Guidance on Urban Airshed Model (UAM) Reporting Requirements for Attainment Demonstration


                                        SKSSES32528S3
        United States
        Environmental
        Protection
        Agency
Office of Air Quality
Manning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-454/R-93-056
March 1994
        A1K
EPA  Guidance OBI Urban Airshed Model (UAM)
                  Reporting Requirements for

                   Attainment Demonstration

-------

-------
Guidance on Urban Airshed Model (UAM)
       Reporting Requirements for
        Attainment Demonstration
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
               March 1994

-------
                                  DISCLAIMER
      This report was prepared as a joint effort between the Regional Offices and the Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  It has been
reviewed and approved for publication. Any mention of trade names or commercial products
is not intended to constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                         ii

-------
                                    CONTENTS








 1.     Executive Summary  	         j




 2.     Introduction	         3




 3.     Modeling Protocol	    4




 4.  .   Emissions Preparations	    5




 5.     Air Quality and Meteorological Data Preparations	 .    7




 6.     Diagnostic Analysis   	              g




7.     Model Performance Evaluations	..".....  9




8.     Attainment Demonstration	  U




9.     Data Access Procedures	  14




10.     References	        15




      Appendix A: Contents of Executive Summary  	  17




      Appendix B: Emission Comparison Summary Tables	  19




      Appendix C: Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2 Summaries	  23
                                       in

-------

-------
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document provides guidance to State agencies for documenting modeling
procedures and results supporting 1994 revisions to State implementation plans (SIP's) for
ozone. This documentation is needed for two reasons. First, it is needed to enable the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Offices to write a technical support
document (TSD) assessing the adequacy of the modeling effort and resulting control
measures. Second, the documentation is intended to facilitate public review of the proposed
SIP revisions by highlighting key assumptions and results leading to a State's proposed plan
revisions.

The guidance identifies seven (7) broad areas which must be documented in the SIP
submittal: a modeling protocol; emission preparation (including quality assurance)
procedures and results; air quality and meteorological data input preparations and results;
diagnostic tests performed to improve model performance; model performance results;
control measures and air quality simulation results corresponding with the selected "
"attainment strategy"; methods for accessing data files used and produced by the model.
Areas with overlapping domains must address input data consistency among the domains.
Although there is no requirement that the documentation be submitted prior to the November
15, 1994 due date for the SIP revision, we recommend that each of the 7 parts of the
required documentation be transmitted to the appropriate Regional Office as soon as it is
ready. This practice will foster a higher quality analysis and review, as well as diminish the
need for last minute changes/additions.

The accompanying table identifies the rationale for each of the 7 identified
components of the required documentation. The table also identifies major issues to be
addressed. To facilitate review by the EPA and the public, we recommend an executive
summary be submitted which highlights key assumptions/results and summarizes the major
steps which led to the attainment demonstration. An outline of the executive summary would
be similar to the information in the following table. This is similar to the "preamble" or
executive summary that States often provide to EPA explaining the nature of the SIP
submittal and how it fulfills EPA requirements. The executive summary should be followed
by appendices containing technical documents describing the details of the modeling (i.e.
documentation of the afore mentioned seven (7) broad modeling tasks). This executive
summary should be about ten pages of text with about twenty pages of maps and tables. It
should be a summary of the information a manager or the public would need to understand
the modeling process and serve as a directory to finding additional details. Appendix A lists
the contents of the executive summary.

-------
ea
<
H

Issues included

c
o

_**j
'ocumen
Q
o
o
8
8-
£

S
I*
^J

•5*
CO

in"
'0.
i
.s
1
S
en
t
55
.§
"«
.3
.§ S
|l
if
°> -i
d cu
en
-O 3
§1
•- c
.2? o
« co
c -2
« C
„. o
O 10
J= u
— t-
•5 §• .
l-Jl
S °-55
Communicate ;
assure that the
of all affected

0
o
o
o
"
CU

"eu
•a
0
S
£
Data base used and quality assurance applied; Data processing used to
derive UAM inputs and deviations from guidance and underlying ration
VOC, NOX, CO emissions by State/county for major source categories.

to CO
.2 *"*
co ,0
"E t3
« g
C ^

*w >.
§t
o ^3
S "g.
1 2
^M
8 o-|
111
|1&
< -a -a
CO
c

2
03
a.
& CO
, C
.— o

ca -ti

CX «
v-' cu
.53 "^
^ Cu
5°
Results from mitial application; Consistency with scientific understandi
and expectations; Tests performed, changes made and accompanying
justification; Short summary of final predictions.

to
*o E
w §
*m

O '.3
•" CO
^ "s
C "to
S t^ g
Hi
J2 ix c3
lS .£ E

in
CO
O
H
o
"3
CO
O
C
00
ctt
5
I
Summary of observational data base available for comparison; Results 1
required statistical tests and other pertinent tests and results; Ability to
reproduce observed spatial and temporal patterns.

o r/j
-« 1
o O
;2 *•&
= i
cu ca
co >s7\
T3 J3 t>0
C 0 C
a ° :=:
fe 0 O
•*•§ s
S 2 £
d flj
O u, "O
1^1
•a 2 13
I =3 "
CTD ^ -a

CD
O
ra
E
tS
W r^
ff °

"S 3

° >

K
Qualitative description of attamment strategy; Reductions in VOC and
emissions from each major source category for each State/county from
1990 base levels: CAA mandated reductions and other reductions;
Identification of authority for implementing emission reductions in
attainment strategy; Air quality predictions for each episode day reflect
attamment strategy.

