EPA-AA-TEB-EF-85-2
   MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model

           February  1985
          Mark A. Wolcott
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
        Ann Arbor, Michigan
         Dennis F. Kahlbaum
   Computer  Sciences Corporation
        Ann  Arbor, Michigan

-------
                 Table of Contents








                                             Page




I.   Background                                 3



II.  Summary                                    4



III.     Inputs                                 9



    A.   Vehicle Stock                          10



    B.   Registration Distribution              13



    C.   VMT                                    15



    D.   Diesel Market Penetration              16



    E.   Leaded Market Penetration              16




    F.   Fuel Economy                           17



    G.   Fuel Switching                         17



    H.   Urban/Rural VMT                        19



IV.  Outputs                                    19



V.   Validation             .                    22



VI.  Comparisons                                24










Appendixes



    A.   Model Input-Figures                    A-l



    B.   Model Input-Tables                     B-l



    C.   Program Code                           C-l



    D.   Model Output                           D-l

-------
              The MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model

I.   Background

     The MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption  (M3FC)  model was  developed
to  estimate   gasoline  and   diesel   fuel  used   by   motor
vehicles.   It   is   based   on  the  MOBILES  mobile   source
emissions  model1   and  predicts   the  amount  of   leaded,
unleaded,  and  diesel  fuels  consumed  for each  of  fourteen
vehicle classes.

     Several   such   fuel   consumption   models   have   been
developed   over   the   years2'3'".     None,    however,    is
consistent  with  MOBILE3.    Since  MOBILES  is  the  emission
model used  to  evaluate  present and  potential motor  vehicle
regulations,   it is  desirable to  estimate the benefits  from
these  regulations  with  a  model   for  which  the  underlying
assumptions are the same.

     While   the  primary   concern    behind   the   Agency's
regulations  are  the  public's  health  and  welfare,   these
quantities  are  difficult   to measure.   Tons of  pollutants
eliminated  and  ambient  concentrations  reduced  tend  to  be
easier  to  estimate.   In the  past,  MOBILES,  in  combination
with  Rollback  and  EKMA,5   were  sufficient to  estimate  the
surrogates to health and welfare.

     MOBILE3 itself  estimates grams  of carbon monoxide (CO),
hydrocarbons  (HC)  and oxides  of  nitrogen (NOX)  emitted  for
each  mile  a  vehicle travels.  In general,   these  pollution
estimates  are  not  particularly  sensitive  to fuel  economy.
This  is   particularly   true  with  respect   to  light  duty
vehicles (LDV) and light duty trucks (LOT).

     Refueling  emission  losses,   however,  depend  on  total
vehicle miles  traveled  (VMT)  and  fuel economy (MPG), as well
as  many  other   factors.    Further,   the   benefits   from
controlling  fuel volatility  are  in  part a  function  of  the
total volume of gasoline consumed.  Also,  the amount of lead
emitted  into  the  atmosphere  is  a  function  of  gasoline
volume.  A fuel  consumption  model  based  on MOBILES  lends
itself  to  calculating the  information required  more readily
than MOBILES used by itself.

     The   principle  of  computing   fuel   consumption   is
basically  simple.   Total fuel consumed  is a  function  of the
total number  of vehicles,  the  number of  miles  each vehicle
travels,  and  each  vehicle's  fuel economy.   Therefore,  the
more vehicles  there  are  and the more  miles they  travel,  the
more fuel  they will  consume.  On  the  other hand, the greater
the fuel  economy these  vehicles  obtain, the less  fuel  they

-------
will consume.   In practice, these  basic inputs are  refined
in most models to calculate what their authors believe  to  be
more accurate estimates.

     This  author  is   no   exception.   Accordingly,  after  a
brief summary, a detailed description of each model  input  is
presented.    Registrations, VMT,  and  MPG   for  each  vehicle
class are presented.   In  addition,  leaded  and diesel  market
penetration  rates  and fuel  switching  rates  are  included.
This discussion  of  inputs is  followed  by  a presentation  of
the model's outputs.   These outputs  are  used to  validate the
model by benchmarking  it  against published  results for  the
years 1975-1983.   The  model's  predictions  are  also compared
with estimates  from three other models.   Differences  with
one of  the  models are addressed by describing the effect  of
four  major   input  assumptions.    Finally,   the  appendixes
contain  all  of  the  input data,  the program computer  code,
and the detailed output tables.

II.  Summary

     Total  gasoline consumed by  all motor vehicles peaked in
1978  at 7.41  million barrels  per  day (MBL/Day) .6   Since
that time,  gasoline consumption has  declined.   By the  year
2000,  according  to  M3FC,  gasoline use  will be  only  4.87
MBL/Day.  On the other hand, diesel fuel consumed  by highway
motor  vehicles*  has  increased  every  year   for  each of  the
last  ten years7  and  is   expected  to continue  to  increase
through  the  year 2000.  However, since  gasoline use  will at
first  decline  more  quickly  than   diesel   fuel   use  will
increase, total  fuel  consumed will  decline  until 1994  and
then  very   slowly  increase.   Also,  leaded  fuel   use  will
decline  as   older,  pre-catalyst  vehicles   are   scrapped  and
replaced by newer vehicles designed to run  on  unleaded fuel.
[Figure 1]
  Estimating  diesel  fuel  consumed   by   off-highway  motor
  vehicles,   such  as  farm  and  construction  equipment,  is
  beyond the scope of this report.

-------
                         Figure 1

                 MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                     Total Fuel Consumed
     130
   a,
   V)
   §
  m
       1975     1980      1985     1990
                       Calendar Year
1995
2000
     Underlying  these total  fuel  consumption  curves are  the
total  number  of  vehicles  registered,  total  vehicle  miles
traveled, and the  average on road fuel economy.

     The  total  number of  vehicles  registered  is expected  to
increase  from  120  million  in  19758  to  203  million in  the
year 2000.  The  compound annual growth  rate of  this  increase
is  2.1  percent  per  year  (as  compared  to  the  historical
growth  rate  of  4.0 percent  per year between 1952  and  1975).
[Figure 2]

-------
     220
                          Figure2

                 MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
                   Total Highway Registrations
                                   220
        1975
1980
1985      1990
Calendar Year
1995
     A  larger vehicle  stock  naturally  results in  a  greater
fleet VMT.   Both  the number  of  passenger cars and the  total
miles they  travel  will increase  at  a compound  annual  rate  of
1.8  percent  per  year  from  1975  to  the  year  2000.   Light
trucks  will increase at  an  annual  rate of  3.2  percent  per
year and  heavy trucks  will increase  at  a rate of 3.0 percent
per year.  [Figure  3]

-------
    2200
                         FigureS

                 MOBILES Riel Consumption Model
                Total Highway Vehicle Miles Traveled
                                                  2200
  fe
  (X
  w
 CQ
       1975     1980     1985     1990
                       Calendar Year
                     1995
                                                2000
     Since fuel  economy also  improves during  this same time,
total  fuel  consumption will  decline.  The  average passenger
car  fuel economy will  improve  from  12.6  mpg  in  19759   to
27.6   mpg   by   the   end  of   the   century,   for  an  annual
                            percent.   Similarly,   light  truck
                            at a rate  of  2.5 percent per year,
                            20.7  mpg  (2000).   Finally,  heavy
                            improve   from  5.4  mpg  (1975)10   to
                               annual  improvement.  [Figure  4]
of  3.2
improve
improvement  rate
fuel economy  will
from 11.0  mpg  (1975)"  to
truck  fuel economy  will
7.7 mpg (2000),  a 1.5 percent

-------
      26-

      24-

      22-

      20-

      18-
   3  16H
ex
CO
      14-

      12-

      10-

       8-

       6-

       4-

       2-

       0
                          Figure 4

                 MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                   Fleet On Road Fuel Economy
          x—-
             1975   1980   1985   1990   1995
                       Calendar Year
                                      2000
     The   interactions  of   these   changes   in   number   of
vehicles,  vehicle miles traveled,  and fuel economy  mean that
passenger  car  fuel  use will  decline relative  to truck fuel
use.   In  1975 passenger  cars used  62.8  percent of  all  motor
vehicle  fuel.   By  the  end  of  the  century  that  use  is
expected  to  drop  to   48.3  percent.   At  the  same  time  the
light  truck   share  will  increase  moderately,   from   17.5
percent  to 21.8  percent,  while  the heavy  truck share will
increase somewhat more, from  16.5 percent  to 26.4  percent.*
[Figure 5]
* These  numbers  do  not  add up  to  100  percent.
  consumption accounts  for  the difference.
                                                Off-highway
                               8

-------
     130
                         Figure 5

                 MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                     Total Fuel Consumed
        1975     1960     1985     1990
                       Calendar Year
1995
2000
III.   Inputs

     As   noted   in   the   introduction,  the   principle  of
computing fuel  consumption is  basically simple.   Total fuel
consumed  is  a function  of  the total number  of vehicles, the
number of miles each  vehicle  travels and each  vehicle's fuel
economy.  In  mathematical  notation it  is  represented by the
following equation:

  Fuel Consumption=[Number  of  Vehicles]*[VMT]/[Fuel Economy]

However,  this equation  assumes  that  all  vehicles  have the
same  age, VMT, and  fuel economy.   In  reality,  the vehicles
operating in  any  given calendar  year  are a  mixture of model
years.   Different  model  years  have  different  fuel  economy

-------
characteristics   and   vehicles   of   different   ages   have
different travel  characteristics.   Since  diesel  fuel has  a
higher heating value than gasoline fuel,  fuel type also  is  a
factor  in  fuel  economy  estimates.   Thus,  a  more  accurate
equation is

     Fuel Consumption(i,j,k)=[Number  of Vehicles(i,j,k)]*
              [VMT(i,j,k)]/[Fuel  Economy(i,j,k)]

where i=age,  j=fuel  type, and k=vehicle class.  This  is the
form of  the equation used by the M3FC model.   In M3FC   age
(i)  ranges  from  1  to  30  years;  fuel  type (j)  represents
either unleaded  gasoline,  leaded gasoline,  or  diesel  fuel,
and (k)  represent one of fourteen  vehicle  classes.

     Further,  M3FC  is  capable of computing  fuel  consumption
estimates from 1975 to  2020.   Since  at  least a few  vehicles
are assumed to remain  operational for  up  to 30  years,  most
input  data   must  be  available  from   1946   through  2020.
Operationally this has often  meant that  the time  series of  a
variable remains  constant at one  level  for some  very  early
years and,  in most  cases,  remains  constant at  a  different
level for all  years beyond the year 2000.

III.A.  Vehicle Stock

     The first  element  of the fuel  consumption equation  is
referred  to  as  the  vehicle stock,  the  total  number  of
vehicles operating  in a  given calendar  year.   Vehicle  stock
estimates  are  required   for  each  vehicle  class  for  every
projection year from 1975 through the year  2020.

     The  initial step  of estimating  vehicle  stock  is  to
obtain   historical  total   stock   estimates.    Historical
estimates are available  principally  from  two  sources,  the
R.L.  Polk  Company8  and  the  Federal Highway  Administration
(FHWA)ll

     Although  the  truck  stock   estimates  from  these  two
sources  are similar for  all  years,  car  registrations differ
markedly.   Figures A-l   and  A-2  and  Table  B-l  show  the
vehicle stock estimates from these two sources.

