A list of compounds emitted from on-road and non-road mobile sources


Report No. SR01 -02-01
A List of Compounds Emitted
from Ori-Road and Non-Road
Mobile Sources
prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 21, 2001
prepared by:
Sierra Research, Inc., Sacramento, California
Energy & Environmental Analysis, Inc., Arlington, Virginia
Eastern Research Group, Austin, Texas

-------
A LIST OF COMPOUNDS EMITTED
FROM ON-ROAD AND NON-ROAD
MOBILE SOURCES
prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
under Contract No. 68-C07-0051
Work Assignment 3-01
February 5, 2001
prepared by:
Sierra Research, Inc.
1801 J Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 444-6666
Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.
1655 N. Fort Meyer Drive, Suite 600
Arlington, Virginia 22209
(703) 528-1900
Eastern Research Group
5608 Parkcrest Drive, Suite 100
Austin, Texas 78731
(512)407-1820

-------
Disclaimer
Although the information in this report has been funded wholly or in part by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-C07-0051, it has not been subjected to the
Agency's peer and administrative review and is being released for information purposes only. It
therefore may not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency, and no official endorsement should be
inferred.

-------
sierra
research
February 21, 2001
1801 J Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 444-6666
Fax: (916) 444-8373
Joie Middlebrook, TRIP
Project Officer
US EPA/NVFEL, 734/214-4934
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Subject: Contract 68-C07-0051, Work Assignment 3-01, "The Development of a List
of Compounds Emitted from On-road and Non-road Mobile Sources"
Dear Ms. Middlebrook:
Enclosed is a copy of the report titled "A List of Compounds Emitted from On-Road and
Non-Road Mobile Sources," prepared by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. and
Eastern Research Group under subcontract to Sierra Research. A copy has also been sent
to the Work Assignment Manager, Mr. Scarbro, along with a copy of the report on disk in
Word 2000 format. Please call with any questions.
Sincerely,
Robert G. Dulla
Senior Partner
cc: Carl Scarbro, w/disk

-------
A List of Compounds Emitted
from On-Road and Non-Road
Mobile Sources
Table of Contents
page
1.	Executive Summary 	 1
2.	Methodology	 3
3.	Results	 9
Appendix A		 A-l

-------
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Under Work Assignment 3-01 of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contract
#68-C07-0051, Sierra Research, Inc. (Sierra), in conjunction with subcontractors Eastern
Research Group (ERG) and Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. (EEA), performed a series
of tasks related to the compilation of a list of compounds emitted from on-road and non-road
mobile sources. Due to resource and time constraints, and at the explicit direction of EPA, this
work involved only a review of 46 specific documents or datasets rather than a comprehensive
literature review. Forty-four of the 46 references were listed as reference materials for Chapter 2
of the "Draft Technical Support Document: Control of Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Fuels" (EPA 420-D-00-003, July 2000) and two were
added as supplemental materials during the course of the work assignment.
In total, over 700 specific emission compounds were identified and reviewed. Approximately
500 of these compounds have distinct CAS (Chemical Abstracts Service) registry numbers and
there are approximately 10 additional distinct compounds for which a CAS number could not be
identified. All of the remaining compounds constitute either identified or unidentified mixtures,
such as "dimethyloctane" (which would include all applicable isomers), "total hydrocarbons,"
"unidentified C6 alkylbenzenes," or "unknown." By necessity, researchers often combine
compounds that coelute during chromatography and, therefore, report these compounds in total.
In other cases, compounds cannot be specifically identified and are reported as unidentified.
Finally, many emission species commonly measured and reported in the mobile source sector
actually comprise aggregations of individual compounds (e.g., total organic gases [TOG], oxides
of nitrogen [NOx]) and, accordingly, cannot be identified in terms of distinct compound
attributes.
As required under the work assignment, a comprehensive database of the identified compounds
has been created. This database includes the following information for each report reviewed:
• Reported species name
• Associated IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) name
• CAS registry number
• Molecular formula
• Formula weight
• Generating engine type (spark ignition (SI), compression ignition (CI), or turbine)
• Generating fuel type (gasoline, diesel, etc.), and
• Reported emission type (exhaust or evaporative).
The compounds contained in the report were restricted to those identified in the literature that are
also identified in EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), EPA's list of identified toxic
compounds and those identified in the literature. This narrowed the scope of the report
-1-

-------
considerably. Compounds not in IRIS were identified from the reviewed literature and are listed
separately for EPA in the same format. These data are available upon request from EPA.
While the information presented in the tables contained in this report as well as in the larger
database accurately reflects that contained in the studies reviewed, the limitations of this project
make it imperative that caution be used in drawing conclusions from the information. As an
illustration of this point, it is well known that nitric oxide (NO) is the primary constituent of NOx
emissions emitted by internal combustion engines, including Diesel engines and engines
operated on alternative fuels such as CNG and methanol. However, Table 1 indicates that NO
has been identified only in the exhaust of gasoline-fueled engines, a conclusion that is clearly
incorrect and a direct result of the restricted scope of the review. The absence of an indication
that a compound is emitted from a source cannot be treated as an indication that a compound is
not emitted by that source, only that they were not measured and reported in the reviewed
literature.
Tables presenting bibliographic and associated test program characteristics provide important
descriptive information regarding the review materials, and information critical in evaluating the
overall quality of any underlying emissions test data are presented in the report and the
supplementary data. In addition to providing the report name, author, and sponsor, these tables
give an overview of the vehicles or engine tested, the test fuel characteristics, the driving cycle
and test methods employed, and other key summary information.
-2-

