Local EAC Plan Report Page 1 March 31, 2004 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background As a requirement of the Mountain Early Action Compact ( EAC), the Local Early Action Plan ( Local EAP) due March 31, 2004, must include measures that are specific, quantified, permanent and enforceable as part of the SIP or TIP once approved by EPA. The Local EAP also details specific implementation dates for adopted local controls. This report includes updated air quality emission inventories and modeling results for future year 2010 in Sections 4 and 6. Also included in this report is an overview of the air quality in the Mountain area, the health effects and sources of ozone, Federal and State control measures, and emissions modeling and results. The Mountain area includes Buncombe, Haywood, Henderson, Madison and Transylvania Counties.

1.2 Modeling Background The modeling analysis is a complex technical evaluation that begins by selection of the modeling system and selection of the meteorological episodes. North Carolina Division of Air Quality ( NCDAQ) decided to use the following modeling system:

  Meteorological Model: MM 5   This model generates hourly meteorological inputs for the emissions model and the air quality model, such as wind speed, wind direction, and surface temperature.

  Emissions Model: Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions ( SMOKE)  This model takes daily county level emissions and temporally allocates across the day, spatially locates the emissions within the county, and transfers the total emissions into the chemical species needed by the air quality model.

  Air Quality Model: MAQSIP ( Multi Scale Air Quality Simulation Platform)   This model takes the inputs from the emissions model and meteorological model and predicts ozone hour by hour across the modeling domain, both horizontally and vertically.

The modeling system being used for this demonstration and the episodes being modeled were discussed in detail in the June 30, 2003 progress report ( see Appendix B).

The following historical episodes were selected to model because they represent typical meteorological conditions in North Carolina when high ozone is observed throughout the State:

  July 10 15, 1995   June 20 24, 1996   June 25 30, 1996   July 10 15, 1997 Local EAC Plan Report Page 2 March 31, 2004 The meteorological inputs were developed using MM5 and area discussed in detail in Appendix B.

The precursors to ozone, Nitrogen Oxides ( NOx), Volatile Organic Compounds ( VOCs), and Carbon Monoxide ( CO) were estimated for each source category. These estimates were then spatially allocated across the county, temporally adjusted to the day of the week and hour of the day and speciated into the chemical species that the air quality model needs to predict ozone. The emission inventories used for the current year and future year modeling are discussed in detail in Section 4.

The State, Federal and Local control measures currently in practice and those being implemented in the future to reduce point and mobile ( highway and nonroad) source emissions are discussed in Section 5.

The status of the modeling work is discussed in Section 6.

1.3 Stakeholder Involvement EACs incorporate detailed discussion of the " Stakeholders Involvement" Local EAC Plan Report Page 3 March 31, 2004 2 Overview of Air Quality In The Mountain Area The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), under the authority of the Federal Clean Air Act, regulates outdoor air pollution in the United States. The EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) for six " criteria pollutants" that are considered harmful to human health and the environment. 1 These six pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Particulate matter is further classified into two categories: PM 10, or particles with diameters of 10 micrometers or less, and fine particulate ( PM 2.5), particles with diameters of 2.5 micrometers or less. Levels of a pollutant above the health based standard pose a risk to human health.

The NCDAQ monitors levels of all six criteria pollutants in the Mountain area and reports these levels to the EPA. According to the most recent data, the Mountain area is meeting national ambient standards for five of the pollutants, but is not meeting the Federal 8 hour standard for ground level ozone. Federal enforcement of the ozone NAAQS is based on a 3 year monitor " design value". The design value for each monitor is obtained by averaging the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8 hour ozone values over three consecutive years. If a monitor's design value exceeds the NAAQS, that monitor is in violation of the standard. The EPA may designate part or all of the metropolitan statistical area ( MSA) as nonattainment even if only one monitor in the MSA violates the NAAQS.

There are four ozone monitors in Mountain EAC area. These monitors are: Bent Creek, located in Buncombe County; and Purchase Knob, Waynesville and Fry Pan, all located in Haywood County. The location of these monitors are shown in Figure 2 1.

Figure 2 1: Mountain EAC Area's Ozone Monitor Local EAC Plan Report Page 4 March 31, 2004 For the 3 year period 2000   2002, all but one monitor, Waynesville, was violating the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. However, the most recent 3 year period 2001   2003, all but one monitor, Purchase Knob, is now attaining the 8 hour ground level ozone NAAQS, see Table 2 1. Purchase Knob continues to marginally violate the standard. The historical ozone monitoring data, including the years which the design values are based on, is listed in Table 2.2. Monitor design values are dependant on which three year period the 4th highest 8 Hour ozone concentrations are averaged. Data gaps in early year in Table 2.2 mean monitors were not installed during these years.

Table 2 1: Ozone Monitor Design Values in parts per million ( ppm)

Monitor Name County 00 02 01 03 Bent Creek Buncombe 0.085 0.079 Fry Pan Haywood 0.085 0.082 Purchase Knob Haywood 0.087 0.085 Waynesville Haywood 0.080 0.079 Table 2.2 Historical 4th Highest 8 Hour ozone values ( 1994 2003)

4th Highest 8 Hour Ozone Values ( ppm) Monitor Site 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Bent Creek 0.069 0.076 0.074 0.075 0.090 0.084 0.090 0.076 0.090 0.071 Fry Pan 0.066 0.085 0.086 0.085 0.102 0.096 0.085 0.081 0.090 0.077 Purchase Knob 0.085 0.078 0.087 0.092 0.093 0.087 0.082 0.094 0.080 Waynesville 0.082 0.083 0.075 0.084 0.079 NCDAQ forecasts ozone levels on a daily basis from May 1   September 30 for Mountain EAC area. This forecast is issued to the public using EPA's Air Quality Index ( AQI) color code system. Table 2 3 lists the ozone regulatory standard and AQI breakpoints with their corresponding health risks.

Table 2 3: Air Quality Index Color Code System Pollutant concentration ( ppm) ranges for AQI color codes Pollutant/ Standard Standard Value Green AQI 0   50 Good Yellow AQI 51 100 Moderate Orange AQI 101 150 Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups Red AQI 151 200 Unhealthy Purple AQI 201 300 Very Unhealthy Ozone/ 8 hour average 0.08 ppm averaged over 8 hours 0 0.064 0.065 0.084 0.085 0.104 0.105 0.124 0.125 0.374 Local EAC Plan Report Page 5 March 31, 2004 The AQI color codes standardize the reporting of different pollutants by classifying pollutant concentrations according to relative health risk, using colors and index numbers to describe pollutant levels. The AQI is also used to report the previous day's air quality to the public. In the Mountain area, the forecast and previous day air quality reports appear on the weather page of local newspapers and NCDAQ's website: http:// daq. state. nc. us/ airaware/ forecast. Additionally, the ozone forecast is broadcasted during the local news on television and radio. Local EAC Plan Report Page 6 March 31, 2004 3 Ozone And Its Health Effects And Sources 3.1 Overview of Ozone Ozone ( O3) is a tri atomic ion of oxygen. In the stratosphere or upper atmosphere, ozone occurs naturally and protects the Earth's surface from ultraviolet radiation. Ozone in the lower atmosphere is often called ground level ozone, tropospheric ozone, or ozone pollution to distinguish is from upper atmospheric or stratospheric ozone. Ozone does occur naturally in the lower atmosphere ( troposphere), but only in relatively low background concentrations of about 30 parts per billion ( ppb), well below the NAAQS. The term " smog" is also commonly used to refer to ozone pollution. Although ozone is a component of smog; smog is a combination of ozone and airborne particles having a brownish or dirty appearance. It is possible for ozone levels to be elevated even on clear days with no obvious " smog".

In the lower atmosphere, ozone is formed when airborne chemicals, primarily nitrogen oxides ( NOx) and volatile organic compounds ( VOCs), combine in a chemical reaction driven by heat and sunlight. These ozone forming chemicals are called precursors to ozone. Man made NOx and VOC precursors contribute to ozone concentrations above natural background levels. Since ozone formation is greatest on hot, sunny days with little wind, elevated ozone concentrations occur during the warm weather months, generally May through September. In agreement with EPA's guidance, North Carolina operates ozone monitors from April 1 through October 31 to be sure to capture all possible events of high ozone.

3.2 Ozone Health Effects The form of oxygen we need to breathe is O2. When we breathe ozone, it acts as an irritant to our lungs. Short term, infrequent exposure to ozone can result in throat and eye irritation, difficulty drawing a deep breath, and coughing. Long term and repeated exposure to ozone concentrations above the NAAQS can result in reduction of lung function as the cells lining the lungs are damaged. Repeated cycles of damage and healing may result in scarring of lung tissue and permanently reduced lung function. Health studies have indicated that high ambient ozone concentrations may impair lung function growth in children, resulting in reduced lung function in adulthood. In adults, ozone exposure may accelerate the natural decline in lung function that occurs as part of the normal aging process. Ozone may also aggravate chronic lung diseases such as emphysema and bronchitis and reduce the immune system's ability to fight off bacterial infections in the respiratory system.