   , According    to    Oak    Ridge    National    Laboratories
(ORNL),12 there are several reasons for  these differences:

     1.   The FHWA count  includes  all vehicles  that  have been
registered throughout  the calendar  year.   Therefore,  their
number includes vehicles  retired during  the year  and double
counts vehicles  that have been registered  twice in different
or the  same  states.  The  Polk count only  includes  vehicles

                              10

-------
that are  registered  on July 1, thus  factoring  in  scrappage,
to some degree,  and avoiding double counting.

     2.  Polk counts  are restricted to passenger cars,  while
FHWA figures may include light duty trucks for some states.

     3.  Beginning with  the 1980  estimate, Polk counts vans
as light trucks, rather than passenger cars.  The  FHWA  count
includes  vans  as  passenger  cars  or trucks,  depending  on
individual state classifications.

     It is  for  these  reasons  that the Polk estimates  appear
to  be   a  better  indicator  of  the  average automobile  stock
during a calendar year than are the FHWA  estimates.

     While  these  same  reasons  apply to  estimates of  truck
registrations,  the  two  groups'  truck estimates are  closer,
probably because the  scrappage  rate of  trucks is  lower than
that  of cars.   Also,  since  a truck is  less  likely  to  be
reregistered in a second state within a  given calendar  year,
double  counting in  the FHWA  figures is  reduced.  The M3FC
model  therefore, uses  the  Polk values as the basis  for  its
pre-1984 car and truck vehicle stocks.

     In order to  extend these estimates to the  year  2020,
ordinary  least  squares  regressions were  applied  separately
to  the 1950-1983  car  and truck  registration time  series.
The slopes  of these  regression lines were than extrapolated
from   the   1983   Polk  data.8    These    results   are   also
presented in Figures A-l and A-2 and Table B-l.

     Thus,   the   historic   and   extrapolated   Polk   car
registrations directly  provide  the  stock estimates for LDVs.
As  for trucks,   a  method  was  needed to   apportion the Polk
numbers   among   the   numerous   M3FC  truck   classes.    To
accomplish  this task,  a special  run  was made of  the Energy
Environmental Analysis,  Inc.  (EEA)  10th  Quarterly Report13
model  using  1977  calibration  data.   The  stock  obtained from
that run are shown below.

         1977 EEA 10th Quarterly Report Registrations

     LDV            LDT1        LDT2             Class 2B

     99.904         15.388      7.339            0.887

     Classes 3-5    Class 6     Classes 7-8B

     1.245          1.688       1.686
                              11

-------
     The  1977  Truck  Information  and  Use   Survey   (TIUS)
report14 was  then  used to separate grouped Classes 3-5  and
7-8B into individual weight classes.

     1977 TIUS Baseline Registration Fractions  by Class

     Class 3      Class 4       Class 5       Class  6

     .099         .068         .122           .198
     Class 7

     .089
                  ClassSA

                  .090
          Class 8B

          .172
                All Other
                Trucks

                .162
     By  using   these  functions  as  weighting  factors,   the
grouped  classes  were split.   For example,  in 1977 Class  3
comprised .099/ (.099 + .068 + .122)  or 34.3%  of  the grouped
Classes  3-5  registration  total or  0.427 million  vehicles.
Applying this procedure to  the remaining  classes yields  the
baseline registration distribution used in the M3FC model.
         M3FC 1977 Baseline Registration Distribution
LDV
99.904

Class 5
0.527
           LDT1
           15.378

           Class 6
           1.688
LOT 2
7.339

Class 7
0.426
Class 2B
0.887

Class 8A
0.433
Class 3
0.427

Class 8B
0.827
Class 4
0.291
     This  distribution  forms  the  basis  for  all  past  and
future truck  stock estimates used  in the M3FC  model.   From
this, an iterative  process  was  used to obtain future vehicle.
stock estimates.

     Starting with 1977 as a base year,  a  constant  scrappage
rate  was  applied  to  each  vehicle class.   The  assumed  LDV
scrappage  rate  was 7.9 percent  while that for  LDT1  through
Class  8B  was   5.0  percent.    These  scrappage  rates  are
averages  from  the  1969  to 1983  values  published in  MVMA
Motor Vehicle  Facts  and Figures,  1984.1S   After  scrappage
                                     each  class were  added.
                                     the Data Resources, Inc.
was  applied,  sale  projections
The sales figures were  derived
(DRI)  Trendlong  report5   and
with other regulatory analyses.
           for
           from
           sales
                                      percentages  consistent
     After the scrapped vehicles  were removed from the fleet
and  sales were  added, the  resulting  totals  for cars  and
trucks  were  compared to  the  projected  Polk figures.   By
renormalizing  these   series  by vehicle class,  the  overall
totals  not  only  reflected  Polk  figures  but  also  followed
                              12

-------
vehicle  stock  trends  projected by  DRI.    This  process  was
repeated until the  year  2020 using  the following  recursive
formulas:

                            Step 1

    Vehicle Stock by Class(year+l)=[Stock  by Class(year)]*

         [Scrappage Rate]+[Modified DRI  Sales(year+l)]

                  Remove buses  from Class 6

                            Step 2

                 Compute car and truck totals

                            Step 3

               Vehicle Stock by Class(year+l)=

   [Vehicle  Stock  by Class(year+l)]*[Polk Sum]/Computer Sum]

                         Go to Step 1

The resulting  vehicle  stock by class  estimates  are shown in
Table B-2.

III.B.  Registration Distribution

     In  any calendar year,  the  total  vehicle  stock consists
of  vehicles of different  vintages.   Since  each  vintage  has
its  own  unique  blend  of  fuel  economy  and  VMT,  it  is
necessary to  know how many  vehicles  there  are  of  each age.
The MOBILES  registration  distributions form the basis  upon
which   these   estimates  were   made   for   M3FC.    (For   an
explanation    of    these    distributions,     see    Fleet
Characterization Data Used in MOBILES.16)

     However,  before the MOBILES distributions could be used
in  the fuel  consumption  model, certain  modifications  were
needed.  The  MOBILES  registration estimates  are  assumed to
be  as  of July 1  of  each year,  before  the  first  model year's
sales  are complete.  In  addition,  all vehicles older than 19
years  of  age  are added  together  and  placed in  the  20+  age
group.  To  adjust for  these differences the original MOBILES
registration  equations,  covering  ages 2  to 19  years,  were
extrapolated  forward,  to  a  full   first  year  and  extended
backward to 30 years of  age.   The resulting series  was  then
renormalized so that the total adds up to  100 percent.

     Since  there  are  seven  vehicle  classes in  MOBILES  and
essentially  fourteen  in  the  M3FC   model,  the  following
mapping scheme was used:
                              13

-------
           M3FC
          Vehicle
           Class

          LDV
          LDT1
          LDT2
          Class 2B
          Class 3
          Class 4
          Class 5
          Class 6
          Class 7
          Class 8A
          Class 8B
          School Buses
          Public Buses
          Off-Highway
   MOBILES Registration
    Distribution  Used
Gas

LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
LDGT2
LDGT2
HDGV
HDGV
HDGV
HDDV
HDDV
HDDV
 *
 *
 *
Diesel

 LDDV
 LDDT
 LDDT
 LDDT
 LDDT
 HDGV
 HDGV
 HDGV
 HDDV
 HDDV
 HDDV
     Classes  4-6  are  primarily gasoline  vehicles so  those
fueled by diesel  are  assumed  to be used like  their  gasoline
counterparts.   Therefore,  they  were  assigned the  adjusted
MOBILES  HDGV  distributions.    Also,  since  diesel   engines
predominate  Class  7-8B trucks,  these classes were  assigned
the   adjusted   HDDV   distributions.     The    registration
distributions used  in the  M3FC model  are shown  in  Figures
A-3 through A-6 and listed in Table B-3.

     To actually obtain the number  of vehicles of a  certain
age,   the   calendar   year   dependent   vehicle    stock   was
multiplied by the fraction of vehicles at that age:

          Number  of Vehicles  (age)=[Vehicle Stock]*
               [Registration Distribution(age)]

                where age ranges from 1 to 30.

With  the  exception of buses  and off-highway  vehicles,  this
methodology  was  used  for   each  year   and   vehicle  class
analyzed  by  the model.  The  data  for buses  and  off-highway
vehicles  are  calendar   year  dependent  rather  than   age
  The  treatment  'of  these  vehicle  categories  is  slightly
  different than  the  others.   Only  total  VMT and  fleet  MPG
  are available for buses.  Therefore,  individual  model year
  distributions are not  included  in  the  model.    Further,
  off-highway  gasoline  use  is   entered  directly  into  the
  model.
                              14

-------
dependent and  so  did not  require  registration  distributions
in their calculations.

III.C.   VMT

     The number of miles  traveled per year  by  a vehicle  is
dependent on  age as well  as class.  M3FC  uses most of  the
VMT  age curves  found  in  the MOBILES model  as  shown in  the
listing below.   (For  a detailed discussion  of  these  curves,
see Fleet  Characterization  Data  Used for  MOBILES.2l)    The
mapping  scheme   is   nearly  the  same  as   that   used   for
registration distributions.

                                   MOBILES  VMT
            M3FC                 Distribution Used
           Vehicle
            Class            Gas              Diesel

           LDV               LDGV             LDDV
           LDT1              LDGT1            LDDT
           LDT2              LDGT2            LDDT
           Class 2B          LDGT2            LDDT
           Class 3           LDGT2            LDDT
           Class 4           HDGV             HDGV
           Class 5           HDGV             HDGV
           Class 6           HDGV             HDGV
           Class 7           HDGV
           Class 8A          HDGV
           Class 8A          HDGV
           Class 8B          HDGV

     This   scheme   is   fairly  straightforward   except   for
Classes  2B  and above.   The  LDGT2/LDDT distributions  were
assigned to  Class  2B  because  this  class  behaves  more  like
LDT2  than  either  HDG  or  HDD  vehicles.   Since  Class  3
vehicles are  being  slowly  phased  out and  replaced by  Class
2B vehicles, they were also assigned the LDT2 distribution.

     Diesel  Classes  7-8B  use  separate  VMT  distributions
derived  from  the  1977  Truck   Inventory and  Use  Survey.'4
While  these distributions  formed  the basis for  the single
MOBILES HDDV  distribution, using  the  separate  distributions
yields   somewhat   greater   accuracy  in   calculating   fuel
consumption for these heavy truck classes.

     For all distributions  it was  assumed  that  vehicles  over
20 years of  age travel annually the  same distance  as age 20
vehicles.  Figures A-7 through  A-12  and Table  B-4  summarize
the VMT distributions used.
                              15

-------
III.D.  Diesel Market Penetration

     Each  model  year,  a certain  number of  gas and  diesel
vehicles  are  produced.   The  fraction  of  diesel   vehicles
compared to  the  total  produced  for a given class is referred
to  as  the  diesel  market  penetration   rate.    In  the  M3FC
model,  these rates  are  used to estimate  the number  of  gas
and diesel  vehicles operating in  each  model year.   This  is
accomplished by using the following formulas:

  Number of  Diesel  Vehicles(year)=[Number of  Vehicles(year)]*
                   [Diesel Penetration(year)]

   Number of Gas Vehicles(year)=[Number  of  Vehicles(year)]*
                 [1-Diesel Penetration(year)]

     The  diesel  penetration  rates  used in  the M3FC model
were  prepared  by  EPA.17   Generally  rates  were  available
from  1960  to  1995.   Because the  M3FC  model   requires  data
from  1946  to 2020,  it was  assumed  that the rates   prior  to
1960  were  the  same as  those  in  1960  and  rates after  1995
were  the same  as  those in  1995.   The diesel  penetration
rates are  shown in  Figures  A-13 through A-18  and  listed in
Table B-5.

