Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0083-0684
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-09-02T04:00Z

Michigan
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
Recommended
Attainment/
Nonattainment
Boundaries
in
Michigan
for
the
8­
Hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
Steven
E.
Chester
Director
July
15,
2003
Page
1
Recommended
Attainment/
Nonattainment
Boundaries
in
Michigan
for
the
8­
Hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
2000­
2002
Design
Value
Designated
Area
Designation
Parts
per
million
(
ppm)

Southeast
Michigan
.088
Wayne
County
Nonattainment
Oakland
County
Nonattainment
Macomb
County
Nonattainment
St.
Clair
County
Nonattainment
Livingston
County
Nonattainment
Washtenaw
County
Nonattainment
Monroe
County
Nonattainment
Genesee/
Lapeer
.084
Genesee
County
Attainment
Lapeer
County
Attainment
Lenawee
.085
Lenawee
County
Nonattainment
Cass
.090
Cass
County
Nonattainment
Berrien
.087
Berrien
County
Nonattainment
Muskegon
.089
Muskegon
County
Nonattainment
Ottawa
.085
Ottawa
County
Nonattainment
Allegan
.092
Allegan
County
Nonattainment
Grand
Rapids
.082
Kent
County
Attainment
Mason
.087
Mason
County
Nonattainment
Benzie
.086
Benzie
County
Nonattainment
All
other
counties
Attainment
Page
2
Recommended
8­
Hour
Ozone
Designations
(
2000/
2001/
2002)

Nonattainment
­
Wayne,
Oakland,
Macomb,
St.
Clair,
Livingston,
Washtenaw,
Monroe,
Lenawee,
Cass,
Berrien,
Allegan,
Ottawa,
Muskegon,
Mason,
Benzie
Attainment
­
Kent,
Genesee,
Lapeer
Attainment
­
All
other
counties
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor­
Flint
CMSA
Wayne,
Oakland,
Macomb,
St.
Clair,
Livingston,
Washtenaw,
Monroe,
Lenawee,
Lapeer,
Genesee
Triangle
=
monitoring
site
Figure
1
Recommended
8­
hour
Ozone
Designations
NOTE:
A
Michigan
map
with
all
county
names
listed
is
provided
on
Page
40.
Page
3
Recommended
Attainment/
Nonattainment
Boundaries
In
Michigan
for
the
8­
Hour
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
Introduction
In
July
1997,
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
promulgated
a
new
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
(
NAAQS)
for
ozone,
referred
to
as
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard.
The
federal
Clean
Air
Act
requires
the
EPA
to
seek
recommendations
from
the
states'
governors
for
initial
designations
of
the
attainment
status
for
all
areas
of
the
states
when
a
new
or
revised
standard
is
promulgated.

The
states
are
also
asked
to
provide
recommendations
for
the
appropriate
boundaries
of
all
nonattainment
areas.
The
EPA
guidance
on
boundary
selection
identifies
the
boundaries
of
the
metropolitan
statistical
area
(
MSA)
or
consolidated
metropolitan
statistical
area
(
CMSA),
as
defined
by
the
U.
S.
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB),
Census
Bureau,
as
the
p
resumptive
nonattainment
area.
Generally,
an
MSA
is
a
core
area
with
a
substantial
population,
plus
nearby
communities
maintaining
a
large
economic
and
social
integration
with
the
core
community.
State
recommendations
that
deviate
from
an
MSA
or
CMSA
boundary
must
provide
an
a
nalysis
of
local
factors,
such
as
location
relative
to
the
urban
core,
amount
of
emissions,
population,
and
prevailing
meteorology.

The
EPA
will
review
and
either
affirm
the
states'
recommendations
or
make
modifications
as
determined
to
be
necessary.
Final
promulgation
of
designations
is
to
occur
by
April
15,
2004,
in
accordance
with
a
consent
agreement
between
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Justice
and
several
environmental
advocacy
groups.

This
report
provides
the
basis
for
recommendations
of
attainment/
nonattainment
designations
and
boundaries
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
for
all
areas
in
the
state
of
Michigan.
The
Michigan
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
(
MDEQ)
has
considered
the
input
of
local
communities
and
organizations.
The
Southeast
Michigan
Council
of
Governments
(
SEMCOG)
and
the
Genesee
County
Metropolitan
Planning
Commission
(
GCMPC)
have
provided
much
of
the
analysis
for
the
Southeast
Michigan
area.

Analysis
The
8­
hour
ozone
designations
are
to
be
based
on
the
design
values
(
the
average
of
the
fourth
highest
values
from
each
three
consecutive
years
of
data
at
each
monitor)
calculated
from
observations
from
the
most
recent
three­
year
period
of
record.
The
ozone
design
value
for
an
entire
region
is
derived
by
the
measurements
of
whichever
monitor
in
the
region
has
the
highest
ozone
values.
State
recommendations
are
to
be
based
on
the
period
2000­
2002,
whereas
the
EPA
indicates
that
a
different
data
set,
2001­
2003,
will
be
the
basis
of
the
EPA's
final
nonattainment
determinations.
Page
4
Design
values
in
violation
of
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
have
been
recorded
in
Southeast
Michigan,
Cass
County,
and
the
West
Michigan
counties
bordering
Lake
Michigan
with
monitors.

As
mentioned
previously,
the
EPA
presumes
that
nonattainment
area
designations
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
sta
ndard
reflect
the
MSA
or
CMSA
to
incorporate
not
only
the
areas
of
measured
violations,
but
also
the
contributing
nearby
emission
source
areas.
Recommendations
that
vary
from
the
presumption
must
be
supported
with
an
analysis
considering
the
following
eleven
factors:

·
Emissions
and
air
quality
in
adjacent
areas
(
including
adjacent
C/
MSAs).

·
Population
density
and
degree
of
urbanization,
including
commercial
development
(
significant
difference
from
surrounding
areas).

·
Monitoring
data
representing
ozone
concentrations
in
local
areas
and
larger
areas
(
urban
or
regional).

·
Location
of
emission
sources
(
emission
sources
and
nearby
receptors
should
generally
be
included
in
the
same
nonattainment
area).

·
Traffic
and
commuting
patterns.

·
Expected
growth
(
including
extent,
pattern,
and
rate
of
growth).

·
Meteorology
(
weather/
transport
patterns).

·
Geography­
topography
(
mountain
ranges
or
other
air
basin
boundaries).

·
Jurisdictional
boundaries
(
e.
g.,
counties,
air
districts,
existing
1­
hour
nonattainment
areas,
Reservations,
etc.).

·
Level
of
control
of
emission
sources.

·
Regional
emission
reductions
(
e.
g.,
nitrogen
oxides
(
NOx)
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)
call
or
other
enforceable
regional
strategies).

New
Metropolitan
and
Micropolitan
Statistical
Area
Definitions
On
June
6,
2003,
the
OMB
established
revised
definitions
of
MSAs,
new
definitions
for
Micropolitan
Statistical
Areas
(
MiSAs)
and
Combined
Statistical
Areas
(
CSAs),
and
provided
guidance
on
uses
of
the
statistical
definitions
of
these
areas.