£<
- cu
"ea fT1
0 —
•— c
.£3 .5
3 to

CO
-------
2. Introduction

Section 182(b) of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 requires States
containing one or more nonattainment area classified as "moderate" or worse to demonstrate
that the controls prescribed in their SIP revisions are sufficient to attain the ozone NAAQS.
Serious or worse nonattainment areas are required to use a photochemical grid model for this
purpose. The Urban Airshed Model (UAM) is the grid model recommended by the U.S.
EPA for regulatory applications of this nature. This document is intended to provide
assistance to the States in their development of the documentation for the 1994 SIP revision
submittals. States using the UAM to determine if the implementation of nitrogen oxides
reasonably available control technology (NOX RACT) is unnecessary to attain the ozone
NAAQS should describe as prescribed by this document the model runs to perform this
determination and the associated results.

The Urban Airshed Model (UAM) is the most complex model released to the States
for regulatory use. This will present a challenge for the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the public to review complex and detailed material to determine the
technical soundness underlying State recommended control measures. It is appropriate that
we identify what is needed in the demonstration package to ensure that such reviews can be
performed consistently, fairly and with confidence. Li determining the technical soundness
of a UAM application, our goal is to request sufficient information to allow us to review the
modeling, but at the same time not place an undue burden on the States. The State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal, which requires a modeling demonstration, should
include sufficient information to enable the appropriate Regional Office to prepare a technical
support document (TSD) which vouches for the technical adequacy of the modeling analysis
underlying the SIP revision.

This guidance identifies modeling results and supporting information which should be
included for review of UAM applications by the appropriate EPA Regional Office. Any
circumstances where EPA guidance allows a choice of methods for developing input data or
where the guidance is not followed, more detailed information as to how and why the method
was applied should be reported.

To the extent possible, the States should provide the Regional Office with deliverables
following each of seven modeling activities identified in this guidance. These deliverables
include the modeling protocol; emission preparation procedures and results; air quality and
meteorological data input preparations and results; diagnostic tests performed to improve
model performance; model performance results; control measures and air quality simulation
results corresponding with the selected "attainment strategy"; and methods for accessing data
files used and produced by the model. Areas with overlapping domains must address input
data consistency among the domains. Early review of these materials will allow the Regional
Office to alert the States of any problems. This should speed up the final review and
approval process. Although the guidance is intended to facilitate Regional Office review of
the attainment demonstration, as with other regulatory model applications, the EPA-Model
-------
Clearinghouse will continue to serve as the mechanism for resolving controversial issues.

The executive summary presented the rationale behind the need for documentation for
each modeling activity. The following sections contain detailed examples of the types of
materials and ways in which the appropriate information may be presented. In addition to
technical documentation for each modeling activity we are recommending the submittal of an
executive summary which highlights key assumptions/results, summarizes the modeling
process and identifies revisions to the modeling protocol. This guidance document is
intended to describe all possible types of documentation which may be needed to document
the modeling portion of the SIP submittal. The Regional Offices will help tailor the guidance
to the individual needs of a particular application.
3. Modeling Protocol
The protocol should be developed and approved by all State/local agencies with
nonattainment areas in the domain. The lead state should formally submit the protocol to the
EPA for approval. The protocol should follow the recommendations of the EPA guideline
for regulatory application of the UAM (Reference 1). The recommendations include the
following:

• Episode dates with the meteorology, air quality analyses, and
reasoning/rationale for the selections;

• Domain definition and reasoning/rationale for its size and location;

• Procedures for diagnostic analyses and model performance evaluation;

• Description of attainment year mandated control measures;

• Procedures for interpreting the model simulation results for use in
demonstrating attainment;

• Description of the background, objectives, and procedures to be followed
while performing the modeling;

• List of deliverables and a schedule for completion of the modeling;

• Procedures used to coordinate and develop consistent data bases within the
domain for multi-State areas;

• Organizational structure for oversight and technical review.
-------
• Revisions made to the original protocol approved by EPA at the start of the
modeling process should be documented in the original protocol and addressed
in the executive summary.

Maps of the location and extent of the domain, maps of synoptic wind patterns, tables
displaying the peak ozone values monitored during the design year and after, and maps of the
location of the meteorological stations, air quality monitors and major sources in the area
should be included with the descriptions of domain location and episode selection criteria.

4. Emissions Preparations

Information needed to review emissions preparations include, 1) documentation of the
procedures used to develop the emission estimates and 2) summary tables and graphics which
allow a quick look and quality assurance of the estimates. These are needed for both the
model performance simulation and the attainment demonstration simulation. This section
describes information needed to document the emissions inventory used for the model
performance evaluation. Section 8 contains information needed to document the attainment
demonstration inventory.

Documentation for the development of the emissions inventories (anthropogenic and
biogenic) for the model performance evaluations should detail the methodologies and
procedures used in preparing emissions for modeling the historical episodes. The UAM
Emissions Preprocessor System version 2.0 (EPS) is the EPA recommended system/method
for processing the inventories. Other systems/methods that may be used should be fully
documented with technical description and implementation procedures. At a minimum, the
following factors should be addressed regardless of the method/system used to process the
emissions.

• Identify data bases from which the inventories were accessed (e.g., extracted
from the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), from State
emission inventory systems, historical data, UAM Biogenic Emissions
Inventory System (BEIS), Regional Oxidant Model (ROM)-UAM Interface
Biogenics, etc.).

• Discuss modifications/adjustments used to derive the model performance
inventories from the 1990 State Emission Inventory with reference to detailed
documentation for the 1990 State Emission Inventory.

• Discuss procedures used to compile and guarantee consistency among
inventories for each State within the modeling domain including
implementation of existing controls, types of sources inventoried and how
estimates were derived. _r
-------
• Discuss quality assurance and validity checks performed on the inventories,
include responses to public and Regional Office review comments.

• Discuss MOBILE model inputs (summarize to identify Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M), Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), speeds and other MOBILE
input variables). Provide information listing the I/M, RVP and other input
variables, for each county. Summarize Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
information and how mobile sources were processed for modeling.

, • If used, describe how day-specific adjustments were applied.

• Discuss deviations from EPA guidance in developing inventories.

• Discuss use or replacement of EPA suggested default data (such as speciation
profiles, spatial allocation surrogates and temporal profiles).

