model domain using GA HPMS traffic count data 

(a) Base year roadway mileage and HPMS average annual traffic count data from GDOT 

RC/HPMS databases 

(b) Traffic count growth trends for each analysis year estimated by HPMS functional class 

(i) Growth rates extracted from TPO travel demand model for GA portion of 

nonattainment area within the travel model 

(ii) Growth rates applied to GA portion of nonattainment area outside of travel model 

(2) Estimate congested flow speeds for remaining portion of Walker County donut area using 

VMT-weighted speed by HPMS functional class, extrapolated from TPO travel demand 

model for each analysis year 

(3) Develop emission factors for each roadway drive cycle and speed bin; Note that these 

factors will be the same for all of Georgia portion of nonattainment area, i.e., same as 

those used for (1)(b)(i) 

(4) Estimate PM2.5 and NOx emissions from VMT and congested speeds 

(a) Emission factors applied at aggregate HPMS functional class level 

2.1 Travel Demand Modeling Post-Processing Procedures 

The Chattanooga regional travel demand model produces daily estimates of travel and vehicle hours 

traveled (VHT) and a peak hour speed for each link in the highway network. The links from the daily 

highway assignment contain a variety of attributes such as the number of lanes, distance, speed, 

capacities and daily volumes. The daily VMT is determined by multiplying the daily volume by the 

distance for each link. Other refinements to the network link data were performed to produce the files 

needed for MOVES. The procedures used in estimating emissions for the Catoosa-Walker model area 

are slightly different from the procedures used for emissions modeling (including conformity analyses) in 

the other nonattainment areas in Georgia. Emissions for the areas within the model are prepared using 

MOVES in rate look-up mode whereas in the other nonattainment areas in Georgia, MOVES is applied 

in Inventory mode. 

HPMS Adjustment of VMT

Section 93.122(b)(3) of the Transportation Conformity Rule recommends that HPMS adjustment 

factors be developed to reconcile travel model estimates of VMT to HPMS estimates in the same base 

year of model calibration. HPMS adjustment factors were developed for the 2035 LRTP to reflect the 

new calibration base year of 2007. HPMS factors were calculated at the HPMS functional class level 

using the following equation: 
HPMS ADJUSTMENT FACTOR I = (2007 HPMS VMTI/2007

MODEL VMTI) (WHERE I=HPMS FUNCTIONAL CLASS)

Separate sets of adjustment factors were estimated for Catoosa County and for the TPO portion of 

Walker County. 

To determine “2007 HPMS VMT” for Catoosa County, average annual daily VMT for the year 2007 for 

each of the 12 HPMS functional classes was compiled from GDOT’s 445 Report which contains countyspecific mileage and VMT by HPMS functional classification. “2007 Model VMT” was calculated for 

Catoosa County by HPMS functional class from the 2007 travel model run completed as part of the 2035 

LRTP model calibration. Table 2.1-1 shows the HPMS adjustment factors by HPMS functional class for 

Catoosa County, Georgia. HPMS adjustment factors were applied at the link level to travel model VMT 

for Catoosa County, based on each link’s HPMS functional classification code, for each analysis year. 

The HPMS adjustment factors for the TPO portion of Walker County were determined based on the 

portion of the county within the travel model and, therefore, subject to HPMS adjustment. County-level 

HPMS data for Walker County for each roadway functional class was derived from GDOT’s 445 Report. 

VMT data was factored down based on the proportion of each roadway classification’s mileage within 

the travel model area compared to the total mileage for that roadway type within Walker County. Table 

2.1-2 shows the travel demand model and HPMS VMT for the TPO portion of Walker County, and 

HPMS adjustment factors by functional class. These factors were applied at the link level to travel 

model VMT for the TPO portion of Walker County, based on each roadway link’s HPMS functional 

classification code, for each analysis year. HPMS adjustment factors were reviewed and approved by 

ICC. 

Table 2.1-1: 2007 HPMS Adjustment Factors

Catoosa County, Georgia 

Name

Functional 

Class(es)

Average Annual 

Daily 2007 Travel 

Model VMT

Average Annual 

Daily 2007 

HPMS VMT

2007 HPMS 

Adjustment Factor

Rural Interstate 1 402,303 372,202 0.93

Rural Principal Arterial 2 30,625 18,942 0.62

Rural Minor Arterial 6 77,889 82,512 1.06

Rural Major Collector 7 86,125 133,443 1.17

Rural Minor Collector 8 28,113 133,443 1.17

Rural Local 9a 54,891 324,050 1.45

Urban Interstate 11 696,013 646,109 0.93

Urban Freeway 12 0 0 0.00

Urban Other Arterial 14 77,844 34,486 0.44

Urban Minor Arterial 16 393,399 549,584 1.40

Urban Collector 17 60,913 48,983 0.80

Urban Local 19a 167,985 324,050 1.45

a Most local roads (Functional Classifications (FC) 9 and 19) were not included in the TPO travel demand model. Travel on these roads 

in the travel demand model was approximated by travel on centroid connectors, which are coded as facility type 99 in the model. Due to 

their similar purposes, VMT and emissions on FCs 9 and 19 are compared to those on facility type 99 in the TPO travel demand model. 

Ramps also were included in the travel demand model with a facility type of 7. Ramps are not included in the HPMS data. 

Source: Chattanooga-Hamilton County/North Georgia LRTP 2035, Volume 2 – Draft Conformity Determination Report, 

Feb 2012 
CHATTANOOGA TPO2035LRTP – VOLUME 2: CDR

Table 2.1-2: 2007 HPMS Adjustment Factors

TPO Portion of Walker County, Georgia

Name

Functional 

Class(es)

Average Annual 

Daily 2007 

Travel Model 

VMT

Average Annual 

Daily 2007 

HPMS VMT

2007 HPMS 

Adjustment Factor

Rural Interstate 1 0 0 0.00

Rural Principal Arterial 2 186,903 93,730 0.50

Rural Minor Arterial 6 1,931 2,609 1.35

Rural Major Collector 7 32,857 33,036 0.99

Rural Minor Collector 8 465 33,036 0.99

Rural Local 9a 33,137 232,342 2.19

Urban Interstate 11 0 0 0.00

Urban Freeway 12 0 0 0.00

Urban Other Arterial 14 100,920 175,157 1.74

Urban Minor Arterial 16 133,000 157,015 1.18

Urban Collector 17 43,926 44,308 1.01

Urban Local 19a 72,821 232,342 2.19

a Most local roads (Functional Classifications (FC) 9 and 19) were not included in the TPO travel demand model. Travel on these 

roads in the travel demand model was approximated by travel on centroid connectors, which are coded as facility type 99 in the 

model. Due to their similar purposes, VMT and emissions on FCs 9 and 19 are compared to those on facility type 99 in the TPO 

travel demand model. Ramps also were included in the travel demand model with a facility type of 7. Ramps are not included in the 

HPMS data. 

Source: Chattanooga-Hamilton County/North Georgia LRTP 2035, Volume 2 – Draft Conformity Determination Report, 

Feb 2012 

Roadtype Classification

The network link data was also classified by MOVES roadtype based on functional classification. 

The mapping of FHWA highway functional system classifications to the appropriate MOVES 

roadtypes used for this modeling is listed in Table 2.1-3. Interstate and freeway ramps are 

functionally classified as local facilities in Georgia. Since these facilities operate with restricted 

access, the facility type definition variable (a unique variable in the highway network that defines the 

highway facilities based on their operation) was used to classify ramps as either rural or urban 

restricted facilities. Off-network activity is calculated within the MOVES process based on the 

source type (vehicle) population and is not an input from the travel demand model data. 

Table 2.1-3 

Listing of FHWA Highway Functional Classifications 

Mapped to MOVES Road Types 

FHWA Highway Functional System MOVES Road Type MOVES Value

Rural interstate Rural restricted access 2 

Rural other principal arterial Rural restricted access 2 

Rural minor arterial Rural unrestricted access 3 

Rural major collector Rural unrestricted access 3 

Rural minor collector Rural unrestricted access 3 

Rural local Rural unrestricted access 3 

Urban interstate Urban restricted access 4 

Urban other freeways Urban restricted access 4 

Urban other principal arterial Urban unrestricted access 5 

Urban minor arterial Urban unrestricted access 5 

Urban collector Urban unrestricted access 5 

Urban local Urban unrestricted access 5 

Speed Bin Classification

The network link hourly data was also stratified by speed bin. MOVES defines 16 "speed bins" 

which describe the average driving speed on a roadtype or highway network link. Table 2.1-4 

lists the speed bins and ranges that were assigned to the network link data by hour. 

Table 2.1-4 

Listing of MOVES Speed Bins 

Speed Bin Lower Range Upper Range

1 <= 2.4 

2 2.5 7.4 

3 7.5 12.4 

4 12.5 17.4 

5 17.5 22.4 

6 22.5 27.4 

7 27.5 32.4 

8 32.5 37.4 

9 37.5 42.4 

10 42.5 47.4 

11 47.5 52.4 

12 52.5 57.4 

13 57.5 62.4 

14 62.5 67.4 
9 

Speed Bin Lower Range Upper Range

15 67.5 72.4 

16 => 72.5 

2.2 Development of MOVES Input Files 

The mobile source emissions used for Walker-Catoosa analysis reflect all federal and state 

mobile source control rules, including federal tailpipe standards and gasoline sulfur and volatility 

limits. 

Interagency Consultation

Section 93.110 of the Transportation Conformity Rule directs that the interagency consultation 

process review latest planning assumptions used as part of the conformity analysis and that key 

assumptions be specified and included in the draft documents and supporting materials used for 

the interagency consultation. A detailed listing for the procedures and planning assumptions 

used for the conformity analysis of the adjusted 2035 LRTP and FY ’11-’14 TIP to be amended 

is outlined in the “Interagency Review of Planning Assumptions Used in Regional Emissions 

Analysis” Appendix B in the Draft Conformity Determination Report – Volume, Feb 2012. 

MOVES input data and assumptions were discussed as a regular agenda item during 2011 and 

were approved by the IAC in June 2011. These are the same assumptions that were used to 

produce the emissions for the SIP. 

To prevent transportation conformity problems, the emissions used in preparation of emission 

inventories for SIP MVEB development and transportation conformity analysis must be 

consistent. Interagency consultation helps to assure consistency between the two procedures. 

The MOVES input parameters for the Catoosa-Walker PM2.5 Maintenance Plan mobile source 

emissions modeling were established through interagency consultation and are listed below: 

1) Emission Factor Model: MOVES2010a - Database: MOVES20100830 

• Pollutants to be modeled: PM2.5 and NOx. 

• Analysis Years 

Attainment year (inventory): 2007 (datasets were interpolated between 2002 and 2009 

since 2007 model runs were not available)

 MVEB year 2025 

• Scale: County: Temporal Aggregation: Annual 

• Geographic Bounds: Hamilton County and Walker and Catoosa Counties 

• Vehicles/Equipment All source types, gasoline and diesel 
10 

• Road types: All road types including off-network 

• General Output:grams/miles/jouls/distance traveled/population 

• Source type Population: 

Hamilton County: Hamilton County Vehicle Registration Data w/MOVES 

National Default Vehicle Type Ratios (TDEC spreadsheet) unless TN registration 

data becomes available. Future year growth is estimated in the source type 

spreadsheet based on a growth in population by county, Catoosa and Walker 

Counties: Vehicle Registration Data (2002) w/MOVES National Default Vehicle 

Type Ratios (See Exhibits 5 & 6) 

• Vehicle Type VMT: 

VMT: 

For 2007: HPMS VMT mileage data 

For 2025: TDM VMT mileage data 

HPMS VTypeYear 

Catoosa County VMT from TDM. Walker County VMT from TDM and HPMS. 

