WPCC W~bDW#7X'~._%(RTp@Z m}0{j|\" qKt,Pn{\anAC-$Qf-u1Xm!7TX[O"$6O9PlLd5!,XUO^]"F8aqs;i 2,ذvoˏr_3Qtw6|9S4oY専1RH1' i]]Ea9-XM*tXA74,ۓ\ҙMF6S;pA,ǫԽX:Ut@~ 00 0< 0 0 0< 0HR 0H 0H 0H* 0Hr 0H 0H 0HJ 0N 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0 0 0 0 0t 0b 0J 0,! 0 " 0# 0$ 0% 0& 0' 0' 0( 0) 0*U*+ 0+ 0<, 0- 0 6.U6@/ 0 v/ 00 01 0l2 0n3 0tv3 0p3 0tZ4 0t4 0tB5 0 t5 0t*6 0t67 0("7#J7U N 9 %Y9M_9(c9N9^ 9w9499 m9 0c9 1u-: 72: 0w: 0K; 0; 0u< 0)= 0= 0> 0D? 1@ 72A 1A 72@B 1rB 72B 1+C 72C\  `&Times New Roman' DRAFT ,John F. Kowalczyk(0Patrick Cummins .   61 $4Heading 1XXX      XXX<:Default Par1<[ :Outline001_1   , 8.` hp x (#8   bXX` hp x (#b  <[ :Outline002_1   , 8.` hp x (#8   bXX` hp x (#b  <X :Outline003_1    5+4 4` hp x (#5   _UX` hp x (#_  2  0Level 1    2  0Level 2    2  0Level 3    2  0Level 4    2  0Level 5    2  0Level 6    2  0Level 7    2  0Level 8    2 0Level 9    2X 0_level1   X 5+ ` hp x (#5   _UX` hp x (#_  2U 0_level2    2(` ` hp x (#2   \RX` hp x (#\  2R| 0_level3    /% hp x (#/   YOX` hp x (#Y  2Oy 0_level4   ` ," hp x (#,   VLX` hp x (#V  2Lv 0_level5    )h hp x (#)   SIX` hp x (#S  2Is 0_level6    &p x (#&   PFX` hp x (#P  2Fp 0_level7   h #p x (##   MCX` hp x (#M  2Cm 0_level8     pp x (#    J@X` hp x (#J  2@j 0_level9     x (#   G=X` hp x (#G  2X 0_levsl1   X 5+ ` hp x (#5   _UX` hp x (#_  2U 0_levsl2    2(` ` hp x (#2   \RX` hp x (#\  2R| 0_levsl3    /% hp x (#/   YOX` hp x (#Y  2Oy 0_levsl4   ` ," hp x (#,   VLX` hp x (#V  2Lv 0_levsl5    )h hp x (#)   SIX` hp x (#S  2Is 0_levsl6    &p x (#&   PFX` hp x (#P  2Fp 0_levsl7   h #p x (##   MCX` hp x (#M  2Cm 0_levsl8     pp x (#    J@X` hp x (#J  2@j 0_levsl9     x (#   G=X` hp x (#G  2X 0_levnl1   X 5+ ` hp x (#5   _UX` hp x (#_  2U 0_levnl2    2(` ` hp x (#2   \RX` hp x (#\  2R| 0_levnl3    /% hp x (#/   YOX` hp x (#Y  2Oy 0_levnl4   ` ," hp x (#,   VLX` hp x (#V  2Lv 0_levnl5    )h hp x (#)   SIX` hp x (#S  2Is 0_levnl6    &p x (#&   PFX` hp x (#P  2Fp 0_levnl7   h #p x (##   MCX` hp x (#M  2Cm 0_levnl8     pp x (#    J@X` hp x (#J  2@j 0_levnl9     x (#   G=X` hp x (#G  8[o 6heading 11?-%2A`Arial? XXXS\  `&Times New RomanS %2A`Arial6fz 4heading 2?-%2A`Arial?     XXXS\  `&Times New RomanS <:Default Para<fz :WP9_Body Tex?-%2A`Arial?     XXXS\  `&Times New RomanS :dl 8HTML PretagK2<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS<6X9`(Courier New<dl :HTML TeletypK2<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS8dl 6HTML Code1K2<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS<go :HTML Code DeK2<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS\  `&Times New RomanS4 2HTML VarXXXXXX< :HTML BlockquXXXXXX< :HTML AddressXXXXXX8 6HTML Cite1XXXXXX< :HTML Headin5 XXX < :HTML Headin4 XXX < :HTML Headin3 XXX < :HTML Headin2XXX XXX< :HTML Headin1 XXX < :HTML Heading XXX 3P($HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 60(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularCX W- )HU.d'U(;3$2#  0  .3  0  3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Ni)(O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(# MPQRSTUVyGaeimquy}Bullet ListBullets ListXW(CEKQW]cioAutoList11)1)1)1)1)1)1)1)Z1)(CEKQW]cioAutoList21)1)1)1)1)1)1)1)\1)(CEKQW]cioAutoList3a)a)a)a)a)a)a)a)^a) A!  _8C!CXXdd8  DRAFT  ForForumDiscussionOnlyOctober23,2002   FindingsandRecommendationsoftheWRAPsMobileSourcesForumRegardingthe b SignificanceofMobileSourceandPavedandUnpavedRoadDustEmissions H forthePurposesofSection309oftheRegionalHazeRule  . ~  Background   0   X!XXCXEPAsRegionalHazeRulerequiresstatesandtribesthatchoosetosubmitplansunderSection    309todeterminewhethermobilesourceandroaddustemissionscontribute significantlyto   visibilityimpairmentatanyofthe16ClassIAreasontheColoradoPlateau.Ifmobilesourceor x  roaddustemissions(evaluatedseparately)arefoundtocontributesignificantly,thencertain ^  provisionsmustbeincludedintheSection309plans.Inthecaseofmobilesourceemissions, D  therulerequiresestablishmentofanemissionbudgetandtrackingsystem.Inthecaseofroad *z  dust,therulesaysthat necessaryandappropriateemissionmanagementstrategiesmustbe ` implemented.These significancedeterminationsaretobemadeonceinconjunctionwiththe F Section309plan_submittals_. ,   EPAsRegionalHazeRuledoesnotdefinealevelofvisibilityimpairmentthatshouldbe  consideredsignificantforeithermobilesourceorroaddustemissions.Itisthereforeleftupto  thestatesandtribestoproposeappropriatecriteriaintheir_SIPs_Ԁand_TIPs_.Itisdesirablefor t consistencyinregionalplanningforstatesandtribessubmittingplansunderSection309toreach Z consensusonwhetherornotmobilesourceand/orroaddustemissionscontributesignificantlyto @ visibilityimpairmentatanyofthe16ClassIareas,basedontheintentoftheGrandCanyon &v VisibilityTransportCommission(_GCVTC_)recommendationsandtherequirementsofSection  \ 309oftheRegionalHazeRule. B TheMobileSourcesForumandotherstakeholderswereunabletoagreeonasinglequantitative  thresholdfordeterminingifmobilesourceorroaddustemissionsshouldbeconsidered  significantforthepurposesofSection309.However,threepreliminaryalternativeapproaches   fordeterminingsignificancewereidentifiedbytheForuminApril2002,alongwithasetof p!  criteriathatwouldapplyregardlessofwhichapproachwasconsidered(seeAttachment1). V"! GiventhatlimitedtechnicalinformationwasavailableatthetimetheForumidentifiedthese <#" approaches,theyagreedthatbeforemakinganyfinalrecommendationstheywouldevaluateair "$r# qualitymodelingresultsagainsteachproposedapproachtoassesstheirreasonablenessfor %X $ fulfillingtheintentofthe_GCVTC_ԀrecommendationsandtherequirementsoftheRegionalHaze %>!% Rule. &$"&   ' #'  AirQualityModelingAnalysis   BasedonthelanguageintheRegionalHazeRule,theMobileSourcesForumconcludedthatthe | significancetestforroaddustemissionsshouldbeevaluatedonastatewide/reservationwide b basis.Ontheotherhand,basedontheintentoftheGrandCanyonVisibilityTransport H CommissionandthepreambletotheRegionalHazeRule,theMobileSourcesForumconcluded . ~ thatthesignificancetestformobilesourceemissionsshouldbeevaluatedforurbanareasinthe  d 9statetransportregionwithpopulationsgreaterthan250,000.Theseareasarelistedin  J Attachment2.DuetothelargenumberofurbanareasinCalifornia,andthefactthatCalifornia  0 willnotbesubmittingaSection309plan,itwasnotpracticaltomodeltheimpactofeachurban    areainCaliforniaseparately.Therefore,theimpactofCaliforniasmobilesourceemissions    wereevaluatedonastatewidebasis.     