-------
2. METHODOLOGY
As required, the following 44 reports or datasets as presented in Chapter 2 of the "Draft
Technical Support Document: Control of Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Motor
Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Fuels" (EPA 420-D-00-003, July 2000) were obtained and subjected
to a detailed review to identify all reported emissions compounds.
1. Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program, 1990. Phase 1 Working Data Set
(published in electronic form). Prepared by Systems Applications International, San Rafael,
CA.
2. Ball, James C., 1997. Emission Rates and Elemental Composition of Particles Collected
from 1995 Ford Vehicles Using the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule, the Highway
Fuel Economy Test, and the US06 Driving Cycle. Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE
paper No. 97FL-376.
3. Bass, E. A., and M. S. Newkirk, 1995. Reactivity Comparison of Exhaust Emissions from
Heavy-Duty Engines Operating on Gasoline, Diesel, and Alternative Fuels. Southwest
Research Institute, Report No. SwRI 9856, December 1995.
4. Billings, R., T. Kraus, B. Hunt, and J. Mangino, R. Cook, L. Driver, 1998. Development
and Comparison of 1990 and 1996 Mobile Source Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions
Estimates. Presented at AWMA Conference "Emissions Inventory: Living in a Global
Environment," New Orleans, LA, December 8-10, 1998.
5. Boekhaus, K. L., J. M. DeJovine, D. A. Paulsen, L. A. Rapp, J.S. Segal and D. J.
Townsend, 1991. Clean Fuels Report 91-03: Fleet Test Emissions Data -- EC-Premium
Emission Control Gasoline. Arco Products Co., Anaheim, CA.
6. CARB, 1991. Butadiene Emission Factors, memo from K. D. Drachand to Terry McGuire
and Peter Venturini, July 17, 1991.
7. Carroll, J. N., 1991. Emission Tests of In-use Small Utility Engines: Task III Report,
Non-road Source Emission Factors Improvement. Prepared for U.S. EPA by Southwest
Research Institute. Report No. SwRI 3426-006.
8. Censullo, A. C., 1991. Development of Species Profdes for Selected Organic Emission
Sources. California Polytechnic University, report prepared for California Air Resources
Board.
9. College of Engineering - Center for Environmental Research and Technology, University
of California, 1998. Evaluation of Factors that Affect Diesel Exhaust Toxicity. Submitted to
California Air Resources Board, Contract No. 94-312.
10. Eastern Research Group, 1999. Documentation for the 1996 Base Year National Toxics
Inventory for Commercial Marine Vessel and Locomotive Sources. Draft Report prepared for
Emission Factor and Inventory Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S.
EPA, November 1, 1999.
-3-

-------
11. Eastern Research Group, 1999. Documentation for the 1996 Base Year National Toxics
Inventory for Aircraft Sources. Draft Report prepared for Emission Factor and Inventory
Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. EPA, November 1, 1999.
12. Eastern Research Group, 1999. Documentation for the 1996 Base Year National Toxics
Inventory for Nonroad Sources. Draft Report prepared for Emission Factor and Inventory
Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. EPA, November 1, 1999.
13. Eastern Research Group, 1999. Documentation for the 1996 Base Year National Toxics
Inventory for Onroad Sources. Draft Report prepared for Emission Factor and Inventory
Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. EPA, November 1, 1999.
14. EPA, 1999. Estimation of Motor Vehicle Toxic Emissions and Exposure in Selected
Urban Areas. Prepared by Sierra Research, Inc., Radian International Corp., and Energy &
Environmental Analysis, Inc. for U. S. EPA, Office of Mobile Sources, Assessment and
Modeling Division, Ann Arbor, MI, Report No. EPA420-D-99-002, March 1999.
15. EPA, 1996. "Determining POM/PAH Emission Factors for Mobile Sources."
Memorandum from Pam Brodowicz, Office of Mobile Sources, to Eric Ginsburg and David
Mobley, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, December 19, 1996.
16. EPA, 1999. 1990 Emissions Inventory of Forty Potential Section 112(k) Pollutants:
Supporting Data for EPA's Section 112(k) Regulatory Strategy. Distributed by Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, May 21, 1999.
17. EPA, 1997. Memo from Rich Cook, Rich, Office of Mobile Sources, to Anne Pope,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Source Identification and Base Year 1990
Emission Inventory Guidance for Mobile Source HAPs on the OAQPS List of 40 Priority
HAPs. June 11, 1997.
18. EPA, 1998. Memo from Rich Cook, Office of Mobile Sources, to Laurel Driver and Anne
Pope, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Guidance on Mobile Source Emission
Estimates in the 1996 National Toxics Inventory. June 9, 1998.
19. EPA, 1993. Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for Reformulated Gasoline. U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, December 13, 1993.
20. EPA, 1992. Speciation for SAI Runs. April 14, 1992 memo by Chris Lindhjem, Penny
Carey, and Joe Somers.
21. EPA,. 1992. 11% MTBE Exhaust Speciation. August 14, 1992 memo by Rich Cook.
22. EPA, 1992. Exhaust, Evaporative, and Running Loss Speciation. July 10, 1992 memo by
Chris Lindhjem, Penny Carey, and Joe Somers.
23. EPA, 1993. Motor Vehicle-Related Air Toxics Study. Office of Mobile Sources, Emission
Planning and Strategies Division, Ann Arbor, MI. Report No. EPA 420-R-93-005.
24. EPA, 1993. Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)/ Particulate Matter (PM) Speciation
Data System (SPECIATE), Version 1.5.
25. Cook, Rich, and Pam Brodowicz. 1998. Derivation of Mobile Source Toxic Fractions
Applied to the Gridded Houston VOC Inventory. Appendix III.G. in "Air Dispersion
Modeling of Toxic Air Pollutants in Urban Areas." Emissions, Monitoring and Analysis
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, July 1998.
-4-

