# Appendix A-1 Air Quality System (AQS) DataUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
User ID: GYE QUICKLOOK CRITERIA PARAMETERS Report Request ID: 919382 Report Code: AMP450 Oct. 13, 2011 GEOGRAPHIC SELECTIONS Tribal

Code State County Site Parameter poe City 39 081 54 009 54 029 AQCR DAR CBSA esA EPA Region Method Duration Begin Date End Date

PROTOCOL SELECTIONS Parameter Classification Parameter Method Duration

STATE_CODE COUNTY_CODE

SITE_ID

poe DATES EDT_ID 4 2 3
5 6 7 88101 SELECTED OPTIONS QUICK LOOK 

# I SORT ORDER 

# I I Option Type Option Value 

## I Order Column EVENTS PROCESSING EXCLUDE REGIONALLY CONCURRED EVENTS 1 PARAMETER_CODE MERGE PDF FILES YES WORKFILE DELIMITER

GLOBAL DATES APPLICABLE STANDARDS Start Date End Date Standard Description 2008 2010 PM25 24-hour 2006 PM25 Annual 2006

Selection Criteria Page 1UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

EXCEPTIONAL DATA TYPES lEDT DESCRIPTION 

# I
o NO EVENTS 1 EVENTS EXCLUDED 2 EVENTS INCLUDED 5 EVENTS WI,TH CONCURRENCE EXCLUDED

Note; The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 1 of 6 Oct. 13, 2011UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450) Oct. 13, 2011 PM2.5

- Local Conditions (88101) Ohio Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)

P 98TH WTD a 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH PERCENTILE AR1TH ISITE 10 C PQAO CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR METH #OES MAX MAX MAX MAX VALUE MEAN CERT EDT 39-081-0017 1 0809 Steubenville Jefferson 618 LOGAN ST. 2008 120 106 45.6 36.4 35.2 34.8 35.2 14.28* y 0 39-081-0017 1 0809 Steubenville Jefferson 618 LOGAN ST. 2009 120 112 38.6 25.1 24.7 24.0 24.7 12.11 0 39-081-0017 1 0809 Steubenville Jefferson 618 LOGAN ST. 2010 120 108 35.3 33.3 29.8 29.1 29.8 12.68 0 39-081-1001 1 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2008 120 57 39.5 35.0 30.9 27.7 35.0 14.05 y 0 Junction COMMERICAL 39-081-1001 1 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2009 120 58 23.5 23.3 22.9 22.5 23.3 11.22 0 Junction COMMERICAL 39-081-1001 1 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2010 120 55 25.9 25.1 23.3 22.5 25.1 12.64 0 Junction COMMERICAL 39-081-1001 2 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2008 120 48 38.2 33.5 26.6 26.1 38.2 13.57* y 0 Junction COMMERICAL 39-081-1001 2 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2009 120 52 23.1 22.5 22.4 21.1 22.5 10.69* 0 Junction COMMERICAL 39-081-1001 2 0809 Mingo Jefferson 501 2010 120 52 28.2 26.3 25.2 23.6 26.3 13.01* 0 Junction COMMERICAL

Note: The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 2 of 6UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450) Oct. 13, 2011 PM2.5

- Local Conditions (88101) West Virginia Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)

24-HOUR p 98TH WID 0 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH PERCENTILE ARlIH ITE 10 C PQAO CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YEAR METH ifOBS MAX MAX MAX MAX VALUE MEAN CERl' EDT 54-009-0005 1 1150 Follansbee Brooke FOLLANSBEE

- 2008 145 117 39.8 39.5 38.9 35.6 38.9 14.68 y 0 MAHAN LANE 54-009-0005 1 1150 Follansbee Brooke FOLLANSBEE

- 2009 145 122 38.3 24.4 23.2 23.1 23.2 12.15 0 MAHAN LANE 54-009-0005 1 1150 Follansbee Brooke FOLLANSBEE

- 2010 145 122 32.6 32.0 29.8 29.7 29.8 14.14 0 MAHAN LANE 54-009-0011 1 1150 Weirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2008 145 121 37.4 35.9 34.9 34.5 34.9 13.79 y 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-009-0011 1 1150 Weirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2009 145 118 48.6 29.3 26.3 24.7 26.3 11.88 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-009-0011 1 1150 Weirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2010 145 122 38.0 36.3 31.6 30.8 31.6 13.48 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-009-0011 2 1150 Neirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2008 145 29 38.4 37.5 34.7 31.4 38.4 15.48 y 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-009-0011 2 1150 Weirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2009 145 32 48.4 25.7 25.0 19.2 48.4 11.86 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-009-0011 2 1150 Weirton Brooke WEIRTON

- 2010 145 29 37.6 30.0 29.2 21.5 37.6 14.37 0 MARLAND HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 54-029-1004 1 1150 Weirton Hancock WEIRTON

- OAK 2008 145 119 39.4 37.3 35.8 30.9 35.8 13 .33 y 0 ST AND OWINGS ST (BETWEEN
Note: The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 3 of 6UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

PM2.5

- Local Conditions (88101)

24-HOUR West virginia

YEAR METH #OBS Oct. 13, 2011 Micrograms/cubic meter (LC) (105)
98TH vITO 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH PERCENTILE ARITH MAX MAX MAX MAX VALUE MEAN CERT EDT

29.6 28.7 25.2 22.9 25.2 11.25 0

o 12.58 31. 2 30.7 31.2 33.1 34.4 122

122 ADDRESS DEAD ENDS) WEIRTON

- OAK 2009 145 8T AND OWINGS ST (BETWEEN DEAD ENDS) WEIRTON

- OAK 2010 145 ST AND OWINGS ST (BETWEEN DEAD ENDS) COUNTY

Hancock Hancock 1 1150 Weirton

1 1150 weirton p o C PQAO CITY

54-029-1004

54-029-1004 ISITE ID

Note: The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 4 of 6PARAMETER 88101 88101 METHOD CODE 120 145 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

METHODS USED IN THIS REPORT

COLLECTION METHOD ANALYSIS METHOD Andersen RAAS2.5-300 PM2.5 SEQ w/WINS GRAVIMETRIC R & P Model 2025 PM-2.5 Sequential Air Sample: Gravimetric Oct. 13 r 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 5 of 6UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR QUALITY SYSTEM QUICK LOOK REPORT (AMP450)

PQAOS USED IN THIS REPORT

jpQAO AGENCY DESCRIPTION 

# I

0809 Ohio EPA, Southeast District Office 1150 West Virginia Air Pollution Control Commission oct. 13, 2011

Note: The * indicates that the mean does not satisfy summary criteria. Page 6 of 6

# Appendix A-2 SLAMS letter

## j Environmental Protection Agency

. John R. Kasich,Governor

MaryTaylor, Lt. Governor ScottJ. Nally, Director 

### CERTIFIED MAIL
March 10, 2011 Cheryl L. Newton, Director Air and Radiation Division U.S.EPA, Region V 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, Illinois 60604
RE: 2010 SLAMS PM,.• and Ozone Data Certification Dear Ms. Newton: Please find enclosed our SLAMS Report (AMP-450, AMP-450NC and AMP255) for calendar year 2010 as required in 40 CFR, Part 58, Section 58.15.· The ambient concentration and the quality assurance data have been completely submitted to the AQS database. The remaining criteria pollutant data will be certified within the month of April. I certify that the Ozone and PM,., 

### data in the report are accurate to the best of our knowledge taking into consideration the quality assurance findings and only to thee.xtent of the activities performed by Ohio EPA. There were no incidents of air pollution that reached or exceeded levels as specified by Section 51.151 which could cause significant harm to the health of persons. Sincerely,

Robert Hodanbosi Chief, Division of Air Pollution Control Enclosure

50 West Town Street. SUne 700 P.O. Box 1049 CoIumbus,OH 43216-1049 6141644 3020 614 16443184 (fex) www.epa.ohio.gov

# Appendix B-1 Ohio 2005 SIP Base Year Inventory Discussion

## OHIO 2005 Base Year PM2.5 SIP Inventory

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Lazarus Government Center 50 West Town Street, Suite 700 Columbus Ohio 43215

Prepared by Ohio EPA Division ofAir Pollution Control Emissions Inventory Unit February 2008

1

## Table of Contents Section Introduction , , 3 1.0 Point Sources 4 2.0 Area Sources 8 3.0 Non Road Sources 15 4.0 On Road Sources 17 5.0 MAR Sources .43

2-1 Categories included in the 2005 area source Inventory 

### 8 2-2 Emission Factors used forWood Burners included in area sources 11 3-1 NMIM NCO Tables for SpecificYears and States 16 4-1 Federal Functional Class Categories 23 4-2 DVMT Summary by County 24 4-3 Speed by Federal Functional Class 28 4-4 Link Group Codes & Associated BPR Curves 

### 29 4-5 Mobile6 Inputs 31 4-6 LADCO Data Output............................................

.. 39 4-7 County SummaryTable of MPOs by County .40 5-1 Numberof operations and LTOs for 2005 45 5-2 EDMS Aircraft Emissions 50 5-3 Fleet Emission Factor Categories 51 5-4 Pollutant by County (Sample) 54 Figure 1 Speed Comparison Graphs 27



### 2

## 2005 Base Year PM2.5 SIP Inventory for Ohio Introduction The State of Ohio has a number of counties with air quality data showing nonattainmentforthe following PM2
.5standard:

• Annual Standard 

### = 15.0 ug/m3 The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) requires all states to revise and submit State Implementation Plans (SIP) for areas which are classified as non-attainment ofthe 

### 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Federal Register ( Vol. 72, No. 

### 79/Wednesday, April 

### 25, 2007) provides the emissions inventory rules and regulations for the PM2 .5 Clean Air Fine Particle implementation rule. An electronic version of the document can be found at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/2007/April/Day-25/a6347.pdf. 

### As part of the designation of non-attainment areas for PM2 .5 standards, a new attainment demonstration SIP will be necessary. A key element in the overall SIP planning process is the need for an updated emissions inventory. This document presents the 

### 2005 Base Year Particulate SIP Emissions Inventory for Ohio as required bythe CAAA. It includes emissions for point, area, on-road mobile and non-road mobile forthe State of Ohio. This technical report documents the procedures and the methodologies that were used in the development of daily emissions for all counties in Ohio. This report describes the folloWing: 1. Identification of stationary and mobile sources included in the inventory; 

### 2. Sources of data, and data collection methods used in the development ofthe inventory; 3. Methods and procedures used to estimate emissions; and 4. Assumptions considered in the development of the emissions inventories. The intent of this report is to describe how the inventory was prepared, and what information was considered in the inventory development. This document is comprised of 

### 5 sections, one section for each inventory type. The biogenic inventory is not being discussed in this document because Ohio EPA did not participate in the generation of this inventory. Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) ran EPA's BEIS model in the Emission Modeling System (EMS) to generate SummerWeekday emissions forVOC and NOx.

3

### SECTION 1 POINT SOURCES Emissions and source specific data for point sources are collected for the 2005 baseyear SIP inventory by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA.) The primary source of data for point sources is facility reported STARShip files. STARShip is a software package developed by Ohio EPA, Division ofAir Pollution Control (DAPC), to assist the regulated community in preparing and submitting a variety of electronic permit applications and reports to the DAPC. These data are reported by the Title V facilities annually as part of the emissions fee/inventory process conducted by Ohio EPA and include emissions, process rates, operating schedules, emissions control data and other relevant information. The STARShip files are electronically transferred to the DAPC and stored into the Division's Oracle database, STARS. The files are reviewed by the local air agencies and Ohio EPA district and central office staff. After review, the data are imported into Excel and linked with an Access® database to further process the information into the federally approved National Emission Inventory (NEI) database format in version 3.0. The files are quality assured again using the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S.EPA) QAlQC 

### software for format and content. The data is finally submitted to LADCO for emissions processing through the Emissions Modeling System. The State provided inventory for Electric Generating Units (EGU) is replaced with the Federal EGU inventory. The EGU inventory is compiled by U.S. EPA's Acid Rain Program. It is based on facility reported emissions as measured by continuous emissions monitors. In conclusion, the final point source inventory is a hybrid of the federal EGU inventory and the state provided non-EGU units. A major distinction typically made in emissions inventories is that between point and area sources. In this inventory, point sources are sources for which individual records are maintained forthat source. Such records are maintained for all Ohio Title Vfacilities (706 facilities statewide). The area source inventory accounts for facilities from nonTitle V facilities and calculates emissions information using surrogate emissions factors based on energy usage, population, employment records, or other reliable data. A more detailed discussion of the area source inventory is provided in Section 2. The point source inventory described herein is considered to be the most current and accurate source ofemissions data available for 2005.
1.1 Point Source Process Emissions Ohio EPA defines point source process emissions as those which occur at an identifiable Title V stationary stack or vent. Point source emissions not emitted from discrete stacks orvents are termed fugitive emissions and are discussed in Section 1.2.

4

### 1.1.1 Source Identification and Data Collection The sources to be included in the 2005 base year inventory are identified using the Title V STARS database. Facility production and emissions data are included in this database. This information is facility-reported actual 2005 emissions. 

### 1.1.2 Non-reactive

# vac Emissions Adjustments This section is primarily applicable for VOC pollutants. Sources are required to identify emissions of photochemically non-reactive Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC.) Based upon this information, those emissions have been specifically excluded from the 2005 base line inventory in accordance with U.S. EPA's "Recommended Policy on the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds." A complete list of the compounds that U.S. EPA has identified as being photochemically non-reactive, and therefore not included in the inventory, are listed below:

• Methane
• Ethane • Methylene chloride
• Methyl chloroform
• Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)
• Dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12)
• Chlorodifluoromethane (CFC-22)
• Trifluoromethane (HFC-23)
• Chlorofluoromethance (HCFC-31)
• Difluoromethane (HFC-32)
• Decafluoropentane (HFC-43-10mee)
• Ethylfluoride (HFC-161)
• Trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113)
• Dichlorotetrafluoroethane (CFC-114)
• Chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115)
• 2,2-Dichloro-1,1, 1-trifluoroethane (HCFC-123)
• 1,1,2-Trifluoroethane (HCFC-123a)
• 2-Chloro-1, 1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124)
• Pentafluoroethane (HFC-125)
• 1,1 ,2,2,-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134)
• 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a)
• 1,1-Dichloro-1-f1uoroethane (HCFC-141 b)
• 1-Chloro-1 ,1,-difluoroethane (HCFC-142b)
• 1,1,1-Trifluoroethane (HFC-143a)
• Fluoroethane (HCFC-151a)
• 1,1-Difluoroethane (HFC-152a)
• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-225ca)
• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-225cb)
• Hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea)
• Hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa)
• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ca)
• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea)
• Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb)


### 5

### • Pentafluoropropane (HFC-245fa)
• Pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc)
• Parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF)
• Methoxybutane • Nonaflourobutane
• Heptafluoropropane «CF 3

### !2CFCF2

### 0CH3) 

### • Heptafluoropropane «CF 3

### )CFCF2

### 0C2

### Hs )
• Perchloroethylene • Cyclic, branched or linear completely methylated siloxanes
• Methyl acetate • Volatile methyl siloxanes
• Acetone


### 1.1.3 Emissions Estimation Methodologies Since source reported actual annual emissions are used in the 2005 base year inventory, 

### no estimation methods are necessary. The reports are provided to LADCO in National Emissions Inventory 

### Input Format (NIF) 3.0 format. LADCO imported and processed the NIF files in EMS and applied temporal and spatial profiles to the annual emissions to calculate weekday emissions rates. The final point source inventory 

### is split into two separate reports, the Electric Generating Units (EGU) which is the U.S. EPA inventory

### for electric generating units and the non-EGU which is the state inventory 

### minus the EGU units. 

### 1.2 Point Source Fugitive Emissions Another type of emissions data which is required to be filed from point sources is fugitive 

### emissions. Before 1990, fugitive emissions were categorized as area sources due to the lack of detailed information available 

### for fugitive 

### sources. However, 

### since these emissions are now electronically reported in the State's ORACLE database, STARS, these emissions can be classified as point sources.



### 1.3 References Getting Started: Emissions Inventory 

### Methods for PM2.5 U.S. Environmental 

### Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September, 1999. Emissions Inventory 

### Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Qaulitv Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Research, Triangle Park, NC. November 

### 2005. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, Fourth Edition and Supplements, AP-42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1985.



### 6

### Preparing 2002 Regional PM2.5 Emissions QAQPS PM Inventory Conference Inventory Conference San Diego, 2003. Documentation for the 2002 Electric Generating Unit National Emissions Inventory (NEI). Eastern research group, Inc., 1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Morrisville, NC 27560 and E.H. Pechan and Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way

7

### SECTION 2 AREA SOURCES Area sources are sources which are typically small, individual, numerous, and have not been inventoried as specific point, mobile, or biogenic sources. For inventory purposes, they are grouped with other like sources into categories that allow emissions to be calculated collectively using one methodology. Since area sources are traditionally defined at the county level, most methods are designed to estimate area source emissions at the county level. Ohio EPA has either used published Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP)6 methodologies or selected other methodologies which are shared by other states. The decision of which methodology to use was largely based on Ohio's data availability. Data which was not available on a county-level is estimated by assigning a percentage ofthe state's total activityto each county based on the state's population or employment information. If Ohio county specific activity data is available through Ohio EPA or other State Agencies, that data is used ratherthan allocating activity by percentage. Table 2-1 lists the sources which emit PM2.5, 

### NOx

### and S02 along with the respective EFs used to calculate each pollutant.


### Table 2·1 Categories 

### in the 2005 PM205 

### SIP Area Source inventory
Area Source NOx 

### PM2
.5 

### S02 

### Section Commercial Natural 941b/MMSCF 7.6Ib/MMSCF 0.6 Ib/MMSCF 2.1 Gas Combustion Industrial Distillate Oil 20 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 0.25 Ib/E3gai fuel 42.6 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 2.2 Combustion Industrial Residual Oil 55 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 4.67 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 157 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 2.2 Combustion Industrial Natural Gas 941b/MMSCF 7.6 Ib/MMSCF 0.6 Ib/MMSCF 2.2 Combustion Residential Coal 9.1 LblTon Coal 3.8 LblTon Coal 31 LblTon Coal 2.3 Combustion Residential Distillate 18 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 0.83 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 42.6 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 2.3 Oil Combustion Residential Natural 941b/MMSCF 7.6 Ib/MMSCF 0.6 Ib/MMSCF 2.3 Gas Combustion Residential LPG 13 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 0.17 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 0.1 Ib/E3gai

### fuel 2.3 Combustion Human Cremation 1.01 E+01 IblTon 0.0637 IblTon NA 2.4 cremated Cremated Structure Fires 1.4 LblTon 10.8 LblTon NA 2.5 burned burned OutdoorWood Boilers 2.8 LblTon 2.76E+1 LblTon 4 E-1 LblTon 2.6

8

### Residential Wood Combustion Non-Certified 2.80E+00 IbfTon 3.06E+01 IbfTon 4.00E-01 IbfTon 2.3 Non-Catalytic 2.80E+00 IbfTon 1.96E+01 IbfTon 4.00E-01 IbfTon Catalytic 2.00E+00 IbfTon 2.04E+01 IbfTon 4.00E-01 IbfTon

2.1 Commercial Natural Gas Combustion (SCC 2103006000) 

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

### population4

. Emissions factors are given in table 2-1. The area source emissions are calculated based on an adjusted value by subtracting the emissions due to point sources. 2.2 Industrial Fuel Combustion Industrial Distillate Oil Combustion (SCC 2102004000) 

### Ohio's fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on 

### the county's population4

. The area source NOx emissions are calculated and adjusted by sUbtracting the emissions due to point sources. A heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used and 84,408 thousand gallons are consumed in 

### 2005. [MMBTU stand for Million British Thermal Units]. Emissions factors are given in table 2-1. S02 emissions were calculated using EF 42.6 Lb/1000 Gal. PM10 and PM2 .5 

### emissions are calculated using 1Lb/1000 Gal and 0.25 Lb/1000 Gal respectively. All Factors are obtained from AP_4219 Industrial Residual Oil Combustion (SCC 2102005000) 

### Ohio's fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on the county's population4

. The area source NOx emissions are calculated and adjusted by subtracting the emissions due to point sources. 54,652 thousand gallons14 are consumed in 2005 and a heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used. The S02 emissions are calculated using EF 157 Lb/1000 Gal. PM10and PM2
.5

### emissionsare calculated using 7.17 Lb/1000 Gal and 4.67 Lb/1000 Gal respectively. All factors are obtained from AP-4219 Industrial Natural Gas Combustion (SCC 2102006000) 

### Ohio's fuel consumption is apportioned per county based on 

### the county's population4

. The area source NOx emissions are calculated and adjusted by subtracting the emissions due to point sources. 293,857 MMCF14 are consumed in 2005. The S02



### 9

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

### and PM2 .5emissions are calculated using 7.6 Lb/MMBTU. All factors were obtained from AP_4219 

### 2.3 Residential Fuel Combustion Residential Coal Combustion (SCC 2104001000) 

### Ohio's household consumption of coal is apportioned per county based on county population4

. 

### NOx emissions are calculated using EF of 9.1 of coal. The S02 emissions are calculated using EF 31Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10 

### and PM2.5 emissions are calculated using 6.2Lb/Ton and 3.8 Lb/Ton respectively. All factors were obtained from AP_42 19 

### Residential Distillate Oil Combustion (SCC 2104004000) 

### Ohio's household consumption of distillate oil is apportioned per county based on county population4

. 

### NOx emissions are calculated using EF of 18 Ib/1000 gallons distillate fuel respectively. A heating value of 140 MMBTU/1000 Gal is used. The S02 emissions are calculated using EF 42.6 Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10 

### and PM2.5 emissions are calculated using 1.08Lb/1 000 Gal and 0.83 Lb/1000 Gal respectively. All factors are obtained from AP_42 19 

### Residential Liquid Petroleum Gas Combustion (LPG) (SCC 2104007000) 

### Ohio's household consumption of LPG is apportioned per county based on county population4

. 

### NOx emissions are calculated using EF of 13 Ib/1000 gallons LPG. The S02 emissions are calculated using EF 0.1 Lb/1000 Gal. The PM 10

### and PM2.5emissions are calculated using 0.17Lb/1 000 Gal. All factors are obtained from AP-42 19 

### Residential Natural Gas Combustion (SCC 2104006010) 

### Ohio's household consumption of LPG is apportioned per county based on county population4

. 

### NOx emissions are calculated using EF of 94 Ib/MMSCF. MMSCF stands for Million Standard Cubic Feet. This source also emits S02 emissions which are calculated using EF 0.6 Lb/MMBTU. The PM 10 

### and PM2.5 emissions are calculated using 7.6Lb/MMBTU. All factors are obtained from AP_42 19 

### Residential Wood Combustion 

### NOx emissions from this area source are calculated for seven types of residential heating units that utilize wood forfuel. They are listed belowwith the appropriate SCC: Fireplaces without inserts Fireplaces with inserts catalytic (non-U.S. EPA cert) Fireplaces with inserts non -catalytic Fireplaces with inserts catalytic (U.S. EPA cert) Wood stoves - Conventional Woodstoves
- Catalytic Wood stoves - Non catalytic 2104008001 2104008002 2104008003 2104008004 2104008010 2104008030 2104008050
10

### The number of Ohio homes with fireplaces are adjusted for those that burn wood. The following assumptions are applied to those adjusted homes: 92 percent ofwood combusted in non-certified units 5.7 percent ofwood combusted in non-catalytic units 2.3 percent ofwood combusted in catalytic units A state consumption value is applied which is apportioned to each county based on its population4• 

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

### 2-2 Emission Factors Used for Wood Burners SCC 

### 2104008002 2104008003 2104008004 SCC 

### 2104008010 2104008050 2104008030 SCC 

### 2104008001 RAPIDS Code Non-Certified Non-Catalytic Catalytic Units S02 

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

### 2.80E+00 2.80E+00 2.00E+00 Lb/ton PM2.5 

### 3.06E+01 1.96E+01 2.04E+01 Lb/ton To avoid double counting ofwood consumption forfuel, this category is adjusted by subtracting the wood consumption from OWB to allow this categoryto account onlyfor indoorwood burning emissions. Residential Wood combustion also emits S02 which is calculated using EF 0.4 LblTon EF. The PM2 .5 

### emissions are calculated using EF as shown in table 2-2. All factors are obtained from AP_4219


### 2.4 Human Cremation (SCC 

### 2810060200) Not all Ohio counties possess a crematory so only those counties with crematories are used to calculate the number of cremations and their resulting NOx emissions. The 2005 cremation data is obtained from the Ohio Department of Health, Vital Statistics17• 

### It is estimated that 3% of deaths occur outside the State of Ohio with no available data to account for their disposition at the time this area source is being calculated. Therefore, those deaths are not accounted for in this category. The methodology does not offer an EF for NOx for this category nor is NOx required to be calculated for this area source. Ohio feels that it is a combustion source and NOx needs to be included in the inventory along with the other combustion sources. Through its Permits-to-Install for human cremation, Ohio has selected a NOx EF of 10.13Ib/ton cremated to calculate emissions from this area source.

11

### This source also emits PM, PM1Q, and PM2.5 

### emissions which are calculated using EF 0.1 LblTon, 0.071 LblTon and, 0.0637 LblTon respectively. All factors are obtained from AP-4219


### 2.5 Structure Fires (See 2810030000) The Structure Fires category includes residential and commercial fires resulting from unintentional actions. Intentional fires, forest and wildfires, agricultural, and vehicle burning are not included in this area source. The State Fire Marshall Office, Fire Prevention Bureau15 

### provided data on the numberofstructure fires per county in 2005. This area source is considered a combustion source for NOx emissions which are calculated using EF 1.4 Ib/ton burned. The residential and commercial structures fires for each county are tabulated and a fuel loading of 1.15 Ton/fire is applied. This source also emits PM, PM1Q, and PM2.5 

### emissions which are calculated using EF 10.8 LblTon. This factorwas obtained from AP-4219


### 2.6 OutdoorWood Boilers (See 2104008070) OutdoorWood Boilers (OWB), are also known as outdoorwater stoves and outdoor wood furnaces, are used as outdoor residential heaters. These boilers have wood burning fireboxes surrounded by a water reservoirvented by a chimney stack. The combustion ofthe wood in the firebox heats the water in the surrounding reservoir and the heated water is pumped to the residence. OWB units can also supply residential hot water. The water capacity ranges from 60 gallons to 764 gallons. The operational design creates long periods where the fire smolders and creosote is formed 13

. 

### When the water circulating through the furnace reaches an upperset point, the air supply to the fire is cut-off, cooling the fire so the waterwill not overheat. The furnace operates in this "idle" mode until the watertemperature hits a lowerset point and the air supply is re-established. The OWB may be in idle mode far longerthan in operating mode. This type ofoperating causes very poor combustion and heavyfoul smoke. Most ofthe smoke emitted is fine condensed organic material that does not burn under cool, oxygen starved conditions. In addition, many owners burn green wood full of moisture which also causes poorcombustion 12. 

### The smoke created from these outdoorwood burning units can contain several pollutants that are harmful to breathe, including fine particle pollution such as PM 2.511 

### in addition to NOx (research assisted by Deborah Lucas, DAPC intern, 2007) This new area source category has many unknowns and variables associated with it and Ohio does not possess accurate OWB unit sales data available to calculate emissions on the county level. Therefore, several assumptions are made in agreement with the Great Lake States in orderto formulate a homogeneous inventoryforthe region.

12

### The assumptions are as follows:

• 100% of wood combusted in non-certified units.
• OWB units to be 90% in rural counties and 10% in urban counties
• 11.68 cords ofwood consumption per unit peryear (includes heating efficiency of 30-40%) • 5 months heating season = 3650 hours 

### (24/7)
• PM2.5 

### emissions factor 

### (g/kg wood) =13.82 (Average of indoor and outdoor) or 27.64 Ib/ton ofwood The agreed upon methodology requires that total number of OWB sold in Ohio be apportioned to each county based on rural or urban designation while observing the 9:1 ratio in area sales. The guesstimated factors (see above) 

### are applied to calculate the emissions from this outdoorwood burner. Total emissions obtained from this category are subtracted from the Residential Wood Combustion category to allow for accurate emissions from the indoorwood burning units. 

### 2.7 References 1. Documentation Forthe 2002 Non-Point Source National Emission Inventory For CAPS and HAPS. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Emissions Factor and inventory Group. E.H Pechan and Associates, Inc. January 2004. 2. United States Census Bureau. Population Division. 

### http://eire.census.gov/popestldata/counties/tables/CO·EST2002/CO·EST2002-01- 39.php (Accessed 2003) 3. United States Census Bureau. County Business Patterns. http://censtats.census.gov/cbpnaic/cbpnaic.shtml (Accessed 2003) 4. Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research. Population Projects byAge and

### Sex: 2005-2030. 

### http://www.odod.ohio.gov/research/files/p200.htm (Accessed August 2006) 5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1999 Base YearNon-point 

### Source National Emission InventoryforHazardousAirPollutants, 

### Research Triangle Park, NC. September 28, 2001. 6. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP). Volume III
- Area Sources Preferred and Alternative Methods. November 1996. 7. Documentation for the Draft 1999 National Emissions Inventory (Version 3.0) for Criteria Air Pollutants and Ammonia. Area Sources. E. H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. March 3, 2003



### 13

### 8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), Volume III
- Area Sources Preferred and Alternative Methods, Chapter 8. September 1997. 9. Spreadsheet formulation provided by "Buzz" David Asselmeier, Air Quality Planning Section, Inventory Group, Springfield, Illinois. 10. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP). Volume III
- Area Sources Preferred and Alternative Methods. May 1997. 11. (Environmental Chemistry.com) viewed on Feb 8th, 2007. [http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/environmental/200602outdoorwoodfurnaces.ht 

## m!1 12. (Washington State, Department of Ecology) viewed on Feb 8th, 2007 [http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/air/AOPPermits/Boiler/OutdoorBoilershome.htmll 13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reducing Pollution from OutdoorWoodFired Hydronic Heaters. Fact Sheet http://www.epa.gov/owhh/pdfs/fact sheet 1 29 07.pdf (Accessed 1/2007) 14. Industrial Sector Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates, 1970-2001, Ohio. Energy Information Administration. U. S. Department of Energy. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sepprices/ind/prindoh.html http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec1 27.pdf (Accessed 2003) 15. State Fire Marshal Office. Fire Prevention Bureau, Columbus, Ohio. http://www.com.state.oh.uslodoc/sfmlfirecont.htm (Accessed 2003) 16. Documentation for the Draft 1999 National Emissions Inventory (Version 3.0) For Criteria Air Pollutants and Ammonia. Area Sources. 

