Early Action Plan for the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area North Carolina A joint effort by USEPA Region 4, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners, Town of Falcon, City of Fayetteville, Fort Bragg Military Reservation, Town of Godwin, Town of Hope Mills, Town of Linden, Pope Air Force Base, Town of Spring Lake, Town of Stedman and Town of Wade and the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization March 31, 2004 Table of Contents 1. Introduction........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Stakeholders Involvement.................................................................................. 2 1.3 Cumberland County Characteristics ................................................................... 4 1.31Local and Regional Efforts ............................................................................... 6 1.4 Modeling Background ....................................................................................... 6 2. Overview of Air Quality In Cumberland County ................................................ 8 3. Ozone And Its Health Effects And Sources ........................................................ 10 3.1 Overview of Ozone.......................................................................................... 10 3.2 Ozone Health Effects....................................................................................... 10 3.3 Ozone Sources................................................................................................. 11 3.3.1 Volatile Organic Compounds........................................................................ 11 3.3.2 Nitrogen Oxides............................................................................................ 11 3.3.3 Sources of NOx and VOCs ........................................................................... 11 4. Emissions Inventories.......................................................................................... 13 4.1 Description ...................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Current Year Inventories.................................................................................. 13 4.3 2007 Future Year Inventories........................................................................... 15 4.4 Comparison of 2000 and 2007 Inventories ....................................................... 16 4.5 Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Inventories ....................................................... 20 4.6 2012 and 2017 Future Year Inventories ........................................................... 21 5. Control Measures ................................................................................................ 22 5.1 Local EAC Control Measures .......................................................................... 22 5.2 State Control Measures .................................................................................... 34 5.2.1 Clean Air Bill ............................................................................................... 34 5.2.2 NOx SIP Call Rule........................................................................................ 34 5.2.3 Clean Smokestacks Act................................................................................. 34 5.3 Federal Control Measures ................................................................................ 34 5.3.1 Tier 2 Vehicle Standards............................................................................... 34 5.3.2 Heavy Duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicles Standards..................... 35 5.3.3 Large Nonroad Diesel Engines Proposed Rule .............................................. 35 5.3.4 Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standard ............ 35 6. MODELING STATUS ........................................................................................ 36 6.1 Status of Current Modeling 36 6.2 Preliminary Modeling Results.......................................................................... 37 6.3 Geographic Area Needing Further Controls ..................................................... 43 6.4 Anticipated Resource Constraints .................................................................... 44 APPENDIX A.............................................................................................................. 46 APPENDIX B   EARLY ACTION COMPACT........................................................ 57 APPENDIX C   LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADOPTIONS ....................................... 68 APPENDIX D   MODEL, EPISODE AND METEREOLOGY ............................... 69 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  1  1. Introduction 1.1 Background The Clean Air Act ( CAA), as amended in 1990 is the most recent version of a law first passed in 1970. The 1990 Amendment made some major changes in the act, by empowering the US Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) to set up permitting and enforcing programs for larger sources that release pollutants into the air.

In addition, the EPA's principal responsibilities under the Clean Air Act were:

  to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) for pollutants considered harmful to the public health and the environment ( Primary Standards limits to protect public health, including the health of " sensitive" population such as asthmatics, children and the elderly; Secondary Standards limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals and crops, vegetation and buildings)   to ensure that air quality standards are met or attained   to ensure that the sources of toxic air pollutants are controlled   to monitor the effects of the program On July 17, 1997, the EPA promulgated revised National Ambient and Air Quality Standards, addressing changes in the Ozone and Particulate Matter. Soon after, the American Trucking Association sued the EPA in the U. S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit disputing the legality of how the standard was set and how it would be implemented. In May of 1999 the Appeals Court ruled against the EPA finding that the Agency had acted in an unconstitutional manner in setting the standards and that the implementation approach improperly ignored CAA requirements dealing with ozone non attainment areas. The EPA appealed to the Supreme Court. In a decision dated March 26, 2001, the Supreme Court found that the EPA's setting of the standards was constitutional, and that the Agency could set NAAQS at levels necessary to protect public health and welfare without considering costs, however the EPA could not ignore Subpart 2 of the CAA when implementing the 8 hour ozone standard. The final designation of non attainment for the 8 hour ozone standard will take place on April 15, 2004.

On June 19, 2002, EPA Region 6 endorsed Texas' Protocol for an " Early Action Compact" ( EAC). The protocol described attainment of the 8 hour NAAQS for ozone and it provided for Early Reduction Compacts. The purpose of the Compact would be to:

  Develop early voluntary 8 hour air quality plans between Local, State government and the EPA   Apply to areas that are in attainment for the 1 hour ozone standard, but approach or monitor exceedances of the 8 hour standard   Designed to develop and implement control strategies, account for growth, and achieve and maintain the 8 hour ozone standard Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  2    Include all necessary elements of a comprehensive air quality plan, but tailored to local needs and driven by local decisions   Offers more expeditious timeline to achieve emission reductions   Provides for fail safe provisions for the area to revert to traditional State Implementation Plan ( SIP) process if specific milestones are not met ( Source: Air Quality Update   Sheila Holman   MPO Conference, Rocky Mount, September 26, 2002)

After review of the proposed Compact, the EPA decided to extend participation in the EAC to the entire country. Each area that met the criteria was to have an Early Action Compact Memorandum of Agreement signed by December 31, 2002.

Since the introduction of the revised 8 hour ozone standard, Cumberland County has registered values that will make this area non attainment for ozone. There are two monitoring sites in Cumberland County: one in Wade and one in Golfview ( Hope Mills). To establish if an area will be designated as non attainment for ozone, the North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources ( NC DENR) Division of Air Quality ( DAQ) averages the fourth highest reading during an ozone season ( May through September) for three consecutive years. If the average is of 0.085 ppm or above, the area will be designated as non attainment. Cumberland County has registered a reading of 0.087 for the years 2001 2003 for both monitoring sites, which is a " marginal" reading, making participation in the EAC a logical step for this area.

1.2 Stakeholders Involvement The Cumberland County Board of Commissioners approved the EAC and then Chairman Baggett signed the Memorandum of Agreement on December 13, 2002. During the following months, every municipality within the then Metropolitan Statistical Area signed a resolution of support of and participation in the Early Action Compact. Fort Bragg Military Reservation and the Fayetteville Area MPO also agreed to support this effort. Commissioners instructed the Planning and Inspections Director to oversee the EAC process and the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization ( FAMPO) Staff to provide administrative and logistical support. FAMPO staff immediately began to solicit volunteers to participate in the process. Efforts were made to contact environmental and health groups to join in this effort. Both the Sierra Club and the American Lung Association could not find individuals interested in participating, because there are no local chapters in this area, and volunteers would have to commute from the Raleigh/ Durham area. One of the volunteers is a member of the Sandhills Area Land Trust ( SALT) Board of Directors, but agreed to serve as a citizen Stakeholder, and not as a SALT representative. Thus no major environmental group is a member of the Cumberland County Stakeholders. Table 1 lists the names and affiliations of Stakeholders as of March 2004.

