EPA-450/3-74-071
DECEMBER 1974
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW
FOR
NEW JERSEY
AS REQUIRED
BY
THE ENERGY SUPPLY
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION ACT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
EPA-450/3-74-071
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW
FOR
NEW JERSEY
AS REQUIRED BY THE ENERGY SUPPLY AND ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION ACT
PREPARED BY THE FOLLOWING TASK FORCE:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
Environmental Services of iRW, Inc.
800 Foil in Lane, SE, Vienna, Virginia 2218
(Contract 68-02-1385)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
December 1974
-------
NEW JERSEY
ENERGY SUPPLY AND ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION ACT
(SECTION IV - STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW)
Table of Contents Page
1 .0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
1.1 Background and Purpose of Review 1
1.2 Findings of Review 4
2.0 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW 7
2.1 Summary 7
2.2 Current Air Quality Status of New Jersey 8
2.3 General Review of Current State Implementation
Plan 12
2.4 Special Considerations 14
3.0 AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION ASSESSMENTS 19
3.1 The Assessment Criteria 19
3.2 New Jersey - New York - Connecticut Interstate
Region (043) 21
3.3 Metropolitan Philadelphia Interstate Region (045) 23
3.4 New Jersey Intrastate Region (150) 24
3.5 Northeast Pennsylvania - Upper Delaware Valley
Interstate Region (151) 25
4.0 REFERENCES 27
APPENDIX A - State Implementation Plan Background 29
APPENDIX B - Regional Indicators ". 41
APPENDIX C - Power Plant Assessment 43
APPENDIX D - Industrial, Commercial Institutional Source Assessment 49
APPENDIX E - Area Source Assessment 57
APPENDIX F - Other Analyses 71
-------
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The enclosed report is the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
response to Section IV of the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination
Act of 1974 (ESECA). Section IV requires EPA to review each State Implemen-
tation Plan (SIP) to determine if revisions can be made to control regulations
for stationary fuel combustion sources without interfering with the attain-
ment and maintenance of the .National Ambient Air Quality Standards (MAAQS).
In addition to requiring that EPA report to the State on whether control
regulations might be revised, ESECA provides that EPA must approve or
disapprove any revised regulations relating to fuel burning stationary
sources within three months after they are submitted to EPA by the States.
The States may, as in the Clean Air Act of 1970, initiate State Implementa-
tion Plan revisions; ESECA does not, however, require States to change any
existing plan.
Congress has intended that this report provide the State with informa-
tion on excessively restrictive control regulations. The intent of ESECA is
that SIP's, wherever possible, be revised in the interest of conserving low
sulfur fuels or converting sources which burn oil or natural gas to coal.
EPA's objective in carrying out the SIP reviews, therefore, has been to try to
establish if emissions from combustion sources may be increased. Where an
indication can be found that emissions from certain fuel burning sources can
be increased and still attain and maintain NAAQS, it may be plausible that
fuel resource allocations can be altered for "clean fuel savings" in a manner
consistent with both environmental and national energy needs.
In many respects, the ESECA SIP reviews parallel EPA's policy or. clean
fuels. The Clean Fuels Policy has consisted of reviewing implementation
plans with regard to saving low sulfur fuels and, where the primary sulfur
dioxide air quality standards were not exceeded, to encourage States to either
defer compliance regulations or to revise the S02 emission regulations. The
States have also been asked to discourage large scale shifts from coal to oil
where this could be done without jeopardizing the attainment and maintenance
of the NAAQS.
1
-------
To date, EPA's fuels policy has addressed only those States with
the largest clean fuels saving potential. Several of these States have
revised or are currently in the process of revising SOp regulations.
These States are generally in the Eastern half of the United States.
ESECA, however, extends the analysis of potentially over-restrictive
regulations to all 55 States and territories. In addition, the current
reviews address the attainment and maintenance of all the National Am-
bient Air Quality Standards.
There are, in general, three predominant reasons for the existence
of overly restrictive emission limitations within the State Implementa-
tion Plans. These are 1) The use of the example region approach in
developing State-wide air quality control strategies; 2) the existence
of State Air Quality Standards which are more stringent than NAAQS; and
3) the "hot spots" in only part of an Air Quality Control Region (AQCR)
which have been used as the basis for controlling the entire region.
Since each of these situations affect many State plans and, in some
instances, conflict with current national energy concerns, a review of
the State Implementation Plans is a logical follow-up to EPA's initial
appraisal of the SIP's conducted in 1972. At that time SIP's were
approved by EPA if they demonstrated the attainment of NAAQS or more
stringent state air quality standards. Also, at that time, an accept-
able method for formulating control strategies was the use of an example
region for demonstrating the attainment of the standards.
The example region concept permitted a State to identify the most
polluted air quality control region (AQCR) and adopt control regulations
which would be adequate to attain the NAAQS in that region. In using
an example region, it was assumed that NAAQS would be attained in the
other AQCR's of the State if the same control regulations were applied to
these control regions. The problem with the use of an example region is
that it can result in excessive controls, expecially in the utilization
of clean fuels, for areas of the State where sources would not otherwise
contribute to NAAQS violations. For instance, a control strategy based
on a particular region or source can result in a regulation requiring 1
-------
percent sulfur oil to be burned state-wide where the use of 3 percent
sulfur coal would be adequate to attain NAAQS in some locations.
EPA anticipates that a number of States will use the review find-
ings to assist them in making the decision whether or not to revise
portions of their State Implementation Plans. However, it is most
important for those States which desire to submit a revised plan to
recognize the review's limitations. The findings of this report are
by no means conclusive and are neither intended nor adequate to be
the sole basis for SIP revisions; they do, however, represent EPA's
best judgement and effort in complying with the ESECA requirements.
The time and resources which EPA has had to prepare the reports has not
permitted the consideration of growth, economics, and control strategy
tradeoffs. Also, there have been only limited dispersion modeling data
available by which to address individual point source emissions. Where
the modeling data for specific sources were found, however, they were
used in the analysis.
The data upon which the reports' findings are based are the most
current data available to the Federal Government. However, EPA believes
that the States possess the best information for developing revised plans.
The States have the most up-to-date air quality and emissions data, a
better feel for growth, and the fullest understanding for the complex
problems facing them in the attainment and maintenance of air quality.
Therefore, those States desiring to revise a plan are encouraged to
verify and, in many instances, expand the modeling and monitoring data
supporting EPA's findings. In developing a suitable plan, it is suggested
that States select control strategies which place emissions from fuel
combustion sources into perspective with all sources of emissions such as
smelters or other industrial processes. States are encouraged to consider
the overall impact which the potential relaxation of overly restrictive
emissions regulations for combustion sources might have on their future
control programs. This may include air quality maintenance, prevention of
-------
significant deterioration, increased TSP, NO and HC emissions which
X
occur in fuel switching, and other potential air pollution situations
such as sulfates.
Although the enclosed analysis has attempted to address the attain-
ment of all the NAAQS, most of the review has focused on total suspended
particulate matter (TSP) and sulfur dioxide (SO^) emissions. This is
because stationary fuel combustion sources constitute the greatest
source of SC^ emissions and are a.. .major source of TSP emissions.
Part of each State's review was organized to provide an analysis
of the SCL and TSP emission tolerances within each of the various AQCRs.
The regional emission tolerance estimate is, in many cases, EPA's only
measure of the. "over-cleaning" accomplished by a SIP. The tolerance
assessments have been combined in Appendix B with other regional air
quality "indicators" in an attempt to provide an evaluation of a region's
candidacy for changing emission limitation regulations. In conjunction
with the regional analysis, a summary of the State's fuel combustion
sources (power plants, industrial sources, and area sources) has been
performed in Appendix C, D, and E.
1.2 FINDINGS OF REVIEW
The New Jersey State Implementation Plan has been reviewed, within
the context of ESECA Section IV, in order to determine whether emission
or fuel sulfur content regulations for combustion sources appeared to be
excessively restrictive. The major findings are as follows:
BASED ON THE DATA AVAILABLE FOR THIS ANALYSIS, THERE ARE NO INDI-
CATIONS THAT PARTICULATE EMISSION LIMITING REGULATIONS ARE OVERLY
RESTRICTIVE IN ANY NEH JERSEY
ONLY THE NEH JERSEY INTRASTATE AQCR (150) APPEARS TO OFFER A PO-
TENTIAL FOR CLEAN FUEL SAVINGS BY MEANS OF A RELAXATION OF THE
FUEL SULFUR CONTENT REGULATION.
-------
New Jersey Air Quality Regions are shown in Figure 1-1. The over-
all review on a Regional basis indicates the following:
a New Jersey - New York - Connecticut AQCR (043) - this Region is
a poor candidate for fuel conversions of any kind because of the
generally poor air quality, the high population density, and the
degree of industrialization.
0 Metropolitan Philadelphia (045) - this Region has some areas
which could likely absorb the air quality impact of new_ coal-
fired sources. However, the existing major sources are in areas
with high industrialization and marginal air quality, so there is
little potential for fuel switching.
t New Jersey Intrastate AQCR (150) - this largely rural AQCR shows
the most potential for clean fuel savings in New Jersey. It has
no major industrialized areas and has generally good ventilation
because of the large unshielded coast line.
a N.E. Pennsylvania - Upper Delaware Valley AQCR (151) - this
Region has poor potential for fuel conversion chiefly because
there are few large sources capable of changing fuels.. The only
significant power plant is located within the narrow confines of
the Delaware Valley and has very poor dispersion characteristics.
NOTE: Reference numbers in the report refer to the references listed in
Section 4.0
-------
AIR QUALITY
CONTROL REGIONS
N.E. PENNA.-UPPER DEL
VALLEY INTERSTATE
NJ.-N.Y.-CONN. INTERSTATE
METRO. PHILA. INTERSTATE
N.J. INTRASTATE
FIGURE 1-1 NEW JERSEY COUNTIES AND AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGIONS.
-------
2.0 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW
2.1 SUMMARY
A revision of fuel combustion source emissions regulations will depend
on many factors. For example:
• Does the State have air quality standards which are more stringent
than NAAQS?
• Does the State have emission limitation regulations for control of
(1) power plants, (2) industrial sources, (3) area sources?
• Did the State use an example region approach for demonstrating the
attainment of NAAQS or more stringent State standards?
• Has the State not initiated action to modify combustion source
emission regulations for fuel savings; i.e., under the Clean Fuels
Policy?
t Are there no proposed Air Quality Maintenance Areas?
» Are there indications of a sufficient number of monitoring sites
within a region?
• Is there an expected 1975 attainment date for NAAQS?
t Based on (1973) air quality data, are there no reported violations
of NAAQS?
• Based on (1973) air quality data, are there indications of a
tolerance for increasing emissions?
• Are the total emissions from stationary fuel combustion sources
proportionally lower than those of other sources?
• Do modeling results for specific fuel combustion sources show a
potential for a regulation revision?
• Is there a significant clean fuels savings potential in the region?
The following portion of this report is directed at answering these
questions. An AQCR's potential for revising regulations increases when
there are affirmative responses to the above.
The initial part of the SIP review report, Section 2 and Appendix A,
were organized to provide the background and current situation information
for the State Implementation Plan. Section 3 and the remaining Appendices
-------
provide an AQCR analysis which helps establish the overall potential for
revising regulations. Emission tolerance estimates have been combined in
Appendix B with other regional air quality "indicators" in an attempt to
provide an evaluation of a region's candidacy for revising emission limiting
regulations. In conjunction with the regional analysis, a characterization
of the State's fuel combustion sources (power plants, industrial sources,
and area sources) has been carried out in Appendices C, D, and E.
Based on an overall evaluation of EPA's current information, AQCR's
have been classified as good, marginal, or poor candidates for regulation
revisions. Table 2-1 summarizes the State Implementation Plan Review. The
remaining portion of the report supports this summary with explanations.
2.2 CURRENT AIR QUALITY STATUS OF NEW JERSEY
2.2.1 Definition of Air Quality Control Regions
The State of New Jersey is made up of four Air Quality Control Regions
(AQCR's), one intrastate Region, lying wholly within the state and three
interstate Regions, which lie partly within New Jersey and partly within one
or more adjoining states:
• AQCR 043 - New Jersey - New York - Connecticut Interstate Region;
• AQCR 045 - Metropolitan Philadelphia Interstate Region (Del. -
N.J. - Pa.);
• AQCR 150 - New Jersey Intrastate Region;
t AQCR 151 - Northeast Pennsylvania - Upper Delaware Valley Inter-
state Region (N.J. - Pa.).
Figure 1-1 portrays the Geographic boundaries of the New Jersey portions of
these AQCR's, and Table 2-2 lists the New Jersey counties in the four Regions,
Other information pertaining to New Jersey air pollution control areas in
general is presented in Table A-l in the Appendix. These data are discussed
in more detail in Section 3.0.
-------
TABLE 2-1. STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVIEW
(SUMMARY)
STATE
N.J.-N.V.
Conn.
AQCR 043
Met.
Philadelphia
Interstate
AQCR 045
N.J.
Intrastate
AQCK ISO
N.E. Penn.-
U|iper Del.
Valley
AQCK 151
"INDICATORS"
• Does the State have air quality standards which are
more stringent than NAAQS?
• Does the State have emission limiting regulations
for control of:
1. Power plants
2. Industrial sources
3. Area sources
* Did the State use an example region approach for
demonstrating the attainment of NAAQS or more stringent
Stdte standards?
• Has the State not initiated action to modify combustion
source emission regulations for fuel savings; i.e., under
the Clean Fuels Policy?
• Are there mj proposed Air Quality Maintenance Areas?
* Are there indications of a sufficient number of
monitoring sites within a region?
• Is there an expected 1975 attainment date for NAAQS?
• Based on (1973) Air Quality Data, are there no
reported violations of NAAQS?
• uascd un (I'jVJ) Air Quality liata. are trie re indications
of a tolerance for increasing emissions?
• Arj the total omissions froui II. J. stationary fuel
combustion '^uisicts proportionally lower tt.an these of other
sources?
* [10 modeling rssults for specific fuel c« bnstinn snurcns
show a potential for a regulation revision?
* Is there a significant Clean Fuels Saving potential in
the region?
• Based on the above indicators, what is the potential
for revising fuel combustion source emission limiting
regulations?
TSP
Mo
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
so2
Ho
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
TSP
No
Yes
No
No
I!o
Y-S
Nn
so2
No
Yes
Yes
flol
Yes
Mo
Ho
No
Poor
TSP
No
Yes
No
No
MO
Yes
No
so2
Mo
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yus
Yes
No
No
Poor
TSP
No-
Yes
Yes
No
110
Yes
No
' S02
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ho
YM
Yes
Good
' TSP
No
Yes
Yes
No
HO
Yc-i
No
so2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yji
III!
No
Huiyinal
I
No violations occurred within tleu Jersey portion of AQCR.
-------
TABLE 2-Z. NEW JERSEY AIR QUALITY CONTROL
REGIONS (AQCR's)
Control Region
Counties Included in Region*
Metropolitan Philadelphia
Interstate
N. E. Pennsylvania-Upper
Delaware Valley Interstate
New Jersey Intrastate
New Jersey-New York-
Connecticut Interstate
Burlington, Camden, Gloucester,
Mercer, and Salem
Hunterdon, Sussex, and Warren
Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland,
and Ocean
Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Middlesex,
Monmouth, Morris, Passaic, Somerset,
and Union.
*Including only the N. J. portion of the region.
10-
-------
'2'
2.2.2 Air Quality Standards
The state and national ambient air quality standards for SO,
particulates, and N0« are given in Table A-2. The two sets of standards
are identical so no potential for overly-restrictive controls exists from
this cause.
2.2.3 Air Quality Monitoring
The state air quality monitoring network for TSP and SCL is adequate,
in general, with the number of stations reflecting such factors as popula-
tion density and degree of industrialization. Air quality data for TSP and
S02 are given in Tables A-3 and A-4, respectively. In brief, these data
indicate the following:
• New Jersey has relatively high suspended particulate levels, with
all AQCR's showing air quality violations. All of the interstate
Regions show violations of both annual and 24-hr, national
standards.
• Only AQCR 043 (N.O. - N.Y. - Conn.) shows any violations of S02
standards, but an annual reading equal to the standard was
recorded in AQCR 045 (Metropolitan Philadelphia).
2.2.4 Emissions of Sulfur Dioxide and Particulates
The contributions of fuel combustion sources located in New Jersey
to the total emissions in each AQCR are summarized in Table A-5 for both
TSP and SO^. Tables A-6 and A-7 provide a more detailed view by means of
categorization in terms of combustion source type, i.e., electricity genera-
tion, industrial-commercial-institutional, and area. The salient features
from these tables are:
• New Jersey combustion sources are significant contributors to
the TSP emission burden in the New York Interstate Region and in
the New Jersey Intrastate Region.
§ These sources are the major S0? emitters in the preceding AQCR's
and are significant donors in the Metropolitan Philadelphia Region.
« An unexpected result in the heavily-industrialized New York AQCR is
that area sources are the principal New Jersey combustion emitters,
contributing 6% of the regional particulate total. This is not
unexpected in the largely rural New Jersey Intrastate Region where
there are few point sources.
11
-------
0 The major combustion source of SCL within the state is electricity
generation in each Region.
2.2.5 S00 and Particulate Regulations
el
The state regulations for control of TSP and S02 from fuel-burning
sources are based on a particulate emission limitation regulation (Table A-8)
and a combined fuel sulfur content-emission limitation regulation (Table A-9),
respectively. The regulations are discussed in more detail in Section 2.3.
2.2.6 Control Strategy Assessments
Tables A-10 and A-ll, the control strategy assessments for TSP and
S0p» respectively, were developed primarily as inputs to the regional assess-
ments of Appendix B, which are discussed in detail in Section 3.0. Basically,
the tables represent attempts to determine the following:
1. Are the allowable emissions projections'made in the original SIP
in reasonable agreement with such estimates based on more recent
data?
2. Will the ambient air quality standards for TSP and SOp be
attained as scheduled?
3. Is there any tolerance for relaxation of combustion regulations?
That is, are predicted 1975 emission levels less than the levels
required for attainment of NAAQS?
According to Table A-10, there is no tolerance for relaxation of particulate
regulations. On the other hand, according to Table A-ll, it might be
possible to relax the fuel sulfur content regulation in some cases. The
detailed assessments, which consider many other factors, are presented in
Section 3.0.