• Provide emissions summary reports by county for EPA tier 1 and 2 categories
(Reference 5) for nitrogen oxides (NO,), volatile organic compounds (VOC),
and carbon monoxide (CO), both before and after processing through EPS.
Summary for each State's nonattainment areas should be presented for each
pollutant in the same format required for the 1990 inventory (point, area,
highway mobile and off-highway mobile).

The emissions summary reports may be generated by the UAM EPS RPRTEM
module. For a list of source classification codes (SCC's) in each tier refer to the Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards Technology Transfer Network, Clearinghouse for
Inventory/Emission Factors (CHIEF) Bulletin Board Service. Appendix C contains an
example of the tier 1 and tier 2 summaries.

Below are examples of tables/graphics that it would be helpful to include in the SIP
submittal to support emission preparations and results. It is encouraged but not required that
graphics listed below be submitted or representative graphics containing the information in a
similar fashion be submitted.

• Pie charts illustrating emissions by source category, (e.g., point, area, mobile,
off-highway, biogenic, etc.) or by EPA tier 1 categories (Reference 5);

• A chart to facilitate comparisons between 1990 emissions and base case
modeling inventories (see Appendix B);

• List of elevated point sources with annual/daily emission totals, maps of point
source locations with total VOC, NOX and CO emissions indicated;
-------
• List of historical or day-specific data included in the inventories;

• List of significant shutdown sources hi which emissions can be counted as
reductions (nonbankable);

• Emission density plots (by grid and by county) for VOC, NOX, and CO;

• Time series (24-hour) plots of county total emissions by source category (i.e.,
mobile, point, area, off-highway);

• Time series plots of day-specific diurnal patterns for emissions sources such as
electric utilities (turbines, boilers);

• Summary tables by source category for methods used for speciation, temporal
and spatial allocation when EPA defaults are not used.

5. Air Quality and Meteorological Data Preparations

The SIP modeling documentation should identify problems encountered, as well as
deviations from EPA guidance (such as the use of a prognostic wind model instead of the
UAM Diagnostic Wind Model (DWM)) along with the following information on air quality
and meteorological data preparations.

• Sources of Meteorological Data: Identify and list sources of meteorological
data (National Weather Service (NWS), AIRS, utilities, etc.) and indicate
quality assurance and validity checks made on the data.

• Sources of Air Quality Data: Identify and list networks which provided
monitored air quality data and indicate if data were quality assured per EPA
guidance (Reference 4).

• Boundary and Initial Conditions: Discuss the methodology used to develop
these fields for the model performance runs (e.g., measurements from air
quality monitoring networks, ROM predictions, etc.). Methods used to
develop the future year boundary and initial conditions should be documented.
Changes to these input fields from that used in the model performance
simulations should be described through both narrative and tabular displays.

• Density of Data: Present maps indicating the locations of the meteorological
stations and air quality monitors with county boundaries annotated.

• Selection of Wind Model: Explain how the wind fields were obtained^ROM,
-------
UAM DWM, prognostic), and provide the rationale for the approach used.

• Mixing Heights: Explain how mixing heights were obtained listing the upper
air stations and the algorithms (Le., RAMMETX, MEXEMUP, etc.) used.
The rationale for any method differing from the default method (RAMMETX)
should be fully documented with technical description and implementation
procedures.

Graphics illustrating patterns of wind fields, temperatures, mixing heights, etc.
throughout each episode day should be presented. Examples are 1) maps of wind direction
and speed, 2) time series plots of hourly variations in mixing heights and temperatures, and
3) tile maps/isopleth of spatial patterns of air quality. References 6 and 7 may be used in
developing these and other graphics.
6. Diagnostic Analysis
The documentation of the model diagnostic/sensitivity analyses should recapitulate for
EPA review and for public comment the rationale used in developing the input data files for
the model application. The submitting agency should document their conclusions based on
valid and thorough reasoning, and provide evidence of the reliability of the model
performance for a SEP attainment demonstration.

Rather than relying solely on a few performance statistics, a qualitative understanding
of ozone formation in the particular area must be established. A "conceptual model"
describing the principal features of the interaction of emissions, ozone chemistry, wind
patterns (strength, convergence, recirculation) that qualitatively characterize an ozone episode
should be included. It should highlight key factors in ozone formation for the particular
episode, and their relative importance. A description of the overall urban plume direction,
hour of occurrence for peak ozone concentration and distance downwind, typical wind flow
patterns, expected influence of major sources or emissions categories, relationship between
ozone concentrations to diurnal temperature and growth of mixing layer, the importance of
ozone and precursors aloft, and multiple day carry-over of pollutants are a few items that
should be used to discuss this conceptual model.

The diagnostic analysis should include quality assurance checks of input fields, the
sensitivity simulations listed in EPA's UAM Guideline (Reference 1), and additional
diagnostic simulations as needed to improve model performance. These additional -
simulations should use inputs altered as a result of sound technical reasoning, arid/or
alternative methodologies or interpretations of data. The results and conclusions from quality
assurance tests of the input fields (e. g., emissions, meteorology) should be provided. In
other words, any "problem" leading to poor model performance and the "solution" need to
-------
be clearly discussed. Plots of emission patterns, wind vectors, wind trajectories, initial
conditions, etc., can provide qualitative tests. Performance statistics, plots of residuals
stratified by concentration or other variables, mass flux through boundaries, and correlation
between pollutants, their ratios, and other variables are examples of more quantitative
information that can be examined in the diagnostic analysis. For each episode considered
documentation of the diagnostic evaluation should address the following items that resulted in
alteration of key model inputs.

• Describe the "conceptual model" of ozone formation for the episodes in each
meteorological regime.

• Describe the initial simulation results.

• Illustrate ozone and precursor concentrations temporal and spatial patterns.

