WPC^. G%ֳ܆tR6|as skipiq,3 JcAYy~8_G4CtP*b8'ya$0*Uw<9} N8J ]NrwT)(wtAp2^q#Ӑ_XC_oKX+׃cY}+QȩmMPrSm_p6x fnGµ@rWMǃt j&;) +M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  YYYY'dxd(.(3($ !USUS.,      0  (#$  0  )Hairline dH\  `timesroman7Table_A#<PRINT RANGE>(hH  Z(Times New Roman 1  dTable_A%2A`Arial(.3Ly$ !USUS.,    0  .($$  0  dddd'dxdtTABLE AnTABLE BTABLE JhTABLE FTABLE KnTABLE B@ dTABLE GnTABLE B TABLE HnTABLE BdTable_A&0 d dTABLE IhTABLE A8TABLE CTABLE D(TABLE EKY !USUS.,  _  8XXdd8      _RACM_ԀANALYSISFORFOURSERIOUSAREASDESIGNATED_NONATTAINMENT_  FOR1HROZONE_NAAQS_Ԁ   U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency  OfficeofAirQualityPlanningandStandards  ResearchTrianglePark,NC27711   and   OfficeofTransportationandAirQuality o t AnnArbor,MI48105 [ ` October12,2000 38    _RACM_ԀANALYSISFORFOURSERIOUSAREASDESIGNATED_NONATTAINMENT_  FOR1HROZONE_NAAQS_Ԁ   ThispaperprovidessupplementalinformationforEPAsnoticesofproposed_rulemaking_Ԁfor   Stateimplementationplans(_SIPs_)forfourareasdesignatedserious_nonattainment_Ԁforthe1hour o t nationalambientairqualitystandard(_NAAQS_)forgroundlevelozone.These_nonattainment_ [ ` areasare:GreaterConnecticut,WesternMassachusetts(Springfield),MetropolitanWashington G L  (DC,MD,VA),andAtlanta,GA.Thisinformationaddressescommentsreceivedonthose 38  proposalsthatquestionedEPAsproposedapprovalofthe_SIPs_ԀregardingtheCleanAirActs $  (Acts)requirementthat_SIPs_Ԁcontainreasonablyavailablecontrolmeasures(_RACM_).    SUMMARY   EPAhasperformedananalysistoevaluateemissionlevelsofoxidesofnitrogen(_NOx_)and  volatileorganiccompounds(VOC)andtheirrelationshipstotheapplicationofcurrentand  anticipatedcontrolmeasuresexpectedtobeimplementedinfourseriousonehourozone  _nonattainment_Ԁareas.Thisanalysiswasdonetodetermineifadditionalreasonablyavailable  controlmeasures(_RACM_)areavailableafteradoptionofCleanAirAct(Act)requiredmeasures kp forthefollowingseriousozone_nonattainment_Ԁareas:GreaterConnecticut,NewYorkNew W\ JerseyConnecticut;Springfield,Massachusetts;Washington,D.C.VirginiaMaryland;and CH Atlanta,Georgia.TheEPAperformedthisanalysisinresponsetocommentsthatweresubmitted /4 ontheproposalsontheseareasonehourozoneattainmentdemonstrations.TheEPAtook   actiontoproposeapproval(anddisapprovalinthealternative)oftheseareas_SIPs_ԀonDecember   16,1999[GreaterConnecticut(64FR70332);Springfield(64FR70319);Metropolitan  Washington(64FR70460);andAtlanta(64FR70478)].Thisinformationsupplementsthe  December16,1999proposals.  Section172(c)(1)oftheActrequires_SIPs_Ԁtocontainreasonablyavailablecontrolmeasures   (_RACM_)asnecessarytoprovideforattainmentasexpeditiouslyaspracticable.Several ! _commenters_Ԁhavestatedthatthereisnoevidenceinthefourseriousozoneattainment {"  demonstrationsthatwereproposedonDecember16,1999thattheyhaveadoptedall_RACM_,and g#l! a_commenter_Ԁfurtherstatedthatthemobilesourceemissionbudgetsinthe_SIPs_Ԁareinadequateby S$X" definitionbecausethe_SIPs_Ԁdonotdemonstratetimelyattainmentorcontaintheemission ?%D # reductionsrequiredforall_RACM_.Inaddition,some_commenters_Ԁstatedthatforallpotential +&0!$ _RACM_ԀmeasuresnotadoptedintotheSIP,theStatemustprovideajustificationforwhythey '"% weredeterminednottobe_RACM_. h TheanalysisEPAconducteddemonstratesthatanumberof (#& possibleemissioncontrolmeasureshavebeenevaluatedfortheiremissionreductions.Itfurther (#' demonstratesthatthemeasuresevaluatedeither(a)arelikelytorequireanintensiveandcostly )$( effortfornumeroussmallareasources,or(b)donotadvancetheattainmentdatesforthefour *%) areas,andthereforewouldnotbeconsidered_RACM_ԀundertheAct. +&* ЇEPAhaspreviouslyprovidedguidanceinterpretingthe_RACM_Ԁrequirementsof172(c)(1).See  57FR13498,13560.Inthatguidance,EPAindicateditsinterpretationthatpotentiallyavailable  measuresthatwouldnotadvancetheattainmentdateforanareawouldnotbeconsidered  _RACM_.EPAconcludedthatameasurewouldnotbereasonablyavailableifitwouldnot  advanceattainment.EPAalsoindicatedinthatguidancethatstatesshouldconsiderall  potentiallyavailablemeasurestodeterminewhethertheywerereasonablyavailablefor   implementationinthearea,andwhethertheywouldadvancetheattainmentdate.Further,states   shouldindicateintheirSIP_submittals_Ԁwhethermeasuresconsideredwerereasonablyavailableor o t not,andifmeasuresarereasonablyavailabletheymustbeadoptedas_RACM_.Finally,EPA [ ` indicatedthatstatescouldrejectpotential_RACM_Ԁmeasureseitherbecausetheywouldnot G L  advancetheattainmentdate,wouldcausesubstantialwidespreadandlongtermadverseimpacts, 38  orforvariousreasonsrelatedtolocalconditions,suchaseconomicsorimplementationconcerns. $  TheEPAalsoissuedarecentmemorandumonthistopic,GuidanceontheReasonably    AvailableControlMeasures(_RACM_)RequirementandAttainmentDemonstrationSubmissions   forOzone_Nonattainment_ԀAreas.JohnS._Seitz_,Director,OfficeofAirQualityPlanningand   Standards.November30,1999.Website:http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.   Inresponsetopubliccommentsreceivedontheproposed_rulemakings_ԀinDecember,EPAhas  reviewedtheSIP_submittals_Ԁforthefourseriousareasanddeterminedthattheydidnotinclude  sufficientdocumentationconcerningavailable_RACM_Ԁmeasures.Therefore,EPAhasitself  reviewednumerouspotential_RACM_Ԁmeasures,asdocumentedinthefollowinganalysis.Based kp onthisanalysis,EPAconcludedf  g thesemeasureswouldg Ԁeither(a)likelyrequireanintensiveand W\ costlyeffortfornumeroussmallareasources,or(b)notadvancetheattainmentdateinanyofthe CH fourareas. /4 XXXXEPAreachedthisconclusionprimarilybecausethereductionsexpectedtobeachievedbythe   potential_RACM_Ԁmeasuresarerelativelysmall,intherangeof8.4to29.7tonsperdayofVOC  and4.5to16.7tonsperdayof_NOx_Ԁforstationarysourcesand2.03to11.38tonsperdayofVOC  and3.56to17.07tonsperdayof_NOx_Ԁformobilesources.Thesepotentialreductionsarefarless  thantheemissionsreductionsneededwithinthe_nonattainment_Ԁareastoreachattainment.  Inaddition,allofthefourareasrelyinpartonreductionsfromoutsidethe_nonattainment_Ԁareas ! fromEPAs_NOx_ԀSIPcallorsection126rule(65Fed.Reg.2674,January18,2000)toreach {"  attainment.Inthe_NOx_ԀSIPcall,63Fed.Reg.57356,EPAconcludedthatreductionsfrom g#l! variousupwindstateswerenecessarytoprovidefortimelyattainmentinvariousdownwind S$X" states,includingallsixofthestatesdiscussedinthisanalysis.The_NOx_ԀSIPcalltherefore ?%D # establishedrequirementsforcontrolofsourcesofsignificantemissionsinallupwindstates. +&0!$ However,thesereductionswerenotslatedforfullimplementationuntilMay2003.Further,the '"% UnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheDistrictofColumbiaCircuitrecentlyorderedthatEPA (#& couldnotrequirefullimplementationofthe_NOx_ԀSIPcallpriortoMay2004.Michigan,etal.,v. (#' EPA,D.C.Cir.No.981497,OrderofAug.30,2000. )$(   *%) Theattainmentdemonstrationsforthefourseriousareasindicatethattheozonebenefitexpected   tobeachievedfromregional_NOx_Ԁreductions(suchasthe_NOx_ԀSIPcall)aresubstantial.(Seethe  individualattainmentdemonstrationsinthedocketforeachoftheseareas.)Inaddition,manyof  themeasuresdesignedtoachieveemissionsreductionsfromwithinthefour_nonattainment_Ԁareas  willalsonotbefullyimplementedpriortotherespectiveattainmentdate.Therefore,EPA  concludes,basedontheavailabledocumentation,thatsincethereductionsfrompotential_RACM_   measuresdonotnearlyequatetothereductionsneededtodemonstrateattainment,noneofthese   measurescouldadvancetheattainmentdatepriortofullimplementationoftheSIPcallor o t section126rulein2003or2004andalllocalmeasuresbytherespectiveattainmentdate,and [ ` thusnoneofthesepotentialmeasurescanbeconsidered_RACM_Ԁforthesefourareas. G L  8  XXdXXd8  #XXXX #AlthoughEPAencouragesareastoimplementavailable_RACM_Ԁmeasuresaspotentiallycost $  effectivemethodstoachieveemissionsreductionsintheshortterm,EPAdoesnotbelievethat    section172(c)(1)requiresimplementationofpotential_RACM_Ԁmeasuresthatg eitherrequirecostly   implementationeffortsorproducerelativelysmallemissionsreductionsthatwillnotbesufficient   toallowanyofthefourareastoachieveattainmentinadvanceoffullimplementationofallother   requiredmeasures.  ANALYSIS XXXX  Theanalysisformobilesourcecategoriesdiffersfromthatforstationarysourcecategoriesin kp severalrespects: W\ 1.Themobilesourcecategoriesarefewerinnumber,andthereforetheemissionsinventory /4 informationfortheattainmentyearwasmorereadilyavailablefromSIPfilesforEPAtouse.   Thestationarysourcecategoriesaremorenumerous,anddetailedcategorybycategoryemissions   informationfortheattainmentyearwasnotreadilyavailablefortheanalysis.Anavailable  projected2007emissioninventorywasthereforeusedforthestationarysourceanalysis.  