On April 3, 2003, the first Cumberland County Air Quality Stakeholders' Meeting took place in the Pate Room of the Library Headquarters. The purpose of the meeting was to give the newly appointed Stakeholders an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the compact efforts and to communicate with representatives of NC DENR and US EPA. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  3  Table 1  Air Quality Stakeholders of Cumberland County as of March 2004.

NAME AFFILIATION Dr. Adegoke O. Ademiluyi Fayetteville State University Department of Government and History Ms. Charlotte G. Agnew, RN Citizen Commissioner Eleanor Ayers Town of Stedman Commissioner Talmage S. Baggett Cumberland County COL. Gregory G. Bean Fort Bragg Military Reservation Mr. Steven Blanchard Public Work Commission Mr. George Breece Citizen Alderwoman Marguerite Corgan Town of Spring Lake Mayor Edwin S. Deaver Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Mr. Daniel Dodd Construction Industry  Barnhill Contracting Company Mr. Robert Duffy Major Industries Dr. Joseph Follet Medical Representative Mr. Michael Green Cohen & Green Mr. Demetrius Haddock Citizen Mr. Henry Holt Petroleum Distributor   Holt Oil Co.

Mr. Jay Jarvis Chemical Industry  Univar USA Inc Mr. Karl Legatski Citizen Mr. Bill Martin Cumberland County Business Council Councilman Robert Massey City of Fayetteville Dr. Harold E. Maxwell D. D. S. Cumberland County Board of Health Commissioner Eddie Maynor Town of Hope Mills Mr. Donovan McLaurin Home Builders Association Dr. Larry Norris Fayetteville Technical Community College Ms. Shirley Pillow Airport Commission Mr. Steven Schultz Cape Fear Health Systems Ms. Denise Sykes Town of Falcon, Godwin, Linden, Wade Mr. Stephen C. Waters, Sr. Ashland Industries Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  4  On May 15, 2003 the Stakeholders held the first regular meeting. At that time the Committee unanimously agreed to use the " Consensus" method to review and/ or approve related documents and processes and selected a Chairman, Mr. George Breece, and a Vice Chairman, Mayor Edwin S. Deaver. The Stakeholders approved a Logo ( see cover of this document) and adopted the goal to provide " A healthful environment for all current and future citizens of Cumberland County"

The Stakeholders met monthly for the first three months and now meet quarterly at a minimum, or as required.

The Stakeholders' Committee is supported by an Air Quality Technical Committee, which meets more often and provides the Stakeholders with technical information and administrative assistance. The Public Involvement does not end with the Stakeholders. An aggressive process of education and outreach into the community has been documented since the beginning of this endeavor, to include involvement of the Public School Systems ( Cumberland County and Fort Bragg/ Pope AFB), utility providers, and of any Organization requesting presentations. The Air Quality web page, maintained by FAMPO staff, provides information on the local effort and related links ( http:// www. fampo. org/ airquality. htm). The Fayetteville MPO is also a community partner in the " It All Adds Up to Cleaner Air" U. S. Department of Transportation ( US DOT)/ EPA initiative, and uses and distributes the material available through the IAAU web site.

Minutes of the Stakeholders' and Technical Committee meetings and list of outreach and presentations are on file and open to the public.

1.3 Cumberland County Characteristics The Cumberland County landscape is a mixture of urban and rural lands. The 2000 census population for Cumberland County was of 302,963, of which 20,540 is rural population and 282,423 is within the Urbanized Area Boundary. Population density is also varied, as shown in Table 2. Because of the difference in land use and densities, care was exercised when proposing and selecting strategies to be implemented by such Table 2. Census 2000 Demographic Information JURISDICTION POPULATION AREA ( Sq. Mi.) DENSITY/ Sq. Mi. Falcon 328 1.26 262.4 Fayetteville 121,015 59.96 2,059.2 Godwin 112 0.25 450.2 Hope Mills 11,237 6.24 1,844.6 Linden 127 0.48 263.8 Spring Lake 8,098 3.69 2,203.9 Stedman 664 1.37 484 Wade 480 1.32 367.6 Cumberland County 302,963 658.46 464.2 Source: U. S. CENSUS BUREAU   Census 2000 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  5  diverse jurisdictions. The Cantonment Area of Fort Bragg Military Reservation, one of the largest military installations in this country, and Pope Air Force Base are also located within Cumberland County, as shown on Figure 1. The presence of such a large military facility is an additional factor in the population makeup of our area. Cumberland County has a combined minority population of approximately 45%, with 34.9% African American. Statistical information shows that 12.8% of the overall population is below the poverty level ( Source: U. S. Census Bureau   Census 2000). All of these factors were taken into consideration when preparing for the implementation of the Early Action Plan.

Figure 1   Proposed Non Attainment Area for the Fayetteville MSA

Spring Lake Spring Lake Spring Lake Wade Hope Mills Hope Mills Hope Mills City of City of City of Fayetteville Fayetteville Fayetteville City of of City of Fayetteville Fayetteville Fayetteville Linden Linden Linden Falcon Falcon Falcon Godwin Godwin Godwin Stedman Stedman Fort Bragg Fort Bragg Fort Bragg Military Reservation Military Military Reservation and and and Pope AFB Pope AFB Pope AFB LEGEND CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOUNDARY FORT BRAGG AND POPE AFB MUNICIPALITIES METROPOLITAN AREA BOUNDARY

MONITOR LOCATION (

MAP NOT TO SCALE JUNE 2003  MC  FAMPO Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  6  1.31 Local and Regional Efforts In April 2001, inspired in part by Governor James Hunt's 1998 challenge on sustainability and smart growth, Fort Bragg Military Reservation embarked on the difficult journey to become a sustainable installation. As part of this effort, several individuals within the surrounding counties began working with the Military Installation to aid in the process, including the planning and implementation schedule of air quality initiatives for the metropolitan area. At that point, a sustainable region was the next logical and necessary step. In partnership with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and stakeholders from the surrounding counties and communities, Sustainable Sandhills began in February 2003, covering the environmental needs and wants of a six county region. Subsequently, a Steering Committee of interested participants was formed. Later, the Steering Committee became the Leadership Council and many of the individuals involved in this endeavor are also members of the Cumberland County Air Quality Stakeholders and/ or Technical Committee. The Sustainable Sandhills Action Plan describes five focus areas: Air, Energy, Land Use, Materials Use and Waste, and Water.

The local and regional efforts to attain sustainability began prior to the development of the EPA's Early Action Compact, demonstrating the commitment of this area in attaining and maintaining a healthy environment now, and for generations to come. The Cumberland County Air Quality Stakeholders/ Technical Committee, Sustainable Fort Bragg and Sustainable Sandhills participants are working together to ensure a united campaign and to avoid duplicated efforts.