The
new
OMB
definitions
resulted
in
the
listing
of
two
large
CSAs
in
Michigan,
one
in
Southeast
Michigan
and
one
in
West
Michigan.
These
CSAs
are
comprised
of
new
MSAs
and
MiSAs
with
counties
grouped
differently
than
in
the
last
2000
Census
update.
Four
counties
have
been
newly
identified
for
inclusion
in
MSAs:
Barry,
Ionia,
Newaygo,
and
Cass.

The
former
four
­
county
Grand
Rapids
MSA
consisting
of
Kent,
Ottawa,
Allegan,
and
Muskegon
counties
is
changed
dramatically,
with
four
separate
MSAs
and
one
MiSA.
The
Grand
Rapids­
Wyoming
MSA
now
consists
of
Kent,
Barry,
Ionia,
and
Newaygo
counties.
The
Muskegon­
Norton
Shores
MSA
includes
only
Muskegon
County;
the
Holland­
Grand
Haven
MSA
includes
only
Ottawa
County,
and
the
Allegan
MiSA
is
comprised
of
Allegan
County.

The
former
ten­
county
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor­
Flint
CMSA
is
now
four
MSAs
and
one
MiSA.
The
Detroit­
Warren­
Livonia
MSA
is
subdivided
into
two
Metropolitan
Divisions.
The
Warren­
Farmington
Hills
­
Troy
Metropolitan
Subdivision
consists
of
the
counties
of
Page
5
St.
Clair,
Oakland,
Macomb,
Livingston,
and
Lapeer.
The
Detroit­
Livonia­
Dearborn
Metropolitan
Division
includes
only
Wayne
County.
The
Flint
MSA
includes
only
Genesee
County,
the
Ann
Arbor
MSA
includes
only
Washtenaw
County,
the
Monroe
MSA
includes
only
Monroe
County,
and
the
Adrian
MiSA
is
Lenawee
County.

The
MDEQ
has
considered
the
new
grouping
in
the
recommendations
of
nonattainment
areas
for
Michigan.
The
new
MSA
delineations
are
especially
appropriate
for
application
in
West
Michigan
ozone
transport
impacted
counties.

Ozone
Transport
Although
the
EPA
has
long
recognized
that
air
quality
in
West
Michigan
is
impacted
by
overwhelming
ozone
transport
and
local
emission
reductions
cannot
bring
about
attainment
with
the
ozone
standard,
the
EPA
maintains
that
nonattainment
designations
for
these
counties
are
appropriate.
See
Figures
4
through
11
beginning
on
page
11.
The
rationale
provided
by
the
EPA
for
this
position
is
that
designations
provide
the
public
with
important
information
on
the
air
quality
in
their
area.

Designations,
however,
are
legal
distinctions
that
drive
emission
reduction
requirements,
not
public
information
tools.
Designations
very
frequently
do
not
reflect
actual
air
quality
status.
A
single
violating
monitor
in
a
MSA
or
CMSA
results
in
a
nonattainment
designation
for
the
entire
area
even
if
all
other
monitors
in
the
area
measure
attainment
levels
of
ozone.
Additionally,
designating
an
area
as
nonattainment
is
a
simple
process,
whereas
changing
that
designation
to
attainment
is
not.
Redesignation
to
attainment
is
a
huge
undertaking
demanding
many
resources
and
a
lengthy
process
that
can
take
years.
An
area
maintains
an
erroneous
designation
throughout
those
years,
thus
providing
misleading
information
to
the
public
on
actual
exposure
to
excessive
levels
of
ozone.
There
are
many
better
informed
mechanisms
in
place
for
providing
accurate
and
timely
air
quality
status
to
the
public,
such
as
the
MDEQ
web
site
with
near
real
time
ozone
levels
reported
hourly,
OzoneAction!
Day
programs,
and
the
Air
Quality
Index.

Although
nonattainment
designations
for
the
West
Michigan
ozone
transport
receptor
region
are
inappropriate,
the
MDEQ
recommendations
are
consistent
with
the
EPA's
interpretation
of
required
designations
of
nonattainment
for
counties
with
monitors
recording
violations
of
the
NAAQS.
However,
it
would
be
appropriate
for
the
EPA
to
limit
the
regulatory
mandates
required
for
this
transport
receptor
region
through
options
for
flexibility
in
its
upcoming
ozone
implementation
rule.
Page
6
West
Michigan
Monitors
sited
in
the
Lake
Michigan
coastal
counties
of
Berrien,
Allegan,
Ottawa,
Muskegon,
Mason,
and
Benzie
are
all
measuring
levels
of
ozone
that
violate
the
8
­
hour
ozone
standard.
In
addition,
ozone
levels
in
Cass
County,
an
inland
county,
violate
the
standard.
The
MDEQ
is
recommending
that
the
Muskegon­
Norton
Shores
MSA,
consisting
of
Muskegon
County,
be
designated
nonattainment.
See
Figure
2,
page
9.
The
MDEQ
is
also
recommending
the
Holland­
Grand
Haven
MSA,
consisting
of
Ottawa
County,
be
designated
as
nonattainment;
and
that
the
Allegan
Micropolitan
Statistical
Area,
consisting
of
Allegan
County,
be
designated
as
nonattainment.
These
three
counties,
Muskegon,
Ottawa,
and
Allegan,
should
be
independent
nonattainment
areas,
which
will
allow
for
greater
flexibility
in
control
program
mandates
due
to
highly
disparate
design
values.
The
counties
of
Cass,
Berrien,
Mason,
and
Benzie
should
be
independent
nonattainment
areas,
as
well.
See
Figure
2,
page
9.

Recommendation
of
Attainment
for
the
Grand
Rapids
MSA
Kent
County
should
be
designated
attainment.
The
two
monitors
in
Kent
County
are
measuring
attainment
levels
of
ozone
.
Although
Grand
Rapids
is
the
principle
city
with
the
highest
emission
levels,
population,
and
vehicle
miles
traveled
in
the
entire
West
Michigan
region,
violations
of
the
standard
are
not
occurring
at
the
downtown
and
downwind
monitors.
Kent
County
is
further
inland
from
Lake
Michigan;
therefore,
ozone
levels
are
lower
despite
higher
emissions
of
ozone
precursors.
Kent
County
is
also
not
causing
nonattainment
conditions
in
downwind
communities.
The
monitor
in
Houghton
Lake,
which
may
be
considered
downwind
under
prevailing
wind
conditions
,
is
attaining
the
NAAQS.
The
MDEQ
believes
that
the
overwhelming
ozone
transport
phenomenon
occurring
in
the
Lake
Michigan
region
should
be
differentiated
from
the
regional
ozone
transport
that
is
experienced
elsewhere
in
the
country.
The
degree
of
ozone
transport
impact
on
coastal
monitors
a
few
miles
from
the
water's
edge
is
truly
overwhelming
.
West
Michigan's
transport
occurs
as
distinct
plume
that
grows
in
intensity,
despite
the
lack
of
added
emissions,
as
the
air
mass
travels
across
the
lake.
The
widespread,
diffuse
regional
transport
that
is
considered
to
be
background
ozone
experienced
throughout
the
eastern
United
States
adds
to
the
huge
local
loading
of
pollution
in
large
cities,
as
seen
in
the
Northeast
where
population
densities
are
extremely
high.
Local
emission
reductions
occurring
downwind
from
the
violating
monitors
in
West
Michigan
have
been
shown
to
be
ineffective
in
reducing
the
design
values.
The
MDEQ
recommends
a
designation
of
attainment
for
Kent
County,
and
the
three
new
counties
in
the
newly
defined
Grand
Rapids
MSA.
See
Figure
3,
page
10.
The
outlying
counties
barely
q
ualified
for
inclusion
in
the
MSA
with
commuting
levels
slightly
above
the
25%
threshold.
Barry
County
is
at
25.8%,
Ionia
County
is
at
26.6%,
and
Newaygo
County
is
at
26.7%.
These
three
new
counties
do
not
have
ozone
monitors,
and
emissions
and
population
numbers
are
low.