2.3 GENERAL REVIEW OF CURRENT STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
As noted earlier, there are three predominant reasons for the existence
of overly restrictive emission limitations in a control strategy:
t The Example Region - the regulations for one AQCR can be utilized
for another AQCR, where a less restrictive strategy would be adequate.
12
-------
t Conservative Ambient Standards - ambient standards lower than the
MAAQS can be promulgated.
• "Hot Spots" - an inordinately high pollutant level in part of an
AQCR can be used as the basis for a Region-wide emission rollback
via the proportional approach.
Of these possibilities, the Mew Jersey SIP made use of the example region
and, to some extent, the "hot spot," since control strategies are based on
the worst monitoring sites. The example region for Mew Jersey's regulations
was the Mew Jersey - New York - Connecticut AQCR (Mo. 043). However, the
limitations on fuel sulfur content in the more rural AQCR's of the state
(Regions 150 and 151) are less restrictive than those in the urbanized
ones, so the potential for excessively strict regulations is reduced some-
what. A more detailed discussion of the Plan follows.
The Mew Jersey SIP contains control strategies and regulations which
are adequate to attain the primary standards for particulate matter and SOp
in the State's four AQCR's. The New Jersey portion of the Metropolitan
Philadelphia and Mew Jersey-Mew York-Connecticut AQCR's received 18-month
extensions for submission of plans to attain secondary standards for SOg and
particulate matter. The EPA revocation of the 24-hour and annual average
secondary standards for SOp has eliminated the need for development of any
secondary standard plans for SO-. The State did not submit the required
plans for particulate matter and EPA will propose regulations, applicable
to the New Jersey-New York-Connecticut AQCR, to attain the secondary standard.
The regulations being considered by EPA consist of the control of fugitive
emissions as well as more stringent emission limitations for commercial and
industrial boilers and incinerators. It has been determined that the
existing primary standard plan will be adequate to attain the secondary
standards for particulate matter in the Metropolitan Philadelphia AQCR.
The State regulations for the control of particulate matter include
limitation on particulate emissions from fuel-burning equipment, process
sources and incinerators. The fuel-burning limitation varies depending on
the size of the unit. Small units are limited to 0.6 lbs/106 BTU of
particulate matter while the sources above 200 x 10 BTU/hr are limited to
0.1 lbs/106 BTU. Sources between 20 x 106 BTU/hr and 180 x 106 BTU/hr have
13
-------
emission limitations ranging from 0.4 lbs/106 BTU to 0.11 lbs/106 BTU.
The regulation for process sources requires that all sources control 99%
of potential particulate emissions. The opacity limitation is 20%. The
State's incinerator regulation limits particulate emissions to 0.2 grains/scf
and a Ringelmann reading not greater than No. 2.
In addition to limitations on the sulfur content of fuels (0.2% -
No. 2, 0.3% - No. 6, 0.2% - coal in the New Jersey-New York-Connecticut and
Metropolitan Philadelphia AQCR's and 0.3% - No. 2, 0.5% - No. 6, and 0.7% -
coal in New Jersey Intrastate and N. E. Pennsylvania - Upper Delaware
Valley AQCR's) the State has a regulation which limits the concentration of
SOp to a maximum of 2,000 ppm by volume at standard conditions. During the
period between November 15, 1973 and March 15, 1974 the State granted a
total of 40 variances to their sulfur-in-fuel limitations which allowed
certain sources to burn coal with sulfur contents ranging between 1.25% and
3%.
2.4 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
2.4.1 Special Problems
The State of New Jersey regulations for sulfur content of fuels, if
enforced, would effectively preclude the use of coal in both the New York
and the Metropolitan Philadelphia Interstate Regions. There is virtually
no coal meeting the required 0.2% maximum sulfur limitation. The 0.7%
limitation in the other two AQCR's severely restricts the use of coal in
those Regions, as well.
The conversion of oil-burning plants to coal might well be ruled out
on the basis of the TSP problem in New Jersey, however. The facts are as
follows:
1. New Jersey has generally high levels of suspended particulates.
2. To maintain the same particulate emission rate as an oil-burning
boiler, a coal-fired plant, of the same BTU rating, must have
installed fly ash control equipment with a long-term efficiency
of 99+%.
14
-------
What these statements imply is that, even if the coal sulfur content
limitation is raised to allow burning of coal on that basis, a boiler
operator would still have to decide between a large capital expenditure
with the attendant operating costs in order to burn relatively cheap coal
or, on the other hand, use the more expensive fuel oil.
2.4.2 Regional Characteristics
In making any suggestions for relaxation of emission regulations in
New Oersey, one must keep in mind several pertinent demographic and
environmental features of the state:
1. Some parts of New Jersey contain some of the nation's highest
population densities. Consequently, the number of people
affected by possibly adverse air quality levels is quite large
in these areas.
2. In addition to the high population density, some of these areas
are highly industrialized so the number of emission sources
affected by changes in the regulations can be quite large.
3. All of the Mew Jersey Control Regions except the Intrastate
Region show relatively high TSP and SCL air quality levels in
the other states making up the Regions.
2.4.3 New Power Plant Construction
The demand for electricity in New Jersey has shown tremendous growth
in the past and this is expected to continue. The increase is attributed
to the following factors:
• Population Growth,
t Increases in Per-Capita Demand,
• Continued Expansion of Industry in Both the Developed Areas and
to the South, Southwest, and North.
To meet the increased electrical demand, the power companies have
long-range plans for expansion of existing facilities and construction of
new facilities. Table 2-3 summarizes the planned construction activities.
15
-------
TABLE 2-3 PLANNED POWER PLANT CONSTRUCTION IN NEW JERSEY'
Comoanv
ACE
ACE
JCP&L
JCP&L
METED
NJP&L
PSE&G
PSE&G
Total
Conventional
JCP&L
PSE&G
PSE&G
PSE&G
Total
M 1 1 p 1 p a v*
1 1 U\* 1 C G I
PSE&G
PSE&G
PSE&G
Total
C a c TII y* h i n P
VJQO 1 U I U 1 HC
TOTAI
1 U 1 ML.
Plant
England #3
Deepwater #10
Union Beach #1
Union Beach #2
Gilbert
Thuerk
Sewaren #7
Sewaren #8
Forked River #1
Newbold Island #1
Salem #1
Salem #2
Bergen #4 & 5
Mickleton
Sewaren
N
or
E
E
E
N
N
E
N
E
E
—
N
N
N
N
E
N
E
Type/Fuel
C/0
C/0
C/0
C/0
C/0
C/NA
C/0
C/0
—
PWR/Nu
BWR/Nu
PWR/Nu
PWR/Nu
GT/0 or G
GT/0 or G
GT/0 or G
Capacity
(106 watts)
160
400
316
316
126
370
378
378
2444
1070
1067
1090
1115
AO/IO
45 •
79
252
'yjc
7162
/ 1 0£
Year of
.Completion
1974
1978
1976
1977
1975
1978
1976
1977
1978
1979
1975
1976
1974-5
1974
1974
AQCR
150
045-
043
043
151-
151
043
043
—
150
MA
045
045
043
NA
043
Abbreviations:
Companies - ACE/Atlantic City Electric; JCP&L/Jersey Central Power and
Light; METED/Metropolitan Edison; MJP&L/New Jersey Power and Light; PSE&G/
Public Service Electric and Gas.
Other - BWR/boiling water reactor; C/conventional; E/existing plant;
G/gas; GT/gas turbine; N/new plant; Nu/nuclear; 0/oil; PWR/pressurized
water reactor.
"Data taken from reference 5.
16
-------
From an air quality and clean fuel conservation standpoint, these
projections have some important ramifications:
1. Over sixty percent of the new generating capacity will be nuclear
and will have no particulate or SCL emissions. In addition, no
fossil fuels are consumed by such plants.
2. The new conventional plants must all meet the stringent EPA New
Source Performance Standards, and their air quality impacts will
be less than the older units, which will be going into reserve
status in many cases.
3. Many of the new conventional units are being installed at
existing facilities, some of which have the capability of burning
coal. Before any coal conversion takes place at such an existing
plant, the effect of the new unit should be thoroughly reviewed.
4. All of the new conventional plants are designed to burn oil
rather than coal.
17
-------
3.0 AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION ASSESSMENTS
The purpose of this section is to evaluate the available information
for the State of New Jersey and determine the feasibility of revisions
to the SIP which would result in clean fuel conservation. The first
subsection provides explanations of the methods used in making the
regional assessments. Subsections 3.2 through 3.5 present the results of
the application of the criteria for each of the New Jersey AQCR's.
3.1 THE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
In determining the potential of the AQCR's in a state for emission
standard relaxation, a set of five evaluation criteria has been established:
0 The Regional Indicators,
i Power Plant Evaluation,
• Other Major Fuel-Burning Point Source Evaluation,
• Area Source Evaluation,
• Fuel Use Assessment.
The following paragraphs provide explanations of the use of these
criteria.
3.1.1 The Regional Evaluation
This assessment is based on a review of regional air quality data,
various regional or subregional categorizations (e.g., priority classifi-
cations or proposed air quality maintenance area (AQMA) designations), and
other information available to EPA. The assessment must be made for each
pollutant separately and is made on the basis of 7 indicators: (1) recent
air quality violations; (2) expected NAAQS attainment dates; (3) proposed
Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA) designations; (4) total emissions; (5)
portion of emissions from fuel combustion sources in New Jersey; (6) regional
tolerance for emission increase; and (7) SOp priority classification.
Tables B-l and B-2 tabulate these criteria for each AQCR for TSP and S02,
respectively. This preliminary analysis will be supplemented by a more
detailed evaluation after the individual source categories are reviewed.
19
-------
3.1.2 Power Plant Evaluation
The evaluation of power plants was based on the modeling analysis
1 ?
performed by Wai den Research. ' Wai den assumed certain oil-to-coal
conversions for many of the power plants in New Jersey and then performed
pi ant-by-plant diffusion modeling to determine the air quality impacts of
the plants both before and after conversion. A plant was considered
unacceptable for conversion if the conversion might bring about the
violation of any national ambient air quality standard. All of the power
plant data appear in Tables C-l through C-3, with an overall emissions
summary in C-4.
3.1.3 Major Industrial and Commercial Point Source Evaluation
No modeling results were available for the larger industrial,
commercial, or institutional point sources in New Jersey. Consequently,
the analysis was restricted to an estimate of the emissions reduction
resulting from the compliance of these sources with current New Jersey
emission and fuel regulations. The results are in Appendix D.
3.1.4 Area Source Evaluation
Area source emissions data were available by AQCR from the National
Emissions Data System (NEDS) summary report. In addition, the Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards keeps county summaries. The latter are
reproduced in Appendix E. Since it is unlikely that these small sources
could convert from oil or gas to coal, the clean fuel savings potential
is relatively limited and these analyses are somewhat superficial.
3.1.5 Fuels Analysis
Fuel usage data for the State of New Jersey are tabulated in
Appendix F. These data provide a broad survey of the distribution of fuels
by user type for the entire state, as well as the AQCR's.
20
-------
3.2 NEW JERSEY - MEW YORK - CONNECTICUT INTERSTATE REGION (043)
3.2.1 Regional Assessment (Appendix B)
The regional indicators of this AQCR indicate that it is not a good
candidate for relaxation of either the particulate or the SO^ regulations.
The problems may be summarized as follows:
• Participates - air quality violations, proposed AQMA designation,
negative tolerance for emissions increase, and significant
emissions from New Jersey sources.
• Sulfur Dioxide - air quality violations and a large percentage
of emissions from N.J. sources. (Although, the air quality vio-
lations were recorded in the New York portion of the AQCR, Essex
Middlesex, and Bergen Counties have been proposed as AQMA's for
S02 because of general emissions growth.)
Another reason for non-relaxation of the fuel combustion regulations is the
generally high levels of other pollutants with the potential for synergistic
interactions.
3.2.2 Power Plant Assessments
Three plants were considered to have potential for clean fuel
savings in this AQCR: Jersey Central Power & Light (JCPL) - the Sayre-
ville and Werner Plants; Public Service Electric & Gas (PSE&G) - the
Bergen Plant. The air quality impacts of the proposed fuel conversions are
shown in Table C-3. Based on these results and the air quality in the areas
around the plants, the following assessments can be made:
• JCPL Plants - these stations are in close proximity to one another
in the heavily industrialized Perth Amboy area. The air quality
impact of the fuel switch on the area could easily result in air
quality violations for both the 24-hr. SOp standard and the
annual particulate standard.
• PSE&G Plant - this station lies in the midst of heavy industry
and a dense population. The additional pollutant concentrations
contributed by the fuel switch could result in violations of both
annual and 24-hr. TSP and S02 standards.
In summary, none of these plants are recommended for fuel conversion, at
least not the conversions for which the modeling was performed.
21
-------
3.2.3 Other Major Combustion Sources Assessment
The emissions and fuels data for the major non-utility combustion
point sources are summarized in Table D-3. Because diffusion modeling
results were not available for these plants, it is difficult to make any
specific recommendations for them. Nevertheless, the following comments
are applicable:
1. Most industrial/commercial boilers are designed to burn either
coal or oil and/or gas. They generally cannot switch to coal
so the potential for clean fuel savings is expected to be small.
2. The sources are concentrated in the areas of the Region showing
the worst air quality already.
These sources are not, as a class, recommended for fuel conversion. A
comprehensive evaluation on a source-by-source basis would be required to
thoroughly assess these sources for possible clean fuel savings. A
pertinent observation here is that one large refinery, easily the largest
industrial/commercial oil user in the Region, is quite unlikely to be
able to switch its boilers to coal.
3.2.4 Area Source Assessment
New Jersey combustion area sources are significant emission sources
in this AQCR contributing six percent of the particulate emissions and
ten percent of the S02 emissions to the regional totals. Because: (1)
these sources are not generally capable of burning coal; (2) the emissions
are usually near ground level; and (3) the emissions are highest in the
most densely populated areas; this category is not recommended for fuel
conversion.
3.2.5 Fuels Assessment
The fuel use summary for this Region is shown in Table F-2. Electri-
city generation accounts for about 42% of the fuel oil usage in the Region,
other industrial sources about 11%, commercial sources approximately 19%
and residential sources about 28%. None of the largest usage categories
are suitable for fuel conversion for reasons discussed previously.
22
-------
3.3 METROPOLITAN PHILADELPHIA INTERSTATE REGION (045)
3.3.1 Regional Assessment
The overall assessment of this Region indicates that it is a poor
candidate for relaxation of the participate regulations, but a potentially
good candidate for relaxation of the fuel sulfur content regulations. The
assessment for particulates is based on the following factors:
• Several TSP standard violations,
• No tolerance for emissions increase.
With regard to SOp, it should be mentioned that the annual standard was
equalled in 1973. Consequently, any relaxation of the fuel sulfur
regulations should be made only after a detailed analysis.
3.3.2 Power Plant Assessment (Appendix D)
Three power plants were modeled in this AQCR: Atlantic City
Electric (ACE) - the Deepwater Plant; and PSE&G - the Burlington and
Mercer Plants. The Mercer plant is already burning coal, so no fuel
switch was considered. The assessments for the other two plants are below:
• Deepwater Plant - this plant is just across the Delaware River
from Wilmington, Delaware, within a high concentration of
industry. After conversion to coal, the emissions from this
plant alone can result in 24-hr. SO^ concentrations within 15
to 25 percent of the national standards. For these reasons,
this plant should not be considered a good candidate for a fuel
swi tch.
• Burlington Station - this plant is situated on the east bank of
the Delaware River in the midst of a massive industrial complex
along both river banks. After the proposed switch to coal, the
plant, alone, could result in S0? concentrations within 20 - 30
percent of the national 24-hr, standard. Together with the
other sources in the area, this might result in air quality
violations, and the fuel conversion is not recommended.
3.3.3 Other Major Combustion Source Assessment
The emissions summaries of Tables A-6 and A-7, together with the
data of Table D-3, indicate that: (1) this source category is an insig-
nificant contributor to both particulate and SO^ emissions; (2) a switch
to coal (possible for very few sources) by this category would result in
23
-------
inconsequential clean fuel savings. Hence, there seems little merit in
instituting oil-to-coal conversions in this source group.
3.3.4 Area Source Assessment
This source category contributes very little to either the TSP or
the SOp emissions of the Region. On the other hand, such sources offer
very little potential for clean fuel savings because of their small size
and lack of fuel conversion flexibility.
3.3.5 Fuel Use Assessment
(Data not available for this AQCR.)
3.4 NEW JERSEY INTRASTATE REGION (150)
3.4.1 Regional Assessment
The regional indicators for this AQCR (Appendix B) signify that the
Region is not a good candidate for relaxation of the particulate emission
regulations, and it has marginal potential for relaxation of the fuel
sulfur content limitation. These statements are founded on the reasons
below:
• TSP - air quality violations, a large (28%) emission contribution
by combustion sources, and a negative tolerance for emissions
increase, plus AQMA counties.
• SO 2 - a very large (82%) contribution from combustion sources
to total regional SO^ emissions.
Although fuel combustion contributes a large percentage of the emissions,
it is a large percentage of a relatively small (60,000 ton/yr.) emission
total.
3.4.2 Power Plant Assessment
Only two power plants were the subject of diffusional analysis in
this Region: ACE - the England Plant and the Missouri Avenue Plant. Be-
cause the latter plant already burns coal, it was modeled in its 1972
configuration only. The results for the England station are summarized as
follows:
24
-------
• England Plant - this plant is located in a tidal marsh on the
south shore of Great Egg Harbor in an area with very low
population density and no heavy industry. In addition, there
are no air quality violations in the locale. Although the
impact of the suggested fuel switch on air quality is not
insignificant, it should not result in any air quality violations
if proper fly ash control is implemented. The required degree
of control to avoid TSP air quality violations must be based
on more detailed modeling analysis, taking into account the
expansion of the facility (Table 2-3).
In summary the England Plant appears to be a potential candidate for
conversion of units 1 and 2 to coal.
3.4.3 Other Major Combustion Source Assessment
A few large plants constitute the major clean fuel users in this
category.(See Appendix D.) Because no information is available concerning
the configuration of their boilers (except capacity) or of the air quality
effects of conversion from oil to coal, these plants can only be noted as
possible candidates. A more rigorous investigation would be needed in
order to make a positive recommendation.