### E. H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. March 3, 2003 17. Ohio Department of Health, Vital Statistics 18. Environmental Protection Agency. STAPPA-ALAPCO-EPA Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP). Volume X - Emissions Projections. December 1999. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreportlvolume1 0/x01.pdf (Accessed 2/2007) 19. Environmental Protection Agency. AP-42. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/



### 14

### SECTION 3 NON·ROAD SOURCES The non·road inventory is generated regionally by running U.S. EPA's National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) model. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources undertook the responsibility of customizing the NMIM input files and submitting the output file in NIF format to LADCO and U.S. EPA. LADCO processed the NMIM files in their emissions model and generated daily emissions rates. Grant Heatherington from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provided the following descriptions

... The National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) developed by USEPAwas used to estimate emissions for all other non-road mobile categories. NMIM consolidates nonroad mobile emissions and on-road emissions modeling into a single modeling system. Onlythe non-road emissions modeling portion of NMIM was used in the development of this emission's inventory. NMIM uses the USEPA's NONROAD model to calculate nonroad mobile emissions. The basic NONROAD algorithm for calculating emissions uses base year equipment popUlations, average load factors, available engine powers, activity hours and emission factors. Before NMIM was run, modifications and additions were made to the NMIM input data.
a. Added emission factors for diesel tampers/rammers provided by E.H. Pechan 

### & Associates, Inc. Diesel tamperslrammers are a type of construction equipment. b. Revised PM2.5 

### ratios in SCC table to correctly calculate PM2.5 

### diesel emissions. This errorwas introduced with NMIM2005 and didn't exist in NMIM2004.
c. Revised gasoline parameters using updates provided bythe states and E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. Gasoline parameters include Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), oxygenate content and sulfur content. The NMIM NEI NIF files are on the LADCO ftp site at: ftp;llftp.airtoxics.org/inv2005/nonroad/NMIM/Base L 

### ph2/20051



### Revised NMIM2005 Input Data Emission Factor Data All States: Pechan revised the brake specificfuel consumption (BSFC) emission factor data to include diesel tampers/rammers (2270002006). The revised NMIM file is saved as revBSFC.EMF.

15

### Population Data For26000.pop, replaced default file supplied with NMIM2005 with 26000Jev_NMIM05.pop that contains revised construction data missing from 26000.pop external file provided with NMIM2005. This Michigan construction data should have been added with the other LADCO states modified construction data but was overlooked. 

### SCC Data The default SCC table of NCD20060201 is replaced by a version that contains corrections to the PM25facfield that earlier NCDs contained (I.e. changed from 0.92 to 0.97 for diesel non-road equipment) in NONROAD2004. 

### Fuel Data LADCO States: Pechan revised fourtables (countyyear, countyyearmonth, datasource and gasoline) in the National County Database (NCO) used by NMIM to incorporate new fuel data. AIR revised gasoline characteristics per instructions from the states. Also, gasoline characteristic revisions for 2005 provided by states were incorporated. Additional revisions were incorporated into 2002 data for non-road Stage 2 controls. Depending on the year being modeled, different versions ofthe revised tables are used. Also, the countynrfile, countyyear and datasource tables were revised to reference the new activity, allocation, growth, population and seasonalityfiles described above. NCO tables with names ending in "der' are default versions ofthe table. See table below forthe appropriate versions ofthe tables forthe selected years. Non-LADCO States: The countynrfile, countyyear and datasource tables were revised to reference the new activity, allocation and seasonality files described above. See table belowfor the appropriate versions ofthe tables forthe selected years. 

### Table 3·1 NMIM National County Database Tables for Specific Years and States
states Years 1999 (WI only) 2002,05,07,08,09,12 and 18 LADCO states countynrfile

_NMIM05_rev, countynrfile_NMIM05_rev, countyyear _NMIM05_rev, countyyear_NMIM05_rev, countyyearmonth_NMIM05_w countyyearmonth_NMIM05_w_05_12_18_rev, _05_12_18_rev, datasource_NMIM05Jev, datasource_NMIM05_rev, gasoline_NMIM05_w_05_12_18_rev gasoline_NMIM05_def SCC_NCD20060201_rev (used when SCC_NCD20060201_rev NCD20060201 is used) (used when NCD20060201 is used)



### 16

### SECTION 4 ON-ROAD SOURCES A mobile source of air pollution is a self-propelled or portable emitter of air pollutants, and mobile source emissions are those generated by the engines or motors that power such sources. Most mobile sources, exceptjet orturboprop aircraft, are powered by internal combustion (IC) piston engines, and nearly all use liquid fuels. Gaseous fuels, such as compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), had only a very small fraction ofthe motorfuel market in Ohio in 2005. Solid fuels have not been used by mobile sources in significant amounts since railroads retired their coal-powered steam locomotives in the 1950s. 

### 4.1 Categories of Mobile Sources For inventory and planning purposes, mobile sources are divided into two major categories. 1. 

### On-highway mobile sources (usually referred to as 

### on-road), e.g., motor vehicles such as cars, vans, trucks, buses and motorcycles used for transportation of goods and passengers on roads and streets 

### 2. Off-highway (usually referred to as 

### non-road) mobile sources including:

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

• Self-propelled or portable motorized machines or equipment not used for transportation, ranging from construction equipment and farm tractors to lawnmowers and hand-held powerweed choppers. 

### Mobile Sources: All on-road mobile sources are self-propelled. 

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

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

17

### NOTE: Not all Internal Combustion engines (IC) orturbine engines are mobile sources. Fixed IC engines, such as those that power pipeline compressors or standby generators in electricity plants and elsewhere, are also classified as stationary sources. 

### 4.1.1 Categories and Components of Mobile Source Emissions There are three categories of mobile source emissions:

• Exhaustortailpipe emissions, which result from the combustion offuel in the source's engine

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

• Refueling emissions 

### Exhaust Emissions: Are the result offuel combustion and occuronly when the engine is running. 

### Evaporative emissions: Are Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) based only and are continuously emitted from an engine's fuel system, whetherthe engine is running or not. Gasoline is a very volatile fuel, so total VOC emissions from gasoline powered vehicles have a large evaporative component. Diesel and jetfuels are ofvery low volatility, so evaporative emissions from diesel and turbine engines are a much smaller part oftheir total VOC emissions. Evaporative emissions for CNG or LPG powered vehicles are negligible because theirfuel tanks and systems are of necessity, sealed. Evaporative and exhaust VOC emissions can be calculated separatelyfor most mobile source categories. Evaporative emissions do not include VOC emissions that occur during refueling. 

### Refueling Emissions: These emissions are the third category of mobile source emissions. Refueling emissions are entirely VOC. Although they result from the evaporation offuel, they are distinct from, and not directly related to, evaporative emissions as defined above. Refueling emissions have two subcomponents:

• Displacement emissions. These occurwhen newfuel is transferred into a partly filled tank--be it a service station storage tank, a portable fuel container (gas can), or a vehicle or engine's fuel tank; displacing the air in the tank and forcing that vapor-rich air out the inlet pipe orothervent. There are two stages of displacement emissions:
o 

### "Stage 

### I" emissions occurwhen the underground storage tanks at a service station are being refilled;



### 18

### o 

### "Stage 

### II" emissions occurwhen a motorvehicle (or gas can) is being refueled. 

### NOTE: These emissions are covered in, "Area Sources," section 3.6.

• Spill emissions. These occurwhen drops offuel drip or splash on the ground during or after refueling and evaporate away. 

### 4.2 Ohio On-RoadMobile Source Inventory The inventory ofon-road mobile source emissions was developed in conjunction with the Ohio Department ofTransportation (ODOT), Lake Michigan Air Director's Consortium (LADCO), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and the Ohio EPA (OEPA). Estimates ofthe amounts of NOx and VOC are reported by county in tons per day. Emissions are reported for a typical ozone season weekday in the summer of 

### 2005. 4.2.1 Emission Inventories Developed with 

### MOBILE6 Model MOBILE6 Overview: MOBILE6 is a computer program that estimates hydrocarbon (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), exhaust particulate matter (which consists of several components), tire wear particulate matter, brake wear particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), ammonia (NHs), six hazardous air pollutant (HAP), and carbon dioxide (C02) emission factors for gasoline-fueled and diesel highway motorvehicles, and for certain specialized vehicles such as natural-gas-fueled or electric vehicles that may replace them. The program uses the calculation procedures presented in technical reports posted on EPA's MOBILE6 Web page http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models.htm. MOBILE6 emission factor estimates depend on various conditions, such as ambient temperatures, travel speeds, operating modes, fuel volatility, and mileage accrual rates. Many ofthe variables affecting vehicle emissions can be specified bythe user. MOBILE6 will estimate emission factors for any calendar year between 

### 1952 and 

### 2050, inclusive. Vehicles from the 

### 25 most recent model years are considered to be in operation in each calendaryear. 

### 4.2.2 MOBILE6 Defaults: MOBILE6 includes default values for a wide range of conditions that affect emissions. These defaults are designed to represent "national average" input data values. Users who desire a more precise estimate of local emissions can substitute information that more specifically reflects local conditions. Use of local input data will be particularly common when the local emission inventory is to be constructed from separate



### 19

### estimates of roadways, geographic areas, ortimes of day, in which fleet ortraffic conditions vary considerably. A list of MOBILE6 input parameters is provided below. Most ofthese inputs are optional because the model will supply default values unless 

### alternate data are provided. 

### 4.2.3 MOBILE6 Input Parameters

• Calendaryear • Month (January, July)
• Hourly Temperature
• Altitude (high, low)
• Weekend/weekday
• Fuel characteristics (Reid vapor pressure, sulfur content, oxygenate content, etc.)
• Humidity and solar load
• Registration (age) distribution byvehicle class
• Annual mileage accumulation by vehicle class
• Diesel sales fractions byvehicle class and model year • Average speed distribution by hourand roadway
• Distribution ofvehicle miles traveled by roadway type
• Engine starts perday by vehicle class and distribution by hour
• Engine start soak time distribution by hour
• Trip end distribution by hour
• Average trip length distribution
• Hot soak duration
• Distribution ofvehicle miles traveled by vehicle class
• Full, partial, and multiple diurnal distribution by hour
• Inspection and maintenance (I/M) program description
• Anti-tampering inspection program description
• Stage II refueling emissions inspection program description
• Natural gas vehicle fractions
• HC species output
• Particle size cutoff
• Emissions factors for PM and HAP • Output format specifications and selections 

### 4.2.4 MOBILE6 References The following publications provide much ofthe guidance forthe preparation ofthe onhighway inventory. 

### EPA-450/4·81-026d (Revised), now EPAl450-R-92-009, Procedures forEmission InventoryPreparation, 

### Volume IV: Mobile Sources, December 1992. Hereafter, "Procedures Vol. IV". The 1992 version is still the definitive document on


### 20

### inventories. If a previous edition is referred to, the fact will be noted as, for example, "the 1989 Procedures Vol. IV" or "Volume IV, 1989 edition". EPA420·R-G3·010, 

### User's Guide to MOBILE6.1 andMOBILE6.2: Mobile Source Emission FactorModel, August 2003. This is the User's Guide forthe official MOBILE6.2.03 on-highway mobile source emission factor model and will usually be referred to as the M6.2 (or simply M6) User's Guide (UG). The M6 model in its various versions was developed and published by Assessment & Modeling Division (AMD) ofthe National Vehicle 

### &Fuels Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The NVFEL is part of USEPA Office of Transportation 

### & Air Quality (OTAQ), formerly the Office of Mobile Sources (OMS). Technical Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation, August 2004. Hereafter, the M6 "Technical Guidance [Document]" or "TGD". The TGD is the primary source of guidance on M6 inputs and an invaluable adjunct to the M6 User's Guide. USEPAdocument "Frequently Asked Questions on MOBILE6", 16 January 2002. Hereafter, [M6] "FAQ". This document was published along with the M6 TGD. USEPA memo, "Policy Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for SIP Development and Transportation Conformity", dated 18 January 2002, from John Seitz, Directorof OAQPS, and Margo Oge, Director of OTAQ, to Regional Air Division Directors.

4.3 Ohio's Alternate Data for MOBILE6 Alternative data is state-specific data that is used in the Mobile6 runs. Using local data is preferred to using the default data in Mobile6. Efforts are made to collect as much local data as possible.
4.3.1 Vehicle Registration Distribution by Age Overview: The vehicle age distribution determines the fraction ofvehicles operating within each emissions control requirement standard and the deterioration ofthe emission control technology. Emission rates vary widely between new and oldervehicles. Thus, even small changes in fleet age, particularlyfor oldervehicles, may result in large changes in emission totals.



### 21

### The MOBILE6 model requires estimates ofa distribution of registered vehicles by age and vehicle category for current and future years. MOBILE6 defaultvalues were developed using national level vehicle registration data by age and class for July 1, 1996. EPA developed a methodologyto convert the July 1, 1996 registration profile into a general registration distribution by age and byvehicle category for some 6 composite (gasoline and diesel) vehicle types plus motorcycles. To project future changes, EPA evaluated general sales growth and vehicle scrappage trends forthe totallight-duty vehicle in-use fleet and the total heavy-duty vehicle in-use fleet, and made minor adjustments, where possible, to reflect some ofthe differences between vehicle categories. 

### Description: The MOBILE6 model requires estimates of a distribution of registered vehicles by age and vehicle categoryfor current and future years. OEPA chose to use local vehicle registration data provided bythe Ohio Bureau of MotorVehicles (BMV) which was sent to the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) to develop these inputs. LADCO then contracted with a subcontractorto breakout the age distribution data from the Vehicle Identification Numbers (VIN). 

### Note: Itwas learned during the course ofthis inventorythat there were some discrepancies in the age distribution data. But it was too large ofa project to reevaluate the data priorto this inventory. This will be corrected in the next inventory (2008). 

### Method Applicability: This approach is most applicable in areas where there are significant differences in the local vehicle fleet age distribution relative to the national average. 

### Data Sources and Procedures: This approach involves using local vehicle registration data. This is typically available at the county level, but may also be applied using statewide data from the state motorvehicle registration office. The fleet age should be representative ofthe vehicle fleet overthe small urban or rural area underquestion. 

### Advantages:

• Uses locally specific registration data, which is likely more representative ofthe local area than the national default.

• Requires minimal additional resources, particularly if data is readilyavailable at the county or local level from the State department of motorvehicle registration.

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



### 22

### 4.3.2 DailyVehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT) Overview: In coordination with Ohio Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), the Ohio Department ofTransportation (ODOT) provided DailyVehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT) data and travel demand model (TDM) data. TDM data will be covered in another section. Because TDM results are used bythe state and MPOs to forecast trafficfor a variety of reasons, undergo rigorous calibration and validation checks, and are sensitive to roadway capacity/travel time improvements, the TDMs are considered the best tool for emissions forecasting. Therefore, the DVMT data discussed in this section is not used directly for all areas of Ohio. In counties where it is not used directly it is used for making rough emissions estimates where models do not exist orwhere time prohibits the use ofTDMs. DVMT is a simple mechanism to measure how much traffic is flowing along a roadway during an average 24 hour period. This simple formula multiplies Average Annual DailyTraffic (AADT) bythe length ofthe roadway. For example; if a roadway is 2 miles in length and the AADT is 4000 vehicles perdaythe DVMT would be computed by multiplying 2*4,000 =8,000 or 8,000 DVMT. County-By-County DVMT is computed using the State of Ohio, Department of Transportation's Roadway Information Files and the annual Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) Summary Reports. DVMT's are computed for all ofthe Federal Functional Class (FC) categories within each of Ohio's 88 counties. The AADT and Roadway length information provides a very accurate estimate of statewide total DVMT for The State Highway System (Interstate, US and State Routes). Countytotal DVMT are consistent and considered a good source ofcounty level DVMT for countywide emissions estimates. For roadways that are not partofthe State Highway System, various representative counts were used, such as: railroad crossing counts, HPMS Sample Section Counts, etc. All traffic count data thatwas not collected during the current year has had statewide growth factors applied to accountfor systematic growth. Given the previously mentioned methodologies, the DVMT data is more accurate on roads functionally classified as collector or above. Table 4-1 Federal Functional Class Categories: 01 - Rural Interstate 02 - Rural Principal Arterial 06 - Rural MinorArterial 07 - Rural Major Collector 08 - Rural Minor Collector 09 - Rural Local 11 - Urban Interstate 12 - Urban Freeway 

### &Expressway 14 - Urban Principal Arterial 16 - Urban Minor Arterial 17 - Urban Collector 19 - Urban Local

23

### Table 

### 4·2 DVMT County Summary:

COUNTYSUMMARY: Adjusted CountykOVMT's (kDVMT:: Thousands ofDallyVehicles Miles Traveled)TUTAlfC=07 FC=OO FC=09 FC=11 fC=12 !'JJVM'f 111M IIDVf,f'f hDlIMr iIDlIMT NJIIMT 2 ..3 0.0 2005Data

COIJlfYNItfE 

# , ASHLAND ASHTABU A

, S AVGlAIZE BROWN au LER CARROll CHAMPAIGN fC=01 

# "',,'"

007.86 603.79 261.01

0.1l0 0.00 0.00 

## ,." FC=02 

# ""'"

. 6 334.94 2(11.06 239.72

. 2 473.5ll 171.43



## ,." 167.72 fC=08 

# ""'"
163,(16 273.05 11.55 1 227,85 101J.71 "'.W 113.43 318.62 68 247.87 76}8 125,48 441,31 109.T1 217.2& 28a.15 49.20 132.50 taus 38.1J4 194.20 33 .76 197. 254. 2 126,16 47}8 1111.52 253.04 44.37 142.95 1616".131 0.00 0.00 1852.17 129.74 43.84 974.13 81:33 41.31 1127.28 0.00 0.00**1~.56** 1209.51 283.05 596.35 0.00 0.00 722.11 0.00 0.00 1. 170.72 222,24 1. 5.79 29.89 11 .03

0.00 6.51 FC=16 

# "'.'"

26.$$ 2(11.80 101.53

6. ,no 1104.59



## ,." 24.S6 fC=l1 ",v",



# ,. 

### '"''' 35.$6 1 .2(1 1 2.13

4.59 2.01 

## '" 14J8 FC=19 

## ""'"



# , 21.05 386.78 41.94 T. 1.04 1249,92

0.00 4824 TUTAlU

..'" 

# ""'"

254.313 1(13$.6(1

8 . 396.03 1 35.52 1 O.OIJ 164.49 TUTAl- 

### "".'" 1870.39 2887.n 2 1370.16 1162.80 588.35 886.00 CLEf'MCNT 0.00 325.lJS 55.85 428.85 24. 0 2!l6.4 1121.32 awn 161.6$ 602.60 541.86 42,27 20022 2932.7& 4054.oa

.

# , 2'!S2,15 .44 11J64, 6 28333.57 1319.9 . 3 1069.61 21. 367.21 ! 23333.51 168.90 

# , . 111.16

3. 15J1

.65 100.89 125.1J8 1 . 3 71.28 4747.6&

1228 

### "'"

1. .15



## " 198.19

2 306,22

24 1 .55 11J82.47 .71 

# ,"

T29

.

# , 225.16

.8 119.87



## " 1.

.84 

## "" 8.98 41m.74

41.19

1 9. 1 341.11



## .• o.

## "

.

# , 294.84 27MS 34,00 3.40 4311.73

5.19 3.1

0.00 o. 0.00 163.$9 .S> IJ.OO 3,6.83 

## ,." 9 ,7 .0 ,no o.oa 154.88 ,00 .00 O.OIJ 0.00**\1614.~** 815.31 IJ,OIJ .41 (J.oa .00 21J71.75

7aUl 1101.76 1238.20

6. 1543.09 1392,54 757.45 607.55



## '" 1150.69 73!l.56



## ,. 11$.62

11
. 6"



## ,: 81.84 

## " 

# , liG. 9 204. 179
. .2



### '.00 30021 182.7



## ,. 2'" 

## "." 2.2 

### ,.31 150.

5.54 151.6$ 139. 36.00 

### ,.00 134. 9 62.3\1 2 . 262,88 339.14 

## """ m. 342.53

1l.00 396,12 337.18

87 557.08 1 3 210,93 202.5"5 9 .52 56.15 

## "." 117,24 48.' 

# '" ,. 7.05



## ., 183.03 7 . .6 265.05 182.89 82.69 0.01l 142.54 111. IJ.GO 

## ,., ,.00 ,."" 

## '" ,oo

6 1.92 41.8 1lJl
. 533,35 COLUlABII\.NA C OOTON CRAlllJfO CUYAHOGA DA E

, DEfiANCE

0.00 .98 <JEAV<JA 0.00 273A4 GKtCll,t 147. 182.**[~**Pog. 1 Seo I liZ At 0" 10 '" Coil PEe TRK EXT O"R I!ll



### For PDF web based tables of2005 DVMT by county

### see: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/techservsite/availpro/Road %20Infor/KDVMT /vmt2005.pdf Disclaimer by ODOT: The above PDFweb basedtables contain the State ofOhio's adjustedcountyDVMT's androadmileage fortheyears 1990- 2005. Please be aware that the numbers are estimates only. The factoringprocess usedannual, estimated, andstatewideADT (Average Daily Traffic) growth factors, derivedfrom the outputofa limitednumberof traffic counting stations aroundthe state. Although the growth factors are available by functionalclass, theyare more reliable formajorroads such 

### as interstates or expressways, which are relatively well-sampled, than forlocalroads orcollectors. The numbers also do no allowforperiodic, large-scale functionalreclassification actions


### 24

### which reassign selectedroads orroadsegments from one functionalclass to another. The Ohio Departmentof Transportation therefore does not warrantthe accuracy, completeness, orreliabilityofthese estimates foryourresearch. We also do not assume responsibilityforanyincorrectness thatmayoccur.



### 4.3.3 VMT From Travel Demand Models (TOM) Overview: Travel demand forecast modeling is performed bythe Ohio Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and ODOT for a multitude of purposes including the preparation of regional emissions estimates. The ODOT Office ofTechnical Services' Modeling & Forecasting Section recommends that Ohio's TDMs and ODOT's conformity analysis methods be used to establish the roadway mobile source portion of Ohio's SIP budget to assure consistent methods are used for transportation conformity analysis and budgets. Therefore, ODOT provided both MPO regional TDM runs and statewide TDM runs with associated data to OEPA and LADCO. The ODOT provided model run data for years 2002, 2005, 2009, 2012, and 2018. Data provided included loaded networks in both CSV format and GIS shape files, trip end summaries, zone boundary GIS shape files, intra-zonal trip VMT estimates, and VMT summaries for each ofthe loaded networks. Additional post processing data was provided including but not limited to metadata describing the loaded networks, Hourly distribution byfunctional class, speed profiles, day ofweek/weekend / monthly car and trucktraffic profiles, 2009 & 2018 VMT RPO data sets, statewide VMT growth rates for local traffic, and a 2005 VMT summary comparison spreadsheet. It should be noted that among other things, the loaded TDM Networks contain distance and daily volumes from which VMT is computed. Networkvolumes are post processed to estimate VMT by hour of day. The hourly volumes and capacity, posted speed limit, and type of roadway for each roadway segment are then used to estimate average hourly speeds needed for MOBILE6 based emissions estimates. Modeling by segment by hourof day in this way makes emissions estimates more sensitive to the effects of roadway improvements. This allows transportation planners to evaluate the relative emissions affect of improvements to individual roadways as well as packages of improvements and the entire set of planned roadway improvement projects airquality impacts of construction programs.

25

### 4.3.4 Speed Distribution Profiles Overview: ODOT provided speed distribution profiles to LADCO. A couple ofdifferent sets of speed distribution profiles were provided to OEPA and LADCO for their use, atable of space mean speeds byfunctional class for use with DVMTs and link group speed curves for post processing travel demand model traffic forecasts. Both sets ofspeed profiles are based on the same speed study conducted by ODOT. The speed study is documented in "Statewide Travel Time Study, May 2001 by Greg Giaimo, Ohio Department ofTransportation". When OEPA asked for speeds for use with MOBILE6 fordevelopment of CERR, ODOT provided a set of speeds based on that statewide travel time study. Those speeds are documented in a technical memorandum titled "Estimation ofAverage Speed by Functional Class for MOBILE6 Runs" dated 5/27/2004. Readers should referto those documents for the details. Here the contents ofthe technical memo, Estimated Average Speed by Functional Class, are summarized. Space Mean Speeds by Functional Class for Use with County Level DVMT, HPMS: The memo states that the speeds which the Ohio Department ofTransportation (ODOT) had been using priorto that date, 2004, for air quality analysis estimates based on County DVMT summaries, were developed by a former ODOT employee for addressing the one (1) hourstandards conformity rules established due to 1990 emissions exceedances. No documentation was found in ODOT's files on the origin ofthese average speed values or howthey were estimated. In addition, EPA has requirements for using latest planning assumptions for air quality conformity analyses. Therefore, ODOT believed that itwas in the state's best interestto use the most recent available data to provide a new set ofestimated average speeds consistent with those used for urban area travel demand models which were underdevelopment at that time. The memo contains comparisons of2002 speed data obtained from traffic count equipment, automatic traffic recorders (ATRs) which collect data continuously throughout the year. It also contains comparisons ofthe new speeds with those used to address the one hour standard Gebhart's. The graphs shown in figure 1, taken from the memo, illustrate the comparisons. The first graph compares time mean speeds from the ATRs with space mean speeds from ODOTs travel time study done in 2001 and with the speeds used for addressing the one hourstandard.



### 26-lIlI-1990 Analysis Speeds 2001 Speed Study 

### Figure 1 - Speed Comparison Graphs Speeds Comparison 

### 80.0 -,-------------, r-.---:-A....,-r-ag-e7 Sp

ee

'd-'I 

### 70.0 -ho

### 60.0**hr-~~=** 

# -g 50.0**-1-~------~;;-­** 

# 8. 40.0**+---=:::::".~':-2-'-C:-:"';---..2** II) 

### 30.0 -1-----" 

### 20.0 -1------c 

### 10.0 -1-----------



### 0.0 -!-,--.,-.,-r--,--,---,-,-,-,-,+-! <;:)" <;:)fo <:;,'0 ,,"**,,~** ,," 

# «0 «0 «0 «0 «0 «0 Functional Class



### Speeds Comparison 100 ,--,---,-----



### 80 

### +------ 

# -g 60 Gl Co 

### 40 II) 

### 20 -1--- 0-1--,---,---,--...,-...,--,-.....,.........,.........,.........,....""""'"

Functional Class 

### -- Average Speed

-- Min. Avg Speed Max. Avg. Speed


### """*- Gebhardt's Speeds

-- Spd Study Est Speeds

-- Spd Study Greg Est
The following caution statement was taken from the_Estimation of Average Speed by Functional Class memo. 

### CAUTION: Itshouldbe notedthatspeeds on facilities falling in anyone 

### ofthe federal functional classifications varygreatlybetween roadways, between hour

### ofthe day, and day

### of the week. 

### So these provide only veryrough estimates 

### ofspeedandshouldbe used with caution. In addition, it is expected thatthese average statewide speeds are higherthan the average speeds in the non-attainmentareas because the non

### 27

### attainment counties tendto be morepopulatedandmore congested. The document "Highway Vehicle SpeedEstimation Procedures ForUse in Emission Inventories'; September 1991 byEarlRuiterof Cambridge Systematics Inc. is referencedbyEPA's documentedprocedures foremission inventorypreparation. This documentsuggests postprocessing traveldemandmodeltrafficassignmentresults to estimate average speeds. Final space mean speeds that ODOT provided are summarized in the Table 1 below: 

### Table 4·3 Speed by Federal Functional Class Functional Class 1990 Analysis 2001 Speed Study Speeds Speeds FC01 57.3 64.0 FC02 45.3 53.0 FC06 39.9 53.0 FC07 35.1 43.1 FC08 30.5 43.1 FC09 28.0 43.1 FC11 46.3 61.6 FC12 43.3 61.6 FC14 18.9 29.3 FC16 19.6 29.3 FC17 19.6 29.2 FC19 19.6 23.8
Itwas decided by mutual agreement among individuals within the ODOT Office of Technical Services that these new space mean speed based average speed estimates were reproducible and defensible since they are well documented and should therefore be the speeds used with HPMS** VMT ifany year2002 emissions budget work is done using onlythe county level VMT summaries discussed in section 5.3.2 DailyVehicle Miles Traveled (DVMT).

** Note that HPMS VMT is a statewide VMT estimate and the county level DVMT summaries are consistent with the HPMS VMT so the county level DVMT summaries are loosely referred to as HPMS VMTs even though in fact they are not. 