     At present, the future dieselization of  the LDV and LOT
fleets  is   uncertain.   To  allow  for  this  uncertainty,  the
model has  a provision to  place  a  maximum  limit on the  LDV
and LOT diesel penetration rates  after  1983.   This rate can
be set  in the range from 0 to 11.5 percent for  LDVs and from
0 to 33.9 percent  for LDTs.

III.E.  Leaded Market Penetration

     Similarly,  in a  given  model  year  a  certain  number  of
gasoline vehicles  are  designed  to  run on leaded or unleaded
fuel.   The  proportion of vehicles designed  to  run  on  leaded
fuel  is referred  to  as  the leaded  market penetration rate.
In M3FC,  the number of vehicles designed to use gasoline of
a given type is estimated with the  following two equations:

             Number of Leaded Gas Vehicles(year)=
                [Number of Gas Vehicles(year)]*
               [Leaded Market Penetration(year)]  .

            Number of Unleaded Gas  Vehicles(year)=
               [Number of Gas Vehicles(year)]*
              [1-Leaded Market Penetration(year)]

     The LDV through  LDT2  rates  used in the M3FC model  were
obtained  from  the data   files   used  to produce EEA's  10th

                              16

-------
Quarterly Report.13   Classes  2B-3  were  assumed to  be  100
percent  leaded  up   through  1986  and  100  percent  unleaded
thereafter.   Classes 4-8B and   buses  were assumed to be  100
percent  leaded for  all  years.  Table  B-6 lists the  leaded
market penetration rates used in the model.

III.F.  Fuel Economy

     Fuel economy estimates  were obtained from a variety  of
sources.  An  internal  EPA memorandum Fuel  Consumption  Model
Inputs9  provided new  vehicle  fleet  road MPG  for  LDVs  and
LDTs.   These  estimates were not  distinguished by fuel  type
but  instead  a  diesel  advantage  factor  was  included  to
indicate  the  degree to  which  diesel fueled  vehicles  obtain
fuel  economy  greater   than  their  gasoline  counterparts.
These  two  estimates,   along  with  the  model year  specific
diesel penetration  rates  for each  model  year,  were  combined
to estimate  separate gasoline  and  diesel fuel economy.   The
two equations used are:

          Gas  MPG=[Fleet  MPG]*([1-Diesel Penetration]
       +[Diesel Penetration]/[Diesel Advantage Factor])

        Diesel MPG=[Gas MPG]*[Diesel Advantage Factor]

     The  LDV  and LOT  available  estimates cover  the  1962  to
2000 model years.   It  was  assumed  that MPG  values  prior  to
1962  were the same  as the  1962  figure  and  those  after the
year  2000 would  be  the  same  as  the year  2000  figure.   No
distinction was made between LDT1 and LDT2.

     The  Fuel  Economies  of  Heavy  Duty Vehicles  report18
provided  separate   gas   and diesel  road MPG  values  for  1962
to  2000  model years in  Classes  2B-8B.   As  with the  light
duty  classes,  MPG  values prior to 1962  were  assigned  the
1962  values.   Figures  A-19  through A-26  show the MPG values
while  Table  B-7 show  the  MPG  values  and diesel  advantage
factors used in the model.

III.G.  Fuel Switching

     Unfortunately  not  all gasoline  vehicles  consistently
use the  type  of  fuel for which they  were designed.   Indeed,
fuel  switching  is  defined  as using   a  type  of  fuel  in  a
vehicle other than the type for which it was designed.

     There  are,   therefore,  two  types  of  fuel  switching:
illegal  and  discretionary.   Illegal  fuel switching  is  using
leaded   fuel   in  vehicles  designed  for   unleaded   fuel.
Discretionary  fuel  switching  is  using  unleaded  fuel  in
vehicles designed for leaded fuel.

                               17

-------
     The illegal fuel switching  rates  used  in the M3FC model
are  based  on  those  found  in  MOBILES.1   Two   types   of
tampering  are  used  to  indicate  illegal   fuel  switching.
These  are  labeled   as  "fuel  inlet  tampering"   and  "other
misfueling"   in  MOBILE3.    The  rates  are  given   by  the
following equations:

                             LDV

      Fuel Inlet Tampering = -0.0143*0.02022*(10K miles)
         Other Misfueling = 0.0165+0.0559*(10K miles)

                 LDT1, LDT2, and Classes 2B-3

       Fuel Inlet Tampering =0.1101+0.02022*(10K miles)
         Other Misfueling  =  0.0696+0.00559*(10K miles)

     Since the M3FC model performs  its  calculations  based on
vehicle  age,  these  mileage based  equations were transformed
to  age  based equations  using  the  VMT by  age  distributions
discussed earlier.   The  inlet  tampering and other misfueling
rates  were   then   combined   to   form  a   single,   illegal
misfueling rate.  These are shown in Figure A-27.

     However, these rates do not  reflect the amount of fuel
misused  but  only  the frequency of  misuse.   A multiplicative
adjustment  factor   of  0.417  was  included  in  the  model  to
account  for   the  amount  of  fuel  misused.    This  factor  was
calculated by dividing  the purchased  volume misfueling rate
(7.5  percent) by the vehicle  involvement   misfueling  rate*
(18.0   percent)   in  the   Department   of   Energy's  report,
Patterns  of  Vehicle  Misfueling  in 1981  and  1982:   Where,
When, What Vehicles and How Often?1*

     Discretionary  fuel  switching  rates, on the other hand,
are   based   on  the    Supplementary   Guidelines   for  Lead
Implementation  Plans report.2 °   These rates are  applied to
LDV through Class 2B and  depend  entirely on model year.  For
all  model years  up through  1975 the  rate  is  7.1  percent.
Thereafter,   it  increases  to  27.5  percent.   Since  these
  The purchased  volume  misfueling  rate equals the gallons of
  leaded  fuel  used  by  vehicles  designed  to  operate  on
  unleaded gasoline divided  by the total amount of fuel used
  by  these   vehicles.   It  is  a  misfueling  rate  based  on
  gallons.   On  the  other  hand,  the  vehicle  involvement
  misfueling  rate  is  a  rate  based on  frequency.   It equals
  the  number  of  times  an  owner  misfuels  his/her  vehicle
  divided  by  the  total  number  of  times  that  vehicle  is
  refueled.

                           .   18

-------
values  refer  directly
adjustment   factor   is
discretionary misfueling
        to  the  amount  of   fuel   used,   no
        needed.    Figure  A-28  shows   the
        rate used in the model.
     The following formulas
amount of fuel switched:
           are  used  to calculate  the  total
           Number of  Illegally Misfueled Vehicles=
   [Number of Unleaded Vehicles]*[Illegal  Misfueling Rate]*
                [Misfueling Adjustment Factor]

        Number of Discretionally Misfueled Vehicles =
       [Number of Leaded Vehicles]*[Discretionary Rate]

III.H.  Urban/Rural  VMT

     The  amount  of  VMT  traveled  in  an  urban  or  rural
environment  is  also  dependent  on vehicle  class  and  model
year.    Urban VMT estimates are included  in M3FC to  provide
one   of   several   inputs   to   air   quality  models.    The
urban/rural  rates used in the M3FC  model are summarized in
Figures A-29 through A-34 and Table B-8.
                       1 0
IV.  Outputs

     The  M3FC  model  outputs  fuel consumption  estimates  for
fourteen different vehicle classes.   These  classes  and their
composition are summarized below:
   LDV
   LDT1
   LDT2
   Classes 2B-5

   Class 6
   Classes 7-8A
   Class 8B
   School Buses
   Public Buses
   Off-Highway
Light Duty Vehicles (passenger cars)
Light Duty Trucks 1, 0-6000 Ibs GVW
Light Duty Trucks 2, 6001-8500 Ibs GVW
Light to Medium Duty Trucks, 8501-19500 Ibs
GVW
Light Heavy Duty Trucks, 19501-26000 Ibs GVW
Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks, 26000-50000 Ibs GVW
Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks, 50000+lbs GVW
Agricultural, industrial/commercial,
construction and marine/recreation vehicles
   Table 1 is  a  copy of the  1983  model output.   Tables for
all, years are available in the Appendix D of this report.

   For each  year fuel consumption  and supporting statistics
are  provided.    The  top  one-half   of  the  table  lists  the
diesel  and   gasoline  fuel  consumed  by  light  duty  vehicles
(LDV), light  duty trucks  (LDT1, LDT2) and by  four  sets  of
heavy  duty   truck  classes.   Also   listed  is  consumption  by
                              19

-------
school and  commercial  buses.   Finally,  off-highway  gasoline
consumption is included.

   Gasoline  usage  is  divided  into  two  parts,  leaded  and
unleaded.    Within   each   part,   the   portion   consumed  by
vehicles designed  to  run  on  leaded  fuel  is  distinguished
from  the  portion  consumed by  vehicles designed  to run  on
unleaded fuel.

   By M3FC  definition, the  label  "pre-control"  refers  to
vehicles that were  designed  to  run  on  leaded  fuel.   The
label "control" refers to  those  vehicles that  generally are
equipped  with  catalysts  and   are   thus   designed  to  use
unleaded fuel.  Each type of  usage is listed separately.