Vehicle type splits from GA statewide 2008-2010 daily VMT from Travel Demand 

Model and MOVES defaults to determine split of cars and light trucks (20&30) 

(See Exhibit 4) 

• I/M program: No program 

• Fuel Supply and Formulation 

 Tennessee: TDEC developed formulations where available. 

 Georgia: National defaults 

• Meteorology Data: Local information obtained from NMIM for 2007 

• Ramp Fraction: TDM Results (Urban 4%, Rural 2%) 

• Road Type Distribution: Combination of Catoosa and Walker county MOVES Road 

Type Distribution from TDM and Source Type Distribution from GA HPMS Vehicle 

Type Splits and MOVES Default. 2007 HPMS and TDM for 2025. 

• Age Distribution: MOVES National Defaults 

• Average Speed Distribution: Combination of local and default data. Catoosa and 

Walker county Distribution from TDM with EPA Converter Tool to Convert from 

VMT to VHT 

MOVES

MOVES20100830 is the latest database version for EPA’s motor vehicle emissions model. 

MOVES requires a variety of input files. The MOVES input data files associated with travel 

behavior have been developed using the travel demand model data, Georgia vehicle 
11 

classification counts, and MOVES national defaults. Other data sources were used to develop 

the source type population data, meteorology data, and fuel specifications. 

Methodology to Develop MOVES Input Data

The data files to run MOVES are entered via the County Data Importer. Sample input data are 

shown in Exhibits 1-3 for the years 2007 and 2025. 

2.4 Nonattainment Area Emissions Analysis Summary 

A factor was developed to annualize the weekday emissions to include weekend activity. The 

factor was based on the MOVES defaults for DayVMTFractions which is being used as part of 

the MOVES inputs. The following formula was used: 

Number of weekday equivalents in a year = 365*(5/7)+365*(2/7)*MOVES Urban 

Weekend Adjustment Factor(.7793) = 

341.9809 (rounded to 342) 

This is shown in cell D34 of tab "Import HPMS AADVMT and Factors" in the EPA 

AADVMTCalculator Excel workbook. The daily emissions are produced in grams and are 

converted to tons by dividing by 907,184.74. The daily emissions in tons are then multiplied by 

342 to get annual emissions. Table 2.4-1 lists the results from the regional emissions analysis 

produced using the travel demand model plus the emissions for Walker off-model analysis in 

daily grams while Table 2.4-2 lists the total emissions in annual tons. 

Table 2.4-1 

Summary of Mobile Source Emissions for Catoosa-Walker Nonattainment Area 

(in Daily Grams) 

PM2.5 Nox 

Year Total Total

2007 355.7340 11,783,513.0000 

2025 95,378.0000 2,710,483.0000 

Table 2.4-2 

Summary of Mobile Source Emissions for Catoosa-Walker Nonattainment Area 

(in Annual Tons) 

PM2.5 Nox 

Year Total Total

2007 134.1082 4,442.2723 

2025 35.9566 1,,021.8263 
12 

A series of sensitivity tests were performed for the future years 2025 and 2035. These tests 

assumed different growth scenarios in the nonattainment area and were used to develop safety 

margins. An alternative scenario was tested where the growth doubled between 2012 and 2025 

to account for uncertainty in the future growth projections and transportation improvements.
13 

Exhibit 1: Sample 2007 RunSpec 

runspec>  <DESCRIPTION><![CDATA[CHATT 2007 FOR WALKER & CATOOSA

INVENTORY MODE

USE MOVES DEFAULTS FOR DAY AND MONTH VMT FRACTION

RUN#2 - REVISED ANNUAL VMT FOR WALKER TPO & CATOOSA

 <MODELSCALE VALUE="INV"/>  <MODELDOMAIN VALUE="SINGLE"/> 

 <GEOGRAPHICSELECTIONS> 

 <GEOGRAPHICSELECTION TYPE="COUNTY" KEY="13047" DESCRIPTION="GEORGIA - CATOOSA COUNTY"/>  </GEOGRAPHICSELECTIONS> 

 <TIMESPAN> 

 <YEAR KEY="2007"/> 

 <MONTH ID="7"/> 

 <DAY ID="5"/> 

 <BEGINHOUR ID="1"/> 

 <ENDHOUR ID="24"/> 

 <AGGREGATEBY KEY="HOUR"/> 

 </TIMESPAN> 

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTIONS> 

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="62" SOURCETYPENAME="CO

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="61" SOURCETYPENAME="CO

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="41" SOURCETYPENAME="INT

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="32" SOURCETYPENAME="LIG

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="54" SOURCETYPENAME="MO

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="21" SOURCETYPENAME="PAS

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="31" SOURCETYPENAME="PAS

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="51" SOURCETYPENAME="REF

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="43" SOURCETYPENAME="SCH

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="53" SOURCETYPENAME="SIN

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="52" SOURCETYPENAME="SIN

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="2" FUELTYPEDESC="DIESEL FUEL" SOURCETYPEID="42" SOURCETYPENAME="TRA

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="61" SOURCETYPENAME="COMB <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="32" SOURCETYPENAME="LIGHT 

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="54" SOURCETYPENAME="MOTO

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="11" SOURCETYPENAME="MOTO <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="21" SOURCETYPENAME="PASSE

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="31" SOURCETYPENAME="PASSE

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="51" SOURCETYPENAME="REFU

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="43" SOURCETYPENAME="SCHO

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="53" SOURCETYPENAME="SING

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="52" SOURCETYPENAME="SING

 <ONROADVEHICLESELECTION FUELTYPEID="1" FUELTYPEDESC="GASOLINE" SOURCETYPEID="42" SOURCETYPENAME="TRAN

 </ONROADVEHICLESELECTIONS> 

 <OFFROADVEHICLESELECTIONS> 
14 

 </OFFROADVEHICLESELECTIONS> 

 <OFFROADVEHICLESCCS> 

 </OFFROADVEHICLESCCS> 

 <ROADTYPES> 

 <ROADTYPE ROADTYPEID="1" ROADTYPENAME="OFF-NETWORK"/> 

 <ROADTYPE ROADTYPEID="2" ROADTYPENAME="RURAL RESTRICTED ACCESS"/> 

 <ROADTYPE ROADTYPEID="3" ROADTYPENAME="RURAL UNRESTRICTED ACCESS"/> 

 <ROADTYPE ROADTYPEID="4" ROADTYPENAME="URBAN RESTRICTED ACCESS"/> 

 <ROADTYPE ROADTYPEID="5" ROADTYPENAME="URBAN UNRESTRICTED ACCESS"/> 

 </ROADTYPES>  <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATIONS> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="1

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="2

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="1

RUNNING EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="1

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="1

EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="3" POLLUTANTNAME="OXIDES OF NITROGEN (NOX)" PROCESSKEY="9

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

RUNNING EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

START EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="110" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY EXHAUST PM2.5 - TOTAL" PROCES

IDLE EXHAUST"/>  <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="116" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - BRAKEWEAR PARTICULATPROCESSNAME="BRAKEWEAR"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PRO

PROCESSNAME="RUNNING EXHAUST"/>  <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PROEXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PRO

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE RUNNING EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PRO

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE START EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PRO

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 
15 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="112" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ELEMENTAL CARBON" PROPROCESSNAME="EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE RUNNING EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE START EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="111" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - ORGANIC CARBON" PROC

PROCESSNAME="EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" P

PROCESSNAME="RUNNING EXHAUST"/>  <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" PEXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" P

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE RUNNING EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" P

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE START EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" P

PROCESSNAME="CRANKCASE EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="115" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - SULFATE PARTICULATE" P

PROCESSNAME="EXTENDED IDLE EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="117" POLLUTANTNAME="PRIMARY PM2.5 - TIREWEAR PARTICULATE" 

PROCESSNAME="TIREWEAR"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="1" PR

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="2" PR

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="15" P

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="16" P

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="17" P

IDLE EXHAUST"/>  <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="31" POLLUTANTNAME="SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)" PROCESSKEY="90" PEXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="91" POLLUTANTNAME="TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION" PROCESSKEY

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="91" POLLUTANTNAME="TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION" PROCESSKEY

EXHAUST"/> 

 <POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATION POLLUTANTKEY="91" POLLUTANTNAME="TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION" PROCESSKEY

EXHAUST"/> 

 </POLLUTANTPROCESSASSOCIATIONS> 

 <DATABASESELECTIONS> 
16 

 </DATABASESELECTIONS> 

 <INTERNALCONTROLSTRATEGIES> 

<INTERNALCONTROLSTRATEGY 

CLASSNAME="GOV.EPA.OTAQ.MOVES.MASTER.IMPLEMENTATION.GHG.INTERNALCONTROLSTRATEGIES.RATEOFPROGRESS.RATEOFPROGRESSST

USEPARAMETERS NO

]]></INTERNALCONTROLSTRATEGY> 

 </INTERNALCONTROLSTRATEGIES> 

 <INPUTDATABASE SERVERNAME="" DATABASENAME="" DESCRIPTION=""/>  <UNCERTAINTYPARAMETERS UNCERTAINTYMODEENABLED="FALSE" NUMBEROFRUNSPERSIMULATION="0" NUMBEROFSIMULATIONS=" <GEOGRAPHICOUTPUTDETAIL DESCRIPTION="COUNTY"/> 

 <OUTPUTEMISSIONSBREAKDOWNSELECTION> 

 <MODELYEAR SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <FUELTYPE SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <EMISSIONPROCESS SELECTED="TRUE"/> 

 <ONROADOFFROAD SELECTED="TRUE"/> 

 <ROADTYPE SELECTED="TRUE"/> 

 <SOURCEUSETYPE SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <MOVESVEHICLETYPE SELECTED="FALSE"/>  <ONROADSCC SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <OFFROADSCC SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <ESTIMATEUNCERTAINTY SELECTED="FALSE" NUMBEROFITERATIONS="2" KEEPSAMPLEDDATA="FALSE" KEEPITERATIONS="

 <SECTOR SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <ENGTECHID SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <HPCLASS SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 </OUTPUTEMISSIONSBREAKDOWNSELECTION> 

 <OUTPUTDATABASE SERVERNAME="" DATABASENAME="CHATT2007_PM25_GA_INVENTORY_OUTPUT4" DESCRIPTION=""/>  <OUTPUTTIMESTEP VALUE="HOUR"/> 

 <OUTPUTVMTDATA VALUE="TRUE"/> 

 <OUTPUTSHO VALUE="FALSE"/> 

 <OUTPUTSH VALUE="FALSE"/> 

 <OUTPUTSHP VALUE="FALSE"/> 

 <OUTPUTSHIDLING VALUE="FALSE"/> 

 <OUTPUTSTARTS VALUE="FALSE"/> 

 <OUTPUTPOPULATION VALUE="TRUE"/> 

 <SCALEINPUTDATABASE SERVERNAME="LOCALHOST" DATABASENAME="CHATT2007_PM25_INVENTORY_INPUT4" DESCRIPTION=""/> 

 <PMSIZE VALUE="0"/> 

 <OUTPUTFACTORS> 

 <TIMEFACTORS SELECTED="TRUE" UNITS="HOURS"/> 

 <DISTANCEFACTORS SELECTED="TRUE" UNITS="MILES"/>  <MASSFACTORS SELECTED="TRUE" UNITS="GRAMS" ENERGYUNITS="JOULES"/> 

 </OUTPUTFACTORS> 

 <SAVEDATA> 

 </SAVEDATA> 
17 

 <DONOTEXECUTE> 

 </DONOTEXECUTE> 

 <GENERATORDATABASE SHOULDSAVE="FALSE" SERVERNAME="" DATABASENAME="" DESCRIPTION=""/> 

 <DONOTPERFORMFINALAGGREGATION SELECTED="FALSE"/> 

 <LOOKUPTABLEFLAGS SCENARIOID="2007" TRUNCATEOUTPUT="FALSE" TRUNCATEACTIVITY="FALSE"/> 

</RUNSPEC> 
18 
19 

Exhibit 2: MOVES Input Data for Catoosa-Walker Counties Emissions 

for PM2.5 SIP Budget – 2007 

Source Type Population 

yearID sourceTypeID sourceTypePopulation

2007 11 4,262

2007 21 65,819

2007 31 43,829

2007 32 14,643

2007 41 63

2007 42 37

2007 43 429

2007 51 45

2007 52 2,752

2007 53 310

2007 54 620

2007 61 654

2007 62 716

Ramp Fraction 

roadTypeID RampFraction 

2 0.02 

4 0.04 

Sample Average Speed Distribution 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID hourDayID AvgSpeedBinID AvgSpeedFraction 