Asthmatics and other individuals with respiratory disease are especially at risk from elevated ozone concentrations. Ozone can aggravate asthma, increasing the risk of asthma attacks that require a doctor's attention or the use of additional medication. According to the EPA, one reason for this increased risk is that ozone increases susceptibility to allergens, which are the most common triggers for asthma attacks. In addition, asthmatics are more severely affected by the reduced lung function and irritation that ozone causes in the respiratory system. There is increasing evidence that ozone may trigger, not just exacerbate, asthma attacks in some individuals. Ozone may also contribute to the development of asthma. A recent study published Local EAC Plan Report Page 7 March 31, 2004 in the British medical journal The Lancet found a strong association between elevated ambient ozone levels and the development of asthma in physically active children. 2 All children are at risk from ozone exposure because they often spend a large part of the summer playing outdoors, their lungs are still developing, they breathe more air per pound of body weight, and they are less likely to notice symptoms. Children and adults who frequently exercise outdoors are particularly vulnerable to ozone's negative health effects, because they may be repeatedly exposed to elevated ozone concentrations while breathing at an increased respiratory rate. 3 3.3 Ozone Sources Ozone forming pollutants, or precursors, are nitrogen oxides ( NOx) and volatile organic compounds ( VOCs).

3.3.1 Volatile Organic Compounds Volatile organic compounds ( VOCs) are a class of hydrocarbons, and therefore are sometimes referred to as hydrocarbons. However, it is important to note that hydrocarbons, as a class of chemical compounds, include less reactive compounds not considered VOCs. In other words, although all VOCs are hydrocarbons, not all hydrocarbons are VOCs.

In North Carolina, large portions of precursor VOCs are produced by natural, or biogenic, sources, which are primarily trees. Man made, or anthropogenic, VOCs also contribute to ozone production, particularly in urban areas. Sources of anthropogenic VOCs include unburned gasoline fumes evaporating from gas stations and cars, industrial emissions, and consumer products such as paints, solvents, and the fragrances in personal care products.

3.3.2 Nitrogen Oxides Nitrogen oxides ( NOx) are produced when fuels are burned, and result from the reaction of atmospheric nitrogen at the high temperatures produced by burning fuels. Power plants, highway motor vehicles, the major contributor in urban areas, and off road mobile source equipment, such as construction equipment, lawn care equipment, trains, boats, etc., are the major sources of NOx.

Other NOx sources include " area" sources ( small, widely distributed sources) such as fires ( forest fires, backyard burning, house fires, etc.), and natural gas hot water heaters. Other residential combustion sources such as oil and natural gas furnaces and wood burning also produce NOx, but these sources generally do not operate during warm weather months when ground level ozone is a problem. In general, area sources contribute only a very small portion of ozone forming NOx emissions.

Generally, North Carolina, including the Mountain area, is considered " NOx limited" because of the abundance of VOC emissions from biogenic sources. Therefore, current ozone strategies focus on reducing NOx. However, VOC reduction strategies, such as control of evaporative Local EAC Plan Report Page 8 March 31, 2004 emissions from gas stations and vehicles, could reduce ozone in urban areas where the biogenic VOC emissions are not as high.

3.3.3 Sources of NOx and VOCs The following lists the sources, by category, what contribute to NOx and VOC emissions.

Biogenic: Trees and other natural sources.

Mobile: Vehicles traveling on paved roads: cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, etc.

Nonroad: Vehicles not traveling on paved roads: construction, agricultural, and lawn care equipment, motorboats, locomotives, etc.

Point: " Smokestack" sources: industry and utilities.

Area: Sources not falling into above categories. For VOCs, includes gas stations, dry cleaners, print shops, consumer products, etc. For NOx, includes forest and residential fires, natural gas hot water heaters, etc. Local EAC Plan Report Page 9 March 31, 2004 4 Emissions Inventories 4.1 Introduction Emissions modeling performed by NCDAQ estimates NOx and VOC emissions for an average summer day, given specific meteorological and future year conditions and using emission inputs based on emission inventories that include anticipated control measures. The biogenic emissions are kept at the same level as the episodic biogenic emissions since these emissions are based on meteorology and the meteorological conditions in the future years are kept the same as the episodic meteorology.

There are various types of emission inventories. The first is the base year or episodic inventory. This inventory is based on the year of the episode being modeled and is used for validating the photochemical model performance.

The second inventory used in this project is the " current" year inventory. For this modeling project it will be the 2000 emission inventory, which is the most current. This inventory is processed using all of the different meteorological episodes being studied. The photochemical modeling is processed using the current year inventory and those results are used as a representation of current air quality conditions for the meteorological conditions modeled.

Next is the future base year inventory. For this type, an inventory is developed for some future year for which attainment of the ozone standard is needed. The future base year projections for 2007 take into account all State and Federal control measures expected to operate at that time, including Federal vehicle emissions controls, NOx SIP Call controls, and North Carolina Clean Smokestacks controls. For this modeling project the attainment year is 2007 and the additional years for which a showing of continued maintenance of the 8 hour ozone standard are 2012 and 2017. An additional year, 2010, was modeled since this is the year for which the Charlotte/ Gastonia and Raleigh/ Durham areas must demonstrate attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard. It is the future base year inventories that control strategies and sensitivities are applied to determine what controls, to which source classifications, must be made in order to attain the ozone standard.

The base year inventories used for each source classifications are discussed in Appendix B. In the sections that follow, the inventories used for the current and the future years are discussed. Emission summaries by county for 2000 and 2007 ( entire State) are in Appendix A.

4.2 Current Year Inventories For the large utility sources, year specific Continuous Emissions Monitoring ( CEM) data is used for base year episode specific modeling. However, it did not make sense to use 2000 CEM data for the current year inventory since the meteorology used for the current year modeling runs are the 1995, 1996, and 1997 episode specific meteorology. The concern is that the utility day specific emissions for 2000 would not correspond to the meteorology used in the modeling. After discussing this issue with EPA, the decision was made to continue to use the episodic CEM Local EAC Plan Report Page 10 March 31, 2004 data for the current year inventory. Since only CEM NOx emissions are reported to the EPA, Acid Rain Division ( ARD), the CO and VOC emissions are calculated from the NOx emissions using emission factor ratios ( CO/ NOx and VOC/ NOx) for the particular combustion processes at the utilities.

The inventory used to model the other point sources is the 1999 National Emissions Inventory ( NEI) release version 2.0 obtained from the EPA's Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emission Factors ( CHIEF) website ( http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ net/ 1999inventory. html). In addition, North Carolina emissions for forest fires and prescribed burns are treated as point sources and are episode specific similar to CEM data. These emissions were kept the same as the episodic emissions.

Similar to the other point source emissions inventory, the inventory used to model the stationary area sources is the 1999 NEI release version 2.0 obtained from the EPA's CHIEF website. The exception to this is for North Carolina where a 2000 current year inventory was generated by NCDAQ following the current methodologies outlined in the Emissions Inventory Improvement Program ( EIIP) Area Source Development Documents, Volume III ( http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ eiip/ techreport/ volume03/ index. html).

For the nonroad mobile sources that are calculated within the NONROAD mobile model, a 2000 current year inventory was generated for the entire domain. The model version used is the Draft NONROAD2002 distributed for a limited, confidential, and secure review in November 2002. A newer draft version of this model ( NONROAD2002a) was released by the EPA in June 2003. A comparison was done between the results from the two models and the differences were not significant for NOx emissions, however they were large for CO. Since CO does not play a large role in ozone formation, it is not believed that these differences will impact the ozone concentrations in the air quality model. However, since there are differences, when the final State Implementation Plan ( SIP) modeling is carried out the updated emissions will be used.

The nonroad mobile sources not calculated within the NONROAD model include aircraft engines, railroad locomotives and commercial marine vessels. The 2000 current year inventory used for these sources is the 1999 NEI release version 2.0 obtained from the EPA's CHIEF website. The exception to this is for North Carolina where a 2000 current year inventory was generated by NCDAQ following the methodologies outlined in the EPA guidance document EPA 450/ 4 81 026d ( Revised), Procedures for Inventory Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile Sources.

In order to accurately model the mobile source emissions in the EAC areas, the newest version of the MOBILE model, MOBILE6.2, was used. This model was released by EPA in 2002 and differs significantly from previous versions of the model. Key inputs for MOBILE include information on the age of vehicles on the roads, the speed of those vehicles, what types of road those vehicles are traveling on, any control technologies in place in an area to reduce emissions for motor vehicles ( e. g., emissions inspection programs), and temperature. The development of these inputs is discussed in Appendix B. Local EAC Plan Report Page 11 March 31, 2004 Biogenic emissions used in the 2000 current year modeling are the same as those used in the base year episodic modeling. This is due to the use of the same meteorology for the current year modeling runs. The development of this source category is discussed in Appendix B.

