Draft Attainment Demonstration for the 1997 8 Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Chicago Nonattainment Area

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
November 15, 2008
As indicated in Section 4 of the TSD, all monitors in the Lake Michigan area are projected to achieve the 8-hour standard in 2009, except that located in Holland, Michigan. The projected concentration of 85.3 ppb, is well within the realm of the weight of evidence (WOE) test. In addition, the monitor is projected to attain the 85 ppb level by 2012 with no additional control measures.
4.0 Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
Complete detail on the derivation of the motor vehicle emissions budgets, including discussion of the MOBILE6 model inputs and assumptions is included in Appendix D
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Emission Inventories
1. 2.1 2002 Base Year Inventory
2. 2.2 Projected Inventories for 2008, 2009 and 2010
3.0 Calculation of 15 Percent RFP Target Value
4.0 15 Percent Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
5.0 Reasonable Further Progress for PM2.5
6.0 Conclusion

ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

FOR THE 1997 8-HOUR OZONE

NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD

CHICAGO NONATTAINMENT AREA

AQPSTR 08-07

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau of Air

1021 North Grand Avenue, East

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

November 15, 2008

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

Executive Summary

Attainment Demonstration

Base Year(s) Emissions Inventory

Emissions Control Measures

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)

Contingency Measures

Transportation Conformity

Legal Authority and Resource Commitments

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

Technical Support Document, prepared by the Lake Michigan Air Directors

Consortium, April 25, 2008.

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

Technical Support Document (Supplement), prepared by the Lake Michigan Air

Directors Consortium, September 25, 2008.

2002 and 2005 Emissions Inventory for the Chicago Nonattainment Area

Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration

Summary of VOM RACT Implementation in the Chicago Nonattainment Area

Appendix F Transportation Conformity

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

List of Acronyms

Average Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled

Annual Emissions Report

Average Summer Weekday Vehicle Miles Traveled

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance

All Vehicle Emission Rate

Best Available Retrofit Technology

Clean Air Act of 1990

Clean Air Interstate Rule

Code of Federal Regulations

Carbon Monoxide

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning

Combined Pollutant Strategy

Economic Growth Assessment System

Electric Generating Unit

Environmental Protection Agency

East-West Gateway Council of Governments

Federal Aviation Administration

Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

Illinois Department of Transportation

Inspection/Maintenance

Integrated Planning Model

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

Million British Thermal Units

Maximum Achievable Control Technology

Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP

Multi-Pollutant Strategy

Nonattainment Area

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

National Ambient Air Quality Standard

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

Oxides of Nitrogen

New Source Performance Standards

On-Board Diagnostics

Ozone Transport Commission

Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter

Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter

Parts Per Million By Volume Dry

Quality Assurance

Quality Control

Reasonably Available Control Measures

Reasonably Available Control Technology

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine

Reformulated Gasoline

Reasonable Further Progress

Regional Planning Organization

Reid Vapor Pressure

Source Classification Code

State Implementation Plan

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Vehicle Miles Traveled

Volatile Organic Material

Weight of Evidence

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

xecutive Summary

On April 15, 2004, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) designated

portions of the Chicago metropolitan area as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Chicago nonattainment area (NAA) includes

Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties and Aux Sable and Goose Lake

Townships in Grundy County and Oswego Township in Kendall County. This designation

became effective on June 15, 2004. In the Lake Michigan region, portions of eastern Wisconsin,

northwestern Indiana and western Michigan were also designated as nonattainment for the 8-

hour ozone standard. As a result of the designation of these counties to nonattainment, the State

of Illinois is required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) to develop a plan to attain the NAAQS by a

specified deadline. For 8-hour ozone, the attainment plan was due by June 15, 2007 and

attainment of the NAAQS is to be achieved by June 15, 2009.

As portions of the Lake Michigan area in neighboring states have also been designated as

nonattainment, Illinois has worked closely with the U.S. EPA, and the states of Wisconsin,

Indiana, Michigan and Ohio, through the Lake Michigan Air Director’s Consortium (LADCO),

to prepare this attainment demonstration. Under the direction of LADCO, the states have

developed a photochemical model to simulate the formation and transport of ozone in the

Midwest. After an extensive performance evaluation, the modeling system was used to evaluate

whether the identified emissions reduction strategy was adequate to demonstrate attainment of

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the attainment deadline.

The modeling indicates that the selected strategy will provide sufficient emission reductions to

achieve attainment of the ozone standard at all but one location in the Lake Michigan region.

This location, Holland, Michigan, is projected to achieve the 8-hour ozone standard by 2012

without the need for additional control measures beyond those identified in the selected strategy.

A key element of the strategy, the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) which was promulgated by

U.S. EPA on March 10, 2005, was vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on

July 11, 2008. The emission reductions expected from this program are, therefore, uncertain.

The modeling indicates, however, that the states’ emission reduction strategy is still sufficient to

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

demonstrate attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard by 2009, except in Holland, MI, even

without the emission reductions from CAIR.

The CAA and U.S. EPA’s implementation rule for ozone specify other requirements for states to

address in preparing attainment demonstrations. These include a demonstration of Reasonable

Further Progress (RFP), Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), contingency

measures that must be implemented if the nonattainment area fails to achieve the RFP reductions

or fails to attain the NAAQS within the specified time frame, motor vehicle emissions budgets to

address transportation conformity, and a demonstration that Illinois has the legal authority and is

committing the resources needed to implement this attainment plan. These requirements are

addressed in this document.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Attainment Demonstration

On April 15, 2004, the U.S. EPA designated portions of the lower Lake Michigan region,

including the Chicago metropolitan area, as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These

designations became effective on June 15, 2004. Six counties and three townships in

northeastern Illinois were designated as a NAA, with a classification of moderate, for the 8-hour

standard promulgated by the U.S. EPA in 1997. This area includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake,

McHenry and Will counties and Aux Sable and Goose Lake townships in Grundy County and

Oswego Township in Kendall County.

The Illinois EPA and the air quality agencies from the states of Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and

Wisconsin worked cooperatively with LADCO to develop a photochemical model to simulate

the formation and transport of ozone in the Midwest. The modeling system is used to evaluate

emissions reduction strategies for inclusion in the states’ attainment plans. A complete

description of the modeling methodologies and results are contained in the document “Regional

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

Document” (April 25, 2008), and the Supplement to this document dated September 12, 2008,

both of which were prepared by LADCO and are included as Appendices A and B.

The modeling study included emissions, meteorological, and ozone simulations using a nested

36/12/4 km grid covering the central U.S. and centered on the Lake Michigan region. The air

quality analyses were conducted using the CAMx model, with emissions and meteorology

generated using EMS (and CONCEPT) and MM5, respectively.

As described in Section 3.7 of the LADCO Technical Support Document (TSD), model

performance was assessed by comparing modeled and monitored concentrations with statistical

measures recommended by U.S. EPA to assess the reasonableness of the results. The model

performance evaluation focused on the magnitude, spatial pattern, and temporal variations of

modeled and measured concentrations. The 2002 and 2005 baseline CAMx and CMAQ

modeling databases were evaluated against monitored ozone data from the lower Lake Michigan

and Detroit-Cleveland area in order to evaluate the fitness of the databases for use in the modeled

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

attainment test. In summary, model performance for ozone is generally acceptable and can be

characterized as follows:

Good agreement between modeled and monitored concentrations for higher

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

Regional modeled concentrations appear to be underestimated in the 2002 base year,

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

and inventory improvements;

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

concentrations are consistent with monitored data;

Model accurately simulates the change in monitored ozone concentrations due to

reductions in precursor emissions.

After detailed performance testing of the 2002 and 2005 basecase simulations, the CAMx

modeling system was exercised with a 2009 On-the-Books (OTB) emissions control scenario

aimed at assessing the effects of future year emission control strategies on ozone in the Midwest.

As described in Section 4.0 of the TSD, air quality modeling and other supplemental analyses

performed to estimate future year ozone concentrations indicated that:

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

improvement in ozone air quality;

With the exception of one monitoring station in Holland, MI, all sites in the Lake

Michigan region are expected to meet the current 8-hour standard by the

applicable attainment date;

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Attainment by the applicable attainment date is dependent on actual future year

meteorology (e.g., if the weather conditions are consistent with [or less severe

than] 2005, then attainment is likely).

As indicated in Section 4 of the TSD, all monitors in the Lake Michigan area are projected to

achieve the 8-hour standard in 2009, except that located in Holland, Michigan. The projected

concentration of 85.3 ppb, is well within the realm of the weight of evidence (WOE) test. In

addition, the monitor is projected to attain the 85 ppb level by 2012 with no additional control

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Base Year(s) Emission Inventory

Multiple base year (2002 and 2005) inventories were developed to support the modeled

attainment demonstration and SIP planning process. Though U.S. EPA guidance recommends

2002 for the base year, there is provision in the guidance for use of an alternative base year, and

the LADCO Project Team opted to include a more recent year. The methods used to compile the

base year inventories were essentially the same, and targeted ozone precursor emissions---CO,

NOx, and VOM. Inventories were compiled for point, area, on-road mobile, nonroad, and

biogenic emission sectors. Inventories were provided directly from the Illinois statewide

database or generated from models (i.e. EGUs, on-road, nonroad, and biogenic). Throughout the

inventory development process, LADCO and member states implemented quality assurance

(QA) procedures and quality control (QC) checks to assure inventories of the highest quality.

Procedures outlined in U.S. EPA’s guidance documents pertaining to inventory quality assurance

were followed by inventory development staff and have yielded complete, accurate and high

quality inventories. Tabular data and graphical information of base year emissions are provided

in Section 3.6 (“Model Inputs: Emissions”) of the accompanying LADCO TSD. Within the

narrative of the TSD (see page 51), it is noted that additional detail on the inventories can be

found in the document entitled “Base K/Round 4 Strategy Modeling Emissions” (LADCO, May

16, 2006), as well as in the document entitled “Base M Strategy Modeling: Emissions (Revised)”

(LADCO, February 27, 2008).

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Emissions Control Measures

The modeling analysis described in this document indicates that control measures which have

been promulgated at either the state or federal level, referred to as “on the books” controls,

should be sufficient to allow the Lake Michigan region, with the exception of Holland, MI, to

meet the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the required attainment date. The primary “on-the-

books” emission reduction measures for demonstrating attainment of the ozone standard are

described in this section.

The principle “on the books” emission reduction measures evaluated for this attainment

demonstration are as follows:

1. Title IV (Phases I and II) (

Clean Air Act of 1990, as amended

2. NOx SIP Call (

Federal Register: October 27, 1998, vol. 63, no.207 pp. 57355-57538

35 Il. Adm. Code Part 217)

The NOx SIP Call provided for a trading program and established a seasonal emissions cap

based upon electrical generating units (EGUs) not exceeding 0.15 lb NOx per million British

Thermal Units (MMBTU) heat input and non-EGU boilers and turbines reducing NOx emissions

by 60 percent. The rule also required tightened emission limits on cement kilns (30 percent NOx

reduction) and large stationary internal combustion engines (Illinois is requiring 82 percent NOx

control efficiency). Illinois regulations that were promulgated to meet the requirements of the

federal NOx SIP Call addressed the EGU and non-EGU (boilers, turbines, and combined cycle

systems) NOx emissions within the federally proposed cap and allowance trading framework and

also placed specific emission limits on cement kilns (after May 30, 2004). The NOx SIP Call

was implemented on May 31, 2004. The limits for engines and turbines were appealed;

however, a new implementation date of January 1, 2008 was established for reciprocating

internal combustion engines (RICE).

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

3. New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS)/Maximum Achievable Control Technology

(MACT) Standards (

Clean Air Act of 1990, as amended

A broad range of emission sectors are subject to federal New Source Performance Standards

(NSPS) and NESHAP MACT standards with compliance requirements which take effect post-

2002 and prior to the Chicago ozone attainment date. For MACT sources, these include, in part,

the Combustion Turbine MACT and the 2-, 4-, 7-, and 10 year VOC MACT standards. Projected

reductions in VOM and NOx in Illinois reflect U.S. EPA-estimated values.

4. VOC Solvent Categories: Aerosol Coatings, Architectural and Industrial

Maintenance (AIM) Coatings, Consumer Solvents (

Federal Register: March 24,

2008, vol.73, no.57, pp. 15421-15631

) (

Federal Register: September 11, 1998, vol.63,

no.176, pp. 48848-48887

) (

Federal Register: September 11, 1998, vol.63, no.176, pp.

48819-48847

Recent federal rulemakings have established or amended VOM content limits for aerosol

coatings, AIM coatings, and household and institutional consumer products. These rulemakings

are expected to result in “creditable reductions” of mass VOM emissions of 0.114 pounds per

capita, 1.1 pounds per capita, and 0.9 pounds per capita, respectively.

5. Portable Fuel Containers (

Federal Register: February 26, 2007, vol.72, no.37, pp.

8427-8570

U.S. EPA’s emission standard for portable fuel containers limits evaporation and permeation

emissions to 0.3 grams of hydrocarbons per gallon per day. The standard will affect portable fuel

container sales beginning in 2009.

6. Vehicle Inspection & Maintenance Program (

Clean Air Act of 1990, as amended

7. Reformulated Gasoline (

Clean Air Act of 1990, as amended

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

8. Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control

Requirements (

Federal Register: February 10, 2000, vol. 65, no.28, pp. 6697-6870

Through a combination of tailpipe emission standards (fully phased in by 2007 and 2009) for new

passenger cars, light trucks, and “medium-duty passenger vehicles” and requirements for much lower

sulfur levels in gasoline (fully phased in by 2006), motor vehicle emissions of NOx, non-methane

organic gases, and sulfur compounds will be reduced. Vehicle NOx emission levels will be reduced to

an average of 0.07 grams per mile. Most gasoline producers were to meet a “corporate average gasoline

sulfur standard of 120 ppm and a cap of 300 ppm beginning in 2004”. This cap was reduced to 80 ppm

and “most refineries must produce gasoline averaging no more than 30 ppm sulfur” by 2006. These

requirements were met.

9. On-Highway Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel

Sulfur Control Requirements (

Federal Register: January 18, 2001, vol. 66, no. 12,

pp. 5002-5193

Through a combination of tighter engine emission standards phased in beginning in 2007, and

the required sale of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD) in 2006, VOM and NOx emissions will

be reduced. The sulfur content of on-road diesel fuel was reduced by 97 percent to 15 ppm

beginning in June 2006. This will enable the use of advanced emissions control equipment on

diesel vehicles. The program will result in vehicle NOx emissions levels that are 90 percent

below year 2000 levels.

10. Federal Control Programs Incorporated into NONROAD Model (e.g., Nonroad

Diesel Rule), plus Evaporative Large Spark Ignition and Recreational Vehicle

Standards (

Federal Register: November 8, 2002, vol.67, no.217, pp. 68241-68447

11. Tier 4 Nonroad Diesel Engine Standards and Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content

Restrictions

(Federal Register: June 29, 2004, vol. 69, no. 124, pp. 38957-39273)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Through new emission standards and emission test procedures for nonroad diesel engines

(phased in starting mid-2007), in combination with reductions in the sulfur content of nonroad

diesel fuel (500 ppm cap starting June 2007; 15 ppm level by June 2010), nonroad engine

emissions of NOx, non-methane hydrocarbons, fine particulate (PM2.5), and sulfur compounds

will be reduced. The diesel fuel sulfur level of 15 ppm represents a 99 percent reduction from

existing levels. Diesel engine particulate matter emissions will be reduced greater than 95

percent, and NOx emissions will be reduced more than 90 percent.

12. Marine Compression-Ignition Engine Standards and Locomotive Engine

Standards (

Federal Register: April 16, 1998, vol. 63, no. 73, pp. 18977-19084

Federal Register: December 29, 1999, vol.64, no. 249, pp. 73299-73373

13. Consent Decrees---Dynegy Midwest Generation, Refineries (ConocoPhillips,

CITGO, Exxon-Mobil, Marathon Ashland), Ethanol Plants (Archer Daniels

Marathon Ashland Consent Decree, filed May 11, 2001, U.S. District

Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

) (

CITGO Global Refinery Settlement,

filed October 6, 2004, U.S. District Court for the Southern District in Texas

ConocoPhillips Global Refinery Settlement, filed January 27, 2005, U.S. District

Court for the Southern District in Texas

) (

ExxonMobil Consent Decree, filed

October 11, 2005, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

) (

USA v. IL

Power Co., et. al. 3:99-cv-833 Consent Decree, March 2005, U.S. District Court for

the Southern District of Illinois

) (

Archer Daniels Midland Consent Decree, filed

April 9, 2003, U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois

The timing of the Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC Consent Decree results in emission

reductions that are more likely to be reflected in base year emission rates for the Robinson,

Illinois refinery (and for the other affected refineries), than as new controls incorporated as part

of future year attainment modeling. However, some requirements of the Consent Decree and/or

emission reduction benefits may not be fully realized until the post-2005 base year timeframe.