2.Limitedemissionscontrolinformationwasreadilyavailablefortheanalysisofbothstationary  andmobilesources.However,forthemobilesourceanalysis,individualcontrolmeasureswere  evaluated.Forthestationarysourceanalysis,a topdowntechniquewasusedtoestimatethe   sourcecategoriesandemissionsthatarepotentiallyavailableforadditionalcontrol,andthen ! supplementedwithreadilyavailableinformationspecifictoeachofthefourareas. {"  &  MOBILESOURCEANALYSIS S$X" #XXX X1#'g#Q6 XXXXAttachment1isananalysisofabroadrangeoftransportationcontrolmeasures(_TCMs_)#XXX X㬿6# XXXXԀto +&0!$ determineiftheyare_RACM_Ԁforthefour_nonattainment_Ԁareasinquestion.Emissionreductions '"% thatmightresultfromimplementationofthese_TCMs_Ԁwerederivedfromonroademissionsand (#& vehiclesmilesoftravel(_VMT_)dataintheattainmentyearemissionsinventoryforeach (#' _nonattainment_Ԁarea. )$( Table1shows,foreach_nonattainment_Ԁarea,attainmentyearonroademissionsforvolatile +&* organiccompounds(VOC)andnitrogenoxides(_NOx_)intonsperday(_TPD_)incolumn3. ,'+ Lightdutycarsandlightdutytrucksgenerallycontribute80%oftheonroadVOCinventory, -(, and70%oftheonroad_NOx_Ԁinventory.Forthepurposeofthisanalysis,EPAassumesthatonly  lightdutycarsandlightdutytrucks#XXX Xx7# XXXXԀareaffectedbythe_TCMs_.#XXX XO<# XXXXColumn4showstheonroad  VOCinventoryand_NOx_Ԁinventoryreducedby20%and30%respectivelytoaccountforthis  assumption.ThelightdutyvehicleVOCand_NOx_Ԁinventoryforeach_nonattainment_Ԁareais  dividedbytheaveragedailyattainmentyear_VMT_Ԁ(shownincolumn5)foreach_nonattainment_  area,tocalculateemissionsindailytonspermile(shownincolumn6).   Tables25showarangeofemissionsreductionsthatcouldpotentiallybeachievedthroughthe o t implementationof_TCMs_ԀinAtlanta,GA;GreaterConnecticut;Springfield(Western),MA;and [ ` Washington,DCMDVA,respectively.Column1showsarangeof_TCMs_,widelyrecognized G L  bytheliterature,groupedintosevenbroadcategories.Theliteraturealsocontainsestimatesof 38  reductionsin_VMT_Ԁthatcouldbeexpectedfromimplementationofthese_TCMs_.The_VMT_ $  reductionsvaryinmagnitude,dependingonthescopeandscaleofthe_TCMs_,thenumberof    yearsoverwhichtheeffectsareanalyzed,theexistingtransportationinfrastructureanddemand   management(_ie_.existing_TCMs_)inthearea,developmentpatterns,andanumberofother   economicanddemographiccharacteristics.ItisimportanttonotethatintheUnitedStates,   empiricalevidenceofthetravelactivityeffectsof_TCMs_Ԁhavecomeprimarilyfromcasestudies  ofsmallscale_TCM_Ԁprograms,andthatestimatesoflargereffectshavecomefromstudiesof  theoreticalprogramsforwhichthereislittleactuallargescaleimplementationexperience.The  highrangeof_VMT_Ԁreductions,astheresultof#XXX X<# XXXXscenarioswhichmayrequirefundamentalchanges  ininfrastructureinvestmentpolicies,orinthecaseof SmartGrowthmeasures,governmental kp andotherinstitutionalrelationships,may,inrealitybeverydifficulttoachievewithinthe W\ _timeframe_Ԁfordemonstratingattainment. CH Nevertheless,Column2showstherangeof_VMT_Ԁreductionsbypercentoftotalregional_VMT_,   thatcouldoccurasaresultof_TCM_Ԁimplementationaccordingtotheliterature.Bymultiplying   theattainmentyeardaily_VMT_Ԁ(Table1,Column5)foreach_nonattainment_Ԁarea,bytherangeof  _VMT_Ԁreductionsbypercent,onecanestimatetherangeof_VMT_Ԁreducedineach_nonattainment_  areaforeachcategoryof_TCMs_.Column3,showsthisrangeofdaily_VMT_Ԁreducedforeach  category.ThefiguresinColumn4showtherangeofestimatedemissionreductionsintonsper  day(_TPD_).Theseestimateswerecalculatedbymultiplyingtheemissions,indailytonspermile   (Table1,Column6),bytherangeofdaily_VMT_Ԁreducedforeachcategoryof_TCMs_. ! Table6comparestheestimatedemissionreductionsfrom_TCMs_Ԁforeach_nonattainment_Ԁareato g#l! theemissionreductionsnecessaryforeachareatodemonstrateattainment.Column1showsthe S$X" totalemissionreductionneededtodemonstrateattainment.Column2showsthemidpointofthe ?%D # rangeofestimatedemissionreductions(fromTables25,Column6)from_TCMs_.Column3 +&0!$ showstheestimatedemissionreductionsasapercentofthetotalreductionneededto '"% demonstrateattainment.EPAbelievesitisappropriatetousethesefiguresforthepurposeof (#& thisanalysis,giventhewiderangeofpotentialemissionreductioncitedintheliterature.As (#' notedabove,theemissionreductionsonthehighendoftherange,arebasedontheoretical )$( programs,whichwouldrequireimplementationonascaleandscopeunlikelytobemanageable *%) withinthe_timeframe_Ԁforreachingattainment.Theliteratureandimplementationexperiencein +&* urbanareasleadsEPAtobelievethatthelowtomidpointrangeofemissionreductionsare  achievablewithcarefulplanning,adequateimplementationresources,aggressivepublic  informationprogramsandasustainedcommitmentbytheimplementingagencies.Usingthe  midpointoftherangeofemissionreductionsprovidesaliberalestimateofpotentialreductions  from_TCMs_,tocompareagainsttheemissionreductionsrequiredtodemonstrateattainment.#XXX X^F# XXXX  Whencom#XXX XqT# XXXXparedtoemissionreductionsnecessaryforattainment#XXX XT# XXXX,emissionreductionsfrom   _TCMs_Ԁthatcouldpotentiallybeimplementedareonlyasmallpercentageofemissionreductions   needed.PotentialVOCreductionsrangefrom1.4%ofthereductionsneededforGreater o t Connecticut,to5.2%ofthereductionsneededforWashington,DCMDVA.Potential_NOx_Ԁ [ ` reductionsrangefrom3.3%ofthereductionsneededforGreaterConnecticut,to11%ofthe G L  reductionsneededforAtlanta,GA.Fromthisanalysis,EPAconcludesthatimplementationof 38  these_TCMs_Ԁwouldnotproduceemissionreductionssufficienttoadvancetheattainmentdate $  withoutobtainingfurtherreductionsfromsourcesalreadyregulated,orabouttoberegulated,to    areasonablelevel,andthatwillnotbefullyachieveduntiltheattainmentdate.Thisincludesthe   substantialreductionsachievedfromthe_NOx_ԀSIPcallorEPAsruleundersection126ofthe   Act(65FR2674(January18,2000)),bothwithinandupwindoftherelevantStates,whichwill   notbeachieveduntil2003or2004.#XXX XGU# XXXX  AdditionalAreaSpecificInformationonMobileMeasuresforAtlanta!Inadditiontotheabove  mobilesourceanalysis,EPAhadreadilyavailableinformationconcerningcertaincontrol  measurescurrentlyinplaceinGeorgia.AlistoftheSIPapprovedtransportationcontrol kp measuresandtheprogramactivitiesfromthePartnershipforaSmogfreeGeorgia(_PSG_)are W\ listedinthetablebelow.ThetableprovidesanindicationofwhetherthemeasureisaSIP_TCM_, CH inthe_PSG_Ԁprogramorboth;thetablealsoindicateswheretheSIPtookemissionreductioncredit /4 forthemeasures.FortheotherSIPmeasures,theywereapprovedexceptasnoted,butno   emissionreductioncreditwastaken.ThusGeorgiahasactuallyimplementedmostofthe   programslistedintheaboveanalysis.ThisprovidesadditionaljustificationforEPAsposition  thattheAtlantaSIPhasmetthe_RACM_ԀrequirementoftheAct.  *TYUddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,7dd ,A dd +    CONTROLMEASURE    EMISSIONREDUCTION   CREDITTAKENINSIP !    #XXX XZ#XXXXEmployerBasedtransportationdemandmanagement(#XXXXfa#XXXXTDM#XXXXa# XXXX)  "!  """ &   l van/carpools(SIP_TCM_/_PSG_)'${b#XXX Xb# XXXX  $ # X $ $" &   l guaranteeridehome(_PSG_)'%c#XXX X%c# XXXX  % % X % &" &   l middayshuttles(_PSG_)''ed#XXX X d# XXXX  ' "' X ' "(" &   l transitsubsidies(SIP_TCM_/_PSG_)'(Ge#XXX Xd# XXXX  (#) X (#*" &   l _telecommuting_Ԁ(_PSG_)'*Qf#XXX Xe# XXXX  * %+ X * %," &  Areawide_Rideshare_'+Og#XXX Xf# XXXX  +&-  +&." &   l parkandride(SIP_TCM_)'h#XXX Xg# XXXX  d  d" &   l ridematching(_PSG_)'K i#XXX X㬥h# XXXX  K  X K " &   l TransportationManagementAssociations(_TMA_'s)  d (SIP_TCM_)' i#XXX X㬂i# XXXX   P   d" &  ParkingManagement'7 k#XXX X㬹j# XXXX  7   7  " &   l preferentialparkingforHighOccupancyVehicles P  (_HOV_)(_PSG_)'k#XXX Xhk# XXXX  <  X P " &  Bike/PedestrianPrograms'#l#XXX X㬢l# XXXX  #   # " &   l designatedlanes/routes(SIP_TCM_)'m#XXX XXm# XXXX  <  X < " &   l safetyenhancements(SIP_TCM_)'#n#XXX XCn# XXXX  #  X # " &  ImprovedPublicTransit'o#XXX X+o# XXXX  <  <" &   l expressbus(SIP_TCM_)'#;p#XXX Xo# XXXX  #  #" &   l _paratransit_Ԁ(_PSG_)'q#XXX Xp# XXXX  < X <" &   l shuttle_circulators_Ԁ(_PSG_)'#r#XXX X㬼q# XXXX  # X #" &  ActivityCenters's#XXX Xr# XXXX  <  <" &   l MultiModaltransfercenters(_PSG_)'#s#XXX Xos# XXXX  # X #" &   l incident/congestionresponse(_PSG_)'t#XXX X[t# XXXX  < X < " &  SmartGrowth(AtlanticSteel)'# u#XXX XHu# XXXX  # !  # "" &   l _infill_Ԁdevelopment(SIP_TCM_ԀPENDING !<# APPROVAL)'!^v#XXX Xv# XXXX  "($  !