The emissions summary for the 2000 current year modeling inventories for the Mountain EAC area is listed in Table 4.2 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day.

Table 4.2 1 2000 Current Year Modeling Emissions Source CO NOX VOC Point 10 71 15 Area 16 1 16 Nonroad Mobile 109 9 12 Highway Mobile 303 52 26 Biogenic 0 0.5 281 Total Emissions 438 134 350 4.3 Future Year Inventories The inventory used for the preliminary 2007 point source inventory is the EPA's May 1999 release of the NOx SIP call future year modeling foundation files, obtained from the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards ( OAQPS). This is a 2007 emissions inventory, projected from a 1995 base year inventory and controlled in accordance to the NOx SIP call rule. The decision to use this inventory for initial 2007 future year modeling runs was made since all of the point sources required to have controls due to the NOx SIP call rule making are reflected in this inventory. The exception to this is for North Carolina. For the major North Carolina utility sources, NCDAQ obtained estimated future year hour specific data for the two largest utility companies within North Carolina, Duke Energy and Progress Energy. Additionally, the day specific forest fires and prescribed fires inventory were the episodic emissions.

The final modeling run for the 2007 future year point source inventory uses the EPA's 1999 NEI inventory grown to 2007 using growth factors from the EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System ( EGAS) version 4.0. The exception to this is for North Carolina, where State specific growth factors, and where available source specific growth factors, were used to grow the North Carolina 1999 inventory. Additionally, NCDAQ created a new control file that reflect how the states surrounding North Carolina plan to implement the NOx SIP call rule as well as all other rules that are on the books. The 2012 future year point source inventory was generated using this same methodology.

The inventory used to model the stationary area sources for 2007 and 2012 is the 1999 NEI release version 2.0 obtained from the EPA's CHIEF website and were grown to 2007 using growth factors from the EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System ( EGAS) version 4.0. The exception to this is for North Carolina, where the 2000 current year inventory was grown using a mixture of EGAS growth factors and state specific growth factors for the furniture industry. Local EAC Plan Report Page 12 March 31, 2004 For the nonroad mobile sources that are calculated within the NONROAD mobile model, a 2007 and 2012 future years inventories were generated for the entire domain using the same model used to generate the current year inventory. In the final modeling, the NONROAD2002a model will be used to create the nonroad inventory. The remaining nonroad mobile source categories, the 1999 NEI release version 2.0 obtained from the EPA's CHIEF website and were grown to 2007 and 2012 using growth factors from the EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System ( EGAS) version 4.0. The exception to this is for North Carolina, where the 2000 current year inventory was grown with EGAS growth factors.

The same MOBILE model was used to create the 2007 and 2012 future years highway mobile source inventories. The vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) were projected using the methodologies prescribed by EPA. The exception to this was for North Carolina. In the urban areas of North Carolina VMT from travel demand models ( TDM) for future years was available. The future years VMT were estimated by interpolating between the TDM future year estimates. Additionally, estimated future year speeds were obtained from the North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT).

Biogenic emissions used in the future years modeling are the same as those used in the base year episodic modeling. This is due to the use of the same meteorology for the future year modeling runs. The development of this source category is discussed in Appendix B.

The emissions summary for the 2007 and 2012 future years modeling inventories for the Mountain EAC area is listed in Table 4.3 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day.

Table 4.3 1 Future Year Modeling Emissions 2007 2012 Source CO NOX VOC CO NOX VOC Point 23 37 13 32 31 16 Area 16 2 17 17 2 18 Nonroad Mobile 131 8 14 137 8 13 Highway Mobile 178 35 16 119 17 10 Biogenic 0 0.5 281 0 0.5 281 Total Emissions 348 83 341 305 58.5 338 Note that in the maintenance year 2012 the emissions are expected to be lower than the attainement year 2007, therefore continued maintenance of the 8 hour ozone standard is expected.

4.4 Comparison of 2000 and 2007 Inventories The total predicted NOx emissions for the Mountain area decreased by 39%, from 134 tons per day ( TPD) in 2000 to 83 TPD in 2007. This data is tabulated in Table 4.4 1. This same data is displayed in Figures 4.4 1 and 4.4 2 as pie charts with the percent contribution by each source category. Local EAC Plan Report Page 13 March 31, 2004 Point 53% Biogenic 0%

Area 1% Nonroad 7% Mobile 39% Mobile 42%

Area 2% Point 45% Biogenic 1%

Nonroad 10%

Biogenic 80%

Mobile 7% Nonroad 4% Area 5% Point 4%

Nonroad 4% Area 5%

Biogenic 82% Mobile 5% Point 4% Table 4.4 1: Estimated NOx and VOC emissions, in tons per day NOx Emissions VOC Emissions Source 2000 2007 2000 2007 Point 71 37 15 13 Area 1 2 16 17 Nonroad 9 8 12 14 Mobile 52 35 26 16 Biogenic 0.5 0.5 281 281 Total Emissions 134 83 350 341 Figure 4.4 1: 2000 Mountain Area Figure 4.4 2: 2007 Mountain Area NOx Emissions by Source NOx Emissions by Source The total predicted VOC emissions for the Mountain area decreased by 3%, from 350 TPD in 2000 to 341 TPD in 2007. This data is also tabulated in Table 4.4 1. This same data is displayed in Figures 4.4 3 and 4.4 4 as pie charts with the percent contribution by each source category.

Figure 4.4 3: 2000 Mountain Area Figure 4.4 4: 2007 Mountain Area VOC Emissions by Source VOC Emissions by Source Local EAC Plan Report Page 14 March 31, 2004 HDDV 62% HDGV 6% LDGT1 11% LDGT2 4% LDGV 17% Other 0%

HDDV 61% HDGV 6% LDGT1 14% LDGT2 6% LDGV 12% Other 1% There are few VOC control measures expected for area and point sources in the Mountain area, resulting in little or no decrease in emissions. However, the Mountain area contains a power plant, resulting in the point source NOx emissions decrease significantly due to the NOx SIP Call rule. Additionally, there are significant decreases in both highway and nonroad mobile source VOC and NOx emissions. Thus the overall region has a decrease in both NOx and VOC emissions.

For both, highway and nonroad mobile sources, diesel vehicles contribute the majority of NOx emissions. Figures 4.4 5 and 4.4 6 show the relative contributions of vehicle types for the highway mobile source category in 2000 and 2007 for the Mountain area. As shown in these figures, the relative contributions from vehicle types change slightly between 2000 and 2007, with heavy duty diesel vehicles still contributing more than 60% of the overall emissions. The estimated emissions for each vehicle type is tabulated in Table 4.4 2.

Figure 4.4 5: 2000 Mountain Area Figure 4.4 6: 2007 Mountain Area Highway Mobile NOx Sources Highway Mobile NOx Sources HDDV = Heavy duty diesel vehicles ( trucks) HDGV = Heavy duty gasoline vehicles ( trucks) LDGT ( 1& 2) = Light duty gasoline trucks LDGV = Light duty gasoline vehicles Other = Motorcycles, light duty diesel vehicles & trucks Table 4.4 2: Estimated Highway NOx Emissions, by vehicle type NOx Emissions in TPD Source 2000 2007 Heavy duty diesel vehicles 32.4 21.2 Light duty gasoline vehicles 2.9 2.1 Light duty gasoline trucks( 1) 5.6 4.7 Light duty gasoline trucks( 2) 2.3 2.1 Heavy duty gasoline vehicles 8.6 4.2 Other 0.2 0.2 Total 52.0 34.5 Local EAC Plan Report Page 15 March 31, 2004 2 & 4 Stroke Engines 7%

Aircraft 0%

CNG Engines 1%

Diesel Agricultural 5%

Diesel Commercial 3%

Diesel Construction 45% Diesel Industrial 7% LPG Engines 16% Other Diesel 4% Railroad 12%

2 & 4 Stroke Engines 7%

Aircraft 0%

CNG Engines 2%

Diesel Agricultural 5%

Diesel Commercial 4%

Diesel Construction 41% Diesel Industrial 7% LPG Engines 20% Other Diesel 4% Railroad 10% Figures 4.4 7 and 4.4 8 show the relative contributions of equipment types for the nonroad mobile source category in 2000 and 2007 for the Mountain area. As can be seen in these figures, diesel construction equipment contributes the majority of the nonroad mobile source NOx emissions for both years.