Justification
for
the
Exclusion
of
Cass
from
the
South­
Bend­
Mishawaka
MSA
The
county
of
Cass
is
part
of
the
South
Bend­
Mishawaka
MSA;
however,
it
is
the
downwind
county
that
will
experience
air
quality
improvements
as
reductions
are
made
in
the
more
urbanized
upwind
region.
Only
5,002
Cass
County
residents
 
less
than
10%
of
the
county's
population
 
live
in
the
South
Bend
urbanized
area.
Fewer
than
Page
7
15%
of
Cass
County's
workers
commute
to
Saint
Joseph
County,
Indiana.
However,
Cass
County
qualifies
as
a
central
county
of
the
South
Bend
MSA
because
it
meets
the
criterion
of
having
at
least
5,000
residents
in
a
single
urban
area
of
at
least
10,000
population.
The
South
Bend
urbanized
area
surpasses
the
50,000
population
threshold,
so
its
associated
counties
are
metropolitan
rather
than
micropolitan.
Because
of
the
low
population
density,
low
commuting
patterns
within
the
MSA,
separate
state
governments
and
SIPs,
and
the
prevailing
winds
from
the
southwest,
Cass
County
should
be
excluded
from
the
South
Bend
Mishawaka
MSA,
and
be
designated
as
an
independent
nonattainment
area.

Recommendation
of
Separate
Nonattainment
Areas
for
Benzie
and
Mason
Counties
Benzie
and
Mason
counties
are
located
on
the
western
shore
of
Lake
Michigan.
These
counties
are
subjected
to
overwhelming
transport
of
ozone
over
Lake
Michigan
from
the
southwest.
As
shown
in
Table
1
below,
these
counties
have
a
very
low
population,
and
very
few
sources
of
VOC
and
NOx
emissions.
For
these
reasons,
Michigan
is
recommending
these
counties
be
designated
as
separate
nonattainment
areas.

Table
1
West
Michigan
Population
County
1990
Census
Estimated
2000
Allegan
90,509
102,600
Kent
500,631
553,500
Muskegon
158,983
166,400
Ottawa
187,768
229,800
Barry
50,057
54,600
Ionia
57,024
61,300
Newaygo
38,206
46,600
Berrien
161,378
162,300
Cass
49,477
49,800
Mason
25,537
27,300
Benzie
12,200
14,500
Office
of
State
Demographer:
Michigan
Information
Center,
January
1996
Page
8
Table
2
NOx
Emissions
(
Tons/
Yr)
County
Point
Area
Non­
road
On­
road
Total
%
of
Total
Allegan
934.82
573.40
1348.10
4680.73
7537.05
7
%
Kent
1133.67
3124.08
4514.99
15982.09
24754.83
24
%
Muskegon
6781.08
859.80
1665.98
4701.03
14007.89
14
%
Ottawa
36680.13
132.03
2304.79
7795.32
47912.26
47
%
Barry
21.42
219.10
434.03
1368.40
2042.94
2
%
Ionia
38.22
215.53
580.41
2652.03
3486.19
3
%
Newaygo
46.01
279.42
288.87
1127.59
1741.88
2
%
TOTAL
45635.35
6403.35
11137.17
38307.18
101483.05
100
%

Table
3
VOC
Emissions
(
Tons/
Yr)
County
Point
Area
Non­
road
On­
road
Total
%
of
Total
Allegan
1729.63
3780.12
1882.94
2551.83
9944.51
12
%
Kent
4506.39
15318.71
3862.95
12259.31
35947.36
44
%
Muskegon
656.18
4307.07
1739.97
3322.44
10025.67
12
%
Ottawa
1640.27
5882.60
2484.41
5085.62
15092.89
19
%
Barry
89.53
1774.19
710.30
771.85
3345.87
4
%
Ionia
109.51
1970.81
476.33
1371.10
3927.75
5
%
Newaygo
124.11
1656.61
498.68
612.042
2891.82
4
%
TOTAL
8855.62
34690.10
11655.58
25974.56
81175.87
100
%

*
Non­
road
and
On­
road
emissions
totals
taken
from
EPA
Final
1999
NEI,
Ver.
2.
Posted
November
2002.
Area
emission
totals
taken
from
EPA
Draft
1999
NEI,
Ver.
3.
Posted
March
2003.
Point
emissions
totals
taken
from
MDEQ
MAERS
1999
Point
Source
Inventory.
Page
9
Recommended
8­
Hour
Ozone
Nonattainment
Areas
in
West
Michigan
Muskegon­
Norton
Shores
MSA*
°
Muskegon
Holland­
Grand
Haven
MSA*
°
Ottawa
Allegan
Micropolitan
Statiscial
Area*
°
Allegan
Benzie
Mason
Cass
Berrien
Figure
2
Recommended
8­
hour
Ozone
Nonattainment
Areas
in
West
Michigan
Page
10
Recommended
8­
hour
Ozone
Attainment
Area
Grand
Rapids
MSA*

°
Newaygo
°
Kent
°
Ionia
°
Barry
Figure
3
Recommended
8­
hour
Ozone
Attainment
Area
Page
11
Prevailing
Winds
Demonstrating
Transport
into
West
Michigan
Ozone
roses
depict
the
correlation
between
wind
direction
and
elevated
ozone
concentrations
(
above
70
parts
per
billion
[
pbb])
at
several
West
Michigan
monitoring
sites.
The
roses
show
that
these
sites
observe
the
highest
ozone
concentrations
when
the
wind
is
out
of
the
southwest.

Figure
4
Holland
2001
Page
12
Figure
5
Holland
2002
Page
13
Figure
6
Jenison
2001
Page
14
Figure
7
Jenison
2002
Page
15
Figure
8
Grand
Rapids
2001
Page
16
Figure
9
Grand
Rapids
2002
Page
17
Figure
10
Evans
2001
Page
18
Figure
11
Evans
2002
Page
19
Southeast
Michigan
A
nonattainment
designation
for
Southeast
Michigan
area
is
warranted.
The
MDEQ
recommends
that
the
nonattainment
area
boundaries
for
the
for
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
remain
the
same
seven
counties
of
Wayne,
Oakland,
Macomb,
St.
Clair,
Livingston,
Washtenaw,
and
Monroe
that
comprise
the
current
1­
hour
ozone
attainment
area.
These
counties
also
coincide
with
the
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
(
MPO)
boundaries
for
the
region.
The
existing
jurisdictional
boundaries
for
the
MPO,
SEMCOG,
for
air
quality
and
transportation
planning
should
not
be
altered
at
this
time.
Past
air
quality
planning
has
been
effective
in
this
region
with
the
existing
boundary.
The
Southeast
Michigan
area
was
one
of
the
first
major
metropolitan
areas
to
reach
attainment
of
the
1­
hour
ozone
standard.
A
new
ambient
air
quality
standard
already
requires
extensive
work
for
states
and
local
areas.
There
is
no
compelling
reason
to
further
burden
the
MPOs
with
the
added
complications
inherent
in
expanding
boundaries.
The
State
of
Michigan
can
require
ozone
precursor
controls
on
sources
outside
of
nonattainment
areas,
if
needed,
except
in
cases
where
there
is
a
federal
prohibition.