-------
26.	EPA, 1997. "Revisions to Nonroad Toxic Emission Estimates for Five Candidate Title III
Section 112(k) Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene, 1,3-Butadiene, Formaldehyde,
Hexavalent Chromium, and Polycyclic Organic Matter." Memorandum from Richard Cook,
Office of Mobile Sources, to Anne Pope, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
February 20, 1997.
27.	EPA, 1994. Estimating Exposure to Dioxin-Like Compounds -- Volume II: Properties,
Sources, Occurrence and Background Exposures. Office of Research and Development,
Washington, DC. June, 1994 External Review Draft, Report No. EPA/600/6-88/005Cb.
28.	EPA, 1993. "Piston Engine Particulate Matter Emission Factors, Toxic Emission
Fractions, and VOC to TOG Correction Factor for Aircraft." Memorandum from Richard
Cook, Office of Mobile Sources, to Patricia Morris, Region 5, February 17, 1993.
29.	Gabele, P., 1997. Exhaust Emissions from Four-Stroke Lawn Mower Engines. J. Air &
Waste. Manage. Assoc. 47:945-952.
30.	Hare, C. T., and J. J. White, 1991. Toward the Environmentally Friendly Small Engine:
Fuel, Lubricant, and Emission Measurement Issues. SAE Paper No. 911222.
31.	Hare, C. T., and J. N. Carroll, 1993. Speciation of Organic Emissions to Study Fuel
Dependence of Small Engine Exhaust Photochemical Reactivity. Report for Advisory
Committee for Research, Southwest Research Institute, July 1993.
32.	Sierra Research, Inc., 1998. On-Road Motor Vehicle National Toxics Exposure
Estimates. Memorandum from Philip Heirigs to Rich Cook, U.S. EPA. October 15, 1998.
33.	Sierra Research, Inc., 1999. Methodologies Used to Generate Emission Estimates for
Five Motor Vehicle HAPs in the 1996 National Toxics Inventory. Memorandum from Philip
Heirigs to Rich Cook, July 23, 1999.
34.	Sigsby, J. E., S. Tejeda, W. Ray, J. M. Lang, and J. W. Duncan, 1987. Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from 46 In-Use Passenger Cars. Environ. Sci. Technol. 21:466-475.
35.	Spicer, C. W., M. W. Holdren, D. L. Smith, D. P. Hughes, and M. D. Smith, 1992.
Chemical Composition of Exhaust from Aircraft Turbine Engines. Journal of Engineering for
Gas Turbines and Power 114: 111-117.
36.	Spicer, C. W., M. W. Holdren, R. M. Riggin, and T. F. Lyon, 1994. Chemical
Combustion and Photochemical Reactivity of Exhaust from Aircraft Turbine Engines. Ann.
Geophysicae 12:944-955.
37.	Stump, F. D., 1997. Sun Fuels Alaska II Study. Unpublished data.
38.	Stump, F. D., S. Tejada, W. Ray, D. Dropkin, F. Black, R. Snow, W. Crews, P. Siudak,
C. O. Davis, L. Baker and N. Perry, 1989. The Influence Of Ambient Temperature on
Tailpipe Emissions From 1984 to 1987 Model Year Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles.
Atmospheric Environment 23: 307-320.
39.	Stump, F. D., K. T. Knapp, and W. D. Ray, 1996. Influence Of Ethanol-Blended Fuels
On The Emissions From Three Pre-1985 Light-Duty Passenger Vehicles. J. Air & Waste
Manage. Assoc. 46: 1149-1161.
40.	Stump, F. D., S. Tejeda, W. Ray, D. Dropkin, F. Black, R. Snow, W. Crews, P. Siudak,
C. O. Davis and P. Carter, 1990. The Influence Of Ambient Temperature On Tailpipe
Emissions From 1985-1987 Model Year Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles -- II. Atmospheric
Environment 24A: 2105-2112.
-5-