Figure 4.4 3: 2000 Mountain Area Nonroad Equipment NOx sources Figure 4.4 4: 2007 Mountain Area Nonroad Equipment NOx sources Local EAC Plan Report Page 16 March 31, 2004 4.5 Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Inventories North Carolina developed the 2010 future year emissions inventory as an intermediate year between 2007, where attainment of the 8 hr Ozone standard is to be demonstrated, and 2012 where continued maintenance of the standard is required. This year was chosen since it is the year that the Charlotte/ Gastonia area must show attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard.

The inventory used for the 2010 point source inventory is EPA's 2010 emission inventory used for their heavy duty diesel rule making. The decision to use this inventory for the 2010 future year modeling runs was made since all of the point sources required to have controls due to the NOx SIP call rule making are reflected in this inventory. The exception to this is for North Carolina. For the major North Carolina utility sources, NCDAQ obtained estimated future year hour specific data for the two largest utility companies within North Carolina, Duke Energy and Progress Energy. Additionally, the day specific forest fires and prescribed fires inventory were the episodic emissions.

The inventory used to model the stationary area sources is also the EPA's emission inventory used for the heavy duty diesel engine rule making. The exception to this is for North Carolina, where the 2000 current year inventory was grown using a mixture of EGAS growth factors and state specific growth factors for the furniture industry.

For the nonroad mobile sources that are calculated within the NONROAD mobile model, a 2010 future year inventory was generated for the entire domain using the same model used to generate the current year inventory. The remaining nonroad mobile source categories, EPA's 2010 emission inventory used for their heavy duty diesel engine rule making was used.

The same MOBILE model was used to create the 2010 future year highway mobile source inventory. The vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) were projected using the methodologies prescribed by EPA. The exception to this was for North Carolina. In the urban areas of North Carolina VMT from travel demand models ( TDM) for future years was available. The 2010 VMT was estimated by interpolating between the TDM future year estimates. Additionally, estimated future year speeds were obtained from the North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT).

Biogenic emissions used in the 2010 future year modeling are the same as those used in the base year episodic modeling. This is due to the use of the same meteorology for the future year modeling runs.

The emissions summary for the 2010 future year modeling inventories for the Mountain EAC area is listed in Table 4.5 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day. Local EAC Plan Report Page 17 March 31, 2004 Table 4.5 1: Estimated NOx and VOC emissions, in tons per day NOx Emissions VOC Emissions Source 2000 2007 2010 2000 2007 2010 Point 71 37 26 15 13 12 Area 1 2 2 16 17 18 Nonroad 9 8 9 12 14 15 Mobile 52 35 22 26 16 12 Biogenic 0.5 0.5 0.5 281 281 281 Total Emissions 134 83 60 350 341 338 The total predicted NOx emissions for the Mountain EAC area decreased by ~ 55%, from 134 tons per day ( TPD) in 2000 to 60 TPD in 2010. The total predicted VOC emissions for the Mountain EAC area decreased by ~ 3%, from 350 TPD in 2000 to 338 TPD in 2010. The 2010 mobile emissions show a continuing decrease even from the 2007 emission levels for both NOx and VOC.

4.5 2017 Future Year Inventory The State is in the process of developing the 2017 future year emission inventories for purposes of showing continued maintenance of the 8 hour ozone standard. The air quality modeling runs will be completed in the next couple of months and will be part of the final State submittal in December 2004. Local EAC Plan Report Page 18 March 31, 2004 5 Control Measures Several control measures already in place or being implemented over the next few years, will reduce point, highway mobile, and nonroad mobile sources emissions. These control measures were modeled for 2007 and are discussed in the Sections below.

5.1 State Control Measures 5.1.1 Clean Air Bill The 1999 Clean Air Bill expanded the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program from 9 counties to 48, phased in between July 1, 2002 through January 1, 2006. Vehicles will be tested using the onboard diagnostic system, an improved method of testing, which will indicate NOx emissions, among other pollutants. The previously used tailpipe test did not measure NOx. The inspection and maintenance program will be phased in from July 1, 2004 through July 1, 2005, in the Mountain area. Table 5.1.1 1 lists the phase in dates for the Mountain area.

Table 5.1.1 1 Phase In Dates for the Mountain Area County Phase In Date Buncombe July 1, 2004 Haywood July 1, 2005 Henderson July 1, 2005 5.1.2 NOx SIP Call Rule North Carolina's NOx SIP Call rule will reduce summertime NOx emissions from power plants and other industries by 68% by 2006. The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission adopted rules requiring the reductions in October 2000.

5.1.3 Clean Smokestacks Act In June 2002, the N. C. General Assembly enacted the Clean Smokestacks Act, requiring coalfired power plants to reduce annual NOx emissions by 78% by 2009. These power plants must also reduce annual sulfur dioxide emissions by 49% by 2009 and by 74% in 2013. The Clean Smokestacks Act could potentially reduce NOx emissions beyond the requirements of the NOx SIP Call Rule. One of the first state laws of its kind in the nation, this legislation provides a model for other states in controlling multiple air pollutants from old coal fired power plants.

5.1.4 Open Burning Bans In June 2004, the Environmental Management Commission should approve a new rule that would ban open burning during the ozone season on code orange and code red ozone action days Local EAC Plan Report Page 19 March 31, 2004 for those counties that NCDAQ forecasts ozone. NCDAQ will determine what rule penetration and rule effectiveness would be most appropriate to use for this rule.

5.2 Federal Control Measures 5.2.1 Tier 2 Vehicle Standards Federal Tier 2 vehicle standards will require all passenger vehicles in a manufacturer's fleet, including light duty trucks and Sports Utility Vehicles ( SUVs), to meet an average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx per mile. Implementation will begin in 2004, and most vehicles will be phased in by 2007. Tier 2 standards will also cover passenger vehicles over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating ( the larger pickup trucks and SUVs), which are not covered by current Tier 1 regulations. For these vehicles, the standards will be phased in beginning in 2008, with full compliance in 2009. The new standards require vehicles to be 77% to 95% cleaner than those on the road today. Tier 2 rules will also reduce the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 ppm by 2006. Most gasoline currently sold in North Carolina has a sulfur content of about 300 ppm. Sulfur occurs naturally in gasoline but interferes with the operation of catalytic converters in vehicle engines resulting in higher NOx emissions. Lower sulfur gasoline is necessary to achieve Tier 2 vehicle emission standards.

5.2.2 Heavy Duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicles Standards New EPA standards designed to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from heavy duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicles will begin to take effect in 2004. A second phase of standards and testing procedures, beginning in 2007, will reduce particulate matter from heavy duty highway engines, and will also reduce highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm since the sulfur damages emission control devices. The total program is expected to achieve a 90% reduction in PM emissions and a 95% reduction in NOx emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using higher content sulfur diesel.

5.2.3 Large Nonroad Diesel Engines Proposed Rule The EPA has proposed new rules for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, agricultural, and industrial equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and 2014. The proposed rules would also reduce the allowable sulfur in nonroad diesel fuel by over 99%. Nonroad diesel fuel currently averages about 3,400 ppm sulfur. The proposed rules limit nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm in 2007 and 15 ppm in 2010. The combined engine and fuel rules would reduce NOx and particulate matter emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90 %, compared to current nonroad engines using higher content sulfur diesel.

5.2.4 Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standard The new standard, effective in July 2003, will regulate NOx, HC and CO for groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. The new standard will apply to all new engines sold in the US and imported after these standards begin and large spark ignition engines ( forklifts and airport ground service equipment), recreational vehicles ( off highway motorcycles and all Local EAC Plan Report Page 20 March 31, 2004 terrain vehicles), and recreational marine diesel engines. The regulation varies based upon the type of engine or vehicle.

The large spark ignition engines contribute to ozone formation and ambient CO and PM levels in urban areas. Tier 1 of this standard is scheduled for implementation in 2004 and Tier 2 is scheduled to start in 2007. Like the large spark ignition, recreational vehicles contribute to ozone formation and ambient CO and PM levels. They can also be a factor in regional haze and other visibility problems in both state and national parks. For the off highway motorcycles and all terrain vehicles, model year 2006, the new exhaust emissions standard will be phased in by 50% and for model years 2007 and later a 100%. Recreational marine diesel engines over 37 kW are used in yachts, cruisers, and other types of pleasure craft. Recreational marine engines contribute to ozone formation and PM levels, especially in marinas. Depending on the size of the engine, the standard for will begin phase in in 2006.

When all of the standards are fully implemented, an overall 72% reduction in HC, 80% reduction in NOx, and 56% reduction in CO emissions are expected by 2020. These controls will help reduce ambient concentrations of ozone, CO, and fine PM.