   Below the  fuel  consumption estimates  are the  supporting
statistics.    These  are  new  vehicle   and  fleet  road  fuel
economy,*  gasoline and diesel  powered  vehicle registrations,
and urban  and rural VMT.
   The fuel economies listed for LDT1  and  LDT2  represent the
   average of LDT1 and LDT2.
                              20

-------
                                 Draft MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
                                             FEB  13.  1985
                                                  1983

                                        Fleet Fuel Consumption
                               (x10**9 Gallons/Year, x10**6 Barrels/Day)
     Diesel
                        Leaded Gasoline
                                                   Unleaded Gasoline
                                                                                Total Gasoline
                                                                                                         Grand Total

LDV
LOT1
LDT2
Classes 2B-5
Class 6
Classes 7-8A
Class SB
School Buses
Publ ic Buses
Off-Highway
Total LOT
Total LDV+LDT
Total HDV
Total Highway
Grand Total
Gal Ions
0.9O5
O.271
O- 172
0. 174
O.512
3.316
13.356
O.O13
O.730
NA
O.443
1 .348
18. 1OO
19.447
19.447
BBL/Day
O.O59
O.O18
O.O11
O.O11
0.033
O.216
0.871
O.OO1
0.048
NA
O.O29
O.O88
1 . 181
1 .269
1 .269
Pre-Control
16
4
4
3
2
O
0
O
O
2
8
24.
7.
32.
34.
.499
.258
. 157
.683
.262
.952
.053
.389
.O
.509
415
.914
340
253
762
Control
2.228
1 .491
O.542
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.0
2.O33
4.262
0.0
4.262
4.262
Total Pre-Control
18.727
5.749
4.699
3.683
2.262
O.952
0.053
O.389
0.0
2.509
1O. 448
29. 176
7.340
36.515
39.O24
1 .894
O.419
0.854
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.743
1 .273
3. 167
0.0
3. 167
3.91O
Control
38.746
8.761
3.722
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
O.O
0.0
12.482
51 .228
0.0
51 .228
51 .228
Total
4O.64O
9. 179
4.576
0.0
O.O
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.743
13.755
54.395
0.0
54.395
55. 138
Gal Ions
59.367
14.929
9.275
3.683
2.262
O.952
O.053
O.389
O.O
3.252
24.203
83.571
7.340
9O.910
94. 162
BBL/Day % Unleaded
3.873
O.974
0.6O5
O.240
0. 148
O.O62
O.OO3
O.O25
O.O
0.212
1 .579
5.451
0.479
5.930
6. 142
68.46
61 .49
49.33
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
22.85
56.83
65. 09
0.0
59.83
58.56
Gal Ions
60.
15.
9.
3.
2.
4 .
13.
O.
0.
3.
24.
84 .
25.
1 1O.
1 13.
.272
.200
447
857
.774
268
, 4O9
,4O1
.730
252
.646
918
439
358
610
BBL/Day
3.932
O.991
O.616
0.252
0. 181
O.278
0.875
O.O26
O.O48
0.212
1 .608
5.539
1 .659
7. 199
7.411
New Vehicles
                     1983

Vehicle Registrations - Vehicle Miles Traveled
  (x10**6 Vehicles)       (x1O**9 Miles/Year)

                                   Fleet




Road MPG

LDV
LDT1
LDT2
Classes 2B-5
Class 6
Classes 7-8A
Class 8B
School Buses
Publ Ic Buses
Off -Highway
Total LOT
Total LDV+LDT
Total HDV
Grand Total
Gas
22. 13
17.47
17.47
1O.73
5.84
5. 14
O.O
7.73
NA
NA




Diesel
26.77
23.06
23. 06
13.75
8.82
6.27
5.38
1O.75
5.01
NA




nudu
MPG
17. 12
13.82
13.87
9.51
6.27
5.9O
5.O7
7 .82
5.01
NA
13.84
16. 17
6.O5
13.84





Registrations
Gas
1O6.890
18.640
1 1 .268
3.316
1.065
0.382
0.043
O.438
O.O
NA
29.909
136.799
5.245
142.044
Diesel
2.O71
0.387
O.234
0. 137
0.274
O.661
1 . 162
O.O20
O. 116
NA
O.62O
2.691
2.369
5.O6O
Total
108.961
19.027
1 1 . 5O2
3.453
1 .339
1 .043
1 .205
O.458
O. 1 16
NA
3O.529
139.49O
7.614
147. 1O4
Gas
6O2
104
65
. 23
8
3
0
1
0

170
772
37
809
. 13
.81
.33
.75
.75
. 15
. 13
.23
.0
NA
. 14
.27
.01
.28

Urban
Diesel
13.86
3. 14
1 .99
1 .37
1.97
7.45
1 1 .93
O.O6
2.38
NA
5. 13
18.99
25. 15
44. 14


Total
615.99
1O7.95
67.33
25. 12
10.72
10. 6O
12. 06
1 .29
2.38
NA
175.28
791 .26
62. 16
853.42


Gas
406.46
99. 10
61 .78
1O.77
4.20
1.60
0. 10
1 .77
0.0
NA
160.87
567.33
18.44
585.78
VMT
Rural
Diesel
9.36
2.97
1 .88
0.80
2.47
12.96
55.83
0.08
1 .28
NA
4.85
14.21
73.43
87.64




Total
415
102
63
1 1
6
14
55
1
1

165
581
91
673
.82
.07
.66
.57
.67
.56
.93
.85
.28
NA
.73
.54
.87
.41


Gas
1OO8.59
203 . 9 1
127. 11
34 .,53
12.95
4.75
O.23
3.OO
0.0
NA
331 .02
1339.61
55.45
1395.06

Total
'Diesel
23.22
6.11
3.87
2. 17
4.44
2O. 41
67 .76
0. 13
3.66
NA
9.99
33.2O
98.58
131 .78


Total
1031 .80
210.02
13O.98
36. 7O
17.39
25. 16
67.99
3. 14
3.66
NA
341 .01
1372.81
154.O3
1526.83

-------
V.  Validation

   Comparing   the  M3FC  outputs   to  historical  data  for  the
nine  year  period  1975-1983  shows  that   predicted  gasoline
consumption   is  accurate   to  within  an  average  of  three
percent.  [Figure  6]  The  proportion   of   gasoline  that  was
unleaded  is  predicted  accurately  to within  an average  of
four percent.   In both cases  the comparison  is made with the
statistics   published  in   the   Petroleum  Supply  Monthly.6
[Figure 7]
Figure 6
Total Gasoline Consumption
3
JD
to 8-
o
g, 9-
1"
3 3-

.1
8 '
u
_-— ~-"~^^

' — ^^_
*
















Legend
& UJFC
X PSU
197S 1978 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983
Calendar Year
                           Figure?

                       Total Percent Unleaded
              80
              55-

              SO

              49
               19-

               10-

               9-

               0
                  1979 1978 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983
                          Calendar Year
                                22

-------
     Federal  Highway Administration statistics  are  used as
the   basis   of   comparisons    for   highway  diesel    fuel
consumption.   During the  1975-1983 period  M3FC  diesel   fuel
estimates  were   accurate   to  an   average  of  20  percent.
[Figure 8]
              1.3


            •3J. 1.1

            % 1
            ;P 0.9

            1°^
             C 0.7

            It °*
             S 0.9


             I"
            O 0.3

            1 0.2
             a;
            Q 0.1
                           Figure 8

                      Fleet Diesel Consumption
                  1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1988 1983
                          Calendar Year
      The   differences  between   the  model   predictions  and
 published  reports  could  be  explained by inaccuracies  in the
 underlying  registration,  VMT,  and/or  MPG  estimates.   They
 could also  be explained  by  changes  in  driving  behavior  of
 the American public.  For example,  the changing  real  cost  of
 owning  and  operating a car  as well  as the  general  level  of
 economic  activity  influence  the  short-term demand  for  fuel.
 While including  these economic  circumstances  is outside  of
 the model's scope,  consider  that the unemployment  rate fell
 from  8.5  percent  in  1975  to 6.1  percent in 1978,  then rose
 again to  9.6  percent in  1982.  This  trend  mirrors  the  total
 gasoline consumption trend shown  above.
                               23

-------
VI.   Comparisons

     To further evaluate M3FC, we compared the model  results
with  those  from  three   other   models.    Both   Energy  and
Environmental Analysis,  Inc.  (EEA),  in  their  Tenth  Quarterly
Report  and  in  their Eleventh  Periodical  Report,  and  Data
Resources,  Inc.  (DRI),  in  their Trendlong  report,  provide
estimates of fleet gasoline consumption.

     All  four  models predict that  gasoline  consumption will
decline  throughout  the   1980s.   [Figure  9]    The  decline
predicted  by the  M3FC  model is  somewhat steeper  than that
predicted   by   either   the   DRI  model"   or  the   Eleventh
Periodical   Report.22     The   DRI   model   also   predicts
declining  gasoline  use  through  the  year,  2000.   However,
EEA's  Tenth Quarterly  Report model predicts that  gasoline
consumption will mirror that predicted by M3FC.

     Both  M3FC  and  EEA's  two  models   predict  that  the
percent of  gasoline  consumed by  highway  motor  vehicles that
is unleaded will increase  from  approximately 50 percent  in
1980  to  87 percent in  the  year  2000.22[Figure  10]   All
three models also expect  diesel  fuel consumption to increase
at  about   the  same  rate,  although  the M3FC model  predicts
that somewhat  more diesel fuel  will be consumed  in  the year
2000  than  does  the  EEA  model. [Figure   11]    This  is  due
largely to  the greater number  of  diesels  predicted by the
M3FC model.

     Several  factors  explain  the   differences   in  gasoline
consumption.  Figure 12 shows the effect  of  applying  each of
these  model changes.   Two of  the  most  important  deal with
the assumptions about average annual VMT  per  vehicle  and the
diesel penetration rate of new vehicles.

     The M3FC  model  assumes that the average number of miles
accumulated  by each vehicle of  any given  age   is  constant
within  a  vehicle class.   It  makes  no  difference whether one
is  predicting  fuel  consumption   for  1985  or  1995.   On the
other  hand,   EEA,   in   their  Eleventh  Periodical  Report,
assumes that annual  miles traveled per car will  increase at
0.75  percent  per year  through  the  year  2000.  EEA also
assumes  that annual  light  duty  truck  miles traveled will
increase  by  0.5  percent  while medium  heavy   trucks  will
increase by 3.0  percent per year.  EEA expects  annual  heavy
heavy truck VMT  to remain constant or, decline slightly (0.4
percent).22  Eliminating  all of  the above growth  in annual
VMT  per  vehicle  reduces  EEA's  projected  fleet  gasoline
consumption  estimate for the  year  2000  by  0.509  million
barrels per day to 5.411 million barrels per day.
                              24

-------
    g.
  3 3
  s
                         Figure 9

               Fleet Gasoline Consumption
            1979   1980    1985   1990   1995    2000
                       Calendar Year
I
   100

    90

    80

    70

    so

D  50
•g
 o  *°

CU  30

    20

    10

     0
                         Figure 10

                  Fleet Percent Unleaded
             1975  1980   1085    1990   1999   2000
                       Calendar Year
   2.2

1=   »
•3? -

t"
to 18

2 1-4
 X


I "

 ! 0.8

 § 0.8
U
"5 0.4
 01
 01
a °z-
                         Figure 11

                 Fleet Diesel Consumption
            1979   1980    1985   1990   1995    2000
                       Calendar Year
                               25

-------
     The second  area of  significant difference between  the
two  models   concerns  the  diesel  penetration  rate   of   new
vehicles.

     EEA assumes that sales  of  new domestic diesel passenger
cars  will  stabilize  at  1.5 percent  of the  passenger  car
fleet in  1995.   It also expects that  1995  sales of  imported
diesel passenger cars will reach 4.0  percent,  domestic  light
truck diesel  sales will reach 3.5 percent,  and  import  light
truck diesel sales  will  reach  12.0  percent of  the  total
light truck market.22

     On the  other  hand,  M3FC assumes that in 1995  an average
of  11.5 percent  of the  passenger  cars  and  33.9 percent  of
the   light  trucks will  be diesels.1  Naturally, if  diesels
comprise  a   smaller  portion  of  the   fleet,  total  gasoline
consumption will increase.

     Two  scenarios  were  devised  to  measure  the   model's
reaction to  the  assumed diesel  penetration  rate.  The  first
scenario kept both passenger car  and light duty truck diesel
penetration  rates  at 1983  levels of  1.9  and 7.7  percent,
respectively.10    In  this  scenario   gasoline   consumption
increases  by 0.471 million barrels per day in the year 2000.