3.4.4 Area Source Assessment
Area combustion source emissions are significant parts of the AQCR
totals for both particulates (14%) and S02 (17%), although again the totals
are small. Because of the general lack of convertability of these small
sources and the small magnitude of any clean fuel savings, these sources
are not considered candidates for fuel conversion.
3.4.5 Fuel Use Assessment
The fuel use summary (Table F-3) shows that 80% of the fuel oil and
90% of the natural gas in this Region are consumed by area sources, which
are not likely candidates for fuel conversion.
3.5 NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA - UPPER DELAWARE VALLEY INTERSTATE REGION (151)
3.5.1 Regional Assessment
This Region is not considered a good candidate for particulate regula-
tion relaxation, but it does have potential for fuel sulfur content
25
-------
relaxation. The poor TSP evaluation is based on the following items:
• TSP - air quality violations, proposed AQMA designation,
negative tolerance for emissions increase.
An important factor with regard to SCL is that New Jersey combustion sources
are responsible for only five percent of the regional total.
3.5.2 Power Plant Assessment
1 2
The Walden modeling reports ' used for the other Regions did not
A
include any power plants in this AQCR. However, an earlier analysis did
contain modeling results for the Gilbert Plant operated by New Jersey Power
& Light. The conclusion of this report was that, because of the location
of the plant in the narrow confines of the upper Delaware Valley, it should
not be considered for coal conversion.
3.5.3 Other Major Point Source Assessment
There are nonsignificant fuel burning sources of particulates or
SOp in the New Jersey portion of the Region.
3.5.4 Area Source Assessment
Area source emissions are not prominent contributors of either
particulates or of sulfur dioxide in the AQCR. Nevertheless, the small
magnitude of any clean fuel savings from these sources make them poor
candidates for fuel conversion.
3.5.5 Fuel Use Assessment
(Data not available for this AQCR.)
26
-------
4.0 REFERENCES
1. "Modeling Analysis of Power Plants for Fuel Conversion,"
(Group I), prepared by Maiden Research, for Environmental
Protection Agency, 15 July 1974.
2. Ibid, (Group III), 9 September 1974.
3. "1972 National Emissions Report," Report Mo. EPA - 450/
2-74-012, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, June 1974.
4. Diffusional Analysis of Gilbert Power Plant, performed by
Wai den Research, for Environmental Protection Agency,
1 April 1974.
5. "Steam - Electric Plant Factors/1972," 23rd edition,
National Coal Association, 1973.
6. Electrical World Directory of Electric Utilities, 81st
edition, McGraw Hill, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1972.
7. "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors," Publication
No. AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1974.
8. "Federal Air Quality Control Regions," Publication No.
AP-102, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 1972.
9. SAROAD (Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data) computer
printouts for 1973.
10. Federal Power Commission (FPC) fuel usage projections for
major power plants in New Jersey, status as of 5 July 1974.
11. "Stationary Source Fuel Summary Report," National Emission
Data System, Environmental Protection Agency, 23 September 1974.
27
-------
APPENDIX A
State Implementation Plan Background
TABLE A-l NEW JERSEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AREAS
Air Quality
Control Region
Metropolitan Philadelphia
(N.J., Pa., Del.)
New Jersey
Federal
Number
45
150
Priority
Classification
Pa.rticulates
I
III
SO ' NO
I III
IA III
Population
1975
(Minions)
6.06
.59
2
AQMA Designations
TSP Counties SO.. Counties
(6) Bucks ,P Chester,?
Delaware? Montgomery?
Philadelphia,? Mercer
(2) Atlantic Ocean
(1) Camden
(0)
Intrastate (N.J.)
New Jersey - New York - 43
Connecticut (N.J., N.Y..
Conn.)
Northeast Pennsylvania - 151
Upper Delaware Valley
(N.J. - Pa.)
II
III
18.72
2.09
(13) Hudson, Monmouth, Morris
Middlesex, Essex, Union,
Bergen, New York," Nassau,"
Rockland.n Suffolk,"
Westchester, Somerset
(6) Warren, Lehigh p
Northampton ,*p Berks,*p
Lackawanna,*p Luzerne*p
(8) New York, Nassau"
Kockland," Suffolk"
Westcliester, Essex,
Union, Middlesex
1. Criteria Based on Maximum Measured (or Estimated) Pollution Concentration in Area
Priority
Sulfur oxide: (i
-------
TABLE A-2 NEW JERSEY AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
o
All concentrations in ugms/nr
Primary
Secondary
Total Suspended Parti cul ate
Annual 24-Hour
75(G) 2601
60 (G) 1501
Sulfur Oxides
Annual 24-Hour 3-Hour
80(A) 3651
13001
Nitrogen Dioxide
Annual
100(A)
100(A)
CO
o
1. Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
-------
TSP Concentration (|ig/ni3)
TABLE A-3. New Jersey Air Quality Status. TSP1
Number of Stations Exceeding
Ambient Air Quality Standards
AQCR
No.
432'
150
452'
1512'
1.
'I.
3.
4.
No.
Stations
Repot- tiny
5 166
9
6 60
7 32
1973 air quality
Interstate.
Violations based
Formula:
Highest
Annual
125
47
87
232
data in
on 2nd
Reading
24-Hr
489
250
558
806
National
2nd Highest
Reading
24-llr
307
153
387
549
Air Data Bank as
% Reduction
Required
To Meet .
Primary Secondary Standards
Back- .. _
ground Annual 24-llrJ Annual % 24-Hr %
35 5 4 18 11 56 38 72
35 0 0 0 0 1 11 2.5
35 1 3 2 3 13 22 67
35 3 1 3 9 7 22 87
of June 7. 1974
Standard on
Which
Reduction
is Based
Annual
Secondary
60 Mg/iii3
24-llr
Secondary
150 M9/I"3
24-llr
Secondary
150 no/""3
Annual
Secondary
60 iig/ni3
highest reading at any station.
2nd Highest 24-Hr
- 24-llr Secondary
Standard lnn Annual - Annual Secondary Standard lnn
2nd Highest 24-llr - Background
Annual - Background
5. Highest and Second Highest 24-llr readings are in New York portion of AQCR.
6. Highest 24-llr reading is in Delaware portion of AQMA, Second Highest 24-llr reading is in Pennsylvania portion.
7. Highest and Second Highest 24-Hr readings are in Pennsylvania portion of AQCR.
-------
TABLE A-4 N.J. AQCR AIR QUALITY STATUS, S02]
3 Number of Stations Exceeding
SO? Concentration (ugm/m _) Ambient Air Quality Standards % Reduction Requi
AQCR
No.
432,5
150
452,6
1512
1.
2.
3.
4.
No. Stations
24 Hr
47
0
11
3
1973 air quality
Interstate.
Violations based
Formula:
Reporting
Cont.
71
2
23
1
Highest Readin
Annual 24-H
86
19
80
30
data in National Air Data
on 2nd highest
(2nd Highest 24-Hr -
reading at
1381
74
416
223
Bank
any
24-Hr Standard)
g 2nd Highest Reading Primary Secondary to Meet Standar
r 24-Hr Annual 24-Hr3 3-Hr3
93 1 8 2 7
0 00 -321
206 0 0 0 0
119 0 00 -167
as of June 7, 1974.
station.
x 100, (Annual - Annual Standard) x 100
Standard
on which
red reduction
ds4 is based
Annual.
80pg/nr
Annual ,
80 pg/nr
Annual
Annual _
80 pg/inj
5. Highest Annual reading in New York portion of AQCR, Highest 24-Hr in Conn, portion.
6. Highest and Second Highest 24-Hr, readings are in Pa. portion of AQCR.
-------
TABLE A-5. New Jersey Fuel Combustion Source Summary.
AQCR
No.
0434
No. of
i
Power Plants
14
5
3
1
No. of Other N. J. „
Fuel Combustion Plants
TSP
23
7
2
O5
SO,
12
35
I5
I5
No. of Area
0
Sources
9
5
4
3
Total Emissions for
AQCR J103 tons/yr.)
Part.
229
1050
14
231
so2
640
827
60
307
% Emissions from
N. J. Fuel Combustion Sources
Part.
12
<0.5
28
2
so2
51
11
82
5
045
150
1514
Total 23 32 17 21 1524 1834
1. New Jersey plants.
2. New Jersey plants, which, together with power plants, contribute at least 90% of the total New Jersey point source fuel combustion emissions.
Because of the large number of small TSP sources in AQCR's 043 and 045, the percentages for these regions are 83 and 85, respectively.
3. New Jersey counties.
4. Interstate region.
5. Power plants alone contribute over 90% of the point source emissions in the New Jersey portion of the region.
_
-------
'TABLE A-6. New Jersey Emissions Summary for Participates.1
AQCR
043
045
150
151
CO
AQCR
Total
(103 ton/yr.)
229
1050
14
231
Electricity^ Generation
(103 ton/yr.) %
8 3
4 0
1 7
3 1
Industrial/Commercial/ Area Source
2
Institutional Combustion Pt. Source Fuel Combustion
(103 ton/yr.)
6
1
1
0
% (103 ton/yr.)
3 14
0 3
7 2
0 1
%.
6
0
14
0
1. Emissions in NEDS summary document of June 1974.
2. These emissions are only those from the sources in the "Other" category of Table A-5.
-------
CJ
en
TABLE A-7. New Jersey Emissions Summary for Sulfur Dioxide.
043
045
150
151
AQCR
Total
(103 ton/yr.)
640
827
60
307
New Jersey
Electricity Generation
(103 ton/yr.) %
152 24
74 9
37 62
11 4
Industrial/Commercial/ Area Source
2
Institutional Combustion Pt. Source Fuel Combustion
(103 ton/yr.)
31
2
2
0
%
5
0
3
0
(103 ton/yr.)
63
14
10
2
%
10
2
17
1
1. Emissions in NEDS summary document of June 1974.
2. These emissions are only those from the sources in the "Other" category of Table A-5.
-------
TABLE A-8. New Jersey Participate Emission Regulation
for Fuel Combustion
Heat
Input Rate
(TO5 Btu./hr.)
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
TOO
120
140
160
Allowable
Emissions
Ob./hr.)
0.6
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
14.5
15
16.5
17.5
18.5
Heat
Input Rate
(106 Btu./hr.)
180
200
400
600
800
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
10,000
Allowable
Emissions
(Ib./hr.)
19.3
20
40
60
80
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1000
1. Heat input rate is the sum of the heat input rates of all fuel burning
equipment discharging through a common stack.
36
-------
TABLE A-9. New Jersey Fuel Sulfur Content Regulations.
AQCR Sulfur Content (% by Ht.)
043 - N. J./N. Y./Conn. No. 2 Oil - 0.2
Interstate No. 6 Oil - 0.3
Coal - 0.2
045 - Metropolitan Philadelphia Same as 043.
Interstate
150 - N. J. Intrastate Mo. 2 Oil - 0.3
No. 6 Oil - 0.5
Coal - 0.7
151 - N. E. Pa.-Upper Del. Same as 150.
Valley. Interstate
In addition to the above sulfur content limitations, the following
SOp emission limitations are in effect:
Single Units (200xl06 Btu./hr. or larger) - 0.3 lb/105 Btu. input.
Multi-Units (450xl06 Btu./hr. or larger) - 0.3 lb/105 Btu. input.
Non-Commercial Units - 310 ppm S0? by volume
adjusted to 122 by volume,
37
-------
TABLE A-10. Control Strategy Assessment - Participates
State Implementation Plan Requirements
Baseline
Air Quality
AQCR (ug/m3)
043 120 (ann.)
045 (2)
150 (2)
151 (2)
Baseline Allowable
Emissions Emissions
(tons/yr.) (tons/yr.)
91.606 26,943
34,203 (2)
11,932 (2)
2,927 (2)
Predicted
1975 Emissions
(tons/yr.)
52,740
27,066
16,911
2,362
Requirements Based on 1973 Data
1973
Air Quality
(ug/m3)
125 (ann.)
387 (24-hr.)
153 (24-hr.)
232 (ann.)
NEDS ,
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
102,784
40,832
13,723
9,947
Allowable
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
28,780
13,475
13,311
1,294
Tolerance
for Emission
Increase
(tons/yr.)
-23,960
-13,591
-3,600
-1,068
1. From NEDS summary document, June 1974.
2. None. The control strategies for these regions utilized example region approach based on AQCR 043.
3. Difference between 1973-based allowable and predicted 1975 emissions.
-------
TABLE A- H Control Strategy Assessment - S02
State Implementation Plan Requirements
AQCR
043
045
150
151
Baseline
Air Quality
(i-g/m3)
138 (ann.)
(2)
(2)
(V
Baseline
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
286,166
117,777
65,987
11,864
Allowable
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
166,000
(2)
(2)
(2)
Predicted
1975 Emissions
(tons/yr. )
150,584
42,808
70,691
9,454
Requirements Based on 1973 Data
1973
Air Quality
(iig/m3)
86 (ann.)
80 (ann.)
19 (ann.)
30 (ann.)
NEDS ,
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
317,693
120,481
57,872
15,135
Allowable
Emissions
(tons/yr.)
295,000
120,481
243,641
40,410
Tolerance
for [wission
Increase
(ti;ns/yr.)
144,416
77,673
172,950
30,956
1. From NEDS summary document, June 1974.
2. None. The control strategies for these regions utilized example region approach based on AQCR 043.
3. Difference between 1973-based allowable and predicted 1975 emissions.
-------
APPENDIX B
Regional Indicators
B-l REGIONAL INDICATORS FOR RELAXATION OF REGULATIONS-PARTICIPATES
Air Quality
Expected
Emissions
Tolerance for
AQCR
043
045
150
151
No. of
Moni tors
166
60
9
32
Sites with
A. Q. Violations1
61
15
1
7
Attainment Date
for Stds.
7/752
7/752
(3)
7/75
AQMA
Designations
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Total
(103 ton/yr.)
229
1.050
14
231
% from Fuel
Combustion
12
<0.5
28
2
5
Emission Increase
(103 ton/yr.)
-23,960
-13.591
- 3.600
- 1,068
1. If a particular site violated standards for more than one time period, it was counted only once.
2. 18-Month extension granted for secondary standard.
3. Air quality standards met.
4. A negative value indicates more restrictive regulations are needed to meet the standards.
-------
B-2 REGIONAL INDICATORS FOR RELAXATION OF REGULATIONS-SULFUR DIOXIDE
Air Quality
No. of .
AQCR Monitors1 A.
043 118
045 34
150 2
151 4
Sites with
Q. Violations2
9
0
0
0
Expected
Attainment Date AQMA
for Stds. Designations
7/75 Yes
7/75 Yes
(3) No
. 7/75 No
Emissions Tolerance for
Total % from Fuel Emission Increase
(103 ton/yr.) Combustion (103 ton/yr.)
640 39 144.4165
827 11 77,673
60 82 172,950
307 5 30,956
1. Includes both 24-hr, bubblers and continuous monitors.
2. Because different equipment is used for the 24-hr, and continuous measurements, a site which showed both types of violation
is counted as 2 violations.
3. Presently meets standards.
4. This is based on a questionable emission projection for 1975.
-------
APPENDIX C
Power Plant Assessment
AQCR
043
045
TABLE
Plant
Jersey Central
Sayreville
Jersey Central
Werner
P.- S. E. & G.
Bergen
P. S. E. & G.
Edison
P. S. E. & G.
Essex
P. S. E. & G.
Harris en
P. S. E. & G.
Hudson
P. S. E. & G.
Jersey City
(St. Pauls St.)
P. S. E. & G.
Kearny
P. S. E. & G.
Linden
P. S. E. & G.
Marion
P. S. E. & G.
Paterson
P. S. E. & G.
Raymond Ave.
Newark
P. S. E. & G.
Sewaren
At! . City Elec.
Deepwater
C-l . Power PI
Capacity
(106 Watts)
347
116
650
502
(gas turb.)
300
35 (est.)
1115
30 (est.)
599
612
125
20 (est.)
25 (est)
820
308
ant Assessment for Mew Jersey
Projected
Fuel
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Gas
Oil
Gas
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Gas
Oil
Coal
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
1975 Fuel Use
Quantity1
138,481 (F)
40,320 (F)
50,180 (F)
184,506
2,739
3,277 (M)
201
80,346 (F)
4,413 (N)
952,350 (F)
132,594
6,815
3,736 (N)
3,200 (F)
113,274
117,516 (F)
53,000 (F)
2,587 (N)
3,580 (N)
26,470 (F)
242,171
1,324
17,520 (F)
96,547
2,855
Fuel Sulfur
Content (%}
by Reculation
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.20
0.30
1.
Coal - tons/yr, oil - 10 gal/yr., gas - 10 cu. ft./yr.
FPC (F) or the NEDS (M) files of June 1974.
Estimates are from
43
-------
TABLE C-l. Power Plant Assessment for New Jersey
Plant
P. S. E. & G.
Burlington
P. S. E. & G.
Mercer
P. S. E. & G.
Trenton
Capacity Projected 1975 Fuel Use
(10° Watts) Fuel
491
653
10 (est.)
Oil
Quanti ty
1,250 (N)
Fuel Sulfur
Content (%)
Coal
Oil
Coal
Gas
55,350 (F)
158,046
1,222,940 (F)
2,439
oy Keguianon
0.20
0.30
0.20
0.30
150 Atl. City Elec.
England
Atl. City Elec.
Middle
Atl. City Elec.
Missouri Ave.
151 N.J. P & L.
Gilbert
459
87
(gas turb.)
Coal
Oil
Oil
139,926 (est.)
235,198 (est.)
2,360 (N)
50 stm.
61 g.t.
370
Coal
Oil
Oil
Gas
55,330
5,920
51,114
564
0.20
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.30
1. Coal - tons/yr, oil - 103 gal/yr., gas - 1C cu. ft./yr.
FPC (F) or the NEDS (N) files of June 1974.
Estimates are from
44
-------
Table C-2. Summary of Modified 1975 Fuel Use.
Fuel Usage
1
Particulate Control
AQCR
043
045
Plant/Conversion
Jersey Central - Sayreville
Switch Units 1&2 partially to coal.
Jersey Central - Werner
Switch Unit 4 partially to coal.
Public Service - Bergen
Switch Units 1&2 to coal .
Atlantic City E. - Deepwater
Switch Units 1&8 partially to coal.
Public Service - Burlington
Switch Stacks 5&7 partially to coal.