Giventhesubstantialamountofeffortrequiredtoconductmodelingofeachareasmobile ^  sourceimpactsontheColoradoPlateau,thefollowingmodelingprioritieswereestablished D  basedonthesizeofthevariousurbanareasandtheirproximitytothe16ClassIareas: *z     X9%4 4 <DLX91)  9stateregionalanalysisformobilesourceandroaddustemissions(evaluatedseparately) F   2)  MobilesourceemissionsfromCalifornia , 3)  MobilesourceemissionsfromthePhoenixurbanarea  4)  MobilesourceemissionsfromtheLasVegasurbanarea     X<( 4 <DL44X<TheForumagreedthatadditionalmodelingofmobilesourceemissionsfromotherurbanareas t thatwerelesslikelytocausesignificantimpactswouldberequestediftheresultsfromtheruns Z listedaboveprovedinsufficientformakingrecommendationsregardingthesignificanceof @ mobilesourceemissions. &v   ThemodelingofthelistedscenarioswascompletedinmidOctober2002andpresentedtothe B MobileSourcesForumbyrepresentativesoftheWRAPsRegionalModelingCenterina ( conferencecallonOctober18,2002.Themodelingcenterspresentationisincludedas  Attachment3.  ThemodelingresultsshowthatPhoenixwouldexceedthesignificancethresholdat5ClassI p!  areasusingthecumulativeapproach,at6ClassIareasusingthemorestringentindividualarea V"! approach,andatnoneoftheClassIareasusingthelessstringentindividualareaapproach.The <#" modelingresultsshowthatLasVegaswouldexceedthesignificancethresholdat2ClassIareas "$r# usingthecumulativeapproachorthemorestringentindividualareaapproach,andatnoneofthe %X $ ClassIareasusingthelessstringentindividualareaapproach.Otherurbanareaswouldlikely %>!% haveevenlessimpactbecauseoftheirgreaterdistancefromthe16ClassIareasthanPhoenix &$"& andLasVegas. ' #' Attachment4,whichalsodiscussedduringtheOctober18call,providesinformationonmobile )$) sourceemissionsinthe9stateregionforthe20032018timeperiod,includingbreakdownsby l*%* stateandbysubcategoriesofonroadandnonroadmobilesources. R+&+  8,',   FindingsandRecommendations      ,B.` hp x (#XB  p  p݌  Ќ  ,$ XX(#$   BasedontheairqualitymodelingandemissionsinventoryinformationpresentedinAttachments | 3and4,theMobileSourcesForumoffersthefollowingfindingsandrecommendationsfor b considerationbytheWRAP. H      X9%4 4 <DLX91)  Pavedandunpavedroaddustemissionsfromthestatesandreservationsinthe9state  d transportregiondonotcontributesignificantlytovisibilityimpairmentatanyofthe16  J ClassIareasontheColoradoPlateauunderanyofthedefinitionsofsignificance  0 identifiedbytheForum.Therefore,theForumfindsthatnopavedorunpavedroaddust    strategiesarerequiredforSection309plans.      