The
other
three
counties
in
the
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor­
Flint
CMSA,
Genesee,
Lapeer,
and
Lenawee,
should
be
designated
separately.
Page
20
8­
Hour
Ozone
Designation
Recommendations
for
the
Southeast
Michigan
Consolidated
Metropolitan
Statistical
Area
(
CMSA)

Wayne
Monroe
Lenawee
Washtenaw
Oakland
Livingston
Macomb
St.
Clair
Genesee
Lapeer
SEMCOG
Region
Map
1
1999
Consolidated
Metropolitan
Statistical
Area
for
Southeast
Michigan
Page
21
Monitor
>
than
0.08
ppm
Attainment
Nonattainment
Nonattainment
Wayne
Monroe
Lenawee
Washtenaw
Oakland
Livingston
Macomb
St.
Clair
Genesee
Lapeer
Monitor
<
than
0.08
ppm
Note:
Based
on
monitoring
data
for
2000,
2001,
and
2002.
Map
2
Recommended
8­
Hour
Ozone
Designations
for
the
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
Tecumseh
Ypsilanti
Allen
Park
Linwood
East
Seven
Mile
New
Haven
Port
Huron
Otisville
Flint
Oak
Park
Warren
Page
22
Counties
Outside
the
1999
CMSA
The
EPA
should
not
include
any
counties
outside
of
the
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
in
its
8­
hour
ozone
designation.
Because
the
surrounding
counties
either
have
differing
meteorological
conditions
or
a
much
smaller
population
and
urban
area
than
Detroit,
these
surrounding
counties
have
very
few
connections
to
Southeast
Michigan,
both
in
terms
of
air
quality
management
or
transportation
planning.

Justification
for
the
Exclusion
of
Lenawee
County
Lenawee
County,
located
upwind
of
the
Detroit
area,
is
mostly
rural
in
character
and
contributes
little
to
the
emissions
of
the
Detroit
region.
The
Tecumseh
monitor
in
Lenawee
County,
has
a
2000­
2002
design
value
of
.085,
so
a
nonattainment
designation
is
recommended.
However,
the
MDEQ
strongly
urges
EPA
to
designate
Lenawee
County
as
a
separate
nonattainment
area
from
the
seven­
county
recommended
nonattainment
boundary
for
Southeast
Michigan
(
see
Map
2,
page
21).
Lenawee
County
is
likely
to
reach
attainment
levels
of
ozone
long
before
the
Detroit
region
and
it
should
not
be
burdened
with
a
nonattainment
designation
long
after
the
county
meets
the
standard,
as
it
would
be
if
included
in
the
Southeast
Michigan
nonattainment
area.
Furthermore,
Lenawee
County
is
no
longer
even
considered
part
of
the
2000
Combined
Statistical
Area
for
Southeast
Michigan,
according
to
the
U.
S.
Census.
Existing
MPO
boundaries
in
Southeast
Michigan
also
need
to
be
considered,
since
Lenawee
County
is
not
part
of
the
existing
SEMCOG
MPO
boundary.

Emissions
and
air
quality
Lenawee
County
comprises
only
1.2%
and
2.1%
of
the
total
NOx
and
volatile
organic
compound
(
VOC)
emissions,
respectively,
in
the
Southeast
Michigan
1999
CMSA
(
Tables
4
and
5,
page
28).
There
is
no
evidence
that
reducing
Lenawee
County's
small
emissions
contribution
will
reduce
8­
hour
ozone
violations
in
the
Detroit
area.
Violations
of
8­
hour
ozone
in
Lenawee
County,
which
is
located
upwind
of
the
Detroit
area,
are
likely
due
to
ozone
transport.

Population
density
and
degree
of
urbanization
including
commercial
development
The
2000
population
density
of
Lenawee
County
is
low
at
131.8
persons
per
square
mile
(
Table
6,
page
29).
This
is
significantly
different
than
Monroe
County,
which
is
adjacent
to
Lenawee,
and
has
a
population
density
of
264.8
persons
per
square
mile.
In
addition,
the
2000
population
of
Lenawee
County
represents
only
1.8%
of
the
total
Southeast
Michigan
1999
CMSA
population
(
Table
7,
page
29).
The
largest
metropolitan
area
in
Lenawee
County
is
the
city
of
Adrian,
which
has
21,574
people
according
to
the
2000
U.
S.
Census.

Lenawee
County
is
not
very
urbanized.
More
than
half
of
the
population
resides
in
the
rural
area
(
Table
8a,
page
30).
In
addition,
forest
and
farmla
nd
account
for
81%
of
the
land
use
according
to
the
Natural
Resource
Conservation
Service.
Page
23
Monitoring
data
There
is
one
ozone
monitor
in
Lenawee
County
in
the
city
of
Tecumseh,
which
has
a
2000­
2002
design
value
of
.085
(
Table
9,
page
30).
This
monitor
was
placed
there
for
the
sole
purpose
of
measuring
upwind
ozone
concentrations
for
the
Detroit
area.
Since
1990,
the
Tecumseh
monitor
has
recorded
only
two
violations
of
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard,
one
in
the
1994­
1996
period,
and
the
other
in
the
2000­
2002
period.
Because
this
monitor
is
upwind
of
the
Detroit
area
in
a
county
that
is
mostly
rural
in
character,
ozone
transport
is
likely
the
reason
for
high
ozone
levels
at
the
Tecumseh
site.
Therefore,
Lenawee
County's
control
strategy
will
likely
be
much
different
than
that
of
the
Detroit
area.

Location
of
emission
sources
There
are
only
two
major
stationary
sources
of
NOx
emissions
in
Lenawee
County
(
Map
3,
page
37).
Surrounding
counties
in
the
CMSA
have
at
least
double
that
amount.
(
A
map
of
VOC
emissions
is
not
available
because
VOC
emissions
are
not
specified
into
particular
grid
cells
in
the
DEQ's
photochemical
modeling
process.)

Traffic
and
commuting
patterns
Lenawee
County
contributes
only
2%
and
1.6%
of
NOx
and
VOC
on­
road
mobile
emissions
in
the
total
CMSA
(
Tables
4
and
5,
page
28).
The
vehicle
miles
traveled
(
VMT)
in
Lenawee
County
is
projected
to
increase
by
28.5%
from
2000
to
2025,
a
rate
of
1.1%
per
year.
By
2025,
only
1.8%
of
the
CMSA's
total
VMT
will
be
attributed
to
Lenawee
County
(
Table
10,
page
31).