<%" &   l TransitOrientedDevelopment(TOD)(SIP_TCM_ $& PENDINGAPPROVAL)'$w#XXX X.w# XXXX  $'  $(" &   l mixedusedevelopment(SIP_TCM_ԀPENDING {&) APPROVAL) '{&x g' * #XXX XIx# XXXX  S( + "{&,"  "  o)", #XXX Xxy# XXXX&    STATIONARYSOURCEANALYSIS  Attachment2isareportonananalysisdoneforEPAtodeterminewhatemissionreduction   '8zcontrolsmightbeavailablethatwouldbeconsideredreasonablyavailablecontrolmeasures.  EPAlookedatprojected2007emissionsafterCleanAirActmandatorycontrolsandadditional  regionalandnationalcontrols,aswellasStateSIPcontrolswereaccountedfor.Theseinclude   the_NOx_ԀSIPcallorsection126rulereductionsintheeasternUSandthemobilesourceTierII   controlprogram.Forthisanalysis,EPAassumedthatstationarysourcecategoriesthathave o t alreadybeencontrollednationally,regionallyorlocallyintheSIPwouldnotbeeffective [ ` candidatesforadditionalcontrolsthatcouldbeconsidered_RACM_,sincethesecategorieshave G L  onlyrecentlyinstalledtheirlevelofcontrolorareabouttoshortly.ControlsassumedintheSIP 38  wereappliedbasedonnationalassumptionsforthosecontrolsandmaynotmatchthecontrols $  actuallydocumentedintheindividual_SIPs_.Theareaspecificdescriptionsbelow,however,    addresssubstantialdifferencesthatexistandotherconditionsuniquetoeacharea,and   appropriatecorrectionshavebeenincorporatedbelow.   EPAconsidered2007projectedemissionsregardlessofanareasspecificrequestedattainment  datebecauseitrepresentsalevelofcontrolthatwillhavealreadyoccurredbytheareas  attainmentdate,orwilloccurshortlyafterward.Also,the2007projectedemissionsinventory  wasreadilyavailableforthisanalysis,whereasdetailedcategorybycategoryprojectedemission  inventoriesforotherearlierdateswerenotreadilyavailable. kp #XXX Xz#AsdescribedinAttachment2,categoriesandtheiremissionswereidentifiedthatwouldremain CH aftertheothernational,regionalandSIPcontrolswereaccountedfor.Theremainingsource /4 categorieswerethenrankedonthebasisofemissionsbycategory.Thebottom20percentofthe   categorieswereremovedfromconsiderationbasedontheassumptionthattheirindividual   categorycontributionwouldbeconsideredtoosmallandtoonumeroustoregulateindividually,  andthereforewouldnotbeconsideredreasonablyavailable.Theemissionsfromtop80percent  ofthecategorieswerethentotaled.Tables6and7ofAttachment2presentthesummaryofthe  top80percentofthe potentiallycontrollableemissionsforeachofthefourareas.Theseare  summarizedforeachofthefourareasinTableAbelow;however,wheretherewasareaspecific   informationreadilyavailabletoprovidemoreaccurateinformation,thatispresentedinthearea ! specificdiscussionbelow,andTableAreflectsthesedifferences.TheEPAthenassumeda {"  generalizedlevelofcontrol(50percent)appliedtoeachofthesecategories;thisisalsopresented g#l! inTableAbelow.Eventhoughapproximately81percentcontrolwasgenerallyassumedtobea S$X" defaultlevelofcontrolforpreviousControlTechniquesGuidelinesforVOCinthepast,those ?%D # _CTG_sweredevelopedforcategoriesthatweremorereadilycontrolled.Forthis_RACM_ +&0!$ analysis,EPAhasassumedtheloweramount(50percent)forremainingcategories,since '"% controlsmaynotbequiteaseffectiveorasreadilyavailable. (#& Next,EPAcomparedtheresultsoftheselevelsofcontrolpossiblewiththeemissionreductions )$( neededforattainment.TheresultsofthiscomparisonappearinTableBbelow. *%)  +&* The_NOx_Ԁcontrolspotentiallyavailablerangefromabout8percentofthe_NOx_Ԁreductionsneeded  forattainment(inWesternMassachusetts)toover10percent(inAtlanta).Table7of  Attachment2presentstheTier3sourcecategorieswiththesepotentialcontrols.Withthe  exceptionsnotedbelowforAtlanta,itappearsthatthekindsofcategorieswiththemost  emissionsavailableforcontrol(e.g.,industrial,residential,andcommercial/institutional  distillateoilandgascombustion;andwasteincineration)generallyaffectareasources,whichare   smallerandnumerous.Requiring_NOx_Ԁcontrolonthesesourceswouldthereforelikelyrequirean   intensive,costlyeffort.Also,asnotedinEPAsfinalruleonthe_NOx_ԀSIPcall: o t 0  AreaSources. Inthe_NPR_,EPAnotedthatcontrollevelsforareasources(i.e.,sources G L  otherthanmobileorpointsources)couldnotbedeterminedbasedonavailable 38  informationconcerningapplicablecontroltechnologies.Commentstothe_NPR_Ԁdidnot $  identifyspecific_NOx_Ԁcontroltechnologiesthatwerebothtechnologicallyfeasibleand    highlycosteffective.BecauseEPAhasnonewinformationonapplicablecontrol   technologiesforareasources,noadditionalcontrollevelisassumedforthesesourcesin   this_rulemaking_.(63FR57402,October27,1998.) (#(# Asaresult,controlsonthesecategoriesarenotconsideredreasonablyavailable.  AtlantaExceptions: kp 1.ForAtlanta,oneofthetier3categoriesfromTable7is otherindustrialprocesses/mineral W\ products/surfaceminingwith5.4tons_NOx_/day.Table14identifiesthattheseemissionsare CH fromonepointsource,aglassmanufacturer.Furtherinvestigationrevealedthatthissource /4 alreadyhasapermitthatrequiresa_RACT_Ԁlevelofemissions,andthereforeadditional_NOx_   controlswouldnotbeconsideredreasonablyavailable.   2.XXXXԀAtlantahasaregulation(i.e.,Rule39131.02,paragraph2)for_NOx_Ԁemissionsfromfuel  burningequipment.Theregulationapplicabilityisbasedonheatinputcapacity(i.e.,>or=10  _mmBTU_/hrandYYYY+G L G L  > XXH2j  Springfield,MAcategories @ #HXYXH2j##XXXHXY#XXH2j BYYYE/$S X #YYYY B  2007Uncontrolled#HXYX,H2j9##XXhHXYX#XXH2j WYYYYD,S X #  YYYE  WTier2Name ?YYYY,!16 YYYY ?Tier3Name ?YYYY,!16 YYYY ?VOC_OSD_#HXYXH2j"##XXXHXYA#XXH2j WYYYYD,16 "  YYYY  W #HXYXH2j#H2jXHXY#H2jգ#H2j ?YYYY,! 3YYYY ? ?YYYY,! 3YYYY ? WYYYYD, 3  YYYY  WSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,! YYYY ?industrialadhesives aYYYYN! YYYY @6.70@a6.70 xYYYYeM " @6.70  @YYYY  xSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,! YYYY ?other aYYYYN! YYYY Q @3.59Q @a3.59 xYYYYeM " Q @3.59  Q @YYYY  xSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,! YYYY ?thinningsolvents aYYYYN! YYYY 333333@2.15333333@a2.15 xYYYYeM " 333333@2.15  333333@YYYY  xOtherIndustrial ?YYYY,!gl YYYY ?rubber&plasticsmfg aYYYYN!gl YYYY RQ?1.52RQ?a1.52 xYYYYeMgl " RQ?1.52  RQ?YYYY  xAgriculture,Food,& =B KindredProducts ?YYYY,!YYYY ?bakeries aYYYYN!=B YYYY RQ?1.02RQ?a1.02 xYYYYeM=B!" RQ?1.02  RQ?YYYY  xSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,!"YYYY ?electronic&otherelectrical aYYYYN!#YYYY \(\?0.98\(\?a0.98 xYYYYeM$" \(\?0.98  \(\?YYYY  xGraphicArts ?YYYY,!%YYYY ?other aYYYYN!&YYYY Q?0.86Q?a0.86 xYYYYeM'" Q?0.86  Q?YYYY  x ?YYYY,!}(3YYYY ? #HXYXH2jq#H2jXHXY#H2j#H2j  Totals bYYYYO!})#YYYY R0@16.82R0@b#HXYXH2jЮ##XXXHXY#HXYXXXH2jXHXY16.82#HXYXH2j # ^TR}*" R0@16.82  R0@YYYY ^#XXXHXY#Forthe SurfaceCoatingindustrialadhesivescategory,whichthelargestuncontrolled ;@+ categorylisted,itisimportanttolooktoseehowthiscategorymayalreadybecontrolledunder ',, MassachusettsstatewideVOCregulations.IntheMassachusettsairpollutioncontrol - regulations,thedefinitionof coatingincludesadhesivesaswellaspaints,varnishes,sealants . andtemporaryprotectivecoatings.Thus,industrialadhesivesareprobablyalreadylargely / controlledunderthesurfacecoatingregulationsthatMassachusettshasadoptedpursuantto 0 EPAs_CTG_Ԁdocuments.Forthe Agriculture,Food,&KindredProductsBakeriescategory, 1 Massachusettsregulation310_CMR_Ԁ7.18(29),entitled Bakeriesalreadycoversthiscategory 2 withareasonablelevelofcontrol.For SurfaceCoatingother,and GraphicArtsother, 3 regulationsadoptedbyMassachusettsintheearly1990'sthatwerenotcoveredbyEPA_CTG_s  4 addresssomeofthesecategories.Thoserulesare310_CMR_Ԁ7.18(22),Leathersurfacecoating; s!x5 310_CMR_Ԁ7.18(25),Offsetlithographicprinting;310_CMR_Ԁ7.18(26),Textilefinishing;and310 _"d6 _CMR_Ԁ7.18(27),Coatingmixingtanks.Lastly,forthe SurfaceCoatingthinningsolvents K#P7 _category,it_Ԁappearsthatmostoftheemissionsattributedtothiscategoryarefrompointsources 7$<8 thatareknowntobesubjecttosurfacecoatingregulationsthatMassachusettshasadopted #%( 9 pursuanttoEPAs_CTG_Ԁdocuments. &!: Thus,theamountofreductionpotentiallyavailablefromfurthercontrolsontheselisted '"< categoriesismostlikelyverysmall.ThereforeEPAbelievesitwouldnotadvancetheattainment (#= dateforthewesternMA_nonattainment_Ԁarea,particularlysincethisareareliesheavilyon_NOx_ )$> controlsfromupwindareas,andfurtherlocalVOCreductionsinthisareawouldnotproduce *%? significantozonereductions. +&@ ЀGreaterConnecticut:Column5ofTableBindicatesthatcloseto17percentadditionalVOC  reductionsmaybepossiblyavailable(comparedtothereductionsneededforattainmentfroma  1990baseline).  