### 4.3.5 Link Group Speed Curves: The ODOT Modeling & Forecasting Section recommends that Ohio's travel demand forecasting models and ODOT's conformity analysis methods be used to establish the roadway mobile source portion ofOhio's SIP budget for reasons already mentioned in 5.3.2 and to assure consistent methods are used for transportation conformity demonstration analyses and budgets. Therefore, ODOT provided travel demand model runs and the speed curves by link group that ODOT uses for the speed estimates within


### 28

### the post processing oftravel demand model runs for estimating regional emissions. Table 2 shows these link group curves.
Table 4-4 Link Group Codes & Associated BPR Curves Link Facility Free Flow Areatype a 

### b Group Type Speed 1 Freeway 75 Any 0.39 6.3 2 Freeway 70 Any 0.32 7.0 3 Freeway 65 Any 0.25 9.0 4 Freeway 60 Any 0.18 8.5 5 Freeway 55 Any 0.10 10.0 6 Multi-Lane 60 Rural 0.09 6.0 7 Multi-Lane 55 Rural 0.08 6.0 8 Multi-Lane 50 Rural 0.Q7 6.0 9 Multi-Lane 45 Rural 0.07 6.0 10 2 Lane Any Rural 0.34 4.0 10 Urban 50 Suburban 0.34 4.0 Street 11 Urban 50 Urban 0.74 5.0 Street 12 Urban 50 CBD 1.16 6.0 Street 13 Urban 40 Suburban 0.38 5.0 Street 14 Urban 40 Urban 0.70 5.0 Street 15 Urban 40 CBD 1.00 5.0 Street 16 Urban 35 Suburban 0.96 5.0 Street 

### 17 Urban 35 Urban 1.00 5.0 Street 18 Urban 35 CBD 1.40 5.0 Street 19 Urban 30 Suburban 1.11 5.0 Street 20 Urban 30 Urban 1.20 5.0 Street 21 Urban 30 CBD 1.50 5.0 Street Note: a and b are the BPR curve parameters for the equation T 

### =T

### o{1 

### +

### a * (V/C)Ab] 

### 29

### More complete details about emissions modeling process employed by ODOT may be found in ODOT documentations. The documenttitled "Congestion Management & Air Quality Analysis (CMAQ) Program Documentation" dated December2005 may be obtained from the ODOT web site at www.dot.state.oh.us/urban/data/cmaq.doc (Microsoft Word document)



### 4.4 Mobile6 Inputs: The following table contains the inputs supplied to LADCO to process our mobile inventory. 

### 4.4.1 Ohio's 2005 MOBILE6 Inputs The following tables are the result ofa joint meeting between Ohio EPA, ODOT, and MPOs from around the state. At that meeting Mobile6 inputs were discussed and efforts were made to verify the sources ofdata inputs for Moble6. Dialogue has continued between the parties. For historical reference:

>>> Dave Moore <Dave.Moore1@dot.state.oh.us>4/10/20062:13PM»> All, An air quality coordination meeting has been scheduled forApril 27, 2006 at 10:00 AM at ODOT Central Office conference room GA. The primary purpose ofthis meeting is to discuss development of2002 mobile source inventories for use in developing the Ohio 2007 8-Hour Ozone SIP Attainment Demonstrations. See meeting agenda below. OEPA is working toward a June 15, 2006 schedule for submitting the 2002 inventories to US EPA. A key component ofthe meeting will be to review and confirm the MOBILE6.2 input parameters, by Ohio a/q area, for use in developing the 2002 mobile inventories. See draft template below. The Ohio MPO travel demand models will be used to generate the 2002 VMT inputs to MOBILE. Thanks, OM OM



### 30

### IMPORTANT NOTICE: The following tables are notto be used for inventory purposes as the data is subjectto change. Forthe current inputtable, contact Ohio EPA, Division of Air Pollution Control.
Table 

### 4-5 Mobile Inputs 

## Cleveland-Akron 2005 Ozone M6.2 Inp;;,.;;u;;.;;.ts,,-

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


### State Programs



# I Input Stage II Refueling Anti·tampering Programs 93/3/86/86 96/78/50/22222/21111111/1/12/098.112111112 11M Programs Yes Exclude Ashtabula County· No 11M program Program 1 2004 2050 2 T/O OBO 11M Model Years 1 1996 2050 Vehicles 1 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 1 30.0 Compliance 1 98.0 Waiver Rates 1 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints Exemption Age 1 25 Grace Period 1 4 NO TTC Credits Effectiveness OESCfile Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness OESCfile Program 2 2004 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBO & GC 2 1996 2050 2 22222 11111111 1 2 98.0 2 1.0 1.0 2 25 24

3 2001 2003 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE·IN


### 31Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TIC Credits Effectiveness DESC file Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TIC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TIC Credits Effectiveness DESC file 3 1996 2003 3 22222 21111111 1 3 30.0 398.0 3 3.0 1.0 3 25 3 2

4 2001 2050 2 TIO ASM 2525 PHASE-IN 4 1975 1995 422222211111111 430.0 498.0 4 3.0 1.0 4 25 44

5 1998 2000 2 TIO LOADEDIIDLE 5 1975 2000 5 22222 21111111 1 5 30.0 5 98.0 5 3.0 1.0 5 25 5 2

6 1996 1997 2 TIO IM240 6 1975 1997 622222211111111 6 30.0 698.0 6 3.0 1.0 6 CUTPOINT.D 

### 6 25 6 2



### 32Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile 

### Fuel Commands Fuel Program Oxygenated Fuels Fuel RVP 7 1996 2050 2 TIO GC 7 1975 1995 7 22222 21111111 1 7 98.0 7 3.0 1.0 

### 7 25 

### 7 2

1 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2 9 

### Alternative Emission Regulations and Control Measures
Rebuild Effects

Calendar Year Evaluation Month 0.1 

### External Conditions Commands 2005 7 MiniMax Temperature National Climatic Data Center 

### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands Registration Distribution Variabie



### 33

# ICincinnati-Dayton-Springfield 2005 Ozone M6.2 Inputs Includes the following counties: Ohio: Butler, Clark, Clermont, Clinton, Greene, Hamilton, Miami, Montgomery, Warren Indiana: Lawrenceburg Twp., Dearborn County Kentucky: Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties 

# I Input 

### State Programs
Note: Indiana and Kentucky inputs may not coincide with Ohio inputs Stage II Refueling 93/3/86/86 Anti·tampering Programs 96/78/05/22222/21111111/1/12/098./12111112 11M Programs Yes Excludes Clinton Co. and Miami Co., OH, Dearborn County, IN • No 11M program Note: 11M inputs for Kentucky counties are not included Program 1 2004 2050 2 T/O OBD 11M Model Years 1 1996 2050 Vehicles 1 22222 21111111 1 Stringency 1 30.0 Compliance 1 98.0 Waiver Rates 1 1.0 1.0 Cutpoints Exemption Age 1 25 Grace Period 1 2 NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESC file Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile 2 2004 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD & GC 2 1996 2050 2 22222 11111111 1 298.0 2 1.0 1.0 2 25 

### 2 2

Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance 3 2001 2003 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN 3 1996 2003 3 22222 21111111 1 330.0 3 98.0


### 34Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESC file Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TTC Credits Effectiveness DESCfile Program Model Years Vehicles Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TIC Credits Effectiveness DESC file Program Model Years Vehicles 3 3.0 1.0 3 25 

### 3 2

4 2001 2050 2 T/O ASM 2525 PHASE-IN 4 1975 1995 422222 211111111 4 30.0 498.0 4 3.0 1.0 

### 4 25 

### 4 4

5 1998 2000 2 T/O LOADEDIIDLE 5 1975 2000 5 22222 21111111 1 5 30.0 598.0 5 3.0 1.0 5 25 5 2

6 1996 1997 2 T/O IM240 6 1975 1997 622222211111111 6 30.0 6 98.0 6 3.0 1.0 6 CUTPOINT.D 6 25 6 2

7 1996 2050 2 T/O GC 7 1975 1995 7 22222 21111111 1



### 35Stringency Compliance Waiver Rates Cutpoints Exemption Age Grace Period NO TIC Credits Effectiveness DESC file

Fuel Program Oxygenated Fuels Fuel RVP 7 98.0 7 3.0 1.0 7 25 

### 7 2



### Fuel Commands
1 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2 9 

### Alternative Emission Re ulations and Control Measures
Rebuild Effects

Calendar Year Evaluation Month 0.1 

### External Conditions Commands 2005 7 MiniMax Temperature National Climatic Data Center 

### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands Registration Distribution Variable



### 36

## OtherAreas (excluding NOACAIAMATS 

## and OKIIMVRPC) 

## Ozone M6.2 Inputs Includes the following counties: Ohio: Belmont, Columbiana, Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Jefferson, Knox, Licking, Lucas,Madison, Mahoning, Pickaway, Trumball, Wood 

### Fuel CommandsInput Fuel Program Oxygenated Fuels Fuel RVP 1 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.036 2 9 

### Alternative Emission Regulations and Control Measures
Rebuild Effects 0.1 (0.30 for 2018)

CalendarYear Evaluation Month 

### External Conditions Commands All 7 MiniMaxTemperature National Climatic Data Center

Registration Distribution 

### Vehicle Fleet Characteristic Commands

Variable



### 4.5 Ohio's Mobile Emission Data Processed by LADCO (Lake Michigan Air Director's Consortium): 2005 TDM and Mobile6 input data were provided to LADCO for processing. The data was processed by LADCO with T3 to prepare it as an input into the ConCEPT model. T3 and ConCEPT are described as follows.

37

### 4.5.1 T3··Development of Link·Level Mobile Source Emission Inventories: Highly resolved emission inventories for on-road mobile sources are needed for air quality modeling to develop 

### the necessarytechnical supportfor new State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for regional haze, fine particles, and ozone. Emissions for on-road motor vehicles 

### are estimated using vehicle 

### miles traveled, 

### trip starts and ends, speed, and other activity

### data developed 

### by State Agencies and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) using transportation demand models (TOMs), and emission factors from EPA's MOBILE6 model. To support this modeling in the upper Midwest, ENVIRON, working with LADCO, State DOTs, and local MPOs, has developed 

### a software tool (the TOM Transformation Tool, or "T3") that takes TOM output from approximately twenty transportation networks using a variety

### of models, applies appropriate data transformations, and outputs Iink- and county-level activity

### data in a uniform format for inputto the CONCEPT emissions processing model (a new emissions processing model also developed with funding from LADCO). 

### In a parallel effort, analyses of extensive 

### automatic traffic recorder (ATR) data collected by State DOTs were conducted to develop temporal profiles (hour ofday, day ofweek, and month ofyear) of vehicle 

### counts and vehicle 

### mix by roadway type for developing the detailed on-road emission inventories. 

### T3 provides a conduit from the projections oftraffic demand modelers regarding vehicle 

### types, road networks, and vehicle activity

### to the activity

### data required by emissions modelers. The primary goals ofT3 are to provide an easy mechanism for incorporating TOM model outputs in as "raw" a format as possible, while simultaneously providing a great degree offlexibility in representing the TOM projections in terms acceptable to most air quality models. These goals have 

### been achieved

### through the use ofa dimensional transformation approach, where the dimensions ofthe various 

### transformations are user-defined
- hence the name of the tool. By Stella Shepard, Alison K. Pollack, John Haasbeek, ENVIRON International Corporation, 101 Rowland Way, Suite 220, Novato, 

### CA. 94945 & Mark Janssen, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO), 2250 E. Devon Avenue 

### # 250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, janssen@ladco.org


### 4.5.2 ConCEPT··Consolidated Community Emissions Processing Tool an Open· Source Tool for the Emissions Modeling Community: The new CONCEPT (CONsolidated Community Emissions Processing Tool) Emissions Processor is now available 

### for use bythe emissions modeling community. Developed 

### asjoint project between Alpine Geophysics, LLC and ENVIRON Corporation, with Midwest RPO and joint RPO funding, the CONCEPT model combines the best attributes ofcurrent emissions modeling systems into an open source model highlighting the following features:

• Open Source. Written primarily in PostgreSQL, the software required for running 

### 38

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

• Transparent. The database structure ofthe model makes the system easy to understand, and the modeling codes themselves are extremely well documented to encourage user participation in the customizing the system for specific modeling requirements.

• Quality Control. The CONCEPT model structure and implementation allows for multiple levels of QA analysis during every step ofthe emissions calculation process. Using the database structures, an emissions modeler can easilytrace a process or facility and review the calculation procedures and assumptions for any emissions value. The CONCEPT model includes modules forthe major emissions source categories: area source, point source, on-road motorvehicles, non-road motorvehicles and biogenic emissions, as well as a numberof supporting modules, including spatial allocation factor development, speciation profile development, growth and control for point and area sources, and CEM point source emissions handling. The emissions modeling community has already begun development of additional CONCEPT support modules including CEM preprocessing software, graphical QAtools, and an interface to the traffic demand models for on-road motorvehicle emissions estimation. By Cyndi Loomis, James G. Wilkinson, Alpine Geophysics, LLC, 

### & John Haasbeek, Alison Pollack, ENVIRON Corporation. & MarkJanssen, Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO), 2250 E. Devon Avenue 

### # 250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, janssen@ladco.org


### 4.5.3 LADCO Ohio Data Outputs for 2005: The following LADCO outputs and documents can be found at: www.ladco.org/tech/emis/net05/index.html 

### Table 4-6 LADCO Data Output 

# r'-r l ,

# ·-·,--·I----···f--···-**~~~;age** 

# .'C;- 

# -r-----i
..··r-·--i-I---· '--5ourIY 

# I ' 

# I Day unt, , ,

## I~' VM VMT Y All 

# I Raw ! Speed 

## I ' T (th' E P II t 

## I M6 !POllut S IHourly Hourly Summ 3 M6! VS IS mou t umm T Vh ' an em 0 e a ' Sta •.. HP should iss! ants Dropped Run ary p. ry te INetwork Descnptl Inpu !MS match on After 

# I VMT Summ Totals (pol,ve ral MIx (with on DOC ts Exc conformi s Spec! ary (Short h, Summ Summ volum 

# I 'el ty Re at!on ) etype) ary ary e/

. 

## I inventory por

# I I 

# I capaci 

## I 

# I) t. 

## I ty) 

## IoH]AKR.0N--riKRON'!?H**"IO~[A:K~ON["[1'~-=~--** 

# '-!l-rl'--f!'--li--'[t--[1--'

39

### Additional Documents on LADCO Web Page: 

### "Comparison to EPA's Default Model NMIM" "Howwe Build the 2005 Vmt/Networks" "Spreadsheet/Graphics on Vehicle Mix" "Background on the T3 Tool" 4.6 MPO Contact Table Table 4·7 County Summary Table of MPOs by County FIPS county Model Network MPO Contact Person 

### 39001 Adams Statewide Lima Allen County Regional Tom Mazur 

### 39003 Allen Statewide Plannino Commission 

### 39005 Ashland Statewide 

### 39007 Ashtabula Statewide 

### 39009 Athens Statewide 

### 39011 Auolaize Statewide Bel-O-Mar Regional Council Rakesh Sharma and Interstate Planning 

### 39013 Belmont Statewide Commission 

### 39015 Brown Statewide Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Andy Reser CincinnatlDayton Regional COuncil of 

### 39017 Butler Governments 

### 39019 Carroll Statewide 

### 39021 ChampaiQn Statewide Coordinating Committee of Eric Ottoson 

### 39023 Clark Sarinafield the Clark Countv-Sarinafield 

### 40Transportation Study Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Andy Reser CincinnatlDavton Regional Council of 

### 39025 Clermont Governments 

### 39027 Clinton Statewide 

### 39029 Columbiana Statewide 

### 39031 Coshocton Statewide 

### 39033 Crawford Statewide Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis 

### 39035 CUYahoga Cleveland Coordinatina Aaencv 

### 39037 Darke Statewide 

### 39039 Defiance Statewide Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Nick Gill 

### 39041 Delaware ColumbUS Commission 

### 39043 Erie Statewide 

### 39045 Fairfield Statewide 

### 39047 Fayette Statewide Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Nick Gill 

### 39049

. Franklin ColumbUS Commission 

### 39051 Fulton Statewide 

### 39053 Gallia Statewide Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis 

### 39055 GeauQa Cleveland Coordinating AQency Miami Valley Regional Ana Ramirez 

### 39057 Greene CincinnatlDavton Planning Commission 

### 39059 Guernsev Statewide Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Andy Reser CincinnatlDavton Regional Council of 

### 39061 Hamilton Governments 

### 39063 Hancock Statewide 

### 39065 Hardin Statewide 

### 39067 Harrison Statewide 

### 39069 Henrv Statewide 

### 39071 Highland Statewide 

### 39073 Hocking Statewide 

### 39075 Holmes Statewide 

### 39077 Huron Statewide 

### 39079 Jackson Statewide Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson Mike Proprocki Transportation Study Policy 

### 39081 Jefferson Statewide Committee 

### 39083 Knox Statewide Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis 

### 39085 Lake Cleveland Coordinating Agency KYOVA Interstate Planning 

### 39087 Lawrence Statewide Commission Licking County Area Matthew Hill 

### 39089 Licking Columbus Transportation Study 

### 39091 LOQan Statewide 

### 39093 Lorain Cleveland Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis


### 41Coordinating Agency Toledo Metropolitan Area SUjatha Mohanakrishnan 

### 39095 Lucas Toledo Council of Governments 

### 39097 Madison Statewide Eastgate Regional Council RP. Samulka 

### 39099 MahoninQ Youngstown of Governments 

### 39101 Marion Statewide Northeast Ohio Areawide Bill Davis 

### 39103 Medina Cleveland Coordinating Agency 

### 39105 Meigs Statewide 

### 39107 Mercer Statewide Miami Valley Regional Ana Ramirez 

### 39109 Miami CincinnatlDaylon Planning Commission 

### 39111 Monroe Statewide Miami Valley Regional Ana Ramirez 

### 39113 Montgomery CincinnatlDaylon Planning Commission 

### 39115 Moraan Statewide 

### 39117 Morrow Statewide 

### 39119 Muskingum Statewide 

### 39121 Noble Statewide 

### 39123 Ottawa Statewide 

### 39125 Pauldina Statewide 

### 39127 Perrv Statewide 

### 39129 Pickaway Statewide 

### 39131 Pike Statewide Akron Metropolitan Area Jason Segedy

. 

### 39133 Portage Akron Transportation Studv 

### 39135 Preble Statewide 

### 39137 Putnam Statewide Richland County Regional John Adams 

### 39139 Richland Statewide PlanninQ Commission 

### 39141 Ross Statewide 

### 39143 Sandusky Statewide 

### 39145 Scioto Statewide 

### 39147 Seneca Statewide 

### 39149 Shelbv Statewide Stark County Regional Dan Slicker 

### 39151 Stark Canton PlanninQ Commission Akron Metropolitan Area Jason Segedy 

### 39153 Summit Akron Transportation Studv Youngstown (partial Eastgate Regional Council RP. Samulka county model of Governments 

### 39155 Trumbull coveraae) 

### 39157 Tuscarawas Statewide 

### 39159 Union Statewide 

### 39161 Van Wert Statewide 

### 39163 Vinton Statewide Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Andy Reser, OKI Cincinnat/Davton Regional Council of 

### 39165 Warren Governments +


### 42+ Miami Valley Regional Ana Ramirez, MVRPC PlanninQ Commission Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate Planning 

### 39167 Washington Statewide Commission 

### 39169 Wayne Statewide 

### 39171 Williams Statewide Toledo Metropolitan Area SUjatha Mohanakrishnan 

### 39173 Wood Toledo Council of Governments 

### 39175 Wvandot Statewide 

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

### SECTION 5 MARINE, AIRCRAFT and RAIL (MAR) SOURCES MAR sources are non-road sources which are significant enough in terms of emissions to be considered separately from the rest of the non-road sources. The MAR inventory consists of commercial marines, aircraft and locomotive sources. The marine and locomotive inventory is generated by Environ 1 

### under contract with LADCO and the aircraft inventory is generated by Ohio EPA. 5.1 Marine Vessel Sources The approach to commercial marine emission estimates needed to be flexible because the activity data was available in many formats. Emission estimates were determined either by multiplying engine power, load factor, hours peryear of operation, oron the basis ofthe numberofgallons offuel consumed. Emissions were determined forten subclasses ofvessel types: Deep draft vessels (DDV) at port, DDV mid-late, push boats (rivers/lakes), tugs, ferries, other special (excursion) vessels, supportvessels, dredges, commercial fishing, and military vessels (Coast Guard). These were linked to various Ohio lakes and rivers. Because ofthe large variety of methodologies employed, inventory tables for the ten subcategories are detailed in the complete inventory prepared and published by ENVIRON International Corporation: LADCO 2005 COMMERCIAL MARINE EMISSIONS, by Christian E. Lindhjem, March, 2007. Emission totals produced by ENVIRON were provided to LADCO to submitto EPAfor Ohio's State Implementation Plan (SIP).

43

### 5.2 Rail Sources The primary activity unit used to determine emissions is gallons offuel consumed. Emission rates were derived from EPA documents provided as support documentation forthe 1997 locomotive emission standards (EPA, 1997). Gallons offuel consumed were based on rail activity. 

### Rail activitywas broken down into four Source Category Codes (SCC). Class I, linehaul rail: Large interstate railroad companies like Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. Class I,ll, III, switching rail: Yard operations. Class II, III line haul: Regional and local railroads. And Passenger rail: AMTRAK. Class I, line-haul represents 84.3% offuel used and the largest emission's category. The complete emission's inventorywas prepared and published by ENVIRON International Corporation: 

### LADCO 2005 LOCOMOTIVE EMISSIONS, by Christian E. Lindhjem, February, 2007. Emission totals produced by ENVIRON were provided to LADCO to submit to EPAfor Ohio's State Implementation Plan (SIP).

EPA. 1997: "locomotive Emission Standards." Regulatory Support Document, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources, April. And EPA 1997, Emission Factors for locomotives," Environmental Protection Agency, EPA420-F-97-051, December.


### 5.3 Aircraft Sources INTRODUCTION: The aircraft emission's inventory is derived by taking the numberof Landings and Take Ofts (LTOs) peryear and multiplying by an emission factor. In the Ohio inventory when specific aircraft models and engine type emission factors are known they were used. Forthe rest ofthe inventorythe emission factors came from USEPA's fleet average emissions data. Those results are then compiled as tons peryear per pollutant by county. The following describes the components, methodology, and concludes with a description ofan Access based aircraft emission calculator. 

### COMPONENTS:

I. Ohio Airports: A list of both towered and non-towered airports in Ohio is obtained from the Ohio Department ofTransportation. See: www.dot.state.oh.us/aviation/ In conversation with ODOT two individuals stated that the 164 airports listed covered over 90% ofthe airports in Ohio. See Table 1.



### 44

### II. Number of Operations/LTOs by Airport/County: The OOOT list contained the numberof operations a year per airport. An operation is either a landing or atake-off. A Landing and Take Off (LTO) is required for FAA EOMS calculations. LTOs were derived simply by dividing the numberof operations bytwo. These were totaled by county. Table 5-1 Number of operations and LTOs for 2005

CounlY AirportName ID Total Operations LTOslYear Adams Alexander Salamon AMT 5210 2605 Allen AllenCounty AOH 32500 16250 Ashland AshlandCounty 304 49240 24620 Ashtabula AshtabulaCounty HZY 16886 8443 Ashtabula Gennack 7D9 840 420 Athens Ohio University UNI 51600 25800 Au,glaizc Neil Annstrong AXY 29456 14728 Belmont**Bamesvil1e~Bradfjeld** 605 10150 5075 Belmont Alderman 2P7 6150 3075 Brown Brown County OEO 5157 2578.5 Butler ButlerCountyRegional HAO 61687 30843.5 Butler BookField Municipal MWO 40050 20025 Butler Miami University OXD 16708 8354 Carroll CarrollCounty -Tolson TSO 34950 17475 Carroll Parsons 5D6 2674 1337 Champaign Grimes Field 174 23480 11740 ChamoaiJrn Weller 381 300 150 Clark**Snringfield~Beckley** Municipal SOH 64033 32016.5 Clark Mad River 154 15350 7675 Clermont ClemlOutCounty 169 35741 17870.5 Clinton AirborneAirpark ILN 52000 26000 Clinton Clinton Field 166 29360 14680 Clinton HollisterField 2B6 161 80.5 Columbiana ColumbianaCounty 020 31146 15573 Columbiana Koons 808 2546 1273 Coshocton Richard Downing 140 19550 9775 Coshocton Tri-Citv 800 8085 4042.5 Crawford PortBucyrus 170 24871 12435.5 Crawford Galion Municipal 000 5216 2608 Cuyahoga Burke Lakcfront BKL 97100 48550 Cuyahoga**Cleveland~Honkins** International CLE 234356 117178 Cuyahoga CuyahogaCounty CGF 79774 39887 Darke DarkeCounty YES 9238 4619 Defiance DefianceMemorial DFI 9130 4565 Delaware Delaware Municipal DLZ 39300 19650 Delaware Packer 5E9 3181 1590.5 Elie Hinde 88D 1350 675 Elie Kelleys Island 89D 25495 12747.5 Elie**Griffing~Sandusky** SKY 112100 56050


### 45Erie Wakeman 164 17324 8662 Fairfield Miller's Farm 7B4 360 180 Fairfield Fairfield County LBQ 43066 21533 Fayette FayetteCounty 123 29405 14702.5 Franklin Ohio State University OSU 134459 67229.5 Franklin PortColumbus International CMH 218438 109219 Franklin RickenbackerInternational LCK 96200 48100 Franklin Bolton Field TZR 69149 34574.5 Franklin Columbus Southwest 041 11833 5916.5 Franklin DarbyDan 616 11260 5630 Fulton Fulton County USE 21123 10561.5 Gallia Gallia-Meil.ts Ret!lonal OAS 12200 6100 Geawm Gates 708 4200 2100 Geauga GeaugaCounty 708 5350 2675 Greene Greene County-Lewis A.Jackson 1I9 37400 18700 Greene Bloom 141 100 50 Guernsev CambridgeMunicinal CD! 6040 3020 Hamilton Lunken LUK 129430 64715 Hamilton BlueAsh ISZ 35000 17500 Hamilton Cincinnati West 167 30197 15098.5 Hancock Bluffton 507 71980 35990 Hancock Findlay FOY 19800 9900 Hancock Priebe 705 3850 1925 Hardin Ada 007 331 165.5 Hardin Hardin County 195 6562 3281 Hardin Elliott's Landing 074 1560 780 Harrison HarrisonCounty 806 11900 5950 Henrv Henry County 7W5 15637 7818.5 Highland Highland Count'll HOC 18325 9162.5 Holmes Holmes County 100 21400 10700 Huron Huron County 5Al 10100 5050 Huron Willard 801 2715 1357.5 Jackson James A. Rhodes 143 6053 3026.5 Jefferson Jefferson CountyAiroark 202 15969 7984.5 Jefferson Eddie DewMemorial 108 3540 1770 Knox Knox County 413 20150 10075 Knox Wynkoop 604 4691 2345.5 Lake ConcordAiroark 201 4510 2255 Lake Willoughby LostNation Municinal LNN 45085 22542.5 La\Vfence La\VfenceCountyAimark HTW 41910 20955 Licking Newark-Heath VTA 12457 6228.5 Logan BellefontaineRegional EDJ 8325 4162.5 Lorain Columbia 408 5150 2575 Lorain ElYria 101 14300 7150 Lorain Lagrange 920 1155 577.5 Lorain Lorain CountyRegional LPR 62000 31000 Lorain Reader-BotsfordAirfield 670 18700 9350 Lucas ToledoExpress TOL 94600 47300


### 46Madison Madison County UYF 41410 20705 Mahoning SalemAirpark 38D 16920 8460 Mahoning TriMCitv 3G6 10555 5277.5 Mahonin.e: ElserMetro 4G4 49232 24616 Mahoning Lansdowne 04G 750 375 Marion Marion Municioal MNN 42650 21325 Medina MedinaMunicipal IG5 79685 39842.5 Medina Wadsworth Municipal 3G3 4102.'; 20512.5 Medina Weltzien SkvPark 15G 79130 39565 Mercer Lakefield eOA 16212 8106 Miami Hartzell Field Il7 10200 5100 Miami TroySkypark 371 4264 2132 Miami WacoField lWF 0 0 Monroe Monroe County 4G5 3324 1662 Montgomery BrookvilleAil"-Park 162 29359 14679.5 Montgomery James M. CoxDavton IntI DAY 134524 67262 Montgomery Dayton WrightBrothers MGY 89045 44522.5 Montgomery MoraineAirpark 173 12938 6469 Montgomery Dahio Trotwood 144 1853 926.5 Montgomery Phillipsburg 317 68000 34000 Morfran Morgan County 171 .';725 2862.5 Morrow MorrowCounty 419 19108 9554 Muskingum ZanesvilleMunicipal ZZv 33312 16656 Muskingum Parr 421 16150 8075 Noble Noble County-MikeBrienzaField Il0 5950 2975 Ottawa Middle Bass-EastPoint 3W9 1300 650 Ottawa MiddleBass Island 3T7 6500 3250 Ottawa North Bass Island 3X5 1000 500 Ottawa Carl R. KellerField pew 20890 10445 Ottawa**PutMbl~Bav** 3W2 15140 7570 Paulding Paulding 2H8 2100 1050 Perry Crooksville 184 400 200 PelTY Perry County 186 4550 2275 Pickaway Pickaway County eyO 35450 17725 Pickaway Clarks DreamStrip 031 2770 1385 Pike PikeCounty EOP 2012 1006 Portage Freedom AirField 7D6 1623 811.5 Portage Farview 86D 3353 1676.5 Portage Mills 7E3 1050 525 Portage PortageCounty 29G 9621 4810.5 Putnam Ruhe's R47 13250 6625 Putnam Putnam County OWX 11910 5955 Putnam Ohio DustingCo. 6e2 2995 1497.5 Richland Mansfield Lahm Regional MFD 57518 28759 Richland Shelby Community 12G 2012 1006 Ross Ross County RZT 50150 25075 SanduskY Fremont 14G 37450 18725 Sandusky Sandusky CountyReeional S24 6148 3074


### 47Scioto GreaterPortsmouthRegional PMH 45830 22915 Seneca BanditField 5D9 140 70 Seneca FostoriaMetroPolitan FZl 7900 3950 Seneca Weiker 82D 320 160 Seneca SenecaCounty 16G 60165 30082.5 Shelby SidnevMunicinal Il2 20500 10250 Stark Barber 2Dl 13750 6875 Stark MillerAirport 4G3 8000 4000 Stark BeachCity 2D7 6112 3056 Summit Akron Fulton International AKR 26000 13000 Summit**Akron~Canton** Remonal CAK 120441 60220.5 Summit Mayfield lD4 450 225 Summit Kent StateUniversity 103 72500 36250 Trumbull Braceville 4lN 425 212.5 Trumbull Warren 62D 14738 7369 Trumbull Youngstown-Warren Regional YNG 98298 49149 Tuscarawas HarrvCleverField PHD 54880 27440 Union UnionCounty MRT 31886 15943 VanWert Van WertCounty VNW 20516 10258 Vinton Vinton County 221 5225 2612.5 Warren Warren County 168 24951 12475.5 WalTen Red StewartAir.field 401 16800 8400 WaYne WavneCounty BJJ 96520 48260 Williams Williams County 0G6 10010 5005 Wood Wood County lG0 27405 13702.5 Wood Bordner 3D8 2200 1100 Wood DeshlerMunicival 6D7 2000 1000 Wood Metcalf TDZ 90700 45350 Wyandot WyandotCounty 56D 7410 3705


### III. Aircraft Models and Numberof LTO/yr: Specific aircraft models by airport (generallythe largerairports) is obtained from "Table 

### 7" provided bythe United States Department ofTransportation, Office ofAirline Information. This provided the numberof LTO's for each aircraft model peryear per airport. Table 2. Sample from "Table 7." This is the all community total of aircraft models for the Akron/Canton area. "All Service" departures were used as the numberof LTOs per yearforthat model. Listed in the original table are aircraft model by airport and number of services/LTOs.

48

### TOTAL DEPARTURES PERFORMD Aircraft Scheduled Non-Sched All Model Service Service Service A-318 1 1 A319 384 384 BOEING 717-200 3850 3850 BOEING 727-100 1 1 BOEING 727-200 5 5 BOEING 737-100/200 74 74 BOEING 737-200C 3 3 6 BOEING 737-300 2 2 BOEING 737-700/LR 212 212 BOEING 737-800 5 5 BOEING 757-200 4 4 BOEING 767-300/ER 4 4 CANADAIR RJ-I00/ER 542 3 545 CANADAIR RJ-700 2881 2881 CONVAIR CV-580 3 3 DASSAULT FALCON 7 7 DHC8-100 DASH 8 2 2 DOUGLAS DC-9-15F 13 13 DOUGLAS DC-9-30 6 6 EMBRAER-145 144 144 RJ-200ER/RJ-440 5519 5519 SAAB-FAIRCHD 340/B 1804 1804 ALL TYPES 15342 130 15472


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



### 49

### Table 5·2 EDMS Aircraft Emissions Emissions provided by Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (The few aircraft in Ohio not included in the table had emissions derived by EDMS 5.0 in-house.)