According
to
the
county­
to­
county
worker
flow
data
from
the
2000
U.
S.
Census,
a
small
percentage
of
Lenawee
County's
workers,
21.8%,
commute
to
the
seven­
county
SEMCOG
region.
These
workers
comprise
only
0.5%
of
the
work
force
in
the
sevencounty
SEMCOG
region
(
Table
11a,
page
32).

Expected
growth
Little
growth
occurred
from
1990
 
2000
in
Lenawee
County
and
little
growth
is
expected
in
future
years,
both
in
terms
of
population
and
employment.
From
1990­
2000,
the
rate
of
population
g
rowth
was
0.74%
per
year
(
Table
7,
page
29).
From
2000
to
2020,
the
population
of
Lenawee
County
will
increase
by
6.9%,
a
reduction
in
the
rate
of
growth
to
0.33%
per
year
(
Table
12a,
page
33).
Like
the
population
projections,
employment
projections
show
an
increase
of
only
7.2%
from
2000
to
2020,
a
rate
of
0.34%
per
year
(
See
Table
13,
page
34).

Meteorology
As
shown
in
the
wind
rose
for
Detroit
on
page
35,
Lenawee
County's
dominant
summer
winds
are
from
the
south
and
southwest.
Detroit
is
not
contributing
to
Lenawee
County's
nonattainment
problem,
and
given
the
information
listed
in
these
factors,
Lenawee
County
is
not
a
significant
contributor
to
Detroit's
nonattainment
problem.
Therefore,
including
them
in
the
same
designation
boundary
is
not
recommended.

High
ozone
concentrations
in
the
Detroit
area
occur
downwind
of
Lenawee
County
when
winds
are
from
the
southwest.
These
winds
transport
ozone
precursors
over
Page
24
Lakes
Erie,
Huron,
and
St.
Clair,
where
ozone
forms
in
the
sunlight.
It
is
a
common
occurrence
for
the
winds
to
turn
southeasterly,
creating
a
lake
effect,
and
pushing
high
ozone
concentrations
onshore.
This
lake
effect
ozone
is
typically
measured
at
the
Detroit
urban
monitors,
and
the
downwind
monitors
in
New
Haven
and
Port
Huron.

Geography/
topography
There
are
no
mountain
ranges,
air
basins,
or
significant
lake
effects
that
need
to
be
considered
in
Lenawee
County.

Jurisdictional
boundaries
Lenawee
County
is
not
a
part
of
SEMCOG's
planning
boundary
or
the
1­
hour
ozone
attainment
boundary.
Including
Lenawee
County
in
the
seven­
county
recommended
nonattainment
area,
that
is,
the
SEMCOG
region,
would
unnecessarily
complicate
transportation
planning
and
conformity
analyses
and
provide
little
air
quality
benefit
for
the
Detroit
area
and
Lenawee
County.
The
coordination
of
work
between
SEMCOG
and
the
Jackson
MPO,
of
which
Lenawee
County
is
a
member,
would
be
an
enormous
undertaking
with
minimal
air
quality
benefit
because
Lenawee
County
is
neither
a
major
contributor
to
Detroit's
emissions
nor
a
major
receptor
of
Detroit's
emissions.

Another
item
to
note
is
that
neither
Lenawee
County
nor
any
of
the
other
surrounding
counties
in
the
Detroit
region
will
be
ignored
when
planning
for
the
new
air
quality
standards.
When
evaluating
ozone
levels
in
the
Detroit
region,
the
Tecumseh
monitor
in
Lenawee
County
is
always
involved
in
order
to
gain
a
better
understanding
of
upwind
ozone
concentrations.
Furthermore,
as
stated
earlier,
the
State
of
Michigan
can
require
emission
reductions
outside
the
nonattainment
area
if
needed.

Level
of
control
of
emission
sources
The
State
of
Michigan
has
historically
applied
many
air
quality
rules
statewide.
The
State
of
Michigan
can
require
ozone
precursor
controls
on
sources
outside
of
nonattainment
areas,
if
needed,
except
in
cases
where
there
is
a
federal
prohibition.
State
rules
for
Reasonably
Available
Control
Technology
are
applicable
statewide.

Regional
emission
reductions
All
major
NOx
sources
in
the
1999
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
are
subject
to
NOx
SIP
call
requirements.

Justification
for
the
Exclusion
of
Genesee
and
Lapeer
Counties
Both
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties
are
located
northwest
of
Detroit.
Genesee
County's
current
1­
hour
ozone
designation
boundary
should
be
expanded
to
include
Lapeer
County,
which
is
experiencing
relatively
high
growth
in
both
population
and
VMT.
However,
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties
should
be
designated
separately
from
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region
(
Map
2,
page
21)
for
the
following
reasons:

·
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties
neither
receive
significant
emissions
from
the
Detroit
region,
nor
contribute
significant
emissions
to
the
Detroit
region,
and
·
Existing
MPO
and
1­
hour
ozone
designation
boundaries
already
in
existence
for
Genesee
County
and
the
Detroit
region
should
not
be
altered.
Page
25
Emissions
and
air
quality
Together
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties
contribute
7.2%
and
11.5%
of
the
total
NOx
and
VOC
emissions,
respectively,
in
the
1999
CMSA
(
Tables
4
and
5,
page
28).
Because
prevailing
winds
in
this
area
are
from
the
southwest,
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region
is
not
a
major
contributor
of
emissions
to
the
Genesee/
Lapeer
area
and
vice
versa.

Population
density
and
degree
of
urbanization
including
commercial
development
The
population
density
of
Genesee
County
is
moderately
high
at
681.9
persons
per
square
mile,
but
the
population
of
Genesee
County
comprises
only
8%
of
the
total
1999
CMSA
population
(
Table
6
and
Table
7,
page
29).
Forty­
five
point
eight
percent
(
45.8%)
of
Genesee
County's
population
resides
in
the
urban
area
(
Table
8c,
page
30).

According
to
the
2000
U.
S.
Census,
Genesee
County
is
the
2000
Flint
MSA,
and
a
majority
of
the
county
is
urbanized
area
as
shown
in
Map
3,
page
37.
The
urbanized
area
for
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region
is
shown
in
Map
4,
page
38.
The
Detroit
urbanized
area
does
have
outlying
areas
that
are
close
to
Genesee
County,
but
the
urbanized
area
is
centered
around
Detroit.

Lapeer
County
is
a
rural
area.
It
has
a
low
population
density
of
134.4
persons
per
square
mile
and
comprises
only
1.6%
of
the
total
1999
CMSA
population
(
Tables
6
and
7,
page
29).
Only
23.9%
of
the
population
lives
in
the
urban
area
(
Table
8b,
page
30).
Lapeer
County
is
expected
to
grow
in
future
years,
however,
as
discussed
later
in
this
analysis.

Monitoring
data
Genesee
County
has
two
ozone
monitors;
one
is
in
Flint
and
the
other
is
in
Otisville.
The
Flint
and
Otisville
monitors
are
measuring
attainment
of
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
with
a
design
value
of
.084
for
2000­
2002
(
Table
9,
page
30).
If
the
design
value
of
the
2001­
2003
ozone
data
is
above
the
standard,
then
a
nonattainment
designation
is
recommended.
The
issue
is
not
whether
an
attainment
or
nonattainment
designation
is
given
for
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties,
but
that
they
should
be
given
separate
designations
from
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region.