1.4 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 D). 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: Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  7    July 10 15, 1995   June 20 24, 1996   June 25 30, 1996   July 10 15, 1997 The meteorological inputs were developed using MM5 are discussed in detail in Appendix D.

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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  8  2. Overview of Air Quality In Cumberland County 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 matter ( 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 Cumberland County and reports these levels to the EPA. According to the most recent data, Cumberland County 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 two ozone monitors in Cumberland County. One of the monitors is located northeast of Fayetteville ( Wade) and the other is southeast of Fayetteville ( Golfview), as shown in Figure 2 1.

Figure 2 1: Cumberland County 8 hour Ozone Monitor Design Values 2001   2003 For the 3 year periods 2000   2002 and 2001   2003, both monitors marginally violated the 8 hour ground level ozone NAAQS, see Table 2.1. The historical ozone monitoring data, including the years for which the design values are based on, is listed in Table 2.2. Monitor Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  9  design values are dependant on which three year period the 4th highest 8 Hour ozone concentrations are averaged.

Table 2.1 Cumberland County Ozone Monitor Design Values in parts per million ( ppm)

Monitor Name County 00 02 01 03 Wade Cumberland 0.086 0.086 Golfview ( Hope Mills) Cumberland 0.087 0.087 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 Wade 0.084 0.081 0.086 0.085 0.093 0.100 0.086 0.080 0.094 0.086 Golfview 0.085 0.087 0.091 0.085 0.098 0.093 0.083 0.084 0.095 0.082 NCDAQ forecasts ozone levels on a daily basis from May 1   September 30 for Fayetteville. 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 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 Fayetteville 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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  10  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 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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  11  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 Fayetteville 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 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, that contribute to NOx and VOC emissions. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  12  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  13  4. Emissions Inventories 4.1 Description 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 D. 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 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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  14  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 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 detail in Appendix D.

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 D.

The emissions summary for the 2000 current year modeling inventories for the Fayetteville EAC area is listed in Table 4.2 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  15  Table 4.2 1 2000 Current Year Modeling Emissions Source CO NOX VOC Point 1 3 4 Area 6 0.5 12 Nonroad Mobile 59 7 5 Highway Mobile 197 28 18 Biogenic 0 0.4 46 Total Emissions 263 39 85 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. 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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  16  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 D.

The emissions summary for the 2007 and 2012 future years modeling inventories for the Fayetteville 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 1 4 7 1 3 4 Area 7 0.5 12 7 0.6 13 Nonroad Mobile 68 6 4 68 5 3 Highway Mobile 108 19 10 81 11 8 Biogenic 0.0 0.4 46 0 0.4 46 Total Emissions 184 30 79 157 20 74 Note that in the maintenance year 2012 the emissions are expected to be lower than the attainment 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 Cumberland County decreased by 25%, from 39 tons per day ( TPD) in 2000 to 30 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.

Table 4.4 1: Estimated NOx and VOC emissions, in tons per day Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  17  Nonroad 20% Area 2% Point 13% Biogenic 1%

Mobile 64%

Nonroad 5% Area 15% Point 9%

Biogenic 58% Mobile 13% Nonroad 6% Area 14% Point 5%

Biogenic 54% Mobile 21% NOx Emissions VOC Emissions Source 2000 2007 2000 2007 Point 3 4 4 7 Area 0.5 0.5 12 12 Nonroad 7 6 5 4 Mobile 28 19 18 10 Biogenic 0.4 0.4 46 46 Total Emissions 39 30 85 79 Figure 4.4 1: 2000 Cumberland County Figure 4.4 2: 2007 Cumberland County Nonroad 17% Area 1% Point 8% Biogenic 1%

Mobile 73%

NOx Emissions by Source NOx Emissions by Source The total predicted VOC emissions for Cumberland County decreased by 7%, from 85 TPD in 2000 to 79 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. The percent of each source category Figure 4.4 3: 2000 Cumberland County Figure 4.4 4: 2007 Cumberland County VOC Emissions by Source VOC Emissions by Source There are few control measures expected for area and point sources in Cumberland County, so they continue to grow, however, there are significant decreases in highway and nonroad mobile source emissions to produce an overall decrease in both NOx and VOC emissions. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  18  HDDV 55%

HDGV 7% LDGT1 16% LDGT2 7% LDGV 14% Other 1%

HDDV 56%

HDGV 6% LDGT1 13% LDGT2 5% LDGV 20% Other 0% 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 Cumberland County. As shown in these figures, the relative contributions from vehicle types do not change greatly between 2000 and 2007. The estimated emissions for each vehicle type are tabulated in Table 4.4 2.

Figure 4.4 5: 2000 Cumberland County Figure 4.4 6: 2007 Cumberland County 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 15.5 10.3 Light duty gasoline vehicles 5.8 2.7 Light duty gasoline trucks ( 1) 3.7 2.9 Light duty gasoline trucks ( 2) 1.5 1.3 Heavy duty gasoline vehicles 1.8 1.3 Other 0.1 0.1 Total 28.4 18.6 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 Cumberland County. As can be seen in these figures, diesel construction equipment contributes about half of nonroad mobile source NOx for both years. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  19  Diesel Construction 50% Other Diesel 4% Railroad 13%

LPG Engines 11% 2 & 4 Stroke Engines 5% Aircraft 4% CNG Engines 1% Diesel Agricultural 6%

Diesel Commercial 2%

Diesel Industrial 4% Diesel Construction 51% Other Diesel 4% Railroad 16%

LPG Engines 8% 2 & 4 Stroke Engines 5% Aircraft 3% CNG Engines 1% Diesel Agricultural 6% Diesel Commercial 2%

Diesel Industrial 4% Figure 4.4 3: 2000 Cumberland County Nonroad NOx sources Figure 4.4 4: 2007 Cumberland County Nonroad NOx sources Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  20  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 and Raleigh/ Durham areas 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 Fayetteville EAC area is listed in Table 4.5 1. These emissions represent typical weekday emissions and are reported in tons per day. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  21  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 3 4 3 4 7 1 Area 0.5 0.5 0.5 12 12 12 Nonroad 7 6 7 5 4 8 Mobile 28 19 12 18 10 8 Biogenic 0.4 0.4 0.4 46 46 46 Total Emissions 39 30 23 85 79 75 The total predicted NOx emissions for the Fayetteville area decreased by ~ 41%, from 39 tons per day ( TPD) in 2000 to 23 TPD in 2010. The total predicted VOC emissions for the Fayetteville area decreased by ~ 12%, from 85 TPD in 2000 to 75 TPD in 2010. The 2010 highway mobile source emissions show a continuing decrease even from the 2007 emission levels for both NOx and VOC. The difference in the point source VOC emissions is believed to be an artifact of the differences between the EPA point source inventories used in the modeling. In future modeling runs a consistent North Carolina inventory will be used and grown using State specific growth factors instead of relying on EPA's future year inventories.

4.6 2017 Future Year Inventory The State is in the process of developing the 2017 future year emission inventory 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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  22  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. State and federal control measures were modeled for 2007, and are discussed in the Sections below.