• Describe consistencies or inconsistencies of temporal and spatial variations
with the conceptual model and expectations about ozone formation. -"

• Discuss input data modifications and rationale for making the changes (in
terms of data and reasoning, for the particular variables chosen and for the
new values or methods used).

• Describe conclusions reached as a result of simulation of the changed inputs by
providing qualitative summary of results: changes in model estimates, and key
features of plots or computations made from the estimates.

• Describe any performance measures used to evaluate the input data such as
wind fields, mixing heights, or air quality boundary conditions.

• Discuss conclusions reached on model performance, with problems or
concerns noted.

• Summarize inputs changed relative to the initial simulation.

• Describe any methods and results used to examine model uncertainty to
particular parameters and the model's sensitivity to these parameters.

7. Model Performance Evaluations

The evaluation of model performance is needed in order to determine the utility of the
model for evaluating the impact of emission control strategies. Model evaluation takes place
after all sensitivity tests and refinements to model inputs. As a first step, the modefer must
-------
choose input data which axe most representative of actual conditions. That is, the 'best'
mjitial and boundary conditions, meteorology, and emissions. Once the best conditions are
defined, an assessment of model performance is required for each primary episode day.

The SIP modeling documentation must describe the model performance with both
graphical and statistical measures. EPA recommends the use of a four-cell weighted average
to determine the predicted concentration to be used in comparison with observed values.
While prediction of ozone is of primary importance for the SIP, concentrations of ozone
precursors should be evaluated whenever quality assured observations are available which are
representative of spatial scales comparable to those treated in the model. The following
measures should be applied for evaluating modeling results. Please refer to References 1 and
7 for additional details.
Graphical:
Time-series plots comparing hourly predicted and observed concentrations for
each monitoring station;

Isopleths or tile maps of observed and predicted (lowest layer) concentrations
for selected hours and for daily maxima;

Scatter plots of predictions and observations;

Quantile plots;

Additional graphical displays, such as paired predictions of daily maxima, are
encouraged.
Statistical:
• Unpaired highest-prediction accuracy;

• Normalized bias test of all pairs with observations above 60 parts per billion
(ppb);

• Gross error of all pairs with observations above 60 ppb;

• Additional tests are encouraged.

Caution should be used when interpreting the statistical measures for a sparse
monitoring network. EPA recommends that the statistical performance be compared with the
following ranges:

• Unpaired highest prediction accuracy: ±15-20 percent J:
10
-------
• Normalized bias: +.5-15 percent
• Gross error for all pairs with observations >60 ppb: 30 - 35 percent

The SIP modeling documentation should state a conclusion as to the usefulness of
each episode for regulatory purposes.

If, after review of the input data, significant uncertainty remains as to the 'best'
conditions, the State may choose to perform additional modeling to assess the effect of this
uncertainty on model performance. One way to address uncertainty is to develop additional,
yet, reasonable input conditions. While uncertainty analyses are not required by the EPA as
part of the model performance evaluation, the results of such tests may provide the State with
additional support for various control strategies. If uncertainty analyses are performed, the
State should document the range of uncertainty considered in the model inputs and reasons
underlying the selected range. Meteorology, emissions, etc., should not be altered without
providing justification. Procedures and documentation requirements are similar to those
discussed in the previous section on diagnostic analysis. Model performance must still be
evaluated for the 'best' input conditions regardless of any uncertainty analyses.
8. Attainment Demonstration
In the Clean Air Act (CAA) each ozone nonattainment area is assigned a date by
which the area must reach attainment. After identifying the "best" input conditions and
completing a model performance evaluation, the input emissions data must be projected into
the future to the attainment date. This requires the emissions to be adjusted to reflect
expected future year emissions accounting for growth and CAA mandated controls. If
necessary, the modelers and control strategy development staff must work together to identify
additional economical and enforceable control measures that demonstrate attainment.
Attainment is demonstrated when the modeled predictions result in ozone concentration below
0.12 parts per million (ppm) for each grid cell hi the domain for all hours of each primary
day. Supporting documentation for the attainment simulation for each episode must describe
how the emissions were adjusted and the resulting air quality predictions as well as the
development of future year boundary conditions. To the extent that contingency measures
are required for a nonattainment area, it would be helpful if these control measures were
modeled and documented as well.

States may opt to conduct more comprehensive statistical testing of the modeling
results for the attainment demonstration. The focus of the ozone attainment demonstration is
on the daily maximum 1-hour concentration predicted at each location in the modeling
domain. Responsible parties are encouraged to broaden the scope of the attainment
demonstration to examine the impact on other important metrics, such as different
concentration averaging times, population exposure, subdomain and temporal impacts, effects
on other pollutant species, and other important measures that are sensitive to emissioTl control

11
-------
strategies. To the extent that other metrics are used they should be described in the SIP
modeling documentation.

Emissions Adjustments:

Documentation for the development of the future/projection emission inventories
should detail the methodologies and procedures used in projecting the inventories to the
attainment date. For the attainment demonstration strategy the emission control measures
applied to reach attainment should also be described. The following items should be
addressed.

• Describe procedures used to project 1990 emissions to future year(s) (i.e.,
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Economic Growth Analysis System
(EGAS), and local data with rationale for the use of said data). This should
include a table of growth rates.

• Discuss how controls were applied by source classification code (SCG) and
geographic extent (i.e., statewide, county, nonattainment area)

• Discuss how the projection inventories reflect or differ from the following:

- 15 % and 3 % Rate-of-Progress Inventories;
- 1990 Clean Air Act mandated controls;
- NO* substitution provisions.

• Discuss the consistency among the States in the implementation of the Clean
Air Act mandated controls and additional controls adopted by the States.

• Discuss MOBILE model inputs (summarize to identify Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M), Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), speeds and other MOBILE
input variables). Provide information listing the I/M, RVP and other input
variables, for each county. Summarize VMT information and how mobile
sources were processed for modeling.

• List any new sources and expected emissions (e.g., utilities, etc.) added to the
inventory for future years.

