1 MOBILE6 -Input and Modeling Guidance -SIP and Conformity Policy North American Vehicle Emission Control Conference Atlanta, April 4, 2001 Gary Dolce.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SIP Development Process Overview For the Great Smoky Mountain National Park Transportation Partners Requirements, Scenarios and Timelines Laura Boothe,
Advertisements

1 SAFETEA-LU Changes to the Transportation Conformity Rule February 21, 2008.
1 Estimating On-Road Vehicle Emissions Using CONCEPT Alison K. Pollack Ralph Morris ENVIRON International Corporation.
Emission Factor Modeling Graciela Lubertino, HGAC.
Ozone Modeling over the Western U.S. -- Impact of National Controls on Ozone Trends in the Future Rural/Urban Ozone in the Western United States -- March.
Session 7: Other Conformity Rule Changes FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.
Transportation Conformity and Development of Emission Budgets.
MOBILE6 and Compressed Natural Gas Vehicles Janet Kremer U.S. EPA Office of Mobile Sources.
A Review ISO 9001:2015 Draft What’s Important to Know Now
November 2008 Michael Smith (SAIC) Steve Lockwood (PB Consult) NCHRP Project SP20-59 (17) CAPTA Costing Asset Protection: An All Hazards Guide for Transportation.
PM Control Strategies for Mobile Sources Presentation for PM2.5 Implementation Workshop June 21, 2007 Gary Dolce U.S. EPA Office of Transportation and.
B.H. Baek and Catherine Seppanen Institute for the Environment-UNC at Chapel Hill Allison DenBleyker, Chris Lindhjem and Michele Jimenez ENVIRON International.
1 An Update on EPA Attainment Modeling Guidance for the 8- Hour Ozone NAAQS Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS/EMAD/AQMG November 16, 2005.
Knowledge to Shape Your Future Electric / Gas / Water Information collection, analysis and application EE Potential Summary Study Overview CALMAC Meeting.
Fuel Economy in Harris County-2007 Graciela Lubertino, PhD.
Best Practices Related to Research Problem Identification, Scoping, and Programming: A Researcher’s View Martin Pietrucha, Director The Thomas D. Larson.
Air Quality and Conformity Issues James M. Shrouds, Director Office of Natural and Human Environment Federal Highway Administration AASHTO SCOE Meeting.
0 Office of Transportation and Air Quality Update for Air Directors: Transportation and Air Quality Christopher Grundler Deputy Director NACAA Spring Meeting.
Overview of EPA Policy and Guidance Supporting Innovation Presented by: Lydia Wegman Director, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division EPA’s Office.
Oil and Gas Workgroup Summary October 21-23, 2009 Denver.
1 The Renewable Fuels Standard: A Status Report Dr. Michael Shelby EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality March 7 th.
SIP Steering Committee Meeting March 29,  In October 2011, EPA issued draft SIP and modeling guidance related to the 1-hour SO2 standard issued.
Recent Developments in Transportation Conformity Beverly Chenausky Multimodal Planning Division – Air Quality Breakout Session: Transportation Conformity/Air.
MOVES Briefing for NACAA EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality March 3, 2009.
Early Action Compacts Presented by Karen Borel EPA Region 4 March 25, 2003.
Inventory Needs and Legal Requirements Martin Johnson Emission Inventory Workshop Air Resources Board March 13, 2006.
WRAP Committee and Forum Updates WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT October 15, 2003.
MOBILE6 On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Model 5-Day Training Course Presented in Seattle the week of September 10, 2001 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
1 CCOS Update November 3, 2006 PC Meeting Project Status –Completed Projects Results –On-Going Projects Status Plan for CCOS Final Phase –Guiding Principles.
OTC Attainment Planning Update SIP Steering Committee April 13, 2011.