However,theanalysisdescribedabovedidnotaccountforsomeofthespecificrequirementsthat  ConnecticutalreadyhasinitsSIP.InConnecticut,emissionsfromtop80percentofthe   categoriesthatwereassumedtobeuncontrolledincludedthefollowing:   *bcd d''44FG(#(#, ,4 , +  >YYYY+[ `[ `  >XXH2j  GreaterCTcategories @ #HXYXH2j##XXXHXYϾ#XXH2j BYYYE/$g l #YYYY B  2007Uncontrolled#HXYX,H2j_##XXhHXY~#XXH2j WYYYYD,g l #  YYYE  WTier2Name ?YYYY,!E J YYYY ?Tier3Name ?YYYY,!E J YYYY ?VOC_OSD_#HXYXH2jH##XXXHXYg# WYYYYD,E J "  YYYY W ?YYYY,!', YYYY ? ?YYYY,!', YYYY ? WYYYYD,',    YYYY WSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,!38 YYYY ?industrialadhesives bYYYYO!38 YYYY Q;@27.97Q;@bЀ27.97 yYYYYfN38 " Q;@27.97   Q;@YYYY ySurfaceCoating ?YYYY,!?D YYYY ?other bYYYYO!?D YYYY )\(*@13.08)\(*@b13.08 yYYYYfN?D " )\(*@13.08   )\(*@YYYY ySurfaceCoating ?YYYY,!KP YYYY ?thinningsolvents aYYYYN!KP YYYY (\@5.64(\@a5.64 xYYYYeMKP " (\@5.64   (\@YYYY xSurfaceCoating ?YYYY,!W\ YYYY ?electronic&other W\  electrical aYYYYN!CHYYYY RQ@4.83RQ@a4.83 xYYYYeMW\ " RQ@4.83   RQ@YYYY xServiceStations:Breathing OT &Emptying ?YYYY,!;@YYYY ?other aYYYYN!OT YYYY (\@3.07(\@a3.07 xYYYYeMOT!" (\@3.07   (\@YYYY xOther ?YYYY,!GL"YYYY ?other aYYYYN!GL#YYYY {Gz@2.81{Gz@a2.81 xYYYYeMGL$" {Gz@2.81   {Gz@YYYY xOtherCombustion ?YYYY,!SX%YYYY ?other aYYYYN!SX&YYYY = ףp=@2.03= ףp=@a2.03 xYYYYeMSX'" = ףp=@2.03   = ףp=@YYYY x ?YYYY,!_d(3YYYY ? bYYYYO!_d)3YYYY ףp= M@59.43ףp= M@b  59.43 ^TR_d*# ףp= M@59.43   ףp= M@YYYY ^Forthe SurfaceCoatingindustrialadhesivescategory,whichthelargestuncontrolled KP+ categorylisted,itisimportanttolooktoseehowthiscategorymayalreadybecontrolledunder 7<, ConnecticutstatewideVOCregulations.Insomecircumstances,industrialadhesiveswouldbe #(- coveredbythesurfacecoatingregulationsthatConnecticuthasadoptedpursuanttoEPAs_CTG_ . documents.Inothercircumstances,industrialadhesiveswouldbecoveredbyConnecticuts / regulation(i.e.,22a17420(f))governingequipmentthatemitsmorethancertainamountsof 0 VOCperhourandperday. 1 Forthe SurfaceCoatingothercategory,someoftheemissionsattributedtothiscategoryare !3 fromsourcesthataresubjecttothesurfacecoatingregulationsthatConnecticuthasadopted "4 pursuanttoEPAs_CTG_Ԁdocuments. #5 Forthe SurfaceCoatingthinningsolventscategory,itappearsthatmanyoftheemissions [%` 7 attributedtothiscategoryarefrompointsourcesthatareknowntobesubjecttoeitherthe G&L!8 surfacecoatingregulationsthatConnecticuthasadoptedpursuanttoEPAs_CTG_Ԁdocumentsor 3'8"9 pursuanttoConnecticutsnon_CTG_Ԁ_RACT_Ԁregulation. ($#: Forthe SurfaceCoatingelectronic&otherelectricalcategory,itappearsthatgiventhat )$<  Connecticutsmiscellaneousmetalpartsandproductssurfacecoatingregulationcoverssources *%= underStandardIndustrialClassification(SIC)codeofMajorGroup36(electricalmachinery),  thatmanyoftheemissionsattributedtothiscategoryarecoveredbythatregulation.   Forthe ServiceStations:Breathing&Emptyingcategory,someportionofthegasoline  dispensingfacilitiesinthestatehaveinstalledpressurereliefvalvesontheirundergroundstorage  tankventsalreadyaspartoftheirstageIIequipment,whichisrequiredthroughoutthestatefor   allfacilitiesdispensingmorethan10,000gallonspermonth.Thesepressurereliefvalves,where   installed,wouldalreadysubstantiallyreducethebreathinglossesfromtheundergroundtanks. o t The Othercombustioncategoryreferstostructuralfireswhichcannoteffectivelybecontrolled G L  withairpollutioncontrolregulations. 38  Thus,theamountofreductionpotentiallyavailablefromfurthercontrolsontheselisted    categoriesismostlikelyverysmall,andthereforeEPAbelievesitwouldnotadvancethe   attainmentdatefortheGreaterConnecticut_nonattainment_Ԁarea.   Furthermore,asshowninthemodeledattainmentdemonstration,GreaterConnecticutrelies  heavilyoncontrolsinupwindareas,especiallyfromthe_NOx_ԀSIPcallorthesection126ruleand  fromthemetropolitanNewYorkcityarea.SinceNewYorkcityhasanattainmentdateof2007,  itisunlikelythatalltheemissionreductionsnecessarytobringGreaterConnecticutinto  attainmentwillbeobtaineduntil2007.Furthermore,zerooutanalysesshowthateven kp eliminatingallofConnecticutsemissionsdoesnothelpConnecticutattainbyit1999attainment W\ date,sincetheeffectsoftransportaresosignificant.(See64FR70343)Therefore,additional CH VOCreductionsarenotseenasadvancingtheattainmentdatefortheGreaterConnecticutarea. /4 MetropolitanWashington:Column5ofTableBindicatesthat7.3percentadditionalVOC   reductionsmaybepossiblyavailable(comparedtothereductionsneededforattainmentfroma  1990baseline).(Notethattheactualreductionswillbemore,sincetheattainmentlevelof  emissionsmustalsoaccountforadditionalcontroltooffsetemissionsgrowthfrom1990tothe  attainmentyear.)However,fortheMetropolitanWashingtonarea,itishighlyunlikelythatthis  additionalpotentialreductionwouldadvancetheattainmentdatefortheareabecauseofthe   followingreasons: ! a.Theareareliesheavilyoncontroloftransportedemissionsandozone. {"  b.TheWashingtonareamodelingindicatesthat_NOx_Ԁemissionreductionsaregenerallymore g#l! beneficialinreducingozoneconcentrations,suggestingthattheareamaybe_NOx_Ԁlimited.When S$X" themaximumozoneresponseforVOCcontrols(.029ppb/tonVOC)isappliedtothepotential ?%D # additionalVOCemissionreductionsintheD.C.areadueto_RACM_Ԁ(10.2%orapproximately17 +&0!$ tons/day),theresultisanozonebenefitofonly.49ppb.SeeAttachment4foramodeling '"% sensitivityanalysis(availableonlyindocketforMetropolitanWashingtonarea). (#& &  Atlanta: )$( a.Table6ofAttachment2indicatesthat66.28tonsperdayofVOCemissionsmaybe *%) ')Ypotentiallycontrollabletosomelevel.However,asnotedabove,theAttachment2analysiswas +&* performedusingnationallyavailableinformation,whereasEPAhasadditionalreadilyavailable  informationforAtlantaasfollows:Thecategory Wastedisposal&recyclingopen  burning!residentialisshowninTable6toyield11.13tons/dayVOCemissions.However,  Georgiahasaruleprohibitingopenburning;thereforeEPAisassumingthatcategoryasnot  availableforadditionalcontrol.Thereforetheresultingemissionreductionsshouldbe66.28  11.13=55.15tons/day.ThisvalueispresentedintheTableAbelow.   b.XXXXRegulationsforthemanagedslashandprescribedopenburnsexistinthe13county o t _nonattainment_Ԁarea.Aregulationformanagedslashburnsexistfortheattainmentcountiesin [ ` their4kmmodelingdomain.#XXXX #ԀTheseemissionsamountto6.78tons/dayinTable8andwouldnot G L  beavailableforfurthercontrol. 38  c.Column5ofTableBindicatesthat8.3percentadditionalVOCreductionsmaybepossibly    available(comparedtothereductionsneededforattainmentfroma1990baseline).(Notethat   theactualreductionswillbemore,sincetheattainmentlevelofemissionsmustalsoaccountfor   additionalcontroltooffsetemissionsgrowthfrom1990totheattainmentyear.)Itiswellknown   thatAtlantais_NOx_Ԁlimited,andthereforereliesmainlyona_NOx_Ԁcontrolstrategy(see,e.g.,  Attachment6,p.69).The_nonattainment_Ԁareadependsheavilyonemissionreductionsfrom  _NOx_Ԁsourcesoutsidethe_nonattainment_Ԁarea.Therefore,itisunlikelythatevenaslargea  possiblereductionasindicatedherewouldadvancetheattainmentdate.  d.Inidentifyingsourcestomakeuptheshortfallidentifiedasneededforattainment,GAhas W\ identifiedmore_NOx_ԀandVOCreductions(i.e.,41_tpd_Ԁ_NOx_Ԁand27_tpd_ԀVOC)thanrequiredin CH theshortfallcalculations(i.e.,36_tpd_Ԁ_NOx_Ԁand21_tpd_ԀVOC).Thus,therewillbeadditional /4 VOCreductionsthatwilloccurevenwithoutconsiderationof_RACM_.   e.Inapplyingforafuelwaiverforitsadditionallowersulfurgasoline,Georgiaperformedits  ownanalysisofwhyanumberofcontrolswerenotconsideredforimplementation.Acopyof  thatanalysisappearsasAttachment3(availableonlyindocketforAtlantaarea).Thatanalysis  alsosupportaconclusionthatfurthercontrolsarenotconsideredreasonablyavailable.   ! TRP$'3 Letter LandscapeX3' Letter'3 Letter Landscape3'TXXXX   XXTABLEA X _RACM_ԀANALYSIS!STATIONARYSOURCES!ESTIMATEDADDITIONALEMISSIONREDUCTIONSPOSSIBLE   .*Yd d 4 4  bcX81X81,"dd ,Add ,Cdd +     < Emissionreductions(tons < VOC/day)   AREA  P Col1  P Col2  P WesternMA(Springfield) 8. L  R0@16.82R0@816.82 _U+L  R0@16.82 R0@ R @8.41R @_8.4 <20L  R @8.41 R @ <GreaterCT 8.   ףp= M@59.43ףp= M@859.43 `V+  ףp= M@59.43 ףp= M@ Q=@29.72Q=@`29.7 =31 Q=@29.72 Q=@ =MetroWashington(DC,VA,MD) 8. L  Q88@24.22Q88@824.22 `V+L  Q88@24.22 Q88@ Q8(@12.11Q8(@`12.1 =31L  Q8(@12.11 Q8(@ =AtlantaGA 8.  H  33333K@55.1533333K@8_55.15_ `V+ H  33333K@55.15 33333K@ Gz;@27.58Gz;@`_27.6_A75 H  Gz;@27.58  Gz;@ A*Ydd%dd "dd Add CYX81X81,"dd ,Add ,Cdd +  P P     \  Emissionreductions(tons  \  _NOx_/day)  t  AREA  p  Col1  p  Col2  p  WesternMA(Springfield) 7-  q= ף!@8.97q= ף!@7_8.97_ ]S* q= ף!@8.97 q= ף!