• Discuss deviations from EPA guidance (Reference 3) in developing projection
and control factors.

• Discuss deviations from methods used to develop the model performance
inventories (such as speciation, temporal and spatial allocation).

• Provide a table of attainment control measures indicating which measures are

12
-------
mandated under each CAA Title and which are additional measures required to
demonstrate attainment;

• Provide summary reports by county for EPA tier 1 and tier 2 categories along
with emission reduction percentages for each primary day;

Below are examples of tables/graphics that it would be helpful to include hi the SIP
submittal to support emission preparations and results. It is encouraged but not required that
graphics listed below be submitted or representative graphics containing the information in a
similar fashion be submitted.

• Pie charts illustrating emissions by source category, (e.g., point, area, mobile,
non-road, biogenic, etc.) or by EPA tier 1 categories (see Appendix C); Pie
charts illustrating reductions in VOC and NOX emissions from each general
category, (e.g., point, area, mobile, off-highway, etc.);

• Summary charts presenting future year emissions, with and without controls,
in the same format as the 1990 State Emission Inventory (see Appendix B);'

• List of new elevated point sources with annual/daily emissions totals; maps of
location of major sources with total emissions indicated;

• Emission density plots (gridded and by county) for VOC, NOX and CO;

• Time series (24-hour) plots of county total emissions by source category (i.e.,
mobile, point, area, non-road);

• Summary tables by source category for methods used for speciation, temporal
and spatial allocation when EPA defaults are not used.

Model Results:

A description of the resulting air quality predictions from the "attainment strategy"
simulation should be included in the attainment demonstration portion of the SIP modeling
documentation. For each primary day provide the following.

• Isopleth plots or tile maps for the hour which contained the maximum ozone
concentration as well as, the hour before and after the maximum occurred
(Similar plots for maximum VOC and maximum NOX would be helpful.);

• A table listing the peak domain concentrations of ozone, VOC, and NOX, both
before and after controls;

• Daily peaks of ozone, VOC, and NOX for each grid cell (either isopletns or

13
-------
maps of the daily maximum in each cell for each pollutant);

• Time series plots of the grid cell where the maximum pollutant concentration
occurs for ozone, VOC, NOX.

If possible, the concentration isopleths\maps of grid cell data should outline the
location of the model domain with political boundaries to identify concentrations within each
county.
9. • Data Access Procedures
The data files used in the model performance and attainment simulations are not
required as a part of the SIP submittal. However, EPA and public officials may need to
obtain key information used for modeling so as to replicate the model performance and
attainment simulations. Therefore, documentation concerning accessibility of key
data/information used for modeling should be included hi the SIP submittal. To be
"accessible" a data file must be maintained electronically with sufficient
instructions/assistance for reviewing agencies to access the files to replicate results. A
contact person should be identified to assist an interested party in obtaining referenced
information. When appropriate, so as to lend additional assistance and answer technical
questions in regard to the UAM application, the lead State person should be identified.

Ideally, all data, even raw data, used hi the development of the input files should be
maintained. At a minimum, the standard UAM input files should be maintained with a
description of the raw data sources. For example, the 1990 emissions, from which model
input emissions are derived, should be made available through the AIRS Area and Mobile
Source Subsystem (AMS) and AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) or otherwise documented.
Modelers are encouraged to present a table showing where the data was accessed and where
the final processed data resides with file naming conventions. Files defining how each UAM
preprocessor was implemented and which options were invoked within the program, should
be maintained. A listing of all programs used to process the data and the type of computer
used to process the data should be included. A detailed description of the contents and
format of each file should be included. States/local agencies might consider the possibility of
using the National Technical Information Service for storage and distribution of these files
and associated documentation.

The following data files should be maintained by the State/local agency.

• Input files and control input packet files to all of the UAM preprocessor
programs including those supplied with the UAM modeling system as well as
other preprocessors (i.e., RAMMETX as well as MEXEMUP) including for
example, AIRS AMS and AFS work files input into EPS, link-base^emissions

14
-------
data in the LEASE input file and MOBILE model input/output files for
episode-specific simulations, projection factor files used to project emissions to
future attainment year (input to CNTLEM module of EPS) and control factor
file used for input into CNTLEM module of EPS;

All UAM ready input files for each episode used for model performance and
attainment simulations (i.e., gridded, speciated and temporally allocated UAM-
ready output files from the EPS);

Default or modified EPA supplied data files (such as speciation profiles, and
assumed diurnal or seasonal patterns).
10. References

1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991, Guideline for Regulatory Application
of the Urban Airshed Model. EPA-450/4-91-013, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.

2. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Procedures for the Preparation of
Emission Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone. Volume TL:
Emission Inventory Requirements for Photochemical Air Quality Simulation Models.
EPA-454/R-92-026, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC.

3. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993, Guidance for Growth Factors
Projections and Control Strategies for the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans. EPA-
452/R-93-002, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park
NC.

4. Finkelstein, P. L., D. A. Mazzarella, T. J. Lockhart, W. J. King and J. H. White.
Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems. Volume IV:
Meteorological Measurements. EPA-600/4-82-060, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.
5. E. H. Pechan and Associates, Inc., 1993 Regional Interim Emissions Inventories
(1987-1991). Volume I: Emission Summaries. EPA-454/R-93-02/a, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.

6. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, User's Guide for the Urban Airshed
Model. Volume VI: User's Manual for the Postprocessing System, EPA-450/4-90-
007F, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
15
-------
7. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, User's Guide for the Urban Airshed
Model. Volume VII: User's Manual for the Performance Evaluation System. EPA-
450/4-90-007G, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle
Paik, NC.

8. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991, Procedures for the Preparation of
Emission Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone. Volume I:
General Guidance for Stationary Sources. EPA-450/4-91-016, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.