-------
41. Stump, F. D., K. T. Knapp, W. D. Ray, P. D. Siudak, and R. F. Snow, 1994. Influence
Of Oxygenated Fuels On The Emissions From Three Pre-1985 Light-Duty Passenger
Vehicles. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 44:781:786.
42. Warner-Selph, M. A. and J. DeVita, 1989. Measurements of Toxic Exhaust Emissions
from Gasoline-Powered Light-Duty Vehicles. SAE Technical Paper No. 892075.
43. Warner-Selph, M. A., and L. R. Smith, 1991. Assessment of Unregulated Emissions from
Gasoline Oxygenated Blends. Ann Arbor, Michigan: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Mobile Sources.
44. Wyborny, L. Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) Emissions from Passenger Cars. Draft
Technical Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources, April 1998.
In addition, each report was characterized both bibliographically and in terms of any associated
emissions testing characteristics. Two additional data sources not included on the required
review list, but that seemed particularly relevant to the desired work product, were also
incorporated into the review:
45. Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. Phase II Working Data Set
(published in electronic format on April 5, 1996 by Systems Applications International,
San Rafael, CA.)
46. California Air Resources Board. Electronic Database Of Comparative Testing Performed
Over the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule and the Unified Cycle. Unpublished.
All emission compounds identified in these 46 source materials were subsequently independently
researched to determine associated CAS registry numbers, IUPAC naming conventions,
molecular formulas, and formula weights. In nearly all cases, such data were not provided in the
source materials and required significant secondary effort to identify and compile. Moreover,
the style of compound nomenclature and abbreviation observed in the various source materials
ranged widely, which necessitated significant effort in many cases to identify specific
compounds with certainty.
For this work, two specific internet-based chemical services were utilized to assist in the
identification of CAS registry numbers and IUPAC naming conventions. Databases developed
and maintained by The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and
CambridgeSoft Corporation were used to query and retrieve information when available. The
specific references for these resources are as follows:
W.G. Mallard and P.J. Linstrom, Eds., NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference
Database Number 69, February 2000, National Institute of Standards and Technology,
Gaithersburg MD, 20899, ('http://webbook.nist.gov')
ChemFinder Database, CambridgeSoft Corporation, Cambridge, MA 02140,
f http://www.chemfinder.com)
-6-

-------
Appropriate IUPAC naming conventions are not as straightforward as might initially be
envisioned. There is a wide range of naming "conventions" in practical usage and while it
would seem appropriate for only a single name to apply to each compound under IUPAC
convention, such is not always the case, especially for some of the complex multi-ring
molecular compounds associated with petroleum-based fuel combustion. IUPAC rules
"accept" many common compound names that do not otherwise adhere to standard IUPAC
convention. For example, the name "iso-butane" is accepted, while strict adherence to
convention dictates a name of "2-methyl-2-propane." For multi-ringed molecules, accepted
alternatives can become both numerous and complex, so it can be difficult at times to
determine that two research studies are actually measuring the same compound. For this work,
IUPAC naming conventions and accepted alternatives were researched using an internet-based
handbook published and maintained by Advanced Chemistry Development of Toronto,
Ontario, Canada:
IUPAC Nomenclature of Organic Chemistry, Advanced Chemistry Development Inc., Toronto,
Ontario M5H 3V9, Canada, (http://www.acdlabs.com/iupac/nomenclature/)
Formula weights were developed from the appropriate molecular formulas using atomic weights
obtained from the internet-based WebElements Periodic Table developed and maintained by
Mark Winter.
WebElements Periodic Table, Mark Winter, University of Sheffield, England,
(http://www.webelements.com/webelements/index.htmn
Finally, each set of source data was assigned an overall qualitative indicator of test quality, based
on an "academic scale" of "A" through "F," with an "A" representing excellent test quality and
an "F" representing poor or very uncertain test quality. This assessment of test quality was
sometimes difficult to determine since many of the source materials did not provide complete
documentation of test data generation. In general, however, testing that was performed and
documented as an integral component of source development and followed procedures and
protocols established by the EPA or other regulatory or standards setting organizations was
assigned either an "A" or "B" rating. Testing that was poorly documented was assigned a lower
rating. It is also important to recognize that it is the test quality, not the quality of the source
material, that was rated. Reports that simply summarized test results from previous testing
programs were generally given "C" ratings. While there were several good reports that
attempted to quantify emission estimates or risk from emissions using previously established test
results or emission factors, these reports typically did not address any actual test performance
issues. As a result, such studies were generally given "C" or "D" ratings depending on the
degree to which test data collection protocols could be determined. In limited cases, a quality
assessment grade was already assigned to the source data by the EPA. In such cases, these
existing assignments were used without change.
Caution should be taken in reviewing all data presented in either the summary tables or
electronic database associated with this report. These data are not exhaustive. Simply because a
compound does not appear in the database assembled for this report or does not appear under a
specific emission source category does not necessarily mean that that compound is not emitted
by mobile sources in that or any source category. The data presented in this report are based
-7-

-------
only on that testing reflected in the reviewed materials, which generally cannot be exhaustive in
terms of the universe of compounds investigated. Additional testing could reveal compounds
that are not included in the attached database as well as compounds that are emitted from a wider
range of source categories than indicated by currently available research. This caution is not
intended to limit the utility of the compound database, simply to place its design in a proper
context for future consideration and enhancement.
-8-

-------
3. RESULTS
The electronic dataset of reported emission compounds that was used to develop this report
presents the full range of researched information, including the following:
• The reported compound name,
• The associated RJPAC compound name,
• The associated CAS registry number,
• The associated molecular formula,
• The associated mole weight,
• The type of emissions tested (i.e., exhaust versus evaporative),
• The type of engine tested (i.e., SI, CI, or turbine),
• The type of fuel tested (i.e., gasoline, diesel, etc.),
• An indication of the range of measured emission rates,
• An indicator of whether applicable detection limits were exceeded,
• An overall assessment of test quality on an "A" though "F" scale, and
• The year associated with source material.
In total, the electronic dataset contains 11,097 emission compound entries extracted from the 46
separate source materials reviewed. As a result, the complete set of data is too extensive to
present within this report. EPA requested, however, that two specific aggregations of these
emissions compound data be generated. These data aggregations are presented as Tables 1 and 2
below.
The specific data aggregations requested by EPA involved the intersection of emission
compounds contained within the electronic dataset generated under this study with an
independent list of compounds provided by EPA. This independent list primarily consists of
compounds included in the EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database.* In total,
EPA provided Sierra with a list of 542 compounds, 539 of which comprise the IRIS database.
Sierra was asked to treat three compounds not specifically listed in the IRIS database, nickel
(CAS 07440-02-0), chromium (CAS 07440-47-3), and dioxins/furans (no CAS), as equivalent to
an IRIS listing.
The IRIS database can be found at http://www.epa.gov/iris. The database used to generate the compound tables
presented in this report was downloaded from that site on January 26, 2001. The IRIS database lists compounds
for which EPA has reviewed currently available information and provided a consensus scientific position on the
potential for serious adverse health effects that may result from lifetime (chronic) exposure to listed compounds.
If sufficient data exist, the EPA calculates a reference concentration for non-cancer health effects resulting from
chronic inhalation exposure, the reference dose for non-cancer health effects resulting from chronic oral exposure,
and/or the carcinogen assessment for both oral and inhalation exposure. Compounds for which insufficient
information exists to determine the non-cancer or cancer hazard are also listed in the IRIS database. IRIS listings
are updated as new information becomes available.
-9-