Public Service - Mercer
Type
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
% Ash
15
10
15
15
15
11
% S
1.5
0.3
3.0
0.3
l.J
3.U
0.3
2.0
0.3
1.4
2
Quantity
649
36,204
163
13,146
1,253
420
116,718
1,085
7,308
936
Efficiency (%)
0
85
90
Unit 1
Unit 8
Units
Unit 7
99
- DO
- 85
5&6 - 85
- 90
(1972 operations)
150
Atlantic City E. - England
Switch Units 1&2 to coal.
Atlantic City E. - Missouri Ave.
(1972 operations)
Coal
Coal
10
1.3
5.6 0.6
661
147
85
86
151
II 0
MODELING
FOR
THIS
R E G I 0 N
1. Those fuel data represent the assumed values utilized by llalden Research
in modeling these specific plants.
2. Units are: coal - 103tons/yr.; oil - 103gal./yr.; gas - 10 cu.ft./yr.
-------
CTl
TABLE C-3. Summary of New Jersey Power Plant Modeling Results
Maximum 24-Hr Concentration (yig/m)
Missouri Ave. - 1972 Operation
Contribution to
AQCR
043
045
150
Plant/Situation
Sayreville - 1972 Operation
Modified Op.
Werner - 1972 Operation
Modified Op.
Bergen - 1972 Operation
Modified Op.
Deepwater - 1972 Operation
Modified Operation
Burlington - 1972 Operation
Modified Op.
Mercer - 1972 Operation
England - 1972 Operation
Modified Op.
Nominal
Load
56
204
74
267
19
208
46
274
32
288
160
41
191
S00
2
Maximum
Load
51
166
86
247
14
154
59
296
45
245
185
39
183
Nominal
Load
9
97
12
13
3
53
7
64
5
126
3
3
5
TO ri
TSP
Maximum
Load
9
97
14
15
2
40
9
66
6
105
5
2
5
Maximum Annual
Concentrations (yg/m )
Qfi
£
4
16
3
11
1
18
4
19
3
15
6
2
11
T^P
•\ I or
< l
8
< 1
< 1
< 1
3
1
3
1
6
< 1
< 1
< 1
30
27
20
17
151
NO MODELING FOR THIS REGION
-------
TABLE C-4. New Jersey Power Plant Assessment Summary
1975 Effects of Sulfur Dioxide Regulations
Required
AQCK
043
045
150
151
Existing
Coal Consumption (10 tons/yr.) S02 Emission
(tons/yr.22 S
982 1,902 163
0 2,021 420
147 0 661
000
SOp Emission
Reduction (tons/yr.)
-36,169
-33,380
-15,256
0
TSP finis
Reductl
(tons/yr
666
894
182
2840
1. Assuming the fuel conversions of Table C-2.
-------
APPENDIX D
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional Source Assessment
Table D-l. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - PARTICULATES
AQCR
043
Name of Plant
American Cyan.
Uridcjewater Twp.
'lea tinny Arsenal
Union Carbide
I'iscataway
EXXON - bayway
Itayonne
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
390
270
320
.
237 (2)
82
252
225
68 (total
of 6 small units)
88
64
360
645
fuel Usage
Type
Coal
Oil
Gas
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Coal
Coal
Coal
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
% Ash
15.0
-
-
_
-
10.5
-
8.0
8.0
8.0
.
-
-
-
-
% S
0.5
0.5
-
0.5
-
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.50
0.42
0.50
0.50
0.50
Quantity2
47
9,300
352
3,520
13
43
6,240
4 .
42
70
31,567
4,260 .
3,430
20,700
38,300
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
899
110
52
964
24
30
830
55
39
49
39
238
441
Allowable
171
118
140
208
62
110
99
317
63
54
158
283
Reduction
728
0
0
780
0
720
0
0
0
0
80
158
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are:. Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 1Q3 gal/yr.. Gas - 106 cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table D-l. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - PARTICIPATES
AQCR
043
Name of Plant
National Lead
Ti02 - Sayreville
Ashland Chemi
Newark ;
Hercules Inc.
Kenvil
vlerck Chem.
Rahway
Fort Monmouth
Hercules Inc.
Parlin
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
344 (3)
44
130 (2)
40 (3)
90
200
500
337 (total
of 5 blrs.)
27 (total
of 4 blrs.)
204
18 (3)
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Coal
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
% Ash
-
11.0
-
-
-
-
-
10.0
10.9
% S
0.50
0.60
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.48
0.30
0.70
0.5
0.64
Quanti ty
30,890
12
3,400
5,054
2,350
5,200
18,000
s'.si?
1.3
4,900
69
. Emissions (tons/yjr.)
Actual
355
344
40
88
27
60
207
28
86
56
54
Allowable
452
46
150
131
64
88
219
271
73
89
89
Reduction
0
298
0
0
0
0
0
0
.13
0
0
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 103 gal/yr., Gas - 10° cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table D-l. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - PARTICULATES
AQCR
043
045
150
Name of Plant
Head i n'g Co.
Carteret
HcGuire AFO
GAK Co.
Gloucester
Burlington AAP
Gulf & Western
Gloucester
RCA Corp.
Camden
Lenox China
Pomona
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
• 59
47
353
161 (2)
40 (4)
672
67 (2)
150 (2)
104fl (3)
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
Oil
% Ash
-
7.5
-
-
-
-
"
% S
1.04
1.04
0.70
0.30
0.30
0.50
0.50
0.30
0.50
Quantity2
5,000
4.000
40
12.000
2,000
8.850
8,090
7.740
52.040
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
59
47
195
138
24
98
93
88
598
Allowable
52
47
42
162
175
294
56
74
481
Reduction
7
0
153
0
0
0
37
14
117
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 103 gal/yr., Gas - 106 cu. ft./yr.
_
-------
Table D-l. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - PARTICULATES1
AQCR
150
151
Name of Plant
Toms Rive'r Chem.
Toms Ri ver
NO SIGNIFICANT
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
300
157
14 (total
of 6 blrs.)
SOURCES
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
% Ash
-
6.0
-
% S
1.00
-
1.0
0.10
f
Quantity2
6,000
300
1.5
634
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
72
9
2
Allowable
131
80
37
Reduction
0
0
0
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 103 gal/yr., Gas - 10° cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table 0-2. Major Indus trial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment -S0_ .
AQCR
043
Name of Plant
VJhippany Paper
Jefferson
EXXON - Bayway
Bayonne
Union Carbide
Piscataway
National Lead
liO- - Sayreville
Pica tinny Arsenal
Amcr. Cyanamid
Bridiiewater Twp.
Merck Chem.
iialiway
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)'
82 (total
of 3 blrs.)
122b (total
of 10 blrs.)
559 (total
of 3 blrs.)
344 (3)
237 (2)
390
590 (total
of 2 blrs.)
500
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Oil
% Ash
-
-
8.0
-
10.5
15.0
-
-
% S
5.0
0.50
0.7
0.5
0.8
1.00
0.50
0.50
0/48
Quantity2
55.234
70.172
116
30.890
43
6.240
47
12.820
18.000
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
21,380 .
2.715
1.543
1.212
650
490
447
950
678
Allowable
1.283
1,629
441
727
162
147
179
570
424
Reduction
20.097
1.086
1.102
485
488
343
268
380
254
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units ara: Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 103 gal/yr.. Gas - 106 cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table D-2. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - SC .
AQCR
043
045
Name of Plant
DuPont
Linden
Int. Smelting
Perth Amboy
Lever Bros.
Edgewater
Shell Oil
Sewaren
DuPont
Carney's Pt.
McGuire AFB
Burlington AAP
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
123 (total
of 5 blrs.)
400
84 (total
of 2 blrs.)
78
76 (3)
353
65 (total
of 8 blrs.)
672
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Oil
Oil
Gas
Oil
Oil
•Coal
Oil
Oil
% Ash
-
-
-
-
-
7.5
—
-
% S
0.70
0.75
0.50
0.9
1.70
0.50
0.70
0.50
Quantity2
6,900
5,800
5,400
47
3,000
8,700
40
410
8,850
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
379
341
212
212
1,161
533
23
554
Allowable
162
91
127
71
205
213
10
332
Reduction
217
250
85
141
956
320
13
222
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr., Oil - 103 gal/yr., Gas - 106 cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table D-2. Major Industrial/Commercial Fuel Combustion Source Assessment - SO- .
AQCR
150
151
Name of Plant
A. E. Stone
Pleasantvi lie
Riegal Paper
Mil ford
Boiler
Size
(106 Btu/hr.)
16 (total
of 2 blrs.)
1032
80
Fuel Usage
Type
Oil
Oil
Oil
% Ash
_
-
_
% S
0.50
0.5
1.00
Quantity2
910
51,100
4.800
Emissions (tons/yr.)
Actual
10
. 2.010
341
Allowable
10
2.010
171
Reduction
0
0
170
1. Data in this table were in the NEDS FILES AS OF June 1974.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr.. Oil - 10^ gal/yr.. Gas - 106 cu. ft./yr.
-------
Table D-3. New Jersey Major Commercial/Industrial Combustion Source Summary.
AQCR
043
045
150
151
Type
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Fuel Use
% Ash Existing
10.35 0.66
0.55
7.50 0.70
0.63
6.00 1.00
0.52
_
1.00
Data
( S
Allowable
0.20
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.70
0.50
0.70
0.50
Quantity2
288
211,028
40
47,380
1.5
111,014
0
4,800
Part. Emissions (tons/yr.)
Existing
3,262
1,959
195
441
9
672
NSS
NSS
Allowable3
723
1,768
42
390
9
555
NSS
NSS
Reduction
2,539
191
153
51
0
117
NSS
NSS
SO? Emissions (tons/yr.)
Existing
2,640
28,569
533
1,738
•NSS
2,020
NSS
341
Allowable
782
5,231
213
547
NSS
2,020
NSS
171
Reduction
1,858
23,338
320
1,191
NSS
0
NSS
170
1. These data are based on the more detailed data of Tables C-l and C-2.
2. Units are: Coal - 103 tons/yr. and Oil - 103 gal./yr.
3. In those plants where the allowable emissions exceed the existing emissions, the existing emission is considered to be the allowable value.
NSS - no significant sources in commercial/industrial category.
-------
APPENDIX E
Area Source Assessment
TABLE E-l. AREA FUEL COMBUSION SOURCE EMISSIONS SUMMARY (tons/year)
Air Quality Control Region
N.J. - N.Y. - Conn.
Metropolitan Philadelphia
N. J. Intrastate
N.E. Pa. - Upper Del. Valley
No.
043
045
150
151
Commercial
Part.
5,678
1,246
1,365
187
so2
26,781
5,876
6,435
879
Industrial
Part.
3,126
642
335
120
so2
7,452
1,766
1,241
351
Residential
Part.
5,519
1,247
543
243
so2
29,080
5,992
2,743
1,004
-------
SOURCE ID; A STATE- 31 COUNTY- ooao AQCR- iso YEAR. 70
•EM-EST-PRTIIOO-TONS).
EM-EST-C01100-TONS)-
* SULF-RESID-OIL"
RES-BITUM110-TONS)"-
RES-WOOOt100-TONS)-
CI-RIO-01H10E1-GAL)"
JNO-BITUMIJO-TONSI-
IND-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT)-
RES-OS-INCl10-TONS)-
[RES-OP-BRNI100-TONS)"-
JGAS-UT-VEH(IOOO-GAL)-
lOIE-HV-VEHl1000-GAL
I COUNTY-POP!1000
(CIV-AIRCRAFTI 10-LTO
IVES-OIE-OU10E1-GAL
f EVAP-SOLVENTtT/YR
!VEH-MI-RURLCIOEI-MI
ID1RT-RD-TRVIJOOO-MI }•
fROCK-H-STI1000-TONSl"
1SLASH-BRN-ARE(ACRES)"
JORCH-DA-F1REDIDA/YR)-
J COAL-REF-BURN(n/YR)«-
19! EM-EST-S02I100-TONS1-
- 712! * SULF-ANTH-COAL"
uoi * ASH-ANTH-COAL-
[RES-DIS-OILIIOE1-&ALI"—
2! Cl-ANTHl10-TONS)-
126[ CI-N-GASl10E7-CUFT)"
151 IND.COKEI10-TONS)"
•-- 701 IND-WOODIlOO-TONSI-
0! IND-OS-INC(100-TONS1-
01IND-OPN-BRNt100-TONS)"—
63752IGAS-HVY-VEHCIOOO-GALI-
- S677!DIE-OFF-HHY(IOE1-GAL)"--
1751 DENSITY-CODE-
1689!COMM-A1RCRAFT< 10-LTO)"
l636fVES-RID-OlL(|OEl-GAD"
- 193f EVAP-GASI 10E5-GALI" -
5760SJVEH-MI-SUBANIIOES-MI i-
I DIRT-AIR-STRIPSUTOI-
IFOREST-FIRE-ARIACRESI-
|SLASH-BN-QU(TON/ACREI-
|STRUCTURE-FlRESt«/YR)-
-[---- --COMMENTS-' —
72
-0.7
7.1
EM-EST-NOXUOO-TONS)-
* SULF-BITUH-COAL"
X ASH-B1TUM-COAL-
3018 RES-RlD-OILt 10EH-GAD-
C1-B1TUM1 10-TONS)-
67 CI-WOODI100-TONS ).
1ND-DIS-OILI 10ES-GAD-
0}I NO-PR-GAS(10E7-CUFT )•
0} CI-OS-1NC1100-TONS)-
Oj Cl-OI--'-BRN< 100-TONSI-
8670|GAS-Ot -HWYIIOOO-GAL)•
-- 83J DJE-I- -LOCt lOEM-GAD-
8|HIt-At CRAFT I100-tTO)-
"103| VES-B1TUM(10-TONS)-
; VES-GASI1000-GALI-
— 726JVEH-MI-LA-ROI lOES-Ml I-
jVEH-Ml-URBAN! I OEM-Mi)-
fCONST-LANDl iOOO-ACRE)-
fFOR-FIRE-QU(TON/ACRE|-
f ORCHARD-HEATERS!1001-
|CRB-SUE-BK(100-CUYD)«
EM-EST-HCIloo-TONSi- H9I
1,01 * SULF-D1ST-OIL- 0.5J
V.0| RES-ANTH110-TONSI- 961
- 0|RES-N-GAS(IOE7-CUFT»- 280!
|CI-pIS-OlL(IOE1-GALI- 63671
I JND-ANTHI10-TONS)" - 01
HH2| IND-RD-OlLl10EM-GALI" 25H!
I 1
oi PART-EMSIT/YRI-
- 0| 502-EMSIT/YR)--
853| NOX-EMb>Y/YR»-
208f - HC-EMSIT/YR)-
265| CO-EMSIT/YR)-
J NO. 6-EMSIT/YR)-
NO, 7-£Ms(T/YR)«
NO. 8-EMS1T/YR)--
NO. 9-£Ms(T/YR).
JNO. 10-£MS(T/YR|-
|NO, I1-EMS1T/YRJ"
JNO. l2-£Ms< T/YR)--
,.. .
f
32951J
16H3, 1B7I
9115.7211
-12616. 5361
S39S1.361 |
--- O.OOOf
. 0.0001
--- 0.000 t
0.0001
----- o.ooor
0.0001
-—0.0001
..... ---- -r
---- I -
tn
oo
-SOURCE JO! A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 0300 AQCR- OS3 YEAR. 70
JEM-EST-PRTI100-TONS)
EH-EST-CO< IOO-TONSI
» SULF-RESID-OIL
RES-BITUMt JO-TONS)
RES-WOODt100-TONS)
CI-RID-OILI 10ES-GAL)
IND-B1TUMI10-TONS)
IND-N-GASI 10E7-CUFT I
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS)
!RES-OP-BRN( 100-TONS)
!GAS-LT-VEH(IOOO-GAL)
JDIE-HV-VEHIIOOO-GAL)
1 COUNTY-POPt1000)
•Cl V-A IRCRAFTI 10-LTO)
JVES-OIE-OLIIOEM-GAL)
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR)
!VEH-MI-RURL( lOEt-Ml )
lOIRT-RO-TRV(lOOO-HI)
(ROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)
(SLASH-BRN-AHEtACRES)
|ORCH-OA-FIREO(DA/YR)
f COAL-REF-BURNI»/YRi
tOM' EM-EST-S02I100-TONS)'
5216! % SULK-ANTH-COAL-
1.0! - * ASH-ANTH-COAL'
IRES-DlS-OtLllOEt-GAL)'
1 ! CI-ANTHI 10-TONS)'
298! CI-N-GASl JQE7-CUFT )•
1751 IND-COKEI10-TONS)'
205! INO-hOOQt|00-TONS)'
35711! INO-OS-1NC(jOO-TONS)'
0!tNO-OPN-BRN(iOO-TONS)'
33569t!GAS-HVY-VEH(tOOO-GALI'
2900!01E-OFF-HWY(10E1-GAL)'
8981 OENsITY-COOEi
• 12015ICOMM-AIRCRAFT(lo-LTO)•
- 1636!VES-R|0-OIL( lOEl-GALI-
1116! EVAP-G'ASI IDES-GAL)-
97l5!VEH-Ml-SUBAN(tOE1-Ml)«
I DIRT-AIR-STRIPSILTO)!
1FOREST-F1RE-ARIACRES)'
ISLASH-BN-QUITON/ACRE)•
ISTRUCTURE-FIRES(B/YR)'
! COMMENTS"
- l?5| EH-EST-NOX(100-TONS)-
0.7! * 'SULF-BITUM-COAL-
7.11 » ASH-B1TUM-COAL-
8685 [RES-RID-OIHIOE1- GAL)-
| CI-BITUM)10-TONS)-
205! C1-WOOOI 100-TONS)-
IIND-OIS-OILI10E1-GAL)-
OllND-PR-GAS(10E7-CUFT)«
-2611! Cl-OS-INCI 100-TONS).
0! Cl-OPN-BRNl100-TONS).
15651 |GAS-OFF-HWY( 1000-GALI-
121! DlE-RR-LOCI10E1-GAL)-
9JMIL-AIRCRAFTI100-LTO)-
0| VES-B1TUM(10-TONSl-
« VES-GASI 1000-GAL )-
5555fVEH-MI-LA-RD(JOEl-Ml )•
fVEH-MI-URBANIto£i-Mi)-
(CONST-LANDtlOOO-ACRE)-
iFOR-FIRE-QUITON/ACRE|.
t ORCHARD-HEATEHSI100)-
|CRB-SIZE-BK(100-CUYDI-
— 637| EM-EST-HCI IOO-TONSI-
l.OI * SULF-DIST-OIL-
— 9.0! RES-ANTHI 10-TONS).