NOx emission reductions from the fluidized catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) at the Robinson

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

refinery will be achieved through catalyst additives, low NOx combustion promoter, and

possibly selective non-catalytic reduction. For refinery heaters and boilers, control technology is

required that will reduce NOx emissions to “0.040 lbs/ mmBTU or lower”.

The CITGO consent decree requires installation of a wet gas scrubber for SO

and PM control on

the FCCU, and imposes an SO

emission limit of “25 parts per million by volume dry (ppmvd) at

on a 365-day rolling average basis and 50 ppmvd at 0% O

on a 7-day rolling average

basis.” PM emissions are limited to “0.5 pounds . . . per 1000 pounds of coke burned on a 3-

hour average basis.” Compliance with these emission limits was required by December 31,

2007. By that same date, and for purposes of achieving NOx emission reductions, CITGO was

to convert the FCCU to “full burn operation, or accept and agree to comply with concentration

based emission limits of 20 ppmvd on a 365-day rolling average and 40 ppmvd on a 7-day

rolling average basis, both at 0% oxygen.” The installation of low NOx burners “to achieve

0.060 lb / mmBTU high heating value of NOx in the FCCU carbon monoxide (CO) boiler”

during combustion of auxiliary fuel was also required by December 31, 2007. The settlement

agreement includes a requirement for installation of one or more tail gas units to control

emissions from Claus trains (119A and B at the Lemont Refinery) no later than December 31,

2008. The requirements for pollutant reductions extend to many of the refinery emission

sources, including provisions to minimize acid gas flaring and tail gas flaring incidents.

The ConocoPhillips settlement provides for near-term installation (no later than December 31,

2009) of Low-NOx Burners and Ultra Low-NOx Burners on combustion units at its “Distilling

West” operations. Other NOx emission reduction requirements are set forth in the consent

decree, as are provisions for CO, SO2, and particulate matter reductions.

The ExxonMobil settlement provides for installation and operation of a wet gas scrubber for SO2

control and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) for NOx control on the Joliet refinery fluid

catalytic cracking unit (FCCU). Compliance with SO

emission limits of “25 ppmvd at 0% O

a 365-day rolling average basis and 50 ppmvd at 0% O

on a 7-day rolling average basis” on the

FCCU are to be met by December 31, 2008. By the entry date of the consent decree, the FCCU

must also meet “an emission limit of 1.0 pound of PM per thousand pounds of coke burned.”

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

SO2 and NOx reductions will also come from other emission sources (e.g., FCCU catalyst

regenerators, combustion units, etc.).

The settlement reached with Dynegy Midwest Generation for alleged violations at the Baldwin

Generating Station included the requirements to “commence operation of the SCRs installed at

Baldwin Unit 1, Unit 2 . . . so as to achieve and maintain a 30-day rolling average emission rate

from each such unit of not greater than 0.100 lb/mmBTU NOx and “maintain a 30-day rolling

average emission rate of not greater than 0.120 lb/mmBTU NOx at Baldwin Unit 3.” Low NOx

burners and Overfire Air Technology are required on Dynegy Midwest Generation’s Wood River

Units #4 and #5.

The settlement reached with Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) for alleged violations at

its grain and oil-seed processing facilities targets emission reductions from dryers, carbon

furnaces, fermentation units, boilers, and ethanol loadout systems. Optimization of existing

pollution control equipment (e.g., scrubbers), installation of new equipment (i.e., SNCR, RTOs,

and RCOs), and permanent shutdown of some emission sources are identified for meeting the

required pollutant reductions. For its Decatur, Illinois facility, ADM must achieve 95% VOM

control (or a concentration limit of 10 ppmvd) and 90% SO2 control (or a concentration limit of

20 ppmvd) on the Gluten Feed/Fiber Dryers, Gluten Meal Dryers, and Carbon Furnaces. At both

the Decatur and Peoria facilities, ADM must achieve 95% VOM control (or a concentration limit

of 20 ppmvd) on yeast propagators and ethanol fermenters and 95% control on non-dedicated

ethanol loadouts. ADM had to achieve a minimum of one-third of the estimated VOM emission

reductions by December 31, 2005. By December 31, 2012, 100% of the required VOM

reductions must be met. Coal-fired boilers (#1, 2, and 3) at the ADM Peoria facility, had to

comply (in aggregate) with an SO2 emission limit of 421 tons per rolling 30-day period by

March 31, 2007, and a limit of 3400 tons per rolling 12-month period by March 31, 2008. Coal-

fired boilers (#1 and 2) at the Quincy, Illinois facility must comply with a NOx emissions limit

of 0.43 lb/mmBTU. Other pollution reduction requirements for these and other ADM emission

sources are also provided for in the Consent Decree.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

14. Illinois (Nonattainment Area) NOx RACT

Illinois’ NOx RACT requirement has not yet been adopted by the Illinois Pollution Control

Board and will not be implemented until 2010. Emission reductions from this requirement will

therefore not contribute to attainment by the 2009 attainment deadline, but will help to maintain

attainment beginning in 2010. This requirement will also contribute to attainment in Holland,

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)

Since the Chicago region is classified as a moderate nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone

standard, a 15 percent net reduction in VOM emissions from 2002 levels is required by 2008 in

order to meet the RFP requirements. The Illinois EPA has not relied on NOx substitution to

meet its 15 percent RFP reduction, relying solely on VOM emission reductions.

Reductions in VOM emissions are primarily achieved through implementation of the following

control programs:

Federal commercial and consumer solvent regulation

Federal architectural and industrial maintenance coatings regulation

Motor vehicle fleet turnover and implementation of the Federal Tier 2 motor vehicle fuels

and emissions standards

Appendix D of this document contains Illinois EPA’s full RFP demonstration. As shown in

Appendix D, “on-the-books” control measures, including those listed above, will result in a 20.0

percent reduction in VOM emissions from 2002 emissions levels by the year 2008. In addition,

continuing reductions in 2009 and 2010 are estimated to result in year 2010 VOM emissions at

23.85 percent below 2002 levels. These emission reductions easily achieve the 15% RFP target

for the Chicago nonattainment area.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and Reasonably Available

Control Measures (RACM)

Pursuant to Sections 172, 182(b) and (f) of the CAA, RACT is required for all existing major

sources of the applicable criteria pollutant and its precursors (VOM and NOx) located in NAAs.

U.S. EPA defines RACT as the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of

meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering

technological feasibility and economic reasonableness (70

71612; November 29, 2005). The

major source threshold for moderate NAAs is defined as 100 tpy. A source generally consists of

several units that emit pollutants. The sum of emissions from all units at the source determines if

a unit is major and thus subject to RACT requirements.

RACT is not a new requirement under the CAA. Illinois previously addressed RACT

requirements in the Chicago area in developing attainment plans for the 1-hour ozone standard.

The RACT requirement for NOx was previously waived under the 1-hour ozone standard, and

Illinois must adopt new regulations to implement NOx RACT in the NAA. However, Illinois

has previously adopted RACT requirements for VOM emissions in the NAA. (See 35 Ill. Adm.

Code Part 219) The Illinois EPA has evaluated the previously adopted regulations to determine

if the RACT requirement is still being met for 8-hour ozone.

Sections 172, 182(b)(2), and 182(f) of the CAA require implementation of RACT for sources

that are subject to Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) that are promulgated by U.S. EPA.

The U.S. EPA has issued CTGs defining RACT for those categories of sources that emit the

greatest amounts of VOM emissions. Emissions sources covered by CTGs are referred to as

CTG sources. Table E-1 in Appendix E presents the CTG source categories, CTG reference

documents, and the applicable Illinois rules promulgated in response to the CTGs. Illinois EPA

will soon be proposing regulations to implement the CTG categories issued in 2006 by the U.S.

EPA. Table E-2 in Appendix E presents CTG source categories where no sources located in the

ozone NAA within that category were found. Based on this review, Illinois EPA has adopted

applicable rules, will soon conduct rulemaking, addressing all CTG categories adopted by U.S.

EPA through 2006 for which there are existing sources in the Chicago NAA.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Non-CTG sources are defined as major VOM sources which are not subject to CTGs, but for

which RACT is required. All major sources of ozone precursors located in the ozone NAA that

are not subject to individual RACT rules are subject to a generic RACT rule. These rules apply

to non-CTG sources that have the potential to emit 100 tons or more per year of VOM. Thus,

Illinois has met the obligation to implement RACT on non-CTG VOM sources in the NAA.

It should be noted that other regulatory requirements also affect VOM emission sources within

the Chicago ozone NAA. These include Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT),

federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), and National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS). These programs satisfy the RACT requirements for

specific source categories because these rules are more stringent than RACT.

It is concluded from this review that Illinois’ existing VOM RACT rules fulfill U.S. EPA’s

RACT requirements for VOM sources in the NAA. As mentioned previously, however, the

RACT requirement for NOx was previously waived under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, so Illinois

must adopt new regulations to implement NOx RACT in the NAA. With respect to the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS, Illinois will not pursue the NO

waiver. Illinois therefore intends to submit a

SIP revision to implement NO

RACT requirements per Sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the

CAA once these requirements have been adopted by the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA also requires states to demonstrate that all control measures

necessary to demonstrate attainment are being adopted as expeditiously as practicable. U.S. EPA

interprets Section 172(c)(1) as a requirement that states incorporate all reasonably available

control measures (RACM) that would advance a region’s attainment date into their SIP.

In practice, this is a negative test showing that there are no other measures that will advance the

attainment date for one year or more. U.S. EPA guidance provides a narrow definition of

RACM. The guidance states that measures which can be implemented and produce sufficient

benefits to advance the attainment date are RACM. The guidance states that cost can be a factor

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

in determining whether a measure is reasonable. U.S. EPA guidance notes that measures that are

not enforceable are not RACM.

The Illinois EPA has engaged in a number of exercises reviewing potential controls. There have

been a number of SIP revisions that were made going as far back as 1982. After the 1990 Clean

Air Act Amendments, Illinois addressed obligations involving the 1-hour ozone standard by

preparing a 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Plan. Based on a review of a comprehensive list of

emission controls, several controls were implemented that resulted in emission reductions of

ozone precursors. In reviewing these options, the state considered technical feasibility, costs,

and the time it would take to implement the reductions. Strategies that met these criteria were

implemented. It was determined that other strategies did not meet these criteria, and these were

not implemented.

During the development of this plan revision, LADCO, the Illinois EPA, and the other LADCO

states prepared “white papers” listing emission control options for consideration by stakeholders.

The “white papers” were comprehensive, and were assembled based on similar reviews being

conducted by other planning efforts, for example in Texas and Northeast states. Staff reviewed

the “white papers” and presented them for discussion among stakeholders. During these

discussions, no measures that have not already been implemented were identified that met the

criteria of being reasonable to install and expediting attainment. This conclusion is not

surprising given the long history of ozone planning in the Lake Michigan region. Therefore, the

Illinois EPA has concluded that all measures that were reasonably available and would expedite

attainment have already been implemented.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Contingency Measures

Section 172 (c)(9) of the CAA require states with ozone nonattainment areas classified as

moderate and above to adopt contingency measures by June 15, 2007. Such measures must

provide for the implementation of specific emission control measures if the NAA fails to achieve

required RFP reductions or fails to attain the NAAQS within the time-frames specified under the

CAA. The CAA requires that contingency measures take effect without further action by the

state or by the U.S. EPA upon failure by the state to meet RFP requirements or attainment of the

NAAQS by the required deadline.

The General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (57 Fed. Reg. 13507, April 16, 1992) states that the contingency measures, in total, must

generally be able to provide for 3 percent reductions from the 2002 baseline emissions. A 3

percent reduction in VOM emissions equates to 22.58 tons per day and a 3 percent reduction in

NOx emissions equates to 32.58 tons per day. While all contingency measures must be fully

adopted rules or measures, states can use measures in two different ways. A state can choose to

implement contingency measures before the June 15, 2008 RFP milestone deadline.

Alternatively, a state may decide not to implement a contingency measure until an area has

actually failed to achieve an RFP or attainment milestone. In the latter situation, the contingency

measure emission reduction must be achieved within one year following identification of a

milestone failure.

To satisfy the requirements for contingency measures needed for the RFP plan and the

attainment plan, Illinois is relying on a mix of federal and state measures, some of which were

required under the CAA and some of which were state-specific measures. All measures relied

upon in the plan have been adopted and will be implemented in Illinois within the 2002-2012

Pursuant to U.S. EPA’s guidance document “Guidance on the Post-1996 Rate-of-Progress Plan

and the Attainment Demonstration” (EPA-452/R-93-015), NOx reductions within 200 kilometers

and VOM within 100 kilometers may be used to demonstrate RFP. Although Illinois is not

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

relying on NOx reductions within the NAA to demonstrate RFP, it is appropriate to consider

these reductions as contingency measures.

Illinois is relying on one or more of the following federal and state measures to satisfy the

requirement for contingency measures:

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards

Heavy-duty diesel engine standards

Multi-Pollutant Strategy contained in Illinois’ Clean Air Mercury Rule

Consent Decrees on Petroleum Refineries

Portable Fuel Containers

The Illinois EPA has quantified the expected emission reductions from the contingency measures

listed above. Tables 6-1 and 6-2 summarize Illinois EPA’s estimates of the expected VOM and

NOx reductions from these programs. As mentioned above, contingency measures, in total, must

generally be able to provide for 3 percent reductions from the 2002 baseline emissions. A 3

percent reduction in VOM emissions equates to 22.58 tons per day and a 3 percent reduction in

NOx emissions equates to 32.58 tons per day. Clearly, the listed measures will provide sufficient

emission reductions within the NAA to satisfy this requirement. More importantly, these

measures will help to ensure that the area, once it has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, will

continue to do so in subsequent years.

Table 6-1: Estimated VOM Reductions (TPD) from Contingency Measures

Heavy-duty diesel

Consumer Products/AIM

Portable Fuel Containers

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table 6-2: Estimated NOx Reductions (TPD) from Contingency Measures

Heavy-duty diesel

IL Multi-Pollutant Strategy

Consent Decrees on Refineries

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Transportation Conformity

The purpose of this document is to describe and establish the Chicago nonattainment area motor

vehicle emissions budgets associated with the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration State

Implementation Plans (SIP). For the 8-hour ozone standard, average summer weekday motor

vehicle emissions budgets are being proposed for the projected attainment year 2009 and for the

precursor pollutants volatile organic material (“VOM”) and oxides of nitrogen (“NOx”).

These budgets were developed consistent with the motor vehicle activity assumptions and

emissions control strategies incorporated into the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration

analysis. The budgets reflect an emissions level determined using motor vehicle VMT and fleet

mix provided by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) and which was

supplied to LADCO for use in the attainment demonstration photochemical modeling analysis.

A motor vehicle emissions budget is that portion of the total allowable emissions allocated to

highway and transit vehicle use that are defined in the SIP for a certain year. The rules

governing transportation conformity require certain transportation activities to be consistent with

motor vehicle emissions budgets contained in control strategy implementation plans (40 CFR §

93.118). Section 93.101 of the rule defines a “control strategy [State] implementation plan

revision” as a “plan which contains specific strategies for controlling the emissions and reducing

ambient levels of pollutants in order to satisfy CAA requirements of reasonable further progress

and attainment.” In order to demonstrate conformity to the motor vehicle emissions budget,

emissions from the implementation of a transportation plan or a transportation improvement

program must be less than or equal to the budget level (40 CFR § 93.118(a)).