5.3 Local EAC Control Measures Place Holder for EACs to add discussion Local EAC Plan Report Page 21 March 31, 2004 6 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION 6.1 Status of Current Modeling Modeling completed to date include: the base case model evaluation/ validation runs, the current year modeling runs and the preliminary 2007 future year modeling runs. The results of these modeling runs can be viewed at the NCDAQ modeling website:

http:// www. cep. unc. edu/ empd/ projects2/ NCDAQ/ PGM/ results/

NCDAQ will complete the final 2007 future year modeling run with the updates described in the emissions inventory section. Additionally, the continued maintenance demonstration modeling runs for 2012 and 2017 will be completed in the following months. The results of these modeling runs will be part of the State's submittal in December 2004.

Some errors were found in the base year modeling inventories outside of North Carolina. The magnitude of the errors will be evaluated and, if warranted, the base year model evaluation/ validation runs may be re run.

6.2 Preliminary Modeling Results The base case model runs for all three episodes met the validation criteria set by the EPA. The model evaluation statistics can be viewed at the NCDAQ modeling website cited above.

Figures 6.2 1 and 6.2 2 display the modeling results for 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 2000 current year and the 2007 future year, respectively, for the 1996 modeling episode. One can see a significant decrease in the 8 hour ozone episode maximum between the current year and the future year. This is better visualized with Figure 6.2 3, the difference plot between the 2007 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode ( i. e., 2007 modeling result minus 2000 modeling results). In this figure cool colors, the blues and greens, represents decreases in the 8 hour ozone episodic maximum. These decreases were the results of the all of the State and Federal control measures listed in Section 5 that are expected to be in place by 2007.

The 1997 episode shows similar results. Figures 6.2 4 through 6.2 5 are the 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 2000 current year and the 2007 future year, respectively, for the 1997 episode and Figure 6.2 6 is the difference plot between the 2007 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode.

Although the modeling demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8 hour ozone standard into 2012 and 2017 has not been completed to date, modeling has been completed for future year 2010 for a project outside of the EAC modeling. These results can be used to show continued decrease in expected ozone formation beyond the 2007 attainment year. Local EAC Plan Report Page 22 March 31, 2004 Modeling results for the 1996 and 1997 episodes using the 2010 future year inventory does continue to show attainment and further reduction in ozone levels compared to the 2007 modeling. Figure 6.2 7 and 6.2 8 display the modeling results for the 1996 episode using the 2010 emissions inventory, showing the 8 hour ozone episodic maximum and the difference plot between 2010 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum, respectively. In the 2010 difference plots, cool colors of blue and green represent decreases in the 8 hour ozone episodic maximum. Figures 6.2 9 and 6.2 10 display the 8 hour ozone episodic maximum and difference plot, respectively, for the 1997 episode as modeled for future year 2010 ( compared to current year 2000). These results are consistent with the 1996 episode results.

Figure 6.2 1 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode. Local EAC Plan Report Page 23 March 31, 2004 Figure 6.2 2 2007 future year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode.

Figure 6.2 3 Difference plot between the 2007 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode. Local EAC Plan Report Page 24 March 31, 2004 Figure 6.2 4 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode.

Figure 6.2 5 2007 future year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode. Local EAC Plan Report Page 25 March 31, 2004 Figure 6.2 6 Difference plot between the 2007 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode.

Figure 6.2 7 2010 future year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode. Local EAC Plan Report Page 26 March 31, 2004 Figure 6.2 8 Difference plot between the 2010 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1996 episode.

Figure 6.2 9 2010 future year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode Local EAC Plan Report Page 27 March 31, 2004 Figure 6.2 10 Difference plot between the 2010 future year and the 2000 current year 8 hour ozone episodic maximum for the 1997 episode 6.3 Geographic Area Needing Further Controls The current draft version of EPA's attainment test was applied to the modeling results. In very basic and general language the attainment guidance states if the future year design value for a given monitor is below 0.085 parts per million ( ppm) then the monitor passes the attainment test. The future year design value of a monitor is calculated by multiplying the current year design value of a monitor by a relative reduction factor ( Equation 6.3 1).

DVF = DVC x RRF Equation 6.3 1 Where DVF is the Future year Design Value, DVC is the Current year Design Value, and RRF is the relative reduction factor.

The Current year Design Value ( DVC) in the attainment test framework is defined as the higher of: ( a) the average 4th highest value for the 3 yr period used to designate an area " nonattainment", and ( b) the average 4th highest value for the 3 yr period straddling the year represented by the most recent available emissions inventory. In this exercise, the DVC used to designate an area nonattainment will be 2001 2003 and the DVC straddling the year represented by the most recent available emissions inventory is 1999 2001. The higher of those two values is shown in Table 6.3 1 as the DVC. Local EAC Plan Report Page 28 March 31, 2004 The relative reduction factor ( RRF) is calculated by taking the ratio of the future year modeling 8 hour ozone daily maximum to the current year modeling 8 hour ozone daily maximum " near" the monitor averaged over all of the episode days ( Equations 6.3 2).

RRF = mean future yr. 8 hr daily max " near" monitor " x" Equation 6.3 2 mean current yr. 8 hr daily max " near" monitor " x"

The results of applying the attainment test showed all monitors in the Mountain EAC area in attainment of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS in 2007. These results are displayed in Table 6.3 1 below.

Table 6.3 1 2007 Attainment Test Results for the Mountain EAC Area Monitor Name DVC ( ppm) RRF DVF ( ppm) Bent Creek 0.083 0.92 0.076 Fry Pan 0.087 0.92 0.080 Purchase Knob 0.087 0.91 0.079 Waynesville 0.080 0.89 0.071 Table 6.3 2 shows the results of applying the attainment test for the EAC monitors in 2010. These preliminary results indicate that the expected State and Federal control measures already in place by 2010 results in all monitors in the Mountain EAC area attaining the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. In fact, all of the expected future year design values dropped between the 2007 and 2010 modeling runs, indicating that continued maintenance of the standard in 2012 would be expected.

Table 6.3 2 2010 Attainment Test Results for the Mountain EAC Area Monitor Name DVC ( ppm) RRF DVF ( ppm) Bent Creek 0.083 0.86 0.071 Fry Pan 0.087 0.85 0.073 Purchase Knob 0.087 0.82 * 0.071 * Waynesville 0.080 0.84 0.067 * Test results are determined from the 12 km model results.

6.4 Anticipated Resource Constraints The resource constraint of most concern is the funding needed to implement some of the local control measures. NCDAQ and the local EAC areas are both looking for grant opportunities to help fund EAC initiatives. Local EAC Plan Report Page 29 March 31, 2004 References:

1. U. S. EPA. National Ambient Air Quality Standards. http:// www. epa. gov/ airs/ criteria. html.

2. McConnell et al. 2002. Asthma in exercising children exposed to ozone: a cohort study. Lancet 359: 386 391.

3. U. S. EPA. " Smog   Who Does It Hurt? What You Need to Know about Ozone and Your Health" http:// www. epa. gov/ airnow/ health/ index. html. Local EAC Plan Report Page 30 March 31, 2004 APPENDIX A Stationary Point Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Alamance 0.68 0.66 1.60 0.07 0.76 1.03 Alexander 0.03 0.04 1.38 0.02 0.00 1.66 Alleghany 0.00 0.01 0.03 Anson 0.13 0.46 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ashe 0.23 0.16 0.34 0.03 0.01 1.23 Avery 0.00 0.01 0.00 Beaufort 0.04 0.20 0.30 1.48 2.48 0.34 Bertie 0.69 0.36 0.57 0.18 0.27 1.04 Bladen 0.40 1.19 0.49 0.23 2.33 0.58 Brunswick 14.55 6.64 3.87 4.78 9.81 2.79 Buncombe 1.25 53.32 3.60 13.78 13.79 3.10 Burke 2.55 0.84 5.18 7.87 0.61 13.73 Cabarrus 0.82 3.03 4.06 0.18 2.10 3.60 Caldwell 1.35 1.19 21.88 0.51 0.16 28.09 Camden 0.00 0.00 0.00 Carteret 0.15 0.22 0.30 0.01 0.11 0.00 Caswell Catawba 4.16 96.23 18.81 13.14 51.84 20.46 Chatham 4.51 21.19 2.21 7.90 4.72 2.16 Cherokee 0.02 0.02 0.22 Chowan 0.03 0.21 0.37 0.03 0.15 0.01 Clay Cleveland 0.82 1.70 1.04 0.80 4.46 1.62 Columbus 20.82 15.41 6.93 15.75 9.05 2.53 Craven 4.94 4.21 3.73 4.54 4.94 1.85 Cumberland 1.22 3.16 4.08 0.51 3.76 6.86 Currituck 0.08 0.01 0.00 Dare 0.05 0.19 0.01 0.01 0.34 0.00 Davidson 3.31 12.16 15.05 3.02 6.34 20.47 Davie 0.17 0.20 1.98 0.09 0.04 3.79 Duplin 0.24 1.10 0.14 1.11 2.41 0.02 Durham 1.00 1.58 1.19 0.30 1.03 5.73 Edgecombe 0.49 5.95 0.90 0.43 7.29 0.02 Forsyth 2.09 6.15 9.76 1.96 6.78 19.96 Franklin 0.28 0.21 1.71 0.01 0.13 0.12 Gaston 3.67 86.48 5.40 21.44 38.21 7.51 Local EAC Plan Report Page 31 March 31, 2004 Stationary Point Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Gates 0.08 0.03 0.10 Graham 0.09 0.08 1.29 0.02 0.02 1.38 Granville 0.34 0.36 1.79 0.37 0.13 1.92 Greene 0.00 0.07 0.00 Guilford 1.59 1.83 18.13 0.17 0.88 39.44 Halifax 6.22 10.72 1.71 17.11 12.80 0.41 Harnett 0.20 0.33 1.12 0.23 0.63 0.62 Haywood 7.85 12.48 5.00 9.26 16.05 2.44 Henderson 0.25 0.31 3.79 0.03 0.43 4.53 Hertford 1.33 0.47 1.13 0.02 0.17 0.24 Hoke 0.08 0.25 0.40 34.24 1.00 10.35 Hyde 0.00 0.04 0.00 Iredell 3.58 9.98 20.42 3.63 11.15 4.37 Jackson 0.60 0.52 0.38 0.00 0.05 0.00 Johnston 0.80 0.46 1.80 0.02 0.15 2.46 Jones Lee 1.37 0.42 1.27 1.14 0.28 0.75 Lenoir 0.63 2.27 1.30 0.14 3.10 0.23 Lincoln 0.76 5.82 2.73 8.90 14.26 2.18 McDowell 2.12 1.04 3.87 0.78 0.71 1.33 Macon 0.11 0.08 0.05 Madison 0.02 0.07 0.00 Martin 10.72 10.38 3.24 31.74 9.97 3.18 Mecklenburg 5.49 2.30 11.99 3.32 3.73 23.26 Mitchell 0.41 0.50 2.49 0.13 0.02 2.09 Montgomery 0.24 0.32 1.99 0.05 0.01 0.02 Moore 0.17 0.14 2.29 0.02 0.00 1.74 Nash 9.02 0.97 2.67 0.50 1.06 0.56 NewHanover 35.65 31.96 6.52 46.31 49.30 6.49 Northampton 1.10 0.30 0.86 0.14 0.30 0.10 Onslow 0.34 1.77 0.16 0.09 1.22 0.02 Orange 2.86 1.80 0.37 3.37 0.78 0.01 Pamlico Pasquotank 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 Pender 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.01 Perquimans Person 5.79 205.34 1.36 13.83 32.70 1.22 Pitt 1.06 0.88 1.95 0.37 0.75 1.11 Polk 0.02 0.03 0.00 Randolph 0.53 0.38 4.01 0.02 0.07 2.33 Richmond 0.33 0.26 0.17 323.38 11.45 10.71 Robeson 0.92 17.43 1.12 1.64 13.56 2.28 Rockingham 5.60 34.09 16.65 17.02 16.47 8.01 Local EAC Plan Report Page 32 March 31, 2004 Stationary Point Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Rowan 2.28 37.52 8.27 15.19 19.17 11.65 Rutherford 3.24 49.60 2.56 4.66 13.67 3.45 Sampson 0.24 0.23 0.22 Scotland 0.38 6.14 3.60 0.57 8.50 7.33 Stanly 26.81 1.15 1.79 17.59 1.36 1.94 Stokes 8.15 324.10 1.01 5.16 22.79 0.62 Surry 3.28 1.09 6.10 6.10 1.06 4.12 Swain 0.00 0.00 0.12 Transylvania 0.21 5.00 2.83 0.25 7.01 2.55 Tyrrell Union 0.81 0.68 1.81 0.03 0.17 2.54 Vance 0.34 1.52 1.16 0.04 1.45 0.00 Wake 1.59 1.49 4.24 0.27 0.94 10.08 Warren 0.18 0.08 0.07 Washington 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Watauga 0.17 0.18 0.13 0.02 0.05 0.00 Wayne 5.08 19.84 3.38 24.50 27.43 1.85 Wilkes 1.88 0.97 5.69 3.68 0.83 6.11 Wilson 0.51 1.48 3.74 0.22 2.51 1.99 Yadkin 0.01 0.03 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.03 Yancey Stationary Area Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Alamance 6.21 0.47 5.78 6.65 0.50 6.17 Alexander 3.26 0.20 2.96 3.42 0.21 2.93 Alleghany 1.00 0.08 0.79 1.03 0.08 0.81 Anson 3.83 0.16 1.40 4.14 0.17 1.47 Ashe 2.29 0.17 1.42 2.36 0.17 1.50 Avery 1.61 0.12 0.85 1.66 0.13 0.90 Beaufort 22.68 0.30 5.75 25.28 0.31 5.93 Bertie 6.46 0.16 3.25 7.09 0.17 3.20 Bladen 5.37 0.25 3.08 5.79 0.25 3.13 Brunswick 5.25 0.39 3.12 5.47 0.40 3.26 Buncombe 5.74 0.55 8.11 5.91 0.58 8.66 Burke 4.02 0.32 3.48 4.15 0.33 3.64 Cabarrus 5.81 0.38 5.88 6.26 0.41 6.52 Caldwell 3.19 0.25 3.91 3.32 0.25 4.05 Camden 7.54 0.05 1.35 8.43 0.05 1.40 Carteret 5.22 0.20 2.96 5.67 0.20 3.10 Caswell 3.96 0.18 1.69 4.24 0.19 1.71 Local EAC Plan Report Page 33 March 31, 2004 Stationary Area Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Catawba 7.04 0.43 11.22 7.48 0.44 11.37 Chatham 4.82 0.34 2.46 5.18 0.36 2.58 Cherokee 2.29 0.19 1.15 2.35 0.20 1.19 Chowan 2.70 0.09 1.61 2.96 0.09 1.65 Clay 0.83 0.08 0.46 0.85 0.08 0.51 Cleveland 8.89 0.43 4.45 9.53 0.45 4.70 Columbus 10.62 0.41 5.37 11.52 0.42 5.36 Craven 6.34 0.28 4.92 6.87 0.29 5.06 Cumberland 6.32 0.51 11.54 6.76 0.54 12.12 Currituck 8.37 0.14 1.61 9.27 0.14 1.71 Dare 0.86 0.08 1.21 0.89 0.08 1.30 Davidson 9.36 0.65 7.74 9.81 0.67 7.96 Davie 4.37 0.19 1.76 4.69 0.20 1.87 Duplin 17.79 0.37 5.91 19.65 0.38 5.95 Durham 2.25 