EDMS Aircraft Emissions/LTO byAircraft Type EDMS 4.5 Emissions Inventory Report of2005 Aircraft Inventory Emissions Factors ii /JJ;DF020/'TIITit 

### ;:,Qg/···,/,//i//ii,Y_i',',/';i i'/'ii .- ;,i;, 

# ;eo'/;voeP'/ ;i;sot(/;; 5// A-318 19.8 18.7 4.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 A-300-600IRlCFiRCF 27.1 56.4 2.0 2.2 4.0 0.2 0.2 A-300BlCIF-IOO/200 30.2 52.5 3.5 3.7 3.3 0.2 0.2 A-310-200C/F 32.6 52.5 7.3 7.9 3.3 0.2 0.2 A-319 19.8 18.7 4.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 A320·1001200 13.7 19.8 1.3 1.3 1.8 0.2 0.2 A·321 16.8 36.8 3.1 3.3 2.2 0.0 0.0 A-330-200 29.8 61.5 0.4 0.4 4.4 0.2 0.2 AVROLlNERRJ85 24.7 9.5 2.9 3.3 1.3 0.2 0.2 BAE-146-300 24.7 9.0 3.1 3.3 1.3 0.2 0.2 BEECH 1900AlBIC 11.0 1.1 3.3 3.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 BEECH K1NGAIR C90 1.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 717·200 11.7 23.4 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 727-100 21.4 23.1 4.6 5.1 2.9 0.4 0.4 727-100C/QC 44.5 19.8 4.6 5.1 2.4 1.1 1.1 727·200 19.6 27.3 2.9 3.1 3.3 1.1 1.1 737·100/200 14.1 16.1 2.2 2.4 2.0 0.7 0.7 737-200C 13.9 17.4 6.8 7.5 2.0 0.9 0.9 737·300 28.7 15.9 1.8 2.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 737·400 26.5 18.5 1.5 1.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 737-500 24.7 21.2 1.3 1.3 2.0 0.0 0.0 737-7001LR 17.6 20.1 2.0 2.0 1.8 0.4 0.4 737·800 15.7 27.1 1.5 1.8 2.0 0.7 0.7 737-900 15.7 27.1 1.5 1.8 2.0 0.7 0.7 747-100 252.6 108.5 106.7 116.8 7.1 0.4 0.4 747·200/300 60.6 104.7 7.1 7.7 6.8 0.7 0.7 747-400 67.0 105.6 5.7 6.4 7.3 0.7 0.7 757-200 24.7 35.7 2.0 2.2 2.6 0.4 0.4 757·300 27.1 33.1 0.4 0.4 3.1 0.2 0.2 767-2001ER 32.6 52.5 7.3 7.9 3.3 0.2 0.2 767·3001ER 32.0 62.2 2.6 2.9 4.0 0.4 0.4 777 32.8 85.1 5.1 5.7 4.4 0.4 0.4 CANADAIRRJ100/ER 16.3 4.9 1.5 1.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 CANADAlRRJ-700 12.6 9.3 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 CESSNA 208 1.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CONVAIRCV-580 36.2 0.9 8.8 9.5 0.7 0.0 0.0 DASSAULTFALCON 13.7 2.6 2.4 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 DHC8-100DASH 8 5.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 DORNIER328JET 1.3 6.6 11.9 12.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 DOUGLAS DC·IO·IO 102.5 76.7 38.6 42.1 4.2 0.0 0.0 DOUGLAS DC-IO-30 45.4 78.7 5.3 5.7 5.1 0.4 0.4 

### 50DOUGLAS DC-IO-40 13I.S SI.S 30.2 33.1 6.0 0.7 0.7 DOUGLAS DC-8-63 263.5 25.6 219.1 239.9 4.2 5.1 5.1 DOUGLAS DC-S-71 53.6 34.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 0.0 0.0 DOUGLAS DC-S-73 53.6 34.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 0.0 0.0 DOUGLAS DC-9-10 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 I.S 0.2 0.2 DOUGLAS DC-9-15F 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 1.8 0.2 0.2 DOUGLAS DC-9-30 14.1 14.6 3.7 4.0 1.8 0.2 0.2 DOUGLAS DC-9-40 39.7 16.5 10.S 11.9 2.0 1.3 1.3 DOUGLAS DC-9-50 12.6 20.1 I.S I.S 2.2 0.9 0.9 EMBRAER-135 I2.S 5.5 1.1 1.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 EMBRAER-140 13.7 6.0 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 EMBRAER-145 6.4 6.S 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 EMBRAER-170 9.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 F2S-4000/6000 76.7 10.4 77.2 S4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 JETSTREAM41 4.6 2.0 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 L-IOllOllI00/200 33.3 112.0 6.2 6.8 5.7 1.3 1.3 LEAR-25 75.2 0.7 7.9 S.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 LOCKHEED LIOO-30 4S.7 9.9 19.6 21.4 1.8 0.0 0.0 MD-ll 47.S 93.3 4.0 4.4 6.0 0.7 0.7 MD-80, 1, 2 3,7,8 16.3 20.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.2 0.2 MD-90 12.1 23.S 0.2 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.2 RJ-200ERJRJ-440 16.3 4.9 1.5 I.S 0.7 0.0 0.0 SAAB-FAIRCHD 340/B 4.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 

### NOTE: Where specific aircraft model data was not available fleet emissions were used. EPA defaultfleet average emission factors were taken from "Documentation for Aircraft, Commercial Marine Vessel, ,Locomotive, and Other Non-road Components ofthe National Emissions Inventory. 2005, see Appendix A, Aircraft Emission Estimation Methodology." Specific model LTOs were subtracted from county LTO totals to eliminate double counting those LTOs. Table 5·3 Fleet Emission Factor Categories Fleet emission factors were broken down into three categories. Itinerant General, Local General, and Military. Table 5·3a Fleet Average Emission Factors for Itinerant General Aircraft. 

### (Taken from: Table A-5) Pollutant Emission Factors (Ibs/LTO) HC 

### 1.234 NOx 

### 0.158 CO 

### 28.13 SOx 

### 0.015 PMI0 0.60333 Note: Airtaxi HCemissions 

## * VOCIHC 

### (0.9914) conversion/actor = 

### airtaxi VOCestimate



### 51

### Table 5-3b Fleet Average Emission Factors for Local General Aircraft. 

### (TakenFrom' TableA-II) Pollutant Emission Factors (Ibs/LTO) HC 0.394 NOx 0.065 CO 12.014 SOx 0.01 

### PM10 0.2367 

### Note: GA HC

### emissions 

## * VaC/HC(0.9708) 

### conversionfactor = 

### GA vac

### estimate

Table 5-3c FleetAverage Emission Factors for MilitaryAircraft. 

### (Taken from: TableA-17) 

### Pollutant Emission Factors (IbslLTO HC 1.234 NOx 0.158 CO 28.13 SOx O.oI5 

### PM10 0.60333 

### Note: MilitaryHC

### emissions 

## * VaC/HC(1.1046) 

### conversionfactor = 

### Military vac

### estimate



### METHODOLOGY Introduction The following information was considered in the development ofemission estimates: 1. Commercial scheduled and non-scheduled aircraft air carrier activity and commercial airfreight activity by aircraft model types, 2. General aviation and airtaxi annual local and itinerant operations for year 2005, 3. Military annual local and itinerant operations for year 2005. Due to the need to have aircraft operations information expressed as landing/take off (LTO) cycles, the following assumptions were made: 1. For commercial aircraft and commercial airfreight activity, the numberofannual aircraft annual LTO cycles was assumed to be equal to the numberof
52

### departures. The daily LTO cycle frequency was then obtained by dividing the yearly LTO cycles by 365.
2. For general aircraft annual local and itinerant airport operations, each respective operations total was divided by 2 to obtain the corresponding year local and itinerant L TO cycles. The expected daily local and itinerant LTO cycles then were obtained by dividing these annual totals by 365. 3. For military annual local and itinerant operations, each respective operations total was divided by 2 to obtain the corresponding year local and itinerant LTO cycles. The expected military daily local and itinerant LTO cycles then were obtained by dividing these annual totals by 365. Airport L TO cycles were further categorized into commercial aircraft by plane and engine type, general aviation itinerant aircraft of unknown aircrafttype, general aviation local aircraft of unknown aircrafttype, and military aircraft. This was necessary in order to utilize the U.S. Department ofTransportation, Federal Aviation Administration EDMS Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System. Commercial and airfreight aircraft emission factors per L TO cycle were determined using EDMS for each commercial aircrafttype models where possible were used at each towered airport. Default commercial aircraft engine type, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) default time in mode values fortakeoff, approach, and landing roll times were used in the EDMS model simulations. Forthose aircrafttypes that could not be determined using the EDMS emissions model, aircraft emission factors based upon EPA alternative fleet average procedures were then used to estimate their emissions. These included general aviation and airtaxi itinerant aircraft of unknown aircrafttype, general aviation local aircraft of unknown aircrafttype, and military aircraft. Conversion from total hydrocarbons to volatile organic compounds was performed ancj based upon the EPA guidance.
APPROACH 

### 1. A list of more than 90% ofthe airports was obtained from the Ohio Department of Transportation. These were classed by airport, county, aircraft flight classification, and the total number ofoperations per year. 2. The number ofoperations (a landing or a take off) were then divided bytwo giving the numberof LTOs per year per airport. These airports were combined by county for the total number of LTOs peryear, per county. 3. In dialog with ODOT itwas determined that the following Ohio flight groups of aircraft be combined to match the three categories used by the USEPA in calculating emissions.



### 53

### Itinerant (General, air carrier, commuter, airtaxi, general aviation itinerant) 

### Local (General aviation local) 

### Military (Military)
4. LTOs for specific models ofaircraft per airport were taken from the FAA Table 7. See 

### Table 2 above. These were then combined to give the numberof LTOs per aircraft model per county. Specific model LTOs were subtracted from county totals to avoid double counting those LTOs. 5. Emission factors were determined from the FAA's EDMS program for specific aircraft model and engine type. See 

### IV. Emission factors above. The aircraft emission table provided by Michigan has the emission factors for most ofthe aircraft flown in Ohio.

. Where specific aircraft model data was not available USEPA average fleet emissions were used. 6. Emission factors times LTOs by county yielded tons per year per county. 

### Table 5-4 Pollutant by County (Sample)

County ADAMS ADAMS ADAMS ADAMS ADAMS ADAMS ADAMS ALLEN ALLEN ALLEN ALLEN ALLEN ALLEN ALLEN ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHLAND ASHTABULA ASHTABULA ASHTABULA POLLUTANT CO HC NOX PMIO-PRl PM25-PRl SOX VOC CO HC NOX PM10-PRl PM25-PRl SOX VOC CO HC NOX PM1O-PRI PM25-PRl SOX VOC CO HC NOX ACTIVITY(LTOSNEAR) 2605 2605 2605 2605 2605 2605 2605 16250 16250 16250 16250 16250 16250 16250 24620 24620 24620 24620 24620 24620 24620

8863 8863 8863 ACTIVITY(LTOSIDAY) 7.136986 7.136986 7.136986 7.136986 7.136986 7.136986 7.136986 44.52055 44.52055 44.52055 44.52055 44.52055 44.52055 44.52055 67.45205 67.45205 67.45205 67.45205 67.45205 67.45205 67.45205 24.28219 24.28219 24.28219 EM1SSIONS(TONNEAR) 24.552325

0.977285 0.136045 0.513114825 

## o 0.0157875 0.96314234 147.945065

5.841097 0.827189 3.081191265 

## o 0.0984575 5.769568254 173.67794

6.19414 0.94895 3.532515 

## o 0.1311 6.07175247

78.115087

3.042551 0.431593



### 54

### ASHTABULA PM10-PRl 8863 24.28219 1.623493455 

### ASHTABULA PM25-PRI 8863 24.28219 0 

### ASHTABULA SOX 8863 24.28219 0.0520325 

### ASHTABULA voe 8863 24.28219 2.99420213 

### ATHENS CO 25800 70.68493 196.874985 

### ATHENS He 25800 70.68493 7.267183 

### ATHENS NOX 25800 70.68493 1.081521 

### ATHENS PM10-PRl 25800 70.68493 4.037266335 

### ATHENS PM25-PRl 25800 70.68493 0 

### ATHENS SOX 25800 70.68493 0.1420925 

### ATHENS voe 25800 70.68493 7.128180006



### 7. Emissions were then summed by pollutants in each county by SCC aircraft category type so data could be provided to LADCO in the EPA prescribed NEI
- NIF format.
DATA ERROR The first aircraft emission inventory submitted to LADCO in April, 2007 contained an error. The inventory submitted in May, 2007 has the error corrected. The errorwas the result ofa carry-overfunction in Access that picked up the number of operations as instead of L TOs

....which made the inventory exactlytwice as large as what it really was. 

### ACCESS CALCULATOR Introduction: 

### Ourdatabase programmer set up Access application to calculate Ohio's aircraft emission inventory, and export those results to Excel. His utility allows for easy modification ofthe aircraft data to match future data scenarios. Outputto Excel also allows for additional data manipulation and importation.



### 55

### Interface:

GotDData: cafcwatt:!'Emlssions: '**E~port** EIn!Ssfoniii 

## IC!l ..J ..J ..J

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



### 56

# Appendix C-1 Mobile Source Emissions Inventory for the Steubenville-Weirton PM2.5 Nonattainment Area

# BROOKE-HANCOCK-JEFFERSON TRANSPORTATION STUDY

TECHNICALMEMORANDUM2011-1

Transportation Air QualityAnalysis and Technical Documentation FortheWeirton-Steubenville, WV-OH StateImplementation Plan InventoryMobileEmission Estimates Forthe U.S. EPA 1997 Annual PM2• 5 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard

Submitted: May 

### 2011 Revised: February 2012Production ofthis Documentpaid for by funds from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Federal TransitAdministration, OhioDepartmentofTransportation, West VirginiaDepartmentofTransportation and dues from BHJmembergovernments. Prepared By: Brooke-Hancock-JeffersonMetropolitan Planning Commission The Metropolitan Planning Organization for Steubenville, Ohio-Weirton, WVArea 124North Fourth Street, 2ndFloor Steubenville, OH 43952 740/282-3685 304/797-9666 740/282-1821 FAX Email: mikepap@bhjmpc.org Website: www.bhjmpc.orgBROOKE-HANCOCK-JEFFERSON TRANSPORTATION STUDY Transportation Air Quality Analysis and Technical Documentation Forthe Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH State Implementation PlanInventory Mobile Emission Estimates Forthe U.S. EPA 1997 Annual 

### PM2.5 National AmbientAirQuality Standard TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Page 1 On Road Mobile Emission Summary Page 3 LatestPlanningAssumptions Page 5 Travel DemandModeling

- Analysis Years Page 5 Social-Economic Demographics Page 5 EmissionFactor Generation Page 9 Temperature andRelativeHumidity Page 11 Ramp Fraction Page 12 SourceType Population Page 12 Vehicle Age Distribution Page 12 Road Type Distribution Page 21 PostProcessing Page 22 Appendix A - Interagency Consultation Documentation

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe 

## u.s. EPA 1997Annual PM", NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 PageiTable 1 Table 2 Table 3
Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10
Figure 1 Figure 2 LIST OFTABLES BHJ Region On-RoadMobile Emissions by State Page 3 BHJ Region On-RoadMobile Emissions by County Page 4 BHJ RegionRepresentative Social-Economic Demographic Variables By County 2005-2020 Page 7 Moves Inputs Page 9 Average Temperature and Relative Humidity Data Page 11 Ramp Fractions Page 11 Source TypePopulation for Year2005 Page 12 Vehicle Age Distribution forJefferson County, 

### OH Page 13 Vehicle AgeDistribution for BrookelHancockCounty, WV Page 17 Road TypeDistribution for Brooke-Hancock-JeffersonNon-AttainmentArea
.....Page 21 LIST OFFIGURES BHJ Geographic AreaFine Particulate MatterNon-AttainmentAreaBoundary

.................................................................................................................................Page 2 BHJ Geographic AreaCoveredbyTravel DemandModel andTraffic Analysis Zone Structure Page 8

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville. WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard May 2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page Ii

### SELECTED ABBREVIATIONS 

### & ACRONYMS

BHJ

- Brooke-Hancock-JeffersonMetropolitan Planning Commission CFR

- Code ofFederal Regulations FHWA - Federal Highway Administration; FTA

- Federal Transit Administration; LRTP

- Long Range TransportationPlan MOBILE6

- Mobile Source EmissionFactor Model MOU

- Memorandum ofUnderstanding MPO

- Metropolitan Planning Organization MVEB

- MotorVehicle Emissions Budget NAAQS

- National AmbientAirQuality Standard NOx

- Nitrogen Oxides ODOT

- Ohio DepartmentofTransportation OEPA - Ohio Environmental Protection Agency PM

- Particulate Matter PM2.5

- Particulate Matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (often referredto as Fine Particulate Matter) PMIO - Particulate Matterwith an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns SIP

- State ImplementationPlan STIP

- StatewideTransportation Improvement Program TAZs

- Traffic Analysis Zones TCM

- Transportation Control Measure TDM

- Travel Demand Model TIP

- Transportation ImprovementProgram in a Metropolitan Planning Area USEPA

- United States Environmental Protection Agency VMT

- VehicleMiles ofTravel VOC

- Volatile Organic Compounds WVDEP

- WestVirginiaDepartmentof Environmental Protection WVDOT

- WestVirginia Departmentof Transportation

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville. WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAirQuality Standard May2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page iii

### REVISION HISTORY February24,2012 EditPage 1; Introduction; Paragraph#1 Revise paragraph into two sentences. EditPage 3; On RoadEmission Summary Paragraph#1; InsertMaintenance Year2022 with 2025 Revise; Table 1; 

### BHJ Region on-Road Mobile Emissions by State; Add Maintenance Year2025 Revise Page 4; Table 2; 

### BHJ Region on-Road Mobile Emissions by County; Add Maintenance Year 2025 Revise Page 5; Travel Demand Modeling

- Analysis Years; Add Analysis Year 2025

- Maintenance Year Revise Page 9; Emission Factor Generation; Paragraph#1 Add2025

### Transportation Air Quality Analysis and Technical Documentation Forthe Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH State Implementation Plan Inventory Mobile Emission Estimates Forthe U.S. EPA 1997 Annual

### PM2.5

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard INTRODUCTION This memorandum documents the airquality analyses and underlyingplanning assumptions performed for the Annual PM2.5 on-road mobile source emission inventories forthe Weirton-Steubenville, WVOH Metropolitan area State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Ohio DepartmentofTransportation (ODOT), Division ofTransportation System Development-Modeling and Forecasting Section andthe Brooke-Hancock-JeffersonPlanning Commission (BHJMPC) completedthese analyses in coordination with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and WestVirginiaDepartmentof Environmental Protection (WVDEP). The BHJ Region is comprised ofthe counties ofBrooke and Hancockinthe northpanhandle ofWest Virginia and Jefferson in east-central Ohio. On January 5, 2005, the USEPA designated all three counties within the BHJMPO PlanningArea as non-attainmentfor the PM2.5 air quality standard. The designation became effective on April 5, 2005; 90 days after USEPA published action in the Federal Registry. Figure I displays the geographic extentofthe Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV non-attainment area The BHJMPC serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The MPO submittedthe necessary Travel DemandModel networks along withall land use and social-economic demographics. The ODOTModeling and Forecasting sectionperformed the MOVES runs to generate travel demand model based emission factors as well as the complete airquality analyses for the metropolitan area.

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the Us. EPA 1997AnnualPM", NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May 2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 1

### Figure 1 BHJ GEOGRAPHIC AREA FINE PARTICULATE MATTER NON-ATTAINMENT AREA BOUNDARY

LEGEflO C tOIMTTAlUMEtlTAREA BOunDARY M"M_ STATE eoUta>ARY

- counTYeoUllOARY

, T01fUtUHIP BOUtmARY

PliUUlCJPAlAREA fllVERORLAKf HGHWI,Y.& POLmCAl LfGEl10

- IJ3ROUTE

- STATfROll1:l; ':l$':""''''',:;'l llI ".'''

..**..,e~~~.''''** """""".,,.,,,**.O"OO,,~** a

..", • ..,"""""""_00"""..""'.......,.."'....," "'.. "e ". Ol'*,,,,,,,,,, "-""""""""lhu::ll"'<l,,"'"

..." :10""....



### s

r (.j**8ml>k~""r",,,,~.,JllffAI'l'M** , r..1"""""."1'·"'.·\1(,...·".·...", ...:ti,**~I.w.-"" ~"",I''';'''\**  lO\' WAYN CRO sS.c

TransportationAirQuaiityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM2.SNationalAmbientAirQuaiityStandard May 2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 2

### ON ROAD MOBILE EMISSION SUMMARY The Table I and 2 belowpresenta summary ofthe pol1utantemissions including FineParticulate Matter (PM25), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), SulfurDioxide (SOz) modeled for each countythatmake up the BHJ Region. The Model Years forthe demonstration includes the Base Year2005, AttainmentYear2008 (a leap year), Interim Year 2015, and Maintenance Year2025. Table 1 

### BHJREGION ON-ROAD MOBILE EMISSIONS BY STATE

OHIO

Jefferson County

Year PM 2.5 (tons/yr) NOX (tons/yr) S02 (tons/yr) 

### VMT (annual) 2005 2008 2015 2022 2025

WEST VIRGINIA 73.17 2105.85 18.18 562,071,084 60.97 1758.04 5.65 557,286,295 31.88 870.17 3.93 544,597,475 16.78 374.80 3.56 549,620,540 16.49 322.71 3.56 572,657,778

Brooke and Hancock Counties

Year PM 2.5 (tons/yr) NOX (tons/yr) S02 (tons/yr) 

### VMT (annual) 2005 2008 2015 2022 2025 38.04 1023.15 13.59 393,012,357 27.93 772.27 4.03 389,998,556 13.50 323.71 2.87 400,179,462

8.82 158.47 2.50 390,998,315 8.44 114.56 2.36 391,153,545

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville. WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 3

### Table 2 BHJREGION ON-ROAD MOBILE EMISSIONS BY COUNTY

Jefferson County

Year PM 2.5 (lons/yr) NOX (lons/yr) 802 (lons/yr) VMT (annual) 2005 2008 2015 2022 2025 73.17 2105.85 18.18 562,071,084 60.97 1758.04 5.65 557,286,295 31.88 870.17 3.93 544,597,475 16.78 374.80 3.56 549,620,540 16.49 322.71 3.56 572,657,778

Brooke County

Year PM 2.5 (lonsJyr) NOX (lons/yr) 802 (lonslyr) VMT (annual) 2005 2008 2015 2022 2025 19.41 540.40 7.01 212,244,639 14.42 412.02 2.11 212,778,859 6.97 174.71 1.51 219,881,355 4.55 86.23 1.33 215,917,336 4.34 62.47 1.26 216,619,184

Hancock County

Year PM 2.5 (lonslyr) NOX (lonsJyr) 802 (lons/yr) VMT (annual) 2005 2008 2015 2022 2025 18.63 482.75 6.58 180,767,718 13.51 360.25 1.92 177,219,697 6.53 149.00 1.36 180,298,107 4.28 72.24 1.17 175,080,979 4.10 52.09 1.10 174,534,361

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May20JI; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 4

### LATEST PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS The annual PM2.5 inventory runs meetthe latestplanning assumption requirement. This reportwill presentthe latestpopulation and land use data available thatcalibratedthe modelingprocess usedto calculatethe vehicle emissions forthe mobile emissionsbudgets as well as the inputvalues for U.S. EPA's mostrecent emissions software MOVES forthis attainment demonstration. A series ofconference calls held inNovember2010 and February 2011 bythe Interagency Consultancy Group establishedtwo parameters. First, thatthis re-designation effortwill requirethe use ofU.S. EPA's mostrecentemissions software MOVES for all mobile source emission analyses and second, the annual emission estimates will be based a single-season approach. The group also decidedthat since travel demandmodels produce average daily conditions, the daily emissions estimates are multipliedby 365 days to produce annual emissions estimates expressedin tons peryear. TRAVEL

### DEMAND MODELING -ANALYSIS YEARS A Travel Demand Model (TDM) is the traditional forecasting tool used to examine potential changes in future travel patterns for a specific study area, in this case the Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson Metropolitan Area. The BHJ MPO, with the assistance of ODOT Modeling & Forecasting, maintains a validated region-wide TDM that employs a four-step modeling process consisting of trip generation, trip distribution, mode choice, and route assignment performed with the Cube Voyager software package. The model Outputs generated from the TDM are link-by-link directional 24-hour traffic volumes for simulatingBase Year andHorizon Yeartravel patterns generatedbythe LRTP transportation network. The currentBHJ TDMValidation Year is 2000. The model uses comparable Average Daily Traffic countdata, updated social-economic variables for each ofthe analysis years by eitherupdating existing orknown land use commitmentfor 2008,2009, and 2014, orprojected 2014 and 2020variables based on a straight-line extrapolationbetween 2009 setofvariables and the Horizon Year 2030 variables. These networks represent all plannedfederal-aidprojects as well as anyregionally significantprojects found inthe BHJTIP andLRTP expectedto be open for traffic bythe end ofeachrespective analysis year. The interagency consultation process, as previously discussed, establishedthe following model years for Brooke and Hancock counties, WV and Jefferson County, OH that reflected the most recent correspondence from the U.S. EPA:

• Analysis Year2005

- Baseline Emissions
• Analysis Year 2008

- AttainmentYear
• Analysis Year2015 -Interim Year
• Analysis Year2022

- Maintenance Year
• Analysis Year2025

- Maintenance Year 

### SOCIAL-ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHICS Identifying projected growth centers and understanding urban and rural population changes are essential to determine future transportation needs in a given study area. Critical elements include an understanding ofthe past and anticipated future shifts in the region's economy, population, land use
TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May 2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 5patterns, and otherenvironmental factors overtime. In turn, these factors are useful forpredicting future transportation patterns andjustifytransportation improvements overthe nexttwentyyears. Travel forecasting procedures require the userdelineate the TDM study area into geographic areas called Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs). Typically, TAZs are based on factors such as land use, areatypes (urban, suburban orrural), orpolitical governmentunits such as cities, villages, ortownships. TAZs representcenters oftravel generators orattractors based on a setofdemographic variables. The BHJMPO collects and reviews the TDM independentvariables that characterize current and future estimates ofthe metropolitan area's social and economic activitythatmayinfluence land-use developmentpatterns. In all, there are 376 TAZs in the BHJmodel represented by 60 TAZs forBrooke County, 78 TAZs for Hancock County, and 237 TAZs forJefferson County. Figure2 displays the BHJ MPO geography covered bythe Steubenville-WeirtonTravel DemandModel (the entirethree-county area) includingthe TrafficAnalysis Zone structure. The computer-based TDM for the SteubenvilleWeirtonMetropolitan Areahighwaynetwork employs the following land usevariables:



### • [AREAJYPE] ;: Area Type
• [AVG]ARK];: Average parking cost
• [ENROLL] ;: School enrollmentclassifiedby Private [ENROLL]RIV], Public [ENROLL]00] and Post-secondary [ENROLL_ UNIV] schools

• [HOTEL_RM] ;: Hotel Rooms
• [MED_HHINC] ;: Median household income

• [POP];: Population
• [POP 18];: Population 18 years orless

• [POP

_GRP] ;: Populationresiding in Group Quarters
• [TOTEMP] ;: Total Employment grouped bytheNorthAmerican Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
• [TOT

_HH] ;: Occupiedhousing
• [TOT_VEH];: Vehicles available perhousehold

• [WORKERS];: Workers perhousehold Table 3 is a set ofdemographic variables developed forthe mostrecent2006 24-HourPM2.5 National AmbientAir Quality Standard for the Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH non-attainment area compiled September2010.

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenvi/le, WV-OH Forthe U.S EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May20Il; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 6Table 3 BHJREGION REPRESENTATIVE SOCIAL-ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES BY COUNTY 2005-2020
Variable by Year County Total Brooke, WV Hancock, WV Jefferson, OH 2005 Population 24,696 32,572 69,457 126,725 2005 Households 9,976 13,714 28,472 52,162 2005 Employment 8,351 12,958 23,263 44,572

. 2008 Population 24,602 31,971 67,643 124,216 2008 Households 9,912 13,441 27,592 50,945 2008 Employment 8,234 10,736 23,676 42,646



### .. 2014 Population 24,431 30,965 64,381 119,777 2014 Households 9,813 13,007 26,134 48,954 2014 Employment 8,145 13,047 21,819 43,011

.... 2020 Population 24,253 29,790 60,934 114,977 2020 Households 9,694 12,488 24,532 46,714 2020 Employment 7,770 12,252 21,551 41,573

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the U.S EPA 1997AnnualPM, 5 NationalAmbientAirQuality Standnrd May2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 7

## , EJJTRAfFlCZOUE BOUUOARY**~:~ ~Are**  BOUNDARY

-- COutfTY60ulmARY

---•.**rowt~~tt1P** BOut(QARY 'oUJ'/flClPALAR£A COIUf;RVAllOfUREA**~fi'1i0)** RlVEROR LAKE Figure2 BHJ GEOGRAPHIC AREA COVERED Y TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL AND TRAFFI ANALYSIS ZONE STRUCTURE

LEGEND**~C<O, l\."tJ~"",,,,,,,,~,,"'~I~,,,,,,,,,,,.,,t""""**  00.,.,..,,;**~.;** .."" n"":.."".... "111101:1..**7~~** 0::.0.. .." ;'ll••**".~ ~~....,,,**  • .,,. _ ....n"'.... ,.,....""l ,.-....

'0:1 """'.