     The  second  scenario  allowed  diesel  passenger  cars  to
gain  up to  5.0  percent  and  light trucks to  gain up to  15.0
percent of  the market.   The effect  of  this is to  increase
gasoline consumption by 0.308 million barrels per day in the
year 2000.

     A  third factor  that  will  affect the  amount of highway
gasoline  consumed  is  the  proportion  of  the  fleet  that
consists of  light  trucks.   Since  the fuel  economy  of  light
trucks  is substantially less than  that of passenger  cars, if
more  individuals  replace  their  passenger   cars  with  light
trucks  (pickups,  vans,  etc.),   fleet  fuel  consumption  will
increase.

     To test the reaction of the model  to this third factor,
the  DRI   passenger  car  projections  for   year  20004  were
substituted  for   the   model's,  original  projections.    The
difference between the  two was  then added to the light truck
sto.ck.  This increased  highway  gasoline  consumption  by 0.081
million barrels per day in the year 2000.

     While  these  factors  account  for the  major differences
between M3FC and EEA's  Eleventh Quarterly  Report, only  M3FC
is   fundamentally   consistent  with   the  MOBILES   emission
factors model.   That model, in  turn  has   been  extensively
reviewed   by   industry   as  well   as   state   and   local

                              26

-------
governments.     We   believe,   therefore,   that   M3FC  estimates
have  a  greater  chance  of  accurately  predicting  future  fuel
consumption.
                       Figure 12

                   Model Differences
         (million barrels of gasoline per day)

                          2000
                                                 Low Diesel
                                                 Penetration Rates
                                                   Constant 1983 Diesel
                                                   Penetration Rates
                                                   (1.9*LDV/7.7r.LDT
                                                   0.163
                                                   DRI LDV
                                                   Registrations
                                                   (1984+)
                                                   6.081
                                                   Increased Vehicle
                                                   Stock (3.5%)

                                                   0.162
                                                 VMT Growth
                                                  75%l
                                                  .7M\
                                                  590
(3.r.MHT/-.45SHHt)
0.5'
                                              Other Model
                                              Differences

                                              0.063
                                       27

-------
              The Mobiles  Fuel  Consumption  Model
                        February 1985

                          References
1     U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency,  Office of  Mobile
     Sources,   User's  Guide  to  MQBILE3,   EPA  460/3-84-002,
     June,  1984.

2     Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., The  Motor  Fuel
     Consumption  Model,  Eleventh Periodical Report,  prepared
     for the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency, November,
     1984.

3     U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency,  Office of  Policy
     Analysis,   Costs  and  Benefits   of   Reducing   Lead  in
     Gasoline,  EPA-230-03-84-005,  May 1984.

4     Data  Resources,  Inc.

5     U.S.   Environmental   Protection Agency,  Office  of   Air
     Quality,   Planning   and  Standards,   User's  Manual   for
     Modified   Rollback/EKMA   Strategy   Assessment    Model,
     EPA-450/4-81-025,  July,  1981.

6     U.S.    Department    of   Energy,   Energy    Information
   .  Administration,  Petroleum  Supply Monthly,  DOE/EIA-0109
     (84/06),  June,  1984.

7     U.S.   Department  of  Transportation,   Federal   Highway
     Administration,  Highway Statistics,  1981, Table  MF-2.

8     R.L.  Polk and Company,  Detroit, MI.

9     U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency,  Office of  Mobile
     Sources,   "Fuel  Consumption  Model  Inputs",  Note  from
     Karl  Hellman to  Ralph Stahman,  October 17,  1984.

10    U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency,  Office of  Mobile
     Sources,   personal   communication   from  Amy   Brochu,
     December,  1984. .

11  ,  U.S.   Department  of  Transportation,  Federal   Highway
     Administration,  Highway Statistics,  1967 -  1982, Table
     VM-1.

12    U.S.    Department   of   Energy,   Oak   Ridge   National
     Laboratory,  Transportation Energy Data Book:  Edition  7,
     ORNL-6050, June,  1984.
                              28

-------
13    Energy  and  Environmental Analysis,  Inc.,  The Highway
     Fuel   Consumption   Model,   Tenth   Quarterly  Report,
     prepared  for the U.S.  Department of  Energy,   November,
     1983.

14    U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,  Bureau  of  the Census,
     Truck Inventory and Use  Survey,  1977.

15    Motor  Vehicle Manufacturers  Association  of  the United
     States, Inc., MVMA Motor Vehicle  Facts  & Figures, 1984.

1 *    U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency,  Office  of Mobile
     Sources,  Fleet Characterization  Data  Used  in  MOBILE3,
     August, 1984, EPA-AA-TEB-EF-84-6.

17    U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency,  Office  of Mobile
     Sources,   personal   communication  from   Amy  Brochu,
     November  20,  1984 and December and November  23,  1984.

18  -  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency,  Office  of Mobile
     Sources,  Fuel Economies  of  Heavy Duty Vehicles,   July,
     1984.
u.
Mi
S.
sfue
Depa
ling
rtment
in 1981
of
and
Energy, Patterns
1982:
Where,
When,
of
What
Vehicle
Vehic
les
     and How Often?,  October,  1984.

20    U.S.   Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Office  of  Air
     Quality Planning  and  Standards  and  Office  of  Mobile
     Sources,     Supplementary	Guidelines	for	Lead
     Implementation   Plans,   Updated   Projections  for  Motor
     Vehicle Lead Emissions,  EPA-450/2-83-Q02,  March 1983.

21    U.S.   Department  of  Transportation,  Federal  Highway
     Administration,   Highway  Statistics,   1975-1982,  Table
     MF-2.

22    Energy and Environmental Analysis,  Inc.,  The  Motor Fuel
     Consumption Model,  Eleventh Periodical Report/  prepared
     for the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,  November,
     1984.
                              29

-------
 Appendix A





Model Input





  Figures

-------
   ISO
   140
   130
   120
   110
in  BO
O  70
"S  60

                             Figure A-l
                   MOBILES Kiel Consumption Model
                          Car Registrations
              1950    I960    1970    1980    1990   2000
                          Calendar Year


140
130
C 110
O
3 l00'
^m 80-
0 70
~% 60
In JO-
S' 40-
°= 30




Figure A-2
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Truck Registrations






...--"
y**
	 jy^
*•
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Calendar Year









Legend
& ».LPo*. UHt
x PndlcMHirC
ana* 	



-------
   18
   18
   14
IS 12
_u
c
«. to
o
1  -
O
£  •
    4-
    Z-
    0
                           Figure A-3
                 MOBrtJES FUel Consumption Model
                   LDV Registration Distributions
                               15
                               Age
    is
    18
    14
tj  13
^)
.«  10-
o
1  .
f.
    4
    2
    0
                           Figure A-4
                 MOB1LE3 Fuel Consumption Model
               LDT-Class 3 Registration Distributions
                                19
                               Age
                             Figure A-5
                   MOB1LE3 Fuel Consumption Model
                 Classes 4-6 Registration Distributions
                                                                                       id
                                                                                       18
                                                                                       u
                                                                                    t»  13
                                                                                    _«>
                                                                                    C
                                                                                    <8  "
                                                                                    .*)
                                                                                    I"
                                                                                    &   •
                                                                                        4
                                                                                        2
                                                                                        0
                            Figure A-6
                  MOBILE} Fuel Consumption Model
               Classes 7-8B Registration Distributions
                                                                                                            10
                                                                                                                   is
                                                                                                                  Age

-------
Figure A-7
90-
^~. 80'
a
>. 70-
8 8°
•3 so
0)
TJ
C 40
a
in
§ 30
J20-
10
0
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
LDV VMT







* ~— — ~________^
	 a







Legend
A Cat
X Ol«l«l
0 S 10 15 20 25 30
Age
Figure A-8
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
um VMT
80

, 70-
3 80
B
•g 80-
m
^ 40-
 10












*^^^
^^~~---__^_^^
^~ ~~ 	 . 	 g














0 S , 10 15 20 28 30 .
Age













Legend
& Got
X Dl«*«t

-




































Figure A-9
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDT2-Class 3 VMT
^ 80-
LI
id
^ 70
V
3 60-
6
•3 50-
M
C 40-
0 30-
_^
E- 20
10-












•^^^
" ^..^^^
a











Legend
a Cat
X Di»«
0 5 10 IS 20 25 30
Age

-------
Figure A-10
90-
^~. 80"
a
^ ™-
>
5 60-
g
•S so-
to
^ 40
cd
CO
§ 30
J3
J20.
> ,0-
0-
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Classes 4-6 VUT





	 K
0 5 10 15 20 25 30






Legend
& Co*
X DI«M(

Age
Figure A-ll
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 7 VMT
^ eo-
i*
a
I"
3 60-
6
•S 50-
01
•o
O 40-
s
W
3
. o 30-
jq
^f
H zo
•>
> 10







\
\ . -
\ '
• \
\

^^^^^^ ^^^
	 -i^;- 	 „










Legend
A G«
x Dili*

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Age
Figure A-13
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
aass 8 VMT
_ 80-
u.
id
I"

^ 90-
•g so-
1,0
S
O 30-
ti.
H 20
>
10-


\
*(

\
\
\ \
\ \
\ v
V \ V-,
^•v^^ ^>s^^ 	 g
^**-~^^^^ ^^^
^ 	 K









Legend
a C«t

* Ctati 8A, OWIM
Qs* .y* "l*i*
0 S 10 15 20 25 30
, Age

-------



E

a
o
'•g
u
0)
C
£
1
3
M
U
Q


Figure A-13
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDV Diesel Market Penetration
90

80


70-

80

50-
40
30
20

10














/^-^















1980 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year



E
C
o
-jj
u
IU
ti
£
1
id
5
0)
«
Q


Figure A-14
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDT1 & LDT2 Diesel Market Penetration
90-
80


70

80-

50
40

30
20

10


—







. .
/
/
/
^-^















1980 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year



E

a
o

«i
*j
a
a.
OJ
1
S
"3
OT

i3




Figure A-15
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Classes 2B-5 Diesel Market Penetration
90

80


70

80

50-

40-
30

20

10













' _ ' „
,-^^
j'
f
/
•* — 	 . /















Legend
& Clan 28
X CtojtMj-S
I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year

-------
                                             100

                                             90

                                             80

                                             70

                                             60
                                         £   50

                                         1   40
                                          8
                                         o
                                              30-
                                                                      Figure A-16

                                                            MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
                                                            Class 6 Diesel Market Penetration
                                                     I960 1965  1970 I9T5  1980  1985 1990  199}  2000
                                                                      Model Year
                             Figure A-17
                   MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                   Class 7 Diesel Market Penetration
100

 90-

 80
•a
    .10-

     0
            I960 1965  1970  197S  1980  1985  1990  1995  2000
                             Model Year
                                                                                         100

                                                                                          90
                                                                                                               Figure A-18
                                                                                                     MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                                                                                                     Class 8 Diesel Market Penetration
                                                                                     f
                                                                                      o
                                                                                      "«   60
                                                                                      0
                                                                                      O.   50
                                                                                     I
                                                                                      a
                                                                                     3
                                                                                              1960 1965  1970  1975  1980  1965  1990 1995 2000
                                                                                                              Model Year

-------
   36
   34
   32
   30
   28
   26
   24
O 22
3 20
    18
    16
    14
    12
    10
     8
     6
     4
     Z
     0
•a
§.
                           Figure A-19
                  MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                          LDV Road MPG
           1960 1985  1970  1975  I960  1985  1990 1995 2000
                           Model Year
                                                                                                             Figure A-20
                                                                                                    MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
                                                                                                            LOT Road MPG
                                                                                             I960 1965  1970  1975 1980  1985  1990  1995  2000
                                                                                                              Model Year
Figure A-21
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 2B Road MPG
34-
32
30-
28-
26-
24
0 22
2 20-
•5 '"
g 16
OZ 14-
12-
'10 •
8
. 6
4
2-









	 -~"
	 	 	 	 — • — - "
' ' . •' ,' • 	 	 	 	 *


















Legend
A Gal
X Ol«l*
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year


36 •
34
32-
30
28
26
24
0 22
S 20
-a 18'
o 18
K 14-
12
10-
8-
6-
4
2
0 -


Figure A-32
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Classes 3-5 Road MPG












	 . x
»=— 	 — ' ~~* .