-------
Due to differences in the specificity of compounds listed in the IRIS database and corresponding
compounds reported in the test reference source materials, Sierra and its subcontractor, EEA,
treated several additional compounds as equivalent to a compound or group of compounds
specifically listed in the IRIS database. This equivalency is required solely to address certain
non-specificities in either the IRIS database or the source materials and does not reflect the
addition of new compounds to the IRIS database. Specifically, 29 compound equivalencies were
established to address specificity differences.
The IRIS database includes the non-specific compound mixed xylenes (CAS 01330-20-7), but
not the specific xylene isomers that can constitute the mixture. Since such isomers were reported
individually in several of the source materials, Sierra treated the individual isomers o-xylene
(CAS 00095-47-6), p-xylene (CAS 00106-42-3) and m-xylene (CAS 00108-38-7), as well as the
more restrictive isomer mixture "m- & p-xylene" (no CAS) as equivalent to the overall mixed
xylenes compound listed in the IRIS database. Conversely, the IRIS database includes the
specific compounds benzo(b)fluoranthene (CAS 00205-99-2) and benzo(k)fluoranthene (CAS
00207-08-9), but not the less specific mixed benzofluoranthene (CAS 56832-73-6) designation
under which several source materials grouped all measured benzofluoranthenes. Accordingly,
Sierra treated mixed benzofluoranthene (CAS 56832-73-6) as equivalent to the two specific
benzofluoranthene compounds listed in the IRIS database.
EPA's requested addition of the non-specific compound dioxins/furans (no CAS) generated a
number of individual compound equivalencies. However, given the extensive number of dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds that could fall under the general heading dioxins/furans, the
generated list of equivalencies is not comprehensive. There are 75 chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin
congeners and 135 chlorinated dibenzofuran congeners that fall into the general category of
dioxins/furans. In addition, there are another 75 brominated dibenzo-p-dioxin congeners, 135
brominated dibenzofuran congeners, and 209 polychlorinated biphenyl congeners, many of
which are considered to be dioxin-like compounds and included in estimates of dioxin-related
toxicity. Since the accepted toxicity varies across individual compounds, the dioxin/furan group
is often treated in terms of "toxic equivalents," with 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
(2,3,7,8-TCDD) assigned a toxicity factor of unity and serving as the basis for expressing total
measured dioxin/furan toxic equivalent concentrations. Most source materials that report total
dioxin/furan measurements do not provide data for individual component compounds. For this
reason, 2,3,7,8-TCDD (CAS 01746-01-6) is treated as the basic IRIS-equivalent compound in all
instances where unspecified dioxin and furan measurements are reported.
Some studies do report individual dioxin and furan compound measurements. The IRIS database
currently includes a listing for hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (CAS 19408-74-3) as well as
non-specific listings for brominated dibenzofurans (no CAS) and polychlorinated biphenyls
(CAS 01336-36-3), but does not list other individual dioxin/furan compounds. Because EPA
requested that dioxin/furan compounds be considered as IRIS equivalents, Sierra treated all
individual dioxin/furan compounds reported in the source materials as such, but did not attempt
to create a comprehensive list of all possible compounds due to the extensive number of
dioxin/furan congeners as described above. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that all such
congeners should be considered to be IRIS equivalents given the breadth of the non-specific
dioxin-like compound listings that are included in the IRIS database. The source materials
reviewed for this report included the 24 unlisted dioxin/furan congeners or groups of congeners
listed below, each of which was treated as an IRIS equivalent compound for this report.
-10-