There
are
no
ozone
monitors
in
Lapeer
County.

Location
of
emission
sources
Thirteen
major
stationary
sources
of
NOx
emissions
are
located
in
Genesee
County.
Most
of
these
facilities
are
located
in
the
central
and
northern
portion
of
the
county
and
are
thus
fairly
removed
from
the
seven­
county
area.

There
are
only
four
major
stationary
sources
of
NOx
emissions
in
Lapeer
County.

Traffic
and
commuting
patterns
Genesee
County
contributes
9.4%
and
9.3%
of
the
NOx
and
VOC
on­
road
mobile
emissions,
respectively,
in
the
1999
CMSA
(
Tables
4
and
5,
page
28).
The
VMT
is
Page
26
projected
to
increase
by
29.1%
from
2000
to
2025,
a
stable
rate
of
1.1%
per
year.
By
2025,
Genesee
County
is
expected
to
account
for
9.5%
of
the
total
VMT
in
the
1999
CMSA
(
Table
10,
page
31).
The
county­
to­
county
worker
flow
data
shows
that
only
16.3%
of
Genesee
County's
workers
commute
to
the
seven­
county
recommended
nonattainment
area.
This
represents
a
mere
1.4%
of
the
workers
i
n
the
seven­
county
area
(
Table
11a,
page
32).

Lapeer
County
contributes
2.7%
and
1.9%
of
the
on­
road
mobile
NOx
and
VOC
emissions,
respectively,
in
the
1999
CMSA
(
Tables
4
and
5,
page
28).
The
2000­
2025
projection
of
VMT
growth
for
Lapeer
County,
however,
is
the
largest
in
the
region
at
43%,
a
rate
of
1.7%
per
year
even
though
Lapeer
County
is
projected
to
contribute
only
2%
of
the
VMT
in
the
1999
CMSA
by
2025
(
Table
10,
page
31).
According
to
worker
flow
data
from
the
U.
S.
Census,
40.7%
of
Lapeer
County's
workers
commute
to
the
seven­
county
region;
however,
these
workers
comprise
only
0.7%
of
the
work
force
in
the
seven­
county
region
(
Table
11a,
page
32).

Expected
growth
Genesee
County
has
a
rather
high
population
density
and
a
large
urban
area.
The
expected
population
and
emplo
yment
growth,
however,
is
quite
low.
From
1990­
2000,
Genesee
County's
growth
rate
was
0.12%
per
year
(
Table
7,
page
29).
From
2000­
2020,
Genesee
County's
population
is
projected
to
increase
by
5.3%,
a
rate
of
just
0.25%
per
year
(
Table
12a,
page
33).
Employment
projections
for
Genesee
County
are
higher
than
the
population
projections,
but
this
growth
rate
is
still
relatively
low.
From
2000­
2020,
total
employment
will
increase
by
13.4%,
a
rate
of
0.64%
per
year
(
Table
13,
page
34).

In
direct
contrast
to
Genesee
County,
Lapeer
County
has
a
rather
high
population
growth
rate
of
1.6%
per
year
from
1990­
2000,
second
only
to
Livingston
County
(
Table
7).
From
2000­
2020,
the
population
growth
rate
is
expected
to
increase
21.2%,
a
rate
of
1%
per
year
and
the
fourth
highest
in
the
1999
CMSA
(
Table
12a,
page
33).
The
2000­
2020
total
employment
projection
for
Lapeer
County
is
comparable
with
the
employment
projection
for
Genesee
County.
An
increase
of
12.6%
is
expected
during
this
time
frame,
a
rate
of
0.6%
per
year
(
Table
13,
page
34).

Meteorology
A
wind
rose
for
Flint,
the
major
city
in
Genesee
County,
for
April
through
September
2002
shows
that
the
winds
are
mainly
from
the
South
and
Southwest
(
Wind
Rose
2,
page
36).
This
southwesterly
wind
flow
is
similar
to
Detroit's
wind
patterns.
In
other
words,
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties,
located
northwest
of
Detroit,
are
neither
major
contributors
nor
major
receptors
of
emissions
from
the
Detroit
region.

On
occasion,
however,
the
two
Genesee
County
monitors
measure
elevated
ozone
levels
when
winds
are
from
the
southeast
Detroit
region.
Emission
reductions
will
occur
in
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region
and
can
be
expected
to
slightly
benefit
air
quality
in
these
two
counties
as
well.
Page
27
Geography/
topography
There
are
no
mountain
ranges,
air
basins,
or
significant
lake
effects
that
need
to
be
considered
in
either
Genesee
or
Lapeer
counties.

Jurisdictional
boundaries
Existing
one
­
hour
ozone
designation
boundaries
coincide
with
the
Flint
and
Detroit
MPO
boundaries
in
the
region
(
Map
5,
page
39).
Genesee
County
is
the
jurisdictional
MPO
boundary
for
the
Genesee
County
Metropolitan
Planning
Commission
(
GCMPC).
The
MPO
for
the
Detroit
region,
SEMCOG,
consists
of
the
seven­
county
recommended
nonattainment
area
for
Detroit:
Livingston,
Macomb,
Monroe,
Oakland,
St.
Clair,
Washtenaw,
and
Wayne
counties.
These
existing
MPO
jurisdictional
boundaries
are
another
reason
to
have
separate
designation
boundaries
for
Genesee
and
Lapeer
Counties
and
the
seven­
county
Detroit
region.
The
GCMPC
and
SEMCOG
have
distinct
procedures
in
place
for
conformity
analyses
and
transportation
planning
that
would
become
unnecessarily
complicated
if
the
two
areas
were
included
in
the
same
designation
boundary.

While
the
jurisdictional
boundary
fo
r
the
GCMPC
does
not
include
Lapeer
County,
the
8­
hour
designation
boundary
should
include
both
counties
because
of
the
high
amount
of
growth
that
is
occurring
in
Lapeer
County.
In
addition,
Genesee
and
Lapeer
counties
already
coordinate
work
on
several
transportation
and
non­
transportation
related
items,
primarily
due
to
their
membership
on
the
Genesee,
Lapeer,
and
Shiawassee
Region
V
Planning
and
Development
Commission
(
GLS
Region
V
PDC).
The
transportation
work
that
is
coordinated
through
GLS
Region
V
PDC
includes:

·
Traffic
counts;
·
Highway
Performance
Monitoring
System
(
HPMS)
work;
·
The
Asset
Management
program;
·
MDOT
(
Michigan
Department
of
Transportation)
Enhancement,
Bridge,
and
Safety
Applications;
·
The
regional
Rideshare
program;
and
·
The
Regional
Transit
Study,
which
addressed
interregional
public
transportation
needs.

The
non­
transportation
related
work
performed
by
the
GLS
Region
V
PDC
includes
reviewing
applications
that
are
eventually
submitted
to
agencies
such
as
the
Michigan
Department
of
Natural
Resources
(
MDNR),
the
Michigan
State
Housing
Development
Authority
(
MSHDA),
and
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development
(
HUD).
An
air
quality
designation
that
links
these
two
counties
and
builds
on
their
existing
relationships
is
more
reasonable
than
including
Lapeer
County
with
the
Detroit
region's
designation.