@ @4.5@]_4.5_ ;1/ @4.5 @ ;GreaterCT 8. p zG8@24.63zG8@8_24.63_ _U+p  zG8@24.63 zG8@ (@12.3(@__12.3_ <20p! (@12.3 (@ <MetroWashington(DC,VA,MD) 8. l" )\h:@26.41)\h:@8_26.41_ `V+l# )\h:@26.41 )\h:@ L\@113.2L\@`_113.2_ =31l$ L\@113.2 L\@ =AtlantaGA 8. % R@@33.39R@@8_33.39_ _U+& R@@33.39 R@@ 333330@16.7333330@__16.7_@64' 333330@16.7  333330@ @*Ydd%dd "dd Add CYX81X81,dd ,$dd +  p(p Col1  ,) 2007emissionspossibleforcontrol!Tables6and7fromAttachment2  ,* Col2  (+ emissionscontrolif50%controlassumedforthesecategories (,    p,   #XX:#XXTABLEB _RACM_ԀANALYSIS!STATIONARYSOURCES X COMPARISONOFPOSSIBLEREDUCTIONSTOREDUCTIONSNEEDEDFORATTAINMENT   U* Y dd/dd (dd $YX81X811.841.617.046.4,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +     < Emissionreductions(tonsVOC/day)  <   < AREA  8 Col1  8 Col2  8 Col3  8  Col4  8  Col5  8  WesternMA(Springfield) 5+    O@62O@562 H>(   O@62 O@ # H0 H> #   O@62O@H62 \R(  O@62 O@ R @8.41R @\8.4 dZ0 R @8.41 R @ 333333+@13.6333333+@d13.6 <20 333333+@13.6 333333+@ <GreaterCT 6, 8 f@176f@6176 I?)8 f@176 f@ # I0 I?8 #  f@176f@I176 ^T)8 f@176 f@ Q=@29.72Q=@^29.7 e[18 Q=@29.72 Q=@ fffff0@16.9fffff0@e16.9 <208 fffff0@16.9 fffff0@ <MetroWashington(DC,VA,MD) 6,  4 d@167d@6167 I?) 4 d@167 d@ # I0 I? 4 #  d@167d@I167 ^T) 4 d@167 d@ Q8(@12.11Q8(@^12.1 dZ1 4 Q8(@12.11 Q8(@ 333333@7.3333333@d7.3 ;1/ 4 333333@7.3 333333@ ;AtlantaGA ?5   `s@310`s@?310 g]2  `s@310 `s@  5@215@g21 g]1    5@21 5@ t@331t@g331 g]2 ! t@331 t@ Gz;@27.58Gz;@g27.6 dZ1 " Gz;@27.58 Gz;@  @8.3 @d8.3?53 #  @8.3   @ ?*Ydddd 1dd 1dd 1dd 1dd Idd  Y X81X81,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +   x # x    4 $ Emissionreductions(tons_NOx_/day)  4 %   4 & AREA   0 ' Col1   0 ( Col2   0 ) Col3   0 * Col4   0 + Col5   0 , WesternMA(Springfield) 5+  -  F@44F@544 H>( .  F@44 F@ # H0 H> / #   F@44F@H_44 [Q( 0  F@44 F@ @4.5@[4.5 cY/ 1 @4.5 @ ffffff$@10.2ffffff$@c10.2 <20 2 ffffff$@10.2 ffffff$@ <GreaterCT 6, 0 3 c@158c@6158 I?)0 4 c@158 c@ # I0 I?0 5 #  c@158c@I158 ]S)0 6 c@158 c@ (@12.3(@]12.3 cY00 7 (@12.3 (@ 333333@7.8333333@c7.8 ;1/0 8 333333@7.8 333333@ ;MetroWashington(DC,VA,MD) 6, ,9 g@191g@6191 I?),: g@191 g@ # I0 I?,; #  g@191g@I191 ]S),< g@191 g@ ffffff*@13.2ffffff*@]13.2 cY0,= ffffff*@13.2 ffffff*@ @7.9@c7.9 ;1/,> @7.9 @ ;AtlantaGA ?5 ? ^@120^@?120 g]2@ ^@120 ^@  B@36B@g36 g]1A  B@36 B@ c@156c@g156 f\2B c@156 c@ 333330@16.7333330@f16.7 dZ0C 333330@16.7 333330@ ffffff%@10.7ffffff%@d10.7@64D ffffff%@10.7  ffffff%@ @*Ydddd 1dd 1dd 1dd 1dd Idd YX81X81,Xdd ,,dd +  pDp Col1  ,E Attainmentyearreductionsfromoriginalattainmentdemonstration(reductionsattheattainmentyearfrom1990)(frommaterialaccompanyingAdministrators ,F briefing12/99;locatedat4 O  5  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/fr_notices/citiex.pdf).6iO}  7 ԀNotethatsincethesereductionsarefroma1990base,allemissionsgrowthbetween G 1990andtheattainmentyearwouldalsohavetobeoffsetbycontroltoprovideanattainmentlevelofemissions,sothesereductionsdonotaccountforallthat TH additionalemissionreductionsneededtooffsetgrowth. lI Note:TheVOCand_NOx_ԀemissionsneededforattainmentforGreaterConnecticutwasrevisedbytheStateofConnecticut.Connecticutsubmittedrevised2007 ,J transportationconformitybudgetsinFebruary2000,andthischangedboththeonroadestimatesfor2007andtheemissionreductionsnecessaryforattainment.The K revisionsarereflectedinthistable.TableCbelowprovidesthederivationoftherevisednumbers. TL Note:The_NOx_ԀemissionreductionsneededforattainmentforWesternMassachusettshavebeenupdatedbasedoninformationprovidedbytheEPARegionIoffice lM anddifferfromtheamountsinthe12/99briefingmaterial. ,N Note:TheVOCand_NOx_ԀemissionreductionsneededforattainmentforAtlantahavebeenupdatedbasedoninformationprovidedbytheEPARegionIVofficeand O differfromtheamountsinthe12/99briefingmaterial.(seeAttachment5!availableonlyindocketforAtlantaSIP).  TP Col2  Q AdditionalshortfallneededidentifiedbyEPAorState(frommaterialaccompanyingAdministratorsbriefing12/99;locatedat R http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/fr_notices/citiex.pdf)  hS Col3  T Totalreductionsneededforattainment(Col1+Col2)  U oCol4  h V Additionalreductionsthatmightbeobtainedfromstationarysourcemeasuresunderpossible_RACM_Ԁrules(fromCol.2ofTableA) h W o Col5  d Percentdifference(Col3Col4)*100%d   #XX#   TABLEC S EmissionsSummaryfor1HourOzoneAttainmentDemonstrations(tonsperday) 9 September27,2000  w #*~LYMddXdd X,dd ,YX81X81~,Sdd ,dd,dd,dd,9dd,9dd,dd,dd+  -#C C  -Ѐ_Nonattainment_ԀArea  O  (attainmentyearorattainment  5  yearrequested) ?5&s  "f ?1990  O  Emissions .$ 5 " .AttainmentYear  O Emissions .$ 5 " .Emission  O Reductions1  5  (Thisdoesnot s   include Y    shortfall) * ? "   * ! U  !VOC 'a " '_NOx_ 'a " 'VOC 'a " '_NOx_ 'a " 'VOC 'a " '_NOx_ "a " "GreaterConnecticut \ (2007) 6ddd%B"zzR 6  Total: \ Z* ^ddM!B"ddd z@417z@^  417 \ * ~ddmAB " z@417 z@dd  v@354 v@~354 ddvA\!"  v@354  v@dd @@@@ n@  241 \" 1, ddJB#" @@@@  n@dd @@@@h@196 ddsJ\$" @@@@ h@dd  @@f@176 zdddg>\%"  @@ f@dd  @@c@z158 ND>\&"  @@ c@ddd N ! X& !  Point: G=d'  A@34A@G34 f\1d("  A@34 A@  U@87U@f87 f\1d)"  U@87 U@  1@171@f17 f\1d*"  1@17 1@  H@48H@f48 dZ1d+"  H@48 H@  @@1@d17 bX/d,"  @@ 1@  @@C@b39 ?5/d-"  @@ C@ ? ! z- !  Area: H>6. @f@178@f@H178 f\26/" @f@178 @f@   @8 @f8 f\060"   @8  @ b@148b@f148 f\261" b@148 b@  "@9"@f9 cY062"  "@9 "@  @@>@c30 bX/63"  @@ >@  @@b-1 ?5/64"  @@  ? ! L4 !  Onroad: H>X5 _@127_@H127 h^2X6" _@127 _@ f@176f@h176 g]2X7" f@176 f@  >@30>@g30 f\1X8"  >@30 >@  @S@77@S@f77 dZ1X9"  @S@77 @S@  @@@X@d97 bX/X:"  @@ @X@  @@X@b99 ?5/X;"  @@ X@ ? ! n; !  Nonroad: G=*<  S@78S@G78 f\1*="  S@78 S@  T@83T@f83 f\1*>"  T@83 T@  G@46G@f46 f\1*?"  G@46 G@  O@62O@f62 dZ1*@"  O@62 O@  @@@@d32 bX/*A"  @@ @@  @@5@b21?53*B"  @@  5@ ?XX#XXO9#1Thesearedifferencesinthenonattainmentareatotalemissions(1990emissionsminusattainmentyearemissions).SomeStatesaregetting C additionalemissionreductionsoutsidethenonattainmentarea.Theseadditionalreductionsarenotreflectedinthetable.  nD XXXX    ATTACHMENT1!MOBILESOURCEANALYSIS    ; TRP$'3 Letter LandscapeP$'3 Letter Landscape'3 Letter Landscape'3 Letter LandscapeTTable1.AttainmentYearEmissionsandVehicleMilesTraveled(_VMT_)   *fYgddSdd Sdddddd9dd99dd9ddddLYM..,` dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +    _Nonattainment_ԀArea J  (attainmentyearor 0 requestedattainmentyear)    Mobile J Source 0 Category    AttainmentYear J Emissions  0   Emissionsfrom J  LightDutyVehicles  0  (VOC=80%)   (Nox=70%)     AttainmentYear J Daily_VMT_  0  DailyTons J perMile (from 0 LightDuty  Vehicles)    Atlanta,GA  & v   & v   & v  <2 & v xA 132000000xA<132,000,000 ;1/& v xA 132000000 xA ; 8. & v L-2003L8(2003) 7-+  L-2003 L 7OnroadVOC    132_TPD_    106_TPD_     ;1   Hת>.0000008Hת>;.0000008 :0.  Hת>.0000008 Hת> :   j  Onroad_NOx_   j! 224_TPD_   j" 157_TPD_   j#  ;1  j$ v !>.0000012v !>;.0000012 :0. j% v !>.0000012 v !> :   &    '    (    )    *   +  *hYidd` dd ` dd dd dd dd dd fYg..,` dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +   +   GreaterConnecticut  ^ ,   ^ -   ^ .  ;1 ^ / A75590000A;75,590,000 :0.^ 0 A75590000 A : 8. ^ 1 \-2007\8(2007) 7-+ 2 \-2007 \ 7OnroadVOC   3 31_TPD_   4 24_TPD_   5  ;1  6 v !>.0000003v !>;.0000003 :0. 7 v !>.0000003 v !> :  R8 Onroad_NOx_  R9 91_TPD_  R: 51_TPD_  R;  ;1 R< _eG|>.0000007_eG|>;.0000007 :0.R= _eG|>.0000007 _eG|> :  |>   |?   |@   |A   |B  |C  *jYkdd` dd ` dd dd dd dd dd hYi..,` dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +  C  Springfield,MA FD (WesternMA)  ,E   FF   FG   FH   FI  8. FJ L-2003L8(2003) 7-+VK L-2003 L 7OnroadVOC  VL 24_TPD_  VM 19_TPD_ ;1 VN ezvA23570000ezvA;23,570,000 `V.VO ezvA23570000 ezvA Hת>.0000008Hת>`.0000008 :0.VP Hת>.0000008 Hת> :   Q Onroad_NOx_   R 49_TPD_   S 34_TPD_   T  ;1  U _eG|>.0000014_eG|>;.0000014 :0. V _eG|>.0000014 _eG|> :  JW   JX   JY   JZ   J[  J\   *lYmdd` dd ` dd dd dd dd dd jYk..,` dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd ,dd +  `\`  Washington,DCMDVA  ]   ^   _  <2 ` ǟA 133300000ǟA<133,300,000 ;1/a ǟA 133300000 ǟA ; 8. b T-2005T8(2005) 7-+>c T-2005 T 7OnroadVOC  >d 105_TPD_  >e Ѐ84_TPD_  >f  ;1 >g v !>.0000006v !>;.0000006 :0.>h v !>.0000006 v !> :  i Onroad_NOx_  j 178_TPD_  k  125_TPD_  l  ;1 m 1E2>.00000091E2>;.0000009>42n 1E2>.0000009  1E2> > Table2.Atlanta,GAPotentialEmissionReductionsfromTransportationControlMeasures(_TCMs_)   *VYWdd` dd ` dd dd dd dd dd lYm.., dd , dd , dd ,m dd +  ||    _TCM_ԀCategory 0  X   Regional_VMT_ԀReduction 0 (%Range)     RegionalDaily 0 _VMT_ԀReduced     EmissionsReduced 0 (TonsperDay) #    #EmployerbasedTDM @   ЄVan/CarPools & v  ЄMiddayShuttles  \  ЄParkingCashOut  B  ЄGuaranteedRideHome  ( ЄTransitSubsidy    Є_Telecommuting_      0.23.5 @   264,0004,620,000  @  VOC:0.2113.696 @  _NOx_:0.3175.544   \ AreaWide_Rideshare_ n  ЄParkandRide T  ЄRideMatching :  ЄTransportationManagement   Assoc.  