OJRES-N-GASUOE7-CUFT)-
---- JCI-DlS-OlL( 10E1-GALI-
! IND-ANTHI 10-TONS)-
---- 1296JIND-RD-OJLUOE1-GALI"
— -I 19QI
0!
— 1378!
379!
21
»
---- 562!
I
167088!
(NO
(NO
|NO
-I —
PART-£M5(T/YR|
S02-EMSIT/YR)
- NOX-EMSIT/YR)
HC-EMS(T/YR)
CO-EMS1T/YR)
NO. 6-£MS(T/YR)
NO. 7-£MS(T/YR)
NO. 8-EMS(T/YH)
NO. 9-EMS1T/YR)
10-EMSIT/YR)
ll-£MS(T/YR)
l2-£Ms(T/YR)
- 963!
0.5!
- 1291 !
1669!
|5009!
01
715!
!
1 1882.8261-
12035.801!
-31122.917!
86858.910!
391602.121 I
0.000!
0.000!
0.000!
0.0001
0.000!
~-0.000!
0.000!
-------
SOURCE ID! A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 0660 AQCR" 015 - YEAR- 70
en
10
fEM-EST-PRTt | 00-TONS) i
EH-EST-COtIOO-TON5)<
» SULF-RESID-OIL-
RES-BITUMIIO-TONSI-
RES-WOODIIOC-TONS)"
CI-RIO-OILIJOEI-GALl-
IND-B|TUM(ID-TONS)'
IHD-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT)'
RES-OS-INCIJO-TONSI.
!RES-OP-BRNI 100-TONS)'
!GAS-LT-VEHC1000-GAL)'
• OIE-HV-VEHIIOOO-GAL »•
I COUNTY-POP)1000) <
»CIV-A[RCRAFTI lO-LTO)"
|VF.S-DlErOLIIOE1-GAL)»
I EVAP-SOUVENTIT/YR)«
IVEH-HI-RURLIIOEI-MI i«
JDIRT-RO-TRVI1000-MI)•
IROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)'
fSLASH-BRN-AREUCRES)"
!ORCH-OA-MRED(DA/YR)i
I COAL-HEF-BURNI»/YR)•
-• 21! EM-EST-S02IJOO-TOHS)'
2003! » SULF-ANTH-COAL-
I.ot < ASM-ANTH-COAL-
IRES-DIS-OILUOEI-GALI"
7| CI-ANTHl10-TONSI"
62} Cl-N-GASl JOE7-CUFTC
87! IND-COKEt10-TONSI"
511 INO-WOOOCJOO-TONSI-
287SI JND-OS-INCIlOO-TONSI-
0J INO-OPN-BRNI|00-TONS) •
J60I19|GAS-HVY-VEH||000-GALI-
i j 1021 DIE-OFF-HWT ( JOEI-GAL)"
323| - DENSITY-CODE"
IQISICOhM-AlRCRAFTl10-LTO)'
)436|VES-H|D-OIL(|OEH-G*L)«
3871 EVAP-GASI |OE5-GAL»»
104571 }VEH-M|-SUBAN( IOEH-HM"
J OlRT-AIR-STRlPStUTO)-
rFOREST-FIRE-AR(ACRESI-
ISLASH-DN-QUITON/ACRE!•
JSTRUCTURE-F1RES(«/YRI«
I COMMENTS-
63t EM-EST-NOXIIOC-TONS)
o.7( x SULF-BITUH-COAL
7.If » ASH-BITUM-COAL
363 I{RES-R ID-OIL IIOEH-GAL)
} CI-BITUMt10-TONS)
N3f CI-WOODI100-TONS)
| IND-DIS-OIUIOEH-GAU
0|IND-PR-GASIIOE7-CUFT)
• 135| Cl-OS-JNCIJOO-TONS)
0| Cl-OPN-BHNIJOO-TONS)
2I780|GAS-OFF-HHY(JOOO-GAL)
)S2f DlE-RH-LOCIJOEH-GALI
8ft1IL-AlHCHAFT( JOO-LTO)
0| VES-BITUHl10-TONS)
j VES-GAS1IOOO-GAL
J676»V£H-M1-LA-RDI IOE-J-H1
— |VEH-h(-URBANIIOEH-MI
(CONSl-UANDIIOQO-ACRE
-— fFOR-t IRE-QU1TON/ACRE
| ORCnARD-HEATERS)100)
|CRB-SlZE-BKI100-CUYDI
EM-EST-HCUOO-TONSI
I.OI » 5ULF-DI5I-01L
».OJ RES-ANTHI 10-TONSI
0|RES-N-GAS| 10E7-CUFTI
| |ND-ANTHUO-TONS)«
322IIND-RD-01LI IOES-GAL)-
961
0!
|575|
237f
3071
I
502-EMslT/YR)-
NOX-EMSIT/YH)-
HC-EMS(T/YH).
CO-EMSIT/YR)-
NO, 6-EMSIT/YR)-
NO. 7-EHs(T/YR).
NO. 8-EMslT/YR)"
NO. 9-EHSIT/YR).
(NO. IO-EMSIT/YHI-
- J78»
O.SI
528!
8101
3111!
0!
' 185!
1
2586.758 I
1108*726!
-|6859>176!
30157.989!
136657. HI If
0.000!
0.0001
0.000!
0.0001
0.000!
-|NO.-| I-E«S(T/YR)- O.OOOf-
|NO. 12-EMS1T/YR)- 0.0001
I - I
I
SOURCE |0: A STATE- 3| COUNiY- 0710 AqcR- 015 YEAR- 70
JEM-EST-PRTI100-TONS)
EM-EST-CO(IOO-TONS)
« SULF-HESIO-OIL
RES-BITUMIID-TONS)
RES-WOODI|00-TONS)
CI-RID-OIL I IOE1-GAL)
INO-Q|TUMI10-TONS)
IND-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT)
HES-OS-INCI10-TONS)
IHES-OP-BRNI100-TOMS)
IGAS-LT-VEMIJOOO-GAL)
IOIE-HV-VEHII 000-GAL I
I COUNTY-POPI 10001
ICIV-AIRCRATTI IO-LTO)
21451 X SULF-ANTH
I.01 X ASH-ANT H
fHES-OIS-OILI|OE1
CI-ANTH(10-
C|-N-GAS(IQE7-
|9H |NO-COK£(IO-
109 (NO-WOODI{00-
21»37 IND-OS-1NC(JOO-
TONS)-
•COAL"
-COAL-
-GAD-
0!IND-OPN-flRNI[00-
179053JGAS-HVY-VEHI1000
-J5286JDIE-OFF-HWYIlOEl
1561 DENSITY
I 10
CUFTI"
TONS)-
TONS)-
TONSI-
TONS)"
-GAL)"
-GAL)-
-CODE-
-LTOI"
93} EM-
"0.71
7.11
37 20 1 RES-
!
eOf -
UNO-
OflND-
127B| Cl
• 01 CI-
2135I.-GAS-
21 si DIE
9JMIL-
Ot
tST-NOX« 100-
SULF-BITUM
* ASH-BITUM
/D-OILUOEM
l-BI TUMI |0-
I-WOQDI 100-
IS-OILI IOE1
T-GASI 10E7-
OS-INCt 100-
JN-BRN( 100-
rf-HUY( 1000
-HR-LOCIIOEI
AIHCRAFTI 100
S-B I TUM (JO-
TONS)-
-COAL"
-COAL-
-GAD-
TONS|.
TONS).
-GALI-
CUFT l«-
TONS).
TONS). -
-GAL)"
-GAD.-
-LTO)"
TONS )•
3371 EH-EST-HCI loo-TONSi. isu
— |. 01 * SOLF-OIST-OIL. ...... O.S|
9.01 RES-ANjHC JO-TONS)- J835I
-— 0|R£S-N-GAS| JOE7-CUFT)" - 7001
|CI-DlS-OlLl IOE1-GALI- 58511
---- I ------ (ND-ANTHI IO-TONSI- ------ 0|
6861 IND-RD-olul IOE1-GALI" 3951
--- I ............................ «
7ioa.86ii
------- 01 -S02-EHSJT/YH).- 56J3.332I-
2223! NOX-EMsl T/YR I • 19668.2021
— 301 » - HC-EMS « TV YR | • — 15998,969 I-
0( CO-CMSIT/YR). 199231.6011
----- |-NOr~*-EM3 ( T/ Y« I •• -- OrOOO f-
-------
!VES-DJE-OL M866
i 5251
> 19368
. — Q
0
i 0
0
I Q
> 0
, o
set
O.Sf --
7f
-236f
27M9!
0!--
20!
j.-.
• M36!
,2M9|
.979!
.77 If
.210!
.000! —
.000!
.000' —
.0001
.000!
.000!
.000!
SOURCE JDS A STATE- 3J COUNTY- 1050 AQCR- 150- YEAR. 70
IEM-EST-PRTI 100-TONSI-
! EM-EST-COIIOO-TONS)-
I » SULF-HES1D-OIL-
I RES-BITUMIlo-TONSi-
! RES-WOOD! 100-TONSl-
3MI EM-EST-S02I100-TONSI-
M55I « SULF-ANTH-COAL"
t.of * ASH-ANTH-COAL--
IRES-DIS-OIL 11 OEM-GAD-
MI Cl-ANTHt10-TONSI-
- 82| EM-EST-NOXI 100-TONS)-- (OM| EM-EST-HcI 100-TONS)
0.7f » SULF-BITUM-COAL" 1,0! » SULF-DIST-0 I L
7.1! ~- * ASH-B1TUM-COAL- 9.0J—- RES-ANTH( 10-TONSI
2797!RES-RID-OIL(10EM-GAD- 0|RES-N-GAS(lOE7-CUFT)
- ! CI-BITUMI10-TONS)- {C I-DIS-0 I L( I OEM-GAL)
--9SI-
0,5!
— MM!—-
162!
31831 -
-------
|CI"RID-0'IL(10EH-GAL|«
I jnD-BJTUHl10-TONS).
JIND-N-GAS!IOE7-CUFT).
! RES-OSn|IJC I ID-TONS ).
IRES-OP-BRNI100-TONS).
IGAS-LT-VEHII000-GAL I•
IDIE-HV-VEHI 1000-GAU"
f COUNTY-POP! 1000).
fdv-AIRCRAFTi IO-LTOI-
IVES-DIE-OL!IOE1-GALI"
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR).
IVEH-MI-RUHLIiOEM-MIi-
IDIRT-RD-TRVJI 000-Ml I-
IROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)-
ISLASH-BRN-ARE(ACRES)-
fORCH-DA-MREDtDA/YR)«
I COAL-REF-BURNIfl/YRI-
bit CI-N-GASt )o£7-CUFT)«
107! iND-COKEl10-TONSI'
13SI |NO-WOOO(100-TONS)*
256721 INO-OS-INC!lOO-TOUS)'
OHND-OPN-BRNJ(00-TONSI*
35712IGAS-HVY-VEHJ|000-GAL) •
- 327SIDIE-OFF-MWYI |0£«(-GALI«
1211 DENSITY-CODE.
0|COMM-AlRC«AFTl 10-LTO I •
2'iSHIVES-RID-OlLJ |0£l-GALI'
97! EVAP-GASJJOES-GALI-
2a803|VEH-M|-SU8AN CI-OPN-BRN(100-TONS|.
M66 I (GAS-OfF-MWYI1000-GAL)"
- 57 | DlE-RR-LOCI IOE1-GAD"
7|M1L-AJRCRAFTIIOO-LTO|«
Of VES-BITUHI10-TONS)•
I VES-GAS)1000-GAL)«
StVjVEH-Ml-LA-RDIIOEM-Ml I"
iVEH-Ml-URBANlIOEt-Hl)•
jCONST-MNDC 1000- ACRE) -
(FOR-FIRE-QUITON/ACRE|-
| ORCHARD-HEATERS! 100)-
|CR8-SIZE-BK(IOO-CUYDI-
ANTHI10-TONS)"
Olu» IOE-*-GALI«
I IND
BS|(IND.RD
,
PART-£MS(T/YH|
01
6VO)
l'8|-
01
I
502
NOX
HC
CO
NO, 6
NO. 7
NO. a
219671 NO. 9
-I NO. 10
(NO. II
|NO. |2
I
I
•EMS(T/YR|-
•EMS«T/Y»)»
•£MS«T/YR|«
•£HS(T/VH)«
•EHS(T/YR|-
•EMSIT/YHl-
•£MS(T/YR|«
•EHSJT/YR)-
-EHSIT/YR)-
5655
NOH0
0!
S89I
---- 1
.051 I
.62H !
71309.
0.
0.
0.
0.
---- 0.
0«
0.
191 I
0001
000!
000!
0001
0001
OOOI
000!
1
I
SOURCE |0; A STATE-"3I 'COUNTY- 1380 AQCR- OS3 - YEAR. 70
tEM-EST-PRTI100-TONS).
I EM-EST-CO!100-TONS).
f » SULF-RESIO-OIL"
RES-B|TUh(JO-TONS).
RES-WOOO(100-TONS)-
CI-RlO-OIL!IOEH-GALI-
JNO-BITUMIiO-TONS)"
INO-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT)-
RES-OS-INC!10-TONS).
|RES-OP-URN(100-TONS)•
fGAS-LT-VEHI1000-GAL|«
|0|E-HV-VEH|1000-GAL)-
| COUNTY-POP!1000).
!C1V-A|RCRAFTIIO-LTO).
IVES-DIE-OL!IOEH-GALI-
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YH).
i VEM-MI-HURL(IDEM-MIi-
(DIRT-RO-THVI I 000-MI )-
|ROCK-H-STI I 000-TONS I-
|SLASH-BRN-ARE!ACRES).
lORCH-DA-f1REDIDA/YR).
I COAL-REF-BURNIn/YR).
»2f "EM-EST-S02I 1 00- TONS I-
36771 « SULF-ANTH-COAL-
i.oi * ASH-ANTH-COAL-
!RES-D|S-OlL(|QEt-GAL)-
OJ
298|
• SH8J
222)
(8528!
C I-ANTHI 10-TONS)
CI-N-GASl JQE7-CUFT I"
- IND-COKEl IO-TONSI-
|NO-WOOO( JOO-TONS )•
IND-OS-INCC 100-TONSI-
0|INU-OPN-aRN||00-TONS)-
'239792 'GAS- HVY-VEltl | 000-GAL)"
17707 [DIE-OFF -HWY( (OEH-GALI-
— 930! OENSITY-CODE-
273 JfCOriH-AlRCRAFT I 10-LTO)"
0!VES-RID-OlL(|OES-GAD-
I2HI! EVAP-GASI (OE5-GALI-
' IVS90|VEH-M|-SUBAN|IOEI»-MM"
I DIRT-AIR-STRIPSILTOI-
!FO«EST-FIR£-AR(ACRESI-
•SLASH-BN-QUI TON/ACHE )•
|ST«uCTUHE-FIRES(«/YHI-
I COMMENTS-
— 2161 EM-EST-NOXI 100-TONS)
0.71 « SULF-BITUM-COAL"
7.|| » ASH-BITUM-COAL"
IS823IRES-RIO-OILI10E1-GAL).
• CI-BITUni10-TONS).
205| CI-WOOOIIOO-TON5).
!IND-DIS-OIL!IOE1-GALI
0|IND-PR-GAS(|OE7-CUFT).
-27|6| Cl-OS-INCl100-TONS).
0| CI-OPN-BRN!100-TONSl-
-326|2|GAS-OFF-HWY(I000-GALI-
H39| DIE-RR-LOC!IOEM-GALI-
9|M|L-A|RCRAFT(100-LTO).
BvSbf VES-BITUHI10-TONS).
- 667f VES-GASt1000-GAL).
3392|V£H-Ml-LA-RD(|OEl-Ml).
|VEH-Ml-UROANlIOE1-MI)•
| CONST-LAND! I 000-ACRE).
,FOR-F1R£-QU(TON/ACRE).
| ORCHARD-HEATERS!100).
(CRB-SIZE-BKlJOO-CUYDI-
IOO-TONSI-
SULF-OIST-OIL"
-ANTHI 10-TONS).
GAS|IOE7-CUFTI-
-OlL(IOEH-GALI-
-ANTHIID-TONS).
-OlL(IUE1-GAL)>
•EMSI
•£MS<
•£MS(
•£MS(
•EMSI
•£MS(
•EMS!
•EMSI
•EMS!
•EMS!
•EMS!
•EMSI
T/YR).
T/YRl-
V/YH)-
T/YR).
T/YR)-
T/YRl-
T/YR)"
T/YRl-
T/YR)"
T/YH)-
T/YR)"
T/YH).
6801
O.SI
• S966I
1252!
|5009|
0!
• 8071
I
9866.:
IS587.277I
•29906.385!
60IS2.9H5I
271521.070!
0.0001
•-- -o.oooi
0.000!
0.000!
0.000!
— 0.000 f-
0.000!