LADCO along with the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, have

developed a strategy to demonstrate attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in the lower Lake

Michigan area in the year 2009. This plan incorporates base year emissions from all source

categories (i.e., point, area, on-road, off-road), projections of emissions growth, and the inclusion

of emissions reduction strategies. Transportation network data (e.g., road links, traffic volumes

and speeds) and assumptions (e.g., fleet mix, VMT mix) were provided to LADCO by the

CMAP for use in the modeling.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

The motor vehicle emissions budgets established and described herein were developed consistent

with the methodology and control strategy assumptions used in the 8-hour ozone Attainment

Demonstrations. They rely on the motor vehicle emissions control measures incorporated into

the attainment demonstration. The effects of these controls are incorporated into the emissions

factors produced by the U.S. EPA’s MOBILE6 model. These control measures include motor

vehicle emissions standards, the operation of a vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M)

program, and the required use of reformulated gasoline and low sulfur gasoline and diesel fuel.

Using the above VMT and control program assumptions and methodology, following are the

year 8-hour ozone motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Chicago NAA for use in determining

transportation conformity.

Proposed Chicago NAA Year 2009

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Complete detail on the derivation of the motor vehicle emissions budgets, including discussion

of the MOBILE6 model

inputs and assumptions is included in Appendix D

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Legal Authority and Resource Commitments

As set forth in earlier SIP revisions, the Illinois EPA has the necessary legal authority to

implement the Attainment Demonstration that is being submitted. In brief, the legal authority for

the State of Illinois to carry out its implementation plan is established in the Environmental

Protection Act (Act) [415 ILCS 5/1 et seq]. The Act is a comprehensive piece of legislation

designed to place the control and enforcement of every type of environmental problem under one

Pursuant to Section 4(l) of the Act, the Illinois EPA is designated as the air pollution agency for

the State for all purposes of the CAA, including developing SIPs and proposing regulations. In

accordance with and by the authority granted by the Act, the Illinois EPA will continue

providing adequate funding and personnel to implement the provision of this plan for meeting

the air quality standards.

The Illinois Pollution Control Board (Board) has been designated under the Act as the agency

responsible for adoption of emission control regulations and has the authority necessary to adopt

the type of regulations for the control of VOM emissions from consumer products and

architectural and industrial maintenance coatings included in this plan (Section 5 of the Act).

The Illinois EPA is empowered to enforce the Act and applicable regulations promulgated there

under (Title VIII of the Act). The Illinois EPA is directed to investigate alleged violations upon

the request of the Board or upon receipt of information alleging a violation and may make such

other investigations as it shall deem advisable. If such an investigation discloses that a violation

may exist, the Illinois EPA shall bring an enforcement action against the violator before the

Board in accordance with the Act and applicable State rules.

The Board’s orders may be enforced by the Illinois EPA or the State’s Attorney of the county in

which the violation occurred or by the Attorney General of Illinois (Sections 33(d) and 42 of the

Act). Injunctive relief is specifically authorized under Section 43 and 45(b) of the Act. In

addition, violation of the Act, or of regulations adopted pursuant to the Act, or knowingly

submitting any false information is a criminal misdemeanor (Section 44 of the Act). Section 44

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

of the Act also provides that it is the duty of every State and local law enforcement officer to

enforce the Act and regulations and authorizes the issuance of citations for that purpose.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Regional Air Quality Analyses for

Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze:

Final Technical Support Document

Prepared by the

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

April 25, 2008

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Regional Air Quality Analyses for

Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze:

Final Technical Support Document (Supplement)

Prepared by the

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

September 25, 2008

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

2002 and 2005 Emissions Inventory

for the Chicago Nonattainment Area

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions

Point Sources

External Fuel Combustion

Electric Generation

Commercial/Institutional

Internal Fuel Combustion

Electric Generation

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Commercial/Institutional

Off-highway Engines

Industrial Processes

Chemical Manufacturing

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Pharmaceuticals

Phthalic Anhydride

Synthetic Organic Fiber

Synthetic Rubber

Fuel Combustion

Food/Agriculture

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Feed Manufacturing

Grain Elevators

Starch Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Primary Metal Production

By-product Coke

Fuel Combustion

Secondary Metal Production

Fuel Combustion

Mineral Products

Asphalt Manufacturing

Asphalt Roofing

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Cement Manufacturing

Concrete Manufacturing

Glass Manufacturing

Stone Quarrying

Fuel Combustion

Petroleum Industry

Desulfurization

Process Heaters

Paper and Wood Products

Fuel Combustion

Rubber and Plastic Products

Plastic Products

Tire Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Fabricated Metal Products

Drum Reclamation

Fuel Combustion

Oil and Gas Production

Fuel Combustion

Miscellaneous Machinery

Electrical Equipment

Transportation Equipment

Health Services

Leather and Leather Products

Textile Products

Process Cooling

In-Process Fuel Use

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Organic Solvent Emissions

Organic Solvent Use

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Surface Coating Operations

Flatwood Products

Large Appliances

Metal Furniture

Miscellaneous Metal Parts

Thinning Solvents

Fuel Combustion

Petroleum Product Storage

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Variable Vapor Space Tanks

Bulk Terminals/Plants

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Variable Vapor Space Tanks

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Printing/Publishing

Screen Printing

Thinning Solvents

Petroleum Marketing/Transport

Organic Chemical Storage

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Organic Chemical Transport

Organic Solvent Evaporation

Fuel Combustion

Solid Waste Disposal

Sewage Treatment

Fuel Combustion

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Commercial/Institutional

Fuel Combustion

Fuel Combustion

Site Remediation

Point Source Total

Area Sources

Aircraft Refueling

Architectural Coating

Automobile Refinishing

Commercial Cooking

Consumer Solvent Use

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Fuel Combustion – Commercial/Institutional

Fuel Combustion – Industrial

Fuel Combustion – Residential

Gasoline Marketing

Tank Truck Leaks

Storage Tank Breathing

Industrial Surface Coating

Marine Vessel Loading and Transport

Prescribed Burning

Residential Household Waste

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Pavement Markings

Portable Fuel Containers

Solvent Cleaning

Structure Fires

Waste Water Treatment

Area Source Totals

On-road Mobile Sources

On-road Mobile Source Totals

Off-road Mobile Sources

Agricultural Equipment

General Aviation

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Airport Ground Support Equipment

Commercial Equipment

Construction Equipment

Construction and Mining Equipment

Industrial Equipment

Lawn and Garden Equipment

Logging Equipment

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Railroad Equipment

Recreational Equipment

Underground Mining Equipment

Off-road Mobile Source Totals

Animal Husbandry

Animal Husbandry Totals

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-1: 2002 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Biogenic Sources

Point Source

Area Source

On-road Mobile

Off-road Mobile

Animal Husbandry

1,631,448.97

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions

Point Sources

External Fuel Combustion

Electric Generation

Commercial/Institutional

Internal Fuel Combustion

Electric Generation

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Commercial/Institutional

Off-highway Engines

Industrial Processes

Chemical Manufacturing

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Pharmaceuticals

Phthalic Anhydride

Synthetic Organic Fiber

Synthetic Rubber

Fuel Combustion

Food/Agriculture

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Starch Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Primary Metal Production

By-product Coke

Fuel Combustion

Secondary Metal Production

Fuel Combustion

Mineral Products

Asphalt Manufacturing

Asphalt Roofing

Concrete Manufacturing

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Glass Manufacturing

Stone Quarrying

Fuel Combustion

Petroleum Industry

Desulfurization

Process Heaters

Paper and Wood Products

Fuel Combustion

Rubber and Plastic Products

Plastic Products

Tire Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Fabricated Metal Products

Drum Reclamation

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Fuel Combustion

Oil and Gas Production

Fuel Combustion

Miscellaneous Machinery

Electrical Equipment

Transportation Equipment

Health Services

Leather and Leather Products

Textile Products

Process Cooling

In-Process Fuel Use

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Fuel Combustion

Organic Solvent Emissions

Organic Solvent Use

Surface Coating Operations

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Flatwood Products

Metal Furniture

Miscellaneous Metal Parts

Thinning Solvents

Fuel Combustion

Petroleum Product Storage

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Variable Vapor Space Tanks

Bulk Terminals/Plants

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Variable Vapor Space Tanks

Printing/Publishing

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Screen Printing

Thinning Solvents

Petroleum Marketing/Transport

Organic Chemical Storage

Fixed Roof Tanks

Floating Roof Tanks

Organic Chemical Transport

Organic Solvent Evaporation

Fuel Combustion

Solid Waste Disposal

Sewage Treatment

Fuel Combustion

Commercial/Institutional

Fuel Combustion

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Site Remediation

Point Source Total

Area Sources

Agricultural Pesticide Application

Aircraft Refueling

Architectural Coating

Automobile Refinishing

Commercial Cooking

Consumer Solvent Use

Fuel Combustion – Commercial/Institutional

Fuel Combustion – Industrial

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Fuel Combustion – Residential

Outdoor Wood Boiler

Gasoline Marketing

Tank Truck Leaks

Storage Tank Breathing

Industrial Surface Coating

Marine Vessel Loading and Transport

Prescribed Burning

Residential Household Waste

Pavement Markings

Portable Fuel Containers

Solvent Cleaning

Structure Fires

Waste Water Treatment

Area Source Totals

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

On-road Mobile Sources

On-road Mobile Source Totals

Off-road Mobile Sources

Agricultural Equipment

General Aviation

Airport Ground Support Equipment

Commercial Equipment

Construction Equipment

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Construction and Mining Equipment

Industrial Equipment

Lawn and Garden Equipment

Logging Equipment

Railroad Equipment

Recreational Equipment

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table C-2: 2005 Chicago NAA Emissions (continued)

Underground Mining Equipment

Off-road Mobile Source Totals

Point Source

Area Source

On-road Mobile

Off-road Mobile

1,466,470.83

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Nonattainment Area

8-Hour Ozone and Annual PM2.5

Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration

AQPSTR 08-06

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021 North Grand Avenue East

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table of Contents

List of Tables………………………………………………………………………2

List of Figures……………………………………………………………………...2

List of Acronyms…………………………………………………………………..3

Executive Summary………………………………………………………………..4

Introduction ..............................................................................................................5

Emission Inventories ................................................................................................6

2002 Base Year Inventory ...........................................................................6

Projected Inventories for 2008, 2009 and 2010 ...........................................6

2.2.1 Point Source Emissions....................................................................8

2.2.2 Area Source Emissions ....................................................................9

2.2.3 On-road Mobile Source Emissions ..................................................9

2.2.4 Off-road Mobile Source Emissions ...............................................10

2.2.5 Projected Inventories .....................................................................12

Calculation of 15 Percent RFP Target Value .........................................................14

15 Percent Reasonable Further Progress Plan .......................................................15

Point Sources .............................................................................................15

4.1.1 Source Shutdowns ..........................................................................15

4.1.2 MACT Sources ..............................................................................15

4.1.3 ERMS Sources ...............................................................................15

Area Sources ..............................................................................................16

4.2.1 Consumer and Commercial Products.............................................16

4.2.2 Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings ......................16

Demonstration of RFP and Progress Towards Attainment ........................17

Reasonable Further Progress for PM2.5 ................................................................19

Conclusion .............................................................................................................22

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Base Year VOM Emissions for 2002 (tons/day) .....................................................7

Projected Point Source VOM Emissions (tons/day) ................................................8

Projected Area Source VOM Emissions (tons/day) .................................................9

Projected On-road Mobile Source VOM Emissions (tons/day) ............................10

Projected Off-road Mobile Source VOM Emissions (tons/day) ............................11

Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2008 (tons/day) ...........................................12

Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2009 (tons/day) ...........................................12

Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2010 (tons/day) ...........................................13

Demonstration of RFP in Nonattainment Area (tons per day) ..............................17

List of Figures

Chicago NAA VOM Emissions for RFP ...............................................................18

Chicago NAA Projected NOx Emissions ..............................................................20

Chicago NAA Projected PM2.5 Emissions ...........................................................20

Chicago NAA Projected SO2 Emissions ...............................................................20

Chicago NAA Projected Total Emissions..............................................................21

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

List of Acronyms

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance

Clean Air Interstate Rule

Code of Federal Regulations

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning

Carbon Monoxide

Economic Growth Analysis System

Electric Generating Unit

Emissions Reduction Market System

Federal Aviation Administration

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

Illinois Department of Transportation

Implementation Planning Model

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

Maximum Achievable Control Technology

Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP

Nonattainment Area

National Ambient Air Quality Standard

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

Oxides of Nitrogen

Ozone Transport Commission

Particulate Matter

Particulate Matter < 2.5 microns

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine

Reformulated Gasoline

Reasonable Further Progress

Reid Vapor Pressure

Source Classification Code

State Implementation Plan

US Environmental Protection Agency

Vehicle Miles Traveled

Volatile Organic Material

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Executive Summary

The Chicago nonattainment area (NAA) is comprised of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry

and Will Counties plus Oswego Township in Kendall County and Aux Sable and Goose Lake

Townships in Grundy County. This area was previously classified a severe nonattainment area

for the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) and is currently classified

as a moderate nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone standard. A 15 percent net reduction in

VOM emissions from 2002 to 2008 is required to meet the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)

requirements. This document will demonstrate that projecting emissions and incorporated the

discussed controls will result in a 20.0 percent reduction in VOM emissions in year 2002

emissions in the year 2008. In addition, continuing reductions in 2009 and 2010 are estimated to

result in year 2010 VOM emissions at 23.85 percent below 2002 levels.

To meet the required RFP reductions, Illinois EPA is allowed to use reductions in NOx and

VOM emissions. Substitution of reductions in NOx emissions for VOM reductions is allowed

under U.S. EPA’s NOx Substitution Guidance (December, 1993). However, Illinois EPA has

chosen not to use NOx substitution to meet its 15 percent RFP reduction, relying solely on VOM

emission reductions. Reductions in VOM emissions are primarily achieved through

implementation of the following control programs:

Federal commercial and consumer solvent regulation

Federal architectural and industrial maintenance coatings regulation

Motor vehicle fleet turnover and implementation of the Federal Tier 2 motor vehicle fuels

and emissions standards

Demonstrating attainment by April 2010 for PM2.5 alleviates the need for RFP. The emission

values used in the attainment demonstration show an overall reduction in emissions by the

attainment date.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

1.0 Introduction

The Chicago NAA area is comprised of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will Counties

plus Oswego Township in Kendall County and Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy

County. This area was previously a “Severe” NAA for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and is

currently designated as a “Moderate” NAA for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. If an area with the

same boundary as an area for which U.S. EPA approved a 15% ROP plan for the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS, that area is considered to have met the RFP obligation under subpart 2 of the Clean Air

Act Amendments (40 CFR 51.910(a)(1)(ii)). For the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, such areas are

required to submit a RFP plan under the general nonattainment provisions in §172(c)(2) of the

Clean Air Act subpart 1.

The Chicago NAA is required to attain the 8-hour ozone standard by 2010. Because this date is

more than 5 years beyond the date of designation, the Illinois EPA must implement a plan to

provide for a 15 percent reduction in emissions of volatile organic material (VOM) and/or

nitrogen oxides (NOx) from the baseline year within six years after the baseline year. The

baseline year for the area is 2002 which makes the target year 2008. The purpose of this

document is to demonstrate that VOM emissions in the Chicago 8-hour ozone NAA will

decrease more than 15 percent from the 2002 base year through 2008. Between 2002 and 2008,

VOM emissions are expected to decrease 19.80 percent.

The remainder of this document describes the methods used to demonstrate the required

reductions in emissions. This includes the development of the base year inventory, future year

inventories, calculation of the target emissions levels, and discussion of the emission control

measures to be implemented to achieve the required reduction.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

2.0 Emission Inventories

In order to determine the level of emissions reductions which must be achieved to meet the

required RFP emission reduction, a 2002 base year inventory must first be compiled. The 15

percent reduction requirement is then calculated using the U.S. EPA-required methodology. The

2002 inventory is then projected, using emissions source category-specific growth factors, to

2008. The selected emissions control measures are then evaluated and incorporated into the

2008 inventory and the resulting total emissions compared to the base year to determine whether

those emissions reductions satisfy the RFP requirement.

2.1 2002 Base Year Inventory

The Illinois EPA submitted the Chicago NAA 2002 base year inventory to U.S. EPA on June 1,

2005. This inventory was prepared consistent with U.S. EPA criteria and guidance documents

and represents emissions estimates for ozone precursors (NOx and VOM) on a typical ozone

season weekday during the peak ozone season (June, July, August) in 2002. More detailed

information about the compilation of the inventory can be found in the document Illinois Base

Year Ozone Inventory for 2002 (APQSTR06-03).