-------
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 	CAS 41903-57-5
pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 36088-22-9
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 34465-46-8
heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 37871-00-4
octachlorodibenzodioxin	CAS 03268-87-9
tetrachlorodibenzofuran	CAS 30402-14-3
pentachlorodibenzofiiran 	CAS 30402-15-4
hexachlorodibenzofuran 	CAS 55684-94-1
heptachlorodibenzofuran 	CAS 38998-75-3
octachlorodibenzofuran 	CAS 39001-02-0
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 01746-01-6
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 40321-76-4
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 39227-28-6
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 57653-85-7
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin	CAS 35822-46-9
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran			CAS 51207-31-9
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofiiran	CAS 57117-41-6
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran	CAS 57117-31-4
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran 	CAS 70648-26-9
1.2.3.6.7.8-hexachlorodibenzofuran		CAS 57117-44-9
1.2.3.7.8.9-hexachlorodibenzofuran		CAS 72918-21-9
2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran 	CAS 60851-34-5
1.2.3.4.6.7.8-heptachlorodibenzofura	n	CAS 67562-39-4
1.2.3.4.7.8.9-heptachlorodibenzofura	n	CAS 55673-89-7
Sierra and its subcontractor, EE A, then cross-referenced the dataset for this study, which consists
of a list of the compounds emitted by mobile sources as reported in the 46 source references
listed in Section 2, with the compounds listed in the IRIS database and supplementary
equivalents. For convenience, this latter cross reference list is referred to throughout the
remainder of this report as the IRIS database, although the IRIS equivalent compounds are not
explicitly included in that database. A total of 109 of the compounds listed in the IRIS database
were identified. Table A-l of Appendix A presents the list of cross-referenced compounds.
EPA requested that two specific tables be created from Table A-l, which is the list of
compounds included in the IRIS database that are emitted by mobile sources. These two tables
include only those compounds associated with (1) a test program assigned a quality grade of "C"
or better (i.e., "A," "B," or "C"), and (2) 1990 or newer source material. Table 1 is a list of such
compounds that were measured at levels above the applicable detection limit. Table 2 is a list of
those compounds that were not measured at levels above the applicable detection limit. A total
of 80 compounds were identified at levels above the detection limit and are reported in Table 1.
A total of 65 compounds were not detected at levels above detection limits and are reported in
Table 2*
Tables 1 and 2 include all cross-referenced compounds listed in the IRIS database, including some for which the
EPA has determined that there are currently insufficient data to assess the cancer and/or non-cancer hazard. The
EPA expects that it will not include in any mobile source air toxics rulemaking, compounds for which there is not
a consensus opinion, as expressed in IRIS, regarding the potential associated hazard.
-11-

-------
In reviewing Tables 1 and 2, several considerations are important. First, there is considerable
overlap between the two tables since the same compound may have been both above and below
the method detection limit in two or more separate source materials. Second, most of the source
materials did not report detection limit information. All reported emissions measurements in all
source materials were initially assumed to be below the applicable method detection limits in the
absence of information to the contrary. For source materials that did not report detection limit
information and did not include original emissions testing, the initial assumption was never
altered and all reported emissions were assumed to be below the applicable detection limits for
this report. For source materials that did involve original emissions testing, Sierra and its
subcontractor, EEA, contacted the authors of individual source materials to confirm that reported
non-zero emission measurements were, in fact, representative of emission measurements above
the applicable detection limit. In all cases, authors confirmed that a non-qualified, non-zero
emissions measurement did signify a measurement above the detection limit; however, qualifiers
such as a "<" sign or equivalent, even when followed by a non-zero numeric value, did signify
measurements that were not quantifiable above the detection limit. The only exception to this
approach was made for source reference 24, the EPA's SPECIATE database. EPA indicated to
Sierra that method detection limit verifications were implemented as a standard acceptance
criterion for entry into the SPECIATE database and, therefore, all SPECIATE data should be
treated as indicative of emissions measurements above applicable method detection limits.
Sierra determined whether a compound listed in the IRIS database was assigned to either Table 1
or 2 (in accordance with detection limit criteria) on this basis alone. Table A-2 of Appendix A
summarizes the responses of individual source material authors. Finally, as has been previously
stated, the omission of a specific compound from either Table 1 or 2 does not necessarily signify
that it is not emitted from mobile sources in either detectable or non-detectable quantities.
In accordance with space constraints, both Tables 1 and 2 present abbreviated versions of the
data available in the complete dataset developed for this study. The complete dataset is available
in electronic format. Tables 1 and 2 summarize some of the more detailed data on engine, fuel,
and emissions type associated with each listed compound through a series of applicability
indicators.* As with the compounds themselves, these indicators should not be taken as hard and
fast limitations of compound pervasiveness. The indicators are as constrained by the scope of
the source review materials as they are by any test speciation. For example, there are few studies
that investigated fuels other than gasoline or Diesel and sources other than highway vehicles.
Expansion of currently underrepresented source and fuel types may result not only in the
expanded applicability of specific listed compounds, but also a general expansion of the overall
compound lists.
Tables 3 and 4 present the associated bibliographic and testing characteristic data for the
reviewed source materials. Table 3 summarizes the bibliographic information for each of the 46
references. For each reference, the following information is provided:
" In Tables 1 and 2, the columns headed "Gas Exh," "Gas Evap," "Dsl Exh," "CNG Exh," "LPG Exh," "Meth Exh,"
"Meth Evap," "Eth Exh," "Eth Evap," "Jet Exh," and "Resid Exh" note whether the detailed dataset indicated that
the listed compound was associated with "gasoline engine exhaust," "gasoline engine evaporative," "Diesel engine
exhaust," "CNG engine exhaust," "LPG engine exhaust," "methanol engine exhaust," "methanol engine
evaporative," "ethanol engine exhaust," "ethanol engine evaporative," "aircraft turbine exhaust," or "residual oil
engine exhaust," respectively.
-12-