ЄVanPoolSubsidy/Insurance     0.10.2 n   132,000264,000  n  VOC:0.1060.211 n  _NOx_:0.1580.317  :  ParkingManagement f! ЄPreferentialParkingfor_HOV_ L" ЄParkingPricing 2# ЄZoningRequirements $ ЄCommercialVehicle % Management  &   0.54.2 f'  660,0005,544,000  f( VOC:0.5284.435 f) _NOx_:0.7926.653  2+ Bicycle/PedestrianPrograms ^, ЄDesignatedLanes/Routes D- ЄSafetyEnhancements *. ЄTransitSupportFacilities  /   <0.1 ^0  <132,000  ^1 VOC:<0.106 ^2 _NOx_:<0.158  *4 ImprovedPublicTransit td ЄExpressBus ZJ  _Paratransit_ @ 0 ЄShuttle_Circulators_ &  ЄCoordinatedFare      0.53.0 td  660,0003,960,000  td VOC:0.5283.168 td _NOx_:0.7924.752 @ 0   ActivityCenters   ЄMultimodalTransferCenters   ЄRemoteParking   ЄIncident/CongestionResponse      0.10.2   132,000264,000   VOC:0.1060.211  _NOx_:0.1580.317   SmartGrowth J:  Є_Infill_ԀDevelopment 0  ЄTransitOriented   Development   ЄMixedUseDevelopment     0.18.8 J:   132,00011,616,000  J:  VOC:0.1069.293 J:  _NOx_:0.15813.939    *XYZdd dd dd dd m dd m VYW.., dd ,m dd +    Total  \L  VOC:1.63821.12 \L _NOx_: 2.45431.680  (! _  x( Ї Table3.GreaterConnecticutPotentialEmissionReductionsfromTransportationControlMeasures(_TCMs_)   *x[Y\dd dd m dd m XYZ..x, dd , dd , dd ,m dd +  ||    _TCM_ԀCategory 0  (j   Regional_VMT_ԀReduction 0 (%Range)     RegionalDaily 0 _VMT_ԀReduced     EmissionsReduced 0 (TonsperDay) #    #EmployerbasedTDM @   ЄVan/CarPools & v  ЄMiddayShuttles  \  ЄParkingCashOut  B  ЄGuaranteedRideHome  ( ЄTransitSubsidy    Є_Telecommuting_      0.23.5 @   151,0002,646,000  @  VOC:0.0450.794 @  _NOx_:0.1061.852   \ AreaWide_Rideshare_ n  ЄParkandRide T  ЄRideMatching :  ЄTransportationManagement   Assoc.  ЄVanPoolSubsidy/Insurance     0.10.2 n   76,000151,000  n  VOC:0.0230.045 n  _NOx_:0.0530.106  :  ParkingManagement f! ЄPreferentialParkingfor_HOV_ L" ЄParkingPricing 2# ЄZoningRequirements $ ЄCommercialVehicle % Management  &   0.54.2 f'  378,0003,175,000  f( VOC:0.1130.953 f) _NOx_:0.2652.223  2+ Bicycle/PedestrianPrograms ^, ЄDesignatedLanes/Routes D- ЄSafetyEnhancements *. ЄTransitSupportFacilities  /   <0.1 ^0  <76,000  ^1 VOC:<0.023 ^2 _NOx_:<0.053  *4 ImprovedPublicTransit td  ExpressBus ZJ Є_Paratransit_ @ 0 ЄShuttle_Circulators_ &  ЄCoordinatedFare      0.53.0 td  378,0002,268,000  td VOC:0.1130.680 td _NOx_:0.2651.588  @ 0  ActivityCenters  v  ЄMultimodalTransferCenters l \  ЄRemoteParking RB  ЄIncident/CongestionResponse  8(   0.10.2  v  76,000151,000   v VOC:0.0230.045  v _NOx_:0.0530.106  RB SmartGrowth   Є_Infill_ԀDevelopment   ЄTransitOriented ~n  Development dT  ЄMixedUseDevelopment  J:    0.18.8    76,0006,652,000    VOC:0.0231.996   _NOx_:0.0534.205 ~n   *]Y^dd dd dd dd m dd m [Y\.., dd ,m dd +  `P`P  Total    VOC:0.3524.536  Nox:0.82210.133  !  ) Ї Table4.Springfield,MA(WesternMA)PotentialEmissionReductionsfromTransportationControlMeasures(_TCMs_)   *x_Y`dd dd m dd m ]Y^..x, dd , dd , dd ,m dd +  ||    _TCM_ԀCategory 0  n{   Regional_VMT_ԀReduction 0 (%Range)     RegionalDaily 0 _VMT_ԀReduced     EmissionsReduced 0 (TonsperDay) #    #EmployerbasedTDM @   ЄVan/CarPools & v  ЄMiddayShuttles  \  ЄParkingCashOut  B  ЄGuaranteedRideHome  ( ЄTransitSubsidy    Є_Telecommuting_      0.23.5 @   47,000825,000  @  VOC:0.0380.660 @  _NOx_:0.0661.155   \ AreaWide_Rideshare_ n  ЄParkandRide T  ЄRideMatching :  ЄTransportationManagement   Assoc.  ЄVanPoolSubsidy/Insurance     0.10.2 n   24,00047,000  n  VOC:0.0190.038 n  _NOx_:0.0340.066  :  ParkingManagement f! ЄPreferentialParkingfor_HOV_ L" ЄParkingPricing 2# ЄZoningRequirements $ ЄCommercialVehicle % Management  &   0.54.2 f'  118,000990,000  f( VOC:0.0940.792 f) _NOx_:0.1651.386  2+ Bicycle/PedestrianPrograms ^, ЄDesignatedLanes/Routes D- ЄSafetyEnhancements *. ЄTransitSupportFacilities  /   <0.1 ^0  <24,000  ^1 VOC:<0.019 ^2 _NOx_:<0.034  *4 ImprovedPublicTransit td  ExpressBus ZJ Є_Paratransit_ @ 0 ЄShuttle_Circulators_ &  ЄCoordinatedFare      0.53.0 td  118,000707,000  td VOC:0.0940.566 td _NOx_:0.1650.990  @ 0  ActivityCenters  v  ЄMultimodalTransferCenters l \  ЄRemoteParking RB  ЄIncident/CongestionResponse  8(   0.10.2  v  24,00047,000   v VOC:0.0190.038  v _NOx_:0.0340.066  RB SmartGrowth   Є_Infill_ԀDevelopment   ЄTransitOriented ~n  Development dT  ЄMixedUseDevelopment  J:    0.18.8    24,0002,074,000    VOC:0.0191.659   _NOx_:0.0342.904 ~n   *aYedd dd dd dd m dd m _Y`.., dd ,m dd +  `P`P  Total    VOC:0.2933.772  _NOx_:0.5156.601  !   |" Table5.Washington,DCMDVAPotentialEmissionReductionsfromTransportationControlMeasures(_TCMs_)   *xNYOdd dd m dd m aYe..x, dd , dd , dd ,m dd +  ||    _TCM_ԀCategory 0     Regional_VMT_ԀReduction 0 (%Range)     RegionalDaily 0 _VMT_ԀReduced     EmissionsReduced 0 (TonsperDay) #    #EmployerbasedTDM @   ЄVan/CarPools & v  ЄMiddayShuttles  \  ЄParkingCashOut  B  ЄGuaranteedRideHome  ( ЄTransitSubsidy    Є_Telecommuting_      0.23.5 @   267,0004,666,000  @  VOC:0.1602.800 @  _NOx_:0.2404.199   \ AreaWide_Rideshare_ n  ЄParkandRide T  ЄRideMatching :  ЄTransportationManagement   Assoc.  ЄVanPoolSubsidy/Insurance     0.10.2 n   133,000267,000  n  VOC:0.0800.160 n  _NOx_:0.1200.240  :  ParkingManagement f! ЄPreferentialParkingfor_HOV_ L" ЄParkingPricing 2# ЄZoningRequirements $ ЄCommercialVehicle % Management  &   0.54.2 f'  667,0005,599,000  f( VOC:0.4003.359 f) _NOx_:0.6005.039  2+ Bicycle/PedestrianPrograms ^, ЄDesignatedLanes/Routes D- ЄSafetyEnhancements *. ЄTransitSupportFacilities  /   <0.1 ^0  <133,000  ^1 VOC:<0.080 ^2 _NOx_:<0.120  *4 ImprovedPublicTransit td  ExpressBus ZJ Є_Paratransit_ @ 0 ЄShuttle_Circulators_ &  ЄCoordinatedFare      0.53.0 td  667,0003,999,000  td VOC:0.4002.399 td _NOx_:0.6003.599  @ 0  ActivityCenters  v  ЄMultimodalTransferCenters l \  ЄRemoteParking RB  ЄIncident/CongestionResponse  8(   0.10.2  v  133,000267,000   v VOC:0.0800.160  v _NOx_:0.1200.240  RB SmartGrowth   Є_Infill_ԀDevelopment   ЄTransitOriented ~n  Development dT  ЄMixedUseDevelopment  J:    0.18.8    133,00011,730,000    VOC:0.0807.038   Nox:0.12010.557 ~n   *PYQdd dd dd dd m dd m NYO.., dd ,m dd +  `P`P  Total    VOC:1.24015.996  _NOx_:1.86023.994  !   rb# Table6.ComparisonofPotential_TCM_ԀEmissionReductionstoEmissionReductionsNeededforAttainment  *xRYSdd dd m dd m PYQ..x, dd , dd , dd , dd +  || _Nonattainment_ԀArea  0 ReductionsNeeded 0 forAttainment(_TPD_)   PotentialReductions 0 from_TCMs_Ԁ(_TPD_)   _TCM_ԀreductionsasaPercent 0 ofTotalReductionsNeeded    Atlanta,GA  @    VOC331 @   _NOx_ 156  & v   VOC11.38 @   _NOx_Ԁ17.07  & v  VOC3.4% @  _NOx_ 򀄀 11%  & v GreaterConnecticut     VOC176   _NOx_Ԁ158     VOC2.21   _NOx_Ԁ5.48     VOC1.3%   _NOx_ 򀄀 3.5%    Springfield,MA P  (WesternMA)  6   VOC62 P  _NOx_ 򀄀 44  6   VOC2.03 P  _NOx_Ԁ3.56  6   VOC3.3% P  _NOx_Ԁ8.1% 6   Washington,DCMDVA     VOC167  ! _NOx_ 򀄀 191   "  VOC8.62  # _NOx_Ԁ12.93   $  VOC5.2%  % _NOx_Ԁ6.8%  &      & TRY03' LetterP$'3 Letter Landscape 3' Letter'3 Letter LandscapeT    ATTACHMENT2  STATIONARYSOURCEANALYSIS   XXXXSeptember14,2000 L  Thisattachmentcontainstheresultsofananalysisofpollutantemissionsandcontrolmeasures $ t fortheAtlanta,Georgia;GreaterConnecticut;Springfield,Massachusetts;andWashington,DC  ` seriousozone_nonattainment_Ԁareas.  L  Thepurposeofthisanalysisistoevaluateozoneseasonoxidesofnitrogen(_NOx_)andvolatile $  organiccompounds(VOC)emissionlevelsandtheirrelationshipstotheapplicationofcurrent   andanticipatedcontrolmeasuresexpectedtobeimplementedineachofthesefourareas.This   analysiswasperformedtoprovideEPAwithdatatosupporttheirdeterminationifadditional   ReasonablyAvailableControlMeasures(_RACM_)areavailableintheseareasafteradoptionof   thecontrolmeasuresrequiredbytheCleanAirAct(CAA)orproposedinStateImplementation p Plans(_SIPs_). \ The2007emissionestimatesusedinthisanalysisweredevelopedby_E.H._Ԁ_Pechan_Ԁ&Associates, 4 Inc.(_Pechan_)underacontractforEPAtosupporttheTier2motorvehicle_rulemaking_.These  p nationalinventoriescontainemissionestimatesforelectricitygeneratingunits(_EGUs_),on-road  \ mobile,non-_EGU_Ԁpoint,stationaryarea,and_nonroad_Ԁsources.The2007projectionyear H inventorywaspreparedbyapplyinggrowthandcontrolassumptionstothe1996National 4 EmissionsTrends(NET)baseyearinventory.Forallthenon_EGU_Ԁpointsourceandstationary   areasectors,emissionsgrowthwasestimatedutilizingBureauofEconomicAnalysisGross   ProductgrowthfactorsattheStatelevelby2-digitStandardIndustrialClassificationcode.  