Table 2-1 summarizes the emissions in the area. As biogenic emissions would have been

subtracted later in determining the adjusted base year emissions inventory, biogenic emissions

have not been included.

2.2 Projected Inventories for 2008, 2009 and 2010

Growth or decline in industrial activity, population, fuel consumption, vehicle miles traveled,

etc., directly affects the generation of emissions. The expected growth in VOM emissions for

point, area and mobile sources must be accounted for in determining the emissions budget.

Therefore, an additional amount of emissions reductions may need be obtained to compensate for

the additional emissions attributable to growth. The following sections describe the

methodology used to project the base year inventory to 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table 2-1: Base Year VOM Emissions for 2002 (tons/day)

The primary method of projecting point and area source emissions to a future year was to use

growth factors. Growth factors relate a future year’s emissions to a previous year’s emissions by

use of a multiplication factor. For example, if the growth factor is 1.05, this represents a five

percent growth rate between the two years. As part of its inventory and modeling activities,

LADCO contracted with E. H. Pechan & Associates to develop growth factors for point and area

sources in the 5-state Midwest Regional Planning Organization to support future year control

strategy analyses for ozone, PM2.5 and regional haze. The factors that were developed were

specific to each state and were based primarily on factors/data from the U.S. EPA’s Economic

Growth Assessment System model, EGAS 5.0. The base year for these growth factors was 2002.

Factors for the years 2003-2018 were included.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

2.2.1 Point Source Emissions

Source category-specific growth factors supplied by LADCO from the application of the EGAS

model were used to future year emissions for all point sources.

In addition, there are approximately 60 construction permits for ethanol and biodiesel plants

statewide. The large increase in the number of these types of facilities is most likely not

reflected in the growth factors supplied by LADCO. These plants are not included in the 2002

base year inventory but have the potential to begin operation in 2008-2010. The locations of

these new plants were plotted and two were identified as being located in the Chicago NAA.

These sources included in the projected inventory are:

Ford Heights Ethanol LLC – Ford Heights

Rochelle Ethanol LLC - Joliet

The emissions from these sources were calculated by using the allowable emission rates and

anticipated operating hours identified in the permit and permit application. The sources were

assumed to begin operation in 2008. The emissions increase associated with these sources is

projected to be 0.355 tons VOM/day. Table 2-2 contains the projected point source VOM

emissions for the years 2008, 2009 2010.

Table 2-2: Projected Point Source VOM Emissions (tons/day)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

2.2.2 Area Source Emissions

Area source emissions were projected to future years using EGAS-based category specific

growth factors provided to LADCO. The following table contains Chicago NAA projected area

source emissions by county for 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Table 2-3: Projected Area Source VOM Emissions (tons/day)

2.2.3 On-road Mobile Source Emissions

U.S. EPA’s MOBILE6 model was used to calculate emission factors for future years. Input files

used in the model were similar to those described in Illinois Base Year Ozone Inventory for 2002

(APQSTR06-03). Parameters that were known/estimated for 2008 (e.g., fleet mix) were used.

Since no temperatures are available for 2008 and beyond, the climatological averages (minimum

and maximum) were used. VMT for the area was grown using a 1.27 percent per year growth

rate. Emission factors output by the MOBILE model were then multiplied by the projected VMT

to obtain emissions.

On-road mobile source emissions were not calculated for 2010. The complexity of the MOBILE

model and the amount of data needed/returned precludes running the model for every year of

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

interest. The next year the model was run after 2009 was for 2012. Emissions for 2010 were

estimated by interpolation between 2009 and 2012.

The Bureau of Air’s Division of Mobile Source Programs has worked with IDOT and CMAP to

develop the motor vehicle emissions estimates for 2008 and 2009. These emissions were

calculated in the same manner as described above, but with updated data from CMAP for VMT

fractions. The 2010 value was obtained by extrapolating the 2008-2009 values. The calculated

values for the budget for 2008, 2009 and 2010 will be used in place of the projected values. RFP

will not be affected.

Table 2-4: Projected On-road Mobile Source VOM Emissions (tons/day)

The year 2008 motor vehicle VOM emissions estimates are not being proposed as motor vehicle

emissions budgets for the purpose of conducting transportation conformity. Since the year 2008

will have already ended by the time this SIP is submitted and because the 2009 motor vehicle

emissions estimates are being proposed as budgets, there is no need to finalize the 2008

emissions estimates as motor vehicle emissions budgets.

2.2.4 Off-road Mobile Source Emissions

U.S. EPA’s NONROAD model was used to calculate emissions

for 2008. Inputs used for the

model were similar to those described in Illinois Base Year Ozone Inventory for 2002

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

(APQSTR06-03). Parameters that were known/estimated for 2008 (e.g., fuel RVP) were used.

Since no temperatures are available for 2008 and beyond, the climatological averages (minimum,

maximum and average) were used.

The NONROAD model does not calculate emissions for marine vessels, locomotives and

aircraft. Projected emissions for marine vessels and locomotives were calculated using the

growth factors from LADCO.

Aircraft emissions were also calculated using growth factors from LADCO. However,

preference was given to data from the FAA showing the growth of landings and take-offs at

airports with control towers. Emissions from the expansion of O’Hare airport were calculated

using the change in landings and take-offs presented in O’Hare Modernization Final

Environmental Impact Statement Section 4(f) and Section 6(f) Evaluation: General Conformity

Determination, July 2005. The worst-case scenario was used. The addition of a third Chicago

area airport near Peotone was also included in the future year inventory.

Table 2-5: Projected Off-road Mobile Source VOM Emissions for 2008 (tons/day)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

2.2.5 Projected Inventories

The following tables contain county-specific projected VOM emissions for 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Table 2-6: Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2008 (tons/day)

Table 2-7: Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2009 (tons/day)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table 2-8: Total Projected VOM Emissions for 2010 (tons/day)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

3.0 Calculation of 15 Percent RFP Target Value

This section details the methodology used to calculate the required amount of reductions

required to meet an overall reduction of 15 percent. The steps to calculate this value are as

Step 1. Establish the emissions for the baseline year

Step 2. Identify any adjustments (non-creditable reductions such as from the pre-1990

federal motor vehicle control program (FMVCP))

Step 3. Calculate the adjusted baseline (Step 1 – Step 2)

Step 4. Calculate mandated reductions (Step 3 x 0.15)

Step 5. Calculate total required reductions (Step 4 + Step 2)

Step 6. Identify the target emissions for the future year (Step 1 – Step 5)

The result in Step 6 is the level of emissions that must be achieved to meet the 15 percent

reduction. If the future year emissions are greater than the target emissions level, the 15 percent

reduction has not been met. The value in Step 3 can be used in combination with the future year

emissions to calculate the actual reduction. Following is the calculation of the RFP VOM target

level in tons per day (tpd).

Step 1. Total 2002 Chicago NAA baseline emissions from Table 2-1: 752.65

Step 2. Non-creditable reductions from the FMVCP: 13.46

Step 3. Adjusted baseline: 752.65 – 13.46 = 739.19

Step 4. Required reduction: 739.19 x 0.15 = 110.88

Step 5. Total required reductions: 110.88 + 13.46 = 124.34

Step 6. 2008 target emissions level: 752.65 – 124.34 = 628.31 tpd

Therefore, Chicago NAA 2008 VOM emissions must be equal to or less than 628.31 tons per day

in order to demonstrate that the area has achieved the required RFP reduction.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

4.0 15 Percent Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)

This section delineates the additional (real) reductions not already accounted for in the projected

inventory to determine compliance with RFP. These reductions can include items such as

shutdowns of sources, implementation of new regulations, applicable consent decrees, etc.

Illinois EPA has carefully checked its emission reduction assumptions and analyses to make sure

no double counting of source reductions has taken place.

4.1 Point Sources

4.1.1 Source Shutdowns

No source shutdowns from the point source inventory are being included to meet the 15 percent

reduction. All sources operating in 2002 were assumed to be operating in 2008.

4.1.2 MACT Sources

Reductions in VOM emissions due to implementation of additional MACT regulations after

2002 are not included in the future year inventory.

4.1.3 ERMS Sources

The ERMS rule sets a cap on VOM emissions from certain sources

in the Chicago nonattainment

area. This cap is a limit on the growth of emissions. Allotments from sources no longer

operating in future years can be traded to other operating sources to offset their emissions.

The projected emissions from the ERMS sources for 2008, 2009 and 2010 were reviewed in

order to establish whether or not those emissions had increased above the cap set by the ERMS

rule. For all three years, the projected emissions did not exceed the cap and therefore no

reductions were claimed for RFP.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

4.2 Area Sources

4.2.1 Consumer and Commercial Products

Consumer and commercial products are currently regulated by the U.S. EPA under 40 CFR 59

Subpart D, promulgated

on September 11, 1998. This national rule currently limits the VOM

content of 24 product categories. These 24 categories are included in six larger categories:

personal, household, automotive aftermarket, adhesive, pesticide and miscellaneous products.

A revision to this rule is expected to be promulgated in 2009. Even though the rule will not be in

place in 2008, manufacturers will be modifying their formulations prior to the applicability date.

U.S. EPA has published a memo (“Emission Reduction Credit for Three Federal Rules for

Categories of Consumer and Commercial Products under Section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act”)

which identifies the amount of credit states can take in 2008 for purposes of RFP.

For Consumer and Commercial Products, a 29 percent reduction is expected by the new rule.

The guidance memo allows states to claim 75 percent of that reduction for calendar year 2008.

Illinois EPA is using a 50 percent reduction rather than a 75 percent reduction. This results in a

reduction of 11.64 tons/day of VOM in 2008. The remaining 50 percent reduction is claimed in

4.2.2 Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings

Architectural and industrial maintenance coatings are currently regulated by the U.S. EPA under

40 CFR 59 Subpart D, promulgated September 11, 1998. A revision to this rule is expected to be

promulgated in 2009. Even though the rule will not be in place in 2008, manufacturers will be

modifying their formulations prior to the applicability date. U.S. EPA has published a memo

(“Emission Reduction Credit for Three Federal Rules for Categories of Consumer and

Commercial Products under Section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act”) which identifies the amount of

credit states can take in 2008 for purposes of RFP.

For Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings, a 31 percent reduction is expected by the

new rule. The guidance memo allows states to claim 75 percent of that reduction for calendar

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

year 2008. Illinois EPA is using a 50 percent reduction rather than a 75 percent reduction. This

results in a reduction of 5.14 tons/day of VOM in 2008. The remaining 50 percent reduction is

claimed in 2009.

4.3 Demonstration of RFP and Progress Towards Attainment

The following table identifies the adjustments made to the projected inventories to obtain

expected emissions in 2008, 2009 and 2010.

Table 4-1: Demonstration of RFP in Nonattainment Area

(tons per day)

Consumer Solvent

Off-road Mobile

Percent Reduction from 2002

Percent Reduction from

previous year

The total reduction for the NAA for purposes of RFP (2002-2008) is 20.00 percent. This value

meets the requirement of a 15 percent reduction for RFP.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Figure 4-1: Chicago NAA VOM Emissions for RFP

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Emissions (tons/day)

RFP

The attainment date for the Chicago NAA is June 15, 2010. Guidance from U.S. EPA Region 5

has indicated to Illinois EPA that for years after 2008, progress (reductions) towards attainment

in 2010 should be shown. There is no specific reduction target, only progress towards

attainment. As can be seen in Table 4-1, the additional reduction in VOM emissions from 2008

to 2010 is an additional 28.44 tons/day of VOM or an additional 4.80 percent reduction.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

5.0 Reasonable Further Progress for PM2.5

The same Chicago area that is nonattainment for ozone is also nonattainment for PM2.5 with the

attainment date being April 5, 2010. The RFP requirements for PM2.5 are addressed in 40 CFR

60 Section 51.1009. In short, that section indicates that if a State submits an attainment

demonstration and implementation plan showing it will attain the PM NAAQS by the attainment

date, the State is not required to submit a separate RFP plan.

40 CFR 60 Section 51.1002 states that NOx, PM2.5 and SO2 emissions must be included in the

attainment demonstration. The pollutants of ammonia and VOM may be included if the State

shows that sources of those emissions contribute significantly to PM2.5 contributions. Illinois

EPA will be using the pollutants of NOx, PM2.5 and SO2.

The methods used to compile the 2002 base year inventory and projected inventories for PM

were identical to the methods described in Section 2 of this document. Illinois EPA conducted a

full ozone season and annual inventory for the 2002 base year concurrently to account for

needing a PM inventory.

Unlike the demonstration of RFP for ozone, there is no specific reduction mandated for PM2.5.

A successful demonstration of attainment using the projected inventory values is sufficient to

show progress. The following figures show the emission rates of the pollutants of interest. A

combined total of all three pollutants is also given. Emissions of PM2.5 and SO2 show slight

increases over time. The SO2 emissions are primarily from combustion sources. A large portion

of PM2.5 emissions are from fugitive sources that are typically out of the State’s ability to

control (reduce) emissions. These are sources such as agricultural tilling, road construction and

other construction. When these emissions are subtracted from the overall PM2.5 inventory, there

is a slight reduction in PM2.5 emissions.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Figure 5-1: Chicago NAA Projected NOx Emissions

200

200

008

200

Emissions (tons/year)

Figure 5-2: Chicago NAA Projected PM2.5 Emissions

200

006

200

011

201

Emissions (tons/year)

No Fugitives

Figure 5-3: Chicago NAA Projected SO2 Emissions

200

200

008

200

Emissions (tons/year)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Figure 5-4: Chicago NAA Projected Total Emissions

200

006

200

011

201

Emissions (tons/year)

No Fugitives

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

6.0 Conclusion

Based upon the 2002 base year inventory and best estimates for the 2008 inventory based on

expected control measures, the NAA met the requirement of 15 percent reduction rate for RFP.

This required reduction was met through a 19.80 percent reduction in VOM emissions.

Additionally, continued progress towards attainment in June 2010 is shown by an additional 5.89

percent reduction in VOM emissions from 2008 to 2010.

Demonstrating attainment by April 2010 for PM2.5 alleviates the need for RFP. The emission

values used in the attainment demonstration show an overall reduction in emissions by the

attainment date.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Summary of VOM RACT Implementation

in the Chicago Nonattainment Area

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rule.

CTG/ACT Reference

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Coatings and

Graphic Arts

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume

VIII: Graphic Arts –

Rotogravure and Flexography

(EPA-450/2-78-033, 12/78,

NTIS PB 292-490).

Flexible Package Printing

(EPA 453/R-06-003, Sept. 2006)

Applies to graphic arts operations that use

the flexographic and rotogravure printing

processes as applied to both publication

and packaging printing.

35 Ill. Admn. Code, Part

218, Subpart H: Printing

and Publishing, (Sections

218.401-218.404)

In the process of

August 16, 1991

In the process of

September 27, 1993

Offset Lithographic Printing

(EPA-453 R-94-054).

Offset Lithographic Printing and

Letterpress Printing

(EPA 453/R-06-002, Sept. 2006)

Applies to graphic arts operations that use

the offset lithographic printing process.

35 Ill. Admn. Code, Part

218, Subpart H: Printing

and Publishing (Sections

218.405-218.411)

In the process of

August 16, 1991

In the process of

Metal Furniture,

Surface Coating of

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume III:

Surface Coating of Metal

(EPA-450/277-032, 12/77, NTIS

Applies to surface coating of metal

furniture by metal furniture manufacturers.

35 Ill. Admn. Code, Part

218, Subpart F: Coating

Operations, Section

August 16, 1991

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Coatings and Solvents

Metal Parts and

Products, Surface

Miscellaneous

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume VI:

Surface Coating of

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and

(EPA-450/2-78-015, 6/78, NTIS

Applies to industries that are not covered

by specific CTG documents (Specific

CTGs have been published for can, coil,

automobile and light duty truck, metal

furniture, magnet wire, and large

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart F: Coating

Operations, Section

August 16, 1991

Solvent Metal

Industrial Cleaning

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Solvent Metal

Cleaning (EPA-450/2-77-022,

11/77, NTIS PB-274-557).

Control Techniques Guidelines:

Industrial Cleaning Solvents

(EPA 453/R-06-001)

Applies to cold cleaners, open top vapor

degreasers, and conveyorized degreasers

which use volatile solvents to clean metal

Applies to industrial cleaning solvents in

cleaning operations associated with

manufacturing, repair, and service

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart E: Solvent

Cleaning, Sections

218.181-1218.84

In the process of

August 16, 1991

In the process of

September 27, 1993

Wood Furniture

Manufacturing

Control of VOM Emissions from

Wood Furniture Manufacturing

Operations (EPA-453/R-96-007,

4/96, NTIS PB-96-178-769).