1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
















Legend
& Cos
X Dl««l



-------



36 -
34-
32
30-
28
26-
24
O 22-
s *°
-o ">•
™ 16 •
& M
12-

10
8
6 •
4
2
0 J

Figure A-Z3
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
Class 6 Road MFC












	 	 x

A 	 	 . 	 A


I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year

















Legend
& Cos
X Ol«5«l











£
a
•o
a
o
QJ







Figure A-24
MOBILEX3 Fuel Consumption Model
Class 7 Road MFC
34-
32-
30
ae
28-
24
22
20-
18
16
14
12
10
8-
6
4-
2-












f, 	 ^ 	 	 	 	 	 	 — - — a














Legend
a Gol
X Di»«l 	
I960 1965 1970 197S 1980 1985 1990 199S 2000
Mode! Year
Figure A-25
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 6 Road MFC
34-
32-
30-
28
26-
24-
0 22-
a zo'
1R -
•a 1B
(0 ] A ,
. &. M-
12 :
. 10
a
6 -

4 •
2-
0 •











' ,

x 	 	 ^.B



I960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000













Legend
6 Co
X Cteli 6«. Ql«.<
a cton sa. m.i*

Model Year









1
•o
1








Figure A-26
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Bus Road MFC
34
32
30-
28
26
24-
22-
20-
16
16
14
12-
10
8
6
4-
2-









	 — 	 	 **
x —
A__ 	 *
	 Q
0












Legend
a School. Go«
X School. Dl«i«l
0 Pi*llc. OUltl
1980 1965 1970 1975 1980 I98S 1990 1995 2000
Calendar Year

-------
   80
g

i"
                        Figure A-27

                MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
                    Illegal Misfueling Rates
                                   	g
                       10    IS    20
                            Age
Figure A-Z8
70-
60-
g
„ so
1
-Switching
8 S
I20
10
0-
MOBILE) Fuel Consumption Model
LDV It LOT Discretionary Fuel-Switching Rate




f



1940 19SO 1900 1B70








I960 1990 ZOOO







Model Year

-------
   90

   BO-


6? ?°

O 60
"o
S. 50
b
2 40

a 30
u
3 20

    10

    0
               Rgure A-29
      MOBILES FViel Consumption Model
       IDV & IDT  Urban VMT Fractions
                                                    Legend
                                                   a LDV
                                                   x tor
I960 1965 1870 197S 1980  1985  1990  1995 2000
                Model Year
figure A-30
MOBILES FViel Consumplion Model
Classes 3B-5 Urban VMT Fraclions
80
f? 70
0 60-
0
E
£.-,
a 40
!.*•

P. 20

10



	 B
"" "" '
/




' ' .




















1960 1965 1970 1975 I960 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year











Legend
A CkM«».C«N 	
X Cta*« 11, Ota**
D Chnm 1-S, CM
• SSSff'iJlKt






































Rgure A-31
MOBILES FUel Consumplion Model
Class 6 Urban VMT Fraclions
80
S? 70
o 60-
o
£. 50
£
t-

5 30-

3 20

10


^~
^^^^
&

. 	 .- — x
.. J, 	 • 	



















Legend


x Dlasal
1960 1B65 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year

-------
Figure A-33
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Class 7 Urban VMT Fractions
80-
T 70-
6s,
0 60
t!
I 5°
| 4°
S ^o
J3
i;
3 20

10


^ 	
^-^



f 	 x
* - -. — — '

















Legend
& Gas
X Ol«s«l
I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Figure A-33
90-
80
g 7°
§ 60
1 5°
s 4°-
>
fl 30
J3
U
3 20
10
0-
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Class 8 Urban VMT Fractions

/
/
' /~~^\l

~*~ 	 x
x-. r .
\^ 	 /







Legend
a Ckni B, Co*
x Cto» 84, OUs.4
a Ck»t ee. »*•<*
I960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
   90
O 60
4-*

I 50
                           Figure A-34

                  MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
                     Bus Urban VMT fractions
                                                               Legend
                                                              X Public Buses
           1960 1965  1970  1975 1980 1985  1990  1995  2000
                         Calendar Year

-------
 Appendix  B






Model Input






  Tables

-------
              Table B-l

Historical  and Predicted Vehicle Stock
        (millions of vehicles)
Year
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
195B
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1966
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Polk
Cars
39
42
44
47
49
51
52
55
57
58
60
63
66
68
71
72
75
78
80
83
86
89
92
95
97
99
102
104
104
105
106
108

















.772
.203
.384
.380
.802
.434
.495
.085
. 103
.854
.920
.384
.051
.940
.264
.968
.358
.495
.449
. 138
.439
.805
.608
. 241
.818
.904
.957
.677
.564
.839
.867
.961



















80
83
86
89
92
96
101
104
106
1 10
1 13
1 16
120
121
123
123


















FHwA
Cars


. 414000
.693000
.861000
. 280000
.799000
.860000
.762000
.856300
.712600
. 188640
.6961 1 1
.574999
. 247990
.723650
. 29 14 1 1
.697863


















M3-FC
Cars
39.
42.
44.
47.
49.
51 .
52.
55.
57.
58.
60.
63.
66.
68.
71 .
72.
75.
78.
80.
83.
86.
89.
92.
95.
97.
99.
102.
104 .
104.
105.
106.
108.
111.
113.
116.
1 18.
1 20.
123.
125.
1 27 .
130.
132.
134.
137.
139.
141.
144 .
146.
148.
772
203
384
380
802
434
495
085
103
854
920
384
051
940
264
968
358
495
449
138
439
805
608
241
818
904
957
677
564
839
867
961
310
660
009
358
708
057
406
755
105
454
803
153
502
851
201
550
899
Polk
Trucks
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
1 1
1 1
1 1
12
13
14
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
23
24
26
28
30.
32
35.
36
36.
38

















.567
.065
.420
.693
.800
. 162
.544
.776
.056
.532
.803
.043
.464
.899
.445
. 127
.357
.988
.685
.586
.686
.465
.773
.412
.312
.813
.560
.222
.565
.583
.268
.069
.987
. 143

















FHwA
Trucks


16,
17,
18.
19.
20,
21 .
23.
25.
26.
28.
30.
32.
33.
34.
34.
35.




















.530900
346800
.235300
. 127000
. 199600
646000
.233000
.077200
,237800
257220
,054159
202966
,870109
166042
,995004
81 1962


















M3-FC
Trucks
7.
a.
8.
8.
8.
9.
9.
9.
10.
10.
10.
1 1 .
1 1 .
1 1 .
12.
13.
14.
14,
15.
16.
1 7 .
18.
19.
21 .
23.
24.
26.
28.
30.
32.
35.
36.
36.
38.
39.
39,
40.
41 .
42,
43,
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51 ,
51 .
52.
53.
567
065
420
693
,800
162
544
776
056
532
803
,043
,464
,899
,445
, 127
,357
.988
685
.586
686
.465
773
,412
,312
,813
560
,222
,565
.583
,268
.069
.987
. 143
,065
.986
.908
.829
.751
.673
.594
.516
,437
.359
. 281
.202
. 1 24
.046
.967
.889
.810