9. . U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Procedures for Emission Inventory
Preparation. Volume IV: Mobile Sources. EPA-454/R-92-026, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
16
-------
Appendix A
Contents of Executive Summary

The executive summary should provide a summary of the information a manager or
the public would need to understand the modeling process and results. A list of the contents
of the executive summary is as follows. Each section should highlight key aspects of the
modeling and reference additional technical support documents for more details.

INTRODUCTION:

Explain the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requirements and their relationship to
the SIP modeling.

MODELING PROTOCOL:

Explain how the protocol was adopted by the States and approved by EPA. -State
when the protocol was approved. Discuss the extent of the domain, the grid cell size
and the reasons for how and why these were set as they are. List the days originally
selected for modeling and explain how and why they were chosen. List days actually
modeled and discuss why this list is different from the original list of days. Note any
additional revisions to the original protocol approved by the EPA at the start of the
modeling process. Include illustrations such as map of model domain with grid cell
size and UTM coordinates.
EMISSIONS:

Identify the sources of the modeling inventory (e.g., AIRS, State draft, State prepared
EPS compatible format). Include date inventory was frozen, if applicable. Provide a
tabular summary of the emissions data. Illustrations should include pie chart of VOC,
NOX, CO emissions by source type (point, area, highway mobile and off-highway
mobile, biogenics) for the entire domain, if possible, by State.

AIR QUALITY/METEOROLOGY:

Describe the air quality and meteorology data used. Quantify number of sites and
indicate how, when and where these data were collected. This information may be
represented in tabular form. Illustrations might include map of air quality monitors
and meteorological sites.

DIAGNOSTIC TESTS/MODEL PERFORMANCE:

Summarize results of diagnostic tests and list improvements made from the original
simulations.
17
-------
SIMULATION RESULTS:

List control measures and programs used to reduce ozone to meet the standards.
Describe predicted air quality after controls from the attainment demonstration.
Explain basis for attainment demonstration, specifically if all grid cells in the domain
do not attain in every episode. Illustrations should include pie charts of emissions
with attainment controls by source type and maps of the resulting peak ozone by
episode.

DATA ACCESS:

List of technical support documents submitted to EPA to support the SEP revisions.
List technical papers or other scientific advances that occurred during the modeling
process. Provide references describing how the public can obtain access to technical
files.
18
-------
Appendix B
Emission Comparison Summary Tables

To assist with the review of emissions data for the episode year and the future
attainment year(s), it would be useful to provide comparison tables for VOC, NOX and CO
for each year of interest. Two examples are presented in this appendix. One contains annual
totals for each major source type (Le., point, area, mobile and off-highway). The other
example contains annual totals for each tier 1 and tier 2 source category.
19
-------
EXAMPLE 1 - Major Source Type

For each nonattainment area provide the following total VOC emissions summaries
with detailed listings as indicated. In the example, "State" represents State Name, "XYZ"
represents name of nonattainment area, "ZZZ" is species name (VOC, NOX, or CO) and
"xx" is the name of a particular listing. Example:

State Nonattainment Area XYZ - Total ZZZ Emissions Summary

Table I - Projection Year Emissions without Controls
Year
Point
Area
Highway
Off-Highway
1988

1990

1996

1999

2005

1988 and 1990 are actual emission estimates. See listing "xx" for emissions growti
2007

h rates and methodologies.
Table II - Projection Year Emissions with 15% Rate-of-Progress (ROP) Controls and
other Clean Air Act (CAA) Mandated Controls
Year
Point
Area
Highway
Off-Highway
1988

1990

1996

1999

2005

2007

1988 and 1990 are actual emission estimates. See listing "xx" for 15% ROP and CAA mandated controls.

Table EDE - Projection Year Emissions with 15% ROP, CAA Mandated and Additional
Controls
Year
Point
Area
Highway
Off-Highway
1988

1990

1996

1999

2005

2007

1988 and 1990 are actual emission estimates. See listing xx for additional controls.
20
-------
EXAMPLE 2 - Tier 1 and Tier 2 Categories
DATE: 01/04/1994
TIME: 10:22:04

01 FUEL COMB. ELEC. UTIL.
01 Coal
02 Oil

02 FUEL COMB. INDUSTRIAL
02 Oil
03 Gas
04 Other

03 FUEL COMB. OTHER
01 Commercial/Institutional Coal
02 Commercial/Institutional Oil
03 Commercial/Institutional Gas
04 Misc. Fuel Comb.(Except Residential)
05 Residential Wood
06 Residential Other

04 CHEMICAL & ALLIED PRODUCTS
01 Organic Chemical Mfg
03 Polymer & Resin Mfg

Interim Inventory VOC Report For Point + Area (Tons/Year)
"State
1987

41.3
98.7
140.0

506.1
20.8
134.0
660.9

0.1
24.2
5.9
39.6
3829.1
134.0
4032.9
MFG
959.4
9.6
969.0
Name"
1988

42.6
124.3
166.9

502.5
23.6
133.6
659.7

0.1
17.3
6.2
41.4
3790.2
126.9
3982.1

1067.6
10.7
1078.3

1989

40.9
130.9
171.8

496.4
27.1
131.9
655.4

0.1
18.2
6.6
44.3
3698.8
143.8
3911.8

1172.8
11.8
1184.6
PAGE
1990

41.3
108.5
149.8

475.4
38.9
126.3
640.6

0.1
25.8
6.5
48.1
3542.4
151.6
3774.5

1295.9
13.1
1309.0
: 1 .
1991

44.8
78.0
122.8

464.8
51.7 '
123.3
639.8
. .
0.1
30.5
6.6
46.4
3542.4
162.1
3788.1

1265.5
12.8
1278.3
06 PETROLEUM & RELATED INDUSTRIES
01 Oil & Gas Production

07 OTHER INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
01 Agriculture, Food, Kindred Products
02 Textiles, Leather, Apparel Products
04 Rubber & Misc. Plastic Products
10 Misc. Industrial Processes
1.4
1.4