ControlsassumptionsincludedimplementationofallfederalCAArequiredprogramsas  applicableincluding:TitleIIIMaximumAchievableControlTechnology(_MACT_),TitleI  ReasonablyAvailableControlTechnology(_RACT_),andControlTechniqueGuidelines(_CTG_). l ControlsfortheTier2motorvehiclestandardsandthe_NOx_  X  SIPCallarealsoincludedinthe2007emissionestimates.Thedetailsofthedevelopmentofthe  emissioninventories(includinggrowthandcontrolassumptions)areprovidedinProceduresfor  DevelopingBaseYearandFutureYearMassandModelingInventoriesfortheTier2Final  _Rulemaking_,_E.H._Ԁ_Pechan_Ԁ&Associates,Inc.,September1999. t Inessence,theanalysisprovidesanassessmentofthesourcecategoriesthatarenotcontrolledin L  eachareaby2007,eitherthroughadoptionofthecontrolmeasuresrequiredbytheCAAor 8  throughthoseproposedinthe_SIPs_.Theemissionsourcecategoriesevaluatedinthisstudy $ t includeallcategories except electricgeneratingunits(_EGU_),pointsourcecombustion,onroad  ` mobile,_nonroad_,and_biogenics_Ԁsources(i.e.,theanalysisfocusesonstationaryareasourcesand  P  noncombustionpointsourcesonly).Theanalysisconsidersonly2007ozoneseasondaily_NOx_  <  andVOCemissionestimatessincethesepollutantsarethemainprecursorsofozone.Notethat (  2007isnottheproposedattainmentdateforthefourareasandthe_NOx_andVOCemission   estimatesutilizedforthisanalysisdonotmatchthepost-controlemissioninventoriesprovidedin   theStatesubmitted_SIPs_Ԁforeacharea.   Table1providesalistingofthestationaryareasourceandnoncombustionpointsource t categoriesthatweredeterminedtohaveeitherCAAor_SIPs_Ԁcontrolrequirementsby2007. ` Controlmeasuresarerequiredinthesecategoriesinsevereozone_nonattainment_Ԁareasthrough L federalrules,_MACT_,_RACT_,_CTG_,andanticipatedSIPrequirements.Inmostcases,the 8 controlledcategoriesweredefinedatthetier1+tier2+tier3level.Wherenecessaryand/or $t possible,controlcategoriesweredefinedattheSCCand/or_nonattainment_Ԁarealevel. ` Theresultsarepresentedinninesummarytables.Tables2through5presentTier3emission 8 summariesforozoneseasondailytonsof_NOx_andVOCforeachofthefourareas.Thecolumns $ labeled 1996provideemissionestimatesfromthe1996NationalEmissionsTrendsInventory  (NET)developedby_EFIG_.Thecolumnslabeled 2007provide2007emissionestimatesthat  includeemissionsfromALLsectors.Thecolumnslabeled 2007SectorsincludeONLY  emissionsfromthesourcesectorsunderconsiderationinthisanalysis(allexcept:_EGU_,  combustionnon-_EGU_,onroadmobile,_nonroad_,andbiogenic).Thecolumnslabeled 2007 p Uncontrolledincludeemissionsfromthesourcesectorsthatareunderconsiderationinthis \  analysisANDarenotlistedascontrolledinthe 2007summaries(see_Pechan_Ԁ1999abovefor H! detailsofthecontrolsincludedinthe2007emissioninventory). 4"  Thecolumnslabeled 2007%RemainingshowthepercentageofVOCand_NOx_emissionsthat  $\" remaininuncontrolledcategories.Forexample,thetworightmostcolumnsinTable2shows $H # thatintheAtlantaozone_nonattainment_Ԁarea19%ofVOCand10%of_NOx_areemittedfrom %4!$ sourcecategoriesthatareexpectedtobeuncontrolledin2007.Similarresultsarefoundinthe & "% GreaterConnecticutandtheSpringfieldMassachusetts_nonattainment_Ԁareas(about20%VOC ' #& and10%_NOx_remaining).TheWashington,DC_nonattainment_Ԁareashowsthatintotal8%of (#' VOCand7%of_NOx_areexpectedtoberemaining.ThelargestuncontrolledVOCcategoryinall )$( areasissolventutilizationsurfacecoating. *%)  l+&* ЇTables6and7listtheTier3categoriesandemissionsineachareathataccountfor80%ofthe  uncontrolledVOCand_NOx_emissions,respectively.Tables8and9provideemissionsbysource  classificationcode(SCC)fortheTier3categoriesshowninTable6and7(i.e.,source  categoriesineachareathataccountfor80%oftheuncontrolledemissions). t Tables10through17providethedetailedVOCand_NOx_emissionestimatesforthe 2007 L  UncontrolledsourceslistedinTable6and7.Thesetablesprovidepointsourceleveldetails 8  andincludesectortype(stationaryareaorpointsource),statecodes,countycodes,plantnames, $ t plantandpointids,SCC,andSCCdescriptions.Tables10through13providethisinformation  ` forVOCforAtlanta,Georgia;GreaterConnecticut;Springfield,Massachusetts;andWashington  L  DC,respectively.Tables14through17providethedetailedinformationfor_NOx_forthesame  8  fourareas. $  [ThetablescitedabovearefoundinseparateExcelspreadsheetfile;name:_result_tables.xls_]      ATTACHMENT3  GEORGIAANALYSISOFADDITIONALMEASURESINSUPPORTOFGASOLINE  FUELWAIVER. #XXXX4#  (availableelectronicallyinseparatefile:RACMatt3._pdf_Ԁ)  t L  ATTACHMENT4  MODELSENSITIVITYSTUDYFORMETROPOLITANWASHINGTONAREA   (availableonlyindocketforMetropolitanWashingtonArea)   _A.WashingtonAreaOzoneSensitivityModeling  TheairqualitymodelingusingtheUrbanAirshedModel(UAMIV)wassubmittedwiththe  attainmentdemonstrationthatincludedmodelingofthepost1996planandsensitivityrunsthat t lookedattheairqualityeffectsofreductionsbeyondthepost1996plan. ` Severalscenariosweredeveloped.Thebasecase basebs2A2beffectivelymodeledthepost 8  1996planwithOTAGRunIboundaryconditions.ThesensitivelyrunS1A2bfurtheredreduce $ t NOxemissionsfrompointsourcesby60%.Inadditiontoa60%reductioninNOxpointsource  ` emissionsincaseS1A2B,caseS2A2breducedNOxemissionsfrommobileandareasourcesby  L  30%.CaseS3A2bcontainstheemissionreductionsincaseS1A2bplusanadditional30%  8  reductioninbothareaandmobilesources.BecausepointsourceVOCemissionsaresosmall $  (lessthan4%ofthemanmadeemissions)intheMetropolitanWashington,DCarea,theUAM   modelwouldnotbeexpectedtorespondtoevena100%reduction.Therefore,nosensitivity   modelingwasperformedforpointsourceVOCemissions.Theresultsofthesensitivity   modelingarelocatedinTables72through74startingonpage25inappendixCoftheApril10,   1998attainmentplansubmittalentitled StateImplementationPlan(SIP)Revision,PhaseII p AttainmentPlanfortheWashingtonDCMDVANonattainmentAreaAppendices . ` B.Analysis (x Table1belowprovidesasummaryofthemodelingresultsandeffectsofthesensitivityruncase P reductionsontheinventory.Themodelingresultsincludethepeakozoneconcentrationsand < gridcellsover125ppbintheWashington,DCsubdomain.Foreachepisodedaythefollowing ( arecalculated:    Thepeakozonedecreaseinppb.    ThedecreaseinNOxorVOCemissionsintonsperday. t 0  Theresponseofozoneconcentrationstoreductions,the ozoneresponse,inppbperton L! reduced.Thisisthetotalpeakozonedecreasedividedbythereductionsmodeled.8" (#(# ForsensitivitycaseS1A2b(60%reductioninpointsourceNOxemissionsfromthebasecase) $L # the ozoneresponseiscalculatedversusthechangeinozonerelativetothebasecasebs2A2b. %8!$ ForsensitivitycaseS2A2b(S1A2bplusanadditional30%NOxreductionfrombasebs2A2bin '#& mobilenon-roadandon-roadandareasources)tworesponsefactorsarecalculated:Oneis (#' relativetotheinventoryandozonepredictionsofsensitivitycaseS1A2b.thesecondisrelative )$(  totheinventoryandchangeinozonerelativetothebasecasebs2A2b.Thelatter Ozone *%) responseconsidersthecombinedeffectsoftheadditional60%reductioninNOxemissions  frompointsourcesandanadditional30%reductioninNOxfromareaandmobilesources.   ForsensitivitycaseS3A2b(S1A2bplusanadditional30%VOCreductionfromthebasecasein t bothareaandmobileemissions)reductiontheresponseiscalculatedversusthechangeinozone ` relativetothesensitivitycaseS1A2b(additional60%reductionofNOxfrompointsourcesfrom L  thebasecase). 8  C.Results  ` Theresultsareasfollows:  8  SensitivitycaseS1A2b(additional60%reductionofNOxfrompointsources)showsaslight    ozoneresponserelativetothebasecasebs2A2bintherangeof0.013to0.056ppbpertonof   NOxreduced.Thenumberofcellsover125ppbincreasedordecreasedslightlydependingupon   theepisodeday.   SensitivitycaseS2A2b(caseS1A2bplusadditional30%reductionofmobileandareaNOx \ sources)resultsinana ozoneresponserelativetothecaseS1A2bintherangeof0.083to H 0.120ppbpertonofNOx% @ reduced.Thenumberofcellsover125ppbdecreaseddramaticallyon 4 allepisodedays.ConsideringtheeffectsoftheoverallNOXreductions(60%frompointsources  p and30%fromothersources)representedincaseS2A2b,the ozoneresponseislowerranging  \ from0.048to0.088ppbpertonreducedduetotheeffectoflesseffectivepointsourceemission H reductions. 4 SensitivitycaseS3A2b(caseS1A2bplusadditional30%reductionofmobileandareaVOC   sourcesNOxfrompointsources)resultsinana ozoneresponserelativetothecaseS1A2bin  therangeof0.021to0.029ppbpertonofVOCreduced.Thenumberofcellsover125ppb  decreasedonallepisodedays.ThelackofmodelingofjustVOCemissionreductionsoffrom  mobileandareasourcesof30%fromthebasecasebs2A2bwithouttheadditional60%reduction l fromNOxpointsourcesbyisadrawback.However,becausetheresponsetoreductionsfrom X  NOxpointsourcesisrelativelysmall,theresponsetojustVOCreductionsof30%fromthebase D! casebs2A2bwouldprobablybesimilar. 