X<( 4 <DL44X< X9%4 4 <DLX9Itiswidelyrecognizedthattherearelargeuncertaintiesinestimatingvisibilityimpacts x  fromroaddustemissions.TheWRAPsDustEmissionsJointForum(_DEJF_)was ^  recentlyformedtoimproveourtechnicalunderstandingofvisibilityimpairmentcaused D  bydustfromallsources.EPAisalsoworkingonthisproblem.Theworkofthe_DEJF_ *z  andEPAwillprovidethebasisforevaluatingduststrategiesinfutureregionalhaze ` plans,includingpotentialstrategiesforpavedandunpavedroaddustemissionsthatoccur F withinornearClassIareas. ,  X<( 4 <DL44X<  X9%4 4 <DLX92)  Inrecommendingthepossibilityofmobilesourceemissionsbudgetsforurbanareas,the  _GCVTC_Ԁwasconcernedbecausethemodelingshowedmobilesourceemissionsreaching  alowpointin2005andthenincreasing.However,duetoupdatedmobilesource t emissionsmodelsand,moreimportantly,newfederalonroadengineandfuelstandards Z (gasanddiesel),mobilesourceemissionsfromonroadandnonroadsourcesare @ projectedtocontinuouslydeclineduringthe20032018timeperiodcoveredbythe &v Section309plans(seeAttachment4).  \   X<( 4 <DL44X<  X9%4 4 <DLX93)  TheWRAPsairqualitymodelingindicatesthatin2018,approximately80%ofthe ( visibilityimpairmentfrommobilesourceswillbecomingfromthenonroadsector.The  Forumrecognizesthattheimpactofnonroadsourcesisoverestimatedbythecurrent  EPAnonroademissionsmodelthatwasutilizedforthisanalysis.EPAhasindicated   thatintheverynearfutureitwillreleaseindraftformanewemissionsmodelfornon p!  roadsourcesthatwillshowsignificantlyloweremissionsfromthissourcecategory. V"! Also,EPAisintheprocessofdevelopingnonroad,heavydutydieselengineandfuel <#" standards.Thesenewstandardsareexpectedtoleadtomuchloweremissionsfromnon "$r# roadsourcesinthefuture.Nevertheless,duetothelongphaseinperiodforthesenew %X $ standards(nonroadequipmentcanremaininuseforaslongas30years),nonroad %>!% engineswillcontinuetobemajoremissionssourceswellintothefuture. &$"&    ' #' 4)  The_GCVTC_ԀrecommendationuponwhichtheRegionalHazeRuleisbasedappearsto  intendthattheemissionbudgetsshouldapplyonlytoonroadmobilesources(number3,  page44ofthe_GCVTC_ԀReport).Airqualitymodelingoftheonroadmobilesource | impactfromtheentireregionshowedarelativelysmallcontributionatallofthe16Class b IAreas(anaverageof4.5%ofthenaturalcondition).Thisindicatesthattheimpactfrom H onlyonroadmobilesourcesfromanyoneurbanareaintheregionwouldnotbe . ~ significant.  d    X<( 4 <DL44X<  X9%4 4 <DLX95)  Giventhat:1)currentmodelingshowsthatin2018nonroademissionswillbethe  0 primarymobilesourcecontributortovisibilitydegradation;2)thereisconsiderable    uncertaintyregardingtheimpactofnonroademissionsbecauseofexpectedchangesto    EPAsnonroademissionmodel;3)nonroademissionswillfurtherdecreaseinthe   futurewithexpectednewEPAregulations;and4)therecommendationofthe_GCVTC_ x  appearstointendthatemissionbudgetsshouldapplyonlytoonroadmobilesources,the ^  MobileSourcesForumdoesnotbelieveitwouldbeappropriatetotriggertheSection309 D  provisionsformobilesourceemissionsbudgetsbasedonthecombinedonroadandnon *z  roadimpacts. `   X<( 4 <DL44X<  X9%4 4 <DLX96)  Accordingly,theWRAPsMobileSourcesForumrecommendsthatnomobilesource , emissionsbudgetsforurbanareasinthe9statetransportregionarenecessaryor  appropriatetosatisfytherequirementsofSection309oftheRegionalHazeRule.  