11 2 12 1 0.0000000 

11 2 12 2 0.0000000 

11 2 12 3 0.0000000 

11 2 12 4 0.0000000 

11 2 12 5 0.0000000 

11 2 12 6 0.0000000 

11 2 12 7 0.0209484 

11 2 12 8 0.0028679 

11 2 12 9 0.0000000 

11 2 12 10 0.0000000 

11 2 12 11 0.0000000 
20 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID hourDayID AvgSpeedBinID AvgSpeedFraction 

11 2 12 12 0.0000000 

11 2 12 13 0.3871103 

11 2 12 14 0.0587978 

11 2 12 15 0.5302755 

11 2 12 16 0.0000000 

11 2 15 1 0.0000000 

11 2 15 2 0.0000000 

11 2 15 3 0.0000000 

11 2 15 4 0.0000000 

11 2 15 5 0.0000000 

11 2 15 6 0.0000000 

11 2 15 7 0.0209484 

11 2 15 8 0.0028679 

11 2 15 9 0.0000000 

11 2 15 10 0.0000000 

11 2 15 11 0.0000000 

11 2 15 12 0.0000000 

11 2 15 13 0.3871103 

11 2 15 14 0.0587978 

11 2 15 15 0.5302755 

11 2 15 16 0.0000000 

11 2 12 1 0.0000000 

11 2 12 2 0.0000000 

11 2 12 3 0.0000000 

11 2 12 4 0.0000000 

11 2 12 5 0.0000000 

11 2 12 6 0.0000000 

11 2 12 7 0.0209484 

Note: File contains 39,937 records and is available on request 

Road Type Distribution 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID RoadTypeVMTFraction

11 1 0.00000

11 2 0.15973

11 3 0.23823

11 4 0.23509

11 5 0.36695

21 1 0.00000

21 2 0.12422

21 3 0.19961
21 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID RoadTypeVMTFraction

21 4 0.25998

21 5 0.41619

31 1 0.00000

31 2 0.12422

31 3 0.19961

31 4 0.25998

31 5 0.41619

32 1 0.00000

32 2 0.12422

32 3 0.19961

32 4 0.25998

32 5 0.41619

41 1 0.00000

41 2 0.20661

41 3 0.20093

41 4 0.27506

41 5 0.31740

42 1 0.00000

42 2 0.20661

42 3 0.20093

42 4 0.27506

42 5 0.31740

43 1 0.00000

43 2 0.20661

43 3 0.20093

43 4 0.27506

43 5 0.31740

51 1 0.00000

51 2 0.16544

51 3 0.24649

51 4 0.24568

51 5 0.34240

52 1 0.00000

52 2 0.16544

52 3 0.24648

52 4 0.24568

52 5 0.34240

53 1 0.00000

53 2 0.16544

53 3 0.24648
22 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID RoadTypeVMTFraction

53 4 0.24568

53 5 0.34240

54 1 0.00000

54 2 0.16544

54 3 0.24649

54 4 0.24568

Source Type Population

yearID sourceTypeID sourceTypePopulation

2007 11 4,262

2007 21 65,819

2007 31 43,829

2007 32 14,643

2007 41 63

2007 42 37

2007 43 429

2007 51 45

2007 52 2,752

2007 53 310

2007 54 620

2007 61 654

2007 62 716

Vehicle Type VMT – HPMSVtypeYear Worksheet 

HPMSVtypeID yearID HPMSBaseYearVMT baseYearOffNetVMT

10 2007 4012462.16 0

20 2007 692988088.8 0

30 2007 460943431.7 0

40 2007 6902542.93 0

50 2007 43556058.17 0

60 2007 91815721.94 0

Vehicle Type VMT – Sample HourVMTFraction 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID dayID hourID HourVMTFraction

11 1 5 1 0.009862

11 1 5 2 0.006272

11 1 5 3 0.005058

11 1 5 4 0.004667

11 1 5 5 0.006995

11 1 5 6 0.018494
23 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID dayID hourID HourVMTFraction

11 1 5 7 0.045957

11 1 5 8 0.069644

11 1 5 9 0.060828

11 1 5 10 0.050286

11 1 5 11 0.049935

11 1 5 12 0.054365

11 1 5 13 0.057646

11 1 5 14 0.058032

11 1 5 15 0.062255

11 1 5 16 0.071005

11 1 5 17 0.076973

11 1 5 18 0.077432

11 1 5 19 0.059783

11 1 5 20 0.044392

11 1 5 21 0.035446

11 1 5 22 0.031824

11 1 5 23 0.024942

11 1 5 24 0.017907

11 2 5 1 0.010774

11 2 5 2 0.007644

11 2 5 3 0.006546

11 2 5 4 0.006635

11 2 5 5 0.00954

11 2 5 6 0.020055

11 2 5 7 0.04103

11 2 5 8 0.057972

11 2 5 9 0.053471

11 2 5 10 0.052548

11 2 5 11 0.055061

11 2 5 12 0.057674

11 2 5 13 0.059143

11 2 5 14 0.060802

11 2 5 15 0.065299

11 2 5 16 0.072608

11 2 5 17 0.077382

11 2 5 18 0.075482

11 2 5 19 0.058706

11 2 5 20 0.043986

11 2 5 21 0.035731

11 2 5 22 0.030743
24 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID dayID hourID HourVMTFraction

11 2 5 23 0.023852

11 2 5 24 0.017318

11 3 5 1 0.010774

11 3 5 2 0.007644

11 3 5 3 0.006546

11 3 5 4 0.006635

11 3 5 5 0.00954

11 3 5 6 0.020055

11 3 5 7 0.04103

11 3 5 8 0.057972

11 3 5 9 0.053471

11 3 5 10 0.052548

11 3 5 11 0.055061

11 3 5 12 0.057674

11 3 5 13 0.059143

11 3 5 14 0.060802

11 3 5 15 0.065299

11 3 5 16 0.072608

11 3 5 17 0.077382

11 3 5 18 0.075482

11 3 5 19 0.058706

11 3 5 20 0.043986

11 3 5 21 0.035731

11 3 5 22 0.030743

11 3 5 23 0.023852

11 3 5 24 0.017318

Note: File contains 1,561 records and is available on request 

Meteorology Data 

monthID zoneID HourID temperature relHumidity 

7 130470 1 53.93 73.43

7 130470 2 52.80 75.28

7 130470 3 51.71 76.85

7 130470 4 50.73 78.33

7 130470 5 49.93 79.39

7 130470 6 49.24 80.40

7 130470 7 49.00 80.68

7 130470 8 50.22 79.09

7 130470 9 53.50 73.91
25 

monthID zoneID HourID temperature relHumidity 

7 130470 10 58.03 66.56

7 130470 11 62.50 59.15

7 130470 12 66.32 53.19

7 130470 13 69.32 48.73

7 130470 14 71.45 45.62

7 130470 15 72.92 43.49

7 130470 16 73.47 42.51

7 130470 17 73.22 42.53

7 130470 18 71.82 44.20

7 130470 19 68.82 48.39

7 130470 20 65.03 54.30

7 130470 21 61.50 60.33

7 130470 22 58.93 64.98

7 130470 23 57.02 68.30

7 130470 24 55.37 71.11

Age Distribution - Sample 

sourceTypeID yearID ageID ageFraction

21 2007 0 0.0519

21 2007 1 0.0579

21 2007 2 0.0645

21 2007 3 0.0658

21 2007 4 0.0642

21 2007 5 0.0619

21 2007 6 0.0613

21 2007 7 0.0637

21 2007 8 0.0642

21 2007 9 0.0651

21 2007 10 0.0595

21 2007 11 0.0531

21 2007 12 0.0492

21 2007 13 0.0433

21 2007 14 0.0365

21 2007 15 0.0309

21 2007 16 0.0234

21 2007 17 0.0177

21 2007 18 0.0137

21 2007 19 0.0121

21 2007 20 0.0098

21 2007 21 0.0081

21 2007 22 0.0059

21 2007 23 0.0050
26 

sourceTypeID yearID ageID ageFraction

21 2007 24 0.0037

21 2007 25 0.0026

21 2007 26 0.0017

21 2007 27 0.0011

21 2007 28 0.0009

21 2007 29 0.0007

21 2007 30 0.0008

31 2007 0 0.0400

31 2007 1 0.0501

31 2007 2 0.0739

31 2007 3 0.0747

31 2007 4 0.0783

31 2007 5 0.0771

31 2007 6 0.0714

31 2007 7 0.0671

31 2007 8 0.0641

31 2007 9 0.0588

31 2007 10 0.0511

31 2007 11 0.0435

31 2007 12 0.0379

31 2007 13 0.0337

31 2007 14 0.0286

31 2007 15 0.0259

31 2007 16 0.0207

31 2007 17 0.0161

31 2007 18 0.0128

31 2007 19 0.0126

31 2007 20 0.0113

31 2007 21 0.0104

31 2007 22 0.0089

31 2007 23 0.0078

31 2007 24 0.0066

31 2007 25 0.0050

31 2007 26 0.0034

31 2007 27 0.0025

31 2007 28 0.0019

31 2007 29 0.0019

31 2007 30 0.0020

Note: File contains 373 records and is available on request 
27 

Exhibit 3: MOVES Input Data for Catoosa-Walker Counties Emissions 

for PM2.5 SIP Budget – 2025 

roadTypeID RampFraction 

2 0.02 

4 0.04 

Sample Average Speed Distribution 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID hourDayID AvgSpeedBinID AvgSpeedFraction 

11 2 12 1 0.0000000 

11 2 12 2 0.0000000 

11 2 12 3 0.0000000 

11 2 12 4 0.0000000 

11 2 12 5 0.0000000 

11 2 12 6 0.0000000 

11 2 12 7 0.0225002 

11 2 12 8 0.0033240 

11 2 12 9 0.0000000 

11 2 12 10 0.0000000 

11 2 12 11 0.0000000 

11 2 12 12 0.0000000 

11 2 12 13 0.3858164 

11 2 12 14 0.0579704 

11 2 12 15 0.5303889 

11 2 12 16 0.0000000 

11 2 15 1 0.0000000 

11 2 15 2 0.0000000 

11 2 15 3 0.0000000 

11 2 15 4 0.0000000 

11 2 15 5 0.0000000 

11 2 15 6 0.0000000 

11 2 15 7 0.0225002 

11 2 15 8 0.0033240 

11 2 15 9 0.0000000 

11 2 15 10 0.0000000 

11 2 15 11 0.0000000 

11 2 15 12 0.0000000 

11 2 15 13 0.3858164 

11 2 15 14 0.0579704 
28 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID hourDayID AvgSpeedBinID AvgSpeedFraction 