-------
•	Reference number,
•	Title,
•	Author,
•	Date,
•	Author affiliation,
•	Reference sponsor, and
•.	Other bibliographic information.
In general, the information presented in Table 3 is relatively complete. It should be noted that
some of the materials used in this work assignment may be difficult for the general public to
locate and may require assistance from the EPA to obtain.
Table 4 provides a summary description of the testing characteristics employed in each of the 46
reviewed source materials. The following information is provided for each:
•	Reference number,
•	Tested source characteristics (i.e., type of mobile source, vehicle model years, etc.),
•	Tested fuel characteristics (i.e., fuel type, availability of fuel specifications, etc.),
•	Drive schedule/drive cycle employed (e.g., FTP, power settings, test length, etc.),
•	Testing laboratory,
•	Measurement technique,
•	Assessment of test quality; (i.e., a qualitative assessment of test quality based on an
"academic scale" of "A" through "F" with an "A" representing excellent test quality and
an "F" representing poor test quality), and
•	Additional comments.
-13-

-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS
THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
Cmpnd
Num
1UPAC Name (or aliernativc)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Exh
1 ia..
livup
Osl
lixli
CNG
Exh
1.1'li
Exh
Melh
Exh
Melh
Evap
Eth
Exh
Eth
Evap
Jei
Exh
Resid
Exh
Applicable References
4
(l-methylethyl)-benzcne
00098-82-8
C9HI2
120.19
X
X
X
X

X
X
X



1,8,9,24,31,45,46
43
1,1,2-irichloroethane
00079-00-5
C2H3(CI)3
133.40

X









24
47
1,1 -biphenyl
00092-52-4
CI2H10
154.21


X








9
50
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-hcptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
35822-46-9
C12II(CI)702
425.30


X








9
51
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran
67562-39-4
CI2H(CI)70
409.30


X








9
54
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibcnzofuran
70648-26-9
CI2H2(CI)60
374.86


X








9
57
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
57653-85-7
CI 2H2(CI)602
390.86


X








9
78
1,3-butadiene
00106-99-0
C4H6
54.09
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

1,3,5,6,7,8,9,24,29,30,31,
37,39,41,43,45,46
134
2,2,4-trimethylpentane
00540-84-1
C8HI8
114.23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X



1,8,9,24,29,31,45,46
152
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran
51207-31-9
C12H4(CI)40
305.97


X








9
183
2-butanone
00078-93-3
C4H80
72.11
X

X
X
X
X





1,8,24,31,45,46
191
2-methoxy-2-methylpropanc
01634-04-4
C5HI20
88.15
X
X

X

X
X
X



1,24,29,30,37,41,43,45,46
220
2-propenal
00107-02-8
C3H40
56.06
X

X
X
X
X

X

X

1,7,9,24,31,45,46
259
4-methyl-2-pentanone
00108-10-1
C6H120
100.16
X










8
359
acenaphlhylene
00208-96-8
C12H8
152.19


X








9
360
acetaldehyde
00075-07-0
C2H40
44.05
X

X
X
X
X

X

X

1,3,5,7,8,9,24,29,30,31,37,
39,41,43,45,46
361
acetone
00067-64-1
C3H60
58.08
X

X
X
X
X

X

X

1,7,8,9,24,31,45,46
365
anthracene
00120-12-7
CI4H10
178.23
X

X






X

9,24
366
antimony
07440-36-0
(Sb)
121.76
X

X








2,9
367
arsenic
07440-38-2
(As)
74.92
X

X








9,24
368
barium
07440-39-3
(Ba)
137.33
X

X








2,9,24
369
benzaldehyde
00100-52-7
C7H60
106.12
X

X
X
X
X

X

X

1,7,8,9,24,29,31,45,46
371
benzene
00071-43-2
C6H6
78.11
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

1,3,5,7,8,9,24,29,30,31,37,
39,40,41,43,45,46
373
bcnzo(a)anthraccne
00056-55-3
CI8H12
228.29


X






X

9,24

-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS
THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
t'mpnd
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Molecular
Mole
Gas
Gas
Dsl
CNG
l.PG
Melli
Metli
Elh
Elh
.let
Nu m
Number
Formula
Weight
Exh
Evap
Exh
Exh
lixll
Exh
Evap
Exh
Evap
l:xh
Nisid
I \h
Applicable References
374
benzo(a)phenanthrene
00218-01-9
CI8HI2
228.29
X

24
375
benzo(a)pyrcnc
00050-32-8
C20HI2
252.31

9,24
383
bcnzo(ghi)perylenc
00191-24-2
C22HI2
276.33
X

9,24
385
benzofluoranthene
56832-73-6
C20HI2
252.31
X

9,24
387
boron
07440-42-8
B
10.81
X

24
395
cadmium
07440-43-9
(Cd)
112.41

9
400
chlorine
07782-50-5
(Cl)2
70.91
X

2,9,24
401
chloroben2ene
00108-90-7
C6H5(tl)
112.56

24
402
chromium
07440-47-3
(Cr)
52.00
X

2,9,24
412
copper
07440-50-8
(Cu)
63.55
X

2,9,24
415
crotonaldehyde
00123-73-9
C4H60
70.09
X

X
X
X
X

1,7,9,24,31,45
418
cyclohexanone
00108-94-1
C6HIOO
98.14
X

8
435
diesel engine emissions

3,6,8,9
462
ethylbenzene
00100-41-4
C8HI0
106.17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,31,45,46
478
fluoranthene
00206-44-0
CI6HI0
202.25
X

9,24
479
fluorene
00086-73-7
CI3HI0
166.22

9
480
formaldehyde
00050-00-0
CH20
30.03
X

X
X
X
X

1,3,5,7,8,9,24,29,30,31,37,
39,40,41,43,45,46
485
heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
37871-00-4
CI2H(CI)702
425.30