0.35 7.67 2.42 0.39 8.18 Edgecombe 4.60 0.25 5.60 4.96 0.26 5.50 Forsyth 3.94 0.40 11.46 4.18 0.44 12.21 Franklin 7.51 0.36 3.18 8.19 0.37 3.25 Gaston 5.05 0.52 6.85 5.35 0.56 7.35 Gates 1.82 0.08 1.14 1.95 0.09 1.12 Graham 0.75 0.06 0.35 0.77 0.06 0.37 Granville 7.05 0.27 3.27 7.65 0.28 3.34 Greene 5.83 0.15 2.95 6.40 0.16 2.88 Guilford 10.99 0.95 19.33 11.77 1.04 20.36 Halifax 9.79 0.30 5.16 10.73 0.31 5.19 Harnett 8.91 0.51 5.74 9.49 0.52 5.80 Haywood 2.44 0.21 2.08 2.51 0.21 2.18 Henderson 4.02 0.37 3.51 4.14 0.38 3.72 Hertford 5.54 0.13 2.34 6.11 0.13 2.38 Hoke 3.54 0.16 1.85 3.82 0.16 1.88 Hyde 4.91 0.05 1.45 5.48 0.05 1.45 Iredell 9.47 0.51 6.14 10.19 0.54 6.46 Jackson 2.45 0.21 1.23 2.52 0.21 1.30 Johnston 12.71 0.73 9.46 13.78 0.76 9.42 Jones 4.70 0.08 1.81 5.20 0.09 1.78 Lee 4.54 0.21 2.57 4.90 0.22 2.68 Lenoir 8.28 0.26 5.44 9.09 0.27 5.45 Lincoln 6.50 0.30 2.82 7.01 0.31 3.04 McDowell 2.28 0.20 1.30 2.35 0.21 1.37 Macon 1.85 0.14 0.98 1.90 0.14 1.02 Madison 1.87 0.18 1.41 1.93 0.18 1.42 Martin 5.52 0.23 3.59 5.93 0.24 3.54 Mecklenburg 4.61 0.99 25.87 4.97 1.12 28.14 Local EAC Plan Report Page 34 March 31, 2004 Stationary Area Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Mitchell 1.47 0.11 0.91 1.52 0.11 0.93 Montgomery 2.44 0.18 1.81 2.53 0.19 1.83 Moore 4.97 0.35 3.49 5.20 0.37 3.66 Nash 9.24 0.42 7.76 10.02 0.44 7.75 NewHanover 0.77 0.12 6.04 0.79 0.13 6.51 Northampton 5.09 0.16 2.65 5.55 0.17 2.60 Onslow 6.21 0.34 5.99 6.59 0.35 6.29 Orange 5.03 0.40 4.54 5.42 0.43 4.79 Pamlico 6.27 0.10 1.38 6.95 0.11 1.44 Pasquotank 12.97 0.14 3.18 14.47 0.14 3.37 Pender 5.90 0.28 2.47 6.30 0.29 2.61 Perquimans 6.91 0.09 1.76 7.68 0.09 1.79 Person 6.29 0.23 2.42 6.85 0.24 2.49 Pitt 9.95 0.46 9.13 10.78 0.47 9.36 Polk 1.57 0.13 0.70 1.61 0.13 0.74 Randolph 10.44 0.66 9.38 11.07 0.68 9.47 Richmond 2.58 0.20 2.01 2.71 0.21 2.11 Robeson 28.32 0.70 9.95 31.17 0.72 10.19 Rockingham 8.86 0.46 4.47 9.48 0.48 4.64 Rowan 9.50 0.46 5.66 10.28 0.49 6.08 Rutherford 4.44 0.31 2.68 4.64 0.33 2.96 Sampson 17.24 0.43 7.57 18.96 0.44 7.53 Scotland 7.55 0.17 2.36 8.33 0.17 2.47 Stanly 8.31 0.32 3.28 9.01 0.33 3.42 Stokes 4.56 0.26 2.42 4.82 0.27 2.45 Surry 6.15 0.37 4.01 6.47 0.38 4.16 Swain 1.22 0.10 0.50 1.26 0.10 0.52 Transylvania 1.75 0.16 1.08 1.80 0.17 1.14 Tyrrell 10.04 0.03 1.72 11.27 0.04 1.79 Union 23.79 0.55 7.20 26.31 0.58 7.68 Vance 4.19 0.19 2.43 4.52 0.19 2.51 Wake 10.49 1.24 24.71 11.31 1.35 26.08 Warren 4.18 0.16 1.44 4.52 0.16 1.47 Washington 12.80 0.08 2.51 14.34 0.09 2.60 Watauga 2.41 0.20 1.82 2.48 0.20 1.91 Wayne 16.32 0.48 7.91 17.91 0.49 8.07 Wilkes 4.79 0.37 3.35 4.95 0.38 3.49 Wilson 5.47 0.29 6.51 5.92 0.30 6.46 Yadkin 6.30 0.23 2.77 6.82 0.23 2.85 Yancey 1.67 0.12 0.90 1.72 0.13 0.92 Local EAC Plan Report Page 35 March 31, 2004 Nonroad Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Alamance 29.54 2.98 2.37 33.64 2.91 2.04 Alexander 4.00 0.51 0.37 4.36 0.53 0.33 Alleghany 2.49 0.36 0.18 2.78 0.33 0.14 Anson 4.19 1.13 0.50 4.55 0.95 0.39 Ashe 3.91 0.44 0.41 4.54 0.43 0.44 Avery 5.37 0.52 0.59 6.39 0.47 0.65 Beaufort 13.85 2.81 2.74 15.07 2.51 2.30 Bertie 6.43 1.66 1.12 6.78 1.48 0.88 Bladen 8.96 1.81 1.44 10.50 1.59 1.66 Brunswick 27.00 2.10 4.70 30.90 1.88 4.16 Buncombe 48.93 4.51 4.43 57.45 4.28 4.27 Burke 14.79 2.10 1.51 16.50 2.05 1.51 Cabarrus 44.68 4.19 3.28 51.35 3.78 2.38 Caldwell 16.55 2.38 1.77 18.65 2.34 1.89 Camden 2.84 0.41 0.99 2.90 0.39 0.80 Carteret 49.17 1.82 14.18 54.95 1.90 12.43 Caswell 2.26 1.07 0.23 2.51 0.85 0.17 Catawba 47.03 5.15 4.20 53.29 5.17 3.95 Chatham 12.91 1.83 1.40 14.40 1.68 1.09 Cherokee 3.99 0.40 0.56 4.58 0.40 0.57 Chowan 4.05 0.47 1.14 4.45 0.46 1.03 Clay 2.19 0.15 0.43 2.72 0.14 0.54 Cleveland 21.51 2.13 1.75 24.58 2.08 1.52 Columbus 9.85 2.12 1.11 11.13 1.89 1.00 Craven 24.08 2.20 2.66 27.45 1.94 1.98 Cumberland 59.31 6.51 4.85 68.38 5.86 3.84 Currituck 15.63 0.77 4.69 17.55 0.77 4.24 Dare 46.18 1.33 18.14 49.76 1.54 15.68 Davidson 30.96 4.24 2.64 35.03 3.90 2.24 Davie 6.77 0.61 0.88 8.20 0.61 1.12 Duplin 10.19 2.36 0.97 11.18 2.13 0.73 Durham 70.50 9.63 6.04 79.17 9.06 5.09 Edgecombe 11.11 2.57 0.97 12.27 2.28 0.78 Forsyth 91.57 6.94 6.70 105.60 6.76 5.27 Franklin 8.37 1.05 0.78 9.71 0.93 0.70 Gaston 54.10 4.77 3.98 61.82 4.70 3.33 Gates 1.58 0.50 0.21 1.69 0.45 0.16 Graham 1.40 0.13 0.25 1.55 0.12 0.20 Granville 13.73 1.39 1.23 15.64 1.32 1.03 Greene 2.31 0.70 0.21 2.52 0.64 0.16 Guilford 194.02 14.69 14.06 226.39 13.97 10.89 Local EAC Plan Report Page 36 March 31, 2004 Nonroad Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Halifax 8.68 2.13 0.92 9.77 1.86 0.83 Harnett 22.07 1.84 1.65 25.33 1.72 1.21 Haywood 11.35 1.08 1.15 13.38 1.00 1.19 Henderson 31.53 2.07 3.82 38.22 1.95 4.41 Hertford 4.08 0.54 0.48 4.74 0.50 0.48 Hoke 3.35 0.64 0.28 3.61 0.62 0.24 Hyde 25.38 1.93 11.68 25.59 1.94 9.56 Iredell 21.67 2.88 2.10 24.69 2.78 1.97 Jackson 6.55 0.51 0.75 7.75 0.46 0.76 Johnston 35.04 3.41 2.84 40.55 3.09 2.26 Jones 1.83 0.46 0.15 2.05 0.41 0.12 Lee 16.81 2.46 1.35 18.80 2.29 1.07 Lenoir 16.43 2.14 1.31 18.63 2.00 1.01 Lincoln 14.00 1.49 1.27 16.03 1.38 1.10 McDowell 7.93 1.84 1.14 9.18 1.61 1.36 Macon 10.89 0.53 0.97 12.89 0.50 0.91 Madison 1.73 0.56 0.17 1.96 0.45 0.13 Martin 4.71 1.32 0.51 5.37 1.16 0.51 Mecklenburg 351.64 23.31 24.93 298.78 21.99 18.42 Mitchell 3.61 1.02 0.51 4.27 0.85 0.61 Montgomery 4.89 0.71 0.58 5.34 0.66 0.48 Moore 27.52 1.89 1.95 31.86 1.73 1.41 Nash 21.77 2.69 1.71 24.83 2.47 1.32 NewHanover 58.02 4.59 5.80 67.25 4.20 4.55 Northampton 4.56 0.97 0.71 5.20 0.86 0.65 Onslow 26.34 3.52 3.92 29.60 3.21 3.31 Orange 31.55 3.66 3.18 37.13 3.19 3.09 Pamlico 9.11 0.88 3.58 9.63 0.85 3.09 