11 2 15 15 0.5303889 

11 2 15 16 0.0000000 

11 2 22 1 0.0000000 

11 2 22 2 0.0000000 

11 2 22 3 0.0000000 

11 2 22 4 0.0000000 

11 2 22 5 0.0000000 

11 2 22 6 0.0000000 

11 2 22 7 0.0225002 

Note: File contains 39,937 records and is available on request 

Road Type Distribution 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID RoadTypeVMTFraction

11 1 0.00%

11 2 15.27%

11 3 25.86%

11 4 22.96%

11 5 35.91%

21 1 0.00%

21 2 11.91%

21 3 21.74%

21 4 25.48%

21 5 40.87%

31 1 0.00%

31 2 11.91%

31 3 21.74%

31 4 25.48%

31 5 40.87%

32 1 0.00%

32 2 11.91%

32 3 21.74%

32 4 25.48%

32 5 40.87%

41 1 0.00%

41 2 19.85%

41 3 21.92%

41 4 27.00%

41 5 31.22%

42 1 0.00%

42 2 19.85%

42 3 21.92%
29 

sourceTypeid roadTypeID RoadTypeVMTFraction

42 4 27.00%

42 5 31.22%

43 1 0.00%

43 2 19.85%

43 3 21.92%

43 4 27.00%

43 5 31.22%

51 1 0.00%

51 2 15.80%

51 3 26.74%

51 4 23.98%

51 5 33.48%

52 1 0.00%

52 2 15.80%

52 3 26.74%

52 4 23.98%

52 5 33.48%

53 1 0.00%

53 2 15.80%

53 3 26.74%

53 4 23.98%

53 5 33.48%

54 1 0.00%

54 2 15.80%

54 3 26.74%

54 4 23.98%

54 5 33.48%

61 1 0.00%

61 2 45.45%

61 3 22.83%

61 4 23.70%

61 5 8.03%

62 1 0.00%

62 2 45.45%

62 3 22.83%

62 4 23.70%

62 5 8.03%
30 

Source Type Population

yearID sourceTypeID sourceTypePopulation

2025 11 4,537

2025 21 49,753

2025 31 26,628

2025 32 8,896

2025 41 64

2025 42 32

2025 43 427

2025 51 17

2025 52 2,521

2025 53 404

2025 54 603

2025 61 337

2025 62 494

Vehicle Type VMT – HPMSVtypeYear Worksheet 

HPMSVtypeID yearID HPMSBaseYearVMT baseYearOffNetVMT 

10 2025 192,103.84 0.00 

20 2025 43,182,163.15 0.00 

30 2025 21,269,282.28 0.00 

40 2025 442,422.46 0.00 

50 2025 2,245,866.77 0.00 

60 2025 4,764,471.61 0.00 

Meteorology Data 

monthID zoneID HourID temperature relHumidity 

4 130470 1 53.93 73.43

4 130470 2 52.80 75.28

4 130470 3 51.71 76.85

4 130470 4 50.73 78.33

4 130470 5 49.93 79.39

4 130470 6 49.24 80.40

4 130470 7 49.00 80.68

4 130470 8 50.22 79.09

4 130470 9 53.50 73.91

4 130470 10 58.03 66.56

4 130470 11 62.50 59.15

4 130470 12 66.32 53.19

4 130470 13 69.32 48.73

4 130470 14 71.45 45.62

4 130470 15 72.92 43.49
31 

monthID zoneID HourID temperature relHumidity 

4 130470 16 73.47 42.51

4 130470 17 73.22 42.53

4 130470 18 71.82 44.20

4 130470 19 68.82 48.39

4 130470 20 65.03 54.30

4 130470 21 61.50 60.33

4 130470 22 58.93 64.98

4 130470 23 57.02 68.30

4 130470 24 55.37 71.11

Age Distribution - Sample 

sourceTypeID yearID ageID ageFraction

21 2025 0 0.0786

21 2025 1 0.0768

21 2025 2 0.0752

21 2025 3 0.0736

21 2025 4 0.0726

21 2025 5 0.0716

21 2025 6 0.0688

21 2025 7 0.0656

21 2025 8 0.0620

21 2025 9 0.0601

21 2025 10 0.0576

21 2025 11 0.0499

21 2025 12 0.0431

21 2025 13 0.0346

21 2025 14 0.0264

21 2025 15 0.0189

21 2025 16 0.0126

21 2025 17 0.0111

21 2025 18 0.0097

21 2025 19 0.0077

21 2025 20 0.0058

21 2025 21 0.0043

21 2025 22 0.0033

21 2025 23 0.0027

21 2025 24 0.0021

21 2025 25 0.0017

21 2025 26 0.0012

21 2025 27 0.0008

21 2025 28 0.0006

21 2025 29 0.0005

21 2025 30 0.0005
32 

sourceTypeID yearID ageID ageFraction

31 2025 0 0.0583

31 2025 1 0.0568

31 2025 2 0.0555

31 2025 3 0.0544

31 2025 4 0.0540

31 2025 5 0.0534

31 2025 6 0.0528

31 2025 7 0.0518

31 2025 8 0.0508

31 2025 9 0.0493

31 2025 10 0.0481

31 2025 11 0.0459

31 2025 12 0.0426

31 2025 13 0.0381

31 2025 14 0.0340

31 2025 15 0.0284

31 2025 16 0.0180

31 2025 17 0.0205

31 2025 18 0.0273

31 2025 19 0.0249

31 2025 20 0.0236

31 2025 21 0.0211

31 2025 22 0.0178

31 2025 23 0.0153

31 2025 24 0.0134

31 2025 25 0.0113

31 2025 26 0.0091

31 2025 27 0.0072

31 2025 28 0.0059

31 2025 29 0.0049

31 2025 30 0.0056

Note: File contains 373 records and is available on request 
33 

Exhibit 4: Vehicle Classification Counts 

Weekday vehicle classification counts from GDOT were obtained for the years 2008 through 2010 for the entire 

state of Georgia. The counts for the 13 county nonattainment Atlanta MPO area were eliminated from the 

calculations. The vehicle classification counts collected were stratified based on the FHWA vehicle 

classifications. The counts were then summarized into the 6 HPMS vehicle type categories based the FHWA 

vehicle classifications. The percent by vehicle type by road type based on functional classification was calculated 

by year and then averaged for the three years. Table1 list the counts by year. Table 2 lists the final factors of 

VMT by vehicle type by road type based on the counts. These values were used to weight the VMT from 

the travel demand model by road type by vehicle type for input into AADVMT worksheet.
34 

Table 1 

GDOT Vehicle Classification Counts 

2008 Statewide minus ARC 13 County MPO Area

RuralRestrictedAccess (FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

UrbanRestrictedAccess(FC=11‐12)

UrbanUnrestrictedAccess(FC=14‐19)

RuralRestrictedAccess(FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

URA(

10 Motorcycles Class 1 415,477 276,557 703,762 273,810 0.3% 0.4% 

20 Passenger Cars Class 2 78,146,859 45,813,738 134,370,835 70,721,022 55.0% 64.5% 

30 Other 2 axle‐4 tire vehicles Class 3 23,048,320 16,181,222 37,536,241 19,040,830 16.2% 22.8% 

40 Buses Class 4 1,348,962 412,115 1,464,298 372,563 0.9% 0.6% 

50 Single Unit Trucks Class 5‐7 5,177,758 3,054,596 6,643,091 2,735,728 3.6% 4.3% 

60 Combination Trucks Class 8‐13 33,983,937 5,320,479 24,746,197 1,724,995 23.9% 7.5% 

142,121,313 71,058,707 205,464,424 94,868,948 100% 100% 

2009 Statewide minus ARC 13 County MPO Area

RuralRestrictedAccess (FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

UrbanRestrictedAccess(FC=11‐12)

UrbanUnrestrictedAccess(FC=14‐19)

RuralRestrictedAccess(FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

URA(

10 Motorcycles Class 1 543,569 380,461 552,296 334,712 0.3% 0.3% 

20 Passenger Cars Class 2 99,860,922 74,033,369 123,617,071 92,974,090 57.6% 65.0% 

30 Other 2 axle‐4 tire vehicles Class 3 29,013,174 25,257,242 35,153,989 26,580,997 16.7% 22.2% 

40 Buses Class 4 1,445,231 636,498 1,260,763 480,718 0.8% 0.6% 

50 Single Unit Trucks Class 5‐7 5,931,816 4,577,695 5,977,298 3,774,967 3.4% 4.0% 

60 Combination Trucks Class 8‐13 36,572,792 9,058,107 19,363,526 2,566,080 21.1% 7.9% 

173,367,504 113,943,372 185,924,943 126,711,564 100% 100% 

Code HPMS Vehicle Type

FHWAVeh Class

Weekday Counts Percent by 

Weekday Counts Percent by 

Code HPMS Vehicle Type

FHWAVeh Class
35 

Table 1 

GDOT Vehicle Classification Counts (continued) 

2010 Statewide minus ARC 13 County MPO Area

RuralRestrictedAccess (FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

UrbanRestrictedAccess(FC=11‐12)

UrbanUnrestricted

Access(FC=14‐19)

RuralRestrictedAccess(FC=1)

RuralUnrestricted

Access(FC=2‐7)

URA(

10 Motorcycles Class 1 531,781 465,637 767,240 413,477 0.3% 0.3% 

20 Passenger Cars Class 2 115,785,383 90,783,273 163,511,794 103,655,999 58.1% 64.4% 

30 Other 2 axle‐4 tire vehicles Class 3 33,029,619 31,077,060 45,607,435 29,985,205 16.6% 22.1% 

40 Buses Class 4 1,648,242 837,435 1,403,597 520,635 0.8% 0.6% 

50 Single Unit Trucks Class 5‐7 6,527,272 5,527,587 7,477,099 4,162,187 3.3% 3.9% 

60 Combination Trucks Class 8‐13 41,728,831 12,222,357 21,492,738 2,746,397 20.9% 8.7% 

Total 199,251,128 140,913,349 240,259,903 141,483,900 100% 100% 

2008‐2010 Statewide minus ARC 13 County MPO Area Summary

RuralRestrictedAccess (FC=1)

RuralUnrestrictedAccess(FC=2‐7)

UrbanRestrictedAccess(FC=11‐12)

UrbanUnrestricted

Access(FC=14‐19)

RuralRestrictedAccess(FC=1)

RuralUnrestricted

Access(FC=2‐7)

URA(

10 Motorcycles Class 1 1,490,827 1,122,655 2,023,298 1,021,999 0.3% 0.3% 

20 Passenger Cars Class 2 293,793,164 210,630,380 421,499,700 267,351,111 57.7% 67.7% 

30 Other 2 axle‐4 tire vehicles Class 3 85,091,113 72,515,524 118,297,665 75,607,032 16.7% 20.7% 

40 Buses Class 4 4,442,435 1,886,048 4,128,658 1,373,916 0.9% 0.6% 

50 Single Unit Trucks Class 5‐7 17,636,846 13,159,878 20,097,488 10,672,882 3.4% 3.8% 

60 Combination Trucks Class 8‐13 112,285,560 26,600,943 65,602,461 7,037,472 21.0% 6.9% 

Total 514,739,945 325,915,428 631,649,270 363,064,412 100% 100% 

Code HPMS Vehicle Type

FHWAVeh Class

Weekday Counts Percent by 

Code HPMS Vehicle Type

FHWAVeh Class

Weekday Counts Percent by 
36 
Table 2 

Final Factors for VMT by Vehicle Type by Road Type 

Code 

HPMS Vehicle 

Type 

FHWA 

Veh 

Class 

Rural 

Restricted 

Access 

Factor

Rural 

Unrestricted 

Access 

Factor

Urban 

Restricted 

Access 

Factor 

Urban 

Unrestricted 

Access 

Factor

10 Motorcycles Class 1 0.002909 0.003512 0.003196 0.002817

20 Passenger Cars Class 2 0.568990 0.646239 0.666475 0.737280

30 

Other 2 axle-4 tire 

vehicles Class 3 0.165098 0.223307 0.187197 0.207472

40 Buses Class 4 0.008700 0.005776 0.006583 0.003800

50 Single Unit Trucks 

Class 5-

7 0.034469 0.040796 0.031867 0.029349

60 Combination Trucks 

Class 8-

13 0.219834 0.080369 0.104681 0.019282

 Total 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000

Since the vehicle classification counts are collected using counters that do not adequately 

distinguish between passenger cars and SUVs, the MOVES defaults for vehicle types 20 and 30 by 

road type were used to redistribute the VMT. The MOVES Defaults are listed in Table 3. 