Applies to any facility that finishes wood

furniture, or performs cleaning or wash

off associated with wood furniture

finishing operations.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart F: Coating

Operations, Section

August 16, 1991

Flat Wood Paneling,

Surface Coating of

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume VII:

Factory Surface of Flat Wood

Paneling (EPA-450/2-78-032,

6/78, NTIS PB 286-199).

Control Techniques guidelines

for Flat Wood Paneling coatings

(EPA 453/R-06-004, Sept. 2006)

Applies to interior paneling made of

Applies to coatings operation at

manufacturing flat wood paneling interior

In the process of

In the process of

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Coatings and

AutoTransport—

Business Machine

Plastic Coatings

AutoTransport—Business

Machine Plastic (EPA 453 R-94-

Applies to surface coating of plastics used

in motor vehicles and business machines.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart F: Coating

Operations, Section

August 16, 1991

Cans, Coils, Paper,

Automobiles, and

Light Duty Trucks,

Surface Coating of

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources – Volume II:

Surface Coating of Cans, Coils,

Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and

Light-Duty Trucks (EPA-450/2-

77-008, 5/77, NTIS PB-272-445).

Applies to surface coatings for protection

and decoration of cans, coils, paper,

fabrics, automobiles, and light duty

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart F: Coating

Operations, Sections

218.204(a), (b), (c), (d),

August 16, 1991

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Coatings and

Ink and Paint

Manufacturing

Control of VOM from Ink and

Paint Manufacturing (EPA 453 3-

Applies to products of the paint

manufacturing industry, including

architectural coatings, product coating for

original equipment manufacturers, and

special-purpose coatings. Also applies to

ink manufacturing, including letterpress

inks, lithographic and offset inks, gravure

inks, and flexographic inks.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart AA: Paint

and Ink Manufacturing,

Sections 218.620 through

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Large Appliances,

Surface Coating of

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume V:

Surface Coating of Large

Appliances (EPA-450/2-77-034,

NTIS PB-278-259).

Applies to the coating of large appliances,

such as doors, cases, lids, panels, and

interior support parts of residential and

commercial washers, dryers, ranges,

refrigerators, freezers, water heaters, dish

washers, trash compactors, air

conditioners, and similar products.

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.204(h)

August 16, 1991

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Coatings and

Magnet Wire,

Surface Coating for

Insulation of

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources, Volume IV:

Surface Coating of Insulation of

(EPA- 450/2-77-033, 12/77, NTIS

PB-278-258), CTG.

Applies to wire coating curing ovens.

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.204(i)

August 16, 1991

Bulk Gasoline

Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from

Bulk Gasoline Plants

(EPA-450/2-77-035,

12/77, NTIS PB-276-

Applies to bulk plants with daily

throughputs of 76,000 liters (20,077 gal.)

gasoline or less.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart Y: Gasoline

Distribution, Section

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

External Floating

Roof Tanks,

Petroleum Liquid

Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from

Petroleum Liquid

Storage in External

Floating Roof Tanks

(EPA-450-2/78-047,

12/78, NTIS PB-290-

Applies to external floating roof

tanks larger than 150,000 liters

(~40,000 gal. Or 950 bbls.) storing

petroleum liquids.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart B: Organic

Emissions from Storage

and Loading Operations,

Section 218.122

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

External Floating

Roof Tanks,

Petroleum Liquid

Volatile Organic Liquid Storage in

Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks

(EPA 453 R-94-00).

Applies to storage tanks in all industries,

but primarily in the petroleum refineries,

pipelines, chemical plants, liquid

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.124

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Fixed Roof Tanks,

Petroleum Liquids

Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Storage of

Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof

Tanks (EPA-450/2-77-036, 12/77,

NTIS PB-276-749)

Organic Liquid Storage

(EPA 453 R-94-00).

Applies to storage vessels with capacities

greater than 150,000 liters containing

petroleum liquids with a true vapor

pressure greater than 10.5 KPa. Exempts

fixed roof tanks with capacities less than

1,600,000 liters used to store produced

crude or condensate prior to lease custody

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.121

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.119

August 16, 1991

August 16, 1991

November 15, 1994

November 15, 1994

Refinery Vacuum

Producing Systems,

Separators, and

Process Unit

Turnarounds

Control of Refinery

Vacuum Producing

Systems, Wastewater

Separators, and Process Unit

Turnarounds (EPA-450/2-77-025,

10/77, NTIS PB-275 662).

Applies to non-condensables from

vacuum producing systems, wastewater

separators, and all pressurized process

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart R:

Petroleum Refining and

Related Industries;

Asphalt Materials,

Sections 218.442-218.444

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Dispensing Stage II

Vapor Recovery

Stage II Gasoline

Dispensing Facilities

(EPA 450 3-91-022a).

Applies to gasoline dispensing into motor

vehicles at gasoline dispensing facilities.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart Y: Gasoline

Distribution, Section 586

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Gasoline Service

Design Criteria for

Stage I Vapor Control Systems –

Gasoline Service Stations, (11/75),

Applies to filling of gasoline storage

tanks from gasoline tanker trucks.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart Y: Gasoline

Distribution, Section

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Organic Liquid

Volatile Organic Liquid

Storage in Floating and

Fixed Roof Tanks (EPA 453 R-94-

Applies to storage tanks in all industries,

but primarily in the petroleum refineries,

pipelines, chemical plants, and liquid

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart B: Organic

Emissions from Storage

and Loading Operations,

Section 218.120: Control

Requirements for Storage

Containers of VOL

August 16, 1991

November 15, 1994

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Tank Trucks,

Gasoline Loading

Hydrocarbons from

Tank Truck Gasoline

Loading Terminals (EPA-450/2-

77-026, 12/77, NTIS PB-275-060);

Applies to tank truck terminals with daily

throughputs greater than 76,000 liters

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart Y: Gasoline

Distribution, Section

218.582: Bulk Gasoline

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Tank Trucks,

Gasoline, and

Vapor Collection

Control of VOM Leaks from

Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor

Collection Systems

(EPA-450/2-78-051, 12/78, NTIS

Applies to gasoline tank trucks that are

equipped with vapor collection systems

and the vapor collection systems at bulk

terminals, bulk plants and service

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Section 218.584:Gasoline

Delivery Vessels

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Stationary Source

Electric Utility

Utility Boilers

(EPA 453 R- 94-023).

Applies to electric utility boilers.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

217, Subpart V: Electric

Power Generation

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Stationary Source

Industrial Commercial

(EPA 453 R-94-022).

Applies to boilers used in industrial,

commercial, and institutional facilities.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

217, Subpart U: NO

Control and Trading

Program for Specified

Generating Units.

Subpart D to meet RACT

in the process of adopting.

N/A: Applies only to

large sources that are

greater than 250 mm

BTU/hour, but for

sources smaller than

250 mm BTU, the

RACT Proposal in the

development process

Subpart D to meet

RACT in the process of

N/A: Applies only to

large sources that are

greater than 250 mm

BTU/hour, but for

sources smaller than

250 mm BTU, the

RACT Proposal in the

development process

Stationary Gas

Stationary Gas Turbines (EPA 453

Applies to stationary gas turbines.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

217, Subpart U: NO

Control and Trading

Program for Specified

Generating Units

Subpart Q to meet RACT

in the process of adopting.

N/A: This rule applies

only to large sources

that are greater than 250

mm BTU/hour, but for

sources smaller than

250 mm BTU, the

RACT Proposal in the

development process

Subpart Q to meet

RACT in the process of

This rule applies only

to large sources that are

greater than 250 mm

BTU/hour, but for

sources smaller than

250 mm BTU, the

RACT Proposal in the

development process

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective Date

Date Last Amended

Stationary Source

Reciprocating

Stationary Reciprocating

(EPA 453 R-93-032).

Applies to stationary

reciprocating internal

combustion engines.

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

proposed Part 217,

Subpart Q: Stationary

Reciprocating Internal

Combustion Engines and

In the process of adopting

by Illinois Pollution

In the process of

adopting by Illinois

Pollution Control

Manufacturing

Cement Manufacturing

(EPA 453 R-94-004).

Applies to the kilns used in

cement manufacturing.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

217, Subpart T: Cement

Kilns to satisfy NOx SIP

Subpart G to meet RACT

for cement and lime kilns

is in the process of

adopting by the Board.

Subpart G to meet RACT

for cement and lime kilns

is in the process of

adopting by the Board.

Manufacturing

Glass Manufacturing

(EPA 453 R-94-037).

Applies to glass manufacturing

Subpart F of Part 217.

Currently in the process

of adopting by the Board.

Subpart F of Part 217.

Currently in the process

of adopting by the Board.

Iron and Steel

Iron and Steel Mills

(EPA 453 R-94-065).

Applies to iron and steel

manufacturing processes.

Subpart H of Part 217.

Currently in the process

of adopting by the Board.

Currently in the process

of adopting by the Board.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective Date

Date Last Amended

Stationary Source

Nitric and Adipic

Acid Manufacturing

Nitric and Adipic Acid

Manufacturing Plants (EPA 450 3-

Applies to nitric and adipic acid

manufacturing operations.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

217, Subpart O, Section

217.381: Nitric Acid

Manufacturing Processes

Cutback Asphalt

Control of VOM from

Use of Cutback Asphalt

(EPA-450/2- 77-037, NTIS PB 278-

Applies to use of cutback asphalt

used for roadway paving.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart X, Section

218.563: Cutback Asphalt

August 16, 1991

Large Petroleum

Dry Cleaners

Emissions from Large

Petroleum Dry Cleaners (EPA-450/3-

82-009, 9/82, NTIS PB-83-124-875).

Applies to petroleum solvent dry

cleaning facilities that consume

123,000 liters or more of

petroleum solvent per year.

35 Ill. Admin. Code, Part

218, Subpart Z: Dry

Cleaners, Section

218.607: Standards for

Petroleum Solvent Dry

August 16, 1991

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Perchloroethylene

Dry Cleaning

Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from

Perchloroethylene Dry

Cleaning Systems

(EPA-450/2-78-050, 12/78, NTIS

Applies to all dry cleaning systems

that use perchlorethylene.

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Subtitle B, Chapter

Section 218.601:

Perchloroethylene

August 16, 1991

Synthetic Organic

Manufacturing

Control of VOM Emissions from Air

Oxidation Processes in Synthetic

Organic Chemical Manufacturing

Industry (EPA-450/3-84-015,

12/84, NTIS PB-85-164 275).

Control of VOM Emissions from

Reactor Processes and

Distillation Operations in SOCMI

(EPA-450/4-91-031, 11/15/93, NTIS

PB-92-180-009).

Applies to synthetic organic chemical

manufacturing operations.

35 Ill. Admin. Code,

Part 218, Subpart

Synthetic Organic

Manufacturing Plant

August 16, 1991

October 28, 1996

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Air Oxidation

Processes in

Air Oxidation Processes

(EPA 450 3-84-015 VOM).

Applies to air oxidation processes

used in the synthetic organic

chemical manufacturing industry.

August 16, 1991

November 15, 1994

Batch Processes

Batch Processes

(EPA 453 R-93 017).

Applies to processes used in

producing plastic materials and

resins, pharmaceuticals, gum and

wood chemicals, cyclic crudes and

intermediates, industrial organic

chemicals, and agricultural

Code, Part 218,

Subpart V: Batch

Operations and Air

August 16, 1991

Bakery Oven Emissions

(EPA 453 R-92-017).

Applies to commercial bakery

Code, Part 218,

Subpart FF: Bakery

August 16, 1991

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Pharmaceutical

Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from Manufacture

of Synthesized Pharmaceutical

Products (EPA-450/2-78-029, 1278,

NTIS PB-290-580).

Applies to facilities and operations

that synthesize pharmaceutical

Code, Part 218,

August 16, 1991

September 27,1993

Pneumatic Rubber

Tires, Manufacture of

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions

from Manufacture of

Pneumatic Rubber Tires (EPA-450/2-

78-030, 12/78, NTIS PB-290-557).

Applies to manufacturing processes;

undertread cementing, tread-end

cementing, bead dipping, and green

Subpart S: Rubber

and Miscellaneous

Plastic Products,

Section 218.461

September 27, 1993

October 21, 1993

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-1: Source Categories, CTG/ACT List, and Applicable Illinois Rules, cont’d

CTG Source Category

CTG/ACT Reference Document

CTG/ACT Applicability

Illinois Rule

Original Effective

Date Last Amended

Polyester Resin

Control of VOM Emissions from

Manufacture of High Density

Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and

Polystyrene Resins (EPA-450/3-83-

008, 11/83, NTIS PB-84-134-600).

Control of VOM Emissions from

Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer

and Resin Manufacturing Equipment

(EPA-450/3-83-006, 3/84, NTIS PB-

Polystyrene Foam Manufacturing

(EPA 450 3-90-020).

Applies to the manufacturing of

high-density polyethylene,

polypropylene, and polystyrene.

Applies to emissions from equipment

used in synthetic organic chemical

polymers and resins.

Applies to polystyrene foam

Polystyrene Plants

September 27, 1993

October 21, 1993

Synthetic Organic

Chemical and

Manufacturing

Equipment Leaks

Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic

Chemical Polymer and

Resin Manufacturing

Equipment (EPA-450/3-83-006, 3/84,

NTIS PB-84-189-372).

Applies to leaks of process fluids

(gaseous or liquid) from plant

equipment such as pumps,

compressors, in-line process valves,

pressure relief devices, open-ended

valves, sampling connections,

flanges, agitators, and cooling

Subpart Q, Section

August 16, 1991

September 27, 1993

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-2 – Source Categories and CTG/ACT List for Which There Are No Applicable Illinois Rules

CTG/ACT Reference

CTG/ACT Applicability

Coatings and Solvents

Automobile Refinishing

Automobile Refinishing (EPA 450 3-88-009).

Applies to automobile refinishing operations which do not

involve an auto body shop.

Shipbuilding

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating) (61 FR

44050, 8/27/96).

Applies to coatings and solvents used for building or maintaining

metal marine or fresh-water metal hulled vessel used for military

or commercial operations, including self-propelled vessels and

those towed by other craft (barges). This definition includes, but

is not limited to, all military vessels, commercial cargo and

passenger (cruise) ships, ferries, barges, tankers, container ships,

patrol and pilot boats, and dredges.

Surface Coating Operations at Shipbuilding and Ship Repair

Facilities (EPA-453/R-94-032, 4/94, NTIS PB-94-181-864).

Applies to any marine or fresh-water metal hulled vessel used for

military or commercial operations, including self-propelled

vessels and those towed by other craft. This definition includes,

but is not limited to, all military vessels, commercial cargo and

passenger ships, ferries, barges, tankers, container ships, patrol

and pilot boats, and dredges. Pleasure craft, such as recreational

boats and yachts, are not included.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Table E-2 – Source Categories and CTG/ACT List for Which There Are No Applicable Illinois Rules – cont’d

CTG/ACT Reference

CTG/ACT Applicability

Natural Gas/Gasoline

Processing Plants,

Equipment Leaks from

Control of VOM Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline

Processing Plants (EPA-450/2-83-007, 12/83, NTIS PB-84-161-

Applies to facilities engaged in the separation of natural gas liquids

from field gas and/or fraction of the liquids into natural gas

products, such as ethane, propane, butane and natural gasoline. It is

not applicable to compressor stations, dehydration units,

sweetening units, field treatment, underground storage facilities,

liquefied natural gas units and field gas gathering systems unless

they are located at a gas plant.

Agricultural Pesticides

Control of VOM from the Application of Agricultural Pesticides

(EPA 453R-92-011).

Applies to pesticides used for agricultural purposes.

Fuel Switching

Fuel Switching to Meet RACT for NO

(EPA Memorandum, July

Applies to switching to a cleaner burning fuel during ozone season. No

Plywood Veneer Dryers

Control Techniques for Organic Emissions from Plywood Veneer

Dryers (EPA 450 3-83-012 VOM).