5.1 Local EAC Control Measures Through the Stakeholders' and Public involvement process, the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area submitted to all of the County's jurisdictions and Fort Bragg a list of proposed strategies to be implemented in the efforts to decrease NOx and VOC emissions.

While reviewing the strategies to be implemented, the Early Action Compact and Milestones were carefully reviewed. This area is very supportive of this process and wishes for a healthful environment for its citizens and a high quality of life. Logistically, many of the strategies that could be selected and implemented require more time to develop and enforce than the two years outlined in the Milestones of the EAC. For this reason some of the following strategies have a deadline of December 2005, whereas efforts to develop new or amended ordinances and documents are already on going. It is the hope of all of the jurisdictions within the Fayetteville MSA that several Strategies will be implemented and enforced during this year, however, knowing that ordinances and new program implementations take time, we will maintain the December 2005 deadline, to assure that all of our efforts will be fully completed by the deadline.

Upon implementation of the strategies, the EAC binds local areas to submit semi annual reports to the EPA until 2007 and to perform modeling for the year 2012. The EAC signed by this area includes modeling for the year 2017, ten years after designation.

The Fayetteville MSA will continue to monitor and report on accomplishments beyond 2007 and will compile and submit such report during the review and update of the MPOs Long Range Transportation Plan, whether required every five years, as currently set, or every three years, if modified in the Reauthorization of TEA 21, the current Transportation Bill, to the year 2019. AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  23

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS LAND USE Landscape Ordinance Require landscaping of major nonresidential developments within the MSA, including retrofitting older developments It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. December 2005   County wide December 2003   Fort Bragg implements the Sustainable Installation Design Guide. Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Fort Bragg Conduct a Smart Growth Audit Conduct a benchmark land use assessment and compare it with Smart Growth policies. To complete in conjunction with new Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Plans It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. December 2005 Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  24

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS LAND USE Transit/ Pedestrian/ Mixed Use Oriented Development Add a mixed use alternative to zoning ordinance along transit lines and include sidewalks, shade trees, benches,

and landscaping as well as bike paths/ lanes, which will increase the desirability of walking and biking and promote the use of transit.

Work with schools and parks to facilitate pedestrian crossing from subdivisions to schools.

Fort Bragg is building upon existing mixed used development by adding pedestrian trails and sidewalks. NO QUANTIFICATION base line and extensive study would be required to obtain NOx emission reductions for Cumberland County.

NOx reductions are supported by the Portland, Oregon study cited on Page 26 of " Improving Air Quality Through Land Use Activities"

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ landguid. htm Portland Oregon study supports 8%

decrease in VMT and NOX emissions decrease of 6%. December 2005 Ongoing at Fort Bragg Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Fort Bragg Infill Development Promote infill and brownfield development in urban areas,

to utilize existing infrastructure and to decrease and/ or maintain VMTs.

Strengthening the downtown area. Economic Incentives are available for businesses in the downtown area through the Downtown Loan Program and Historic Properties, a public/ private partnership. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions by decreasing VMT ( promotes Pedestrian Transit and Mass Transit Use).

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing City of Fayetteville allows Zero Lot Line Subdivision Development encouraging infill development.

Fort Bragg will continue to redevelop existing urban land use. The majority of projects are built on the currently developed sites instead of new, undisturbed sites. Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Fort Bragg AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  25

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS LAND USE Shared Parking Facilities and Connectivity This will reduce the amount of impervious surface, which contributes to the heat island effect and reduces the amount of stop and go traffic. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions by decreasing VMT.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. December 2005 Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Urban Reforestation/

Green Space Public Works Commission has policies to maintain tree coverage in watershed areas and seek to expand land acquisition for preservation of the watershed.

NC Forest Services is seeking grant funding to plant at least 100 trees. Cumberland County to complete a public green space inventory of the entire county.

Conservation Subdivision Option It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions by reducing the heat island affect.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Ongoing March 2004 Under Investigation Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Hope Mills Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade The following is from the EPA Air and Radiation Office of Transportation and Air Quality " Improving Air Quality Through Land Use Activities",

EPA420 R 01 001, January 2001.

The physical characteristics and patterns of land development in a region can affect air quality by influencing the travel mode choices citizens have available to them. Development patterns that locate jobs, housing and recreation in closer proximity to each other, can mean shorter and fewer car and truck trips, thus reducing vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) and likely reducing motor vehicle emissions. Other development patterns have the potential to improve or mitigate air quality problems by providing and promoting alternatives to vehicular travel, such as mass transit, walking, or biking. The most significant urban form features that can affect travel activity are:

  Density = infill   Land Use Mix   incorporating different land uses ( e. g. recreation, housing, employment, shopping) with a development, a neighborhood, or a region.  26

  Transit Accessibility   locating high density commercial and residential development around transit stations, also known as " transit oriented development," or TOD.

  Pedestrian Environment/ Urban Design Factors   features that improve the pedestrian environment such as sidewalks, clearly marked crosswalks, shade trees, benches, and landscaping; also refers to features that improve the bicycling environment such as bike paths and dedicated bike lanes, bike parking and clear signs.

  Regional Patterns of Development   patterns of dispersion, centralization, or clustering of activities within a metropolitan area, as well as the relationship of development to highway and transit systems; involves the interrelationships between employment and residential development and the transportation connection between sets of origin and destination points The air quality impacts of land use activities on transportation depend on numerous factors, including density and location of development, amount of development, mix of uses, and access to transportation alternatives. The interaction of these factors is complex, and due to the variations from one development project to another, each development needs to be analyzed individually. Studies have been conducted in Portland, Oregon; Sacramento and Los Angeles, California; Baltimore, Maryland; and Washington, DC that support VMT reduction associated with land use strategies over a 20 year time horizon. AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  27

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS MOBILE SOURCES Alternative Fuels and AF Vehicles Fort Bragg has developed a plant to convert its fleet to Bio

Diesel 20 and Ethanol E85. This project includes an AF fueling station.

185 vehicles will be converted to B20 ( 100,000 gallons of diesel fuel).

158 Flexible Fuel vehicles to use approximately 55,000 gallons of E85 per year. CACPS was used to get these approximate reductions:

VOC = 326 lbs. Per year This strategy shows a slight increase in NOx emissions ( 102 lbs./ yr), however it also shows reductions in all other pollutants and PM, which could be a potential problem for this area NOx = 2261 lbs. Per year VOC = 3261 lbs. Per year December 2005 Fort Bragg Idling Restrictions Festival Park will include electrical outlets for use to reduce truck idling during festivals. It is expected that this project will decrease NOx emissions.