It
should
be
noted
that
having
separate
designation
boundaries
in
Southeast
Michigan
does
not
mean
that
there
will
be
no
coordination
on
air
quality
planning
with
the
various
groups
located
in
the
1999
CMSA.
The
MDEQ,
SEMCOG,
and
the
GCMPC
are
well
aware
that
effective
air
quality
planning
must
consider
surrounding
counties,
and
efforts
are
currently
underway
to
better
understand
the
nature
of
8­
hour
ozone
violations
in
the
entire
area.
Page
28
Level
of
control
of
emission
sources
The
State
of
Michigan
has
historically
applied
many
air
quality
rules
statewide.
The
State
of
Michigan
can
require
ozone
precursor
controls
on
sources
outside
of
nonattainment
areas,
if
needed,
except
in
cases
where
there
is
a
federal
prohibition.
State
rules
for
Reasonably
Available
Control
Technology
are
applicable
statewide.

Regional
controls
All
major
NOx
sources
in
the
1999
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
are
subject
to
NOx
SIP
call
requirements.

Table
4
NOx
Emissions
in
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
(
Tons/
Yr)

COUNTY
NOx
­
Point
NOX
­
Area
NOx
­
Non­
road
NOx
­
On­
road
NOx
Total
%
of
Total
Genesee
2,184.17
1,545.10
2,515.95
14,512.77
20,757.99
5.7
Lapeer
22.86
151.75
1,156.44
4,241.33
5,572.38
1.5
Lenawee
118.16
217.12
1,079.36
3,089.57
4,504.21
1.2
Livingston
437.00
361.92
962.45
6,493.80
8,255.17
2.3
Macomb
5,126.40
2,279.34
6,180.68
19,053.01
32,639.43
9.0
Monroe
59,586.38
239.12
2,488.37
5,647.02
67,960.89
18.7
Oakland
1,117.08
3,865.95
7,767.84
30,315.55
43,066.42
11.9
St.
Clair
40,577.46
305.38
3,911.48
6,880.01
51,674.33
14.2
Washtenaw
1,170.42
986.83
2,353.54
10,278.74
14,789.53
4.1
Wayne
38,500.28
4,230.14
17,116.01
54,125.94
113,972.37
31.4
TOTAL
148,840.21
14,182.65
45,532.12
154,637.74
363,192.72
100
Table
5
VOC
Emissions
in
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
(
Tons/
Yr)

COUNTY
VOC
­
Point
VOC
­
Area
VOC
­
Non­
road
VOC
­
On­
road
VOC
Total
%
of
Total
Genesee
2,600.21
9,180.23
1,830.99
10,834.21
24,445.64
8.8
Lapeer
1,976.72
2,632.82
806.54
2,170.14
7,586.22
2.7
Lenawee
389.92
2,908.34
648.97
1,892.93
5,840.16
2.1
Livingston
315.74
3,594.28
826.11
3,458.23
8,194.36
2.9
Macomb
3,028.18
14,261.43
4,223.56
15,330.55
36,843.72
13.3
Monroe
6,327.63
2,928.51
1,089.69
3,285.19
13,631.02
4.9
Oakland
5,002.95
20,881.09
8,173.13
23,394.86
57,452.03
20.7
St.
Clair
1,209.83
3,794.91
1,009.63
4,155.79
10,170.16
3.7
Washtenaw
633.36
6,357.58
3,043.21
7,200.19
17,234.34
6.2
Wayne
8,707.12
35,437.55
7,783.49
44,716.79
96,644.95
34.8
TOTAL
30,191.66
101,976.74
29,435.32
116,438.88
278,042.60
100
Source
for
Tables
1
and
2:
EPA's
Final
1999
NEI
version
2,
posted
November
2002
Page
29
Table
6
Population
Density
County
2000
Pop./
sq.
mi.

Livingston
276.1
Macomb
1,640.5
Monroe
264.8
Oakland
1,368.6
St.
Clair
226.7
Washtenaw
454.8
Wayne
3,356.1
Genesee
681.9
Lapeer
134.4
Lenawee
131.8
Source:
U.
S.
Census
Table
7
Population
of
the
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA,
1990­
2000
County
1990
Population
2000
Population
Population
Change
Growth
Rate
(%/
yr)
Percent
of
2000
Total
Pop.

Livingston
115,645
156,951
41,306
3.25
2.9
Macomb
717,400
788,149
70,749
0.90
14.4
Monroe
133,600
145,945
12,345
0.84
2.7
Oakland
1,083,592
1,194,156
110,564
0.93
21.9
St.
Clair
145,607
164,235
18,628
1.16
3.0
Washtenaw
282,937
322,895
39,958
1.28
5.9
Wayne
2,111,687
2,061,162
­
50,525
­
0.22
37.8
Genesee
430,459
436,141
5,682
0.12
8.0
Lapeer
74,768
87,904
13,136
1.60
1.6
Lenawee
91,476
98,890
7,414
0.74
1.8
Total
5,187,171
5,456,428
269,257
0.47
100
Source:
U.
S.
Census
Page
30
Table
8a
Lenawee
County­
2000
Urban/
Rural
Split
Percentage
#
of
persons
in
urban
area
45,355
45.9
#
of
persons
in
rural
area
53,535
54.1
TOTAL
98,890
100.0
Table
8b
Lapeer
county­
2000
Urban/
Rural
Split
Percentage
#
of
persons
in
urban
area
21,038
23.9
#
of
persons
in
rural
area
66,866
76.1
TOTAL
87,904
100.0
Table
8c
Genesee
County­
2000
Urban/
Rural
Split
Percentage
#
of
persons
in
urban
area
45,250
45.8
#
of
persons
in
rural
area
53,640
54.2
TOTAL
98,890
100.0
Table
9
2000­
2002
8­
Hour
Ozone
Monitoring
Data
for
the
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor­
Flint
CMSA
Monitoring
Site
Purpose
2000
4th
High
(
ppm)
2001
4th
High
(
ppm)
2002
4th
High
(
ppm)
Design
Value
(
ppm)
Rounded
Design
Value
(
ppm)

Allen
Park
Pop
exp.
0.067
0.080
0.088
0.078
0.08
Detroit
E.
7
Mile
Max.
conc.
0.080
0.092
0.083
0.085
0.09
Detroit
Linwood
Pop.
exp.
0.077
0.087
0.092
0.085
0.09
Flint
Pop.
exp.
0.072
0.091
0.088
0.083
0.08
New
Haven
Max.
conc.
0.075
0.095
0.095
0.088
0.09
Oak
Park
Pop.
exp.
0.075
0.090
0.093
0.086
0.09
Otisville
Max.
conc.
0.074
0.091
0.089
0.084
0.08
Port
Huron
Pop.
exp.
0.080
0.084
0.100
0.088
0.09
Tecumseh
Backgrd.
0.082
0.086
0.089
0.085
0.09
Warren
Max.
conc.
0.077
0.094
0.092
0.087
0.09
Ypsilanti
Pop.
exp.
0.078
0.092
0.091
0.087
0.09
Note:
The
monitoring
sites
in
bold
type
are
violating
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard.
Page
31
Table
10
Summer
Daily
VMT
County
Year
Genesee
Lapeer
Lenawee
7­
county
area
2000
12,492,958
2,344,471
2,362,255
131,999,400
2005
13,361,936
2,578,147
2,506,136
137,029,200
2010
14,335,023
2,831,
985
2,684,798
141,041,600
2015
14,880,237
2,999,375
2,800,613
143,051,700
2020
15,578,700
3,188,047
2,901,403
144,612,400
2025
16,125,918
3,351,425
3,036,161
147,777,100
%
Change
29.1
43.0
28.5
12.0
%
of
Total
2025
VMT
9.5
2.0
1.8
86.8
Source:
7­
county
area
numbers
are
from
SEMCOG's
spring
2003
conformity
analysis
(
Transportation:/
Air_
Quality/
Win03).
Numbers
for
Genesee,
Lapeer,
and
Lenawee
Counties
provided
by
MDOT.
Page
32
Table
11a
Journey
to
Work
Data
from
the
2000
U.
S.
Census
County
#
of
workers
in
county
#
of
workers
who
drive
to
7­
county
area
%
workers
who
drive
to
7­
county
area
%
of
workers
in
7­
county
area
from
county*