## ,

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 PageSEMISSION FACTORGENERATION The MOVES model generatedthe emission factor files were for base year-2005 and attainment year2008 representing the transportation improvementprograms implemented inthe BHJ Region. The model also generated emission factors for two future year scenarios 2015, 2022, and 2025. Table 4 summarizes the settings used in the MOVES run specification file andthe MOVES CountyDataManager. The subsequenttables providethe specific inputs that are notusing the MOVES default values. Table 4 MOVES INPUTS RunSpecParameterSettings MOVES Version 8/2612010 Scale Custom Domain MOVES ModelingTechnique Emission FactorMethod Rates perDistance Rates perVehicle Time Span Time Aggregation: Hour 1 Monthrepresenting average annualtemperatures Allhours ofday selected 16 speedbins Weekdays only Geographic Bounds Brooke, Hancock, andJeffersoncounties Vehicles/Equipment All sourcetypes, gasoline anddiesel RoadType Allroadtypes including off-network Pollutants andProcesses NOx, All PM

### z .5 categories, SOz, TotalEnergy Consumption Strategies None General Output Units

- grams,joules andmiles OutputEmissions Time hour, Location custom area, on-roademissionrates byroad type andsource usetype AdvancePerformance None

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,sNationalAmbientAirQuality Standard May 2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 9Table 4 (continued) 

### MOVES INPUTS County Data Manager Sources Source Type Population Combination oflocal and defaultdata Local data (Ohio and WestVirginia) from motorvehicleregistration Defaultdataused for sourcetypes 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62 Future yeargrowth rate based on MPO model Household growthrate Vehicle Type VMT Combination oflocal and defaultdata HPMSVTypeYearVMT

- daily VMT from travel demand model monthVMTFraction = default dayVMTFraction=default hourVMTFraction=local IIM Program None FuelFormulation Default Fuel Supply Default Metereology Data Local data obtained from NOAA National Climatic DataCenter. Data will consistofmonthlyhigh and lowtemperatures and daily relative humidity for 2002. Ramo Fraction Using the base yeartravel demand model for VHT fractions. Future fractions will be assumed constant RoadType Distribution Use ODOTand WV Division ofHighways county summary VMT categorized by federal functional classes Age Distribution Combination oflocal and defaultdata. Local data (Ohio and West Virginia) from motorvehicle registration Defaultdataused for source types 41, 42, 43, 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62 The same age distribution will be used for all analysis years Average Speed Distribution Default AlternativeFuel Type Default 

### TEMPERATUREAND RELATIVE HUMIDITY The single season approach fortemperature and relative humidity uses weatherdata collectedbythe National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). The data used inthis report, taken from the Pittsburgh International Airport collection center, is representative of 12 months in2009. Dataentered into a spreadsheetprovidedby U.S. EPA converted the Mobile6to getthe correctdata forthe MOVES model. Listed in the table below are the average annual hourlytemperatures and relative humidity distributionprofiles for the Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH metropolitan area.

TransportationAirQualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe Us. EPA 1997AnnualPM 2.sNationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 10

### Table 5 AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY DATA


### TIME 

### OF DAY AVGHOURLY AVG HOURLY RELATIVE TEMPERATURE HUMIDITY 

### Midnight 47.20 79.7% 1:00AM 46.10 67.1% 2:00AM 45.20 80.7% 3:00AM 44.60 82.9% 4:00AM 44.10 83.8% 5:00AM 43.60 84.1% 6:00AM 43.10 82.6% 7:00AM 43.50 79.6% 8:00AM 45.90 74.8% 9:00AM 49.60 70.1% 10:00 AM 53.50 65.7% 11:00AM 56.80 62.0%



### NOON 59.70 59.8% 1:00 PM 61.30 58.2% 2:00PM 61.90 57.4% 3:00PM 62.00 57.3% 4:00PM 61.60 58.3% 5:00 PM 60.50 61.2% 6:00PM 58.60 65.3% 7:00PM 56.20 69.2% 8:00PM 53.70 66.1% 9:00PM 51.60 74.3% 10:00PM 50.10 75.7% 11:00PM 48.60 78.1% RAMP FRACTION 

### The Base YearTravel DemandModel usedthe Vehicles Hour ofTravel (VHT) fractions to derive the Ramp Fractions shown in Table 6. The future year networks also used the base yearfractions. Table 6 RAMP FRACTIONS 

### roadTVDeID roadDesc 

### rampFraction 2 Rural Restricted Access 0.02 4 Urban Restricted Access 0.09

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the 

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM" NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 11SOURCE TYPE POPULATION A combination oflocal and MOVES defaultdata is the Source Type Population for vehicle classifications. TheMOVES defaultvalues provided the data for Source Type Population 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62 while local data from Ohio and WestVirginia motorvehicleregistrations accounted for all other Source Type PopUlation needed to run the MOVES model. Table 7 shows the Source Type Population identifications, the corresponding Source Type Name, and the numberofvehicles analyzed forJefferson County, OH and Brooke/HancockCounty, WV combined. Table 7 SOURCE TYPE POPULATION FOR YEAR2005 sourceTyvePopulation sourceTypeID sourceTypeName Jefferson BrookelHancock Countv,OH County. WV 11 MotorCycle 6,072 1,673 21 PassengerCar 74,051 21,369 31 PassengerTruck 39,994 17,415 32 Light Commercial Truck 3,033 2,573 41 IntercityBus 38 15 42 TransitBus 68 8 43 School Bus 144 99 51 Refuse truck 23 12 52 Single Unit Short-haul Truck 958 739 53 Single UnitLong-haul Truck 299 84 54 MotorHome 1,953 63 61 Combination Short-haul Truc 283 130 62 CombinationLong-haul Truc 326 145 VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION A grouping ofdata from Ohio and WestVirginia sources along withthe MOVES model defaults make up the VehicleAge Distribution. MOVES default values included Vehicle Type ID 41, 42, 51, 52, 53, 61, and 62. Local data from Ohio and WestVirginia motorvehicle registrations accounted for all other Vehicle Type 

### !D. Table 8 and Table 9 showthe VehicleAgeDistribution forJefferson County, OH and BrookelHancockCounty, WVrespectively.

TransportationAirQualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,.5NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May20l1; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 12

### Table 8 

### VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTIONFORJEFFERSON COUNTY, OH yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraclion yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraclion yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraclion



### 2005 11 0 0.0019 2005 21 9 0.0527 2005 31 18 0.0209 2005 11 1 0.0200 2005 

### 21 10 0.0572 

### 2005 31 19 0.0179 2005 11 2 0.0516 2005 21 11 0.0613 2005 31 20 0.0125 2005 11 3 0.0785 

### 2005 21 12 0.0537 2005 31 21 0.0116 

### 2005 11 4 0.0850 2005 21 13 0.0542 2005 31 22 0.0091 2005 

### 11 5 0.0871 2005 

### 21 14 0.0532 2005 

### 31 23 0.0075 2005 

### 11 6 0.0622 2005 21 15 0.0540 

### 2005 31 24 0.0052 2005 11 7 0.0655 2005 21 16 0.0450 2005 31 25 0.0040 2005 

### 11 8 0.0597 

### 2005 21 17 0.0414 2005 

### 31 26 0.0026 2005 

### 11 9 0.0464 

### 2005 21 18 0.0343 

### 2005 31 27 0.0009 2005 

### 11 10 0.0392 

### 2005 21 19 0.0324 2005 

### 31 28 0.0011 2005 

### 11 11 0.0309 2005 21 20 0.0236 

### 2005 31 29 0.0006 2005 11 12 0.0207 2005 

### 21 21 0.0211 

### 2005 31 30 0.0062 

### 2005 11 13 0.0186 2005 21 22 0.0144 2005 32 0 0.0100 2005 11 14 0.0186 2005 

### 21 23 0.0102 2005 32 1 0.0275 2005 11 15 0.0156 2005 21 24 0.0086 2005 32 2 0.0925 2005 11 16 0.0137 2005 21 25 0.0065 2005 32 3 0.0975 2005 

### 11 17 0.0109 2005 21 26 0.0050 2005 

### 32 4 0.0450 2005 11 18 0.0116 

### 2005 21 27 0.0025 2005 32 5 0.0450 2005 11 19 0.0100 2005 

### 21 28 0.0017 

### 2005 32 6 0.0375 2005 11 20 0.0088 2005 21 29 0.0015 2005 32 7 0.0350 2005 

### 11 21 0.0107 2005 21 30 0.0408 2005 

### 32 8 0.0575 2005 

### 11 22 0.0093 2005 31 0 0.0053 2005 32 9 0.0375 2005 

### 11 23 0.0139 

### 2005 31 1 0.0218 

### 2005 32 10 0.0475 2005 11 24 0.0244 2005 31 2 0.0454 

### 2005 32 11 0.0425 2005 11 25 0.0179 2005 31 3 0.0526 2005 32 12 0.0375 2005 

### 11 26 0.0139 2005 31 4 0.0664 2005 32 13 0.0425 2005 

### 11 27 0.0165 2005 31 5 0.0729 2005 32 14 0.0300 2005 

### 11 28 0.0183 2005 31 6 0.0645 2005 32 15 0.0725 2005 

### 11 29 0.0142 

### 2005 31 7 0.0606 2005 32 16 0.0375 

### 2005 11 30 0.1044 2005 

### 31 8 0.0688 2005 

### 32 17 0.0250 2005 

### 21 0 0.0044 2005 31 9 0.0523 

### 2005 32 18 0.0150 2005 

### 21 1 0.0193 2005 

### 31 10 0.0641 

### 2005 32 19 0.0300 2005 

### 21 2 0.0305 2005 31 11 0.0542 2005 32 20 0.0175 2005 

### 21 3 0.0407 2005 31 12 0.0548 

### 2005 32 21 0.0175 

### 2005 21 4 0.0393 2005 

### 31 13 0.0477 2005 

### 32 22 0.0250 2005 

### 21 5 0.0468 2005 31 14 0.0462 2005 32 23 0.0200 2005 21 6 0.0437 2005 31 15 0.0503 2005 32 24 0.0025 2005 21 7 0.0464 2005 31 16 0.0418 2005 32 25 0.0175 2005 

### 21 8 0.0536 2005 31 17 0.0302 2005 32 26 0.0075

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 13

### Table 8 (continued) 

### VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTIONFORJEFFERSON COUNTY, OR yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction



### 2005 32 27 0,0075 2005 42 5 0,1429 2005 43 14 0,0000 2005 32 28 0,0050 2005 42 6 0,1429 2005 43 15 0.0074 2005 32 29 0,0000 2005 42 7 0,0000 2005 43 16 0,0000 2005 32 30 0,0150 2005 42 8 0,0000 2005 43 17 0,0074 2005 41 0 0,0000 2005 42 9 0,0000 2005 43 18 0.0074 2005 41 1 0,0000 2005 42 10 0,0000 2005 43 19 0,0148 2005 41 2 0,0333 2005 42 11 0,0000 2005 43 20 0,0296 2005 41 3 0,1000 2005 42 12 0,0000 2005 43 21 0,0000 2005 41 4 0,0333 2005 42 13 0,0000 2005 43 22 0,0074 2005 41 5 0,0333 2005 42 14 0,0000 2005 43 23 0,0222 2005 41 6 0,1667 2005 42 15 0,0000 2005 43 24 0,0000 2005 41 7 0,0333 2005 42 16 0,0000 2005 43 25 0,0000 2005 41 8 0,0333 2005 42 17 0,0000 2005 43 26 0,0000 2005 41 9 0,0333 2005 42 18 0,0000 2005 43 27 0,0000 2005 41 10 0,1333 2005 42 19 0,1427 2005 43 28 0,0000 2005 41 11 0,1000 2005 42 20 0,0000 2005 43 29 0,0000 2005 41 12 0,0667 2005 42 21 0,0000 2005 43 30 0.0074 2005 41 13 0,0000 2005 42 22 0,0000 2005 51 0 0,0000 2005 41 14 0,1000 2005 42 23 0,0000 2005 51 1 0,0000 2005 41 15 0,0333 2005 42 24 0,0000 2005 51 2 0,0455 2005 41 16 0,0000 2005 42 25 0,0000 2005 51 3 0,0455 2005 41 17 0,0000 2005 42 26 0,0000 2005 51 4 0,2727 2005 41 18 0,0333 2005 42 27 0,0000 2005 51 5 0,0000 2005 41 19 0,0000 2005 42 28 0,0000 2005 51 6 0,0455 2005 41 20 0,0333 2005 42 29 0,0000 2005 51 7 0,0909 2005 41 21 0,0000 2005 42 30 0,0000 2005 51 8 0,1818 2005 41 22 0,0000 2005 43 0 0,0444 2005 51 9 0,0909 2005 41 23 0,0000 2005 43 1 0,1185 2005 51 10 0,0000 2005 41 24 0,0000 2005 43 2 0,0667 2005 51 11 0,0455 2005 41 25 0,0000 2005 43 3 0,0593 2005 51 12 0,0909 2005 41 26 0,0000 2005 43 4 0,0222 2005 51 13 0,0455 2005 41 27 0,0000 2005 43 5 0,0593 2005 51 14 0,0000 2005 41 28 0,0000 2005 43 6 0,0370 2005 51 15 0,0000 2005 41 29 0,0000 2005 43 7 0,0444 2005 51 16 0,0000 2005 41 30 0,0336 2005 43 8 0,0519 2005 51 17 0,0000 2005 42 0 0,0000 2005 43 9 0,0667 2005 51 18 0,0000 2005 42 1 0,1429 2005 43 10 0,0741 2005 51 19 0,0000 2005 42 2 0,2857 2005 43 11 0,0667 2005 51 20 0,0000 2005 42 3 0,0000 2005 43 12 0,0815 2005 51 21 0,0000 2005 42 4 0,1429 2005 43 13 0,1037 2005 51 22 0,0453

TransportationAirQualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,.sNationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 PageJ4

### Table 8 (continued) VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FORJEFFERSON COUNTY, OR yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraclion yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraclion 

### 2005 51 23 0,0000 2005 53 1 0,0000 2005 54 10 0,0287 2005 51 24 0,0000 2005 53 2 0,0455 2005 54 11 0,0417 2005 51 25 0,0000 2005 53 3 0,0455 2005 54 12 0,0355 2005 51 26 0,0000 2005 53 4 0,2727 2005 54 13 0,0307 2005 51 27 0,0000 2005 53 5 0,0000 2005 54 14 0,0294 2005 51 28 0,0000 2005 53 6 0,0455 2005 54 15 0,0219 2005 51 29 0,0000 2005 53 7 0,0909 2005 54 16 0,0301 2005 51 30 0,0000 2005 53 6 0,1618 2005 54 17 0,0225 2005 52 0 0,0000 2005 53 9 0,0909 2005 54 16 0,0219 2005 52 1 0,0000 2005 53 10 0,0000 2005 54 19 0,0176 2005 52 2 0,0455 2005 53 11 0,0455 2005 54 20 0,0273 2005 52 3 0,0455 2005 53 12 0,0909 2005 54 21 0,0225 2005 52 4 0,2727 2005 53 13 0,0455 2005 54 22 0,0355 2005 52 5 0,0000 2005 53 14 0,0000 2005 54 23 0,0314 2005 52 6 0,0455 2005 53 15 0,0000 2005 54 24 0,0225 2005 52 7 0,0909 2005 53 16 0,0000 2005 54 25 0,0191 2005 52 8 0,1818 2005 53 17 0,0000 2005 54 26 0,0362 2005 52 9 0,0909 2005 53 18 0,0000 2005 54 27 0,0150 2005 52 10 0,0000 2005 53 19 0,0000 2005 54 28 0,0130 2005 52 11 0,0455 2005 53 20 0,0000 2005 54 29 0.0109 2005 52 12 0,0909 2005 53 21 0,0000 2005 54 30 0.2309 2005 52 13 0,0455 2005 53 22 0,0453 2005 61 0 0,0023 2005 52 14 0,0000 2005 53 23 0,0000 2005 61 1 0,0102 2005 52 15 0,0000 2005 53 24 0,0000 2005 61 2 0,0228 2005 52 18 0,0000 2005 53 25 0,0000 2005 81 3 0,0255 2005 52 17 0,0000 2005 53 26 0,0000 2005 61 4 0,0383 2005 52 18 0,0000 2005 53 27 0.0000 2005 61 5 0,0409 2005 52 19 0,0000 2005 53 28 0,0000 2005 61 6 0,0427 2005 52 20 0,0000 2005 53 29 0,0000 2005 61 7 0,0412 2005 52 21 0,0000 2005 53 30 0,0000 2005 61 8 0,0401 2005 52 22 0,0453 2005 54 0 0,0034 2005 61 9 0,0418 2005 52 23 0.0000 2005 54 1 0,0096 2005 61 10 0,0557 2005 52 24 0,0000 2005 54 2 0,0239 2005 61 11 0,0529 2005 52 25 0,0000 2005 54 3 0.0280 2005 61 12 0,0454 2005 52 26 0,0000 2005 54 4 0.0335 2005 61 13 0,0488 2005 52 27 0.0000 2005 54 5 0,0260 2005 61 14 0,0379 2005 52 26 0.0000 2005 54 6 0,0485 2005 61 15 0,0458 2005 52 29 0,0000 2005 54 7 0.0362 2005 61 16 0.0527 2005 52 30 0,0000 2005 54 8 0.0225 2005 61 17 0,0396 2005 53 0 0,0000 2005 54 9 0.0239 2005 61 18 0.0353

TransportationAir QuaiityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe U.S. EPA /997Annual PM,., NationalAmbientAir Quaiity Standard May 20//; RevisedFebruary 20/2 Page /5Table 8 (continued) 

### VEHICLEAGE DISTRIBUTIONFORJEFFERSON COUNTY,OR yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction



### 2005 61 19 0.0352 2005 62 3 0.0470 2005 62 18 0.0221 2005 61 20 0.0283 2005 62 4 0.0359 2005 62 19 0.0221 2005 61 21 0.0340 2005 62 5 0.0331 2005 62 20 0.0083 2005 61 22 0.0314 2005 62 6 0.0249 2005 62 21 0.0166 2005 61 23 0.0224 2005 62 7 0.0276 2005 62 22 0.0166 2005 61 24 0.0242 2005 62 8 0,0331 2005 62 23 0.0166 2005 61 25 0.0157 2005 62 9 0.0663 2005 62 24 0.0083 2005 61 26 0.0147 2005 62 10 0.0884 2005 62 25 0.0083 2005 61 27 0.0077 2005 62 11 0.1050 2005 62 26 0.0110 2005 61 28 0.0068 2005 62 12 0.1243 2005 62 27 0,0028 2005 61 29 0,0059 2005 62 13 0.0746 2005 62 28 0.0028 2005 61 30 0,0538 2005 62 14 0,0635 2005 62 29 0,0000 2005 62 0 0.0028 2005 62 15 0.0414 2005 62 30 0.Q109 2005 62 1 0.0028 2005 62 16 0,0442 2005 62 2 0,0028 2005 62 17 0,0359

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe U.S, EPA 1997AnnualPM,sNationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 16

### Table 9 VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FORBROOKEIHANCOCK COUNTY, WV yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraclion yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraclion 

### 2005 11 

# ° 0,0291 2005 21 9 0,0639 2005 31 18 0,0136 2005 11 1 0,0472 2005 21 10 0,0654 2005 31 19 0,0112 2005 11 2 0,0678 2005 21 11 0,0596 2005 31 20 0,0101 2005 11 3 0,0872 2005 21 12 0,0515 2005 31 21 0,0103 2005 11 4 0,0993 2005 21 13 0,0437 2005 31 22 0,0087 2005 11 5
.. 0,0690 2005 21 14 0,0352 2005 31 23 0,0064 2005 11 6 0,0460 2005 21 15 0,0315 2005 31 24 0,0063 2005 11 7 0,0617 2005 21 16 0,0255 2005 31 25 0,0035 2005 11 8 0,0654 2005 21 17 0,0208 2005 31 26 0,0033 2005 11 9 0,0575 2005 21 18 0,0165 2005 31 27 0,0017 2005 11 10 0,0412 2005 21 19 0,0121 2005 31 28 0,0013 2005 11 11 0,0339 2005 21 20 0,0101 2005 31 29 0,0013 2005 11 12 0,0212 2005 21 21 0,0100 2005 31 30 0,0207 2005 11 13 0,0194 2005 21 22 0,0055 2005 32 

# ° 0,0346 2005 11 14 0,0224 2005 21 23 0,0044 2005 32 1 0,0287 2005 11 15 0,0163 2005 21 24 0,0037 2005 32 2 0,0606 2005 11 16 0,0121 2005 21 25 0,0039 2005 32 3 0,0740 2005 11 17 0,0121 2005 21 26 0,0034 2005 32 4 0,0807 2005 11 18 0,0139 2005 21 27 0,0010 2005 32 5 0,0843 2005 11 19 0,0042 2005 21 28 0,0011 2005 32 6 0,0909 2005 11 20 0,0073 2005 21 29 0,0009 2005 32 7 0,0701 2005 11 21 0,0079 2005 21 30 0,0401 2005 32 8 0,0524 2005 11 22 0,0163 2005 31 

# ° 0;0318 2005 32 9 0,0528 2005 11 23 0,0091 2005 31 1 0,0322 2005 32 10 0,0555 2005 11 24 0,0115 2005 31 2 0,0523 2005 32 11 0,0488 2005 11 25 0,0085 2005 31 3 0,0590 2005 32 12 0,0232 2005 11 26 0,0067 2005 31 4 0,0650 2005 32 13 0,0319 2005 11 27 0,0109 2005 31 5 0,0751 2005 32 14 0,0303 2005 11 28 0,0103 2005 31 6 0,0719 2005 32 15 0,0382 2005 11 29 0,0103 2005 31 7 0,0644 2005 32 16 0,0335 2005 11 30 0,0743 2005 31 8 0,0639 2005 32 17 0,0205 2005 21 

# ° 0,0247 2005 31 9 0,0576 2005 32 18 0,0083 2005 21 1 0,0387 2005 31 10 0,0620 2005 32 19 0,0114 2005 21 2 0,0534 2005 31 11 0,0545 2005 32 20 0,0134 2005 21 3 0,0668 2005 31 12 0,0494 2005 32 21 0,0110 2005 21 4 0,0592 2005 31 13 0,0437 2005 32 22 0,0130 2005 21 5 0,0619 2005 31 14 0,0366 2005 32 23 0,0091 2005 21 6 0,0563 2005 31 15 0,0334 2005 32 24 0,0079 2005 21 7 0,0639 2005 31 16 0,0308 2005 32 25 0,0020 2005 21 8 0,0653 2005 31 17 0,0180 2005 32 26 0,0039

TransportationAir QualityAnaiysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe U.S EPA 1997AnnualPM2.5 NationalAmbientAirQuality Standard May 20Il; RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 17

### Table 9 (continued) 

### VEHICLEAGE DISTRIBUTIONFORBROOKEIHANCOCK COUNTY,WV yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcetypeid ageid ageFraction



### 2005 32 27 0.0024 2005 42 5 0.0576 2005 43 14 0.0464 2005 32 28 0.0031 2005 42 6 0.0504 2005 43 15 0.0374 2005 32 29 0.0028 2005 42 7 0.0461 2005 43 16 0.0144 2005 32 30 0.0007 2005 42 8 0.0492 2005 43 17 0.0111 2005 41 0 0.0843 2005 42 9 0.0759 2005 43 18 0.0136 2005 41 1 0.0672 2005 42 10 0.0609 2005 43 19 0.0138 2005 41 2 0.0576 2005 42 11 0.0506 2005 43 20 0.0118 2005 41 3 0.0506 2005 42 12 0.0489 2005 43 21 0.0104 2005 41 4 0.0693 2005 42 13 0.0434 2005 43 22 0.0107 2005 41 5 0.0562 2005 42 14 0.0394 2005 43 23 0.0073 2005 41 6 0.0488 2005 42 15 0.0320 2005 43 24 0.0092 2005 41 7 0.0379 2005 42 16 0.0321 2005 43 25 0.0000 2005 41 8 0.0453 2005 42 17 0.0181 2005 43 26 0.0000 2005 41 9 0.0535 2005 42 18 0.0082 2005 43 27 0.0000 2005 41 10 0.0560 2005 42 19 0.0231 2005 43 28 0.0000 2005 41 11 0.0550 2005 42 20 0.0071 2005 43 29 0.0000 2005 41 12 0.0597 2005 42 21 0.0032 2005 43 30 0.0000 2005 41 13 0.0528 2005 42 22 0.0007 2005 51 0 0.0498 2005 41 14 0.0487 2005 42 23 0.0013 2005 51 1 0.0398 2005 41 15 0.0400 2005 42 24 0.0009 2005 51 2 0.0340 2005 41 16 0.0167 2005 42 25 0.0006 2005 51 3 0.0767 2005 41 17 0.0147 2005 42 26 0.0002 2005 51 4 0.0926 2005 41 18 0.0133 2005 42 27 0.0004 2005 51 5 0.0604 2005 41 19 0.0180 2005 42 28 0.0003 2005 51 6 0.0544 2005 41 20 0.0112 2005 42 29 0.0001 2005 51 7 0.0243 2005 41 21 0.0090 2005 42 30 0.0002 2005 51 8 0.0696 2005 41 22 0.0099 2005 43 0 0.0794 2005 51 9 0.0625 2005 41 23 0.0038 2005 43 1 0.0660 2005 51 10 0.0514 2005 41 24 0.0048 2005 43 2 0.0647 2005 51 11 0.0730 2005 41 25 0.0048 2005 43 3 0.0594 2005 51 12 0.0610 2005 41 26 0.0040 2005 43 4 0.0798 2005 51 13 0.0796 2005 41 27 0.0036 2005 43 5 0.0406 2005 51 14 0.0442 2005 41 28 0.0026 2005 43 6 0.0511 2005 51 15 0.0479 2005 41 29 0.0007 2005 43 7 0.0435 2005 51 16 0.0145 2005 41 30 0.0000 2005 43 8 0.0585 2005 51 17 0.0169 2005 42 0 0.0624 2005 43 9 0.0696 2005 51 18 0.0156 2005 42 1 0.0771 2005 43 10 0.0419 2005 51 19 0.0040 2005 42 2 0.0742 2005 43 11 0.0526 2005 51 20 0.0043 2005 42 3 0.0727 2005 43 12 0.0556 2005 51 21 0.0043 2005 42 4 0.0627 2005 43 13 0.0512 2005 51 22 0.0000

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM l., NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 18

### Table 9 

### (continued) VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FORBROOKEIHANCOCK COUNTY, WV tyearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction 

### 2005 51 23 0,0092 2005 53 1 0,1419 2005 54 10 0,0323 2005 51 24 0,0027 2005 53 2 0,1124 2005 54 11 0,0161 2005 51 25 0,0070 2005 53 3 0,0585 2005 54 12 0,0161 2005 51 26 0.0003 2005 53 4 0,0609 2005 54 13 0,0161 2005 51 27 0,0000 2005 53 5 0,1017 2005 54 14 0,0000 2005 51 28 0,0000 2005 53 6 0,0783 2005 54 15 0,0323 2005 51 29 0,0000 2005 53 7 0,0185 2005 54 16 0,0161 2005 51 30 0,0000 2005 53 8 0,0138 2005 54 17 0,0645 2005 52 

# ° 0,0622 2005 53 9 0,0686 2005 54 18 0,0161 2005 52 1 0,0520 2005 53 10 0,0748 2005 54 19 0.0161 2005 52 2 0,0412 2005 53 11 0,0517 2005 54 20 0,0484 2005 ' 52 3 0,0466 2005 53 12 0.0129 2005 54 21 0,0645 2005 52 4 0,0559 2005 53 13 0,0031 2005 54 22 0,0806 2005 52 5 0,0572 2005 53 14 0,0064 2005 54 23 0,0323 2005 52 6 0,0434 2005 53 15 0,0067 2005 54 24 0,0968 2005 52 7 0,0344 2005 53 16 0,0000 2005 54 25 0,0323 2005 52 8 0,0351 2005 53 17 0,0032 2005 54 26 0,0161 2005 52 9 0,0435 2005 53 18 0,0024 2005 54 27 0,0000 2005 52 10 0,0578 2005 53 19 0,0000 2005 54 28 0,0000 2005 52 11 0,0531 2005 53 20 0,0002 2005 54 29 0,0000 2005 52 12 0,0460 2005 53 21 0,0101 2005 54 30 0,1452 2005 52 13 0,0580 2005 53 22 0,0006 2005 61 

# ° 0,0843 2005 52 14 0,0430 2005 53 23 0,0011 2005 61 1 0,0672 2005 52 15 0,0251 2005 53 24 0,0005 2005 61 2 0,0576 2005 52 16 0.0409 2005 53 25 0,0000 2005 61 3 0,0506 2005 52 17 0,0220 2005 53 26 0,0020 2005 61 4 0,0693 2005 52 18 0,0219 2005 53 27 0,0000 2005 61 5 0,0562 2005 52 19 0,0239 2005 53 28 0,0000 2005 61 6 0,0488 2005 52 20 0,0190 2005 53 29 0,0000 2005 61 7 0,0379 2005 52 21 0,0225 2005 53 30 0,0000 2005 61 8 0,0453 2005 52 22 0,0088 2005 54 

# ° 0,0161 2005 61 9 0,0535 2005 52 23 0,0112 2005 54 1 0,0000 2005 61 10 0,0560 2005 52 24 0,0115 2005 54 2 0,0484 2005 61 11 0,0550 2005 52 25 0,0125 2005 54 3 0,0000 2005 61 12 0,0597 2005 52 26 0,0130 2005 54 4 0,0000 2005 61 13 0,0528 2005 52 27 0,0265 2005 54 5 0,0323 2005 61 14 0,0487 2005 52 28 0,0059 2005 54 6 0,0645 2005 61 15 0,0400 2005 52 29 0,0032 2005 54 7 0,0323 2005 61 16 0,0167 2005 52 30 0,0027 2005 54 8 0,0484 2005 61 17 0,0147 2005 53 

# ° 0,1697 2005 54 9 0,0161 2005 61 18 0,0133

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnical Documentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,., NationalAmbientAir Quality Standard May 2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 19

### Table 9 (continued) VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION FORBROOKEIHANCOCK COUNTY, WV yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction yearid sourcelypeid ageid ageFraction



### 2005 61 19 0.0180 2005 62 3 0.1140 2005 62 18 0.0035 2005 61 20 0.0112 2005 62 4 0.1186 2005 62 19 0.0012 2005 61 21 0.0090 2005 62 5 0.0804 2005 62 20 0.0010 2005 61 22 0.0099 2005 62 6 0.0643 2005 62 21 0.0006 2005 61 23 0.0038 2005 62 7 0.0403 2005 62 22 0.0010 2005 61 24 0.0048 2005 62 8 0.0304 2005 62 23 0.0000 2005 61 25 0.0048 2005 62 9 0.0315 2005 62 24 0.0009 2005 61 26 0.0040 2005 62 10 0.0320 2005 62 25 0.0003 2005 61 27 0.0036 2005 62 11 0.0290 2005 62 26 0.0003 2005 61 28 0.0026 2005 62 12 0.0080 2005 62 27 0.0000 2005 61 29 0.0006 2005 62 13 0.0087 2005 62 28 0.0000 2005 61 30 0.0001 2005 62 14 0.0115 2005 62 29 0.0000 2005 62 0 0.1668 2005 62 15 0.0062 2005 62 30 0.0000 2005 62 1 0.1331 2005 62 16 0.0013 2005 62 2 0.1140 2005 62 17 0.0011

TransportationAirQualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM,.,NationalAmbientAirQualityStandard May201l; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 20ROAD TYPE DISTRIBUTION The ODOT and WV Division ofHighway county summaryVehicle Miles Traveled (VMl) data categorizedby federal functional class for thethree county non-attainment areas is the basis for Road Type Distribution Fraction. Table 10 illustrates Road TypeDistribution. Table 10 ROAD TYPE DISTRIBUTION FORBROOKE-HANCOCK-JEFFERSON NON-ATTAINMENT AREA
source road roadDesc roadType source road roadDesc roadType TypelD TypelD VMTFraction TvpelD TvpelD VMTFractlon 11 1 Off·Network 0 43 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 11 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 43 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 11 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 51 1 Off·Network 0 11 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 51 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 11 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 51 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 21 1 Off·Network 0 51 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 21 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 51 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 21 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 52 1 Off·Network 0 21 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 52 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 21 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 52 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 31 1 Off·Network 0 52 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 31 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 52 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 31 3Rural Unrestrictedkcess 0.38 53 1 Off·Network 0 31 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 53 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 31 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 53 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 32 1 Off·Network 0 53 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 32 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 53 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 32 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 54 1 Off·Network 0 32 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 54 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 32 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 54 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 41 1 Off·Network 0 54 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 41 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 54 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 41 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 61 1 Off·Network 0 41 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 61 2Rural Restricted kcess 0.11 41 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 61 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 42 1 Off·Network 0 61 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 42 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 61 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 42 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 62 1 Off·Network 0 42 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 62 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 42 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 62 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38 43 1 Off·Network 0 62 4Urban RestrictedAccess 0.25 43 2Rural RestrictedAccess 0.11 62 5Urban UnrestrictedAccess 0.26 43 3Rural UnrestrictedAccess 0.38

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH For the

## u.s. EPA 1997AnnualPM, 5 NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May 20II

.. RevisedFebruary 2012 Page 21POST PROCESSING Several customprograms createdby ODOT were computed the total emissions. Theprocess uses data on daily and directional traffic distributions as well as more up to date volume/delayfunctions from the 2000 Highway CapacityManual (HCM). This process, described below and illustrated inFigure 4, also uses rewritten code able to handlethe newermodel network formats and MOVES generated emission factors. The first step in the process involves running postcms.exe to calculate hourly link volumes based on the percentage ofthe daily volume (travel demand model output) determined by alink's facility and area type. The analysis does not usethe link speeds from thetravel demand model. Using a link's volumeto-capacityratio and link group code, apost-process to the model based on HeM methods estimates the link speeds. The second step (mmoves.exe) uses acombination ofthe MOVES emission factors and thehourlylink volumes that are output ofthepostcms.exeprogram. The hourly volumes multiplied bythe MOVES emission factor forthe correspondinghourofday, speedbin, and roadtype; calculate emissions for everynetworklink for eachhour. The final link on road vehicle emissions forthe area is the sum ofall individual link-houremissions. The third step, (vehcalm.exe), calculates vehicle-based emissions foreach source type for each hourof the day. A combination oflocal and defaultdata is the sourcefor thevehicle sourcetype. The final vehicle emissions for each county are the sum ofall individual hourly emissions forall vehicletypes. Since the intrazonal trips are not loaded onto the network, the fourth step in the process requires a separate methodto account forthose trips that use local roads to travel within a zone. The intracalm.exe program uses intrazonaJ trips to estimate VMTusing the area in square miles and intrazonaltrips ofeach zone. The computerprogram assumes thatthe zone is circularand uses the radius ofthe circle as the averagetrip length forthese intrazonal trips. BycombiningMOVES generated emissions with estimatedintrazonal VMT, the intrazonal emissions are then calculated. The emission rates are the same as those usedto calculated linkbased emissions. The final step is to summarize link, vehicle, and intrazonal emissions for each county, pollutant, and analyzed year, and to multiply annual average daily emissionsby 365 to produce an annual estimate.