Applies to softwood plywood manufacturing operations.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Transportation Conformity

This section describes the development of the Chicago nonattainment area motor vehicle emissions

budgets associated with the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration State Implementation Plans

(SIP). An average summer weekday motor vehicle emissions budget is being proposed for the year

2009 for the precursor pollutants volatile organic material (“VOM”) and oxides of nitrogen

(“NOx”). These budgets were developed consistent with the motor vehicle activity assumptions and

emissions control strategies incorporated into the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration analysis.

The budgets reflect an emissions level determined using motor vehicle VMT and fleet mix provided

by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning and which was supplied to the Lake Michigan Air

Directors Consortium (“LADCO”) for use in the attainment demonstration photochemical modeling

Section 176(c)(4) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires that transportation plans,

programs, and projects which are funded or approved under Title 23 USC must be determined to

conform with State or Federal air implementation plans. A motor vehicle emissions budget is that

portion of the total allowable emissions allocated to highway and transit vehicle use that are defined

in the SIP for a certain year. Section 93.101 of the rule defines a “control strategy [State]

implementation plan revision” as a “plan which contains specific strategies for controlling the

emissions and reducing ambient levels of pollutants in order to satisfy Clean Air Act (“CAA”)

requirements of reasonable further progress and attainment.” In order to demonstrate conformity to

the motor vehicle emissions budget, emissions from the implementation of a transportation plan or a

transportation improvement program (“TIP”) must be less than or equal to the budget level (40 CFR

Transportation conformity will be based on these submitted on road motor vehicle emissions

budgets after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) determines that the budgets

meet the adequacy criteria of the transportation conformity rule under §93.118(e). The motor

vehicle emissions budgets in this submittal are adequate as each of the six criteria under §93.118(e)

is satisfied. These six criteria include:

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

1. The submitted control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance plan was endorsed

by the Governor (or his or her designee) and was subject to a State public hearing.

2. Before the control strategy implementation plan or maintenance plan was submitted to EPA,

consultation among federal, State, and local agencies occurred: full implementation plan

documentation was provided to [US]EPA; and [US]EPA’s stated concerns, if any, were

3. The motor vehicle emissions budgets(s) is clearly identified and precisely quantified;

4. The motor vehicle emissions budget(s), when considered together with all other emission

sources, is consistent with all applicable requirements for reasonable further progress,

attainment, or maintenance (whichever is relevant to the given implementation plan submission);

5. The motor vehicle emissions budget(s) is consistent with and clearly related to the emissions

inventory and the control measures in the submitted control strategy implementation plan

revision or maintenance plan, and

6. Revisions to previously submitted control strategy implementation plans explain and document

any changes to previously submitted budgets and control measures, impacts on point and area

source emissions; any changes to established safety margins; and reasons for the changes

(including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or estimates of vehicle miles

This State Implementation Plan and the associated motor vehicle emissions budgets have been

developed by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois EPA), the designated air quality

agency for the State of Illinois. The required public hearing to accept public comment on the

proposed motor vehicle emissions inventory will be held at 9:00 AM, on December 16, 2008 in

Room 9-031 of the James R. Thompson Center in downtown Chicago. Notification of this hearing

was printed in the Chicago Sun Times on November 15, 2008. Comments on the proposed

attainment demonstration and motor vehicle emissions budgets will be accepted for 30 days after the

public hearing. A “Responsiveness Summary” which addresses the written comments received will

be prepared and included in the final submission

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

In compliance with adequacy criterion #2, interagency consultation meetings were held with

members of the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) Tier 2 Consultation Team on

July 2, 2008. At this meeting, the IEPA representative discussed the requirements for the attainment

demonstration as they relate to transportation conformity and explained the derivation of the

proposed motor vehicle emissions budgets. Compliance with the remaining adequacy criteria is

contained within the narrative of the attainment demonstration document and this transportation

conformity section.

The 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration

The Lake Michigan Air Director’s Consortium along with the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,

Ohio, and Wisconsin, have developed a strategy to demonstrate attainment of achieve the 8-hour

ozone NAAQS in the lower Lake Michigan area in the year 2009. This plan incorporates base year

emissions from all source categories (i.e., point, area, on-road, off-road), projections of emissions

growth, and the inclusion of emissions reduction strategies. Transportation network data (e.g., road

links, traffic volumes and speeds) and assumptions (e.g., fleet mix, VMT mix) were provided to

LADCO by the CMAP for use in the modeling.

The motor vehicle emissions budgets established and described herein were developed consistent

with the methodology and control strategy assumptions used in the 8-hour ozone Attainment

Demonstrations as well as the 8-hour ozone Reasonable Further Progress plan (RFP). The effects of

these controls are incorporated into the emissions factors produced by the USEPA’s MOBILE6

model. Following is a discussion of the inputs and assumptions incorporated into the development

of the motor vehicle emissions budgets.

The RFP plan described in Section 5.0 incorporates county-level base year 2002 average daily

vehicle miles traveled (ADVMT) levels from the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT).

The 2002 ADVMT total for the 6-county-3-township Chicago NAA was approximately 160.8

million miles. This total was projected to the attainment year 2009 using an area-wide vehicle miles

traveled (VMT) growth rate of 1.27 percent per year, determined through consultation between the

Illinois EPA, CMAP, and LADCO. The projected 2009 ADVMT level for the Chicago NAA was

175.7 million miles. To account for ozone season weekday traffic, the average daily VMT estimates

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

were multiplied by Chicago-area-specific Average-Daily-to-Average Summer Weekday conversion

factors supplied by IDOT. The forecast 2009 average summer weekday VMT (ASWVMT) level

used to establish the motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Chicago NAA was 195.5 million miles,

or a little more than 11% greater than the forecast 2009 ADVMT. This level is consistent with the

VMT level used in the attainment demonstration, and since it results in a lower, more conservative

VMT level. The Illinois EPA believes that basing the motor vehicle emissions on this lower total

demonstrates consistency with the attainment demonstration. An ASWVMT level of approximately

193.1 million miles was used in the development of the 2008 RFP plan. Following is a summary of

the information and MOBILE6 model assumptions used included in the development of the draft

motor vehicle emissions budgets.

VMT estimates and motor vehicle emissions factors were developed representative of

summer 2008 for the RFP demonstration, and for 2009 for the modeled attainment demonstration.

Typical Ozone Season Weekday:

The 2002 Chicago Area ozone precursor emissions inventory,

which established the baseline for the CAA-required RFP emissions reductions, is based on activity

on a typical ozone season weekday. The primary parameters affected by this choice of temporal

time frame are the temperature and the adjustment of VMT to account for increased travel during the

Temperature:

U.S. EPA guidance for the use of the MOBILE6 model calls for the use of

representative summer daily temperatures. For future years, the representative summer temperatures

are the National Weather Service’s climatological average minimum and maximum temperatures at

Chicago’s O’Hare Airport for the summer months of June, July, and August. Those are 61

F, respectively.

Absolute Humidity:

U.S. EPA guidance calls for the use of the lowest absolute humidity on days

corresponding to the summer climatological temperatures in the region as calculated from local

climatological data published by the National Weather Service. A climatological average summer

weekday absolute humidity value of 97 grains of water (vapor) per pound of dry air was calculated

for O’Hare Airport.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Motor Vehicle Emission Controls:

The primary motor vehicle emission control programs that will

be in place in the Chicago NAA in 2008 and 2009 are (1) an OBD-II-based vehicle emissions testing

program, and the requirement that gasoline sold in the area be “reformulated gasoline”, fuel that is

specially formulated to reduce emissions.

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M):

The I/M program in effect since 2007 requires

biennial On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) testing on all model year (MY) 1996 and newer

(MY96+) light duty gasoline vehicles, and biennial exhaust idle and gas cap testing on

MY96+ heavy duty gasoline vehicles including gasoline-powered buses, registered in the

I/M area (the “testable area”). The program includes a 4 year grace period for new vehicles

(that is, a MY 2004 car would be tested every other year starting in 2008.) See Attachment

A for more information. This post-2007 I/M program was established after the Illinois

legislature amended the Illinois Vehicle Inspection law in 2005 to (a) drop dynamometer

testing of vehicles, (b) require an OBD-based program beginning in February 2007, and (c)

remove the requirement for testing compliant pre-MY-1996 vehicles. (Motorcycles and

diesel vehicles are not subject to I/M.)

The Chicago testable area is based upon urbanized areas and includes all of Cook, DuPage,

and Lake Counties, and parts of Kane, McHenry, Will, and Kendall Counties. Some of the

VMT in the Chicago testable area is generated by vehicles that come from outside the

testable area and are therefore not required to undergo I/M testing. Conversely, some VMT

in an area without I/M (such as Grundy County’s NAA townships) may be generated by I/M

vehicles from a neighboring testable area. The VMT estimates used when calculating I/M

emission credits for a county or township must be adjusted to reflect VMT from vehicles

subject to I/M only. This is done using I/M coverage factors derived ultimately from

transportation modeling outputs. (I/M Credits are subtracted from emissions calculated

assuming no I/M to give Net Emissions with I/M.) The coverage factors are 98% for Cook

and DuPage Counties (that is, 98% of the gasoline-vehicle VMT in the county is from

vehicles subject to I/M) , 95% for Lake County, 81% for Kendall County’s NAA township,

65% for Will County, 60% for Kane County, 50% for McHenry County, and 25% for

Grundy County’s NAA townships.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Reformulated gasoline (RFG) has been required in the Chicago NAA since 1995. The

attainment demonstration and RFP plan both assume all gasoline sold in the Chicago NAA since

1995 is “Northern” RFG, and that this will continue through and beyond 2008 and 2009. Although a

small amount of non-RFG fuel comes into the NAA in the fuel tanks of vehicles from outside the

area, it is assumed that the use of non-reformulated gasoline fuel in the Chicago area is negligible.

Gasoline Sulfur:

Gasoline sulfur levels were assumed to be 30 parts per million (ppm) in

2008 and 2009 in accordance with the federal Tier 2 gasoline regulations which required the

30 ppm level beginning in 2006.

Diesel Sulfur:

Diesel sulfur levels were assumed to be 15 parts per million in 2008 and

2009 in accordance with the U.S. EPA’s Highway Diesel Rule which was finalized in

January 2001. This regulation required the sale of on-road diesel fuel with no greater than 15

ppm of sulfur beginning in June 2006.

For the Chicago area, the Illinois EPA assumed an area-specific vehicle speed distribution

that appears in the VMT-by-Speed-Bin external file SVMTCH07.DEF, which is described in more

detail later in this document. The speed distribution in this file is for freeways and arterials only

(local roads and ramps have a fixed speed in MOBILE6), and was based on transportation model

output (modeled speeds on links of various classes of roads by modeling period) from CMAP

(CATS) for the year 2007 (the most recent available). This speed distribution is assumed valid for

2008 and 2009 as well.

The regional VMT mix inputs used for 2008 and 2009 were based on Chicago-area-

specific 2005 VMT-by-vehicle-type data supplied by IDOT, modified to reflect expected changes in

the ratio of cars to light trucks. This information is used in the MOBILE model to compute the

average emission factors for certain combined vehicle classes, and the all-vehicle emission rate.

Registration Distribution:

A Chicago-area-specific vehicle registration distribution profile based

upon 2003-04 information data was supplied by Illinois EPA’s Division of Mobile Source Programs

from data provided by the Illinois Secretary of State’s Department of Motor Vehicles.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Emissions Computation:

Illinois EPA calculates emissions budgets using the following formula:

No-I/M County Emissions by vehicle type (VT) and functional class (FC) = (County

ASWVMT by FC) * (VMT Mix by VT and FC) * No-I/M emission factors (EF) by pollutant, VT,

and FC) * 1.102 (grams to ton conversion factor). For areas without I/M, this is the only calculation.

I/M Credits by VT and FC = (County ASWVMT by FC) * (VMT Mix by VT and

FC) * (No-I/M EF – I/M EF [both by pollutant, VT, and FC]) * I/M coverage factor * 1.102. This is

for areas with I/M only.

Net County Emissions by VT and FC = (I/M County Emissions by VT and FC) - I/M

Credits by VT and FC. This is for areas with I/M only.

The Illinois EPA performs these above calculations on a multi-page spreadsheet which automatically

calculates emissions and I/M credits by county or township for each pollutant, VT, and FC, sums

them by VT and FC, and aggregates them into area totals. Attachment A of this section provides

additional details on the MOBILE6 model inputs used in the development of the 2009 Chicago NAA

motor vehicle emissions budgets.

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Using the above VMT and control program assumptions and methodology, following are the 8-hour

ozone motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Chicago nonattainment area for use in determining

transportation conformity.

Proposed Chicago NAA 2009 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

(tons per ozone season weekday)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Attachment A

Transportation Conformity

External MOBILE6.2 Inputs:

In the examples of external files shown below, the actual command lines are

unbolded lines represent comments. The actual text files have no such distinction in typefaces. The

unbolded lines have been “commented out” and have no effect on the MOBILE model. They may

therefore be omitted, but it is suggested that they remain in the files for documentation, and to make

the files easier for the user to read and understand.

The comments and other text in the External Files have been shown in the Courier New typeface.

Actual command lines—the inputs that MOBILE actually uses—are shown in

Courier New

In certain cases (especially the VMT-by-Speed-Bin files) the typeface has been reduced in size so

that the lines would fit within the margins of the page. This makes them easier to read.

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program

The External I/M files giving the inputs used in the MOBILE6 model in this exercise were

ILLOBDIM.D (for 2002 and through 2006) and IM07ON.D (for 2007 and later years). When

evaluating I/M credits for 2008, the residual effect of the ILLOBDIM program in the summer of ’08

is taken into account by assuming that 75% of the vehicle fleet subject to I/M has been tested under

the IM07ON program by that time, and that the other 25% have been tested under the ILLOBDIM in

late 2006 and have not yet come up for retesting under IM07ON by summer 2008 (both programs

are biennial). The effective I/M emission rate in 2008 is thus 25% of ILLOBDIM’s plus 75% of

IM07ON’s. By summer 2009, all vehicles subject to I/M will have been tested under IM07ON, so

this question does not arise: the I/M emission rate is simply that for the IM07ON program.

The IM07ON.D File

, used for the 2008 and 2009 target year inventory

The external I/M file IM07ON.D is described below. It represents an I/M program with four

components, chief of which is an OBD (on-board diagnostics) test for vehicles of model year (MY)

1996 and newer. The order in which the components appear in the external file is not significant,

but they must be numbered consecutively. Illinois EPA begins IM07ON.D with identifying

comments, and adds other comment lines or blank lines to make the file easier to read and

understand. Programs after the first need comparatively few comments because the commands are

largely self-descriptive.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

* ILLINOIS ENHANCED I/M DESCRIPTION

* Filename: IM07ON.D

* External input file for Illinois' OBD-only I/M program

* from 2007 on.

* OBD-only applies to light-duty vehicles only; HDVs still get

* an Idle Test & Gas Cap Check.

* All program start years set to 1986 per U.S. EPA guidance in

* "Frequently Asked Questions on MOBILE6" from U.S. EPA/OTAQ.

* This represents the NEW I/M program in which only 1996 &

* newer vehicles are tested with an OBD test; and the OBD test

* applies only to LDVs.

* This program came into effect in February 2007.

*-------------------------------------------------

* Program description for post MY'96 LDV OBD I/M

*=================================================

* FIRST I/M program--"Evaporative]" OBD for MY 1996+ LDVs

*-------------------------------------------------

I/M PROGRAM

: 1 1986 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD

I/M MODEL YEARS : 1 1996 2050

I/M VEHICLES

: 1 22222 11111111 1

I/M STRINGENCY : 1 20.0

I/M COMPLIANCE : 1 95.0

I/M WAIVER RATES : 1 0.5 2.2 '01 data

I/M EXEMPTION AGE : 1 25

I/M GRACE PERIOD : 1 4

In each case, the first number after the colon refers to the I/M program’s component number.

I/M PROGRAM

: 1 1986 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD

Testing began in 1986 and runs into the indefinite future (2050). The program is a biennial

test-only (2 T/O, here and in other program components) program, in this case an

Evaporative On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) test. The On-Board Diagnostic program in a

vehicle’s engine computer records information from sensors in the engine and fuel system.

Indications of malfunctions or out-of-specification operations of the engine or fuel and

evaporative emission control systems are stored in the engine computer as “fault codes”.