Genesee
187,588
30,541
16.3
1.4
Lapeer
40,141
16,340
40.7
0.7
Lenawee
45,822
9,975
21.8
0.5
*
The
total
number
of
workers
in
the
7­
county
SEMCOG
area
is
2,208,906.

Table
11b
Journey
to
Work
Data
from
the
2000
U.
S.
Census
County
#
of
workers
in
county
#
of
workers
who
drive
to
3­
county
area
%
workers
who
drive
to
3­
county
area
%
of
workers
in
3­
county
area
from
county*

Livingston
79,729
3,102
3.9
1.1
Macomb
383,664
1,170
0.3
0.4
Monroe
68,835
823
1.2
0.3
Oakland
603,761
7,248
1.2
2.6
St.
Clair
76,437
1,234
1.6
0.5
Washtenaw
169,169
1,249
0.7
0.5
Wayne
827,311
1,008
0.1
0.4
*
The
total
number
of
workers
in
the
3­
county
area
is
273,551.
The
3­
county
area
refers
to
Genesee,
Lapeer,
and
Lenawee
Counties.
Page
33
Table
12a
Population
Projections
for
Lapeer,
Lenawee,
and
Genesee
Counties
County
2000
Estimate
2005
2010
2015
2020
%
Change
Lapeer
88,306
93,052
96,460
101,226
107,041
21.2
Lenawee
99,039
100,568
101,347
103,077
105,849
6.9
Genesee
436,829
446,585
451,042
466,356
459,851
5.3
Source:
April
2003
REMI
Model
(
Regional
Economic
Models,
Inc.)
results,
provided
by
the
University
of
Michigan
and
the
Michigan
Department
of
Transportation.

Table
12b
Population
Projections
for
7­
county
SEMCOG
region
County
2000
Census
2005
2010
2015
2020
%
Change
Livingston
156,951
179,733
196,950
216,914
239,059
52.3
Macomb
788,149
811,251
830,143
851,415
876,371
11.2
Monroe
145,945
156,533
167,375
175,108
182,345
24.9
Oakland
1,194,156
1,229,625
1,258,206
1,288,922
1,309,461
9.7
St.
Clair
164,235
171,312
176,795
185,608
192,626
17.3
Washtenaw
322,895
342,163
365,603
384,075
401,076
24.2
Wayne
2,061,162
2,046,588
2,038,012
2,027,915
2,015,793
­
2.2
Detroit
951,270
928,582
908,883
892,263
878,817
­
7.6
Balance
Wayne
1,109,892
1,118,006
1,129,129
1,135,652
1,136,976
2.4
Source:
2030
Regional
Development
Forecast
for
Southeast
Michigan,
SEMCOG,
October
2001
Page
34
Table
13
Projection
of
Total
Employment
for
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
Year
County
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
%
Change
Livingston
59,186
70,241
78,188
86,068
91,653
54.9
Macomb
383,308
398,577
411,534
424,620
430,008
12.2
Monroe
54,375
57,942
61,454
65,109
68,313
25.6
Oakland
910,441
961,096
1,016,875
1,058,697
1,076,435
18.2
St.
Clair
64,531
66,228
70,456
73,694
76,191
18.1
Washtenaw
230,212
238,518
257,970
268,740
275,285
19.6
Wayne
971,127
987,745
994,590
1,005,996
1,016,710
4.7
Detroit
345,465
330,329
320,391
313,942
309,547
­
10.4
Balance
Wayne
625,662
657,416
674,199
692,054
707,163
13.0
Genesee
177,477
178,758
184,623
190,766
201,247
13.4
Lapeer
49,937
53,573
55,147
55,495
56,226
12.6
Lenawee
50,880
53,405
54,325
54,428
54,568
7.2
Source:
Numbers
for
SEMCOG
region
are
taken
from
SEMCOG's
2030
Regional
Development
Forecast,
October
2001.
Genesee
numbers
are
taken
from
the
Genesee
County
2025
Long
Range
Transportation
Plan.
Lapeer
and
Lenawee
County's
numbers
are
taken
from
the
2003
REMI
model
results,
provided
by
the
University
of
Michigan
and
MDOT.
Page
35
Wind
Rose
1
 
Detroit
Page
36
Wind
Rose
2
 
Flint
Page
37
Map
3
Federal
Urban
Air
Boundary
for
Genesee
and
Lapeer
Counties
Page
38
Map
4
Southeast
Michigan
Urbanized
Area
Page
39
Attainment
Attainment
No
designation
Wayne
Monroe
Lenawee
Washtenaw
Oakland
Livingston
Macomb
St.
Clair
Genesee
Lapeer
Ozone
Monitor
Map
5
One­
Hour
Ozone
Designation
Boundaries
Southeast
Michigan
CMSA
Page
40
VAN
BUREN
BERRIEN
CASS
ST.
JOSEPH
KALAMAZOO
CALHOUN
BARRY
EATON
INGHAM
LIVINGSTON
OAKLAND
MACOMB
MONROE
WASHTENAW
BRANCH
HILLSDALE
LENAWEE
ALLEGAN
JACKSON
WAYNE
MANISTEE
MASON
LAKE
OSCEOLA
WEXFORD
OCEANA
NEWAYGO
MECOSTA
CLARE
GLADWIN
MIDLAND
BAY
EMMET
CHEBOYGAN
PRESQUE
ISLE
ANTRIM
OTSEGO
MONTMORENCY
ALPENA
ALCONA
OSCODA
KALKASKA
CRAWFORD
BENZIE
MISSAUKEE
ROSCOMMON
OGEMAW
IOSCO
HURON
TUSCOLA
SANILAC
ST.
CLAIR
ISABELLA
LEELANAU
BARAGA
DELTA
IRON
ALGER
SCHOOLCRAFT
LUCE
CHIPPEWA
MACKINAW
GOGEBIC
ONTONAGON
HOUGHTON
KEWEENAW
MENOMINEE
MARQUETTE
CHARLEVOIX
KENT
OTTAWA
MUSKEGON
IONIA
SHIAWASSEE
GENESEE
LAPEER
CLINTON
MONTCALM
SAGINAW
ARENAC
7­
03
GRATIOT
GRAND
TRAVERSE
DICKINSON
MICHIGAN