However,giventhepotentialimpactfromnonroadmobilesources,theForum  recommendsthattheWRAP: t  Z  ^(83N"M3"    M392  a  )3  0 `   WritealettertoEPAinsupportofexpeditiousimplementationofnewregulations @ fornonroaddieselenginesandfuelthatareasstringentasthoserecentlyadopted &v foronroadmobilesources;andM39 :݌ \` (#` (# Ќ   B   b)0 ` Coordinatearegionalefforttoencouragedemonstrationprojectsandretrofits ( nonroaddieselenginesthatwillresultinemissionreductionswhilenewfederal  standardsarephasingin.Thiseffortshouldalsoexamineopportunitiesto  implementstateand/orlocalprogramsforcleannonroadfuels. ` (#` (#   X<( 4 <DL44X<  7)0  TheWRAPsMobileSourcesForumrecommendsthatfutureregionalhazeplans V"! reevaluatetheimpactofonroadandnonroadmobilesourceemissionstoensurethat <#" emissionscontinuetotrenddownandthatanyprojectedincreasesinemissionsare "$r# addressedconsistentwiththerequirementsofthe_RHR_Ԁfordemonstratingreasonable %X $ progress.#CX!XXX!9# %>!%(#(# @9 Attachment1   =CX!XXCX!   =?  @ *OptionsforDeterminingSignificantImpact=?:@݌  Ќ CX!XXCX!  =CX!XXCX!   =@  =@.A݌̌ CX!XXCX!  =CX!XXCX!   =A  CumulativeApproach=AA݌ b Ќ CX!XXCX!  Thisapproachproposesevaluatingtheimpactfromanurbanareaorfromastateorreservation . ~ basedonthemagnitudeofthecumulativeimpactofmobilesourceandroaddustemissionsfrom  d acrossthe9statetransportregion.  J Ifthecumulativeimpactofmobilesourceemissions(engineanddusttreatedseparately)from    the9statetransportregion(emissionsfromall9statesincludedevenifsomestatesdeclineto    submit309_SIPs_)islessthan10%ofnaturalconditionsfortheaverageofthe20%most   impaireddaysinayear,thenathresholdof5%ofnaturalconditionswouldbeusedfor x  determiningifanurbanareaorstateorreservationissignificant. ^  Ifthecumulativeimpactofmobilesourceemissions(engineanddusttreatedseparately)from *z  the9statetransportregionisequaltoorgreaterthan10%ofnaturalconditionsfortheaverage ` ofthe20%mostimpaireddaysinayear,thenathresholdof1%ofnaturalconditionswouldbe F usedfordeterminingifanyoneareaorstateorreservationissignificant.However,thisproposal , wouldexcludeanyareafrombeingfoundsignificantifitisinthelowest20%ofcontributionsto  theregionalcumulativeimpact.        :H  :HmH݌̌   CX!XXCX!       &  H  IndividualAreaApproach#1H(I  HԌ t Ќ  CX!XXCX!  'tI Thisapproachisbasedonthepremisethatinordertobeconsideredasignificantcontributorto @ impairmentofvisibility,theimpactshouldbeperceptible(i.e.,1_deciview_Ԁwhichisequivalentto &v about10%ofnaturalbackground).  \ Underthisapproach,theimpactofmobilesourceemissionsorroaddustonvisibilitywouldbe ( consideredsignificantiftheimpactfromanurbanarea(inthecaseofmobilesourceemissions)  orastateorreservation(inthecaseofroaddust)isequaltoorgreaterthan10%ofnatural  conditions.   CX!XXCX!       &  L  IndividualAreaApproach#2L"M  LԌ V"! Ќ  CX!XXCX!    