An OBD test consists of plugging a special scanner into an output jack from vehicle’s

engine computer. The scanner queries the computer and records any fault codes that the

computer’s OBD system has saved. OBD tests are quick, dependable, and clean, and, if a

vehicle fails an OBD test, the fault codes that the scanner displays help mechanics diagnose

I/M MODEL YEARS : 1 1996 2050

This program component covers only vehicles manufactured between model year (MY)

1996 (start year) and the indefinite future (MY 2050, the end year). More and more

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

vehicles are becoming subject to this test as new vehicles are bought and older (pre-MY-

1996) ones are scrapped vehicles.

I/M VEHICLES

: 1 22222 11111111 1

Only the five light-duty vehicle types (cars [LDGVs], and light trucks [LDGTs 1, 2, 3, and

4]) are covered by this program component (22222). Heavy-duty gasoline trucks (eight

types) and gasoline buses are not covered by this program component (11111111 1), but

rather by Programs 3 and 4, described below.

I/M STRINGENCY : 1 20.0

Stringency (exhaust inspection failure rate) is 20%. A Stringency entry is necessary for an Exhaust

test, but not an Evaporative test, so this entry can be omitted or “commented out”. In this Evap test

case, it will be ignored by the model, but is included for reference.

I/M COMPLIANCE : 1 95.0

Compliance rate (tested vehicles as percent of all vehicles subject to I/M) is 95%

I/M WAIVER RATES : 1 0.5 2.2

The Waiver Rate is the fraction of tested vehicles that get a waiver—i.e., do not pass the

I/M test but, because repairs cost more than a specified amount, get a certificate of

compliance. Waiver rate is 0.5% for MY 1980 and earlier vehicles (irrelevant now that

pre-MY-96 vehicles are not tested), and 2.2% for MY 1981 and later vehicles. These

figures are from VIM’s actual 2001 waiver statistics, and have been representative of the

last few years, so are deemed representative of 2009. In this case the comment stating that

fact is allowed in the same line as the data.

I/M EXEMPTION AGE : 1 25

Vehicles older than 25 years are not subject to this program. This will not happen until at

least 2021. The default is 25, and the model does not calculate benefits for vehicles older

than 25 years, so in essence this command has no effect. It could be omitted, but is

included for completeness.

I/M GRACE PERIOD : 1 4

Vehicles less than 4 model years old—in this case MY2006, ’07, ’08, and ’09—are exempt

from I/M testing.

Most of the inputs to the second and subsequent program components are the same as those

for the first program, so the description of the components will be abbreviated and

summarized as below, rather than after each command line as above.

* Second I/M program--"Exhaust" OBD for MY 1996+ LDVs

*----------------------------------------------------

I/M PROGRAM

: 2 1986 2050 2 T/O OBD I/M

I/M MODEL YEARS : 2 1996 2050

I/M VEHICLES

: 2 22222 11111111 1

I/M STRINGENCY : 2 20.0

I/M COMPLIANCE : 2 95.0

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

I/M WAIVER RATES : 2 0.5 2.2

I/M EXEMPTION AGE : 2 25

I/M GRACE PERIOD : 2 4

The second program component is a biennial, test-only Exhaust OBD test for MY 1996 and

later LDGVs and LDGTs. In this OBD test, the scanner queries the vehicle’s computer for

fault codes concerning exhaust emissions. Stringency, Compliance, Waiver Rates,

Exemption Age, and Grace Period are the same as in the first program. An entry for I/M

STRINGENCY (20%) is required for an Exhaust I/M program.

*------------------------------------------------------

* Program description for post MY'96 HDV Idle & GC I/M

*======================================================

* Third I/M program--HDV IDLE for MY 1996+ HDVs

*------------------------------------------------

I/M PROGRAM

: 3 1986 2050 2 T/O IDLE

I/M MODEL YEARS : 3 1996 2050

I/M VEHICLES

: 3 11111 22222222 2

I/M STRINGENCY : 3 20.0

I/M COMPLIANCE : 3 95.0

I/M WAIVER RATES : 3 1.2 1.5

I/M EXEMPTION AGE : 3 25

I/M GRACE PERIOD : 3 4

The third program component is a biennial, test-only Idle test for MY 1996 and later

HDGVs and Gas Buses (22222222 2). Light-duty vehicles are not subject to this

component (11111), but rather to components 1 and 2. Stringency, Compliance,

Exemption Age, and Grace Period are the same as in component 1, but the pre- and post-

MY 1981 Waiver Rates (1.2% and 1.5%, respectively), are slightly different from those in

components 1 and 2. HDGVs are few in number, and most of them are commercial

* Fourth I/M program--Gas Cap Check for MY 1996+ HDVs

*----------------------------------------------------

I/M PROGRAM

: 4 1986 2050 2 T/O GC

I/M MODEL YEARS : 4 1996 2050

I/M VEHICLES

: 4 11111 22222222 2

I/M COMPLIANCE : 4 95.0

I/M WAIVER RATES : 4 1.2 1.5

I/M EXEMPTION AGE : 4 25

I/M GRACE PERIOD : 4 4

The fourth program component is a biennial, test-only Gas Cap Check for MY 1996 and

later HDVs. Compliance, Waiver Rates, Exemption Age, and Grace Period are the same as

in the third program. Since a Gas Cap Check is an evaporative I/M test, the I/M

STRINGENCY command is not necessary and is not included here.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

Illinois EPA includes further notes and comments in the I/M file to document it further, as

* This is a standard Illinois I/M input, describing the I/M

* program with OBD Only as it is supposed to exist after

* January 2007. It is the file to be used for regular M6

* I/M runs for 2007 and future years.

* This file was originally SB397.D, supplied 24.viij.05.

* Original SB397.D has been slightly revised by

* the addition of comments such as this one. The actual

* inputs have not been changed. This was done to put the two

* LDV OBD programs (exhaust and evaporative) together, and the

* two HDV programs together too. The order of the programs in

* the I/M file is not significant and has no effect in M6, but

* the programs must be numbered sequentially.

* DVIM verified that this file as shown is correctly describes the

* I/M program planned for introduction in January '07.

* ----------------

* COMPARISON WITH ILLOBDIM.D:

* The first three programs in ILLOBDIM.D, covering the idle

* test for MY'68-'81 LDVs, IM240 for '81-'95 LDVs, and gas

* cap check for MY'68-'95 LDVs have been eliminated from

* IM07ON; and the two HDV programs now refer only to MY'96

There is no “MYCUTS.D” file associated with IM07ON.D, as there was in the previous

ILLOBDIM.D file. The old ILLOBDIM.D file is not included here.

The Registration Distribution

The Registration Distribution (RD) for a vehicle type is an indication of the fraction of the vehicle

fleet of that type that is made up of vehicles of a given age.

The following is based on 2003 registration data from the Illinois Secretary of State’s office (ISOS).

It and its contents are described in detail in the comments to the file. This file contains data

(commented out so not used) from the 2001 RD file (CHIRD01) for historical and reference

purposes. As noted above, those data may be deleted.

* This file CHIRD03.D is derived from REGDATA.D, the default MOBILE6 RD file.

* This file was created 22.ij.06 by SSL and revised on 10.iv.06. The values

* shown for LDVs and LDTs are from 2003 ISOS registration data, as given in

* RD03ERG.xls. In the 22.ij. version, only LDGV RDs were changed from the

* 2002 values, but in the 10.iv. version, the RDs for the four LDT types were

* changed to those given in RD03ERG.xls for the Chicago area.

* This file contains Registration Distribution fractions for the 16 vehicle

* classes by age for July of any calendar year for the Chicago NAA, based on

* 2003/41 gasoline-vehicle age distribution data supplied to IEPA by ISOS, just

* as the CHRD01.D file came from I/M test data supplied by DVIM.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

* (See C:\SSLFILES\INVEN\RDAGE01.XLS.) Age distribution fractions have been

* rounded to 4 decimal places, and some of the RDs from for late years

* (typically in the last line--entries 21-25) have at times been modified by

* +/- 0.0001 or so as necessary to make the RDs add up to 1.0000.

* The user is referred to REGDATA.D and to M6 Users Guide Section 2.8.7.1

* p. 63 ff) for more detailed information about the nature of RD files. See

* also Section 5.3.2 (p. 169 ff) for information on converting M5b RDs to M6

* RDs. See also \SOURCE\BD20.FOR for default RDs.

* In this file, the first number in each distribution is an integer that

* indicates which of the 16 M6 vehicle classes are represented by the RD in

* question. That number is followed by 25 age fractions arranged in two rows

* of 10 values followed by a row with the last 5 values. (This is similar to

* the format used in M5b for RDs.)

* RDs for all vehicle classes are given in this file. This is for completeness

* even though only those vehicle classes whose RDs were changed from the

* REGDATA defaults need to be included in this file. Those that were not

* changed, are so noted.

* It is assumed that the RDs for diesel vehicles are the same as the RDs for

* the corresponding gasoline vehicles; in particular, LDDV and LDDT RDs are

* assumed the same as LDGV and LDGT RDs. Since the (default) HDV RDs are

* based more on diesel vehicles to start with, and HDGVs are many fewer than

* HDDVs, especially in the higher weight classes, we feel the HDV RDs

* represent both HDGV and HDDV reasonably well.

* Default RDs assumed for the various HDV classes. Good area-specific

* HDV age distribution data are lacking--RD03ERG covered only LDVs--and

* besides, much Chicago-area HDV VMT is from vehicles registered outside the

* Chicago area. The best choice, then, was to go with the HDV defaults; and

* similarly with MCs.

* M6 LDV = M5 LDV (Light-duty Vehicles--passenger cars--from

* RD03ERG.XLS for Chicago

1 0.0603 0.0804 0.0805 0.0818 0.0845 0.0773 0.0673 0.0670 0.0574 0.0620

0.0493 0.0449 0.0388 0.0331 0.0280 0.0233 0.0169 0.0122 0.0089 0.0067

0.0045 0.0025 0.0014 0.0009 0.0101

* The following, commented out, are the CHIRD01 values.

*1 0.0548 0.0870 0.0798 0.0735 0.0751 0.0668 0.0775 0.0655 0.0609 0.0565

* 0.0530 0.0505 0.0472 0.0399 0.0295 0.0241 0.0174 0.0114 0.0062 0.0033

* 0.0023 0.0024 0.0030 0.0021 0.0103

* M6 LDT1 = M5 LDT1 from RD03ERG.xls for Chicago

2 0.0796 0.1061 0.1062 0.0532 0.0365 0.0331 0.0358 0.0331 0.0546 0.0569

0.0676 0.0520 0.0396 0.0516 0.0443 0.0444 0.0300 0.0282 0.0188 0.0103

0.0052 0.0026 0.0021 0.0016 0.0066

* The following, commented out, are the CHIRD01 values

* 2 0.0746 0.1128 0.1041 0.1055 0.0886 0.0737 0.0719 0.0694 0.0572 0.0451

* 0.0437 0.0329 0.0333 0.0289 0.0202 0.0140 0.0092 0.0053 0.0024 0.0015

* 0.0011 0.0006 0.0008 0.0006 0.0026

* M6 LDT2 = LDT2 from RD03ERG.xls for Chicago

3 0.0767 0.1023 0.1024 0.1053 0.1024 0.0893 0.0920 0.0766 0.0563 0.0517

0.0434 0.0348 0.0237 0.0157 0.0082 0.0061 0.0061 0.0015 0.0014 0.0010

0.0009 0.0005 0.0003 0.0002 0.0012

* The following, commented out, are the CHIRD01 values

* 3 0.0746 0.1128 0.1041 0.1055 0.0886 0.0737 0.0719 0.0694 0.0572 0.0451

* 0.0437 0.0329 0.0333 0.0289 0.0202 0.0140 0.0092 0.0053 0.0024 0.0015

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

* 0.0011 0.0006 0.0008 0.0006 0.0026

* M6 LDT3 = LDT3 from RD03ERG.xls for Chicago

4 0.0674 0.0899 0.0900 0.0830 0.0867 0.1041 0.0614 0.0594 0.0433 0.0571

0.0479 0.0391 0.0303 0.0218 0.0232 0.0236 0.0185 0.0130 0.0092 0.0066

0.0049 0.0031 0.0017 0.0005 0.0143

* The following, commented out, are the CHIRD01 values

* 4 0.0629 0.1095 0.1300 0.0889 0.0835 0.0624 0.0725 0.0611 0.0455 0.0388

* 0.0300 0.0348 0.0387 0.0313 0.0236 0.0225 0.0161 0.0123 0.0076 0.0034

* 0.0017 0.0032 0.0074 0.0049 0.0074

* M6 LDT4 = LDT2 from RD03ERG.xls for Chicago

5 0.0695 0.0926 0.0927 0.1167 0.1127 0.1290 0.0953 0.0753 0.0561 0.0505

0.0405 0.0135 0.0137 0.0049 0.0065 0.0041 0.0035 0.0024 0.0042 0.0029

0.0017 0.0010 0.0003 0.0002 0.0102

* The following, commented out, are the CHIRD01 values

* 5 0.0629 0.1095 0.1300 0.0889 0.0835 0.0624 0.0725 0.0611 0.0455 0.0388

* 0.0300 0.0348 0.0387 0.0313 0.0236 0.0225 0.0161 0.0123 0.0076 0.0034

* 0.0017 0.0032 0.0074 0.0049 0.0074

* HDV2B (Heavy-duty vehicles 2B--M6 Default RDs)

6 0.0503 0.0916 0.0833 0.0758 0.0690 0.0627 0.0571 0.0519 0.0472 0.0430

0.0391 0.0356 0.0324 0.0294 0.0268 0.0244 0.0222 0.0202 0.0184 0.0167

0.0152 0.0138 0.0126 0.0114 0.0499

* HDV3 (Heavy-duty vehicles3, same RD as HDV2B, M6 Default RDs)

7 0.0503 0.0916 0.0833 0.0758 0.0690 0.0627 0.0571 0.0519 0.0472 0.0430

0.0391 0.0356 0.0324 0.0294 0.0268 0.0244 0.0222 0.0202 0.0184 0.0167

0.0152 0.0138 0.0126 0.0114 0.0499

* HDV4 (Heavy-duty vehicles 4, M6 default RDs)

8 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDV5 (Heavy-duty vehicles 5, same RD as HDV4, M6 Default)

9 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDV6 (Heavy-duty vehicles 6, same RD as HDV4, M6 Default)

10 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDV7 (Heavy-duty vehicles 7, same RD as HDV4, M6 Default)

11 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDV8A (Heavy-duty vehicles 8A same RD as HDV4, M6 Default)

12 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDV8B (Heavy-duty vehicles 8B,same RD as HDV4, M6 Default)

13 0.0388 0.0726 0.0679 0.0635 0.0594 0.0556 0.0520 0.0486 0.0455 0.0425

0.0398 0.0372 0.0348 0.0326 0.0304 0.0285 0.0266 0.0249 0.0233 0.0218

0.0204 0.0191 0.0178 0.0167 0.0797

* HDBS (HDV School buses; this M6 RD default is assumed)

14 0.0393 0.0734 0.0686 0.0641 0.0599 0.0559 0.0522 0.0488 0.0456 0.0426

0.0398 0.0372 0.0347 0.0324 0.0303 0.0283 0.0264 0.0247 0.0231 0.0216

0.0201 0.0188 0.0176 0.0165 0.0781

* HDBT (HDV Transit buses; this M6 RD default is assumed)

15 0.0307 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0614 0.0613

0.0611 0.0607 0.0595 0.0568 0.0511 0.0406 0.0254 0.0121 0.0099 0.0081

0.0066 0.0054 0.0044 0.0037 0.0114

* Motorcycles (this M6 default RD is the same as M5a/b's default RD)

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

16 0.1440 0.1680 0.1350 0.1090 0.0880 0.0700 0.0560 0.0450 0.0360 0.0290

0.0230 0.0970 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

External MOBILE6.2 Activity File Inputs: VMT by Facility Type, VMT by

Hour, VMT by Speed Bin

The following files were used in the 2002 base year and the 2008 and 2009 future year estimates.

VMT by Facility Type

The M6.2 default file is FVMT.D, provided with the MOBILE6 model. The Chicago-area-specific

VMT-by-facility-type file is FVMTCH07.D, shown below. It based on the most recent complete

data from CMAP on VMT by hour by vehicle class. This is a very long file —about 750 lines—so

for the purposes of this Attachment, only the data for vehicle types 1, 6, 11, 13, 24 (LDGV,

HDGV2b, HDGV7, HDGV13, and MC) are shown; the others are omitted. See the second

paragraph of the introduction to the file.