38.1
470.4
222.5
16.8
1.3
1.3

39.0
452.9
256.4
16.6
1.3
1.3

37.7
446.1
250.4
16.2
1.1
1.1

35.5
403.7
235.5
15.6
1.1
1.1

34.6
394.2
228.0
15.6
747.8
764.9
750.4
690.3
672.4
21
-------
DATE: 01/04/1994 Interim Inventory VOC Report For Point -f- Area
TIME: 10:22:06 "State Name" PAGE

08 SOLVENT UTILIZATION
01 Degreasing
02 Graphic Arts
03 Dry Cleaning
04 Surface Coating
05 Other Industrial
06 Nonindustrial
09 STORAGE & TRANSPORT
01 Bulk Terminals & Plants
02 Petroleum & Petroleum Prod. .Storage
04 Service Stations: Stage I
05 Service Stations: Stage n
06 Service Stations: Breath/Emptying
10 WASTE DISPOSAL & RECYCLING
01 Incineration
02 Open Burning
03POTW
05TSDF
11 HIGHWAY VEHICLES
01 Light-Duty Gas Vehicles/Motorcycles
02 Light-Duty Gas Trucks
03 Heavy-Duty Gas Vehicles
04 Diesels
12 OFF-HIGHWAY
01 Non-Road Gasoline
02 Non-Road Diesel
03 Aircraft
04 Marine Vessels
05 Railroads
14 MISCELLANEOUS
02 Other Combustion
1987

3591.0
693.3
952.0
10723.2
1461.4
6381.5
23802.4

2013.5
530.1
1851.1
2535.9
253.6
7184.2

260.6
1824.6
51.8
87.1
2224.1

21482.1
9295.8
904.9
1312 A
32995.2

4437.2
209.7
643.3
4.0
3.7
5297.9

166.1
166.1
1988

4013.9
778.6
969.2
10858.3
1463.8
6805.1
24888.9

2063.0
555.5
1930.9
2645.2
264.4
7459.0

259.0
1806.4
54.3
89.5
2209.2

10742.5
4526.4
426.1
638.8
16333.8

4403.2
217.6
632.7
4.2
4.0
5261.7

166.1
166.1
1989

4013.3
737.7
964.8
10734.1
1380.2
7011.1
24841.2

1929.6
595.2
1920.3
.2236.1
263.0
6944.2

254.1
1763.3
58.3
87.6
2163.3

9343.3
3969.7
358.4
616.9
14288.3

4293.0
190.1
620.3
4.3
4.0
5111.7

166.1
166.1
1990

3932.2
710.9
935.1
10398.8
1288.5
7129.0
24394.5

1855.4
644.5
2068.6
2267.1
283.5
7119.1

244.3
1688.9
63.0
83.7
2079.9

19362.3
8319.2
748.1
1343.2
29772.8

4105.1
161.6
565.5
4.4
4.3
4840.9

166.1
166.1
(Tons/Year)
: 2
1991

3775.3
701.2
905.3
10298.0
1206.4
7471.9
24358.1
*
1787.8
619.1
2163.7
237L3
296.4
7238.3

244.3
1688.9
60.6
78.3
2072.1

19475.7
8373.3
724.6
1350.3
29923.9

4083.2
132.7
500.0
4.5
4.4
4724.8

166.1
166.1
22
-------
Appendix C

Summary of Emissions by Tier 1 and Tier 2 Source Categories

Tierl
1 Fuel Comb. Electric
Utilities

2 Fuel Comb. Industrial

3 Fuel Comb. Other

4 Chemical & Allied
Products Mfg.

5 Metals Processing

Tier 2

ICoal
2Oil
3 Gas
4 Other
5 Internal Combustion

1 Coal
2 Oil
3 Gas
4 Other
5 Internal Combustion

1 Commercial/
Institutional Coal
2 Commercial/
Institutional Oil
3 Commercial/
Institutional Gas
4 Misc. Fuel Comb.
(Except Residential)
5 Residential Wood
6 Residential Other

1 Organic Chemical Mfg.
2 Inorganic Chem. Mfg.
3 Polymer & Resin Mfg.
4 Agri. Chem. Mfg.
5 Paint, Varnish, Lacquer,
Enamel Mfg.
6 Pharmaceutical Mfg.
7 Other Chem. Mfg.

1 Non-Ferrous Metals
2 Ferrous Metals
3 Metals NEC
Point Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
32,882

27,125
2,770
1,770
0
1,217
234,916
12,446
9,892
104,585
92,810
15,182
10,869
1,177

1,326

1,037

7,328

0
0
1,492,417

515,330
40,463
274,576
25,177
10,779

22,596
603,497
73,204
19,962
51,849
1,394
NO,
7,516,334

6,712,495
195,52fr
559,390
0
48,923
1,670,488
472,244
157,727
268,625
209,108
562,783
101,301
29,199

24,226

18,436

29,440

0
0
154,474

32,503
18,052
15,548
46,064
59

25
42,224
65,317
14,343
45,212
5,763
CO
313,164

232,781
18,807
50,621
0
10,956
422,468
70,151
25,129
46,732
182,137
98,319
91,040
11,702

3,443

2,615

73,280

0
0
1,989,447

285,714
95,103
19,067
17,320
0

19
1,572,225
2,090,818
685,855
1,398,763
6,200
Area Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
0

0
0
0
0
0
20,549
636
3,731
16,070
112
0
426,789
273

2,415

3,418

405,251
15,432
455,983

185,121
0
39,605
0
0

231,257
0
0
61,077
353,119
0
NO,
0

0
0
0
0
"0
1,602,265
123,938
87,930
1,389,942
455
0
632,271
9,886

71,021

133,088

65,843
352,433
0

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
CO
0

0
0
0
0
0
240,614
15,958
15,273
208,845
538
0
5,636,360
3,506

13,414

26,612

5,434,658
158,160
0

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
23
-------
Summary of Emissions by Tier 1 and Tier 2 Source Categories (Continued)