'V"M  Thisapproachisbasedonthepremisethatthe_RHR_Ԁrequiressignificancetobebasedona "$r#  contributortovisibilityimpairmentnotasoleorperceptible causeofimpairment. %X $ Underthisapproach,theimpactofmobilesourceemissionsorroaddustonvisibilityimpairment &$"& wouldbeconsideredsignificantiftheimpactfromanurbanarea(inthecaseofmobilesource ' #' emissions)orfromastateorreservation(inthecaseofroaddust)isequaltoorgreaterthan1% (#( ofnaturalbackground. )$)   l*%*  CriteriaApplyingRegardlessofApproach   Inadditiontoidentifyingthreeoptionsfordeterminingsignificantimpact,theforumagreedto | thefollowingcriteriathatwouldapplyregardlessofapproach. b Ifmobilesourcesemissionsinanyoftheurbanareasarefoundtobesignificantinthebaseyear . ~ (2003)andfutureyear(2018),theemissionsbudgetandtrackingprovisionsofSection309  d wouldapply.  J Ifmobilesourceengineemissionsinanyoftheseareasarefoundtobesignificantinthebase    yearandnotinthefutureyear,butemissionsareprojectedtoreachaminimumbefore2018and    thenriseagain,theemissionsbudgetandtrackingprovisionsofSection309wouldapply.   Ifmobilesourceengineemissionsinanyoftheseareasarefoundtobesignificantinthebase ^  yearandnotinthefutureyear,andifemissionsareprojectedtodecreasecontinuallythrough D  2018,thentheemissionsbudgetandtrackingprovisionsofSection309wouldnotapply.The *z  provisionsforaddressingreasonableprogressandmakingperiodicimplementationplan ` revisionsin51.309(d)(10)(ii)willensurethat_SIPs_Ԁarerevisedtoaddressanyfuturefindingthat F theconclusionsreachedundertheoriginalplanwereinerror.However,suchafindingwould , nottriggerarequirementfortheemissionsbudgetcontainedinSection309.  Ifroaddustfromanystateorreservationisfoundtobesignificantinthebaseyear(2003)and  thefutureyear(2018),furtheranalysisshallbeconductedwhenimprovementsinroaddust t emissionsestimatesandmodelingarecompletedbytheWRAPinconjunctionwithEPA.Ifstill Z significantafterthisimprovedanalysis,theprovisionsofthe_RHR_Ԁrequiringimplementationof @ necessaryandappropriatecontrolstrategiesshallbeappliedthroughaSIP/TIPrevisionbyno &v laterthanDecember31,2008.  \    @9 Attachment2  @MetropolitanStatisticalAreasinthe9StateTransportRegionwith  @LL/PopulationsGreaterthan250,000  | AZ  Phoenix/Mesa:_Maricopa_Ԁand_Pinal_ԀCounties(3,252,000) H AZ  Tucson:_Pima_ԀCounty(844,000) . ~ CA0  Totalof11urbanareasgreaterthan250,000 J(#(# CO  Colo.Springs:ElPasoCounty(517,000)    CO0  Denver/Boulder/Greeley:Adams,_Arapahoe_,Denver,Jefferson,DouglasandWeld    Counties(2,582,000) (#(# CO  Ft.Collins:_Larimer_ԀCounty(251,000) x  ID  Boise:AdaandCanyonCounties(432,000) D  NM  Albuquerque:_Bernallio_,_Sandoval_,andValenciaCounties(713,000) ` OR  Eugene/Springfield:Landcounty(323,000) , OR0  Portland/Salem!_Clackamas_,Columbia,Multnomah,Washington,_Yamhill_,Marionand  PolkCountiesandClark,(WA)separately,(2,265,000)(#(# NV  LasVegas!Clark,NyeCountiesandMojave,(AZ)separately(1,563,000) t NV  Reno!_Washoe_ԀCounty(339,000) Z UT  Provo/Orem:UtahCounty(369,000) &v UT  SaltLake/Ogden:Davis,SaltLakeandWebercounties(1,334,000)