applicable implementation plan or implementation plan submission, as appropriate, as sites of violation or possible violation.” 

Furthermore, 40 CFR 93.123(b)(2) states: 

“Where quantitative analysis methods are not available, the demonstration required by § 93.116 for projects described above must be based on a qualitative consideration of local factors.” 

Roadway dispersion modeling may be required based on other special considerations indications, thus state and regional air quality regulatory and transportation planning agencies should be consulted. 

If it is determined that a quantitative hot-spot analysis is not warranted because the project/action does not meet the listed criteria for CO, PM$_{10}$, and PM$_{2.5}$, than a qualitative analysis should still be considered to provide a clear demonstration that the requirements of 40 CFR 93.116 are met. If it is determined that a quantitative hot- spot analysis is needed, the following steps should be considered: 

• Determine approach : 

− Select scenarios (i.e., no-action, project/action) and analysis year(s) for emissions and air quality modeling. 

− Select critical intersection(s) based on highest traffic volumes, worst LOS significant number of diesel vehicles generated by proposed project/action. 91 

• Obtain project specific-data : 

− Obtain traffic volumes, speeds and signal operating conditions for selected peak time periods (i.e., morning, noon, and evening). For PM$_{10 }$and PM$_{2.5}$, more detailed data is necessary (i.e., hourly traffic data). 

− Obtain roadway configurations and geometry of critical intersections for selected scenarios. 

• Estimate on-road motor vehicle emissions : 92 

− Obtain model input data (i.e., meteorological) specific to project site. 

− Estimate emissions using EPA’s MOVES model. Additionally, for PM$_{10 }$ and PM$_{2.5 }$ hot-spot analyses emissions from road dust, 93,94 construction 95 , and additional sources should be accounted for when applicable. 