-------
       Table  B-2

     Vehicle  Stock
(millions  of  vehicles)
Year LDV
1975 95.241
1976 97.818
1977 99.904
1978 102.957
1979 104.677
1980 104.564
1981 105. B39
1982 106.867
1983 108.961
1984 1 1 1 .309
1985 113.656
1986 1 16.008
1987 118.355
1988 120.707
1989 123.055
1990 125.406
1991 127.754
1992 130. 101
1993 132.453
1994 134.801
1995 137.152
1996 139.500
1997 141 .851
1998 144. 199
1999 146.546
2000 148.898
2001 151 . 246
2002 153.598
2003 155.946
2004 158.293
2005 160.645
2006 162.992
2007 165.344
2008 167.691
2009 170.043
2010 172.390
201 1 174.738
2012 177.090
2013 179.437
2014 181 .790
2015 184. 137
2016 186.489
2017 188.836
2018 191 . 184
2019 193.536
2020 195.883
-LDT1
14.631
15.216
15.378
15.617
16. 145
17.392
17.766
18.287
19.027
19.750
20.578
21 .497
22.525
23.530
.24.502
25.444
26.361
27.250
28. 1 14
28.958
29.782
30.584
31 .368
32, 135
32.888
33.628
34.359
35.079
35.789
36.493
37. 190
37.879
38.561
39.239
39.914
40.581
41 .245
41 .906
42.561
43.213
43.862
44.507
45 . 149
45.788
46.426
47.061
LDT2
5. 120
6. 155
7 .338
9.016
10. 105
10.967
.111
. 288
.502
.524
.429
. 237
10.947
10.681
10.453
10. 258
10.092
9.950
9.830
9.730
9.647
9.585
9.541
9.513
9.497
9.493
9.499
9.514
9.537
9.567
9.604
9.646
9.693
9.745
9.801
9.861
9.925
9.992
10.062
10.. 134
10.210
10.287
10.367
10.449
10.533
10.618
Class
2B
0.574
0.651
0.887
1 . 123
1 .349
1 .663
1 .866
2.099
2.343
2.605
2.846
3.065
3.264
3.462
3.651
3.834
4.010
4. 178
4.344
4.501
4.654
4.802
4.945
5.084
5.219
5.352
5.482
5.609
5.734
5.858
5.980
6. 100
6.219
6.336
6.453
6.568
6.682
6.795
6.907
7.019
7. 129
7. 239
7.348
7.457
7.565
7.672
Class
3
0.437
0.435
0.427
0.477
0.474
0.486
0.479
0.479
0.459
0.427
0.395
0.366
0.339
0.314
0.291
0. 270
0.251
0. 234
0.218
0.203
0. 189
0.177
0. 166
0. 156
0. 147
0. 139
0.131
0. 124
0.117
0.111
0. 105
0. 100
0.095
0.090
0.086
0.082
0.078
0.074
0.071
0.068
0.064
0.062
0.059
0.056
0.054
0.051
Class
4
0. 331
0.310
0. 291
0.281
0. 271
0. 272
0.259
0. 247
0.237
0. 220
0.204
0. 189
0. 175
0. 162
0. 150
0. 139
0. 129
0. 120
0.112
0. 105
0.098
0.091
0.086
0.081
0.076
0.072
0.068
0.064
0.061
0.057
0.054
0.052
0.049
0.047
0.044
0.042
0.040
0.038
0.037
0.035
0.033
0.032
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.026
Class
5
0.594
0.562
0.527
0.496
0.473
0.475
0.453
0.432
0.414
0.385
0.356
0.330
0.306
0.283
0.262
0.243
0. 226
0.211
0. 196
0.183
0.171
0. 160
0. 150
0.141
0. 33
0. 25
0. 18
0. 12
0. 06
0. 100
0.095
0.090
0.086
0.082
0.078
0.074
0.070
0.067
0.064
0.061
0.058
0.055
0.053
0.051
0.048
0.046
Class C
6
.058 C
.126 C
.196 C
. 272 C
.340 C
.408 C
.394 C
.367 C
.339 C
.285 C
1. .232 C
1.181 C
1 . 126 C
1 .074 C
1.026 C
0.983
0.942
0.906
0.873
0.845
0.819
0.796
0.777
0.761
0.746
0.733
0.722
0.712
0. 703
0.696
0.689
0.683
0.679
0.674
0.671
0.668
0.666
0.664
0.662
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.662
0.663 i
:iass
7
1.426
1.425
1.426
1.444
1.478
1.544
1.585
1.615
1.639
1.680
1.737
1.803
1.875
1.939
1.996
.046
.091
. 134
. 175
.215
. 253
. 290
.325
.359
.392
.425
.457
.489
.520
.551
.581
.612
.641
.671
.700
.730
.758
.787
.816
.844
.872
.900
.928
.956
.983
2.01 1
Class Class
BA BB
0.465 0.715
0.447 0.755
0.433 0.827
0.425 0.913
0.422 .006
0.438 . 134
0.429 . 183
0.416 .198
0.404 .205
0.384 .214
0.366 .235
0.350 .265
0.335 .297
0.321 .327
0.309 .356
0.298 .384
0. 289 .411
0.281 .440
0.274 .469
0.267 .499
0.262 .531
0.257 .562
0.253 .593
0.249 .624
0.246 .655
0.244 .686
0.242 .716
0.240 .747
0.239 .777
0.238 .B07
0.237 .837
0.236 .867
0.236 .897
0.236 .927
0. 235 1 .956
0. 236 1 .986
0.236 2.015
0.236 2.045
0.237 2.074
0.237 2. 103
0.238 2. 133
0.239 2.162
0. 240 2.191
0.241 2.220
0.242 2.249
0.243 2.278
Schoo 1
Buses
0.368
0.381
0.394
0.399
0.415
0. 382
0.437
0.446
0.458
0 .47 1
0.484
0.49B
0.512'
0.526
0. 54 1
0.556
0 . 57 1
0.587
0.604
0.621
0 .638
0.656
0.674
0. 693
0.713
0.733
0 . 753
0.774
0. 796
0.818
0.841
0.865
0.889
0.914
0 .939
0.966
0.993
.021
.049
.079
. 109
. 140
. 172
.205
. 238
.273
Publ ic
Buses
0 . 094
0.097
0 . 09B
0 . 102
0. 105
0.107
0. 107
0. 13
0. 16
0. 19
0. 23
0. 26
0. 29
0. 32
0. 36
0. 139
0.143
0.147
0. 50
0. 54
0 . 58
0 . b3
0. 67
0.171
0 . 176
0. 180
0. 185
0. 190
0. 195
0 . 200
0. 205
0.210
0.216
0.221
0. 227
0. 233
0. 239
0. 245
0. 25 1
0. 258
0. 265
0. 272
0 . 279
0 . 286
0 . 293
0. 301

-------
         Table B-3




Registration Distributions




    Classes 2B-3  Classes 4-6 Classes 7-BB
Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LDV
. 104
.098
.093
.087
.081
.075
.069
.063
.058
.052
.046
.040
.034
.028
.022
.017
.01 1
.008
.006
.004
.003
.001
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LOT
.087
.083
.079
.075
.071
.067
.063
.059
.055
.051
.047
.043
.040
.036
.032
.028
.024
.020
.016
.012
.008
.004
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
Gas
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
087
083
079
075
071
067
063
059
055
051
047
043
040
036
032
028
024
020
016
012
008
004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Oi ese 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
087
083
079
075
071
067
063
059
055
051
047
043
040
036
032
028
024
020
016
012
008
004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gas
. 147
. 126
. 107
.092
.078
.067
.057
.049
.042
.036
.030
.026
.022
.019
.016
.014
.012
.010
.009
.007
.006
.005
.005
.004
.003
.003
.002
.002
.002
.002
Diesel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 147
. 126
. 107
.092
.078
.067
.057
.049
.042
.036
.030
.026
.022
.019
.016
.014
.012
.010
.009
.007
.006
.005
.005
.004
.003
.003
.002
.002
.002
.002
Gas
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
167
139
1 16
097
081
067
056
047
039
032
027
023
019
016
013
01 1
009
008
006
005
004
004
003
003
002
002
001
001
001
001
Di ese 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
167
139
1 16
097
081
067
056
047
039
032
027
023
019
016
013
01 1
009
008
006
005
004
004
003
003
002
002
001
001
001
001

-------
        Table B-4

    VMT Distributions
(thousands of miles/year)
LDV
Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
1B
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Gas
12.818
12. 102
1 1 .427
10.789
10. 187
9.619
9.082
8.575
8.096
7.645
7.218
6.815
6.435
6.076
5. 737
5.416
5.114
4.829
4.559
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
Diesel
12.818
12. 102
1 1 .427
10.789
10. 187
9.619
9.082
8.575
8.096
7 .645
7.218
6.815
6:435
6:076
5.737
5.416
5.114
4.829
4.559
4.305
4.305
4.305
-4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
LDT1
Gas
17.394
16. 132
14.961
13.876
12.869
1 1 .935
1 1 .069
10.266
9.521
8.830
8. 189
7.595
7.044
6.533
6.059
5.619
5.211
4.833
4.483
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
.Diesel
17.552
16.262
15.068
13.961
12.936
1 1 .986
1 1 . 105
10.290
9.534
8.833
8. 185
7.583
7.026
6.510
6.032
5.589
5. 179
4.798
4.446
4
4 .
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4 .
4.
4.
4.
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
LDT2-
Gas
18.352
16.946
15.648
14.449
13.342
12.320
1 1 .376
10.504
9.700
8.956
8. 270
7.637
7.052
6.511
6.012
5.552
5. 126
4.734
4.371
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
Class 3
Di ese 1
17.552
16.262
15.068
13.961
12.936
1 1 .986
1 1 . 105
10. 290
9.534
8.833
8 . 185
7.583
7 .026
6.510
6.032
5.589
5. 179
4.798
4.446
4. 19
4 . 19
4. 19
4 . 19
4. 19
4. 19
4. 19
4.119
4.119
4.119
4.119
Classes 4-6
Gas
19.967
18.077
16.365
14.815
13.413
12. 143
10.993
9.952
9.010
8. 156
7 .384
6.685
6.052
5.479
4.960
4.490
4.065
3.680
3. 332
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
D iese 1
19.967
18.077
16.365
14.815
13.413
12. 143
10 .993
9 .952
9.010
8 . 156
7 .384
6.685
6.052
5 .479
4 .960
4 .490
4 .065
3.680
3 .332
3.016
3.016
3.016
3 .016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
Class 7 Class 8A Class 8B
Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel
19.967 49.249 19.967 49.112 19.967 86.259
18.077 43.238 18.077 44.022 18.077 78.005
16.365 37.953 16.365 39.470 16.365 70.519
14.815 33.315 14:815 35.388 14.815 63.751
13.413 29.243 13.413 31.729 13.413 57.633
12.143 25.669 12.143 28.448 12.143 52.102
10.993 22.532 10.993 25.507 10.993 47.101
9.952 19.778 9.952 22.869 9.952 42.581
9.010 17.361 9.010 20.505 9.010 38.494
8.156 15.239 8.156 18.384 8.156 34.800
7.384 13.376 7.384 16.483 7.384 31.460
6.685 11.741 6.685 14.779 6.685 28.441
6.052 10.306 6.052 13.251 6.052 25.711
5.479 9.047 5.479 11.881 5.479 23.244
4.960 7.941 4.960 10.652 4.960 21.013
4.490 6.969 4.490 9.551 4.490 18.996
4.065 6.117 4.065 8.565 4.065 17.173
3.680 5.370 3.680 7.679 3.680 15.525
3.332 4.713 3.332 6.885 3.332 14.032
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3,016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
2.685
2.685
2.685
2.685
2.685
2 .685
2.685
2.685
2 .685
2.685
2 .685

-------
       Table B-5



Diesel  Penetration Rates
Year
1960-
1 Q C 1
i y o i
1962
1 Q C O
i yo.3
1964
1 f\ C C
1 ybb
1966
1 Q R~>
i y b /
1968
1 Q CO
i y by
1970
1 Q "7 1
i y / i
1972
1 Q "7 1
i y / o
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
I960
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000+
LDV
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
n n n
DDL)
000
A n A
uuu
000
A A n
UUU
000
A A n
UUU
000
n n n
UUU
000
nn i
UU 1
002
nm
UU^
003
003
003
003
009
026
045
060
039
019
023
028
032
037
041
046
050
063
076
089
102
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
LOT
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
n n r\
UUU
000
A A n
UUU
000
r\nn
OUU
000
000
000
n nn
UUU
000
nnn
UUU
000
nnn
UUU
000
001
001
001
006
013
024
056
071
077
080
090
100
1 10
120
130
150
188
226
263
300
339
339
339
339
339
339
Class
2B
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
Ann
UUU
000
00 1
001
002
003
003
002
002
001
nn A
uou
000
nnn
UUU
000
000
000
000
000
041
081
122
162
180
197
215
232
250
260
270
280
290
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
C 1 asses
3-5
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
010
A 1 A
U I U
014
A 1 Q
U 1 b
022
A O C
U2b
029
03 1
022
n i o
U 1 2
003
n n *3
UU J
003
n r\ A
U04
004
005
003
000
000
041
081
122
162
180
197
215
232
250
260
270
280
290
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
Class
6
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
021
n o 1
U £. 1
042
nc Q
Do J
084
1 05
100
094
088
082
076
054
031
n *5 /I
Uo4
038
041
071
100
106
174
242
309
377
388
398
409
419
430
444
458
472
486
500
510
520
530
540
550
550
550
550
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 ass
7
. 426
,t Q C
.4^0
.426
/I O C
. 4 Jb
.442
. 44 7
.413
. 379
.364
Q /I Q
. o4o
.333
*3 A 1
. J4 1
.348
O Q O
. Jo 2.
.415
.449
.514
.578
.615
.606
.598
.589
.580
.584
.588
.592
.596
.600
.610
.620
.630
.640
.650
.660
.670
.680
.690
.700
.700
.700
.700
Class Class
8A 8B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
.609 0.547
. 609 0 . 547
.609 0.547
.616 0 . 595
.624 0.642
. 632 0 . 690
.583 0.721
.535 0.751
.514 0.809
. 492 0 . 867
.470 0.925
A Q O n Q O T
. 4o £. U . y to
.492 0.921
K A n n Q o i
. b4U U . a *: 1
.586 0.920
.634 0.920
.726 0.960
.770
.794
.818
.841
.865
.889
.886
.883
.881
.878
.875
.888
.901
.915
.928
.941
.953
.965
.976
.988
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
School
Buses