I
-------
- --SOURCE IDS A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 1760 AQCR- OMS - YEAR- 70
IEM-EST-PRTII 00-TONS|"
EM-EST-CO!100-TONS)-
- » SULF-RESID-01L-
RES-BITUM110-TONS)-
RES-WOOD!100-TONS) -
KI-RID-OILI10EM-GAD-
- IND-BITUM!10-TONS)-
INO-N-GAS!IOE7-CUFT)-
RES-OS-INC!10-TONS)-
IRES-OP-BRNI100-TONS)-
IGAS-LT-VEH!1000-GALI-
IDIE-HV-VEHIIOOO-GAD-
J COUNTY-POP!1000)-
ICIV-AIRCRAFTI10-LTO)-
IVES-DIE-OLI1OEM-GAL)-
! EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR)-
IVEH-HI-RURUIIOEM-MI i-
IDJRT-RD-TRVI1000-HI )•
IROCK-H-ST!1000-TONS|•
JSLASH-BRN-AREIACRES)-
|ORCH-OA.FIREO(OA/YR)--
I COAL-REF-BURN(8/YR)-
191 EM-EST-S02I 100-TONS)
9231 » SULF-ANTH-COAL
--l,0| — K ASH-ANTH-COAL
!RE5-OIS.OlLllOEM-GALI
M! ' CI-ANTH( 10-TONS)
til CI-N-GASl JQE7-CUFT )
-• 5MI IND-COKE( 10-TONSI
33! INO-WOODI lOO-TONSI
— 9M05J INO-OS-]NC( lOO-TONS)
Of tNO-OPN-BRNJ lOO-TONS>
7771tJGAS-HVY-VEH(
6333!OIE-OFF-HWY(
1731 DENSITY-CODE
OICOMM-AIRCRAFTHO-LTOI
I636IVES-RIO-OILI lOEM-GAD
|9CONST-LAND!1000-ACRE)
JFOR-FJRE-QUITON/ACRE)
I ORCHARD-HEATERS!100)
1CRB-SIZE-BK!100-CUYD)--
ISHI EM.EST-HC!IOC-TONS)
l.Ot * SULF-D1ST-OU
9.Of RES-ANTH!10-TONSI
OIRES-N-GASUOE7-CUFT)
ICI-DlS-OlL! IQES-GAL)
J |ND-ANTH(10-TONS)
210!INO.RD-OlLlIOEM-GAL)
-313! PART-EMSIT/YRJ-
01 S02-EMSJT/YR)-
NOX-EMSIT/YR)-
HC-EMSIT/YR)-
0! CO-£MS(T/YR)»
I NO, 6-EMSIT/YR)-
NO, 7-EMslT/YR)"-
J NO, 8-EMS1T/YR)-
9-£MS(T/YR)-
10-EMslT/YR|-
II-EMSIT/YR)-
|2-EMS(T/YR|-
ro
SOURCE IDS A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 22MO AQCR- OH3 YEAR. 70
(EM-EST-PRT!100-TONS)
! EM-EST-COIIOC-TONS)
I * SULF-RESID-OIL
I 'RES-B1TUH(10-TONS)
I RES-WOOD!100-TONS)
KI-R1D-OIL!10EH-GAL)
I IND-BITUM!JO-TONS)
! 1NO-N-GAS! IOE7-CUFT)
J RES-OS-INC!10-TONS)
fRES-OP-BRN( 100-TONS)
fGA5-LT-VEH(1000-GAL)
•DJE-HV-VEH!1000-GAL)
I COUNTY-POP!1000)
JCIV-AIRCRAFTI10-LTO)
fVES-D1E-OLI10Et-GAL)
! EVAP-SOLVENT(T/YR)
IVEH-MI-RURL(IOEH-MI)
IDIRT-RO-TRV!1000-MI )
71! EM-EST-S02! lOO-TONSI-
2377! * SULF-ANTH-COAL-
l.o; % ASH-ANTH-COAL-
!RES-DIS-OILI10E4-GALI-
121 CI-ANTH(10-TONS)-
213| CI-N-GAS!IQE7-CUFTI-
M75! IND-COKE!10-TONS)-
222! 1NO-WOOOIlOO-TONS)-
31170! IND-OS-INCIlOO-TONSI-
0(INO-OPN-BRN(|00-TONS)»-
162390[GAS-HVY-VEH!lOOO-GAL)«
I 1047(DIE-OFF-HWY!lOEM-GALI-
609| DENSlTY-CODE-
OfCOMM-AlRCRAFTl 10-LTO I-
l363rVES-R10-OIL< IDEM-GAD"
95Sf EVAP-GAS!lOES-GALI"
29235 IVEH-MI-SUBAN(IOEH-MI)-
I DlRT-AlR-STRlPS(LTO)-
iei! EM-EST-NOXiIOO-TONSI
- 0.7! « SULF-B:.UM-COAL
7«I! * ASH-B:fUH-COAL
-JIC01|RES-RID-OIL( ..EM-GAL)
« Cl-BITUM 10-TONS)
117j CI-WOODI 10-TONS)
f IND-DIS-OILI -JEM-GAD
— 0! IND-PH-GAS! I ..7-CUFT)
I779f Cl-OS-INCI JO-TONS)
Oj CI-OPN-BRNI 00-TONS)
22QB5rGAS-OFF-HWY( 300-GALI
287{ DIE-RR-LOCI-OEM-GAL)
9JMJL-AIRCRAFT 100-LTO)
0! VES-BITUr, 10-TONS)
|01| VES-GASI.000-GAD
--2l20fVEH-Ml-LA-RD 10EM-MI)
jVEH-MI-URBAN. 1 OEM-Ml I
- —' |CONST-LAND( loOO-ACRE)
MMM!
0.5!
2582f
1113!
10721!
0|
807
EM. EST-HC! 100-TONS)-
-- |.0» » SULF-OIST-OIL-
9.0J RES-ANTHl 10-TONSI-
...... 0!RES-N-GAS( JOE7-CUFTI-
|CI-DIS-OILI 10EM-GAD-
----- 1ND-ANTH! 10-TONS I-
IMOM IND-RD-OlLl 10EM-GAD-
1039 PART-EMS! T/YR)- 9677.706
--- •- 0 - S02-EMSI T/YR)- --1 1213.371
2969J NOX-EMsl T/YR)
11231 HC-EMSI T/YR)
0| CO-EMS(T/YR)
I NO, 6-EMslT/YR)-
1MII| NO, 7-EMs(T/YR»-
....... ! NO, e-EMs(T/YR|-
201M32! NO, 9-EMSIT/YR)-
INO. 10-EMSIT/YR)-
21289.076
M9378.097
207359.062!
0.000!
0.000.'
0.000!
0.000!
0.0001
-------
IROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)-
ISLASH-BRN-AREIACRESI"
-lOHCH-DA-FlREDIDA/YRl-
| COAL-REF-BUHNlH/YR).
IFOHEST-FlRE-AR(ACRES)-
ISLASH-BN-OUITON/ACRE!"
|STRUCTURE-F1RES(»/YR>-
| COMMENTS"
|FOR-F1RE-QU( TON/ACRE (•
| ORCHARD-HEATERS!1001'
|CRB-SI2E-BK(100-CUYDI.
(NO. M-£Ms(T/YR)-
(NO. 12-EMslT/YHI-
0.0001
o.oooi
.1
SOURCE ID! A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 2260 AQCR- 151 YEAR. 70
cr>
CO
(EM-EST-PKTII 00-TONS I
EM-EST-COI100-TONS)
* SULF-RESID-OIU
RES-BITUMIIO-TONSI
RES-WOOD)100-TONS)
CI-RID-OIUIOEH-GAL
IND-B1TUMI10-TONS
INO-H-GASIIOE7-CUFT
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS
JRES-OP-BRNI100-TONS
IGAS-LT-VEHI1000-GAL
IOIU-MV-VEHI1000-GAL
I COUNTY-POP!JOOO
fClV-A|RCRAFTI10-LTO
JVES-DIE-OLII OEM-GAL
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YH
fVEH-MI-HURL1IOEM-MI
fDlRT-RD-THVI1000-Ml
IROCK-H-STI1000-TONSl
ISLASH-BRN-AREIACRES)
IOHCH-DA-FIREDIDA/YR)
I COAL-REf-BURNlB/YH)
7f EM-EST-S02)lOO-TONSI"
326J * SULF-ANTH-COAL-
I.01 » ASH-ANTH-COAL-
IRES-DIS-OILIIOEH-GAL(•
101 Cl-ANTHI10-TONSI-
I6J CI-N-GASI10E7-CUFT).
231 INO-COKE|10-TONSI-
211 JNO-WOOOIlOO-TONSI'
3tt6l INO-OS-INCtjOO-TONSI-
0!1NO-OPN-BRN1100-TONS»•
337VOIGAS-HVY-VEHI|000-GAL)•
23I3IDIE-OFF-HWYItOEM-GALl«
701 OENSlTY-COOEi
OICOHM-AlHCRAFTt10-LTOI •
OtVES-RIP-OlLllOEt-GALI-
-971 EVAP-GASIlOES-GAU)'
H7»'»8|VEH-M|-SUBAN(IOEH-M|I<
1 OIHT-AIR-STRIPSIUTOI-
IFOREST-FIRE-ARtACRESC
ISLASH-BN-QU»TON/ACRE»«
fSTHuCTURE-FlRES(«/YH)'
I - COMMENTS-
|7 EM-EST-NOX(100-TONS).
0.7 * SULF-niTUH-COAU-
7.1 X ASH-HIIUM-COAL"
- 1021 RES-RlO-OIH JOE't-GALI"
Cl-BITUMI10-TONS)•
— || CI-WOOOI100-TONSJ-
IND-DIS-OILIIOEH-GALI-
0«IHO-PR-GASI10E7-CUFT»•
321 Cl-OS-INCl|00-TONS)«
Of CI-OPN-BRHI100-TOUSI"
N595|GAS-OFF-HWY(1000-GALI"
33t DlE-RR-LOCIlOES-GALI-
IfMlt-AlRCRAFTI100-LTOI"
— 01 VES-BITUMIID-TONS).
| VES-GASIluOO-GAL)-
-2V4fVEH-Ml-LA-RD( (OEM-Ml)«
|VEH-Ml-URBAN<10E1-Ml I"
...... ,CONST-tANOI 1000-ACHE)--
JFOR-F1R£-QU(T^N/ACHE»-
I ORCHARO-HEAT fiS(100|-
(CRB-S1ZE-BKI| 0-CUYO).
t9| EM-EST-HCIloo-TONSi
|.0| X SULF-DIST-OIL
9.0| RES-ANTMUO-TONSI
0|RES-N-GAS(|0£7-CUFTI
JCI-OlS-OlLlIOES-GAL)
J - JNO-ANTHI10-TONS)
I 31 IINO-RD-OILCIOEN-GALI
I
1221 PART-EMSIT/YRI-
- 01 S02-EMSIT/YR)"
3t| I NOX-EMSIT/YR)"
01 CO.EMSIT/YR|"
| NO. 6-EMSIT/YH)-
671 NO. 7-EMSIT/YR)"
- J NO. 8-EMSIT/YR)-
01 NO. 9-EMSIT/YHJ"
JNO. -|0-EMS«T/YH|-
INO. M-£MS(T/YR|-
- JNO. |2-£MS|T/YH|«
I
• A9I
O.Sf
• 1591
2lOf
• 791 I
. 0»
- 751
|
toss.otot
J075.S66I
3604.8861
7l2t.t311
6»»H.095I
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
o.oooi
— o.ooof-
o.oooi
0.0001
1
I (J
«"..-.
SOURCE |OJ A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 2980 AQCR- OSS YEAR. 70
JEM.EST-HKTI 100-TONS |.
EM-EST-COI loo-TONSi-
» SUUF-RES1D-01L«
RES-BITUMI IO-TONSI-
RES-WOOOI lOO-TONSi-
C1-RID-OILI 10CH-GAL I-
IND-B1TUMI 10-TONS).
INO-N-GASI IOC7-CUFT l«
-NES-OS-1NC( 10-TONS|.
38
1.0
EM-EST-S02IlOO-TONSl-
X 5ULF-ANTH-COAL"
« ASH-ANTM-COAL"
RES-01S-OIL(|OEH-GAL>"
Cl-ANTHI10-TONSI-
81 Cl-N-GASI1QE7-CUFTI"
" '169 |ND«-COKE ( 10-TONS >"
102 |KD-wOOOllOO-TONSI•
-2S6I6J"IND-OS-JNCIJ00-TONS)"
- 7bt EM-EST-NOXIiMO-TONSI-
0.7| X SULF-UI UM-COAL"
7.11 X ASH-BI UM-COAL"
<(605jRES-RlD-OILIl"E'l-GAL)"
| Cl-BITUMl10-TONS).
55| Cl-WOODI100-TONS)"
(IND-DIS-OILIIOES.GAL)'
0|INO-PR-GAS(IOE7-CUFTI"
7<(b4|— Cl-OS-lNCIlOO-TONS)-
EM-EST-HCI loo-TONSi
1.01 X SULF-OIST-OIL
9.01 RES-ANTHI 10-TONS)
0|R£S.N-GAS| IOE7-CUFT I
INO-ANTHI 10-TONS)
10E1-6AL)
3271-
O.Sf
8801
7001
62051 —
01
370f-
-------
-fRES-OP-BRNf100-TOMS)
IGAS-LT-VEHI1000-GALI
-fDIE-HV-VEH(1000-GALI
I COUNTY-POPI1000)
-fCIV-AIRCRAFT(IO-LTO)
JVES-D1E-OL!10EH-GAL)
~J EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YRJ
fVEH-MI-RURL< 10E4-MI )
fOIRT-RD-TRVllOOO-MI)
JROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)
-fSLASH-BHN-ARE(ACRES)
fORCH-DA-FIRED•
30Hf DENSITY-CODE'
6721JCOMM-AIRCRAFT I I0-UTO)•
OfVES-RIO-OlL(lOEH-GAL)1
387f " EVAP-GASIJOE5-GAL)'
574061VEH-M|-SUDANIIOEH-MI)«
f DlRT>AIR.STRlPSUTO)i
»FOREST-FIRE-AR|ACRES)'
- fSLASH-BN-QUITON/ACR£)i
ISTRuCTURE-FlRES(«/YR)'
j COMMENTS-
Uf ClvrPi-bKNl IUU-TUN3)
16B17fGAS-OFF-HWY( 1000-GAL I
113' OlE-RR-LOCI 10EM-GAL)
8 'MIL-AIRCRAFT! 100-LTO I
•-- 150f VES-BITUMI 10-TONSI
f VES-GASI 1000-GAL)
• I397|VEH-M|-LA-RD( IOEH-MI 1
JVEH-MI-URBAN( lOEl-Ml )
fCONST-LANO! 1000-ACRE)
fFOR-FIRE-QUITON/ACRE)
f ORCHARD-HEATERS! 100)
• fonMc i 7 P « Q ^ t i o n • ^ 1 1 v ft i
f WKUM 9 1 AL*ol\ 1 iUU»CUTU |
n i cn?~FMc f T y V B
_ _ __ jj j_ ^ ^U£C'<3l r/I~
1M82I NOX-EMs(T/YR
289f HC-EMSIT/YR
6I| CO-EMSIT/YR
- } NO. 6-EMSIT/YH
|3|f NO. 7-EMslT/YR)
- •- J NO. 8-EMS(T/YR)
II8035J NO. 9-EMsiT/YR).
fNO. IO-EMSIT/YRJ
(NO. 11-EMslT/YR)
- - JNO. l2-EMs
JEM-EST-PRTI100-TONSl
EM-EST-CO)lOO-TONS)
* SULF-RESID-OIL
RES-3ITUMI10-TONSl
RES-WOOOIlOO-TONS)
ICI-RIO-OILI 10ES-GALI
1ND-BITUMI10-TONS)
INO-N-GASI10E7-CUFT)
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS)
JRES-OP-BRNI100-TONS I
IGAS-LT-VEH(1000-GAL)
fDIE-HV-VEH(1000-GAL)
f COUNTY-POP!1000)
ICIV-AIRCRAFTI10-LTO)
fVES-OIE-OL(lOEM-GAL)
f EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR )
JVEH-M1-RURLI10E1-MI)
!OIRT-RD-TRV(1000-M1)
fROCK-H-STI IOOO-TONSI
JSLASH-BRN-ARE(ACRES)
fORCH-OA-FIRED(DA/YR»
I CO*L-REF-BURN(B/YR)
70J EM-EST-S02IJOO-TONSI-
3?77t x SULF-ANTH-COAL-
I.01 - * ASH-ANTH-COAL-
IRES-OIS-OlLljOEl-GAL)"
31 Cl-ANTH(10-TONS)-
1H9I Cl-N-GASl1QE7-CUFT)-
361! iND-COKEt10-TONS)"
I7l« IND-WOOO
-------
lEM.EST-PRTl100-TONSl*
EM-EST-CO)100-TONS)«
* SULF-RESID-OIL'
RES-BITUMt10-TON5).
RES-WOOOI100-TONS).
CI-RID-OILIIQES-GAL).
JND-BITUMI10-TONS).
IND-N-GASIIOE7-CUFTI'
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS).
!RES-OP-8RN(100-TOUS).
IGAS-LT-VEHIJOOO-GAL).
|0|E-HV-VEH|1000-GAL)'
I COUNTY-POPt1000)1
•CIV-AJRCRAFTI10-LTOli
IVES-DIE-OLlJOES-GALI-
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR)«
IVEH-MI-RURLIIOEH-HI><
JOIRT-RO-THVI1000-MI)•
IROCK-H-STIlOOO-TONS)i
ISLASH-BRN-AREIACRES)•
tORCH-DA-FIREO(DA/YR)>
I COAL-REF-BURN(«/YR)'
5ti EM-E5T-S02IIOC-TONS).
31221 » SULf-ANTH-COAL-
1.0! « ASH-ANTH-COAL.
IRES-DIS-OlLtlOES-GALI-
7} Cl-ANTHl10-TONS)"
132! CI-N-GASlIQE7-CUFT).
MO! - 1ND-COKEI 10-TONSI--
H.'tt IND-WOOD(|00-TONS).
362811 IND-OS-|NC<100-TONSI-
01 |NO-OpN-BRrU |00-TONS I•
223S|0!GAS-HVY-VEH| |000-GAD-
17707IOIE-OFF-HWYI|OES-GALI"
S59I ' DENSlTY-CODE"
I COMM-AIRCRAFT IIQ-LTO)"
3272IVES-R10-OILUOES-GALI-
66BI EVAP-GASIJOE6-GALI-
77961IVEH-MI-SUBAHIIOES-MIj-
I OIRT-AJR-STRlPSILTOI-
-•-- IFOHEST-FIRE-ARJACRESI"
ISLASH-BN-QUITON/ACREI-
I STRUCTURE-F I RES(B/YR1"
I COMMENTS-
112
0.7
7. I
8|0/>
EM-EST-NOXl100-TOH5)-
» SULF-BITUM-COAL-
t ASH-13 I TUH-COAL-
HES-R ID-OIL! IOEH-GALI-
CI-BITUMI10-TONS)
91 Cl-WOOOt100-TONS).
IND-DIS-OILIlOEt-GALI-
0| I NO-PR-GAS
IORCH-OA-FIREOIOA/YR).
•! COAL-REF-BUHNlB/YR).