TransportationAir QualityAnalysisAndTechnicalDocumentation Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH Forthe U.S EPA 1997AnnualPM 2., NationalAmbientAir QualityStandard May2011; RevisedFebruary2012 Page 22

### APPENDIX A INTERAGENCY CONSULTATIONDOCUMENTATIONJennifer Hunter [Jennifer.Hunter@epa.state.oh.us] Friday, March OS, 2010 11 :37 AM rsharma@belomar.org; mikepap@bhjmpc.org; Idaniel@clarkcountyohio.gov; twalsh@clarkcountyohio.gov; jrdutton@co.starkoh.us; leigh.oesterling@dot.gov; Dave.Moore1@dot.state.oh.us; jeffrey.blanton@fhwa.dot.gov; Larry.Heil@fhwa.dot.gov; terri@fivco.org; LBrown@indot.in.gov; Jesse.Mayes@ky.gov; SMapel@lcounty.com; cparasa@morpc.org; NGILL@morpc.org; fred.rader@movrc.org; randy.durst@movrc.org; tracy.higgins@movrc.org; bdavis@mpo.noaca.org; aramirez@mvrpc.org; ssalameh@ntelos.net; areser@oki.org; Perry.J.McCutcheon@wv.gov; Richard.L.Warner@wv.gov Carolina Prado; SRAYMOND@idem.IN.gov; SHAWN SEALS; john.gowins@ky.gov; Craig.Butler@louisville.gov; Cynthia.Lee@louisvilleky.gov; William.F.Durham@wv.gov Multi-State PM2.5 Redesignation Effort Cc: SUbject: 

### Mike Pap.. ro..,c .. k

.. i

_ From: Sent: To:

Hello All: OH, KY, IN and WV are working togetherto explore potential redesignation efforts for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard as we are all clean based on 2007-2009 airquality data, You are being contacted because you (oryour organization) have been involved historicallywith such efforts for redesignating OH, OH-IN-KY, OH-IN-WV and/orOH-WV nonattainmentareas. Please reviewthefolloWing mapfor those areas we are interested in obtaining your assistance with: http://www.epa.ohio.gov/portalsJ27/SIP)Nonattainlpm2 S.pdf Preliminary discussions have resulted in the following: I-We would like 

### to request USEPA redesignate each ofthese areas to attainment 2-We require assistance with mobile source modeling 3- ThefollOWing years will need mobile inventorles- 2005 base nonattainmentyear, 2008 attainmentyear, 2015 interim (BUDGET) year and 2021 maintenance (BUDGET) year, 2021 is still underdiscussion but it is our belief2020 will not buy us enough time (it must be 10years from USEPA's APPROVAL) and 2025 has proven 

### to betoo faroutfor establishing other budgets (e,g., non-mobile). So we apologize forthe odd year! 

## +There is significantdiscussion regarding whether Mobile 6.2 or MOVES isthe appropriate, or best, model 

### to use, S-We are shooting for a by no laterthan end of "summertime" to submit. This would necessitate mobile runs be complete bytheJunetime frame so we have time to synthesize the data and prOVide an opportunityfor public comment. In relation to #4 - each ofyou know betteryour capabilities given the time frame we are iooking at. Here are some of the things we are hearing in questioning the appropriatenessof using either model from our USEPA regions and also some ofthe concerns we have raised as agroup. 1. Since we already had these projects in the works R4 and RS (R3 silentthus far) thoughtwe could defend the use of MOBILE6.2 for SIPs prOVided we submit before the summertime frame of2010 butthe closerwe get

### to December2010 for a state submission, the harder itwill beto defend EPA approval ofa SIP that relies on anything otherthan MOVES. 2. RS also expressed the follOWing: please note thatthe MOVES model produces higheremission estimates than MOBILE6.2 for both PM2.5 and NOx. So, at some point in time, within the 2year MOVES grace period, the motor vehicle emission budgets will need to be updated using MOVES. From preliminary estimates, itappearsthat MOBILE6.2 based motorvehicle budgets will betoo tight for MPOs

### to conform the transportation plans afterthe 2year grace period. So, submitting the redesignation requests with MOBILE6.2 based motorvehicle budgets is consistentwith our gUidance. However, you will likely need to updatethe budgets in the redesignation requests using MOVES priorto the end ofthe grace period (priorto the MPOs being reqUired to use MOVES forconformity purposes). The 2 year grace period will end in 2012. 3. Concern was raised about duplicating work (i.e., as a resultof 2above) 4. There is concern there may not be detailed enough county level infonmation for the MOVES Inputs. 15. Itwas suggested that some areas could use MOVES and others Mobile 6.2. However, there is concern that Ifwe aren'tconsistentacross the statethen one orthe other maybe more scrutinized. 50 atthis time foreach ofyourorganizations we'd appreciate the following information by March 16, 2009: 1-Forthe areas on the above map - which counties can you committo modeling? 2-can you committo thetime frame ofspring/early summerfor modeling results? 3-Would you preferto use MOVES or Mobile 6.2? 4-Even ifyou would prefer Mobile 6.2, are youable to use MOVES ifnecessary - within thetime frame? S-Will you have enough county level detail forthe MOVES inputs? 6-Do you haveanyothercomments/questions/concerns? We thankyou foryourassistance,
JennIfer L Hunter Environmental Manager State Implementation Plan (SIP) Development Ohio EPA, DivIsion ofAIr Pollution Control 614-644-3696 Ohio Environmental Protection AgencyThis communication and any response to it mayconstitute a public record and thus maybe publiclyavailable to anyonewho requests

# it.10j

2Oave.Moore1@dot.state.oh.us Thursday, July 15, 20108:22 AM Mike Paprocki Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us RE: AQ Networks 

### Mike P8p;,;ro;,;c;,;,;k;.,i

_ From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:
Mike, Need networksforthe SIPredesignation analysis as follows:

• 2005 base non-attainmentyear • 2008 attainmentyear • 2015 interim (Budget) year • 2021 maintenance (Budget) year
Thanks OM

"Mike Paprocki" <mlkepap@bhlmpc.org> 07/15/201007:57AM To <Dave.Moore1@dot.st8te.oh.us> cc <Nino;Brunello@dotstate.oh,us> Subject RE: AQ Networks

Iplanto start puttingtogethera Memorandum outliningthe process forthe 2006 24-hourconformity exercise starting nextweek. What is needed from me for the 1997 SIP Redesignation package otherthan what Nino has accomplished to date? Michael Paprocki Transportation Study Director BHJ Metropolitan Planning Commission 124 North Fourth Street, Second Floor Steubenville, OH439S2 Phone: 740.282.3685 Fax: 740.282.1821 mailto:mikepap@bhjmpc.org From: Oave.Moorel@dot.state.oh.us [maUto:Dave.Moorel@dot.state.o,h.usj sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 12:40 PM To: mikepap@bhjmpc.org 

### ec: Nino.Brunelio@dot.state.oh.us Subject: AQ Networks Mike, Status of BHJ's networksfor both 2006 PM2.• standard T-Plan conformity determination and 1997 PM2.• SIP 1Jennifer Hunter[Jennifer.Hunter@epa.state.oh.us] Tuesday, September07,2010 12:38 PM mikepap@bhjmpc.org; Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us; Sam Granato Leigh.Oesterllng@dot.gov; Dave Moore; Carolina Prado; jeffrey.blanton@fhwa.dot.gov; Perry.J.McCutcheon@wv.gov; Richard.L.Warner@wv.gov; william.f.durham@wv.gov Re: MUlti-State PM2.5 Redesignation Effort Subject: 

### Mike PaP.. ro

.. c

.. ki

.....
_ From: Sent: To: Cc:

sam, Ninoand Mike, We are aboutto wrap up our Cincinnati area redesignation effortand move onto otherareas. I've been told to have them all donethis year

### -> ouch. I'm touching base backwith all the MPOs and DOTs to seewhere we are in MOVES modeling and howquicklywe could get redesignation modeling accomplished??? I know we talked about this awhile back regarding the Steub/Weirton area (Jefferson, Hancockand Brooke Counties). As a reminder we were looking for the following MOVES modeling for S02, NOxand PM2.S 200S 2008 2015 2021 Thanks,Jen ps....cc'd out ofcourtesyall the others to keep them In the loop.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Unless otherwise provided by law this communication and any response

### to itconstitutes apublic record.

# I

# ° j

1

### Mike 

### Paprocki From: Sent: 

### To:

SUbject: 

### CarolinaPrado [Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.usl Monday, December06, 2010 9:44AM mikepap@bhjmpc.org; Leigh.Oesterling@dot.gov; DaveMoore; Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us; SamGranato; Koch.Martin@epa.gov; PatriciaMorris; Jeffrey.Blanton@fhwa.dot.gov;fred.rader@movrc.org; randy.durst@movrc.org; tracy.higgins@movrc.org; Laura.M.Crowder@wv.gov; Perry.J.McCutcheon@wv.gov; RichardLWarner@wv.gov; FredDurham Steubenville-Weirton, Wheeling, and Parkersburg-Mariettaareas PM2.5 redesignationeffort Interagency Consultancy Group, We would like to start discussion on the PM2.5 redesignations for Steubenville-Weirton, Wheeling, and Parkersburg-Marietta nonattainment areas. We would like to have an Interagency Consultation Group call to agree on parameters and timing for all three redesignations. The Steubenville-Weirton area includes the counties of Jefferson (OH) and Hancock and Brooke (WV), the Wheeling area includes the counties of Belmont (OH) and Ohio and Marshall (WV), and the Parkersburg-Marietta area includes the counties of Washington (OH) and Wood and Pleasants (WV). For the purpose of redesignations and maintenance plans we have to include emissions/projections for all these areas and counties. As you all know we have to use MOVES to model our mobile emission for PM2.5, NOx, and 502, and to fulfill our redesignation/maintenance plan, the following years will need mobile inventories

- 2005 base nonattainment year, 2008 attainment year, 2015 interim (BUDGET) year and 2022 maintenance (BUDGET) year. During this call we would like to agree and be consistent among what's modeled and the assumptions used, as well as to have a sense of timing and other inputs needed. Please let me know ASAP your availability on the following dates: Friday, December 10th

- anytime Monday, December 13th

- anytime Tuesday, December 14th

- after 12:00pm Friday, December 17th

- anytime Also if I missed somebody on this email you think should be part of this lAC call, please forward the email accordingly. Thanks,

Carolina M. Prado State Implementation Plan (SIP) Development Ohio EPA, Division of Air Pollution Control 614- 644-2310 carolina.prado@epa.state.oh.us

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Unless otherwise provided by law, this communication and any response to it constitutes a public record.

1

### Mike Paprocki From: Sent To: Cc:

Subject: Attachments: Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us Tuesday, December 14, 2010 12:43 PM leigh.Oesterling@dot.gov ARamirez@mvrpc.org; Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us; cparasa@morpc.org; Dave.Moore1 @dot.state.oh.us; William.F.Durham@wv.gov; fred.rader@movrc.org; Jeffrey.Blanton@dot.gov; Jennifer.Hunter@epa.state.oh.us; Kotsch.Martin@epamail.epa.gov; laura.M.Crowder@wv.gov; Idaniel@clarkcountyohio.gov; mikepap@bhjmpc.org; Morris.Patricia@epa.gov; ngill@morpc.org; Perry.J.McCutcheon@WV.gov; randy.durst@movrc.org; Richard.l.Warner@wv.gov; rothaj@rapca.org; rsharma@belomar.org; Sam.Granato@dot.state.oh.us; SMapef@lcounty.com; Smith.Dianna@epamall.epa.gov; tracy.higgins@movrc.org RE: MOVES protocols
- PM2.5 redesignation ATT00110.jpg

I mistakenlytyped the newdata source in the wrong place in the parameterlisting. Fuel Formulation is the one using the MOVES defaultvalues. Fuel Supply in notusing defaults. -Nino

<Leigh.Oesterfing@dot.gov> 12114/2010 11:18AM To <NI9o,Brunello@dot.state,gfi.us>, <**<Id~n** 10. cf kcotl t
. >**<rothaI@tapc3~bm;i.;** <Dave.Moore1@dof.stae.oh.us>. <Kotsch.MartJn@ecamail.epa.gov ,**<J~ffrfW;8Iimton@dotg0\f>;** <fr.

### d-,,,..**",i,,<r~ndy,** ursl@mOVfc,otg>, <flacy**hlggfnst?!movrcsrs>.'~LaU~a~lVt;,~~~er@!11/l.I'99v~.** <perry,J.MCCutchaon@vN;gov>;;<BlcffaittLWarilet@wv:goV>,**<fdurham@wydep.org>,~~@?rcOunhi;COtn>.<cpara~a@mofOc.or9>1** <ng!lf@momc.om>,<4§..!ll.lifer,Hunter@gP.a,stale:oh;us;> cc Subject RE: MOVES protocols
- PM2.5 redeslgnatlon

Just one question on fhe protocol- is Fuel Supply using MOVES Default value, as indicated on the alfached protocol? Thanks. I.eigh Leigh A. Oesterling, Planning &Environmental TeamLeader Federal HighwayAdministratIon
- Ohio Division 200 N. High Street. Room 328 Columbus. OH43215 (614) 280-6837 leigh.oesterling@dot.gov Please considerthe environmentbefore pnntingthif. emO$il

From: Nlt1O;Brunello@dot.state,oh,us [maitto:Nino.Bruneflo@dot.state.oh.us] 

### Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 9:00 AM To: carolina Prado; Idanlel@ClarkcQuntyohio.gov; Oesterling, leigh (FHWA); Patricia Morris; aramirez@mvprc.org; Andy 1Roth; rsharma@belomar.org; mikepap@bhjmpc.org; Dave Moore; Sam Granato; Kotsch.Martin@epamail.epa.gov; Smith.Dianna@lepamali.epa.gov; Blanton, Jeffrey (FHWA); fred.rader@movrc.org; randy.durst@movrc.org; tracy.higgins@movrc;,Q[g; Laura.M.Crowder@lwv.gov; PerryJ.McCutcheon@wv.gov; Richard.L.Warner@wv.gov; Fred Durham; SMapel@lcounty.com; Chandra Parasa; ngill@morpc.org; Jennifer Hunter Subject: MOVES protocols
- PM2.5 redesignation
Ali. My apologiesforthe delay. Attached isthe updated MOVES inputs protocolsfortoday's and tomorrow's PM2.5 redesignation conference calls. Nino

Nino Brunello, P.E. Modeling & Forecasting Section Office of Multi-Modal Planning Ohio DepartmentofTransportation (614) 752-5742[attachment "MOVES model protocals for standard MPOs.docx" deleted by Nino Brunelio/MultiModalPlanning/CEN/ODOTj

2

### FineParticulateMatter

### (PMzJJ,AnnualStandard Several parametershave been identifiedfor use in the preparation ofthis analysis. The parameters listed belowwill be appliedinthe base MOVES setup:

• Pollutants to be monitored: S02,NO" and PM2.,
• Model years: 2005,2008 (leap year), 2015, and 2022 (reflectingthe mostrecentcorrespondence from EPA)
• MOVES modeling technique: Emission Factormethod o Rates perDistance o Rates perVehicle o (Rates perProfile are used only forVOCs)

• Scale: Customdomain

• Time Span: o Timeaggregation: Hour o I monthrepresenting average annual temperatures o All hours ofday selected o 16 speed bins o Weekdays only

• GeographicBounds: Custom Domain

- all counties in the MORPC area
• Vehicles/Equipment: All source types, gasolineand diesel

• Road Typa: All roadtypes including off-network

• Pollutants and Processes: NO" All PM,.>categories, S02, Total Energy Consumption

• Strategies: none
• GeneralOutput: Units= grams,joules and miles

• Output Emissions: Time= hour, Location = custom area, on-roademission rates by road type and sourceuse type.
• Advanced Performance: none Thefollowing assumptions will be applied within the County DataManagerportion ofthe MOVES softwarepackage. Each parameter is identified, alongwith the sourcedatathat will be applied (if applicable).

• SourceType Population: Combination oflocal and default data. Local data (20I0) ODOT from motorvehicle registration data. Defaultdataused for sourcetypes 41 , 61, and 62. Future year growth rate based on MPO model variable Householdgrowth rate
• Vehicle Type VMT: Combination oflocal and defaultdata. HPMSVTypeYearVMT= daily VMT from travel demand model with EPA's daily to annual VMT converterapplied. monthVMTFraction= default. dayVMTFraction=default. hourVMTFraction=local.


### • 11MPrograms: 11M program information will be applied for2005 whereapplicable.

• Fuel Formulation: ModifYdiesel sulfurfraction to match previous MOBILE inputs. Futureruns will also be modifiedfor reformulated gas, RVP, etc. for summeranalyses.

• Fuel Supply: UsingMOVES defaultdata.

• Meteorology Data: Local data obtainedfrom NOAA National Climatic DataCenter. Datawill consistofmonthly high and low temperatures and dailyrelative humidity.

• Ramp Fraction: Usingthe base yeartravel demand model forVHT fractions. Future fractions will be assumed constant.
• Road Type Distribution: Use ODOT(and some WVDOT) county summary VMTcategorized by federal functional classes• AgeDistribution: Combinationoflocalanddefaultdata. Localdata(2010) ODOTfrom motor vehicle registrationdata(also someWVDO data). Defaultdatausedfor sourcetypes 41, 51, 54, 61, and62. The sameagedistributionwillbeusedforallanalysisyears. • Average SpeedDistribution: UsingMOVES defaultdata. Datasource does notmatterbecause it is ignoredwhencalculatingemissiourates.
• AlternativeFuelVehicleTypes: Defaultfile willbemodifiedtoreflectany CNGbuses.( : >,,)

- / : if2 

## p. N!

.



### f\ "**l'I)r:.~** 

### [:)G-(. 'S 

## MVI 1<

### n+ ? C') I""2-
1(:',..,)

..**-~** - .. 

# 'RseuIV*Ti60 SW\·1(C 

### f:,
v..,JIL(,..**.~** 

### -

# _ •.........

### carolinaPrado[Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us] Wednesday, February23, 2011 8:29AM rsharma@belomar.org; mikepap@bhjmpc.org;jeffrey.blanfon@dotgov; Leigh.Oesterling@dol.gov; Dave Moore; MarkByram; Nino.Brunello@dol.state.oh.us; Sam Granato; Martin Kotsck; PatriciaMorris; Smith.Dianna@epamail.epa.gov; fred.rader@movrc.org; randy.durst@movrc.org; tracy.higgins@movrc.org; LauraM Crowder; Perry.J.McCutcheon@wv.gov; Richard.L.Warner@wv.gov; FredDurham JenniferHunter TODAYCALL: Steubenville-Weirton,Wheeling, and Parkersburg-Mariettaareas PM2.5 redesignation Cc: SUbject: 

### Mike P2P;,;ro;,;c.k;;.i

_ .... ........_""-........
_ 

### From: Sent: To:



### This is a friendly reminder of our call today. February 23, 2011 

### (Wednesday) at 1:30 

### PM EST. call in number is 614-644-4743, 

### no access code required

Based our 12/14/2010 

### lAC call we agreed that Nino Brunello (ODOT) with BHJ was going to produce network for 2015 

### &2022 

### and produce final protocol document for the Steubenville and Sam Granato (ODOT) was going to tackle the Wheeling and Parkersburg areas in coordination with the respective MPOs. During the call it was agreed we would receive mobile numbers and protocols for all these three areas (Steubenville-weirton, Wheeling, and Parkersburg-Marietta) by March 24, 2011. 

### During this call we would like to have an update on these efforts and know if we are still on target for the 3/24 

### deadline. Thanks, Carolina

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Unless otherwise provided by law, this communication and any response to it constitutes a pUblic record.

1Carolina Prado (Carolina.Prado@epa.state.oh.us] Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:29 PM rsharma@belomar.org; mlkepap@bhjmpc.org; jeffrey.blanton@dot.gov; leigh.Oesterling@dot.gov; Dave Moore; Nino.Brunello@dot.state.oh.us; Sam Granato; Martin Kotsck; Patricia Morris; Smith.Dianna@epamail.epa.gov; fred.rader@movrc.org; randy.durst@movrc.org; tracy.higgins@movrc.org; laura M Crowder; Perry.J.McCutcheon@wv.gov; Richard.l.Warner@wv.gov; Fred Durham JenniferHunter NEXT CALl: Steubenville-Weirton, Wheeling, and Parkersburg-Marietta areas PM2.5 redesignatlon Cc: SUbject: 

### MikeP'!p .. ro.c.,k .. i

_ From: Sent: To:

Follow Up Flag: Due By: Flag Status: Follow up Tuesday, February22,2011 9:00 AM Flagged
Thanks for your participation in today's call. We will have a follow-up calIon February 23, 2011 (Wednesday) at 1:30 PM EST. The call in number is 614-644-4743, no access code required. Thanks, Carolina

__________ H

__ • •

__ Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Unless otherwise provided by law, this communication and any response to it constitutes a public record.

1

# Appendix D-1 LADCO Technical Support

Document (Version IV, April 25, 2008, FINAL)

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

# Appendix 0-2 

# lADCO Technical Support Document (Supplement, Without CAIR Modeling, September 

# 12,2008, FINAL)

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

# Appendix 0-3 WVOEQ 

# Nonroad Modeling

### Emission Totalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 01-05) TotalforJanuary, 2005 Date ofModel Ruu: Nov 03 13:42:20: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIP8 Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 802
54009 BrookeCounty 5.05 15.44 80.54 0.72 0.87 54029 HancockCounty 4.44 9.21 60.40 0.54 0.66 39081 Jefferson County 13.58 12.96 149.65 1.07 0.91 Totals: 23.06 37.61 290.59 2.32 2.44

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurual

CO2 VOC VOC 1,251.92 0.57 0.00

813.50 0.28 0.00 1,260.34 0.44 0.00 3,325.77 1.29 0.00

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 01-05) Total forJanuary, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov03 13:42:20: 2011 

### Tous/Muuth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.15 0.12 6.21 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.20 0.03 0.10 0.22 0.16 5.48 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.14 0.67 0.14 0.59 0.32 0.34 16.21 Totals: 0.23 1.03 0.19 0.78 0.69 0.62 27.90

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2005 (WEIRTON 02-05) TotalforFebruary, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 13:53:00: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 5.04 15.43 80.65 0.72 0.87 54029 HancockCounty 4.44 9.20 60.52 0.54 0.66 39081 JeffersonCounty 13.56 12.93 150m 1.07 0.91 Totals: 23.03 37.55 291.17 2.32 2.44

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today'. Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,251.92 0.57 0.Q4

813.50 0.28 0.06 1,260.34 0.44 0.10 3,325.77 1.29 0.21

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2005 (WEIRTON02-05) Total forFebruary, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov0313:53:00: 2011 TonslMonth

Todays Date: 11/1812011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Counly Displaeement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.15 0.11 6.24 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.20 0.03 0.10 0.22 0.16 5.53 39081 Jefferson County 0.14 0.67 0.14 0.59 0.31 0.34 16.28 Totals: 0.24 1.03 0.19 0.78 0.67 0.61 28.06

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MARCH 2005 (WEIRTON03-05) TotalforMarch" 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov 0314:03:41: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacemeut VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.25 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.17 12.41 54029 HancockCounty 0.17 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.33 0.24 14.81 39081 Jeffersou County 0.34 0.96 0.33 1.28 0.47 0.51 33.92 Totals: 0.64 1.51 0.47 1.60 1.02 0.92 61.14

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MARCH 2005 (WEIRTON 03-05) Total forMarch, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov03 14:03:41: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 10.48 16.91 116.66 0.88 0.98 54029 HancockConoty 12.69 11.11 110.91 0.75 0.78 39081 JeffersonConnty 28.49 19.23 260.79 1.88 1.41 Totals: 51.67 47.25 488.36 3.51 3.16

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,457.56 0.57 0.38 1,087.96 0.27 0.55 2.008.07 0.63 0.90 4,553.58 1.48 1.83

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotalsby 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON APRIL2005 (WEIRTON 04-05) Totalfor April, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 14:14:26: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 10.42 16.79 117.79 0.88 0.98 54029 HancockCounty 12.62 10.97 112.22 0.75 0.78 39081 JeffersonCounty 28.29 18.97 264.52 1.88 1.41 Totals: 51.33 46.73 494.53 3.51 3.16

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,457.56 0.57 1.16 1,087.96 0.27 1.65 2,008.07 0.63 2.78 4,553.58 1.48 5.59

,. 