Emission reductions will be quantified upon project completion and based upon events scheduled. October 2005 City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Stedman Wade Retrofitting Diesel School Buses Fort Bragg has received a grant to fund retrofitting of school buses serving the Fort Bragg Schools. It is expected that this project will decrease NOx emissions. Summer 2004 Fort Bragg The Fayetteville MSA reviewed many AF and AFV possibilities, but, because the infrastructure is not in place at this time and developing it would be cost prohibitive and it could not be implemented by December 2005, no other governments agreed to participate. Mobile source strategies will be reviewed and evaluated for long range planning in this area. AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  28

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS TRANSPORTATION Using Intelligent Transportation Systems ( ITS) and Dynamic Message Signs ( DMS) for Congestion Management and Ozone Alerts Project U 3635 Closed Loop Signal System will provide a new area wide closed loop signal system.

Dynamic Message Signs will be installed at congested intersections/ corridors.

Expansion of existing continuous flow right turn lanes in the urbanized area. It is expected that this project will decrease NOx emissions by decreasing traffic congestion.

It is currently difficult to quantify this effort, however other examples of this system have shown anywhere from 0 20%

reductions in traffic congestion resulting in less idling, travel time, and, as a result, NOx 2004 is expected completion year for Project U 3635. Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Hope Mills Enhance Mass Transit System Redesign routes to be more convenient to riders.

Increase frequency of transit services to 15 minutes.

Fort Bragg initiated a shuttle service providing service around the post and connecting with municipal transit. CACPS was used to get an approximate reduction:

VOC = 17,698 lbs per year NOx = 5,533 lbs per year CACPS was used to get an approximate reduction:

VOC = 147 lbs per year NOx = 54 lbs per year December 2005  FAST Ongoing   Fort Bragg City of Fayetteville Fort Bragg Formulate Car and Van Pooling Increase Rural Transportation Paratransit Development of Database to connect riders. Vanpooling and carpooling programs are being advertised by transit provider.

Rural transportation is currently being expanded to connect outlying areas of the county and smaller municipalities. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

Quantification will be provided when implemented. December 2004 City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Stedman Wade AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  29

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS TRANSPORTATION Encourage Park and Ride for Large Events FAST and Private Transportation providers ( i. e. Festival of Flight) are providing shuttle at nominal cost to public.

For Bragg provides internal transportation services for large on post events at no cost to the rider. Emission reductions will be quantified for each event and included in semi annual updates. Ongoing City of Fayetteville Fort Bragg AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  30

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS CONSERVATION Use renewable energy sources when available ( i. e. solar and methane) Cumberland County Landfill harvests methane and through a contract with Biomass Energy, sells the energy to Cargill Inc., a local industry. Cargill Inc. is using 1000 cubic feet/ minute of landfill gas. Biomass Energy estimates that this usage can be increased to 1600 cubic feet/ minute over the next 4 5 years.

Encourage residents and businesses to support NC Green Power, a nonprofit program working to encourage development of renewable energy sources. A $ 4.00 contribution purchases one block of green power ( equivalent to 100 kilowatt hours). Estimated NOx reduction = 5 tons per year.

AP42, Table 2.4 5 was used to obtain emission reduction estimates. NOx savings were approximated using the flare NOx emission rate of 40 lb/ million cubic feet, 252 million cubic feet/ min of landfill gas usage ( which is 600 cubic feet/ minute multiplied by 7000 operating hours per year).

Update: Working with NC Green Power to obtain the number of blocks of green power purchased by Cumberland County Residents. Ongoing Spring 2004   Promote during AQ outreach, include link on County website. Cumberland County Countywide Retrofitting of public buildings.

Encourage construction of energy efficient buildings. Through the " Guaranteed Energy Savings Contract", the County will engage a company to evaluate and upgrade buildings equipment and material to increase energy efficiency.

PWC is a member of the " Good Cents" Housing Program.

Participating builders receive heat pump rebates and free listing of energy efficient homes for sale in the local newspaper and on the PWC website. Smaller municipalities are also promoting the " Good Cents" Housing Program.

Fort Bragg is currently implementing energy reduction per Executive Order 13123 and as part of its Sustainability Plan by partnering with Honeywell Corporation to retrofit buildings on Fort Bragg ( replacing inefficient interior/

exterior lighting, installing new HVAC systems with energy controls for optimum building performance. Fort Bragg also constructs new homes and retrofits older homes to meet " ENERGY STAR" standards. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions by reducing the output needed from fossil fuel plants to heat and cool homes and public building.

We are still trying to quantify emission reductions, but feel this strategy is directionally correct. December 2004   " Guaranteed Energy Savings Contract"

Ongoing   Promotion of " Good Cents"

Housing Program Ongoing   Fort Bragg Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Fort Bragg AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  31

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS CONSERVATION Encourage Construction and Use of Energy Efficient Equipment.

Promote Purchase of " Green"/

less polluting products. Fort Bragg is implementing energy reduction strategies including low NOX burners in new major emission sources, is increasing the use of water based paints to reduce VOC emissions and has installed a paint booth which uses only water based paint, and is researching alternatives to replace two incinerators. These strategies will lower NOx and VOC emissions. Research efforts will include emission reductions. Ongoing   specified under current contract.

Summer 2004   initiate research on alternatives for the incinerators. Fort Bragg.

Landfill gas to energy projects provide environmental value by capturing methane emissions from landfills and displacing fossil fuel.

Landfill gas is an attractive renewable energy alternative for many applications because of its 24 X 7 availability and high capacity factor ( between 95 and 98%).

Burning landfill gas converts methane into carbon dioxide, and therefore dramatically reduces the impact on climate change by reducing greenhouse gas ( GHG) emissions. Landfill gas ( LFG) procurement is both an opportunity for corporations to reduce their GHG emissions footprint and to create a more diversified energy portfolio.

The World Resources Institute published a report, Corporate Guide to Green Power Markets. " Opportunities with Landfill Gas" is Installment 2 of this report. The Group has found that the most environmentally and economically attractive use of landfill gas, particularly in the absence of policy incentives such as production tax credits, is a medium Btu " direct use" application, which Cargill, Inc. is currently using. AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  32

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS AWARENESS Student Outreach through Education Systems Ongoing effort using the " GLOBE" program, a worldwide hands on, primary and secondary school based educational science program. This is a cooperative effort, led in the US by a federal interagency program supported by NASA ( National Aeronautics & Space Administration), NSF ( National Science Foundation), EPA ( Environmental Protection Agency) and the U. S. State Department. There are currently 9,000 teachers in our area who are trained and present the program that promotes environmental stewardship and research.

Staff, Air Quality Stakeholders, and Technical Committee members are also providing classroom presentations upon request. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Stedman Wade Public Education/ Outreach at Community Events & Churches Ongoing effort through the Speakers Bureau. Staff and volunteers participate in festivals, fairs, community meetings, etc to provide information on air quality and the individual measures that can be taken to improve the air we breathe. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Speakers Bureau Participation in radio/ television programs to reach the general public with air quality information and tips,

advertise meetings and involve the local newspapers and churches in disseminating information to increase public awareness and participation in implementing voluntary reduction strategies. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Air Quality Web Page Maintained and updated by FAMPO ( Fayetteville Metropolitan Planning Organization). Provides information on upcoming meetings, seasonal air quality tips, the Early Action Compact program and other relevant topics. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions. This strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Cumberland County for all participating agencies AIR QUALITY STAKEHOLDERS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SELECTED OZONE CONTROL STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE  33

STRATEGY STRATEGY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATE OF NOX REDUCTIONS ( if available) IMPLEMENTATION DATE ADOPTING JURISDICTIONS AWARENESS Promote Bus Ridership for Youth Fayetteville Area System of Transit ( FAST) is promoting bus tours for children of all ages, educating them on how to use the transit system and the benefits of using transit ( including air quality and health issues).