Table 3 

MOVES Defaults 

Percent VMT by Vehicle Type 

Vehicle Type

Year 10 20 30 40 50 60

1999 0.00390 0.58310 0.33480 0.00280 0.02610 0.04920

2000 0.00380 0.58250 0.33600 0.00280 0.02570 0.04920

2001 0.00340 0.58240 0.33740 0.00250 0.02590 0.04850

2002 0.00330 0.58110 0.33850 0.00240 0.02660 0.04820

2003 0.00330 0.57880 0.34060 0.00230 0.02690 0.04810

2004 0.00340 0.57260 0.34600 0.00220 0.02730 0.04850

2005 0.00360 0.57060 0.34770 0.00220 0.02710 0.04870

2006 0.00400 0.55990 0.35850 0.00220 0.02750 0.04780

2007 0.00450 0.55070 0.36630 0.00220 0.02790 0.04840

2008 0.00510 0.54610 0.36980 0.00230 0.02870 0.04800

2009 0.00530 0.54760 0.37480 0.00210 0.02660 0.04370

2010 0.00530 0.54360 0.37770 0.00220 0.02770 0.04350

2011 0.00530 0.53940 0.37830 0.00240 0.02970 0.04500

2012 0.00530 0.53700 0.37740 0.00250 0.03140 0.04640
38 

Vehicle Type

Year 10 20 30 40 50 60

2013 0.00520 0.53640 0.37610 0.00260 0.03240 0.04730

2014 0.00520 0.53780 0.37370 0.00260 0.03310 0.04760

2015 0.00511 0.54185 0.36926 0.00266 0.03358 0.04754

2016 0.00505 0.54655 0.36414 0.00270 0.03413 0.04743

2017 0.00500 0.55148 0.35868 0.00274 0.03465 0.04744

2018 0.00495 0.55719 0.35240 0.00278 0.03509 0.04759

2019 0.00490 0.56346 0.34559 0.00281 0.03548 0.04777

2020 0.00484 0.57033 0.33840 0.00283 0.03581 0.04779

2021 0.00479 0.57743 0.33138 0.00285 0.03599 0.04755

2022 0.00475 0.58459 0.32444 0.00286 0.03613 0.04723

2023 0.00471 0.59142 0.31755 0.00288 0.03639 0.04705

2024 0.00466 0.59782 0.31089 0.00291 0.03674 0.04698

2025 0.00462 0.60374 0.30470 0.00294 0.03709 0.04692

2026 0.00458 0.60921 0.29896 0.00296 0.03745 0.04684

2027 0.00455 0.61410 0.29377 0.00300 0.03784 0.04674

2028 0.00452 0.61852 0.28903 0.00303 0.03828 0.04662

2029 0.00450 0.62265 0.28449 0.00307 0.03876 0.04652

2030 0.00448 0.62625 0.28038 0.00311 0.03930 0.04648

2031 0.00444 0.62984 0.27688 0.00313 0.03959 0.04611

2032 0.00440 0.63303 0.27380 0.00316 0.03987 0.04574

2033 0.00436 0.63573 0.27104 0.00319 0.04023 0.04545

2034 0.00432 0.63812 0.26857 0.00321 0.04058 0.04519

2035 0.00429 0.64015 0.26636 0.00324 0.04096 0.04501

2036 0.00425 0.64184 0.26447 0.00327 0.04134 0.04483

2037 0.00421 0.64323 0.26287 0.00330 0.04173 0.04465

2038 0.00418 0.64417 0.26173 0.00333 0.04211 0.04447

2039 0.00414 0.64476 0.26096 0.00336 0.04249 0.04428

2040 0.00411 0.64532 0.26017 0.00340 0.04289 0.04411

2041 0.00407 0.64586 0.25937 0.00343 0.04331 0.04396

2042 0.00404 0.64630 0.25864 0.00346 0.04374 0.04381

2043 0.00401 0.64666 0.25799 0.00350 0.04418 0.04366

2044 0.00398 0.64693 0.25741 0.00353 0.04462 0.04352

2045 0.00395 0.64711 0.25692 0.00357 0.04507 0.04338

2046 0.00392 0.64719 0.25653 0.00360 0.04552 0.04324

2047 0.00389 0.64720 0.25620 0.00364 0.04598 0.04310

2048 0.00386 0.64715 0.25593 0.00368 0.04643 0.04295

2049 0.00383 0.64704 0.25572 0.00371 0.04690 0.04281

2050 0.00380 0.64689 0.25554 0.00375 0.04736 0.04266
39 

Exhibit 5: Vehicle Registration Data 

Georgia's Revised Registration Distribution by Age 

Overview

R.L. Polk & Co. (Polk) maintains databases encompassing all registered vehicles 

in operation by state. Polk acquires the source registration data from the states 

and then processes and enhances the data. Key data elements Polk used for 

grouping vehicle registered in Georgia by their appropriate composite (i.e., 

gasoline and diesel) vehicle types were: vehicle make, vehicle model, engine 

make, engine model, fuel type, cab type, bed length, wheel configuration, vehicle 

type, gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR)3 class, model year, and registration 

geography (i.e., county). 

Vehicle characteristic data elements used by Polk are derived from the unique 17 

position vehicle identification number (VIN) assigned to every vehicle. Vehicle 

geography is assigned based on the registration address linked to each VIN. 

In order to assign a MOBILE6 category to all registered vehicles, Polk 

constructed a master vehicle workfile using data from Polk’s TIPNet and NVPP 

databases. This master vehicle workfile accounts for all registered vehicles, 

including: cars, vans, sport utility vehicles, trucks, buses, school buses, and 

motorcycles (GVWR classes 1-8 + motorcycle). The GVWR classes are: 

Class 1 0 - 6,000 lbs. 

Class 2 6,001 - 10,000 lbs. 

Class 3 10,001 - 14,000 lbs. 

Class 4 14,001 - 16,000 lbs. 

Class 5 16,001 - 19,500 lbs. 

Class 6 19,501 - 26,000 lbs. 

Class 7 26,001 - 33,000 lbs. 

Class 8 33,001 - 150,000 lbs. 

The TIPNet database contains vehicles from full-size pickups/vans through class 8 

(GVWR classes 1c-8), and is structured to serve the commercial vehicle market. The 

NVPP database contains vehicles GVWR classes 1-3 and is designed to serve the car, 

light truck/van, and motorcycle aftermarket. 

 3

 The GVWR is the maximum weight of the vehicle when it is fully loaded, as specified by the 

manufacturer. 
40 

Using the data elements listed above, Polk assigned one of the 16 MOBILE6 

categories to each of the vehicles in the workfile. Care was taken to assure that no 

makes and models are duplicated between the two databases. Note that the unit 

volume for same make/model vehicles can be divided among two or more MOBILE6 

categories due to varying vehicle types and GVWR classes within a specific 

make/model. TIPNet data supplies GVWR classes 1c-8 (full-size pickups/vans & 

heavier), while NVPP data provides passenger car, motorcycle, light truck, and light 

vans from GVWR class 1. 

The 16 composite MOBILE6 vehicle types are listed and defined below, with 

examples of the types of vehicles they include. 

Number Abbreviation Description

1 LDV Light-Duty (LD) Vehicles (Passenger Cars)

- Class 1 GVWR 

- Include: Passenger Cars 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Source: R.L. Polk NVPP as of October 2002 

2 LDT1 LD Trucks 1 (0-6,000 lbs. GVWR, 0- 3,750 lbs. 

LVW4

) 

- Class 1 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Exclude Full-Size Pickups & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Source: R.L. Polk NVPP as of October 2002 

3 LDT2 LD Trucks 2 (0-6,000 lbs. GVWR, 3,751-5,750 lbs. 

LVW) 

- Class 1 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Include all Full-Size Pickups & Vans (e.g. 150/1500 series vehicles: F150, 

C/K 1500, E150, Ram 1500 etc.) 

- Include Vehicle Types: Incomplete Pickup + Cab Chassis 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 & NVPP as of October 2002 

4 LDT3 LD Trucks 3 (6,001-8,500 lbs. GVWR, 0-5,750 lbs. ALVW5

) 

- Class 2 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- GVWR: 6,001-8,000 for Ford, Chevy, Dodge, plus all Toyota Tundra 

Models 

 4

 Loaded vehicle weight, the weight of vehicle sitting empty (curb weight) plus 300 pounds. 

5

 Adjusted loaded vehicle weight, average of the gross vehicle weight and the curb weight. 
41 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude: Pickups with Long Bed or Vans with Extended Length (Except 

Tundra) 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: Incomplete Pickup + Cab Chassis + Incomplete 

Vehicle + Straight Truck + School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 & NVPP as of October 2002 

Number Abbreviation Description

5 LDT4 Light-Duty Trucks 4 (6,001-8,500 lbs. GVWR, >5,750 lbs. 

ALVW) 

- Class 2 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- GVWR: 6,001-8,000 for Ford, Chevy, & Dodge 

- Exclude: all Toyota Tundra Models 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Include: Pickups with Long Bed or Vans with Extended Length 

- Include Vehicle Types: Incomplete Pickup + Cab Chassis + Incomplete 

Vehicle + Straight Truck 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

6 HDV2B Class 2b Heavy-Duty Vehicles (8,501-10,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 2 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- GVWR: 8,001-10,000 for Ford, Chevy, & Dodge 

- Exclude: All Toyota Tundra Models 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Include: Pickups with Long Bed or Vans with Extended Length 

- Include Vehicle Types: Incomplete Pickup + Cab Chassis + Incomplete 

Vehicle + Straight Truck 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

7 HDV3 Class 3 Heavy-Duty Vehicles (10,001-14,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 3 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 
42 

Number Abbreviation Description

8 HDV4 Class 4 Heavy-Duty Vehicles (14,001-16,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 4 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

9 HDV5 Class 5 Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles (16,001-19,500 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 5 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

10 HDV6 Class 6 Heavy-Duty Vehicles (19,501-26,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 6 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

11 HDV7 Class 7 Heavy-Duty Vehicles (26,001-33,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 7 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

12 HDV8A Class 8a Heavy-Duty Vehicles (33,001-60,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 8 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: School Bus + Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Include Vehicle Types: 4x2 Non-Tractor Vehicles + All Tractors + Motor 

Home Chassis 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 
43 

13 HDV8B Class 8b Heavy-Duty Vehicles (>60,000 lbs. 

GVWR) 

- Class 8 GVWR 

- Trucks, SUVs, & Vans 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Exclude Vehicle Types: All Tractors + School Bus + Bus Non-School 

(Coach) 

- Exclude Wheels: 4x2 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

14 HDBS School Buses

- Include Vehicle Type: School Bus 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

Number Abbreviation Description

15 HDBT Transit & Urban Buses

- Include Vehicle Type: Bus Non-School (Coach) 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Source: R.L. Polk TIPNet as of March 2003 

16 MC Motorcycles (All) 

- Fuel: All Types 

- Source: R.L. Polk NVPP as of October 2002 

The data acquired from Polk was queried to determine the number of vehicles 

registered in the Catoosa-Walker-Floyd metropolitan statistical area by age and 

vehicle type. Results of this query were used to develop Registration distribution by 

age inputs. For each of the 16 composite vehicle types, the fraction of all vehicles of 

that type which are zero-to-one model year old, two model years old, three model 

years old, etc., up to the oldest category, 25-model-years-and-older, was determined. 