## 9!

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON APRlL2005 (WEIRTON04-05) TotalforApril, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov 0314:14:26: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date:**11118/~0l1** Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.16 0.25 0.06 0.14 0.34 0.26 13.36 54029 HancockCounty 0.20 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.50 0.37 16.18 39081 Jefferson County 0.43 0.96 0.33 1.28 0.72 0.77 36.19 Totals: 0.79 1.51 0.47 1.60 1.56 1.40 65.72

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReponing Utility, Version2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby Connty andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MAY 2005 (WEIRTON05-05) Total forMay, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 14:25:05: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIP8 Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 802
54009 Brooke County 10.38 16.70 118.70 0.88 0.98 54029 HancockCounty 12.57 10.87 113.29 0.75 0.78 39081 JeffersonCounty 28.13 18.78 267.54 1.88 1.41 Totals: 51.07 46.35 499.53 3.51 3.16

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,457.56 0.57 0.62 1,087.96 0.27 0.89 2,008.07 0.63 1.48 4,553.58 1.48 2.99

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MAY 2005 (WEIRTON 05-05) Total forMay, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:25:05: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.10 0.25 0.06 0.14 0.50 0.39 13.00 54029 HancockCounty 0.12 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.74 0.55 15.70 39081 Jefferson County 0.26 0.96 0.33 1.28 1.07 1.15 35.29 Totals: 0.48 1.51 0.47 1.60 2.31 2.08 63.99

CoreModelver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JUNE2005 (WEIRTON06-05) Total forJune, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov0314:36:14: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 20.70 19.09 168.34 1.19 1.18 54029 HancockCounty 28.33 13.84 185.63 1.14 1.00 39081 JeffersonCouuty 61.68 27.45 515.08 3.29 2.06 Totals: 110.71 60.37 869.05 5.62 4.24

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility. Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,798.35 0.58 0.81 1,546.21 0.28 1.16 3,255.15 0.94 1.93 6,599.71 1,80 3.91

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JUNE 2005 (WEIRTON06-05) Total forJune, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov 03 14:36: 14: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.33 0.10 0.19 0.67 0.52 24.10 54029 HancockCounty 0.29 0.42 0.13 0.25 0.99 0.73 32.57 39081 Jefferson County 0.65 1.80 0.69 2.38 1.43 1.54 73.04 Totals: 1.15 2.54 0.92 2.82 3.09 2.78 129.71

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JULY 2005 (WEIRTON07-05) Total forJuly, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:47:36: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 20.68 19.04 168.82 1.19 1.18 54029 HancockCounty 28.30 13.78 186.24 1.14 1.00 39081 JeffersonCounty 61.57 27.33 517.22 3.29 2.06 Totals: 110.55 60.15 872.28 5.62 4.24

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC



## , 1.798.35 0.58 0.94 1.546.21 0.28 1.34 3,255.15 0.94 2.23 6,599,71 1,80 4.50 

# '.

page 10f2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JULY 2005 (WEIRTON07-05) Total forJuly, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov0314:47:36: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.22 0.33 0.10 0.19 0.79 0.61 24.42 54029 HancockCounty 0.30 0.42 0.13 0.25 1.16 0.86 33.04 39081 Jefferson County 0.69 1.80 0.69 2.38 1.68 1.81 73.80 Totals: 1.22 2.54 0.92 2.82 3.64 3.28 131.26

CoreModel ver20080, 07106/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2005 (WEIRTON08-05) Total forAugust, 2005 Date ofModel Ruu: Nov03 14:58:51: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhanst Exhanst FIPS Connty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 20.68 19.05 168.69 1.19 1.18 54029 HancockCounty 28.31 13.79 186.08 1.14 1.00 39081 Jefferson County 61.60 27.36 516.65 3.29 2.06 Totals: 110.59 60.21 871.42 5.62 4.24



### ,

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Dinrnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,798.35 0.58 0.89 1,546.21 0.28 1.28 3,255.15 0.94 2.13 6,599.71 1.80 4.29

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollntant All Fuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2005 (WEIRTON08-05) TotalforAugust, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov 03 14:58:51: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.22 0.33 0.10 0.19 0.76 0.59 24.34 54029 HancockCounty 0.30 0.42 0.13 0.25 1.12 0.83 32.91 39081 Jefferson County 0.68 1.80 0.69 2.38 1.63 1.75 73.59 Totals: 1.20 2.54 0.92 2.82 3.51 3.17 130.84

CoreModel ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReponing Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER2005 (WEIRTON 09-05) Total for September, 2005 Date ofModelRun: Nov 0315:10:09: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 10.38 16.85 119.40 0.90 1.01 54029 HancockCounty 12.58 11.06 114.10 0.77 0.81 39081 JeffersonCounty 28.03 18.56 268.88 1.87 1.39 Totals: 50.99 46.47 502.37 3.53 3.20

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,476.12 0.57 0.68 1,109.45 0.27 0.97 1,996.25 0.63 1.60 4,581.82 1.48 3.25

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by CountyandPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON09-05) Total for September, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 15:10:09: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.10 0.25 0.06 0.14 0.58 0.45 13.21 54029 HancockCounty 0.13 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.85 0.63 16.00 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.29 0.96 0.33 1.28 1.24 1.33 35.69 Totals: 0.52 1.51 0.47 1.60 2.67 2.41 64.89

Core Modelver2008a, 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2005 (WEIRTON 10-05) Total forOctober, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 15:20:58: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC 

### No.. CO PM25 802
54009 Brooke County 10.44 16.95 118.37 0.90 1.01 54029 HancockCounty 12.64 11.16 112.89 0.77 0.81 39081 JeffersonCounty 28.21 18.77 265.49 1.87 1.39 Totals: 51.28 46.88 496.75 3.53 3.20

Core Model veT20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurual

CO2 VOC VOC 1,476.12 0.57 1.37 1,109.45 0.27 1.95 1,996.25 0.63 3.29 4,581.82 1.48 6.60

page I of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2005 (WEIRTON 10-05) Total forOctober, 2005 Date ofMode] Run: Nov 03 ]5:20:58: 2011 

### TouslMonth

Today's Date: llll8/20II Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.17 0.25 0.06 0.14 0040 0.31 13.70 54029 Hancock County 0.21 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.59 0.44 16.66 39081 Jefferson County 0.45 0.96 0.33 1.28 0.85 0.92 36.92 Totals: 0.84 1.51 0.47 1.60 1.84 1.66 67.28

CoreModel ver2008a, 07106/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby Connty andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER2005 (WEIRTON 11-05) Total for November, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:32: 12: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust F1PS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 10.50 17.08 117.20 0.90 1.01 54029 HancockCounty 12.71 11.30 111.53 0.77 0.81 39081 Jeffersou County 28.42 19.03 261.64 1.87 1.39 Totals: 51.62 47.41 490.38 3.53 3.20

Core Modelver200Ba. 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TouslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,476.12 0.57 0.45 1,109.45 0.27 0.64 1,996.25 0.63 1.05 4,581.82 1.48 2.13

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 11-05) Total forNovember, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:32:12: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.14 0.25 0.06 0.14 0.24 0.19 12.53 54029 HancockCounty 0.17 0.31 0.08 0.18 0.36 0.27 14.98 39081 Jefferson County 0.36 0.96 0.33 1.28 0.52 0.56 34.10 Totals: 0.67 1.51 0.47 1.60 1.12 1.01 61.62

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON DECEMBER2005 (WEIRTON 12-05) Total for December, 2005 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:42:59: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 5.04 15.42 80.71 0.72 0.87 54029 HancockCounty 4.43 9.19 60.58 0.54 0.66 39081 JeffersonCounty 13.55 12.92 150.20 1.07 0.91 Totals: 23.02 37.53 291.48 2.32 2.44

Core Model ver20080, 07106109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,251.92 0.57 0.03

813.50 0.28 0.05 1,260.34 0.44 0.08 3,325.77 1.29 0.16

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2005 (WEIRTON 12-05) Total forDecember, 2005 Date ofMode1 Run: Nov 03 15:42:59: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.17 0.13 6.27 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.20 0.03 0.10 0.25 0.19 5.57 39081 Jefferson County 0.15 0.67 0.14 0.59 0.36 0.39 16.35 Totals: 0.25 1.03 0.19 0.78 0.78 0.70 28.20

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 01-08) TotalforJanuary, 2008 DateofModel Run: Nov 0313:46:34: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 3.95 12.39 66.48 0.62 0.16 54029 HancockCounty 3.60 7.70 51.23 0.47 0.11 39081 Jefferson County 12.32 11.18 131.58 0.98 0.16 Totals: 19.87 31.27 249.29 2.07 0.43

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,302.27 0.37 0.00

853.00 0.18 0.00 1,337.19 0.30 0.00 3,492.46 0.85 0.00

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by CountyandPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2008 (WEIRTON01-08) Total forJanuary, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 13:46:34: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: II/I8/20II Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Conoty Displaeement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.16 0.13 4.93 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.20 0.03 0.11 0.23 0.19 4.59 39081 Jefferson County 0.14 0.68 0.16 0.67 0.35 0.38 14.99 Totals: 0.23 1.04 0.21 0.87 0.74 0.70 24.51

CoreModel ver20080, 07106/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2



# •**1(;~~'** .

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2008 (WEIRTON 02-08) Total for February, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0313:57:14: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 802
54009 Brooke County 3.95 12.38 66.57 0.62 0.16 54029 HancockCounty 3.60 7.69 51.33 0.47 0.11 39081 Jefferson County 12.30 11.15 131.89 0.98 0.16 Totals: 19.85 31.22 249.78 2.07 0.43

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,302.27 0.37 0.05

853.00 0.18 0.06 1,337.19 0.30 0.11 3,492.46 0.85 0.22

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY2008 (WEIRTON02-08) Total forFebruary, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 13:57:14: 2011 Vapor FIPS Connty Displacement VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.05 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 39081 Jefferson County 0.15 Totals: 0.24 

### TousIMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total

VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.16 0.13 4.97 0.20 0.03 0.11 0.23 0.19 4.64 0.68 0.16 0.67 0.34 0.37 15.07 

## 1 1.04 0.21 0.87 0.72 0.69 24.69

CoreModel ver2008a, 07106/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by Conoty andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MARCH 2008 (WEIRTON 03-08) Total for March, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov0314:08:00: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOs CO /'PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.23 13.95 96.60 0.75 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.15 9.75 93.64 0.64 0.14 39081 Jefferson County 25.99 16.98 228.58 1.74 0.25 Totals: 44.37 40.68 418.82 3.13 0.56

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,514.99 0.36 0.40 1,135.80 0.17 0.57 2,139.07 0.42 0.98



### - 4,789.86 0.96 1.95



### ,

page I of2

### Emission Totals by Conntyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MARCH 2008 (WEIRTON 03-08) Total forMarch, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:08:00: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Conoty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.23 0.20 10.00 54029 HancockCounty 0.16 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.35 0.28 12.25 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.36 0.97 0.38 1.48 0.51 0.56 31.66 Totals: 0.65 1.51 0.53 1.82 1.09 1.04 53.92

CoreModel ver20080,07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON APRIL2008 (WEIRTON 04-08) Total forApril, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov0314:18:40: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.18 13.83 97.50 0.75 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.09 9.61 94.74 0.64 0.14 39081 Jefferson County 25.81 16.72 231.82 1.74 0.25 Totals: 44.08 40.16 424.05 3.13 0.56

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Dinrnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,514.99 0.36 1.19 1,135.80 0.17 1.71 2,139.07 0.42 3.04 4,789.86 6.96 5.94

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON APRIL2008 (WEIRTON 04-08) Total forApril, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov0314:18:40: 2011 TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.15 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.36 0.30 11.01 54029 HancockCounty 0.20 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.53 0.43 13.70 39081 Jefferson County 0.45 0.97 0.38 1.48 0.78 0.85 34.19 Totals: 0.80 1.51 0.53 1.82 1.67 1.59 58.89

Core Modelver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant All

### Fuels WEIRTON MAY 

### 2008 (WEIRTON 

### 05-08) Total for May, 

### 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 

### 03 14:29:23: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.15 13.75 98.22 0.75 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.Q4 9.51 95.63 0.64 0.14 39081 Jefferson County 25.67 16.52 234.44 1.74 0.25 Totals: 43.86 39.78 428.29 3.13 0.56

CoreModel ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reponing Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 

### lI/I8/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Dinrnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,514.99 0.36 0.64 1,135.80 0.17 0.92 2,139.07 0.42 1.62 4,789.86 0.96 3.18

page 10f2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MAY 2008 (WEIRTON05-08) Total forMay, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:29:23: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounly 0.09 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.53 0.45 10.68 54029 HancockCounly 0.12 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.78 0.64 13.25 39081 Jefferson County 0.28 0.97 0.38 1.48 1.16 1.26 33.25 Totals: 0.49 1.51 0.53 1.82 2.47 2.35 57;17

Core Modelver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2oo5e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JUNE2008 (WEIRTON 06-08) Total forJune, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 14:40:44: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 16.62 16.28 141.45 1.01 0.21 54029 HancockCounty 22.99 12.73 158.87 0.97 0.18 39081 Jefferson County 56.09 24.85 454.68 3.05 0.37 Totals: 95.70 53.86 754.99 5.03 0.77

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,868.19 0.37 0.84 1,608.79 0.18 1.20 3,469.04 0.63 2.12 6,946.03 1.17 4.15

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JUNE 2008 (WEIRTON06-08) Total forJune, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:40:44: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.20 0.33 0.10 0.20 0.71 0.60 19.96 54029 Hancock County 0.28 0.41 0.14 0.26 1.04 0.86 27.36 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.69 1.83 0.79 2.77 1.55 1.69 68.15 Totals: 1.17 2.57 1.03 3.23 3.31 3.15 115.48

CoreModel ver2008a. 07106/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by CountyandPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JULY 2008 (WEIRTON 07-08) Total forJuly, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0715:26:54: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 16.60 16.23 141.84 1.01 0.21 54029 HancockCounty 22.96 12.67 159.38 0.97 0.18 39081 Jefferson County 55.99 24.73 456.55 3.05 0.37 Totals: 95.55 53.63 757.77 5.03 0.77

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,868.19 0.37 0.96 1,608.79 0.18 1.38 3,469.04 0.63 2.44 6,946.03 1.17 4.79

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JULY 2008 (WEIRTON 07-08) Total forJuly, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov07 15:26:54: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.33 0.10 0.20 0.84 0.71 20.32 54029 HancockCounty 0.30 0.41 0.14 0.26 1.23 1.01 27.87 39081 JeffersonConnty 0.73 1.83 0.79 2.77 1.83 1.99 69.00 Totals: 1.24 2.57 1.03 3.23 3.90 3.71 117.19

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant AllFuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2008 (WEIRTON 08-08) Total forAugust, 2008 DateofModel Run: Nov 0315:03:22: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 16.61 16.24 141.74 1.01 0.21 54029 HancockCounty 22.97 12.69 159.24 0.97 0.18 39081 Jefferson County 56.02 24.76 456.05 3.05 0.37 Totals: 95.59 53.69 757.03 5.03 0.77

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 

### 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,868.19 0.37 0.92 1,608.79 0.18 1.32 3,469.04 0.63 2.33 6,946.03 1.17 4.56

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2008 (WEIRTON08-08) TotalforAugust, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:03:22: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penueation Penueation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.33 0.10 0.20 0.81 0.68 20.22 54029 HancockCounty 0.29 0.41 0.14 0.26 1.19 0.98 27.74 39081 Jefferson County 0.72 1.83 0.79 2.77 1.77 1.92 68.77 Totals: 1.22 2.57 1.03 3.23 3.76 3.58 116.73

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReponing Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 09-08) Total for September, 2008 DateofModel Run: Nov0315:14:32: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.15 13.89 98.79 0.77 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.05 9.67 96.30 0.66 0.14 39081 JeffersonCounty 25.59 16.32 235.60 1.73 0.25 Totals: 43.79 39.88 430.69 3.16 0.57

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,534.91 0.36 0.70 1,158.87 0.17 1.00 2,126.38 0.42 1.76 4,820.16 0.96 3.45

page Iof2

### Emission Totals by Conntyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER2008 (WEIRTON09-08) Total forSeptember, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:14:32: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.10 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.61 0.52 10.90 54029 HancockCounty 0.13 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.90 0.74 13.57 39081 Jefferson County 0.30 0.97 0.38 1.48 1.34 1.46 33.70 Totals: 0.53 1.51 0.53 1.82 2.86 2.72 58.16

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2008 (WEIRTON 10-08) Total for October, 2008 DateofModel Run: Nov0315:25:22: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.19 13.98 97.97 0.77 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.10 9.78 95.30 0.66 0.14 39081 JeffersonCounty 25.74 16.53 232.66 1.73 0.25 Totals: 44.04 40.29 425.93 3.16 0.57

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility. Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,534.91 0.36 1.41 1,158.87 0.17 2.02 2,126.38 0.42 3.60

- 4,820.16 0.96 7.02

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2008 (WEIRTON 10-08) Total for October, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 15:25:22: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.16 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.42 0.36 11.36 54029 HancockCounty 0.21 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.62 0.51 14.21 39081 Jefferson County 0.48 0.97 0.38 1.48 0.92 1.00 35.01 Totals: 0.85 1.51 0.53 1.82 1.97 1.88 60.57

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 11-08) Total for November, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:36:34: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.24 14.10 97.04 0.77 0.18 54029 HancockCounty 10.16 9.92 94.17 0.66 0.14 39081 JeffersonCounty 25.93 16.79 229.33 1.73 0.25 Totals: 44.33 40.81 420.54 3.16 0.57

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,534.91 0.36 0,46 1,158.87 0.17 0.66 2.126.38 0,42 1.14 4,820.16 0.96 2.27

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County and Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 11-08) TotalforNovember, 2008 Date ofModelRun: Nov 03 15:36:34: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.24 0.06 0.15 0.26 0.22 10.13 54029 HancockConnty 0.17 0.30 0.08 0.19 0.38 0.31 12.43 39081 Jefferson County 0.38 0.97 0.38 1.48 0.56 0.61 31.88 Totals: 0.69 1.51 0.53 1.82 1.20 1.14 54.44

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 12-08) Total forDecember, 2008 Date ofModelRun: Nov 0715:29:03: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 3.94 12.37 66.61 0.62 0.16 54029 HancockCounty 3.60 7.68 51.38 0.47 0.11 39081 JeffersonCounty 12.29 11.14 132.05 0.98 0.16 Totals: 19.83 31.19 250.04 2.07 0.43

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TouslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,302.27 0.37 0.03

853.00 0.18 0.05 1,337.19 0.30 0.09 3,492.46 0.85 0.17

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2008 (WEIRTON 12-08) Total forDecember, 2008 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0715:29:03: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.05 0.16 0.03 0.09 0.18 0.15 5.00 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.20 0.03 0.11 0.26 0.22 4.69 39081 Jefferson County 0.15 0.68 0.16 0.67 0.39 0.43 15.15 Totals: 0.25 1.04 0.21 0.87 0.83 0.79 24.85

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 01-15) Total forJanuary, 2015 Date ofModel Ruu: Nov03 13:48:41: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Crankcase Diurual FIPS Couuty VOC NOs CO PM25 802 CO2 VOC VOC
54009 Brooke County 2.22 5.75 35.24 0.43 0.02 1,453.33 0.05 0.00 54029 HancockCounty 2.37 4.07 34.75 0.33 0.01 962.47 0.03 0.00 39081 JeffersonCounty 9.56 6.56 108.39 0.78 0.02 1,534.97 0.08 0.00 Totals: 14.16 16.38 178.38 1.54 0.05 3,950.76 0.16 0.00

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals byCounty andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2015 (WEIRTON 01-15) Total forJanuary, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 13:48:41: 2011 

### TonslMouth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.18 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.07 2.73 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.17 0.10 3.02 39081 Jefferson Connty 0.16 0.76 0.19 0.54 0.20 0.15 11.63 Totals: 0.25 1.16 0.25 0.62 0.48 0.32 17.39

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2015 (WEIRTON02-15) Total for February, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0313:59:22: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOs CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 2.22 5.74 35.31 0.43 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 2.37 4.06 34.83 0.33 0.01 39081 JeffersonCounty 9.55 6.54 108.67 0.78 0.02 Totals: 14.14 16.35 178.80 1.54 0.05

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 

### 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,453.33 0.05 0.04

962.47 0.03 0.06 1,534.97 0.08 0.11 3,950.76 0.16 0.20

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by Connty andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2015 (WEIRTON02-15) Total forFebruary, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0313:59:22: 20ll TonsIMonth

Today's Date: IIIIS/20ll Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.18 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.Q7 2.77 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.16 0.10 3.07 39081 Jefferson County 0.17 0.76 0.19 0.54 0.20 0.14 11.73 Totals: 0.26 1.16 0.25 0.62 0.47 0.31 17.57

Core Model ver2008a, 07106/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MARCH 2015 (WEIRTON 03-15) Total for March, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 14:10:08: 20ll Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 4.08 7.15 57.27 0.52 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 5.27 5.98 66.07 0.44 0.02 39081 JeffersonCounty 17.87 10.56 185.79 1.32 0.03 Totals: 27.22 23.69 309.12 2.28 0.07

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: IV18/20ll Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,687.48 0.04 0.34 1,271.30 0.Q2 0.49 2,464.54 0.08 0.97 5,423.31 0.14 1.80

page 10f2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MARCH 2015 (WEIRTON03-15) Total forMarch, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:10:08: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.12 0.26 0.07 0.06 0.17 0.10 5.24 54029 HancockCounty 0.16 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.25 0.15 6.85 39081 Jefferson Connty 0.40 1.09 0.47 1.35 0.30 0.22 22.73 Totals: 0.68 1.68 0.62 1.49 0.71 0.47 34.82

CoreModelver20080,07106/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals 

### by County and Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON APRIL2015 (WEIRTON 04-15) Total for April, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0314:20:47: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 4.05 7.08 57.93 0.52 0.02 54029 HaucockCounty 5.24 5.87 66.91 

### OM 0.02 39081 Jefferson County 17.75 10.38 188.54 1.32 0.03 Totals: 27.05 23.33 313.38 2.28 0.07

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,687.48 0.04 1.03 1,271.30 0.G2 1.48 2,464.54 0.08 3.01 5,423.31 0.14 5.52

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON APRIL2015 (WEIRTON04-15) Total forApril, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0314:20:47: 2011 TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Rnnning Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.15 0.26 0.Q7 0.06 0.25 0.15 6.07 54029 HancockCounty 0.20 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.38 0.23 8.05 39081 Jefferson County 0.50 1.09 0.47 1.35 0.46 0.33 25.03 Totals: 0.85 1.68 0.62 1.49 1.09 0.72 39.15

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant AllFuels WEIRTON MAY 2015 (WEIRTON**0~-15)** TotalforMay, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0314:31:38: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 4.03 7.02 58.47 0.52 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 5.21 5.80 67.60 0.44 0.02 39081 Jefferson County 17.66 10.24 190.77 1.32 0.03 Totals: 26.91 23.06 316.84 2.28 0.07

CoreModel ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Crankcase Dinrnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,687.48 0.04 0.55 1,271.30 0.02 0.80 2,464.54 0.08 1.60

- 5,423.31 0.14 2.95

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MAY 2015 (WEIRTON05-15) Total forMay, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:31:38: 2011 TonslMonth

Today'. Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.09 0.26 0.Q7 0.06 0.37 0.23 5.71 54029 HancockCounty 0.12 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.56 0.35 7.56 39081 Jefferson County 0.31 1.09 0.47 1.35 0.68 0.49 23.72 Totals: 0.52 1.68 0.62 1.49 1.61 1.07 36.99

Core Modelver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReponing Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JUNE2015 (WEIRTON 06-15) Total forJune, 2015 Date ofModel Ruu: Nov 0314:43:00: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.37 9.41 92.67 0.68 0.03 54029 HancockCounty 11.80 8.95 117.80 0.63 0.03 39081 Jefferson County 37.32 16.68 377.42 2.30 0.05 Totals: 57.49 35.04 587.90 3.61 0.11

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diunlal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,073.94 0.04 0.72 1,784.67 0.02 1.04 3,992.38 0.12 2.09 7,850.99 0.19 3.85

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JUNE 2015 (WEIRTON06-15) Total forJune, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 14:43:00: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.20 0.36 0.11 0.08 0.50 ·0.31 10.69 54029 HancockCouoty 0.28 0.45 0.15 0.11 0.75 0.47 15.07 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.76 2.05 0.95 2.62 0.91 0.66 47.49 Totals: 1.24 2.86 1.21 2.81 2.16 1.43 73.25

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JULY 2015 (WEIRTON 07-15) Total forJuly, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:54:17: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 8.36 9.37 92.97 0.68 0.03 54029 HancockCounty 11.79 8.90 118.20 0.63 0.03 39081 Jefferson County 37.26 16.59 379.01 2.30 0.05 Totals: 57.41 34.87 590.18 3.61 0.11

CoreModel ver2008a, 07106109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,073.94 0.04 0.83 1,784.67 0.02 1.20 3,992.38 0.12 2.41 7,850.99 0.19 4.44

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JULY 2015 (WEIRTON07-15) Total forJuly, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov03 14:54:17: 20ll 

### TouslMouth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penneation Penneation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.36 0.11 0.08 0.59 0.36 10.94 54029 HancockCounty 0.30 0.45 0.15 0.11 0.89 0.55 15.45 39081 Jefferson County 0.81 2.05 0.95 2.62 1.07 0.77 48.07 Totals: 1.32 2.86 1.21 2.81 2.54 1.68 74.46

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2015 (WEIRTON08-15) Total for August, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:05:36: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCouoty 8.36 9.38 92.89 0.68 0.03 54029 HaocockCouoty 11.79 8.92 118.09 0.63 0.03 39081 Jeffersoo Couoty 37.28 16.61 378.59 2.30 0.05 Totals: 57.43 34.91 589.57 3.61 0.11

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting UtIlity, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 1111812011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,073.94 0.04 0.79 1,784.67 0.D2 1.14 3,992.38 0.12 2.30 7,850.99 0.19 4.24

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2015 (WEIRTON08-15) Total forAugust, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:05:36: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 

# -

Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Conoty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.36 0.11 0.08 0.57 0.35 10.87 54029 HancockCounty 0.29 0.45 0.15 0.11 0.86 0.53 15.34 39081 Jefferson County 0.79 2.05 0.95 2.62 1.03 0.75 47.90 Totals: 1.30 2.86 1.21 2.81 2.46 1.62 74.11

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON09-15) Total for September, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:16:40: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 4.04 7.11 58.89 0.53 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 5.22 5.90 68.12 0.45 0.Q2 39081 JeffersonCounty 17.61 10.11 191.78 1.32 0.Q3 Totals: 26.87 23.12 318.78 2.30 0.07

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,710.61 0.04 0.60 1,298.09 0.Q2 0.87 2,449.81 0.08 1.74 5,458.51 0.14 3.20

page lof2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON09-15) Total for September, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:16:40: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 Brooke County 0.10 0.26 0.07 0.06 0.43 0.26 5.87 54029 HancockCounty 0.13 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.65 0.40 7.79 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.34 1.09 0.46 1.35 0.78 0.57 24.01 Totals: 0.57 1.68 0.62 1.49 1.87 1.23 37.67



# ..

CoreModel ver20080, 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2015 (WEIRTON 10-15) Total for October, 2015 DateofModel Run: Nov 0315:27:38: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 4.06 7.17 58.28 0.53 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 5.25 5.98 67.34 0.45 0.02 39081 JeffersonCounty 17.71 10.25 189.27 1.32 0.03 Totals: 27.02 23.41 314.89 2.30 0.07

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

## .-

TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11118/2011 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,710.61 0.04 1.21 1,298.09 0.02 1.75 2,449.81 0.08 3.56



### - 5,458.51 0.14 6.52

page 1 of2

### Emission Totalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2015 (WEIRTON 10-15) Total for October, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:27:38: 2011 TouslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Penueation
. Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCouoty 0.16 0.26 0.Q7 0.06 0.30· 0.18 6.35 54029 HancockCouoty 0.21 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.45 0.28 8.45 39081 Jeffersoo Couoty 0.53 1.09 0.46 1.35 0.54 0.39 25.71 Totals: 0.90 1.68 0.62 1.49 1.29 0.85 40.51

CoreModel ver2008a. 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility. Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by 

### County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER2015 (WEIRTON 11-15) TotalforNovember, 2015 DateofModel Run: Nov 0315:38:41: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 4.09 7.25 57.59 0.53 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 5.28 6.08 66.47 0.45 0.02 39081 Jefferson County 17.83 10.43 186.43 1.32 0.03 Totals: 27.20 23.77 310.49 2.30 

## om

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth (j;

Today's Date: 

### 11/1812011 Exhaust Craukcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,710.61 0.04 0.40 1,298.09 0.02 0.57 2,449.81 0.08 1.13

- 5,458.51 0.14 2.10

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 11-15) Total forNovember, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 03 15:38:41: 2011 Tous/Month

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.26 0.07 0.06 0.18 0.11 5.34 54029 Hancock County 0.17 0.33 0.09 0.08 0.27 0.17 6.99 39081 Jefferson County 0.42 1.09 0.46 1.35 0.33 0.24 22.92 Totals: 0.73 1.68 0.62 1.49 0.78 0.52 35.25

Core Modelver2008a, 07/06109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 12-15) Totalfor December, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov 0315:49:31: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/1812011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 802 CO2 VOC VOC
54009 BrookeCounty 2.22 5.74 35.34 0.43 0.02 1,453.33 0.05 ' 0.03 54029 HancockCounty 2.37 4.06 34.87 0.33 0.01 962.47 0.03 0.Q4 39081 Jefferson County 9.54 6.53 108.82 0.78 0.02 1,534.97 0.08 0.08 Totals: 14.13 16.33 179.02 1.54 0.05 3,950.76 0.16 0.16

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by CountyandPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2015 (WEIRTON 12-15) Totalfor December, 2015 Date ofModel Run: Nov0315:49:31: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 11/18/2011 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.18 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.08 2.78 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.22 0.03 0.04 0.19 0.12 3.10 39081 Jefferson County 0.17 0.76 0.19 0.54 0.23 0.17 11.76 Totals: 0.26 1.16 0.25 0.62 0.55 0.36 17.64

CoreModel ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2025 (WEIRTON 01-25) Total forJanuary, 2025 Date ofMode1 Run: Nov 2814:16:27: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 1.99 3.68 32.23 0.26 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 2.20 2.54 35.23 0.19 

## om 39081 JeffersonCounty 8.32 4.57 117.50 0.55 0.02 Totals: 12.50 10.78 184.96 1.00 0.05

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhanst Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,724.31 

## om 0.00 1,143.55 0.02 0.00 1,825.77 0.04 0.00



### -- 4,693.64 0-07 0.00

page 1 of2

### Emission Totalsby County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JANUARY 2025 (WEIRTON01-25) Total forJanuary, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:16:27: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 212212012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.21 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 2.40 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.26 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.06 2.73 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.18 0.89 0.20 0.55 0.08 0.05 10.31 Totals: 0.27 1.35 0.27 0.62 0.20 0.14 15.44

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 oj 2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant AllFuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY 2025 (WEIRTON02-25) TotalforFebruary, 2025 DateofModel Run: Nov 2814:18:39: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 1.99 3.67 32.30 0.26 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 2.20 2.53 35.32 0.19 

## om 39081 JeffersonCounty 8.30 4.55 117.82 0.55 0.02 Totals: 12.49 10.75 185.43 1.00 0.05

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,724.31 

## om 0.03 1,143.55 0.02 0.05 1,825.77 0.04 0.11 4,693.64 0.07 0.19

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON FEBRUARY2025 (WEIRTON02-25) Total forFebruary, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:18:39: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.21 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 2.43 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.26 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.05 2.77 39081 Jefferson County 0.19 0.89 0.20 0.55 0.08 0.05 10.41 Totals: 0.28 1.35 0.27 0.62 0.20 0.14 15.61

Core Modelver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MARCH 2025 (WEIRTON 03-25) Total for March, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:20:55: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage Hot Soak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.31 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.05 3.47 54029 HancockCouuly 0.18 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.08 4.37 39081 Jefferson County 0.44 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.11 0.08 16.92 Totals: 0.74 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.30 0.21 24.76

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MARCH 2025 (WEIRTON03-25) Total forMarch, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 28 14:20:55: 2011 TonsIMontlt

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02 CO2
54009 BrookeCounty 2.50 4.75 53.67 0.30 0.02 1,991.17 54029 HancockCounty 3.05 4.08 65.50 0.25 0.02 1,492.74 39081 Jefferson County 12.18 7.25 195.92 0.86 0.03 2,907.12 Totals: 17.74 16.08 315.10 1.41 0.08 6,391.03

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e Crankcase VOC
0.00 0.00 

## om 0.02 Diurnal VOC**':~'** "0.28**~'** . 

### ...**~'** . 0.40 0.97 1.65

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON APRIL2025 (WEIRTON 04-25) TotalforApril, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:23:10: 20ll 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIP8 Couuty VOC NOs CO PM25 802 CO2
54009 Brooke County 2.48 4.70 54.36 0.30 0.02 1,991.17 54029 HancockCounty 3.03 4.00 66.39 0.25 0.02 1,492.74 39081 JeffersonCounty 12.07 7.09 198.93 0.86 0.03 2,907.12 Totals: 17.58 15.79 319.69 1.41 0.08 6,391.03 Crankcase "' VOC
0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02**Di~rnal** VOC
0.85 1.21 3.01 5.07