38! EH-E5T-S02I100-TONS)-
23271 » SULF-ANTH-COAL-
1,0! * ASH-ANTH-COAL-
IRES-D1S-OIL!lOEH-GALI-
3! Cl-ANTHl10-TONS)-
100! CI-N-GASl1QE7-CUFTI-
170! IND-COKE!10-TONS)-
73! INO-wOOOllOO-TONSI"
3S12! |NO-OS-|NC(|00-TONS)"
0!|NO-OPN-BRN||00-TONS)«
I6|725!GAS-HVY-VEHIjOOO-GAL)-
'13280|OIE-OFF-HWY((OEM-GAL)"'
3B3I OENSITY.-COOE-
9202(COMM-AlRCRAFT<10-LTD)-'
OIVES-R ID-OIL I lOEl-GAL)-
S77I EVAP-GASI(OE5-GALI-
M8725IVEH-M|-SUBAN(IOES-MI)-
EM-EST-NOXl|OO-TONS|
1 SULF-BITUM.COAL
* ASH-BITUH.COAL
0.7
7.1
7|BO RES-RlO-OILl
CI-BITUMI 10-
.'FOHEST-F1WE-ARIACRESI
ISLASH-BN-QUITON/ACRE)
•STRUCTURE-FIRES(8/YR)
! COMHENTS-
69 CI-WOODl100-TONSl"
IND-DIS-OILIIOES-GALI-
INO-PR-GASIIOE7-CUFTI"
6SOI Cl-OS-INCI100-TONS).
0| CI-OPN-BRNl100-TONS).
21995'GAS-OFF-HWYI1000-GAL).
18 I I 0|E-HR-LOC(|OE1-GALt-
8|HIL-A|RCRAFT(IOO-LTO|.
0( VES-BITUMI10-TON5).
( VES-GASI1000-GAL).
25SSIVEH-MI-LA-RDIIOES-MD-
(VEH-Ml-UHBANI |OC
(CONST-LAND! I 000-ACRE).
(FOR-FIRE-QUITON/ACRE)-
| ORCHARQ-HEATERSl100).
fCRB-SUE-BK(IOO-CUYD)-
30oi EH-EST-HCIIOC-TONS)
1.0| » SULF-DIST-OIL
9tO! RES-ANTHIIO-TOHSI
- OIRES-N-GAS(|OE7-CUFT)
|C|-D«S-OlLlIOES-GALI
— f-- INO-ANTHI10-TONSI
S6M||NO-RO-OlL(tOES-GALI
I
IMI
- 0!
1867!
— 521 I
71
I
5991
I
18Q997I
PART-EMSIT/YR).
S02-EMSIT/YR)"
NOX-EMSIT/YH|-
HC-EMSIT/YRI"
CO-EMSIT/YH|«
NO. 6-EMSIT/YH)"
NO. 7-EMSIT/YR).
NO. 8-EMslT/YR)-
NO, 9-EMSIT/YR)"
291N
5780
(NO. lO-EMgiT/YR)-
|NO. 1 l-EMSIT/YRl-
(NO. |2-EMS(T/YR)«
32608
153668
0
U
0
0
"0
0
- - - o
t37l
O.S!
5961
83SI
5039!
- — 01-
267!
j
.795!
• 60S!
.798!
.031!-
.0001
.000!
.000!
.0001
lOOO!
.0001
.000!
!
-------
SOURCE ID; A STATE- ai COUNTY- 3900 AQCR- iso YEAR. 70
JEM.EST-PRTI100-TONS)
EM-EST-C01JOO-TONS)
* SULF-RESID-OIL
RES-B1TUMIJO-TONS)
RES-WOOOI 100-TONS)
CI-RlD-OILtIOEH-GAL)
IND-B1TUMI10-TONS)
IND-N-GASI10E7-CUFT)
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS)
•RES-OP-BRNIIOO-TONSI
!GAS-LT-VEHI1000-GAL)
IDIE-HV-VEHI1000-GAU)
I COUNTY-POPi1000)
fCIV-A|RCRAFTl10-LTO)
IVES-OIE-OLIIOEH-GAL)
J EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR)
IVEH-MJ-RURLI10EM-M1)
IDIRT-RD-TRVIIOOO-MI)
(ROCK-H-STI1000-TONS |
fSLASH-BHN-AREIACRES)
IORCH-DA-F1REDIDA/YR)
J COAL-REF-BURNlK/YR)
2SI EM-EST-S02IlOO-TONSI-
BOB! - * SULF-ANTH-COAL"
1,0.' « A5H-ANTH-COAL-
!RES-DIS-01L(
3!
101 !
17!
27!
01
CI-ANTHI10-TONS)-
Ct-N-GASl10E7-CUFTI-
IND-COKE(ID-TONS)-
INO-WOODI100-TONS)-
1ND-OS-INCI |00-TOHSI-
0|IND-OPN-BRNI(DO-TONS)-
65871IGAS-HVY-VEHI lOOO-GAL I-
611H(DIE-OFF-HWYIlOEH-GALI"
208| DENSITY-CODE-
MICOMM-AIRCRAFTiIO-LTOI-
N090IVES-RID-OILI10E4-GAL)"
290! - EVAP-GASIIOE5-GALI"—
67206 |VEH-MI-SU8AN( IOEM-MII-
! DjRT-AIR-STRlPStLTOI-
•FOREST-FIRE-ARIACRESI-
- -- ISLASH-BN-QUITON/ACREI-
JSTRUCTURE-FIRES|B/YR)»
-— ! COMMENTS-
67! EM-EST-NOXI100-TONS)-
- 0.7! * SULF-BITUM-COAL-
7.1[ * ASH-BITUM-COAL-
-110HIRES-RID-OILI10EM-GAL|"
I C1-BITUM<10-TONS)-
69f Cl-WOODI100-TONS)-
fIND-DIS-OILI10EM-GALI-
0!lNO-PR-GASI10E7-CUFTI-
0| Cl-OS-INCt100-TONS(- . Of
0| C I-OPN-BRNI100-TONS)- - 0|
8958|GAS-OFF-HWY(1000-GAL)- lOlHf
•- 98f DIE-RR-LOCI10EH-GALI- —- IH8J
SJM1L-A1RCRAFTI IOO-LTOI- HI7
0| VES-BITUMI10-TON5I-
J VES-GASl1000-GALI- 7J06
—782|VEH-MI-LA-RO|IOEH-MII- —
iVEH-MI-URBANI10EM-HI I- 26361
— I CONST-LAND!1000-ACRE I•
jFOR-FIRE-QUlTON/ACRE)•
J ORCHARD-HEATERSJ1001- -
;CRB-S1ZE-BK(100-CUYD|-
I57i EM-EST-HCIIOC-TONS). »73j
ItOf * SUuF-DIST-OIL- Oi5!
9.0! RES-ANTHI10-TONS)- 16|
- 0}RES-N-GAS<|OE7-CUFT)« 700!
JCI-OlS-OlLlIOEH-GALI- 506HI
| JNO-AN|H(10-TONS(- 0!
170! INO-RO-OILI 10ES-GAD- 98|
I
PART-EMS!T/YR
S02-EMS1T/YR
NOX-EMslT/YR
HC-EMs(T/YR
CO-EHst T/YR
NO. 6-EMs(T/YR
NO, 7-EMStT/YR
NO. 8-EMSJT/YR
NO. 9-EMS(T/YR
JNOt IO-EMS«T/YR
JNO. ri-EMS«T/YR
JNO. 12-EHSIT/YR
1881
10H28
IH988
6(2|<4
0
0
------- 0
0
---- 0
0
- 0
.835!
.M28 f
.832!
• M13!
.589-
.000!
.000!
.000}-
.000!
.0001
.000!
.0001
.
f
SOURCE 105 A STATE- 31 COUNTY- H120 AQCR- OM3- YEAR- 70
IEM-EST-PRT1100-TONS
EM-EST-COIIOO-TONS
» SULF-RESIO-OIL-
RES-BITUMI10-TONS
RES-WOOD!100-TONS
CI-R10-OILIIOEH-GAL
IND-BITUMI10-TONS
JND-N-GASIJQE7-CUFT
RES-OS-INC(10-TONS
!R£S-OP-BRN(100-TONS
!GAS-LT-VEH(1000-GAL
|DIE-HV-VEH(1000-GAL
! COUNTY-POPI 1000
ICIV-AIRCRAFTIIO-LTO
IVES-DIE-OLIIOEH-GAL
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR
IVEH-MI-RURLIIOEM-M1
SO! EM-EST-S021lOO-TONSI"
2161! x SULF-ANTH-COAL«
- 1.0! - •»•ASH-ANTH-COAU"
!RES-DJS-OIL(lOES-GALI«
2! Cl-ANTHlIO-TONS)«
16H! CI-N-GASl1QE7-CUFT )•
367! INO-COKEI 10-TONS)"
1591 INO-WOODIlOO-TONSI"
•(100! IND-OS-INCI lOO-TONS»«
0!IND-OPN-6RN(|00-TONS)«
1S5930!GAS-HVY-VEH(lOOO-GALI"
110i7!OIE-OFF.HWY(lOEM-GAL)'
161! DENSITY-CODE"
OICOMM-AlRCRAFTtlO-LTOI"
OfVES-RID-OlLllOEH-GAD"
668! EVAP-GASilOES-GAL)'
1169HIVEH-MI-SUBANII OEM-MI)'
126! EM-EST-NOXI100-TONS)
0.7! * SULF-B1TUM-COAL
- 7,u * ASH-BITUM-COAL
»033!RES-R10-OIL(10E4-GAL
f CI-BITUMI10-TONS
113! Cl-WOODI100-TONS
| IND-DIS-OILI10EH-GAL
OMND-PK-GASUOE7-CUFT
— M91! Cl-OS-JNCI100-TONS)
Of CI-OPN-BRNl100-TON5)
|98H7'GAS-OFF-HWY(1000-GALI
218! OIE-RR-LOCI10EH-GAL)
9'MIL-A 1RCRAFTI100-LTO)
0! VES-B1TUMI10-TONS)
— - - t VES-GASI1000-GAL)
2l20|V£H-Ml-LA-RDIlOE4-Ml)
IVEH-MI-URBANI 10EM-MU
283! EM-EST-HC*100-TONS)
1.0! * SULF-D1ST-01L
9.01 - RES-ANTHI10-TONS)
0|RES-N-GAS(10E7-CUFT)
JCI-DlS-OlLl10EH-GALI
INO-ANTHI10-TONS)
IND-RD-olLl10EM-GAL)
-IOOH
393!
0.5!
1609!
973!
8255!
0!
578!
137 PART-EMSIT/YR)
0 S02-EMSIT/YR)
22H7 NOX-EMSIT/YR)
171 HC-£MS|T/YR)
0 CO-EMSIT/YR)
NO. 6-EMSIT/YR)
-•• 568! NO»-7-EMs»T/YR)
I NO. 6-EMSIT/YR)
195593J NO. 9-EMSIT/YR)
- 3H22. I7H!
80S0.2S2!
- I73H6.999!
30927.079!
1H9162.360!
0.000!
0.0001
0.000!
0.000!
-------
JDIRT-RD-TRVI1000-MI|«
|HOCK-H-ST(1000-TONS|.
|SLASH-BRN-AR£(ACRE5|«
|ORCM-DA-FIR£0(DA/YR|.
J COAL-REF-BURN)«/YR|«
I
JFOREST-FIRE-ARIACRES)'
|STRUCTURE-FlRESl«/YRI-
I •— COMMENTS-
|CONST-LAND)IOOO-ACRE|.
| FOR-FIRE-QUITON/ACRE)•
| ORCHARD-HEATERS!100).
fCKB-SIZE-BK<|00-CUrO|.
|NOt |0-EMS)T/YH|-
(NO. I I-EMSIT/YH).
(NO. 12-EHslT/YRI-
0*0001.
0.0001
0>000|
1
I
SOURCE ID; A STATE- 31 COUNTY- tvoo AQCR- ONS YEAR- 70
en
fEM-EST-PRTI I 00-TONS).-
EM-EST-C01IOO-TONSJ.
% SULF-RESIO-OIL-
RES-B1TUHI|0-IONS|.
RES-WQOOIIQO-TONS)-
CI-RID-OILIIOCH-GALI-
INO-BITUM|10-TONS).
INO-N-GAS)IOE7-CUFT).
RES-OS-INCIID-TONS).
fRES-OP-BRNI(00-TONSl-
IGAS-LT-VEH)1000-GAL).
JOJE-HV-VEHI1000-GAL).
f COUNTY-POPII 000)•'
ICIV-MRCRAFTI10-LTOl-
fVES-DIE-OU10EH-GALI-
J EVAP-SOLVENT(T/YR|«
fVEH-MJ-RURUIIOEt-MI).
IOIHT-RD-TRVI1000-M! ).
(ROCK-M-STI1000-TONS I •
JSLASH-BRN-AHE(ACRES).
fORCH-OA-riREOIOA/YR|.
I COAL-REF-BURNlB/YR|-
131 EM-EST-S02)lOO-TONSI-
3381 s SULF-ANTH-COAL-
l.or i ASH-ANTH-COAL-
12! Cl-ANTHl10-TONSI-
ISl CI-N-GAS)IOE7-CUFT)-
171 INO-COKEIIO-10NSI--
31! JND-WOOO)IOO-TONS)"
I NO-OS-I NCI|00-TONS I -
01IND-OPN-BHN) |00-TONS I-
29040IGAS-HVY-VEH)1000-GALI"'
2420'DIE-OFF-HWYI|0£'(-GAL(-
60! DENSITY-CODE"-
0 ICOMM-AIRCRAFT I10-LTO)-
2727|VES-R|D-OILI|OE')-GAL)«
97f EVAP-GAS) lOES-GAL I-
29743|VEH-M|-SUBAN( lOEH-Ml »«
.' OlRT-AIR-STHlPSILTOI-
JSLASH-BN-QUITON/ACRE).
JSTRUCTURE-FIHES|»/YRI-
l COMMENTS-
37| EM-EST-NOXIIOO-TONS|i
Q.7| * SULF-ttlTUM-COALi
7.U * ASH-UITUM-COAL-
8B6|RES-RIO-OIL! IOE<4-GAL)i
I CI-BITUMI|Q-TONS|i
10; C I-WOODI100-TONSI.
fIND-DIS-OJLIIOEN-GAL)•
0|IND-PR-GASIlOE7-CUFT|i
95f Cl-OS-INCIIOO-TONS|i
0| CI-OPN-BRNtIOO-TONS|i
3»52lGAS-OFF-HWY( I 000-GAL I-
28| DlE-RR-LOCI IOE<«-GAL)i
S|M|L-A|RCRArT(|00-LTO|i
0| VES-BITUMI|0-TONS|i
| VES-GASIIOOO-6ALI*
33S|VEH-MI-LA-RD||OE't-Ml)i
fVEH-Ml-UHBANllOEH-Ml)•
(CONST-LAND)I 000-ACRE I'
|FOR-FIRE-QU(TON/ACRE)'
I ORCHARD-HEATERS)I00)i
•-- -fCRB-SIZE-BKl100-CUYD)!
4»| EM
1.0!
9.0|
OJRES
|CI-
-|94|I NO
I
2H9J
01
292|
B2|
-EST-HCIloo-TONSi- - 731
» SULF-01ST-OIL- 0.51
RES-ANTHI10-TONSI- 2011
-N-GAS)(OE7-CUFTI- 56|
plS-OlL)IOEH-GALI" — 7551
IND-ANTM)tO-TONSI- Of
-RD-OlL(lOEt'GALI- --|I3|
| NO
442| NO
| NO
115161 NO
JNO.
(NO.
(NO.
S02-EMSI
NOX-EMS)
HC-EMSI
-CO-£MS(
6-EMSI
7-EMS1
B-EMs)
9-£MSl
IO-EMSI
M-EMSI
|2-£MS|
T/YHI-
T/YRI-
T/YR I-
T/YRI-
T/YR )•- -3H500
2024
|842
-H2t»
T/YHI-
T/YRI-
T/YHI-
T/YH).
T/YRI-
T/YHI--
T/YRl-
.3661
.9361
.791 t
.477 |
• 531 }-
.0001
.0001
.000)
.000)
.0001
.0001
.0001
——I
I
SOURCE |0: A STATE- 3) COUNTY- 5020 AQCR- OH3 YEAR. 70
IEM-EST-P«T(IOO-TONS»
f EM-EST-COIIOO-TONS »
I » SUI.F-HESID-OIL
! RES-BITUMIIO-TONSI
I RES-WOOD)100-TONS)
ICI-RID-OILI IOEt-GAL )
I JND-BITUM)tO-TONS)
I IND-N-GASI IOE7-CUKT)
27! EM-E5T-S02(|00-TONS)-
12921 a SULF-ANTH-COAL-
1.01 » ASH-A'>TH-COAL"
IRES-DlS-OlL) jOt.H-GALI-
01 C I-ANTHl 10-TOljSI-
- -S9I —CI-N-GASj IQE7-CUFT)•
1271 |ND-COKE(10-TONSI-
16 f— ~|NO-WOOD)JOO-TONS>-
39 EM-EST-NOXi100-TONS)-
0.7 » SULF-IH TUM-COAU-
7.1 t ASH-BITUM-COAL-
18S3 RES-RID-OIL)IOEH-GALI-
CI-BITUM)IO-TONSI.
3t CI-WOOD)100-TONS)•-
IND-DIS-OILIIOE1-GAL)-
OflNO-PR-GASlIOE7-CUFT)-
l7H| EM-EST-HCIIOO-TONS). 2H4I
I.01 » SUuF-DIST-OIL- ' 0.51
V.OI RES-ANTHIIO-TONSI- 2381
- 0|RES-N-GAS(IOE7-CUFTI- 554 I
|CI-oIS-OlL(IOEN-GAL). 2H66I
| -•- | NO- ANTH I IO-TONSI- 0 |-
292 I IND-RD-OlL1 IOE1-GAL). 1681
-------
} RES-OS-INCt10-TONS)-
JRES-OP-BRN1IOO-TONS|«
!GAS-LT-VEH<1000-GAL)-
lO|E-HV-VEH(1000-GALI-
I COUNTY-POP!10001-
|CIV-AIRCRAFT(10-LTO)-
-!VES-DIE-OL(10E«(-GAL)"
| EVAP-SOLVENTJT/YR)-
1VEH-MI-RURLIIOEH-M1)-
lOlRT-RD-TRVt1000-MI )•
|ROCK-H-STI1000-TONS)»
! SLASH-BRN-ARE(ACRES)-
-!ORCH-OA-FIRED(DA/YR|"
f COAL-REF-BURNU/YR)-
-J828H! IND-OS-INCItOO-TONS)--
0|IND-OPN-BRN00)»
(CRB-SIZE-BKllOO-CUYOI-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
«
•
•
6UYJ — rAni-tnsii/mi*
0! S02-EMs( T/YR )•
•- -96S| NOX-EMS 1 T/YR )•
379/ HC-EMsl T/YR>-
- •-- J CO-EHs(T/YR|-
| NO. 6-£Ms(T/YR)-
-Of NO, • /•t"S 1 '/ YK ) •
f NO. 8-EMslT/YR)-
93HI8J NO, 9-EMSJT/YR)-
(NO. 10-EHg ( T/YR ) -
JNO. 1 I-EMSIT/YR)-
(NO. 12-EMstT/YRl-
2H75.0711
9867.999!