0"  E.Conclusions $D # Thus,fortheWashington,DCarea,themodelingindicatesthatNOxemissionreductionsare &"% generallymorebeneficialinreducingozoneconcentrations,suggestingthattheareamybeNOx '#& limited. (#'   )$( WhenthemaximumozoneresponseforVOCcontrols(.029ppb/tonVOC)isappliedtothe  potentialadditionalVOCemissionreductionsintheD.C.areaduetoRACM(10.2%or  approximately17tons/day),theresultisanozonebenefitofonly.49ppb.   ̀  ` TRP$'3 Letter LandscapeY03' Letter'3 Letter Landscape 3' LetterTAXXXX*B;>Cdd dd dd dd dd RYS..,,,,,',e,e,e,m +  ;1 , ;#XXXAX#DX7MXXXԀ Table1:Summaryof_Sensistiveity_ԀModelRunsandAnalysis H>&, ,   ,HA. +!> +ModelingInventoryAttainmentPlan * > * '> ' '> ' ?5> , ,? 'P ' -#P -VOC 3)P  3_NOx_ -#P  - 'P  ' 'P  ' 'P  ' 'P ' ?5P , ,? -#b -Point UKb 333333)@12.6333333)@U12.6 wm9b3 333333)@12.6 333333)@ e@174.0e@w174 OE:b3 e@174.0 e@ O 'b ' 'b ' 'b ' 'b ' ?5b , ,? -#$ t -Area VL$ t  c@152.3 c@V152.3 wm:$ t3  c@152.3  c@ fffffJ@53.3fffffJ@w53.3 ND9$ t3 fffffJ@53.3 fffffJ@ N '$ t ' '$ t ' '$ t ' '$ t  ' ?5$ t! , ,? -#6 " -Ѐnon-road UK6 # Q@70.4Q@U70.4 vl96 $3 Q@70.4 Q@ 33333W@92.333333W@v92.3 ND96 %3 33333W@92.3 33333W@ N '6 & ' '6 ' ' '6 ( ' '6 ) ' ?56 * , ,? -#H + -On-Road VLH , ^@123.5^@V123.5 xn:H -3 ^@123.5 ^@ i@205.0i@x205 OE:H .3 i@205.0 i@ O 'H / ' 'H 0 ' 'H 1 ' 'H 2 ' ?5H 3 , ,? 'Z 4 ' KAZ 5  0lv@K358.8 nd5Z 63  0 lv@  0d@n524.6 J@5Z 73  0 d@ J 'Z 8 ' 'Z 9 ' 'Z : ' 'Z ; ' :0Z < , ,: 'l = ' 'l > ' 'l ? ' 'l @ ' 1'l A 1 :0l B : C9!l C ,  ,C +!~ D +ЀModelingResults(Basebs2A2b) 4*~ E 4Episode3 :0~ F :Episode3b H>&~ G ,  ,H ' H ' ' I ' ' J ' ' K ' -# L -July19,  M 1991 3)v N 3July20,  O 1991 7-v P 7July16,1991 H>& Q ,  ,H 1' R 1 0& S 0 -# T -PeakValue WM U  ףp=Za@138.82 ףp=Za@W138.82 zp; V3  ףp=Za@138.82  ףp=Za@ HzOf@178.49HzOf@z178.49 zp; W3 HzOf@178.49 HzOf@  ףp=b@150.07 ףp=b@z150.07 VL; X3  ףp=b@150.07  ףp=b@ Vppb E;# Y , ,E ' Z ' ' [ ' ' \ ' -# ] -Cellsover125ppb SI ^  M@59M@S59 si7 _3  M@59 M@ v@365v@s365 tj8 `3 v@365 v@ m@237m@t237 MC8 a3 m@237 m@ M >4 b , , > & Resultsofsensitivityruns =3c ,   ,=B. 1'd 1S1A2bAdditional60%reductionfrombasebs2A2bin_NOx_Ԁpointsources 0&e 0 'f ' ?5g , ,? ' h ' -# i -VOC 3) j 3_NOx_ -# k - ' l ' ' m ' ' n ' ' o ' ?5 p , ,? -#2q -Point UK2r 333333)@12.6333333)@U12.60 vl92s3 333333)@12.6 333333)@ ffffffQ@69.6ffffffQ@v69.60 TJ92t3 ffffffQ@69.6 ffffffQ@ TModeledPeak 2u Value WMv Gz.a@137.44Gz.a@W137.44 zp;2w3 Gz.a@137.44 Gz.a@ Gze@172.69Gze@z172.69 zp;2x3 Gze@172.69 Gze@ = ףpb@148.67= ףpb@z148.67 VL;2y3 = ףpb@148.67 = ףpb@ Vppb E;#2z , ,E -#*{ -Area VL*|  c@152.3 c@V152.30 wm:*}3  c@152.3  c@ fffffJ@53.3fffffJ@w53.30 TJ9*~3 fffffJ@53.3 fffffJ@ TCellsover125ppb SI*  J@52J@S52 si7*3  J@52 J@ v@361v@s361 tj8*3 v@361 v@  n@241 n@t241 MC8*3  n@241  n@ M ?5* , ,? -#< -Ѐnon-road UK< Q@70.4Q@U70.40 vl9<3 Q@70.4 Q@ 33333W@92.333333W@v92.30 TJ9<3 33333W@92.3 33333W@ TOzonedecrease QG<  @@Gz?Q1.38 nd5<3  @@ Gz?  @@@33333@n5.80 nd5<3  @@ @33333@  @@fffff?n1.40 PF5<3  @@ fffff? Pppb E;#< , ,E -#N -On-Road VLN ^@123.5^@V123.50 vl:N3 ^@123.5 ^@ i@205i@v205.00 SI8N3 i@205 i@ SReductions QGN  @@Z@Q104.4 h^5N3  @@ Z@ @ Z@h104.4 bX/N3 @ Z@ @ Z@b104.4 J@/N3 @ Z@ Jtons_NOx_ E;#N , ,E '` ' KA`  0lv@K358.80 nd5`3  0 lv@  033333Cz@n420.20 PF5`3  0 33333Cz@ POzoneresponse aW` #B @AA##a>?a0.013 E`3 #B @AA# #a>? #B @AA#*qq?0.056 E`3 #B @AA# *qq? #B @AA#\ v?0.013 `VE`3 #B @AA# \ v? `ppb/tonversusBasebs2A2b E;#` , ,E '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' '"r ' ?5"r , ,?C. 1'4 1S2A2b(S1A2bplusanadditional30%_NOx_Ԁreductionfrombasebs2A2binmobile 4 (non-roadandon-road)andareasources) 0&j 0 :04 , ,: +!, | +1.RelativetosensitivityrunS1A2b * , | * ', | ' ', | ' ', | '_ :0, | , ,: ', ' -#, -VOC 3), 3_NOx_ -#, - ', ' ', ' ', ' ', ' :0,  , ,: -#>  -Point UK>  333333)@12.6333333)@U12.60 vl9> 3 333333)@12.6 333333)@ ffffffQ@69.6ffffffQ@v69.60 TJ9> 3 ffffffQ@69.6 ffffffQ@ TModeledPeak > Value WM$ GzT_@125.32GzT_@W125.32 zp;>3 GzT_@125.32 GzT_@ (\d@160.08(\d@z160.08 zp;>3 (\d@160.08 (\d@ (\}a@139.93(\}a@z139.93 VL;>3 (\}a@139.93 (\}a@ Vppb @6> , ,@ -#6 -Area VL6  c@152.3 c@V152.30 |:63  c@152.3  c@ &fffffJ@53.3ffffff?0.7&GzB@37.31 cYH63 &fffffJ@53.3ffffff?0.7& GzB@ cCellsover125ppb RH6  ?1?R1 rh663  ?1 ? k@216k@r216 tj863 k@216 k@ _@127_@t127 MC863 _@127 _@ M ?56 , ,? -#H -Ѐnon-road UKH Q@70.4Q@U70.40 {9H3 Q@70.4 Q@ &33333W@92.3ffffff?0.7&ףp= 'P@64.61 cYHH 3 &33333W@92.3ffffff?0.7& ףp= 'P@ cOzonedecrease QGH!  @@+@Q13.50 nd5H"3  @@ +@  @@(\h2@n18.41 nd5H#3  @@ (\h2@  @@@zG$@n10.14 PF5H$3  @@ @zG$@ Pppb E;#H% , ,E -# Z& -On-Road VL Z' ^@123.5^@V123.50 {: Z(3 ^@123.5 ^@ %i@205ffffff?0.7%a@143.50 bXG Z)3 %i@205ffffff?0.7% a@ bReductions QG Z*  @@QKZ@Q105.18 h^5 Z+3  @@ QKZ@ @ QKZ@h105.18 bX/ Z,3 @ QKZ@ @ QKZ@b105.18 J@/ Z-3 @ QKZ@ Jtons_NOx_ E;# Z. , ,E ' l/ ' KA l0  0lv@K358.80 nd5 l13  0 lv@  0Qs@n315.02 PF5 l23  0 Qs@ POzoneresponse aW l3 #B@AA##?a0.115 E l43 #B@AA# #? #B@AA#?0.120 E l53 #B@AA# ? #B@AA#E?0.083 `VE l63 #B@AA# E? `ppb/tonof_NOx_ԀversusS1A2b E;# l7 , ,E '. ~8 ' '. ~9 ' '. ~: ' '. ~; ' -#. ~< - 3). ~=3 3 3). ~>3 3 3). ~?3 3 @6#. ~@ , ,@ +!@ A +2.Relativetobasebs2A2b 0&@ B 0 -#@ C - '@ D ' '@ E ' 5+@ F , ,5 'R G ' -#R H -VOC 3)R I 3_NOx_ 3)R J 3 3)R K 3 3)R L 3 -#R M - 'R N ' 5+R O , ,5 -#d P -Point UKd Q 333333)@12.6333333)@U12.60 vl9d R3 333333)@12.6 333333)@ ffffffQ@69.6ffffffQ@v69.60 TJ9d S3 ffffffQ@69.6 ffffffQ@ TModeledPeak d T Value WMJ U GzT_@125.32GzT_@W125.32 zp;d V3 GzT_@125.32 GzT_@ (\d@160.08(\d@z160.08 zp;d W3 (\d@160.08 (\d@ (\}a@139.93(\}a@z139.93 PF;d X3 (\}a@139.93 (\}a@ P 5+d Y , ,5 -#\ Z -Area VL\ [  c@152.3 c@V152.30 |:\ \3  c@152.3  c@ &fffffJ@53.3ffffff?0.7&GzB@37.31 cYH\ ]3 &fffffJ@53.3ffffff?0.7& GzB@ cCellsover125ppb RH\ ^  ?1?R1 rh6\ _3  ?1 ? k@216k@r216 tj8\ `3 k@216 k@ _@127_@t127 MC8\ a3 _@127 _@ M 5+\ b , ,5 -#n c -Ѐnon-road UKn d Q@70.4Q@U70.40 {9n e3 Q@70.4 Q@ &33333W@92.3ffffff?0.7&ףp= 'P@64.61 cYHn f3 &33333W@92.3ffffff?0.7& ףp= 'P@ cOzonedecrease UKn g +@13.5+@U13.50 wm9n h3 +@13.5 +@ )\h2@18.41)\h2@w18.41 xn:n i3 )\h2@18.41 )\h2@ HzG$@10.14HzG$@x10.14 OE:n j3 HzG$@10.14 HzG$@ O 5+n k , ,5 -#l -On-Road VLm ^@123.5^@V123.50 {:n3 ^@123.5 ^@ %i@205ffffff?0.7%a@143.50 bXGo3 %i@205ffffff?0.7% a@ bReductions WMp (\2j@209.58(\2j@W209.58 zp;q3 (\2j@209.58 (\2j@ (\2j@209.58(\2j@z209.58 zp;r3 (\2j@209.58 (\2j@ (\2j@209.58(\2j@z209.58 PF;s3 (\2j@209.58 (\2j@ P 5+t , ,5 'u ' KAv  0lv@K358.80 nd5w3  0 lv@  0Qs@n315.02 PF5x3  0 Qs@ POzoneresponse VLy Mb?0.064Mb?V0.064 xn:z3 Mb?0.064 Mb? I +?0.088I +?x0.088 rh:{3 I +?0.088 I +? ~jt?0.048~jt?r0.048 OE4|3 ~jt?0.048 ~jt? Oppb/tonversusBasebs2A2b @6} , ,@ '~ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ?5 , ,?D. 1' 1S3A2B(S1A2bplusanadditional30%VOCreductionfrombasebs2A2binmobile(non-roadandon-road)andareasources H>& ,  ,H ' ' -# -VOC 3) 3_NOx_ -# - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ?5 , ,? -#* -Point UK* 333333)@12.6333333)@U12.60 vl9*3 333333)@12.6 333333)@ ffffffQ@69.6ffffffQ@v69.60 TJ9*3 ffffffQ@69.6 ffffffQ@ TModeledPeak * Value VL `@135.3`@V135.3 yo:*3 `@135.3 `@ QPe@170.51QPe@y170.51 zp;*3 QPe@170.51 QPe@ p= 3b@145.62p= 3b@z145.62 VL;*3 p= 3b@145.62 p= 3b@ Vppb E;#* , ,E -#" -Area e[" ' c@152.3ffffff?0.7'ףp= Z@e106.61 |I"3 ' c@152.3ffffff?0.7' ףp= Z@ fffffJ@53.3fffffJ@53.30 TJ9"3 fffffJ@53.3 fffffJ@ TCellsover125ppb SI"  E@42E@S42 si7"3  E@42 E@ u@347u@s347 tj8"3 u@347 u@ g@189g@t189 MC8"3 g@189 g@ M ?5" , ,? -#4 -Ѐnon-road dZ4 &Q@70.4ffffff?0.7&p= ףH@d49.28 {H43 &Q@70.4ffffff?0.7& p= ףH@ 33333W@92.333333W@92.30 TJ943 33333W@92.3 33333W@ TOzonedecrease QG4  @@Q@Q2.14 nd543  @@ Q@  @@= ףp@n2.18 nd543  @@ = ףp@  @@@fffff@n3.05 PF543  @@ @fffff@ Pppb E;#4 , ,E -#F -On-Road e[F '^@123.5ffffff?0.7'̜U@e86.45 {IF3 '^@123.5ffffff?0.7' ̜U@ i@205i@205.00 SI8F3 i@205 i@ SReductions QGF  @@أp= Y@Q103.86 h^5F3  @@ أp= Y@ @ أp= Y@h103.86 bX/F3 @ أp= Y@ @ أp= Y@b103.86 J@/F3 @ أp= Y@ JtonsVOC E;#F , ,E 'X ' KAX  0Gzo@K254.94 nd5X3  0 Gzo@  033333Cz@n420.20 PF5X3  0 33333Cz@ POzoneresponse aWX #B@AA#nUc?a0.021 EX3 #B@AA# nUc? #B@AA#Q:Y~?0.021 EX3 #B@AA# Q:Y~? #B@AA#l=?0.029 `VEX3 #B@AA# l=? `ppb/tonofVOCversusS1A2b E;#X , ,E 'j ' 'j ' 'j ' 'j ' 'j ' 'j ' 'j ' 'j '-#!j , . -  P Ї#XXXDX7M#  ATTACHMENT5  RECALCULATIONOFEMISSIONREDUCTIONSNEEDEDFORATTAINMENTFORATLANTA   (availableelectronicallyinseparatefile:RACMatt5._pdf_Ԁ)  | TRY03' LetterP$'3 Letter Landscape 3' Letter'3 Letter LandscapeT ATTACHMENT6  SOUTHERNOXIDANTSSTUDY  1993DATAANALYSISWORKSHOPREPORT  (excerpt)  t (availableelectronicallyinseparatefile:RACMatt6._pdf_Ԁ)