The resulting input data is shown on the following two pages. Note that the Polkderived distribution for Class 8b vehicles (vehicle type 13) is commented out; in 

accordance with EPA guidance, defaults were used for this vehicle type. 
44 

Exhibit 6: Source Type Population Input Data Preparation 

1) Date sources 

2002-2003 Polk’s data: Registration data from R. L. Polk & Co.'s National 

Vehicle Population Profile ® (current as of October 2002) and R. L. Polk & Co.'s 

TIPNet ® (current as of March 2003) are used. This database includes number of 

vehicles by age and 16 vehicle types in each Georgia county, and has been used to 

develop age distribution. 

Georgia registration data (2003 and 2007): These registration data were obtained 

from www.georgiastats.uga.edu. This database includes number of vehicles by 

passenger vehicles, trucks, trailers, motorcycles, buses and others in each county 

as explained on the Georgia Department of Revenue website 

(http://motor.etax.dor.ga.gov/stats/renewalsstats.aspx). Passenger Vehicles 

include Ambulances, Convertibles, Coupes, Hearses, Jeeps, Limousines, Mixers, 

Motor Homes, Multi-Purpose Vehicles, Roadsters, Station Wagons, Touring Cars, 

Vans, 2 Doors, 3 Doors, and 4 Doors. Trucks include Truck Tractors, Trucks, and 

Wreckers. 

2) Methodology 

The Polk’s data were summarized by 16 vehicles types in each county and then 

grown to 2007 using different growth factors by vehicle types (Table 1). The 

number of HDBS, HDBT and MC in Polk’s data is comparable to Georgia 

registration data (Table 2 and Table 3). Therefore, the numbers of HDBS and 

HDBT were grown to 2007 by multiplying ratios of the number of buses in 

Georgia motor vehicle registration data in 2007 and 2003. The number of MC 

was grown to 2007 by multiplying ratios of the number of motor cycles in 

Georgia motor vehicle registration data in 2007 and 2003. The number of the rest 

of vehicle types was grown to 2007 by multiplying ratios of human population in 

2007 and 2002. The Georgia motor vehicle registration data were not used for 

these vehicle types due to the difficulty to match the vehicle type used in Georgia 

motor vehicle registration data to the 16 vehicle types as used in the Polk's data. 

Since the ratios of 2007 and 2003 passenger cars and trucks in motor vehicle 

registration data are comparable to the ratios of population data (Table 4), 

population data were used as the growth indicator. 

Table 1. List of different growth factors used by vehicle types 

Vehicle types Growth factor 

HDBS Georgia registration data (2003 and 2007), Buses 

HDBT Georgia registration data (2003 and 2007), Buses 

HDV2B Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV3 Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV4 Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV5 Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV6 Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV7 Population 2002 and 2007 
45 

HDV8A Population 2002 and 2007 

HDV8B Population 2002 and 2007 

LDT1 Population 2002 and 2007 

LDT2 Population 2002 and 2007 

LDT3 Population 2002 and 2007 

LDT4 Population 2002 and 2007 

LDV Population 2002 and 2007 

MC Georgia registration data (2003 and 2007), Motor cycles 

Table 2. Summary of 2002-2003 Polk’s data by 16 mobile vehicle types in four Georgia 

regions 

Vehicle types ATL13 ATL7 GAGAS GAOTHER Total 

HDBS 7,854 1,333 2,032 8,221 19,440 

HDBT 1,362 102 139 540 2,143 

HDV2B 56,809 11,761 15,405 49,039 133,014 

HDV3 27,628 5,996 7,822 23,797 65,243 

HDV4 13,623 2,262 2,850 10,351 29,086 

HDV5 6,005 1,162 1,550 5,577 14,294 

HDV6 19,294 4,088 5,932 21,688 51,002 

HDV7 16,380 2,528 3,838 15,309 38,055 

HDV8A 37,555 4,307 6,619 31,883 80,364 

HDV8B 14,449 2,201 3,061 10,926 30,637 

LDT1 722,044 131,873 181,393 607,189 1,642,499 

LDT2 95,101 28,933 37,692 156,187 317,913 

LDT3 302,139 62,530 75,409 284,851 724,929 

LDT4 43,616 8,019 9,721 39,432 100,788 

LDV 1,723,769 255,647 346,907 1,383,696 3,710,019 

MC 50,081 10,657 13,767 41,123 115,628 

Table 3. Summary of 2003 Georgia registration data by 4 mobile vehicle types 

Vehicle types ATL13 ATL7 GAGAS GAOTHER Total 

Buses 10,676 1,559 2,434 9,797 21,237 

Trucks 558,496 168,930 237,022 823,867 1,788,315 

Passenger Cars 2,259,027 339,456 449,177 1,744,474 4,792,134 

Motorcycles 46,836 10,203 13,124 38,561 108,724 

Table 4. Comparison between different growth factors 

 Ratios 

 2002 2003 2007 2007/2002 2007/2003 

Motor vehicle registration 

Passenger Car 4,792,134 5,330,256 1.112 

Trucks 1,788,315 1,952,470 1.092 

Motor Cycle 108,724 174,617 1.606 

Bus 21,237 35,124 1.654 

Population in Georgia, U.S. Census 

Population 8,585,535 8,735,259 9,533,761 1.110 1.091 

Total Average Annual Daily VMT in Georgia, Georgia DOT 445 report, miles 

VMT 292,562,380 296,810,994 305,327,543 1.044 1.029 

MOVES national SALESGROWTH factor defaults 

Motorcycle 1.383 1.311 

Passenger Car 0.940 1.001 

Passenger Truck 0.972 0.948 

Light Commercial Truck 0.972 0.948 

Intercity Bus 1.353 1.268 
46 

Transit Bus 1.353 1.268 

School Bus 1.353 1.268 

Refuse Truck 1.353 1.268 

Single Unit Short-haul Truck 1.353 1.268 

Single Unit Long-haul Truck 1.353 1.268 

Motor Home 1.353 1.268 

Combination Short-haul Truck 1.464 1.405 

Combination Long-haul Truck 1.464 1.405 

The projected 2007 vehicle population by 16 vehicle types in each county were then 

converted to 32 vehicles types, which were matched with 28 vehicle types and 12 

vehicle types (corresponding to 12 SCC codes) as shown in the EPA MOVES 

converter tool. The EPA MOVES converter tool was also used to convert vehicle 

population in MOVES format by each of the four reference counties. These 

populations are the sum of populations of all counties sharing the same reference 

counties. 
47 

Exhibit 7: Directions for Producing Emissions for Walker County 

Donut Area 

Using MOVES 

Two sets of emissions are produced, running and non-running emissions. 

Running Emissions

The Consultant for the Chattanooga-Hamilton County-North Georgia Transportation 

Planning Organization provides the Transcad networks as shape files. 

A combination of procedures is used to estimate the running and non-running emissions. 

Some manipulation of the dbf file of the network is performed which is used to produce 

summaries of VMT, mileage and average weighted speeds. This information is then 

utilized to calculate the following. 

 VMT by functional class by year 

 Future growth factors based on growth in VMT for Walker and Catoosa counties 

from travel demand model 

 Future VMT and emissions 

Then summaries for every scenario year are prepared to produce growth rates as shown in 

the sample below. 

 Summary of Mileage and VMT by County for Chattanooga for 2002 

 

 Route Milege Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 

HPMS Code Catoosa Walker Dade Tenn Catoosa Walker Dade 

Tenn 

 0 561.2 282.0 53.1 0.0 0 0 0 

0 

 1 26.0 0 24.5 0 448,248.4 0 364,821.8 

0 

 2 2.5 20.4 0 0 36,586.8 233,377.5 0 

0 

 6 16.1 3.0 2.8 0 77,988.0 7,595.1 7,303.2 

0 

 7 44.6 15.2 8.7 0 84,677.4 34,528.2 34,176.1 

0 

 8 22.5 0.4 0 0 27,641.0 562.4 0 

0 

 9 93.1 57.1 4.0 0 52,491.7 35,303.7 3,817.2 

0 

 11 39.2 0.1 1.1 0 745,998.2 0 1,424.5 

0 

 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 

 14 4.6 7.0 1.9 0 83,115.0 108,944.2 8,622.0 

0 

 16 64.4 39.3 0.8 0 399,373.8 146,321.9 1,249.7 

0 

 17 29.1 28.1 0 0 62,737.9 47,091.4 0 

0 

 19 158.2 92.3 2.7 0 162,138.2 79,989.7 774.4 

0 

Total 1,061.3 544.8 99.5 0.0 2,180,996.6 693,714.3 422,188.7 

0 
48 

Catoosa

HPMS Code 2002 2009 Growth 2015 Growth 2025 Growth 2035 Growth

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 

1 448,248.00 412,538.00 0.92 439,151.00 0.98 482,950.00 1.08 526,958.00 1.18

2 36,586.80 31,564.00 0.86 33,498.00 0.92 37,223.40 1.02 41,739.00 1.14

6 77,988.00 80,783.00 1.04 86,908.00 1.11 102,907.40 1.32 114,786.00 1.47

7 84,677.00 91,445.00 1.08 104,485.00 1.23 138,785.00 1.64 164,065.00 1.94

8 27,641.00 30,627.00 1.11 37,056.00 1.34 48,012.00 1.74 60,010.00 2.17

9 52,491.70 58,165.00 1.11 67,411.00 1.28 82,810.00 1.58 99,518.00 1.90

11 745,998.00 712,232.00 0.95 768,853.00 1.03 851,923.00 1.14 933,507.00 1.25

12 0 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 #DIV/0! 0 #DIV/0!

14 83,115.00 79,828.00 0.96 83,656.00 1.01 90,710.00 1.09 93,801.00 1.13

16 399,373.80 403,662.00 1.01 445,898.00 1.12 492,844.00 1.23 546,046.00 1.37

17 62,738.00 62,789.00 1.00 61,890.00 0.99 73,862.00 1.18 83,362.00 1.33

19 162,138.20 172,941.00 1.07 189,203.00 1.17 213,447.00 1.32 238,012.00 1.47

Total 2,180,995.50 2,136,574.00 0.98 2,318,009.00 1.06 2,615,473.80 1.20 2,901,804.00 1.33

Walker

HPMS Code 2002 2009 Growth 2015 Growth 2025 Growth 2035 Growth

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0! 0.00 #DIV/0!

1 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 #DIV/0!

2 233,378.00 192,078.00 0.82 206,524.00 0.88 230,818.00 0.99 258,162.00 1.11

6 7,595.00 1,960.00 0.26 2,086.00 0.27 2,234.00 0.29 2,378.00 0.31

7 34,528.00 34,713.00 1.01 41,030.00 1.19 50,421.00 1.46 59,940.00 1.74

8 562.00 566.00 1.01 877.00 1.56 1,358.00 2.42 1,786.00 3.18

9 35,303.00 34,544.00 0.98 38,141.00 1.08 45,021.00 1.28 49,402.00 1.40

11 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 #DIV/0!