Tierl
6 Petroleum & Related
Industries

7 Other Industrial
Processes

S Solvent Utilization

Tier 2

1 Oil & Gas Production
2 Petroleum Refineries &
Related Industries
3 Asphalt Mfg.

I Agriculture, Food,
Kindred Products
2 Textiles, Leather,
Apparel Products
3 Wood, Pulp & Paper, &
Publishing Products
4 Rubber & Misc. Plastic
Products
5 Mineral Products
6 Machinery Products
7 Electronic Equipment
8 Transportation
Equipment
9 Construction
10 Misc. Industrial
Processes

1 Degreasing
2 Graphic Arts
3 Dry Cleaning
4 Surface Coating
5 Other Industrial
6 Nonindustrial
Point Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
336,249

13,707
319,289

3,254
405,724

203,555

9,975

43,995

45,629

13,971
3,445
321
405

0
. 84,429

1,203,524
67,805
285,549
1,521
712,303
136,347
0
NO,
247,953

53,294
194,095

565
353,558

4,696

76,030

214,726
1,594
0
0

0
56,409

7,593
45
283
0
7,250
14
0
CO
461,533

9,561
450,277

1,695
731,199

269

656,921

42,795
115
11,977
7

0
19,031

1,734
983
189
0
552
10
0
Area Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
414,196

61,077
353,119

0
79,228

50,278

0
0
0
0

0
28,950

4,863,848
683,768
134,980
207,701
1,539,678
397,720
1,900,001
NO.
0

0
0

0
4,627

0
.
0

0
0
0
0

0
4,627

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CO
0

0
0

0
2,155

0
0
0
0

0
2,155

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
-------
Summary of Emissions by Tier I and Tier 2 Source Categories (Continued)

Tier 1
9 Storage & Transport

10 Waste Disposal &
Recycling

1 1 Highway Vehicles

12 Off-Highway

Tier 2

1 Bulk Terminals &
Plants
2 Petroleum & Petroleum
Prod. Storage
3 Petroleum & Petroleum
Prod. Transport
4 Service StationsrStage I
S Service Stations:Stage n
6 Service Stations:
Breath/Emptying
7 Organic Chemical
Storage
8 Organic Chemical
Transport
9' Inorganic Chemical
Storage
10 Inorganic Chemical
Transport
1 1 Bulk Materials Storage
12 Bulk Materials
Transport

1 Incineration
2 Open Burning
3 POTW
4 Industrial WW
5TSDF
6 Landfills
7 Other

1 Light-Duty Gas
Vehicles/Motorcycles
2 Light-Duty Gas Truck
3 Heavy-Duty Gas
Vehicles
4 Diesel

1 Non-Road Gasoline
2 Non-Road Diesels
3 Aircraft
4 Marine Vessels
5 Railroads
Point Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
573,818
100,189

332.549

2,384

2,306
337
0

120,444

14,940

271

400
0

13,357

12,639
127
26
0
0 .
353
212
0
0

0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NO,
2,037
0

1,210

0
0
0

194

539
0

18,800

17,964
572
0
0
0
219
45
0
0

0
0

0
• o
0
0
0
0
0
CO
1,516
30

534

0
0
0

809

143
0

76,370

75,045
847
0
0
0
465
13
0
0

0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Area Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
1,412,815
0

227,423
625,821
0

559,571

0
0

2,253,881

51,284
262,871
10,862
0
1,928,864
0
0
5,075,305
3,274,610

1,235,772
205,164

359,759
1,239,073
608,688
192,391
395,874
42,120
0
NO,
0
0

0
0
• 0

0
0

62,541

12,705
49,836
0
0
0
0
0
6,411,070
2,627,043

881,900
184,617

2,717,510
2,498,668
1,241,197
139,372
188,809
929,290
0
CO
0
0

0 I
o
0 I

0
0

1,610,601

775,054
835,547
0
0
0
0
0
43,719,292
30,205,337

9,802,382
2,197,742

1,513,831
6,511,305
4,095,312
965,531
1,328,595
121,867
0
25
-------
Summary of Emissions by Tier 1 and Tier 2 Source Categories (Continued)

Tierl
13 Ntturil Source*

14 Miscellaneous

Tier2

I Biogenic
2Geogenic
3 Miscellaneous

1 Agriculture & Forestry
2 Other Combustion
3 Catastrophic/ Accidental
Releases
4 Repair Shops
5 Health Services
6 Cooling Towers
7 Fugitive Dust
Point Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
0
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
NO,
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
CO
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
Are* Source Emissions (tons)
VOC
0
0
0
0
575,596
76,573
499,023
0

0
0
0
0
NO.
0
0
0
0
133,007
11,780
121,227
0

0
0
0
0
CO
0
0
*0
0
4,266.7^5
551,918
3.714.827
0

0
0
0
0
26
-------
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-454/R-93-056
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on reverse before completing)
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
6. REPORT DATE
Guidance on Urban Airshed Model (UAM)
Reporting Requirements for Attainment
Demonstration
March 23, 1994
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Technical Support Division (MD-14)
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Technical Support Division (MD-14)
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND P£RK)D~COVEREO
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Th.s document provides guidance to State agencies for documenting modeling procedures and results
supporting the 1994 revision to State implementation plans (SIP's) for ozone. The Urban Airshed Model is an
urban-scale, grid-based photochemical dispersion model. The model provides a means for studying the
relationship of volatile organic compound and nitrogen oxide emissions to ambient levels of ozone This
document provides guidance on the reporting requirements for regulatory use
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Urban Airshed Model (UAM)
attainment demonstration; Clean Air Act
mandated controls; model performance
evaluation
Photochemical Model
ozone
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS IKeponl
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
26
20. SECURITY CLASS /Page!
Unclassified
EPA Form 222O-1 (Rev. 4-771 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
27
-------
-------