Various organizations have tours for groups ( i. e. Boys and Girls Club) that include giving them free bus passes. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions by increasing future mass transit use and decreasing VMT.

The emission reductions are not currently quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing City of Fayetteville Air Quality Educational System at the local libraries. Air Quality handouts and flyers available at all branches.

Children's summer program. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not likely quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing Summer of 2004 Cumberland County for all participating agencies Air Quality poster/ essay contest for schools. Air Quality related contest to raise air awareness. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not likely quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct. Ongoing ( public schools)

Spring 2005 ( public and private schools) Cumberland County for all participating agencies Fort Bragg Discourage Open Burning on Ozone Alert Days ( orange or above) Representation on OBOT ( NC DAQ Open Burning Outreach Team). Will assist NCDAQ in distributing outreach material targeted to reduce open burning. It is believed that this strategy will lower NOX emissions.

The emission reductions are not likely quantifiable, but this strategy is directionally correct.

OBOT will provide materials for public outreach efforts. Ongoing Cumberland County City of Fayetteville Falcon Godwin Linden Spring Lake Stedman Wade Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  34  5.2 State Control Measures 5.2.1 Clean Air Bill The 1999 Clean Air Bill expanded the vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program from 9 counties to 48, and improved the testing method. Vehicles are being tested using the onboard diagnostic system, which indicates NOx emissions, among other pollutants. The previously used tailpipe test did not measure NOx. The inspection and maintenance program was instituted in Cumberland County on July 1, 2003 and is quantifiable and enforceable. This is not a federally mandated program therefore we take credit for it in the SIP and it results to a 4% of mobile NOx reduction in Cumberland County.

5.2.2 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.

5.2.3 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.

5.2.4 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 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.

5.3 Federal Control Measures 5.3.1 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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  35  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.

5.3.2 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.

5.3.3 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.

5.3.4 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 allterrain 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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  36  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  37  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  38  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  39  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  40  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  41  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  42  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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  43  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).

Equation 6.3 1 DVF = DVC x RRF 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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  44  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. 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 both monitors in the Cumberland County 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 Cumberland County EAC Area Monitor DVC ( ppm) RRF DVF ( ppm) Wade 0.088 0.91 0.080 Golfview ( Hope Mills) 0.087 0.90 0.078 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 Fayetteville EAC area continuing to attain 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 Cumberland County EAC Area Monitor DVC ( ppm) RRF DVF ( ppm) Wade 0.088 0.85 0.074 Golfview ( Hope Mills) 0.087 0.85 0.073 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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  45  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. Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  46  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 Gates 0.08 0.03 0.10 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  47  Stationary Point Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Rowan 2.28 37.52 8.27 15.19 19.17 11.65 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  48  Stationary Point Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Catawba 7.04 0.43 11.22 7.48 0.44 11.37 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  49  Stationary Area Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Mitchell 1.47 0.11 0.91 1.52 0.11 0.93 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  50  Stationary Area Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  51  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 Halifax 8.68 2.13 0.92 9.77 1.86 0.83 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  52  Nonroad Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Stokes 8.18 0.68 0.72 9.54 0.61 0.64 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  53  Nonroad Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Cleveland 68.95 10.19 5.97 37.44 6.17 3.49 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  54  Highway Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 Northampton 23.32 4.79 1.95 13.92 2.79 1.24 Fayetteville MSA EAP March 31, 2004  55  Highway Mobile Sources Emissions in tons/ day 2000 2007 County CO NOx VOC CO NOx VOC 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 APPENDIX B   EARLY ACTION COMPACT Application of the Early Action Compact for 8 hour State Implementation Plan Development in the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area North Carolina An Agreement of Partnership by USEPA Region 4, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners December 2002  57  I. Purpose of the Early Action Compact The Early Action Compact ( EAC) is an agreement between the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( DENR), local governments and organizations, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 ( EPA) office. This EAC represents a partnership of Local, State, and Federal agency efforts to develop a State implementation plan ( SIP) for the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area. The SIP is the technical analysis showing what control measures are necessary to attain the 8 hour ozone standard, as well as the adopted rules for those measures. The SIP will be a combination of Local, State, and Federal rules. This EAC includes the memorandum of agreement by all parties, the protocol for the local Early Action Plan ( EAP) and the overall SIP development and the schedule the plan development will follow. The result of this EAC is that the SIP will be developed early, the control measures implemented sooner, and the 8 hour ozone standard achieved in a more expeditious manner than following the normal SIP development timeline. Under the EAC schedule, the SIP is due no later than December 31, 2004. Under the normal schedule, the SIP is due three years after the nonattainment designation ( expected in 2004, so the SIP would be due in 2007). The ultimate result of the EAC approach is that North Carolinians will breathe clean air sooner. If any party to the EAC fails to achieve a milestone, then the nonattainment designation becomes effective upon EPA finding that failure, and all consequences of nonattainment designation apply to the area. The EAC contains necessary and appropriate mechanisms to return the area to the regular nonattainment planning process should any party fail to meet the agreed upon milestones contained in the EAC.

II. Background and History of Air Quality Ozone, or O3, is formed in the atmosphere when two primary pollutants, volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen react in the presence of sunlight. DENR operates the ozone monitors from April 1 through October 31 of each year, though most exceedances, or days above the ozone standard, occur in the May through September timeframe. There are currently two ozone standards that have been set by EPA to protect the public's health. The first standard is a 1 hour standard, which was set in 1977. The standard is set at 0.12 parts per million ( ppm) ozone in the air. The Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area has always met the 1 hour ozone standard.

The second standard is the new 8 hour ozone standard, set by EPA in 1997. This new standard is based on the maximum 8 hour average concentration and is set at .08 ppm. This compact is intended to address the new 8 hour standard and how the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA) will  58  attain this new standard. There are two monitors in the Fayetteville MSA   one in the Town of Wade, and one in the Town of Hope Mills ( Golfview), both of which are in Cumberland County. Both monitors currently violate the 8 hour ozone standard.

III. Current Air Quality Levels Ozone data is evaluated over a three year period to determine compliance with the ozone standard. The current design value based on 2000 to 2002 ozone season data is as follows: Wade monitor  .087 ppm, Golfview monitor  .087 ppm. Table 1 presents the number of days that each monitor exceeded the 8 hour ozone standard over the most recent three years.

Table 1 Number of Days Over the 8 Hour Standard Year 2000 2001 2002 Wade 4 2 17 Golfview 3 3 14 IV. Components of the Early Action Compact A. Area Covered by the Compact The area covered by this compact is the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area, which includes all of Cumberland County.