VMT BY FACILITY

* This is [F:\]AREASPEC\CHNAA\FVMTCH07.DEF, an FVMT file, which was

* developed from CATS 2007 transportation model output

* as given in his MF13.XLS file as sent to and recalculated by

* SL. 13.xj.02.

* VMT fractions are listed for 28 vehicle classes for each hour of

* the day starting at 6AM, as follows

* Classes 1-5 (LDGV, LDGT1, LDGT2, LDGT3, and LDGT4), and

* Classes 14, 15, and 28 (LDDV, LDDT12, LDDT34) were all assumed

* to have the "Light-duty Vehicle" distribution on page "SL VMT

* by vtype reedited" of the MF13 file.

* Classes 6-10 and 16-20 (HDGV2b-HDGV6 and HDDV2b-HDDV6) were assumed

* to have the "LTRK" (light HDV) distribution on that page.

* Classes 11 & 12 and 21 & 22 (HDGV7 & HDGV8a, and HDDV7 & HDDV8a) were

* assumed to have the "MTRK" (medium HDV) distribution on that page.

* Classes 13 and 23 (HDGV8b and HDDV8b) were assumed to have the

* "HTRK" (heavy HDV) distribution on that page

* Classes 24 and 25-27 (Motorcycles and the three bus classes [HDGB,

* HDDBT and HDDBS]) were assumed to have the default distribution

* for those types in FVMT.DEF.

* The four values in each line represent the VMT distribution on

* freeway, arterial, local and ramps--in that order--as shown.

* See M6UG 2.8.5.1.f., p. 49, or CLASLIST.TXT for further info.

* (The CLASLIST file describes the vehicle classes.)

* Veh Int& Arts& Local

*Class Fwys Colls Rd/St Ramps

*----- ---- ----- ----- -----

1 0.3341 0.5393 0.1105 0.0161

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

0.2604 0.6106 0.1160 0.0130

0.2604 0.6106 0.1160 0.0130

0.2669 0.5831 0.1365 0.0135

0.2576 0.5823 0.1468 0.0133

0.2576 0.5823 0.1468 0.0133

0.2576 0.5823 0.1468 0.0133

0.2576 0.5823 0.1468 0.0133

0.2683 0.5830 0.1354 0.0133

0.2683 0.5830 0.1354 0.0133

0.2646 0.5911 0.1315 0.0128

0.2646 0.5911 0.1315 0.0128

0.2825 0.5568 0.1468 0.0139

0.2825 0.5568 0.1468 0.0139

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

0.3363 0.5122 0.1358 0.0157

[Data for Vehicle Types 2 through 5 omitted]

6 0.3836 0.5157 0.0827 0.0180

0.3045 0.5985 0.0822 0.0148

0.3045 0.5985 0.0822 0.0148

0.3589 0.5412 0.0829 0.0170

0.3791 0.5203 0.0826 0.0180

0.3791 0.5203 0.0826 0.0180

0.3791 0.5203 0.0826 0.0180

0.3791 0.5203 0.0826 0.0180

0.3606 0.5397 0.0827 0.0170

0.3606 0.5397 0.0827 0.0170

0.3581 0.5432 0.0816 0.0171

0.3581 0.5432 0.0816 0.0171

0.4101 0.4884 0.0815 0.0200

0.4101 0.4884 0.0815 0.0200

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

0.4312 0.4663 0.0818 0.0207

[Data for Vehicle Types 7 through 11 omitted]

11 0.4158 0.4904 0.0752 0.0186

0.3337 0.5763 0.0749 0.0151

0.3337 0.5763 0.0749 0.0151

0.3905 0.5165 0.0755 0.0175

0.4111 0.4952 0.0752 0.0185

0.4111 0.4952 0.0752 0.0185

0.4111 0.4952 0.0752 0.0185

0.4111 0.4952 0.0752 0.0185

0.3928 0.5144 0.0753 0.0175

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

0.3928 0.5144 0.0753 0.0175

0.3896 0.5185 0.0742 0.0177

0.3896 0.5185 0.0742 0.0177

0.4423 0.4630 0.0743 0.0204

0.4423 0.4630 0.0743 0.0204

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

0.4619 0.4425 0.0745 0.0211

[Data for Vehicle Types 7 through 12 omitted]

13 0.6106 0.3299 0.0430 0.0165

0.5563 0.3937 0.0367 0.0133

0.5563 0.3937 0.0367 0.0133

0.6241 0.3235 0.0376 0.0148

0.6260 0.3178 0.0403 0.0159

0.6260 0.3178 0.0403 0.0159

0.6260 0.3178 0.0403 0.0159

0.6260 0.3178 0.0403 0.0159

0.6561 0.2957 0.0340 0.0142

0.6561 0.2957 0.0340 0.0142

0.6029 0.3414 0.0401 0.0156

0.6029 0.3414 0.0401 0.0156

0.5776 0.3523 0.0508 0.0193

0.5776 0.3523 0.0508 0.0193

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

0.5737 0.3512 0.0547 0.0204

[Data for Vehicle Types 14 through 23 omitted]

24 0.392 0.457 0.117 0.034

0.344 0.497 0.129 0.030

0.338 0.497 0.135 0.029

0.349 0.492 0.129 0.030

0.346 0.497 0.127 0.030

0.333 0.509 0.129 0.029

0.324 0.516 0.132 0.028

0.334 0.506 0.131 0.029

0.334 0.506 0.131 0.029

0.320 0.519 0.134 0.028

0.330 0.506 0.135 0.029

0.312 0.521 0.140 0.027

0.295 0.538 0.141 0.026

0.310 0.527 0.137 0.027

0.329 0.510 0.133 0.029

0.343 0.497 0.131 0.030

0.381 0.460 0.126 0.033

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

0.405 0.437 0.123 0.035

0.426 0.418 0.118 0.037

0.443 0.403 0.115 0.039

0.457 0.394 0.110 0.040

0.461 0.391 0.107 0.040

0.453 0.400 0.108 0.039

0.418 0.434 0.112 0.036

[Data for Vehicle Types 25 through 28 omitted; the file ends after Vehicle Type 28.]

VMT by Hour of the Day

The MOBILE6.2 default file is HVMT.D. The most current Chicago-area-specific file is

HVMTCH7R.SL, shown below, derived from 2007 modeling output from CMAP. Again, this file

contains “commented-out” data from previous files for comparison purposes.

VMT BY HOUR

* Fraction of all vehicle miles traveled by hour of the day.

* First hour is 6 a.m. These data are for the Chicago NAA for

* 2007, derived from CMAP VbyHr07.def file based

* upon his run iepa07 300_20070830, VMT for 2007.

* This file is HVMTCH7R.SL representing SL's estimate of VMT by hour.

* IEPA estimates are based on CMAP data, but assume VMT in multi-hour

* modeling periods is distributed as the default is distributed across

* the hours in question. Calculations made from VbyHr07.def

* in accordance with USEPA guidance on the subject. See M6 Technical Guidance

* Document (Jan '02) Section 4.3.3 for details.

0.03358 0.07039 0.06240 0.07658 0.05870 0.06327

0.06609 0.06207 0.06693 0.07118 0.07991 0.07507

0.05924 0.04599 0.02160 0.01851 0.01360 0.01010

0.00757 0.00603 0.00568 0.00561 0.00687 0.01304

* Here are RP's original fractions from VbyHr07.def

* 0.033579 0.066392 0.066392 0.076578 0.062532 0.062532

* 0.062532 0.062532 0.069056 0.069056 0.077490 0.077490

* 0.052616 0.052616 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861

* 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861 0.010861

* These following are the default values from HVMT.DEF

* supplied for comparison.

0.0569 0.0740 0.0655 0.0555 0.0540 0.0582

0.0608 0.0571 0.0598 0.0636 0.0777 0.0730

0.0501 0.0389 0.0308 0.0264 0.0194 0.0144

0.0108 0.0086 0.0081 0.0080 0.0098 0.0186

* Following are SL's original HVMTCH07 fractions based upon DE's '07 model

* runs made in 2002 (for information).

0.0443 0.0851 0.0755 0.0577 0.0541 0.0583

0.0609 0.0572 0.0659 0.0701 0.0818 0.0769

0.0576 0.0447 0.0219 0.0188 0.0138 0.0102

0.0077 0.0061 0.0058 0.0057 0.0070 0.0132

All these Hourly-VMT files show similar profiles, with morning and afternoon peaks, a noontime

dip, and a minimum about 3AM - 4AM, which is to be expected.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

VMT by Speed Bin

The MOBILE6.2 default file is SVMT.D. The Chicago-area-specific Speed-bin file is

SVMTCH07.DEF, shown below. It represents 2007 CMAP transportation model output, deemed

representative for 2008 and 2009 as well.

1 1 0.0053 0.0044 0.0088 0.0299 0.0300 0.0484 0.0641 0.0632 0.0709 0.0801 0.0981 0.2160 0.1953 0.0857

1 2 0.0135 0.0570 0.0859 0.0790 0.0766 0.0954 0.0681 0.0704 0.0722 0.1018 0.0761 0.1084 0.0524 0.0432

1 3 0.0135 0.0570 0.0859 0.0790 0.0766 0.0954 0.0681 0.0704 0.0722 0.1018 0.0761 0.1084 0.0524 0.0432

1 4 0.0017 0.0054 0.0027 0.0159 0.0331 0.0451 0.0702 0.0761 0.0892 0.1259 0.1164 0.2390 0.0989 0.0805

1 5 0.0017 0.0047 0.0109 0.0329 0.0238 0.0300 0.0439 0.0582 0.0740 0.1160 0.1244 0.2584 0.1237 0.0975

1 6 0.0017 0.0047 0.0109 0.0329 0.0238 0.0300 0.0439 0.0582 0.0740 0.1160 0.1244 0.2584 0.1237 0.0975

1 7 0.0017 0.0047 0.0109 0.0329 0.0238 0.0300 0.0439 0.0582 0.0740 0.1160 0.1244 0.2584 0.1237 0.0975

1 8 0.0017 0.0047 0.0109 0.0329 0.0238 0.0300 0.0439 0.0582 0.0740 0.1160 0.1244 0.2584 0.1237 0.0975

1 9 0.0072 0.0093 0.0142 0.0382 0.0420 0.0478 0.0654 0.0898 0.0849 0.1104 0.1195 0.2126 0.0722 0.0866

1 10 0.0072 0.0093 0.0142 0.0382 0.0420 0.0478 0.0654 0.0898 0.0849 0.1104 0.1195 0.2126 0.0722 0.0866

1 11 0.0081 0.0325 0.0434 0.0683 0.0493 0.0530 0.0780 0.0803 0.0773 0.0953 0.1179 0.1443 0.0875 0.0648

1 12 0.0081 0.0325 0.0434 0.0683 0.0493 0.0530 0.0780 0.0803 0.0773 0.0953 0.1179 0.1443 0.0875 0.0648

1 13 0.0016 0.0013 0.0059 0.0137 0.0237 0.0247 0.0391 0.0556 0.0479 0.0729 0.0904 0.2202 0.2979 0.1049

1 14 0.0016 0.0013 0.0059 0.0137 0.0237 0.0247 0.0391 0.0556 0.0479 0.0729 0.0904 0.2202 0.2979 0.1049

1 15 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 16 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 17 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 18 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 19 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 20 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 21 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 22 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 23 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

1 24 0.0011 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0038 0.0101 0.0178 0.0386 0.0660 0.0981 0.1509 0.5215 0.0919

2 1 0.0000 0.0004 0.0017 0.0041 0.0160 0.0461 0.1311 0.1952 0.1835 0.2385 0.0665 0.1170 0.0000 0.0000

2 2 0.0021 0.0328 0.0517 0.0618 0.0924 0.1181 0.1447 0.1449 0.1170 0.1185 0.0457 0.0704 0.0000 0.0000

2 3 0.0021 0.0328 0.0517 0.0618 0.0924 0.1181 0.1447 0.1449 0.1170 0.1185 0.0457 0.0704 0.0000 0.0000

2 4 0.0001 0.0007 0.0025 0.0068 0.0232 0.0572 0.1470 0.2077 0.1791 0.2034 0.0682 0.1041 0.0000 0.0000

2 5 0.0000 0.0008 0.0029 0.0074 0.0224 0.0565 0.1435 0.1985 0.1862 0.2044 0.0681 0.1093 0.0000 0.0000

2 6 0.0000 0.0008 0.0029 0.0074 0.0224 0.0565 0.1435 0.1985 0.1862 0.2044 0.0681 0.1093 0.0000 0.0000

2 7 0.0000 0.0008 0.0029 0.0074 0.0224 0.0565 0.1435 0.1985 0.1862 0.2044 0.0681 0.1093 0.0000 0.0000

2 8 0.0000 0.0008 0.0029 0.0074 0.0224 0.0565 0.1435 0.1985 0.1862 0.2044 0.0681 0.1093 0.0000 0.0000

2 9 0.0002 0.0028 0.0064 0.0149 0.0423 0.0779 0.1620 0.1879 0.1732 0.1734 0.0644 0.0947 0.0000 0.0000

2 10 0.0002 0.0028 0.0064 0.0149 0.0423 0.0779 0.1620 0.1879 0.1732 0.1734 0.0644 0.0947 0.0000 0.0000

2 11 0.0017 0.0151 0.0292 0.0423 0.0720 0.1030 0.1538 0.1654 0.1429 0.1415 0.0511 0.0821 0.0000 0.0000

2 12 0.0017 0.0151 0.0292 0.0423 0.0720 0.1030 0.1538 0.1654 0.1429 0.1415 0.0511 0.0821 0.0000 0.0000

2 13 0.0000 0.0003 0.0018 0.0039 0.0140 0.0369 0.1146 0.1939 0.1865 0.2383 0.0751 0.1348 0.0000 0.0000

2 14 0.0000 0.0003 0.0018 0.0039 0.0140 0.0369 0.1146 0.1939 0.1865 0.2383 0.0751 0.1348 0.0000 0.0000

2 15 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 16 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 17 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 18 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 19 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 20 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 21 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 22 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 23 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2 24 0.0003 0.0000 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 0.0042 0.0749 0.1565 0.1661 0.3285 0.0786 0.1890 0.0000 0.0000

2.5 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0

50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0+

* Speed bins extend 2.5 mph on either side of the bin name (i.e., the 30 mph

speed bin encompasses speeds from 27.5 to 32.5 mph), except for the 2.5 mph bin

(0 to 2.5 mph) and the 65+ mph bin (62.5 mph or above)

* This is SVMTCH07.DEF.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009

* These data come from a spreadsheet page titled "[DE] spdvmt" in the Excel

file MF13.XLS, supplied to IEPA by CATS, in October '02, being VMT output from

CATS's transportation model aggregated into the various speed bins by county and

M6 road type for the 8 CATS time periods. SL

* slightly modified and reformatted the page, and verified that DE's vmt-by-

speed-bin calculations were correct. See also CATS's file titled VBYSPD.DEF

* The information in this file strictly speaking represents a speed

distribution for 2007, but this is assumed (after discussion with CATS)

reasonably valid throughout the 2000-2010+ period.

* The above data are for the Chicago NAA, and for Freeways and Arterials only.

* See M6 User's Guide Sec. 2.8.8.2.c and Appendix B, Table 5: "Average Speed

Ranges for Speed Bins

* (SPEED VMT Command)" for further information about this file and its use.

* The first number in each line is roadway type: 1 = Freeways; 2 = Arterials.

Locals and Ramps have a fixed speed in M6, and therefore are not affected by

* The second number is the hour of the day, hour 1 being [hour beginning at] 6

AM, and hour 24 being [hour beginning at] 5

AM the next day.

* The third and subsequent numbers are the fractions of VMT in that hour that

occur within the specified speed bins. These fractions were calculated from

DE's file, which gave estimates of VMT assigned to each of the 8 CATS modeling

* Note that, for Freeways, most VMT is in the 45-50-55-60-mph speed bins, with

lower speeds more common during Peak hours (which is reasonable). Much the same

holds for Arterials, where most VMT is in the 30-35-40-45 mph speed bins (also

* See also the default VMT-by-speed file SVMT.DEF for more information and

* --SL, 25.xj.02

7.ix.06...Small changes made to text of these comments by SL; no

changes to numerical data.

Electronic Filing - Received, Clerk's Office, January 21, 2009