Pasquotank 9.56 0.93 1.42 10.86 0.88 1.12 Pender 13.17 1.02 1.77 15.00 0.95 1.44 Perquimans 3.95 0.65 1.27 4.10 0.60 1.02 Person 8.34 0.85 0.80 9.41 0.82 0.64 Pitt 25.16 4.26 1.98 28.79 3.78 1.53 Polk 2.69 0.46 0.22 3.03 0.39 0.17 Randolph 27.23 2.82 2.20 30.77 2.85 1.94 Richmond 14.38 4.66 1.43 15.38 4.02 1.05 Robeson 19.63 5.97 1.91 21.45 5.21 1.62 Rockingham 15.35 2.44 1.55 17.39 2.26 1.63 Rowan 28.37 5.47 2.59 31.85 4.75 2.11 Rutherford 13.10 2.19 1.27 14.86 2.00 1.27 Sampson 10.67 2.15 0.92 11.89 1.96 0.70 Scotland 8.59 1.82 0.75 9.46 1.64 0.63 Stanly 16.77 2.09 1.54 19.02 1.96 1.29 Local EAC Plan Report Page 37 March 31, 2004 Nonroad Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Stokes 8.18 0.68 0.72 9.54 0.61 0.64 Surry 30.76 1.96 2.43 35.44 1.98 2.05 Swain 4.84 0.35 1.35 6.47 0.32 1.88 Transylvania 15.89 0.68 2.79 20.28 0.67 3.77 Tyrrell 6.72 0.61 2.94 6.76 0.61 2.38 Union 47.65 3.89 3.56 55.34 3.56 2.71 Vance 6.24 1.24 0.75 6.84 1.14 0.62 Wake 242.05 18.83 17.61 281.90 17.33 12.59 Warren 3.51 0.70 0.58 3.85 0.56 0.43 Washington 5.43 1.03 1.44 5.68 0.95 1.16 Watauga 9.79 0.50 1.19 12.02 0.48 1.41 Wayne 26.05 3.51 2.10 29.98 3.27 1.71 Wilkes 16.62 1.37 1.38 19.09 1.32 1.17 Wilson 23.57 2.99 1.95 27.15 2.67 1.56 Yadkin 6.59 0.89 0.52 7.45 0.83 0.40 Yancey 7.75 0.37 0.87 9.32 0.34 0.94 Highway Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Alamance 93.84 13.48 8.34 54.81 9.52 5.01 Alexander 15.87 1.75 1.41 10.67 1.27 1.02 Alleghany 6.87 0.74 0.61 3.84 0.45 0.37 Anson 22.65 2.93 1.90 14.23 2.00 1.25 Ashe 15.28 1.61 1.36 8.98 1.03 0.86 Avery 13.78 1.66 1.18 7.98 1.05 0.73 Beaufort 31.89 3.55 2.81 19.36 2.35 1.81 Bertie 19.81 2.38 1.70 12.41 1.61 1.14 Bladen 29.89 3.22 2.65 18.60 2.18 1.78 Brunswick 67.90 8.19 5.82 39.68 5.53 3.69 Buncombe 149.98 23.51 13.10 87.96 16.25 7.83 Burke 65.51 12.34 5.64 36.98 7.79 3.38 Cabarrus 69.09 12.04 6.19 50.62 8.59 4.20 Caldwell 44.10 5.01 3.89 25.98 3.41 2.48 Camden 7.47 0.90 0.64 4.68 0.61 0.43 Carteret 43.77 5.41 3.74 22.53 3.19 2.10 Caswell 16.69 2.00 1.44 10.41 1.34 0.95 Catawba 113.03 15.57 10.08 66.68 10.71 6.25 Chatham 45.51 5.79 3.85 27.65 4.01 2.55 Cherokee 17.05 2.25 1.42 12.85 1.73 1.15 Chowan 8.16 0.92 0.72 4.87 0.60 0.45 Clay 6.05 0.68 0.53 3.81 0.46 0.36 Local EAC Plan Report Page 38 March 31, 2004 Highway Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Cleveland 68.95 10.19 5.97 37.44 6.17 3.49 Columbus 43.72 5.12 3.80 27.16 3.52 2.47 Craven 57.77 6.75 5.06 34.07 4.53 3.19 Cumberland 197.16 28.43 17.85 108.27 18.56 10.31 Currituck 21.48 2.50 1.86 14.09 1.77 1.33 Dare 37.56 4.27 3.27 20.22 2.55 1.89 Davidson 105.57 17.25 9.73 61.60 11.04 6.06 Davie 32.17 7.98 2.67 20.32 5.05 1.78 Duplin 46.97 8.80 4.00 32.00 6.34 2.86 Durham 130.59 24.00 11.93 90.71 14.51 7.74 Edgecombe 41.11 4.72 3.61 23.96 3.17 2.28 Forsyth 188.14 33.73 18.97 125.17 19.34 12.44 Franklin 32.41 3.79 2.81 19.70 2.63 1.89 Gaston 87.61 16.61 8.66 56.34 9.20 5.28 Gates 8.85 1.12 0.75 5.30 0.73 0.47 Graham 4.84 0.50 0.43 3.31 0.39 0.32 Granville 48.49 9.82 5.02 27.96 5.43 3.29 Greene 14.77 1.63 1.30 9.41 1.14 0.89 Guilford 274.08 47.66 27.88 179.81 26.94 18.09 Halifax 48.63 11.44 4.09 31.41 7.19 2.75 Harnett 58.38 9.34 5.01 34.75 6.19 3.25 Haywood 58.30 14.16 4.81 33.85 8.92 2.99 Henderson 59.39 10.05 5.15 34.27 6.56 3.17 Hertford 15.08 1.71 1.32 9.26 1.14 0.87 Hoke 18.56 2.22 1.60 12.36 1.62 1.13 Hyde 4.39 0.48 0.39 2.61 0.32 0.25 Iredell 119.96 29.26 10.08 71.75 18.66 6.42 Jackson 36.42 4.77 3.04 23.49 3.29 2.08 Johnston 123.04 28.31 10.21 81.29 19.92 7.25 Jones 14.67 1.89 1.23 8.62 1.19 0.76 Lee 39.67 4.49 3.51 23.25 3.03 2.21 Lenoir 44.38 4.70 4.04 23.50 2.85 2.31 Lincoln 37.27 4.27 3.28 21.48 2.82 2.08 McDowell 42.05 9.85 3.48 26.32 3.48 2.37 Macon 24.61 3.09 2.08 15.13 2.02 1.37 Madison 13.33 1.64 1.14 8.25 1.10 0.75 Martin 25.08 3.06 2.15 15.47 3.65 1.34 Mecklenburg 341.23 67.76 34.75 222.60 36.34 21.26 Mitchell 9.55 1.09 0.83 5.95 0.75 0.55 Montgomery 26.55 3.60 2.27 18.18 2.61 1.66 Moore 53.39 5.90 4.73 29.76 3.77 2.87 Nash 93.59 17.62 7.97 53.90 10.92 4.94 NewHanover 81.67 9.12 7.49 48.41 6.14 4.72 Local EAC Plan Report Page 39 March 31, 2004 Highway Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC Northampton 23.32 4.79 1.95 13.92 2.79 1.24 Onslow 67.91 7.55 6.03 35.66 4.56 3.41 Orange 62.40 18.80 5.30 44.95 11.91 3.63 Pamlico 9.21 0.93 0.83 5.79 0.64 0.56 Pasquotank 17.53 1.94 1.57 11.15 1.36 1.03 Pender 40.59 8.15 3.41 28.50 5.88 2.53 Perquimans 9.69 1.24 0.82 6.19 0.86 0.54 Person 21.02 2.25 1.89 12.96 1.51 1.23 Pitt 78.82 8.47 7.05 43.54 5.36 4.24 Polk 19.00 4.60 1.56 13.94 3.39 1.19 Randolph 97.79 13.69 8.46 57.60 9.14 5.31 Richmond 40.70 4.98 3.52 24.96 3.35 2.22 Robeson 107.26 20.38 9.20 61.34 12.86 5.62 Rockingham 66.14 7.51 5.82 37.21 4.86 3.57 Rowan 89.79 17.34 7.75 53.43 11.46 4.96 Rutherford 40.07 4.52 3.53 20.79 2.69 2.01 Sampson 51.06 8.35 4.42 32.73 5.69 2.97 Scotland 29.90 3.44 2.64 18.93 2.37 1.73 Stanly 37.66 4.01 3.39 20.69 2.53 2.03 Stokes 24.78 2.82 2.17 13.71 1.79 1.32 Surry 64.94 12.67 5.54 37.68 7.79 3.49 Swain 13.82 1.69 1.18 7.71 1.01 0.70 Transylvania 22.41 2.47 1.99 14.04 1.68 1.33 Tyrrell 3.78 0.49 0.32 2.31 0.33 0.20 Union 56.79 7.70 5.15 39.75 5.00 3.48 Vance 33.57 6.29 2.89 22.07 4.29 1.95 Wake 306.82 59.29 27.61 224.96 39.69 18.67 Warren 15.84 3.56 1.32 10.53 2.39 0.92 Washington 11.19 1.43 0.94 6.82 0.95 0.60 Watauga 25.14 3.08 2.17 15.08 2.02 1.34 Wayne 68.83 7.28 6.20 39.66 4.84 3.87 Wilkes 47.93 5.55 4.18 25.57 3.39 2.45 Wilson 61.49 10.12 5.37 35.49 6.44 3.32 Yadkin 34.98 7.13 2.92 21.93 4.42 1.92 Yancey 11.33 1.45 0.96 6.74 0.93 0.60 Local EAC Plan Report Page 40 March 31, 2004 APPENDIX B