0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0















.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000'
.000
.023
.043
.067
.089
. 108
. 127
. 144
. 160
. 175
. 189
.203
.215
.226
.236
.244
.252
.259
.265
.270
Publ ic
Buses















1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000

-------
          Table B-6
Leaded Fuel Penetration Rates
Year
1960-
1961
1962
1 Q A Q
i y o j
1964
1 OAR
i yoD
1966
1967
» Q f* n
1 ybb
1969
1970
1 Q ~I 1
i y / i
1972
1973
1 Q "7 A
i y / **
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000*

1
1
1
1
1
1





1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LDV
.000
.000
.000
nnn
. UUU
.000
f\f\(~i
. uuu
.000
.000
r\r\f\
. UUU
.000
.000
r\f\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
nnn
. uuu
.097
. 1 19
. 1 19
. 100
.069
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
«
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Classes Classes
LDT1 LDT2 2B-3 4-8B
.000 1.000
.000
.000
. 000
.000
r\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
n r»r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.076
.063
.014
.000
.000
nnr\
. uuu
.000
f\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
r\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
f\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
r\ f\ f\
. DUO
.000
.000
.000
.010 1.000
.011 0.000
.007 0.000
.011 0.000
.014 0.000
.017 0.000
.000 0.000
.000 0.000
.000 0.000
.000
.000
.000
r\nr\
. uuu
.000
f\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
nn r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
r\n r\
. uuu
.000
r\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
n n n
. uuu
.000
.000
nrm
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
.000 i.ooo
.000 1.000
.000 1.000
.000 1 .000
.000 1.000
. 000
. 000
.000
. 000
.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
School Publ ic
Buses Buses


	 	




	 	
	 	


	 	




1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1.000
1.000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000

-------
                                                             Table B-7

                                               Road MPG and Diesel Advantage Factors

                                  Class 28   Classes 3-5   Class 6     Class 7     Class 8A    Class  8B   School  Buses  Public  Buses
       LDV  Diesel   LOT  Diesel  	 		  	  	
Year  Fleet Factor  Fleet  Factor   Gas  Diesel  Gas Diesel  Gas Diesel   Gas Diesel  Gas Diesel   Gas Diesel   Gas   Diesel   Gas   Diesel
















1976

1979
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000+
















14.90

17.30
21 .50
22.30
22.20
22.70
23.30
23.80
24. 10 1
24.50 1
24.80 1
25.20 1
25.70 1
26.20
26.70
27. 10
27.60
28. 10
28.50
28.90
29.40 1
29.70 1
















.62

.35
. 23
.22
. 21
.20
.20
.20
. 20
.20
. 20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
















12.30

12.60
17. 20
17.50
17.80
17.90
18. 10
18.30
18.60
18.80
19.00
19.30
19.60
19.90
20.20
20.40
20.80
21 .20
21 .40
21 .80
22.00
22.30










. 42

• 42



.42

.40
. 38
.36
.34
.32
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30'





10.12

10.12

10.12
10.12

10.12

10.12

10.12
10.12
10.12
10.34
10 . 45
10.55
10.66
10.73
10.80
10.87
10.94
1 .02
1 .09
1 .16
1 .23
1 .30
1 .38
1 1 .45
11 .53
1 1 .60
1 1 .68
1 1 .75
1 1 .83
1 1 .90
1 1 .98





13.12 7.48 8.1 6.21 8.25 5.54 6.60 4.48 6.13

13.12 7.39 8.1 6.04 8.25 5.44 6.60 4.39 6.02


13.12 7.27 8.1 5.82 8.25 5.28 6.60 4.25 5.82
13.12 7.22 8.1 5.75 8.25 5.23 6.60 4.20 5.75
13.12 7.16 8.1 5. 68 8.25 5.19 6. 60 4.15 5. 68

13.12 7.21 8.1 5.57 8.25 5.12 6.63 4.09 5.59

13.12 7.40 8.1 5.50 8.25 5.05 6.70 4.05 5.54
13.12 7.52 8.1 5.58 8.25 5.08 6.82 4.10 5.37
13.12 7. 63 8.1 5. 60 8.40 5.10 6.93 4.15 5.20
13.34 7.79 8.24 5.68 8.52 5.18 7.15 4.26 5.27
13.44 7.88 8.31 5.72 8.58 5.22 7.16 4.27 5.31
13.55 7.96 8.38 5.75 8.64 5.25 7.17 4.28 5.34
13.66 8.04 8.44 5.79 8.70 5.28 7.17 4.28 5.38
13.75 8.09 8.50 5.84 8.82 5.32 7.27 4.31 5.45
13.84 8.14 8.55 5.89 8.95 5.36 7.38 4.33 5.53
13.93 8.20 8.61 5.94 9.07 5.39 7.48 4.36 5.60
14.01 8.25 8.66 5.98 9.20 5.43 7.59 4.38 5.68
14.10 8.30 8.72 6.03 9.32 5.47 7.69 4.41 5.75
14.29 8.36 8.84 6.05 9.40 5.49 7.76 4.43 5.80
14.49 8.41 8.95 6.07 9.48 5.51 7.82 4.45 5.86
14.68 8.47 9.07 6.09 9.56 5.53 7.89 4.46 5.91
14.87 8.52 9.19 6.11 9.64 5.55 7.95 4.48 5.97
15.06 8.58 9.31 6.13 9.72 5.57 8.02 4.50 6.02
15.29 8.63 9.45 6.15 9.80 5.59 8.09 4.52 6.07
15.52 8.69 9.60 6.17 9.88 5.61 8.15 4.53 6.12
15.76 8.74 9.74 6.20 9.96 5.63 8.22 4.55 6.17
15.99 8.80 9.88 6.22 10.04 5.65 8.28 4.56 6.22
16.22 8.86 10.03 6.24 10.11 5.68 8.35 4.58 6.27
16.45 8.92 10.17 6.26 10.19 5.70 8.42 4.60 6.32
16.68 8.97 10.31 6.29 10.27 5.72 8.48 4.61 6.37
16.92 9.03 10.56 6.31 10.35 5.74 8.55 4.63 6.42


4 . 57




4 . 39


4 . 25

4.15

4 . 09

4. 10

4. 26
4. 28
4. 28
4.31
4.33
4.36
4.38
4.41
4.43
4.45
4.46
4.48
4.50
4.52
4.53
4.55
4.56
4.58
4.60
4.61
4.63










4 . 22

4 . 25



4.57

4 .98
5.21
5.33
5. 38
5.44
5.49
5.55
5.60
5.65
5. 70
5.76
5.81
5.86
5.96
6.07
6.17
6.28
6.38
6. 48
6.59
6.69
















7.34

7 .36
7 .65
7 .68
7 .73
7 .78
7 .83
7 .88
7 .94
7 .99
8.04
8 .09
8.14
8.19
8 . 24
8.29
8.34
8.40
8.45
8 .50
8.55
8 .60
















	 	

	 	
0.62 	
0.75 	
0.87 	
.00 ----
.13 	
.25 	
.38 	
.51 	
.63 	 '-
1 . 76 	
1 .89 	
2.01 	
2.14 	
2.27 	
2.39 	
2.52 	
2.65 	
2.77 	
2.90 	
















5.05

5.06
4.98
4.96
5.01
5 .06
5.12
5.17
5.22
5. 27
5.33
5. 38
5.43
5.48
5.53
5.59
5.64
5.69
5.74
5.80
5.85
5.90

-------
                                                             Table B-8
                                                        Urban VMT Fractions
                       Class 2B
                                    Classes 3-5
                                                    Class 6
                                                                  Class 7
                                                                               Class 8A
                                                                                             Class SB
                                                                                                         School  Buses   Public Buses
Year
        LDV
               LOT
                      Gas  Diesel
                                    Gas  Diesel
                                                  Gas  Diesel
                                                                Gas  Diesel
                                                                              Gas  Diesel
                                                                                            Gas  Diese I
                                                                                                          Gas   D i eseI
                                                                                                                        Gas  D iese1


1977
1979
1980
1981

1984


1988
1990
1992
1994




•^nnn*.


0
0
0
0

0


0
0
0
0




n


.597
.597
.597
.597

.597


.597
.597
.597
.597




COT


0
0
0
0

0


0
0
0
0







.514
.514
.514
.514

.514


.514
.514
.514
.514







0.
0.
0.
0.

0.


0.
0.
0.
0.







690
689
689
688

689
691


698
701
703
706
707



710


0,
0
0.
0,

0 .
0.

0 .
0.
0,
0.
0 .
0.
0 .



0 .


,630
.631
.632
.632

. 633
.633
. 633
. 633
.633
. 633
633
633
633
,633
633



633


0
0
0
0

0


0
0
0
0




0
!

.690
. 690
.689
.689
.688

. 689
.691
. 693
. 695
.698
. 699
.701
. 702
.703
. 704
.706
. 707

.710

.710


0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.

0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .

0 .

0 .

550
590
630
63 1
631
632
632
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633

633

633

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0

. 660
. 660
.660
. 660
.667
.674
.680
. 687
. 698
.709
.721
. 732
. 743
.750
. 757
. 765
. 772
.779
. 789
.799
. 809
.819
. 829
. 829
. 829

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

. 430
. 430
.428
. 432
.436
.439
.443

. 448
.449
. 450
. 45 1
. 452
.453
. 454
.454
. 455
.456
. 459
.463
. 466
. 470
.4/3
. 473
. 473

0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0 .
0 .
0 .


630
630
640
650
660
670
68 1
689
698
706
7 1 5
723
725
728
730
733
735
743
751
759

775
775
775


0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


. 370 '
.377
. 379
.380
.382
.383
. 385
. 385
.386
. 386
. 387
. 387
. 388
. 389
. 390
. 39 1
.392
. 393
.394
. 394
. 395
. 396
. 396
. 396


0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0

0


. 580
.630
. 650
.669
.689
.708

. 752
.777
. 80 1
. 826
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850

. 850

. 850


0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0

0


.358
.358
.359
.359

. 359
.359
. 359
. 359
. 359
.360
. 362
.363
. 365
.366
. 372
.377
. 382

. 394

. 394


0.
0,
0.
0.

0 .
0.

0 ,
0.
0 ,
0.
0 .
0.
0,




0


,630
.669
.689
.708

.777


.850
,850
,850
.850







0.
0.
0.
0.

0.


0.
0.
0.
0.







176
176
176
176

176


176
176
176
17b







0.
0.
0.
0.

0


0
0,
0.
0







280
.310
.300
.400

.410


.410
.410
.410
.410







0.
0.
0.
0 .

0 ,


0
0
0 ,
0







280 	
310 	
300 	
.400 	

.410 	


.410 	
.410 	
.410 	
.410 	







0.
0.
0.
0.

0.


0.
0.
0.
0,







620
62U
640
650

.650


.650
.650
.650
.650




Acrn

-------