26851.027!
109808.537!
0.0001
0.000!
0.000!
0.000!
0.000!— -
0.000!
SOURCE ID; A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 5300 AQCR- isi YEAR. 70
c»
lEH-EST-PRTtlOD-TONS)
.• EM-EST-COI loo-TONS)
» SULF-RES1D-01L
RES-B1TUM110-TONSl
RES-WOOD(100-TONS)
CI-RID-OILI10EH-GAL
|ND-B|TUH(10-TONS
INO-N-GASl10E7-CUFT
RES-OS-INCI10-TONS
fRES-OP-BRN(100-TONS
JGAS-LT-VEHI1000-GAL
|OIE-HV-VEH(1000-GAL
| COUNTY-POP!1000
ICIV-AJRCRAFTI10-LTO
(VES-DIE-OLI10EH-GAL
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR
IVEH-MI-RURLIIOE1-MJ
|D1RT-RD-TRV(1000-MI
JROCK-H-STI 1000-TONS
|SLASH-BRN-AREIACRES
!ORCH-DA-FIREO(OA/YR
f COAL-REF-BURNIn/YR
3! EM-EST-S021100-TONS)"
225! * SULF-ANTH-COAL-
I.QI * ASH-ANTH-COAL-
•RES-DIS-OlLI lOES-GAD"-
81 Cl-ANTM) 10-TONS)-
17| CI-N-GAS(10E7-CUFTI"
151 INO-COKEI10-TONS)"
3| 1NO-WOOOI lOO-TONSI-
Of INO-OS-INCIlOO-TON5)»
011ND-OPN-BRNIJOO-TONSI---
22300 .'GAS-HVY-VEHI lOOO-GAL)»
1452|DIE-OFF-HWY(lOES-GALt-
78| DENSlTY-COOE-
0(COMM-AlRCRAFT(10-LTOI--
OIVES-RIO-OIL(IOEN-GAL)-
97| EVAP-GASI10E5-GALI-
28799!VEH-HI-SUBAN(IOES-MI )•
I DIRT-AIR-STRlPSILTOI-
IFOREST-FIRE-AR(ACHES)-
--• |SLASH-BN-QU(TON/ACRE)»
ISTRUCTURE-FIRES(«/YR)»
I - COMMENTS-
10| EM-EST-NOX(100-TONS)•
— 0.7 * SULF-BITUM-COAL«
7.1 * ASH-BiTUM-COAL-
-696 RES-RID-OILI (OEM-GAD-
CI-BITUMI IO-TONSI-
12 CI-WOOOI100-TONS)-
lND-OIS-01L(10EM-GAL)»
0|1NO-PR-GASI10E7-CUFT I-
Of CI-OS-INCI100-TONS)-
0; Cl-OPN-BRNl100-TONS)-
3033(GAS-OFF-HWY(IOOO-GAL)-
37; OIE-RR-LOC( 10EM-GALI"
3|MIL-A1RCRAFTJ100-LTO)«
0| VES-B1TUMIIO-TONS(«
! VES-GASUOOO-GAL)-
-21l|VEH-m-LA-RD(10EH-Ml)»
|VEH-M1-URBAN(10EM-MI(«
fCONST-LANDI1000-ACRE)--
fFOR-FlRE-QU(TON/ACRE)-
.. , ORCHARD-HEATERS!100)-
(CRB-SIZE-BKI100-CUYD)-
*MI EM-EST-HCI IOC-TONS)- •»?!
1.0! * SULF-D1ST-OIL- 0.51
9.01 RES.ANTH(10-TONS)- 159
- 0JRES-N-6AS(IOE7-CUFTI- 126
JCI-OlS-OlLtIOEH-GALI- 863
f JND-ANTHJ10-TONSI" 0
J9| INO-RD-OILI10EH-GALI- II
PART
S02
0!
... . of
380|
282| HC
0| CO
I NO, 6
662| NO. 7
I NO. 6
2877J NO. 9
- • fNO. 10
|NO. 11
(NO. 12
EMSIT/YR
EHs(T/YR
EMsl T/YR
£MS(T/YR
EMslT/YH
EMs(T/YR
EMS(T/YR
EMsiT/YR
EMslT/YR
EHslT/YR
EMS(TXYR)
EMs(T/YR|
298.BH9
- 786.77M
2&3H.380
3780.032
15999.918!
0.000!
0.000!
0.000!
0<000!
0.000!
0.000!
- 0.000!
SOURCE ID? A STATE- 31 COUNTY- 5MMO AQCR- OS3 YEAR- 70
-------
lEM-EST-PHUlOO-TONS).
EH-EST-COIIOO-TONSI.
« SULF-HESIO-OIL"
RES-BITUMIIO-TONSI-
RES-WOOOI|00-TOMS|i
CI-RIO-OILIIOES-GAL).
IND-BITUMI10-TONS!•
IND-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT).
RES-OS-INCt10-TONS).
JRES-OP-QRNt|00-TONS | i
IGAS-LT-VEHIIOOO-GAL|i
fDl£-MV-VEH(|000-GAL I<
| COUNTY-POPI10001'
fCIV-AlRCRAFTI10-LTO)'
JVES-DIE-OLI IOES-GAL)'
f EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YHp
IVEH-MI-RURL(10ES-HI )'
JDIRT-RO-TRVI1000-M!)'
|ROCK-H-ST» 1000-TONS).
|5LASH-BRN-ARE«ACRES)«
jORCM-OA-FlRED(OA/YR)i
I COAL-REF-BURNU/YRl-
571 EM-£ST-S02{ 100-TOnSI"
31011 X SULF-ANTH-COAL"
|.0( I ASH-ANTH-coAL"
IRES-DIS-OILI IOES-GALI-
0|
32f
SSIf
20SI
23975!
Cl-ANTHI 10-TONSI"
- CI-N-GASI IOE7-CUFTI-
IND-COKEI 10-TON.SI"
IND-WOOOI 100-TONS)'
IND-OS-INCI 100-TONSI"
01 |NO-OPN-BRN( |00-TONS)«
2089 All GAS-HVY-VEMt |OUQ-GAL|-
t7707|DIE-OrF-HWY< lOEH-GALI-
5i3f DENSITY-CODE-
OICOMM-A IKCRAFT I IO-LTOI-
ei8(VES-RlD-01L( |0£l-GALI<
76Hf CVAP-6ASI IOCS-GAL)'
1»N»0|VEH-H|-SUBAN| lOES-Hl )•
........ I DIRT-AIR-STRIPSILTOI-
f FOREST-FIRE- A" (ACRES I •
| SLASH. ON-QUI TON/ACRE >•
|STROCTURE-FJRES(I>/YR)'
I ...... connENTS-
121| EM-EST-NOXI100-TONS).
0.7| » SULF-BITUM-COAL-
7.11 % ASH-BITUM-COAL-
B222 | RES-RID.OIL)lOEt-GALIi
I CI-BITUMI ID-TONS).
Z2f C I-WOOOI100-TONS)«
|1ND-D1S-OIL(|OES-GALI>
Of 1ND-PW-GASI10E7-CUFTI-
I584| CI-OS-INCI|00-TONS)i
Oj CI-OPN-ORNl100-TONSIi
28H19(GAS-OFF-HWY(IOOD-GAL)'
— 256J DlE-RR-LOCI10EH-GALP
V|MIL-A|RCRAFT(|00-LTOJ.
Of VES-B1TUMIlO-TONS|i
• VES-GASIlOOO-GAL|i
- 33»2'VEH-M|-LA-RO(|OEN-Hl)i
fVEH-Ml-URBAN(|OEN-Ml|i
-- |CONST-LANO(I 000-ACRE I'
fFOR-FIRE-UUITON/ACRE )•
| ORCMARO-HEATERSlI00|i
(CRB-SIZE-BM100-CUYDI.
3771 EM-EST-HCiIOC-TONSi• S57f
I.Of X SUuF-OIST-OIL- 0.61
9.0| RES-ANTHI10-TONSI- 218SI
0|R£S-N-GAS(IOE7-CUFTI- 6V5f
(CI-QlS-OlLtIOES-GALI- 16081
I (NO-ANTHIIO-TONSI- - 01
12961INO-RO-OILIIOES-GALI- 7S5t
f I
799|
01
PART-EMSIT/YRI-
S02-£Ms(T/YRl-
NOX-EMslT/YH)-
— 387} HC-EMSIT/YH)-
0| CO-EMSIT/YHI-
I NO. 6-EMslT/YRI-
|11| NO. 7-£Ms(T/YR|-
| NO. 8-£Ms(T/YR|-
277331J NO. 9-EMS(T/YR)-
10-EMslT/YR)-
11-EMslT/YRI-
12-£Hs(T/YR|-
|NO.
(NO.
|NO.
I —
7SS7.SOVI
6367.2691
2l75|.S70!
53710.665!
239297.8291
o.oooi
0.0001
0.0001
. 0.0001
O.OOOJ
0.0001
-•- o.ooot
t
cr>
10
SOURCE tO; A STATE- 31 COUNTY- S660 AQCR- 151 YEAR. 70
fEM-EST-PRTI lOG-TOHSl
• EM-EST-COI100-TONSI
I » SULF-RESID-OIL
I RES-RITUMI10-TONS)
( RES-WOOOI100-TONS)
ICI-HID-OIL( IOES-GAL I
I JNO-ttlTUM(ID-TONS)
|1ND-N-GASIIOE7-CUFT)
I RES-OS-INCt10-TONSl
•RES-OP-BKN(100-TONS
I&AS-LT-VEHJIOOO-GAL
•OIE-HV-VEHIIOOU-GAL
• COUNTY-POP!1000
1C I V-A|RCRAFT( 10-LTO
JVES-DIE-OLIIOEH-&AL
I EVAP-SOLVENTIT/YR
.• VEH-MI-HUHL ( IOEI-HI
|01KT-RD-TKV(1000-Ml
IROCK-M-STI1000-TONS
|SLASII-BRN-AHE|ACRES|
tORCH-OA-K|Ht'OIDA/YR)
~ III EM-EST-S02IIOO-TONSI'
S|8f X SULF-ANTH-COAL'
I.Of * ASM-A'-'TH-COAL'
IRES-DIS-OILIJOES-GAL)•
If Cl-ANTM(IO-TONSI'
|S| C I-N-GASI 10E7-CUFT)'
- SBf INO-COKEI10-TONSI'
SI I IND-WOODI lOO-T.ONS)'
509Hf INO-OS-INCI100-TONSI'
OI|ND-OPN-BRN||00-TONSI<
37I6I1GAS-HVY-VEHI(000-GAUl1
2ll8.'DIE-OrF-MWy||OES-GALI'
7si PLNSITY-COOE-
OfCOMM-AlRCRAFTI 10-LTO I •
OIVES-RIO-OILIJOES-GAL)'
97! EVAP-GASI(OE6-GAL>•
38396.>V£H-M|-SUBAN|IOES-M|I<
I 0|RT-A|H-STRlP5tLTO)'
I SLASM-BN-QUITON/ACRE)
fSTHUCTURE-riRES(»/YNI
23! EM-EST-NOXI IOO-TONSI
o.7f » SULF-BITUH-COAL
7.If » ASH-BITUH-COAL
737|RES-RID-OILI|OES-GAL)
| C1-B1TUMI10-TONS)
10f CI-WOODI100-TONS
-flND-OIS-OlLIJOES-GAL
Of IND-PH-GASI IOE7-CUFT
~I23| CI-05-1NC1 100-TONS
0| CI-OPN-BRNI100-TONS
505SfGAS-OFF-HWVIIOOO-GAL
36f DIE-RR-LOCIIOES-GAL
BfMlL-AIRCHAFTI100-LTO
Of VES-BITUni10-TONS
| VES-GASIIOOO-GAL
275|VEH-Ml-LA-RO|lOES-Hl
|VEH-Ml-URBANIlOES-Ml
fCONST-LANDI1000-ACRE
fFOH-KIHE-QUI TON/ACRE
. | OHCHARO-MEATEKSI1001
(CHB-SIZE-BKllOO-CUYD)
7
-------
APPENDIX F
Other Analyses
71
-------
TABLE F-l
.j ,•;.;•< Y I^U-CL FUEL SU
rtf-c-R'i..«
C'JfxLNT AKf!U™L FULL ^U
157'iC
17'lFT"
FILE CRCATfUTT
DAY sfPTCiirFR r?. iH7t
JATF. OF RUM
1C/2V71)
ft 'IT i! 'j r !lL
TC.•:;r"
• ~ i '-] "». * * i< r *"• ~ L" o ^ '
;::. • i^.^ ^AL'.
C;:T OIL
ICLT GALS
NAT 3 A S
1TEC CUFT
f'KCC C4S
1CEE CUFT
COXE
TOMS
WOOD
TONS
9MCO
TOT-.L
r:.r-!
-------
TABLE F-2
SOUKCL FUEL SUMIIAII« KLPUHT»«
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
hNV IHOnMtf|l AL PROTECTION AQlllCY
USEH KILE CKCATEDATE
. FKIuAT NUVtflttfH Ol, |V71
A'Kl« f'i'EL H| I'OHT :
AHI:A SOURCES
IICSIOENTIAL
inousTKi AL
CullH-lNSTL
T 0 1 A L
POINT SOUHCES
1. XT COMb
LLEC (,( n
lliDUSTK 1 AL
C u M ii - 1 1 ; 'i I L
TOTAL
iiipHocess
lUHI'IIL CO, III
ELEC Gf N
1 H D u S T h 1 A L
IOT AL
G h A N L> TOTAL
I-OINT SOUKCES
I'XT COlill
ILEC Gtll
inoijsiKi AL
(. U M H - I II S T L
INTF.HII). roilll
ELEC GI ii
INDUS IK | AL
COMH- i us rt.
IHG-TEST
IOIAL
NL <* Jff*' EY~N|"i; y QKK "" C ollut c T I C u I
.....
ciiKNLMT ANNUAL FUEL son
ANTH COAL UITM COAL KEMP pit- P'ST OIL _
. ._TOi)i_ TONS ._ _...lQUO. SJLS l.Q(IQ. 54L5
3S006U S2bO 7631(0 2661100
.1360 2H3|0 . 562?00 ... 20I43U .
75110 211|U 930120 1150101)
124860 5/9.70 221fe7jQ 1013.3JQ
29331')7 1550530 bb029 _
165U61 2l'lb2l 506lb9 11839
11611 AI9';* Ib79n7 11311
167332 3209927 S2I16J6 111209
"
.._ . ._ 119135
2 |2U
121655
^94|92 3267897 7161366 I5l9|9't
LIGNITE BAGASSE 5W/COAL LIG-PETHO
TuMS T0"b TONS |000 GALS
93«1 906
V3a1 906
HAI<»
NAT UAS PRQC GAS
_H}t*_curT . .... iuE&_cy.u_
318900
6250D .
1(170211
179220
. . IU318Q
9266
557H
1 18332
2707B
2707S
621627
UIESLL (jASQLINE
IllOO GALS KlllCt GALS
DATE Of RUN
1 I/U1//1
CQKE WOOD
.TOWS TONS .
6|00
6100
|8B
|BU
"
6288
JET FUEL
1000 GALS
IOTAI.
9U6
-------
TABLE F-3
•STATIONARY SOURCE FUEL SUMMARY
NAIIQNAU EMISSION UATA SYSlfM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AOLNCY
HO.CR riJFL REPOWTJNEW JERSEY (REMAINDER)
CURRENT ANNUAL FUEL SUMHAxy
AN TH COAL U 1 T M C 0 A L R E S 1 D 0 | L OISTOIL NAT&AS
TONS TONS 1000 GALS 1000 GALS 1UE6 CU?T
AREA SOURCE'S
RESIOtNTU|. 1620 76'->50 1 400U
INDUSTRIAL I7[>o 86in itv70 237U
COMM-|N5TL 3t50 I7J630 2 J a 0
TOT-L |620 I7SO 12060 26b[50 |8/50
POINT Sol)RCES
EXT C 0 M U
ELEC Gl.N VOb9fiO 2H9 279 3S
INDUSTRIAL 1500 607SI 6HO 7UU
, rOdH-INSTL
TOTAL 90/Mi?D 60990 919 73b
INTERNL COM.l
ELEC GEN b285
INQUSTRI «L
COHM- INSTL
TOT«L 828b
GWANt) TOTAL 1620 90V230 730SU 27M3bH jVHab
LIGNITE BAGASSf SW/COAL L|(.-PLTRO . DIESEL
TONS TONb TONS 1000 G«LS lUOU GALS
POINT So"RCES
EXT COMB
ELEC C,£N
I NQUSTH i AL
COnM-lNSTL
INTERNL COMII
f LEC GEN
1 NflUSTRl AL
COMM-lNSTL
FNG-TEST
TOTAL
USER FILE CREATLUAU
SATURDAY SEPIEl.DER 0;., lv?M
DATE UF RUN
PROL GAS COKE WOOD
IOE6 CUFT TUNS TUNS
I'jUO
IbOO
IbUU
GASOLINE JET FUEL
IOOU GALS 1000 GALS
GKANl) TOTAL
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO
EPA-450/3-74-071
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S \CCESSIOWNO.
PLAN REVIEW FOR NEW JERSEY AS
REQUIRED BY THE ENERGY SUPPLY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COORDINATION ACT
5. REPORT DATE
December 1974
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle
Park, N.C., Regional Office II, New York, Mew York,
and TRW, Inc., Vienna, Virginia
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
n. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-1385
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Section IV of the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of 1974,
(ESECA) requires EPA to review each State Implementation Plan (SIP) to determine
if revisions can be made to control regulations for stationary fuel combustion
sources without interf erring with the attainment and maintenance of the national
ambient air quality standards. This document, which is also required by Section
IV of ESECA, is EPA's report to the State indicating where regulations might be
revised.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air pollution
State implementation plans
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
21. MO. OF PAGES
75
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
75
------- |