SIP Improvement: Current initiatives Anna Marie Wood Director Air Quality Policy Division Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U.S. EPA WESTAR.
Stationary and Area Source Committee Update OTC Committee Meeting September 13, 2012 Washington, D.C. Hall of the States 1.
1 EPA’s Climate Change Strategy Robert J. Meyers Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation December 3, 2007.
Sunil Kumar and Eulalie Lucas MOVES Task Force Meeting MWCOG August 18, 2009 Development of Inputs, Outputs, and Procedures for EPA’s Draft MOVES2009 Model.
Air Resources Board California Environmental Protection Agency Ozone SIP Schedule and CCOS Products Policy Committee Meeting John DaMassa April 18, 2002.
Best Available Retrofit Technology Rule - Colorado David R. Ouimette Colorado Air Pollution Control Division.
Mobile Source Committee Update OTC Committee Meeting September 13 th, 2012 Washington, DC 1.
Imperial County PM 10 SIP: Update Imperial County APCD SIP Workgroup Meeting September 24, 2008.
Emission Projections National RPO Meeting St. Louis, MO November 6, 2003 Presented by: Gregory Stella VISTAS Technical Advisor – Emission Inventories.
Missoula Air Quality Conformity Analysis Required by Federal and Montana Clean Air Act – Transportation-specific air quality requirements enacted in Federal.
2014 Program Priorities January 23, Outline Major 2014 Goals 2013 Accomplishments Major 2014 Activities Partnerships 2.
Transportation Conformity Overview H-GAC Conformity Workshop May 30, 2007.
COG/DTP Staff Eulalie Lucas and Erin Morrow Comments on Draft MOVES 2009 International Emission Inventory Conference April 16-17, 2009 Baltimore,Maryland.
Proposed Revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality Models
California Energy Commission Joint Lead Commissioner Workshop on Transportation Energy Demand Forecasts June 24, 2015 Bob McBride Demand Analysis Office.
CALIFORNIA’S AIR TOXICS PROGRAM: IMPROVEMENTS TO ASSESS HEALTH RISK Update to the Air Resources Board July 24, 2014 California Environmental Protection.
Overview of Recent Developments Gregory B. Greenwood Science Advisor Resources Agency.
1 Modeling Under PSD Air quality models (screening and refined) are used in various ways under the PSD program. Step 1: Significant Impact Analysis –Use.
1 Consideration of Final Rulemaking Clean Air Interstate Rule Environmental Quality Board Meeting Harrisburg, PA December 18, 2007 Joyce E. Epps Director,
Item #11 Alternative Approaches for Linking Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions to Metropolitan Transportation Planning Presentation to the National Capital.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
O NROAD S OURCES Angelique Luedeker, ITEP. 2 Onroad Emissions Emissions from vehicles Exhaust Brake and tire wear Evaporation.
Greenhouse Gas Permitting Sean O’Brien Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2015.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
Session 2: Background FHWA Transportation Conformity and CMAQ Workshop Summer 2004.
Reasonable Further Progress Policy and Mid-Course Reviews John Summerhays EPA Region 5 June 20, 2007.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
Air Quality, Transportation Conformity, and the FSTIP FTIP/FSTIP Workshop February 9, 2016.
N EW Y ORK S TATE D EPARTMENT OF E NVIRONMENTAL C ONSERVATION Short Term Ambient Air Quality Standards and The Effect on Permitting Margaret Valis NESCAUM,
Environmental Quality Board May 16, 2007
PM Control Strategies for Mobile Sources
TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY
Fort Stanwix National Monument Energy Audit Contract
Development of 2016 Alpha Onroad Mobile Emissions
EPA’s 2014 Draft RIA EPA’s 2104 Draft RIA continues to rely heavily on PM2.5 co-benefits:
Preparation of Fine Particulate Emissions Inventories
Jacques Delsalle Clean Air and Transport Unit DG ENV
Sensitivity Analysis Update
Status of Preliminary Reasonable Progress Analysis
Emissions Discussion Group November 6, 2003
Presentation transcript:

1 MOBILE6 -Input and Modeling Guidance -SIP and Conformity Policy North American Vehicle Emission Control Conference Atlanta, April 4, 2001 Gary Dolce U.S. EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality

2 MOBILE6 Guidance Two separate guidance/policy documents: How do I use MOBILE6? –Input assumptions –Data sources When do I use MOBILE6? –SIPs –Conformity

3 Using MOBILE6 M6 has improved input and output structure to make it more flexible and user friendly States will need to modify pre- and post- processing systems to account for these changes New input options create potential needs for new data

4 MOBILE6 Input Options MOBILE6 offers significant new input options Some inputs are completely new, e.g.: –Natural gas vehicle fractions –VMT by facility –Fuel sulfur content –Hot soak activity Some inputs are not new but have changed or become more important, e.g.: –Humidity –Registration distribution –VMT fractions –Speeds

5 Input Guidance In the past, we have provided guidance in the User Guide and in Volume 4 of Inventory Guidance Current M6 User Guide contains instructions for using M6, but no guidance on appropriate input assumptions –Chap. 5 contains useful information for converting M5 input assumptions to M6 We are preparing draft guidance for release soon

6 Input Guidance Until new guidance is released, M5 guidance still applies Many new input options add flexibility in certain kinds of analysis, but will not be required in general Some input options will need to be used eventually, but it will take time for states to develop data

7 Guidance Examples New environmental input options: –hourly temperatures –humidity –cloud cover, peak sun, sunrise/sunset Hourly temps are optional –model takes required min/max temps and creates a daily temp profile –hourly temps are an option for modelers looking at specific episodes who want more control over temp profile

8 Guidance Examples Local humidity input will be required –M6 assumes A/C usage based on local temperature and humidity –therefore, humidity has a much more important effect than in M5 and local input is important Cloud cover, peak sun, and sunrise/sunset are optional –these also affect A/C usage, but effect is smaller than humidity –M6 defaults are worst-case conditions –these are an option for modelers looking at specific episodes who want more control over these conditions

9 Guidance examples New vehicle types: –M6 has 16 vehicle categories compared to 5 in M5, not accounting for diesel vs. gasoline split –These new categories are further breakdown of light duty and heavy duty truck categories –Local data is ideal, but unlikely to be available immediately Proposed guidance: –In the near-term, states can use national defaults where local information is not available –EPA will work with other agencies and states to develop tools needed to derive local data

10 Input Guidance Summary We plan to release draft input guidance in May M6 User Guide Chapter 5 will help states get started Until we release new guidance, follow M5 guidance Most new input options are for special cases Some will require new data in the long run, but we will provide interim options such as national defaults that can be used near-term.

11 Proposed M6 SIP and Conformity Policy EPA has prepared proposed draft MOBILE6 SIP and conformity document –Currently under review within EPA –Will release draft version to state and local agencies –Final version will be released when M6 is released to public Proposed policy focuses on how to incorporate M6 into SIP and conformity activities Proposed policy is designed to give states sufficient time for an orderly transition from M5 to M6

12 Who doesn’t have to consider use of M6 in the short term? States who have already submitted M5-based SIPs States who are about to submit M5-based SIPs soon after release of M6 States subject to 10/15/01 consent decree deadline

13 When should M6 be used in SIPs? We propose that states use MOBILE6 for new SIPs –Meets CAA requirement that SIPs be based on most current available information –Could improve transition for future conformity determinations We propose that states who have not yet started or who are in the very early stages of SIP development use MOBILE6

14 What about M5-based SIPs that include Tier 2 benefits? EPA provided interim estimates of Tier 2 benefits that could be applied to M5 emission factors States that rely on those estimates in their SIPs already committed to revise and resubmit motor vehicle budgets 1-2 years after final release of M6

15 When must M6 be used for new conformity analyses? In general, transportation conformity rule requires use of most recent estimates and models Rule allows for a grace period from 3 to 24 months

16 When must M6 be used for new conformity analyses? (cont’d) EPA and DOT are proposing the maximum 24 month grace period before M6 is required for new analyses –Gives time for states to evaluate effects of M6 on future determinations –Gives time for states to determine need to update SIPs and budgets with MOBILE6 States that update budgets with M6 earlier must use M6 earlier for conformity

17 If you want to update SIP using M6, what does it need to include? Updated SIP continues to demonstrate attainment/maintenance with new level of estimated emissions –There are multiple options for how this could be done EPA will work with states on a case-by-case basis to determine exactly what documentation is needed –States should consult with EPA early and often

18 Summary of Preliminary Proposal for SIP and Conformity Policy Don’t need to revise SIP: –Already or about to submit –Ozone areas subject to 10/15/01 deadline Need to update SIP in 1-2 years: –SIPs that include Tier 2 benefits Conformity grace period –2 Years EPA and states will need to assess the full implications of M6 on air quality in the context of changes in both base and future year emissions