12 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 #DIV/0!

14 108,944.00 103,625.00 0.95 109,616.00 1.01 119,827.00 1.10 130,447.00 1.20

16 146,322.00 136,165.00 0.93 144,703.00 0.99 160,418.00 1.10 183,650.00 1.26

17 47,091.00 44,454.00 0.94 46,793.00 0.99 51,418.00 1.09 51,077.00 1.08

19 79,990.00 74,755.00 0.93 80,294.00 1.00 89,057.00 1.11 98,060.00 1.23

Total 693,713.00 622,860.00 0.90 670,064.00 0.97 750,572.00 1.08 834,902.00 1.20

1990 Code Total Georgia for Walker and Catoosa

HPMS Code 2002 2009 Growth 2015 Growth 2025 Growth 2035 Growth

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0!

1 448,248.00 412,538.00 0.92 439,151.00 0.98 482,950.00 1.08 526,958.00 1.18

2 269,964.80 223,642.00 0.83 240,022.00 0.89 268,041.40 0.99 299,901.00 1.11

6 85,583.00 82,743.00 0.97 88,994.00 1.04 105,141.40 1.23 117,164.00 1.37

7 119,205.00 126,158.00 1.06 145,515.00 1.22 189,206.00 1.59 224,005.00 1.88

8 28,203.00 31,193.00 1.11 37,933.00 1.34 49,370.00 1.75 61,796.00 2.19

9 87,794.70 92,709.00 1.06 105,552.00 1.20 127,831.00 1.46 148,920.00 1.70

11 745,998.00 712,232.00 0.95 768,853.00 1.03 851,923.00 1.14 933,507.00 1.25

12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 #DIV/0!

14 192,059.00 183,453.00 0.96 193,272.00 1.01 210,537.00 1.10 224,248.00 1.17

16 545,695.80 539,827.00 0.99 590,601.00 1.08 653,262.00 1.20 729,696.00 1.34

17 109,829.00 107,243.00 0.98 108,683.00 0.99 125,280.00 1.14 134,439.00 1.22

19 242,128.20 247,696.00 1.02 269,497.00 1.11 302,504.00 1.25 336,072.00 1.39

Total 2,874,708.50 2,759,434.00 0.96 2,988,073.00 1.04 3,366,045.80 1.17 3,736,706.00 1.30

Then estimate the base year VMT for the donut area by functional class. The comparison 

of Model VMT to HPMS Mileage is reviewed to pro-rate the amount of VMT needed. 

Normally, it is expected that the mileage in the model summary will be less than the 

mileage in the total county. In a couple of cases, functional class 2 and 16, the Model 

mileage and VMT exceed HPMS values, so it is assumed that all of these facilities are in 

the model network and do not need to be accounted for in the donut area. The following 

figure is the nonattainment area and the next figure is the base network color-coded by 

county. 
49 

Walker County Non-attainment Donut Area 

Base Year Network 
50 
51 

Compare Model Mileage to HPMS Total Mileage

 

HPMS 

Code

Model 

Mileage Model VMT RC File

Total HPMS 

Mileage for 

County

Pro-rate 

Mileage 

Factor

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Pro-rate VMT 

based on 

route mileage 

for Model area

HPMS Adj 

Factor for 

Model Area

0 282.00 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 0.00 0.00 0 1.00 0 0

2 20.40 233,378 7.00 19.57 1.04 191,985 191,985 0.82

6 3.00 7,595 0.37 30.3 0.10 101,862 10,085 1.33

7 15.20 34,528 19.44 131.65 0.12 222,679 25,710 0.74

8 0.40 562 0.44 28.65 0.01 50,506 705 1.25

9 57.10 35,304 54.74 370.32 0.15 282,006 43,483 1.23

11 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0

12 0.00 0 0.00 0 0

14 7.00 108,944 7.13 21.32 0.33 248,347 81,540 0.75

16 39.30 146,322 20.59 35.22 0.90 168,651 168,651 1.15

17 28.00 47,091 17.98 41.68 0.67 72,282 48,558 1.03

19 92.30 79,990 65.77 230.97 0.40 219,488 87,712 1.10

Total 544.70 693,714 193.46 909.68 0.60 1,557,806 658,429 0.95

0.21 331,296

Off_model Area

HPMS 

Code

2002 

Mileage 2002 VMT

0 00

1

2 -0.83 0

6 27.30 91,777

7 116.45 196,969

8 28.25 49,801

9 313.22 238,523

11 0.00 0

12 0.00 0

14 14.32 166,807

16 -4.08 0

17 13.68 23,724

19 138.67 131,776

Total 646.98 899,378

Summarize Route Mileage to use to Pro-rate VMT for Walker County to estimate HPMS Adj Factors for 

the Walker Model Area for 2002
52 

Estimate the VMT in the Walker County Donut Area 

2002 Walker County HPMS Data 2002 Travel Model VMT By HPMS Functional Class 

Average Annual Daily VMT Oct 2007, Travel Model Run

GDOT Office of Transportation Data 445 Report 

Excluded VMT for External Links

Functional Class Name

Functional Class 

No. County Total Pro-Rated VMT Functional Class Name

Functional 

Class No. Grand Total

Subtract Model 

from HPMS - 

Used for OffModel

 Rural Interstate 1 00 Rural Interstate 1 00

 Rural Prin. Arterial 2 191,985 191,985 Rural Prin. Arterial 2 233,378 0

 Rural Min. Arterial 6 101,862 10,085 Rural Min. Arterial 6 7,595 91,777

 Rural Major Collector 7 222,679 25,710 Rural Major Collector 7 34,528 196,969

 Rural Minor Collector 8 50,506 705 Rural Minor Collector 8 562 49,801

 Rural Local 9 282,006 43,483 Rural Local 9 35,304 238,523

 Urb. Interstate 11 0 0 Urb. Interstate 11 0 0

 Urb. Other Fwy 12 0 0 Urb. Other Fwy 12 0

 Urb. Prin. Arterial 14 248,347 81,540 Urb. Prin. Arterial 14 108,944 166,807

 Urb. Min. Arterial 16 168,651 168,651 Urb. Min. Arterial 16 146,322 0

 Urbanized Collector 17 72,282 48,558 Urbanized Collector 17 47,091 23,724

 Urbanized Local 19 219,488 87,712 Urbanized Local 19 79,990 131,776

 658,429 693,714 899,378

Grand Total 1,557,806 658,429 Grand Total 693,714 899,378

Calculate the average weighted speeds for Walker and Catoosa counties for each scenario 

year. 

 

 Chattanooga 2002 for Walker and Catoosa Counties 

 Average Weighted Speed by Functional Class 

 

 

 Functional Class Total VMT Total Weighted VMT Weighted Avg Spd 

 1 448,248.4 29,999,516.7 66.93 

 2 269,964.3 15,109,135.9 55.97 

 6 85,583.1 3,604,719.0 42.12 

 7 119,425.5 4,686,027.5 39.24 

 8 28,203.5 1,032,492.0 36.61 

 9 88,160.6 2,876,663.1 32.63 

 11 745,998.2 46,219,903.8 61.96 

 12 0 0 0 

 14 192,059.2 9,065,007.2 47.20 

 16 545,695.7 20,938,015.0 38.37 

 17 109,829.3 3,777,929.7 39.24 

 19 242,127.9 4,929,459.4 20.36 

 Grand Total 2,875,295.8 142,238,869.1 49.47 

The following calculations are produced 

 Estimates Emissions 

o Estimates future VMT based on growth factors entered 

o Assigns MOVES speed bin based on average weighted speeds entered for 

each functional class 

o Estimates running emission 

 Speed Bin 

o Ranges for MOVES speed bins – used to assign speed bin 

 Road Type VMT 

o MOVES road types by functional class 

 Summary – Summarizes running and non-running emissions 
53 

Sample Worksheet that Estimates Emissions 

Function

al Class

MOVES 

Roadway 

Type

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Off-Model 

2002 VMT

Avg VMT 

Weighted 

Speed

MOVES 

Speed Bin

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

NOx 

Emission 

Factor

PM2.5 

Emissions 

(grams)

NOx 

Emissions 

(grams)

2 2 191,985 0 56 12 0.2107 6.7223 0.0 0.0

6 3 101,862 91,777 42 9 0.1236 3.6717 11,344.8 336,979.0

7 3 222,679 196,969 39 9 0.1236 3.6717 24,347.8 723,214.0

8 3 50,506 49,801 37 8 0.1319 3.7137 6,570.2 184,947.0

9 3 282,006 238,523 33 8 0.1319 3.7137 31,468.1 885,807.7

14 5 248,347 166,807 47 10 0.0501 2.1712 8,362.3 362,169.8

16 5 168,651 0 38 9 0.0531 2.1939 0.0 0.0

17 5 72,282 23,724 39 9 0.0531 2.1939 1,260.6 52,048.5

19 5 219,488 131,776 20 5 0.0847 2.7938 11,155.5 368,156.1

Total 1,557,806 899,377 94,509.2 2,913,322.2

Function

al Class

MOVES 

Roadway 

Type

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Off-Model 

2002 VMT

2009 Growth 

Factor from 

2002

2009 VMT 

using 

Growth 

Factors from 

Model

Avg VMT 

Weighted 

Speed

MOVES 

Speed Bin

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

NOx 

Emission 

Factor

PM2.5 

Emissions 

(grams)

NOx 

Emissions 

(grams)

2 2 191,985 0 0.83 0 56 12 0.1370 3.5811 0.0 0.0

6 3 101,862 91,777 0.97 89,024 43 10 0.0718 1.9331 6,387.8 172,087.3

7 3 222,679 196,969 1.06 208,787 39 9 0.0769 1.9638 16,045.5 410,023.9

8 3 50,506 49,801 1.11 55,279 36 8 0.0834 2.0032 4,610.1 110,736.2

9 3 282,006 238,523 1.06 252,834 32 7 0.1063 2.2099 26,888.8 558,738.9

14 5 248,347 166,807 0.96 160,135 47 10 0.0319 1.1623 5,115.2 186,119.4

16 5 168,651 0 0.99 0 38 9 0.0345 1.1800 0.0 0.0

17 5 72,282 23,724 0.98 23,250 39 9 0.0345 1.1800 803.1 27,435.1

19 5 219,488 131,776 1.02 134,412 21 5 0.0587 1.5403 7,887.2 207,028.2

Total 1,557,806 899,377 0.96 923,720 67,737.8 1,672,168.9

Function

al Class

MOVES 

Roadway 

Type

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Off-Model 

2002 VMT

2015 Growth 

Factor from 

2002

2015 VMT 

using 

Growth 

Factors from 

Model

Avg VMT 

Weighted 

Speed

MOVES 

Speed Bin

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

NOx 

Emission 

Factor

PM2.5 

Emissions 

(grams)

NOx 

Emissions 

(grams)