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON APRJL2025 (WEIRTON04-25) Total forApril, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:23:10: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.16 0.31 0.07 0.04 0.11 0.08 4.12 54029 HancockCounty 0.21 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.13 5.29 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.55 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.17 0.12 19.07 Totals: 0.92 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.46 0.33 28.47

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MAY 2025 (WEIRTON 05-25) TotalforMay, 2025 Date ofModelRun: Nov 2814:25:27: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 2.47 4.66 54.92 0.30 0.02 54029 HancockConnty 3.00 3.95 67.11 0.25 0.D2 39081 JeffersonCounty 11.99 6.96 201.37 0.86 0.03 Totals: 17.46 15.58 323.40 1.41 0.08

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/2212012 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 1,991.17 0.00 0.46 1,492.74 0.00 0.65 2,907.12 0.01 1.60 6,391.03 0.02 2.71

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON MAY 2025 (WEIRTON05-25) TotalforMay, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 28 14:25:27: 2011 TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeConoty 0.09 0.31 0.07 0.04 0.17 0.12 3.74 54029 HancockConoty 0.13 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.26 0.19 4.77 39081 Jefferson County 0.34 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.26 0.17 17.50 Totals: 0.57 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.69 0.49 26.01

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility. Version 2005e page 2 of:2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON JUNE 2025 (WEIRTON 06-25) TotalforJune, 2025 DateofMode1 Run: Nov 2814:27:42: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 4.42 6.61 87.54 0.39 0.03 54029 HancockConnty 5.90 6.59 114.67 0.34 0.03 39081 JeffersonCounty 23.82 11.75 397.00 1.49 0.06 Totals: 34.14 24.95 599.21 2.23 0.12

Core Model ver2008a, 07106109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,428.50 

### • .0.00 0.60 2,069.02 0.00 0.85 4,670.23 

## om 2.09 9,167.74 0.02 3,54

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JUNE 2025 (WEIRTON 06-25) Total forJune, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:27:42: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS CODDty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.21 0.42 0.12 0.05 0.23 0.16 6.?1 54029 HancockCounty 0.30 0.53 0.17 0.07 0.34 0.25 8.42 39081 Jefferson County 0.83 2.35 1.04 2.66 0.35 0.23 33,39 Totals: 1.34 3.29 1.33 2.78 0.92 0.65 48.02

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JULY 2025 (WEIRTON 07-25) Total for July, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:30:01: 2011 Emaust Emaust Emaust Emaust E:shaust FIPS County VOC NOs CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 4.41 6.59 87.84 0.39 0.Q3 54029 HancockCounty 5.89 6.55 115.07 0.34 0.03 39081 Jefferson County 23.76 11.67 398.72 1.49 0.06 Totals: 34.06 24.81 601.63 2.23 0.12

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 212212012 Emaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,428.50 0.00 0,69 2,069.02 0.00 0,98 4,670.23 

## om 2,41 9,167.74 0.02 4,08

page Iof2

### Emission Totals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON JULY 2025 (WEIRTON 07-25) TotalforJuly, 2025 Date ofModel Ruu: Nov 2814:30:01: 2011 TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC

, 54009 BrookeCounty 0,22 0042 0,12 0,05 0.27 0,19 6,38 54029 HancockCounty 0.32 0,53 0,17 0.07 0040 0.30 8.66 39081 Jefferson County 0.89 2.35 1.04 2.66 0041 0.28 33.81 Totals: lA2 3.29 1.33 2.78 1.08 0.76 48.84

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by County and Pollutant All

### Fuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2025 (WEIRTON08-25) Total forAugust, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 28 14:32: 18: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 4.41 6.60 87.76 0.39 0.Q3 54029 HancockCounty 5.89 6.56 114.96 0.34 0.03 39081 Jefferson County 23.78 11.69 398.27 1.49 0.06 Totals: 34.08 24.85 600.99 2.23 0.12

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e

t 

### TonslMQuth


# '" Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Craukcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,428.50 0.00 0.66 2,069.02 0.00 0,93 4,670.23 0.01 2,30 9,167.74 0.02 3.89

page 1 of2

### Emission Totals by Connty and Pollutant AllFuels WEIRTON AUGUST 2025 (WEIRTON08-25) TotalforAugust, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:32:18: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose ToU\! FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 

### ., 54009 BrookeCounty 0.22 0.42 0.12 0.05 0.26 0.19 6.33 54029 HancockCounty 0.31 0.53 0.17 0.Q7 0.39 0.29 8.59 39081 Jefferson County 0.87 2.35 1.04 2.66 0.39 0.27 33.67 Totals: 1.40 3.29 1.33 2.78 1.04 0.74 48$9

CoreModelver20080, 07106109. NONROADReponing Utility, Version 2005c page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER2025 (WEIRTON 09-25) Total for September, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 28 14:34:34: 2011 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2{)12 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.10 0.31 

## om 0.04 0.20 0.14 3,84 54029 HancockCounty 0.14 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.30 0.22 4,91 39081 Jefferson County 0.37 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.30 0.20 17·69 Totals: 0.62 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.79 0.56 26,44

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NON ROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by CountyandPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON SEPTEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON09-25) Totalfor September, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:34:34: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 2.47 4.70 55.31 0.31 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 3.01 3.99 67.60 0.25 0.02 39081 JeffersouCounty
. 11.94 6.87 202.51 0.85 0.03 Totals: 17.42 15.56 325.41 1.41 0.08

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMl>nth

Today's Date:**2/22/~012** Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC 

## voC
2,018.87 0.00 0.50 1,524.81 0.00 0.71 2,889.48 0.01 1.73



### - 6,433.16 0.02 2,93

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2025 (WEIRTON 10-25) Totalfor October, 2025 DateofModel Run: Nov 2814:36:49: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOs CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 2.49 4.74 54.68 0.31 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 3.03 4.05 66.78 0.25 0.02 39081 JeffersonCouuty 12.03 7.00 199.77 0.85 0.Q3 Totals: 17.56 15.79 321.23 1.41 0.08

CoreModel ver2008a, 07106109. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005c 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/;2012 Exhaust Crankcase Diurlll\l

CO2 VOC 

## vdC
2,018.87 0.00**~m** 1,524.81 0.00 1.43 2,889.48 

### om 3,56 6,433.16 

### O.oz 1i,00

page 1**of~**

### EmissionTotals by County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON OCTOBER 2025 (WEIRTON 10-25) Total for October, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 28 14:36:49: 2011 TonsIM()ofh' 

# .'

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Connty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.17 0.31 0.Q7 0.04 0.14 0.10 4.32 54029 HancockCounty 0.23 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.20 0.15 5.59 39081 Jefferson County 0.59 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.21 0.14 19.67 Totals: 0.98 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.55 0.39 29,58

Core Modelver20080, 07106109. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### EmissionTotalsby County andPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 11-25) Total forNovember, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:39:01: 201I Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS Couuty VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 BrookeCounty 2.51 4.79 53.97 0.31 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 3.06 4.12 65.87 0.25 0.02 39081 JeffersonConnty 12.14 7.17 196.66 0.85 0.03 Totals: 17.72 16.09 316.50 1.41 0.08

Core Model ver20080, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Crankcase Diumal

CO2 VOC VOC 2,018.87 0.00 0.33 1,524.81 0.00 0.47 2,889.48 0.01 1.13 6,433.16 0.02 1.92

page 10j2

### Emission Totals by Countyand Pollutant All Fuels WEIRTON NOVEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 11-25) Total forNovember, 2025 Date ofModel Run: Nov 2814:39:01: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS Conoty Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.13 0.31 0.Q7 0.04 0.08 0.06 3.54 54029 HancockCounty 0.19 0.39 0.10 0.05 0.12 0.09 4,47 39081 Jefferson County 0.47 1.25 0.51 1.37 0.13 0.08 17.09 Totals: 0.79 1.95 0.68 1.47 0.33 0.23 25.10

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2

### Emission Totals by 

### County andPollutant All Fuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 12-25) Total for December, 2025 Date ofModelRun: Nov 2814:41:10: 2011 Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust Exhaust FIPS County VOC NOx CO PM25 S02
54009 Brooke County 1.99 3.67 32.34 0.26 0.02 54029 HancockCounty 2.19 2.53 35.36 0.19 0.01 39081 Jefferson County 8.30 4.54 117.98 0.55 0.02 Totals: 12.48 10.74 185.68 1.00 0.05

Core Model ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROAD Reporting Utility, Version 2005e 

### TonslMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Exhaust Crankcase Diurnal

CO2 VOC 

### vOt 1,724.31 0.01 0,02 1,143.55 0.02 0,04 1,825.77 0.04 0.08 4,693.64 0,07 0,14

page 1 of2

### EmissionTotals byCountyandPollutant AllFuels WEIRTON DECEMBER 2025 (WEIRTON 12-25) Total forDecember, 2025 Date ofModelRun: Nov 2814:41:10: 2011 

### TonsIMonth

Today's Date: 2/22/2012 Vapor Spillage HotSoak Running Tank Hose Total FIPS County Displacement VOC VOC LossVOC Permeation Permeation VOC VOC VOC VOC 54009 BrookeCounty 0.04 0.21 0,03 0.03 0.06 0,04 2.43 54029 HancockCounty 0.05 0.26 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.06 2,78 39081 JeffersonCounty 0.19 0.89 0.20 0.55 0.09 0.06 10.41 Totals: 0.29 1.35 0.27 0.62 11.23 0.16 15,62

CoreModel ver2008a, 07/06/09. NONROADReporting Utility, Version 2005e page 2 of2WEIRTON, WESTVIRGINIAPeriodofRecordGeneralClimate Summary

- Temperature 

# WEIRTON,WEST·VIRGINIA Period 

### ofRecord General Climate Summary - Temperature Page 

### I of

### I



# I FromYear-1949 To Year=1976 1 1 Station:(469345) WEIRTON I 1 Averages DailyExtremes I Monthly 

# I DailyExtremes 

## II MonthlyExtremes 

# "i'::. "Min. Temp·1 Averages

# BEJB~GBGHighestBLowestB~~~~ Max. Mm. Mean High Date Low Date Mean Year Mean Year 90F 32F 32F 0 F

# 0000~8~DDDD~~~~ 1 January 1138.71122.111 30.41[J][ 25/19501[J§]1 24/196311 41.91OQJI 23.11021mml 25.41[J] 1February 1141.711 23.411 32.5ICE1I 29/19761Cilll 22/196311 40.9[2§]1 24.4I[§]mQI 22.9[]] 1 March 1151.011 30.211 40.61rnl 30/1976[]]! 11/196011

### 49.81~1 29.5ID:21m[J]02]m 1 April II 64.41140.311 52.410]1 18/19761wl 01/196411 58.110i11 45.710TImmrum 1 May II 74.21149.31[}!]rnl 18/196210111 10/196611

### 67.91~1 55.8102J[Q]mCQ]m 

# I June 1\ 82.011 58.411 70.210211

### 26/19521~1 011196611 73.61D3l1 65.8lrnQmmm 1 July 1185.01162.311 73.611 10011 14119541GI 09/196311 78.0[]]1 70.7IOQJ[J]mmm 

# I August 1\84.01161.411 72.711 10011

### 30/19531~1 29/196511 76.310211 69.51[§][TI]mmm ISeptemberI178.01154.911 66.411 10011 01/195310111 24/197411 70.910TI1 62.6102J0]mmm 1 October II 67.61\44.311

### 55.91~1 03/195110TI1 21/195211 61.21[§]1

### 50.91D3l[Q]m~m tNovemberIl52.71135.011

### 43.81~1 03/1961!CQlI 30/1958/1

## 49.21~r.::.JDJOIlm[J]@]m IDecemberI141.21126.011

### 33.61~1 10/1971101 16/195111

### 41.11~1 24.3I[§]mrnl 23.3[Q] 1 Annual 1163.41142.311 52.81110011 195308301[J§]11963012411

### 54.81~1**50.81~116.71124.311115.2[~** 1 Winter 1140.511 23.811 32.21[J]1 195001251[J§]1 1963012411

### 36.31~1 25.3I[§]mI21.71[J1]Q] 1 Spring II 63.211 39.910TIlrnl 196205181[]1 1960031111

## 54.91~1~[B][Q][J]1 27.61m 

# I Summer 1183.61160.711 72.21110011

### 195308301~1 1966060111 73.81D3l1 70.0Irnl13.9Immm 1 Fall 1166.11144.711 55.411 10011 19530901lCQII 1958113011 58.110TI1 52.0102J0][J]116.0Im TableupdatedonOct28, Formonthly andannualmeans, thresholds, and sums: Months with 5 ormoremissing days arenotconsidered Years with 1 ormoremissingmonths arenotconsidered Seasons areclimatological notcalendar seasons Winter= Dec., Jan., andFeb. Spring = Mar., Apr., andMay Summer

### =Jun., Jul., andAug. Fall = Sep., Oct., andNov.
SoutheastRegional Climate Center, SliRCCstqff

http://www.sercc.comlcgi-binisercc/cliGCStT.pl?wv9345 11312011

# Appendix E-1 Steubenville-Weirton Missing Data Imputation

## Steubenville-Weirton PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Monitor Missing Data Analysis
The current Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment area is located in the eastern side of Ohio and includes the following counties: Jefferson in Ohio and Hancock and Brooke in West Virginia. The area has five monitors measuring PM2.5 concentrations, which are operated by the Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution Control, Southwest District Office (Jefferson County monitors) and by the West Virginia Department of Air Quality. A listing of the design values based on the three-year average of the annual mean concentrations from 2008 through 2010 is shown in Table 1. The design values calculated for the Steubenville-Weirton area shows that the annual PM25 NMQS has been attained.
Table 1 - Monitoring Data for the Steubenville-Weirton area for 2008 - 2010 Annual Standard Site County Year Al<erage 2008 2009 2010 2008-2010 39-081-0017 [a] Jefferson, OH 14.3 12.1 12.7 13.0 39-081-1001 14.1 11.2 12.7 12.7 54-009-0005 Brooke, WV 14.7 12.2 14.1 13.7 54-009-0011 13.8 11.9 13.5 13.1 54-029-1004 Hancock, WV 13.3 11.2 12.6 12.4 Less than 75% capture in at least one quarter [a] This site has a 73% capture, resutting in one day of mssed data. Based on the data from previous years, this site shows a decreasing trend in monitor readings. Ohio believes that had the mssing data been collected itwould not have resulted in a design value that would exceed the standard. Source: U.S. EPA Air Quahty System (AQS); http://www.epa.gov/ttn/alrs/alrsags/lndex.htm However, based on Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the Clean Air Act (CM) the PM2.5 monitoring has to show that the three-year average of the annual mean values, based on data from all monitoring sites in the area or its affected downwind environs, are below 15.0/m3

. Moreover, in accordance with the CM Amendments, three complete years of monitoring data are reqUired to demonstrate attainment at a monitoring site. In addition, U.S. EPA regUlations require at least 75% data capture in each quarter of a consecutive 3-year period in orderfor a design value to be valid. Table 1 shows that the monitor site in Jefferson County (site 39-081-0017) did not comply with the 75% data capture requirement in 2008. Specifically, the fourth quarter (October, November, and December) of 2008 has only 73% capture. This monitoring site experienced an instrument malfunction during the low percentage capture period with a total of 8 missing 1-in-3 day PM2.5 FRM runs.


### 1

### In order to comply with U.S.EPA's 75% capture requirements, Ohio EPA prepared a statistical analysis using multiple imputations. Imputing missing values for site 39-081-0017 and then doing an ordinary analysis as ifthe imputed values were real measurements (this approach is usually better than excluding subjects with incomplete data). Most methods for accounting for having incomplete data can be complex; the bootstrapping method however, is an easy method to implement even though the computations can be slow. To use the bootstrap, to correctly estimate variances of regression coefficients, one must repeat the imputation process and the model fitting perhaps 1000 times using a resampling procedure. Multiple imputations use random draws from the conditional distribution of the target variable given the other variables. When a regression model is used for imputation, the process involves adding a random residual to the "best guess" for missing values, to yield the same conditional variance as the original variable. To properly account for variability due to unknown values, the imputation will be repeated 1000 times. Imputing missing data for Steubenville-Weirton PM2.5 nonattainment area For simplification purposes we will refer to the sites in the Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment area bythe letterdenoted in the second column ofthe table below. 1. Steubenville-Weirton Annual PM2.5 Design Value History Table 2 - Historic Design Values for the Steubenville-Weirton area from 1999 to 2010
Annual DesiQn Value Site Site County 1999- 2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006- 2007- 2008- 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 39-081-0017 A Jefferson, OH 15.8 15.4 15.5 14.8 14.2 13.0 39-081-1001 B 18.2 17.8 17.8 16.9 17.2 16.3 16.1 14.8 13.6 12.7 54-009-0005 C 17.3 16.8 16.8 16.5 16.8 16.4 16.3 15.4 14.4 13.7 D Brooke, WV 54-009-0011 16.6 16.1 16.2 15.8 16.4 15.7 16.1 14.9 14.0 13.0 54-029-1004 E Hancock, WV 17.3 17.5 17.4 17.0 16.6 15.4 15.2 14.3 13.4 12.4 incomplete data (quarterwith <75% capture) violating DV 

### From Table 2, all five sites have design values (DV) that meet the PM2.5 annual standard since the 2006-2008 period. However, site A has not achieved clean data in 2008 and therefore the entire nonattainment area is not eligible for redesignation absent this analysis. As mentioned before, the lack of clean data in 2008 is due to the low percentage of data capture in one or more quarters of 2008. Multiple imputations and bootstrapping methods will help to generate values for the missing data to determine 2008 completeness and recalculate the 2008-2010 DV. 2. Correlation, Quarterly Data Capture, and Data Site Pairing Linear regression analyzes the relationship between two variables, X and Y. For each subject, there is a known X and Y and we want to find the best straight line through the data. The goal of linear regression is to find the line that best predicts Y from X. Linear 

### 2regression does this by finding the line that minimizes the sum of the squares of the vertical distances of the points from the line. To determine which site combination (A and B, A and C, A and D or A and E) has the best data (best fit) from which to impute missing data for site A we determine the correlation between sites A and B, between A and C, between A and D and between A and E. The correlation value (R2) is useful because it describes the degree of relationship between two variables 1 (variables or site concentrations in all sites). R2 is only a descriptive statistics. Roughly speaking, we associate a high value of R2 with a good fit of the regression line and associate a low value of R 2 with a poorfit. The mean of the quarterly data captured (the mean of the percentage captured) will allow verifying the central tendency of each site, which will help to determine what site (B, C, D or E) has a more data completeness to impute for site A. Finally, although not as statistically significant as the correlation, or as the mean of the percentage captured, pairing the site data seeks to reduce variability in order to make more precise comparisons with fewer observations. Pairing the data will help to determine which site, B, C, D or E, have more data when paired with 

### A. Below are the results for site A vs. the rest of the sites. Table 3 - Correlation Matrixfor site A against all other sites.



### A

1 An R2 value of 0.0 means that knowing X does not help to predict Y, there is no linear relationship between X and Y. When R2 equals 1.0, all points lie exactly on a straight line with no scatter; knOWing X predicts Y perfectly. 

### 3

### Table4 - Quarterly Data Capture Monitoring Sites A B C D E 2003Q1 49% 97% 100% 97% 2003 Q2 100% 100% 100% 93% 2003Q3 99% 100% 100% 97% 2003 Q4 85% 92% 93% 97% 80% 2004Q1 97% 93% 100% 100% 100% 2004 Q2 87% 100% 100% 97% 93% 2004Q3 84% 94% 97% 100% 77% 2004Q4 73% 93% 97% 100% 97% 2005Q1 93% 93% 87% 100% 100% 2005 Q2 61% 100% 97% 97% 97% 2005Q3 53% 100% 100% 100% 97% Table 5- Paired Data Site 0 2005 Q4 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

# ... 29· Quarter look 0 2006Q1 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% m (2003 Q4· 2010 Q4) 0 2006Q2 77% 80% 100% 100% 90% 0 pairs pairs pairs pairs N Site Site Total l!! 2006 Q3 100% 93% 100% 100% 94% Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2006Q4 100% 100% 100% 100% 90% A B 102 84 83 101 370 

# .. u 2007 Q1 97% 100% 100% 100% 97% A C 198 175 180 200 753 

# .. .. 2007Q2 87% 100% 100% 100% 93% A 0 Q 201 172 181 201 755 2007 Q3 97% 93% 90% 100% 97"10 A E 202 169 173 196 740 100% 100% 100% 97% 

# .. 2007Q4 87% :s 

### a 2008Q1 100% 94% 94% 97% 94% 200802 83% 100% 97% 100% 97% 2008Q3 90% 100% 100% 100% 100% 2008 Q4 73% 100% 93% 100% 100% 2009Q1 97% 93% 100% 100% 100% 2009 Q2 94% 100% 100% 100% 100% 2009Q3 83% 93% 100% 90% 100% 2009 Q4 94% 93% 100% 97% 100% 2010 Q1 93% 100% 100% 100% 100% 201OQ2 93% 93% 100% 100% 100% 2010 Q3 87% 94% 100% 100% 100% 201OQ4 87% 93% 100% 100% 100%

MEAN 88% 95% 98% 99% 96% 

### Table 3 shows that the correlation between A and D (R2 

### = 0.8449) is stronger than the correlation between site A and the other sites. From the mean ofthe quarterly data captured (Table 4), we can observe that site D has more data completeness (99%) from which to impute for site 

### A. In addition, from the data site pairing (Table 5) it can be observed that site A and D have more paired data to establish a better relationship than site A and the other sites. Based on the information above, we will use multiple imputations and bootstrapping methods to generate the necessary data from Site D to impute on Site A missing values.


### 4

### Linear Regression and Correlation for Site A vs. Site 0

Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.919173221 RSquare 0.844879411 Adjusted RSquare 0.844673408 Standard Error 3.301408004 Observations 755 

## linear Regression Results SiteAvs. Site 0**.~** ..--------

R' =0.8449A.<-<l'W 

# - 30 i I 20 -:

### ~."'7 U::i 

# rm ".**~----+** 

### i 10

# to

# t----- 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 50 

### +----- 60

Coefficients StandardError t Stat P-value Lower95% Upper95% Intercept 2.218223276 0.22529593 9.845820463 1.34608E-21 1.775940467 2.660506086 XVariable 1 0.855135619 0.013352878 64.04129849 6.1227E-307 0.828922326 0.881348912

ANOVA df SS MS F Significance F Regression 1 44701.14605 44701.14605 4101.287912 6.1227E-307 Residual 753 8207.168992 10.89929481 Total 754 52908.31505



### 53. Bootstrapping and Imputation The bootstrapping method randomly applies real residuals from the linear regression to the imputed current-period Site A values. A 1000 bootstrap runs adds a random residual to the "best guess" missing values yielding the same conditional variance as the original variable. A summary of the bootstrapping statistics is presented in Table 5, where the bootstrapping residual is -5.148082e·4• Table 5 - Bootstrapping Summary Statistics Average -5.1480820 e" SO 0.1189829967 Max 0.4526497298 Min -0.3519216842 Finally to impute the missing data using the bootstrapping residual we use the following equation, based on the linear regression from Site A vs. Site 0:
Site A concentration 

### = Intercept + x Variable * Site 0 concentration + bootstrapping residual
Where: Intercept 

### = 2.2182232761572 (from linear regression) x Variable 

### = 0.855135618643403 (from linear regression) Bootstrapping residual 

### = -5.1480820307 e-4 Site 0 concentration 

### = values in Site 0 After applying the above equation to all missing data in Site A, we recalculated the design values based on the three-year average of the annual mean concentrations for all existing years in Site A (Site 39-081-0017). Table 6 shows Site 39-081-0017 before and after the imputation of missing data. Also the "new" site (with imputed values) shows a "new" passing DVfor 2008-2010. Table 6 - Comparison Between Original and Imputed Values for the SteubenvilleWeirton area from 2004 to 2010 Annual Design Value Site Year 2004- 2005· 2006- 2007- 2008- 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 OLD 39-081-0017 15.9 16.4 13.8 16.2 14.3 12.1 12.7 15.4 15.5 14.7 14.2 13.0 NEW 39-081-0017 15.8 16.7 14.1 16.7 14.5 12.4 13.2 15.5 15.8 15.1 14.5 13.3 incomplete data (quarterwith <75% capture)


### 6

### Ohio EPA believes that the above analysis has generated the most statistically significant results yielding to the "best" missing data statistically possible. This analysis should also satisfy US EPA requirements in terms of total percentage data capture and design values underthe PM2.5

### annual standard 

### (15.0j..lg/m3).



### 7References: Brownstone, David and Robert Valleta. 2000. Draft for JEP Econometrics Symposium. "The bootstrap and multiple imputations". Harrel, Frank 

### E. Jr. 2001. Springer Series in Statistics. "Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis". Mooney, Christopher Z., Robert D. Duval, Robert Duval. 1993. Sage Publications Inc. "Bootstrapping: a nonparametric approach to statistical inference" Issues 94-95.



### 8

# Appendix F-1 Public Notice

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

### PM2.5 

### Nonattainment Area Jefferson County, Ohio 

### Notice is hereby given that the Director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) is requesting that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) revise the current air quality designation for the Ohio portion (Jefferson County) of the Steubenville-Weirton, WV-OH area, to attainment with respect to the 1997 annual PMZ.5 

### national ambient air quality standard (NAAOS). Air quality monitoring data collected between 2008 and 2010 in the region demonstrate attainment of the NAAOS 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 PMZ.5 

### standard in this area at leastten years into the future. Computer models show that eXisting state and federal emission reduction requirements are sufficient to attain and maintain the NAAOS in the Steubenville-Weirton 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 NAAOS in the Steubenville-Weirton area in the future. The Steubenville-Weirton area is currently designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual PMz.5 

### standard. As part of an acceptable maintenance plan, Ohio EPA has developed, as required, a contingency plan to provide for additional emission reductions if aviolation ofthe NAAOS is monitored afterthe area has been redesignated. The State of Ohio proposes to: 1. Request the U.S. EPA redesignate the Ohio portion of the Steubenville-Weirton, WV-OH area to attainment with respect to the 1997 annual PMZ • 5 

### NAAOS 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 sufficientto maintain the NAAOS 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 April 3, 2012 at the following address: E-mail: erica.fetty@epa.state.oh.us Mailing address: Erica Fetty Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, DAPC Lazarus Government Center P.O. Box 1049 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Phone: (614) 644-2310 Pursuant to Section 119.03 of the Ohio Revised Code, a pUblic hearing on this redesignation request will be conducted as follows: April 3, 2012 at 3:00PM Steubenville Library
- Schiappa Branch, 4141 Mall Drive, Steubenville, OH 43952. All interested persons are entitled to attend or be represented at the hearing 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 April 3, 2012 will be considered by Ohio EPA prior to final action on this redesignation. Written statements submitted after April 3, 2012 may be considered as time and circumstances permit, but will not be part ofthe 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 theweb site should be directed to Arunee Niamlarb at 614-728-1342; other questions or comments about this document should be directed to Erica Fetty at (614) 644-2310, Erica.Fetty@epa.state.oh.us or mailed to Erica Fettyatthe above address.

# Appendix F-2 Public Comments and Public Hearing Transcript

### JACKCERA StateRepresentative March 22, 2012

Erica Fetty Division ofAir Pollution Control Ohio Environmental Protections Agency Box 1049 Columbus, OH 43216-1049 RE: Requested Recognition of Improved Air Quality in Steubenville Area Dear Erica: It is my understanding that the State of Ohio will seek recognition for the improved air quality in the Steubenville-Weirton WV area from the US EPA. This letter is written in support ofthe efforts being made in this regard. According to recent information shared with my office, the Steubenville area is meeting the 1997 federal fine particulate standard. Overthe course ofthe last decade and a half, this region of the state has worked hard to improve airqualityby enforcing clean air standards set by the federal government. In turn, the monitoring and measuring of air pollutants taken overtime have dramatically improved, thus laying the groundworkforthe re-designation of air quality. This environmental change is definitely a stepping stone forthe local community. Not only is it a huge step forward in protecting the pUblic's health and contributing to climate change, it is also a win-win forthe community as a place that is more appealing to business ventures, new and old alike. The changes made will help ensure a more promising future forthe next generation. With all these positive attributes in mind, I am wholeheartedly supportive ofthe State's efforts in seeking this re-designation. Sincerely,

# JCK~ S te Representative th House District JC/PDW

Committees: Agriculture andNatnral Resources Financial Institutions, Housingand

Urban Development PublicUtilities www.house.state.oh.us 77 S. High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215-6111 ContactInformation: Office: 614-466-3735 Toll-Free: 1-800-282-0253 FAX: 614-719-6995 Email: district95@ohr.state.oh.us

### BEFORE THE OHIO EPA

IN RE: Redesignation Particulate Matter 2.5 Steubenville Area

Public Hearing before Moderator Mary McCarron, taken at the Steubenville Library

- Schiappa Branch, 414 Mall Drive, Steubenville, Ohio, at 3:00 p.m. on April 3, 2012.2 

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

### 2 MODERATOR McCARRON: Today's date is 3 April 3, 2012. My name is Mary McCarron, and I'm 4 presiding over today's hearing. 5 The State of Ohio plans to ask U.S. EPA 6 to officially recognize the air quality in the 7 Steubenville-Weirton, West Virginia area meets 8 the 1997 federal fine particulate standard. 9 At this time there is nobody present to 10 provide testimony, so we will go off the record 11 for a half an hour. 12 13 

### (Break taken until 3:30.) MODERATOR McCARRON: The time is now 14 3:30 p.m., and we will end this hearing. 15 16 

### 17 

### * * * (Thereupon, the hearing was adjourned at 18 3:30 p.m., on April 3, 2012.) 19 20 21 22 

### 23 243 

### 1 C E R T I FIe ATE 2

- - - 

### 3 STATE OF OHIO SS: 4 COUNTY OF FRANKLIN 5 

### I, Jennifer L. parish, Registered 6 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify that the 7 

### foregoing is a true, correct, and complete 8 transcription of the above-mentioned audiotaped 9 

### public hearing before the Ohio Environmental 10 Protection Agency to the best of my ability. 11 12 13 14 15 

### 16 17 

### DATED this 16th day of April, 2012.

JENNIFER L. PARISH, RPR NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF OHIO

18 My Commission Expires: November 23, 2012. 19 

### 20 21 22 

### 23 24