B. Participating Agencies in the Compact The State agency will be the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. USEPA will be represented by the Region 4 office. At a minimum, the local agencies will be represented by the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners. ( or designee) for the county. Other local organizations are invited to participate.

C. Requirements of the Early Action Compact There are certain key requirements that will be addressed in the EAC and in the SIP development. These requirements are described in more detail below: i. Milestones and Reporting The EAC must identify key milestones and an associated schedule. The milestones include the development of the emissions inventories, base case modeling evaluation, identification of local measures, evaluation of local measures, adoption of local measures, and submittal of SIP incorporating local measures. Status reports are required every six months. The status reports  59  must contain information regarding the completion of the milestones, or progress on an upcoming milestone.

ii. Emissions Inventory The NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( NCDENR) will be responsible for developing several emissions inventories for the project. Episode specific inventories will be developed for the July 1995, June 1996, and July 1997 events. Additionally, a current year inventory will be developed for 2000 or 2001 for purposes of applying the attainment test. Finally, future year inventory for 2007, 2012 and 2017 will also be developed.

iii. Modeling The NCDENR will be responsible for conducting the meteorological and air quality modeling analysis. The NCDENR will conduct the modeling analysis based on USEPA's " Draft Guidance on the use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Determinations for the 8 hour Ozone NAAQS", May 1999 ( EPA 454/ R 99 004). The technical analysis will follow the guidance as facilitated by the EPA Regional office.

iv. Control Strategies All of the signatories will participate in the evaluation and selection of control strategies. The Local agency signatories will primarily be responsible for the identification of the local measures. The NCDENR will be responsible for the state measures and for the development of the complete SIP including state and local measures.

v. Maintenance for Growth A key component of the plan is the annual check of growth from the mobile and stationary source sector. In addition, a projection of growth to 2012 is required by the protocol. An additional projection of growth to 2017 will also be performed.

vi. Public Involvement The development of the control measures and the SIP will be done through a public involvement process. Stakeholders from throughout the community will be invited to participate in this open process.  60  Fayetteville Area Early Action Compact Memorandum of Agreement This Early Action Compact ( EAC) is a Memorandum of Agreement between the local government representing the county of Cumberland, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( NCDENR) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). It is for the express purpose of developing and implementing an Early Action Plan ( EAP) that will reduce ground level ozone concentrations in the Fayetteville Metropolitan Statistical Area to comply with the 8 hour ozone standard by December 31, 2007, and maintain the standard beyond that date. Failure to meet these obligations results in immediate reversion to the traditional nonattainment process.

I. General Provisions A. The signatory parties commit to develop, implement and maintain the EAP according to EPA Protocol for Early Action Compacts issued June 19, 2002, and adhere to all terms and conditions stated in the guidelines. See Appendix A for EPA Protocol for Early Action Compacts Designed to Achieve and Maintain the 8 Hour Ozone Standard.

B. If the region does not meet all the terms of the EAC, including meeting agreed upon milestones, then it will forfeit its participation, deferral of the area's non attainment designation will be withdrawn and its non attainment designation for the 8 hour ozone NAASQ will become effective.

C. Before formal adoption into the SIP, this agreement may be modified or terminated by mutual consent of all signatory parties, or any party may withdraw from the agreement. The local government signatories will approve the local control measures before they are submitted to NCDENR for inclusion in the SIP. Once the EAP is incorporated into the SIP, any modifications will be treated as SIP revisions.

D. The signature date of the EAC is the start date of the agreement's term and the agreement remains in effect until December 31, 2007.  61  II. Local Government Responsibilities The local government agrees to develop and implement a local EAP that will, when combined with State and Federal measures, demonstrate attainment by year's end 2007 of the 8 hour ozone standard and maintenance until at least 2012. The local government will develop this plan in coordination with NCDENR, EPA, stakeholders and the public. The EAP will include a process to monitor and maintain long term compliance with the standard. The local government will develop and submit a list of control measures being considered for adoption as part of the EAP by June 16, 2003. The EAP will be submitted to NCDENR and EPA for review by January 31, 2004, and finalized by March 31, 2004, for inclusion in the SIP by December 31, 2004.

In the event a development or issue arises that may impact performance or progress toward milestones ( including if a milestone will be or has been missed and/ or if a termination or modification has been requested), the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Staff, serving as the Lead Planning Agency, or the signatory party responsible will notify all other signatories as soon as possible.

III. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources The state, represented by NCDENR, will provide support to areas throughout the planning and implementation process, including: 1. Development of emission inventories, modeling process, trend analysis and quantification and comparison of emission reduction strategies;

2. Necessary information on all Federal and State adopted emission reduction strategies which affect the area;

3. Technical and strategic assistance, as appropriate, in the selection and implementation of emission reduction strategies;

4. Technical and planning assistance in developing and implementing processes to address the impact of emissions growth beyond the attainment date;

5. Maintenance of monitors and reporting and analysis of monitoring data;

6. Support for public education efforts;

7. Coordinate communication between local areas and EPA to facilitate continuing EPA review of local work;  62  8. Expeditious review of the locally developed EAP, and if deemed adequate, propose modification of the SIP to adopt the EAP;

9. Adoption of emission reduction strategies into the SIP as expeditiously as possible. The final complete SIP revision must be completed, adopted, and submitted by the state to EPA by December 31, 2004.

IV. The Environmental Protection Agency 1. The EPA will provide technical assistance to the state and local area in the development of the early action plan.

2. The EPA will take final action by September 30, 2005 on any SIP revisions submitted by December 31, 2004 pursuant to the compact 3. When EPA's 8 hour implementation guidelines call for designations, if the area has met the first two milestones ( signed compact by December 31, 2002 and list of measures being considered for local adoption by June 16, 2003), EPA will defer the effective date of nonattainment designation and related requirements for participating areas that fail to meet the 8 hour ozone standard until September 30, 2005, contingent upon the area's submission of local control measures by March 31, 2004. As part of the SIP approval mentioned in item 2 above and assuming the SIP is approvable, EPA will propose as part of the SIP approval action, the second deferral of the effective date of non attainment designation until December 31, 2006. If the June 30, 2006 progress assessment is submitted, implementation of the SIP measures have occurred, and air quality improvement is taking place, EPA will propose and, if appropriate, take final action on the third deferral of the effective date until April 15, 2008.

4. Provided that the monitors in the area reflect attainment by December 31, 2007, EPA will move expeditiously to designate the area as attainment and impose no additional requirements.

5. If at any time the area does not meet all the terms of this EAC, including meeting agreed upon milestones, then it will forfeit its participation, deferral of the area's non attainment designation may be withdrawn and its non attainment designation will become effective. The EPA will offer such an area no delays, exemptions or other favorable treatment because of its previous participation in this program.