2 2 191,985 0 0.89 0 56 12 0.0642 1.6826 0.0 0.0

6 3 101,862 91,777 1.04 95,448 43 10 0.0359 0.9582 3,429.0 91,455.1

7 3 222,679 196,969 1.22 240,302 39 9 0.0391 0.9713 9,393.3 233,408.7

8 3 50,506 49,801 1.34 66,733 32 7 0.0545 1.0809 3,634.5 72,134.9

9 3 282,006 238,523 1.20 286,228 24 6 0.0598 1.1488 17,104.2 328,819.5

14 5 248,347 166,807 1.01 168,475 47 10 0.0188 0.6106 3,165.5 102,877.6

16 5 168,651 0 1.08 0 38 9 0.0208 0.6173 0.0 0.0

17 5 72,282 23,724 0.99 23,487 39 9 0.0208 0.6173 487.6 14,499.1

19 5 219,488 131,776 1.11 146,271 20 5 0.0374 0.7899 5,467.6 115,532.9

Total 1,557,806 899,377 1.04 935,352 42,681.8 958,727.8

Function

al Class

MOVES 

Roadway 

Type

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Off-Model 

2002 VMT

2025 Growth 

Factor from 

2002

2025 VMT 

using 

Growth 

Factors from 

Model

Avg VMT 

Weighted 

Speed

MOVES 

Speed Bin

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

NOx 

Emission 

Factor

PM2.5 

Emissions 

(grams)

NOx 

Emissions 

(grams)

2 2 191,985 0 1.00 0 56 12 0.0196 0.6092 0.0 0.0

6 3 101,862 91,777 1.23 112,886 44 10 0.0152 0.3783 1,719.3 42,710.1

7 3 222,679 196,969 1.59 313,181 40 9 0.0172 0.3820 5,379.8 119,639.9

8 3 50,506 49,801 1.75 87,152 36 8 0.0197 0.3868 1,715.6 33,708.2

9 3 282,006 238,523 1.46 348,244 32 7 0.0242 0.4181 8,443.3 145,603.6

14 5 248,347 166,807 1.10 183,488 47 10 0.0106 0.2511 1,946.5 46,081.1

16 5 168,651 0 1.20 0 39 9 0.0121 0.2517 0.0 0.0

17 5 72,282 23,724 1.14 27,045 39 9 0.0121 0.2517 327.1 6,806.7

19 5 219,488 131,776 1.25 164,720 21 5 0.0234 0.3089 3,859.2 50,888.2

Total 1,557,806 899,377 1.17 1,052,271 23,390.7 445,437.8

Function

al Class

MOVES 

Roadway 

Type

Total 

County 

HPMS VMT

Off-Model 

2002 VMT

2035 Growth 

Factor from 

2002

2035 VMT 

using 

Growth 

Factors from 

Model

Avg VMT 

Weighted 

Speed

MOVES 

Speed Bin

PM2.5 

Emission 

Factor

NOx 

Emission 

Factor

PM2.5 

Emissions 

(grams)

NOx 

Emissions 

(grams)

2 2 191,985 0 1.11 0 56 12 0.0131 0.4345 0.0 0.0

6 3 101,862 91,777 1.37 125,734 43 10 0.0116 0.2790 1,459.3 35,080.4

7 3 222,679 196,969 1.88 370,302 40 9 0.0133 0.2810 4,928.5 104,072.7

8 3 50,506 49,801 2.19 109,064 36 8 0.0155 0.2837 1,690.9 30,944.1

9 3 282,006 238,523 1.70 405,489 31 7 0.0189 0.3049 7,653.2 123,624.4

14 5 248,347 166,807 1.17 195,164 47 10 0.0090 0.1879 1,764.4 36,668.9

16 5 168,651 0 1.34 0 39 9 0.0104 0.1875 0.0 0.0

17 5 72,282 23,724 1.22 28,943 40 9 0.0104 0.1875 301.1 5,425.9

19 5 219,488 131,776 1.39 183,169 21 5 0.0206 0.2257 3,775.4 41,350.0

Total 1,557,806 899,377 1.30 1,169,190 21,572.9 377,166.4

2015 VMT Estimates

2025 VMT Estimates Emissions

2035 VMT Estimates Emissions

Emissions

2002 VMT Estimates Emissions

2009 VMT Estimates Emissions
54 

Non-Running Emissions

Uses two sets of inputs, one from a MOVES Inventory run to produce the raterpervehicle 

csv files by year provided by the Consultant for Chattanooga-Hamilton County-North 

Georgia Transportation Planning Organization and the source vehicle population for 

Walker donut area only, also provided by the Consultant for Chattanooga-Hamilton 

County-North Georgia Transportation Planning Organization. 

Emissions by pollutant by process by source type 

MOVESSceMOVESRunyearID monthID dayID hourID zoneID pollutantIDprocessID sourceTypeSCC fuelTypeIDmodelYeartemperatu ratePerVeh

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 11 0 0 53.925 0.004429

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 21 0 0 53.925 0.077338

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 31 0 0 53.925 0.094661

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 32 0 0 53.925 0.094518

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 41 0 0 53.925 0.055112

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 51 0 0 53.925 0.014367

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 53 0 0 53.925 0.473858

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 54 0 0 53.925 0.048803

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 61 0 0 53.925 0.017771

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 2 62 0 0 53.925 0.066364

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 1 90 62 0 0 53.925 13.6234

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 11 0 0 53.925 0.001118

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 21 0 0 53.925 0.059741

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 31 0 0 53.925 0.085073

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 32 0 0 53.925 0.097011

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 41 0 0 53.925 0.074074

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 51 0 0 53.925 0.012731

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 53 0 0 53.925 0.373121

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 54 0 0 53.925 0.020388

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 61 0 0 53.925 0.017416

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 2 62 0 0 53.925 0.134946

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 11 0 0 53.925 0

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 21 0 0 53.925 1.29E‐06

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 31 0 0 53.925 2.50E‐06

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 32 0 0 53.925 7.48E‐06

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 41 0 0 53.925 3.70E‐05

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 51 0 0 53.925 4.73E‐06

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 53 0 0 53.925 4.91E‐05

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 54 0 0 53.925 6.41E‐07

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 61 0 0 53.925 7.61E‐06

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 16 62 0 0 53.925 6.75E‐05

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 17 62 0 0 53.925 0.030323

chatt‐2002 1 2002 4 5 1 130470 3 90 62 0 0 53.925 60.6463
55 

The data is entered into a spreadsheet where pivot tables summarizes the rate per vehicle 

by vehicle type and pollutant and multiplies that times the number of source vehicles by 

type as shown in the example below. 

pollutantID 3

NOX Source Population

Final

Nonrunning

emissions

Row Labels Sum of ratePerVehicle Year 2002

11 0.141028711 11 596 84.0379

21 11.60972385 21 14,471 168,002.5270

31 17.23329229 31 7,759 133,721.4368

32 18.66399529 32 2,592 48,382.8146

41 2.218254813 41 11 23.5606

42 2.442557225 42 7 16.3655

43 9.31284846 43 74 688.7517

51 3.30049217 51 10 32.7373

52 16.94345616 52 519 8,795.2186

53 9.557973602 53 41 395.2339

54 3.258886501 54 110 359.0870

61 4.00518698 61 130 520.4790

62 961.1476361 62 116 111,658.5057

Grand Total 1059.835332 Total 26,436 472,680.7556

pollutantID 110

PM2.5 Source Population

Final

Nonrunning

emissions

Row Labels Sum of ratePerVehicle Year 2002

11 0.001876008 11 596 1.1179

21 0.167654394 21 14,471 2,426.1009

31 0.20641898 31 7,759 1,601.7045

32 0.264015466 32 2,592 684.4093

41 0.08582073 41 11 0.9115

42 0.127094204 42 7 0.8515

43 0.261304708 43 74 19.3254

51 0.080872484 51 10 0.8022

52 0.393625963 52 519 204.3282

53 0.116289582 53 41 4.8087

54 0.050002052 54 110 5.5096

61 0.105179485 61 130 13.6682

62 17.80950013 62 116 2,068.9664

Grand Total 19.66965419 Total 26,436 7,032.5044
56 

The total non-running and running emissions are then summarized. 

Running Emissions

MOVES Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily 

Functional Roadway PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx

Class Type (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams)

2 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6 3 11,344.8 336,979.0 6,387.8 172,087.3 3,429.0 91,455.1 1,719.3 42,710.1 1,459.3 35,080.4

7 3 24,347.8 723,214.0 16,045.5 410,023.9 9,393.3 233,408.7 5,379.8 119,639.9 4,928.5 104,072.7

8 3 6,570.2 184,947.0 4,610.1 110,736.2 3,634.5 72,134.9 1,715.6 33,708.2 1,690.9 30,944.1

9 3 31,468.1 885,807.7 26,888.8 558,738.9 17,104.2 328,819.5 8,443.3 145,603.6 7,653.2 123,624.4

14 5 8,362.3 362,169.8 5,115.2 186,119.4 3,165.5 102,877.6 1,946.5 46,081.1 1,764.4 36,668.9

16 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

17 5 1,260.6 52,048.5 803.1 27,435.1 487.6 14,499.1 327.1 6,806.7 301.1 5,425.9

19 5 11,155.5 368,156.1 7,887.2 207,028.2 5,467.6 115,532.9 3,859.2 50,888.2 3,775.4 41,350.0

Total 94,509.2 2,913,322.2 67,737.8 1,672,168.9 42,681.8 958,727.8 23,390.7 445,437.8 21,572.9 377,166.4

Non-Running Emissions

Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily 

 PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx

(Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams)

7,032.5 472,680.8 4,580.1 387,223.5 3,423.4 347,767.6 2,517.4 265,735.7 2,573.2 269,657.2

Annualization Factor =342 - Running Emissions

MOVES Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual 

Functional Roadway PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx

Class Type (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams) (Grams)

2 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6 3 3,879,908.4 115,246,809.5 2,184,615.0 58,853,841.0 1,172,730.3 31,277,661.2 588,006.5 14,606,854.7 499,095.4 11,997,500.7

7 3 8,326,941.2 247,339,189.9 5,487,573.0 140,228,159.2 3,212,513.7 79,825,759.2 1,839,893.5 40,916,856.7 1,685,538.4 35,592,871.1

8 3 2,247,005.3 63,251,869.1 1,576,639.0 37,871,779.0 1,242,996.5 24,670,136.1 586,743.1 11,528,192.8 578,295.2 10,582,873.0

9 3 10,762,082.2 302,946,237.3 9,195,980.0 191,088,715.4 5,849,647.2 112,456,261.6 2,887,598.5 49,796,419.4 2,617,392.8 42,279,535.3

14 5 2,859,920.8 123,862,087.8 1,749,414.2 63,652,827.3 1,082,596.4 35,184,150.6 665,690.5 15,759,736.7 603,430.3 12,540,765.8

16 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

17 5 431,115.0 17,800,595.4 274,663.1 9,382,804.2 166,772.1 4,958,701.3 111,854.2 2,327,894.8 102,988.8 1,855,661.1

19 5 3,815,177.0 125,909,390.8 2,697,439.2 70,803,641.7 1,869,926.6 39,512,239.8 1,319,847.9 17,403,775.8 1,291,191.5 14,141,695.5

Total 32,322,150.0 996,356,179.7 23,166,323.4 571,881,767.9 14,597,182.7 327,884,909.8 7,999,634.2 152,339,731.0 7,377,932.4 128,990,902.5

Total in tons 35.6291 1,098.2947 25.5365 630.3917 16.0906 361.4312 8.8181 167.9258 8.1328 142.1881

Non-Running Emissions 2,405,116.5 161,656,818.4 1,566,397.0 132,430,421.7 1,170,789.6 118,936,529.3 860,943.4 90,881,625.0 880,030.7 92,222,775.2

Total in tons 2.6512 178.1961 1.7267 145.9796 1.2906 131.1051 0.9490 100.1798 0.9701 101.6582

Grand Total in tons 38.2803 1,276.4908 27.2632 776.3713 17.3812 492.5363 9.7671 268.1057 9.1028 243.8463

2035

2002 2009 2015 2025 2035

2002 2009 2015 2025

2002 2009 2015 2025 2035

Ozone PM2.5 & GHG* Ozone PM2.5 & GHG* Ozone