6. If the area violates the standard as of December 31, 2007, and the area has had a nonattainment designation deferred, the non attainment designation will become effective no later than April 15, 2008. The state will then submit a revised attainment demonstration SIP revision according to the Clean Air Act ( CAA) and EPA's 8 hour implementation rule, unless the 8 hour implementation schedule  63  requires SIPs from 8 hour non attainment areas before December 31, 2008. In that event, a revised attainment demonstration SIP revision for the participating area will be due as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2008. In no event will EPA extend the attainment date for the area beyond that required by the CAA and/ or EPA's 8 hour implementation rule.

7. The region will not be allowed to renew this EAC after December 31, 2007, or to initiate a new compact if it has previously forfeited its participation.

V. The Protocol for Completing the EAP and the 8 Hour Ozone SIP A. Milestones and Reporting 1. Milestones EAC/ CAAP Milestones ( Responsible Party) December 31, 2002 Signed EAC ( All parties) Initial modeling emissions inventory completed ( NCDENR) Conceptual modeling completed ( NCDENR) May 31, 2003 Base case modeling completed ( NCDENR) June 16, 2003 Identify and describe local strategies being considered for inclusion in local clean air plans ( Local Governments) June 30, 2003 Biannual status reports to begin ( Lead Planning Agency/ NCDENR) Future year emissions inventory modeling completed ( NCDENR) Emissions inventory comparison and analysis completed ( NCDENR) October 31, 2003 Future case modeling completed ( NCDENR) Attainment maintenance analysis completed ( NCDENR) One or more modeled control cases completed ( NCDENR) Local emission reduction strategies selected ( Local Governments) January 31, 2004 Submission of preliminary EAP to NCDENR and EPA ( Local Governments)

Final revisions to modeled control cases completed ( NCDENR) Final revisions to local emission reduction strategies completed ( Local Governments) Final revisions to attainment maintenance analysis completed ( NCDENR) March 31, 2004 Submission of final EAP to NCDENR and EPA ( Local Governments) December 31, 2004 EAP adopted and incorporated into the SIP, SIP submitted to EPA ( NCDENR) December 31, 2005 Local emission reduction strategies implemented no later than this date ( Implementing Agency) June 30, 2006 Biannual status reports on implementation of measures begin on this date ( Lead Planning Agency/ NCDENR) December 31, 2007 Attainment of the 8 hour standard no later than this date ( All Parties)  64  2. Reporting In order to facilitate self evaluation and communication with EPA, NCDENR, stakeholders, and the public, the region will assess and report progress towards milestones in a regular, public process, at least every six months.

B. Emissions Inventories 1. An initial modeling emissions inventory will be developed by May 31, 2003. This inventory will include: a. Emissions modeling data for a July 1995, June 1996 and July 1997 episode, all of which are representative of a typical ozone season event and meets EPA episode selection guidance; b. MOBILE6 data with link based Travel Demand Model ( TDM) mobile data in urban areas; c. NONROAD model data adjusted for local equipment populations and usage rates where available; d. Area source data, based on local survey data, when possible.

2. A 2007 future year modeling emissions inventory will be developed by July 31, 2003. This inventory will sufficiently account for projected future growth in ozone precursor emissions through 2007, particularly from stationary, non road and on road mobile sources.

3. Selection of specific episode inventories was partially determined by the conceptual model, which reflects an analysis of meteorological conditions typical of high ozone events. The conceptual model will be updated by May 31, 2003.

4. Emissions inventories will be compared and analyzed for trends in emission sources over time. The emissions inventory comparison and analysis will be completed by October 31, 2003.

C. Modeling 1. Base case modeling will be completed by May 31, 2003 and future case modeling will be completed by October 31, 2003. One or more modeled control cases will be completed by January 31, 2004, with final revisions completed by March 31, 2004. All modeling: a. Will be SIP quality, consistent with the latest EPA modeling guidance, and performed within EPA's accepted margin of accuracy;  65  b. Will be carefully documented; c. Will sufficiently account for projected future growth in ozone precursor emissions; d. Will be accomplished by NCDENR and reviewed by EPA; e. Will be used to determine the effectiveness of NOx and/ or VOC reductions. The control case( s) will be used to determine the relative effectiveness of different emission reduction strategies and to aid in the selection of appropriate emission reduction strategies.

D. Emission Reduction Strategies 1. All adopted Federal and State emission reduction strategies that have been or will be implemented by the December 31, 2007 attainment date will be included in base, future and control case modeling. 2. Additional local emission reduction strategies needed to demonstrate attainment for the Fayetteville MSA by December 31, 2007 will be selected by January 31, 2004, with final revisions completed by March 31, 2004. The selected local strategies will be implemented as soon as practical, but no later than December 31, 2005.

3. Local emission reduction strategies will be specific, quantified, permanent and enforceable. The strategies will also include specific implementation dates and detailed documentation and reporting processes.

4. Voluntary strategies can play a supporting role in the EAP. If emission reductions from voluntary strategies are quantified and credit is taken for them in the EAP, those emission reductions will be enforceable. Additional strategies must be implemented to meet those quantified reduction requirements if quantified voluntary strategies fail. This is true for all quantified emission reductions, which must be made part of the SIP.

5. Local emission reduction strategies will be designed and implemented by the community with stakeholder participation.

6. Local emission reduction strategies will be incorporated by the state into the SIP. In the event that the region desires to add, delete or substitute strategies after SIP submittal, the region will request a modification. EAP modifications will be treated as SIP revisions and facilitated by the state.

E. Maintenance for Growth 1. The EAP will include a component to address emissions growth at least five years beyond December 31, 2007, ensuring that the area will remain in attainment of the 8 hour standard during that period. Attainment  66  maintenance analysis will be completed by January 31, 2004, with final revisions completed by March 31, 2004. The analysis will employ one or more of the following or any other appropriate techniques necessary to make such a demonstration: a. Modeling analysis showing ozone levels below the 8 hour standard in 2012; b. An annual review of growth ( especially mobile and stationary source) to ensure emission reduction strategies and growth assumptions are adequate; c. Identification and quantification of federal, state, and/ or local measures indicating sufficient reductions to offset growth estimates.

2. A continuing planning process that includes modeling updates and modeling assumption verification ( particularly growth assumptions) will be conducted concurrent with the tracking and reporting process for the EAP. This update and verification will be an ongoing process between the signatories, stakeholders and the public. Modeling updates and planning processes must consider and evaluate: a. All relevant actual new point sources; b. Impacts from potential new source growth; and c. Future transportation patterns and their impact on air quality in a manner that is consistent with the most current adopted Long Range Transportation Plan and most current trend and projections of local motor vehicle emissions.

3. If the review of emissions growth in conjunction with the continuing planning process demonstrates that adopted emission reduction strategies are inadequate to address growth in emissions, additional measures will be added to the EAP.

4. In the event that the continuing planning process identifies the need to add, delete, or substitute emission reduction strategies after the EAP has been incorporated into the SIP, the local area will initiate, and NCDENR will facilitate a SIP revision to accommodate changes.