9
486
heptachlorodibenzofuran
38998-75-3
CI2H(CI)70
409.30

9
490
heptane
00142-82-5
C7I116
100.20
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,31,45,46
492
hexachlorodibenzo-p-diox in
34465-46-8
CI2H2(CI)602
390.86

9
493
hexachlorodibenzofuran
55684-94-1
CI 2H2(CI)60
374.86

9
498
hexane
00110-54-3
C6I-II4
86.18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,31,45,46
504
indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrcnc
00193-39-5
C22H12
276.33

9
524
lead
07439-92-1
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS
THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
C mpnd
Num
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Exh
lias
Evap
l)sl
Exh
cn< ;
lixh
I.PG
Exh
Meth
Exh
Meth
Evap
Etll
Exh
Eth
Evap
Jet
Exh
Resid
Exh
Applicable References

525
m- & p-xylcne

C8HI0
106.17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

1,9,24,29,31,43,45
527
m-xylene
00108-38-3
C8HI0
106.17
X
X
X
X

8,24,40,46
529
manganese
07439-96-5
(Mn)
54.94
X

2,9,24
530
mercury
07439-97-6
(Hg)
200.59
X

24
532
methyl alcohol
00067-56-1
CH30H
32.04
X
X
X

X
X
X

1,8,24,29,37,39,41,45,46
560
molybdenum
07439-98-7
(Mo)
95.94
X

24
564
n-nitrosodimethylaminc
00062-75-9
C2H6N20
74.08

9
565
n-nitrosodipropylaminc
00621-64-7
C6HI4N20
130.19

9
569
naphthalene
00091-20-3
C10H8
128.17
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,45,46
570
nickel
07440-02-0
(Ni)
58.69
X

2,9,24
571
nitrates
14797-55-8
N03
62.00
X

9,24
572
nitric oxide
10102-43-9
NO
30.01
X

46
579
o-,m-,p-xylene
01330-20-7
C8H10
106.17

24
580
o-xylene
00095-47-6
C8H10
106.17
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,31,40,43,45,46
582
octachlorodibenzodioxin
03268-87-9
CI2(CI)802
459.75

9
595
p-xylene
00106-42-3
C8HI0
106.17
X
X
X

8,24,40
598
pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
36088-22-9
C12H3(CI)502
356.41

9
599
pentachlorodibenzofuran
30402-15-4
C12H3(C1)50
340.42

9
611
phenanthrene
00085-01-8
CI4H10
178.23
X

9,24
612
phenol
00108-95-2
C6H6O
94.1 1

24
613
phosphorus
07723-14-0
P
30.97
X

2,9,24
625
pyrene
00129-00-0
C16HI0
202.25
X

9,24
629
selenium
07782-49-2
(Se)
78.96
X

24
631
silver
07440-22-4
(Ag)
107.87
X

9,24
633
stronlium
07440-24-6
(Sr)
87.62
X

9,24
634
styrcne
00100-42-5
C8H8
104.15
X
X
X
X

1,8,9,24,45,46
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS
THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
( mpiid
Nun)
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Cxh
Gas
l-vap
Dsl
l:xh
CNG
l-xh
L.I'G
l-xh
Metli
1 :xh
Meth
livap
Hill
l:xh
lilh
1 v j p
.IlI
l-Ah
Resid
l:xh
Applicable References
6.17
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
41903-57-5
CI2H4(CI)4()2
321.97

9
63 X
tetrachlorodibenzofuran
30402-14-3
CI2H4(CI)40
305.97

9
646
toluene
00108-88-3
C7H8
92.14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

1,8,9,24,29,31,40,43,45,46
Ml
uranium
07440-61-1
U
238.03

9
7(11
zinc
07440-66-6
(Zn)
65.39
X

2,9,24
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS INVESTIGATED BUT NOT EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES
ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
Cmpncl
Num
1UPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Exh
Gas
Evap
Dsl
Exh
cnc;
Exh
LPG
Exh
Meth
I3xh
Meth
Evap
Eth
Exh
Eth
Evap
.let
Exh
Kcsid
Exh
Applicable References
4
11 -methylethyl)-bcnzene
00098-82-8
C9H12
120.19
X
X
X

X
X
X

1,9,22,31,45
52
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-hcptachlorodibenzofuran
55673-89-7
C12H(CI)70
409.30

9
53
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
39227-28-6
C12H2(CI)602
390.86

')
54
1,2,3,4,7,8-hcxachlorodibenzofuran
70648-26-9
CI2H2(CI)60
374.86

')
57
1,2,3,6,7,8-hcxachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
57653-85-7
C12H2(CI)602
390.86

9
58
1,2,3,6,7,8-hcxachlorodibenzofuran
57117-44-9
C12H2(CI)60
374.86

9
59
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
19408-74-3
CI2H2(CI)602
390.86

9
60
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran
72918-21-9
C12H2(CI)60
374.86

9
61
1,2,3,7,8-pcntachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
40321-76-4
C12H3(CI)502
356.41

9
62
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran
57117-41-6
C12H3(C1)50
340.42

9
69
1,2-dichlorobenzene
00095-50-1
C6H4(CI)2
147.00
X

8
78
1,3-butadiene
00106-99-0
C4H6
54.09
X
X

X
X

1,5,22,36,45
134
2,2,4-trimethylpentane
00540-84-1
C8H18
114.23
X
X

5,22,31
144
2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran
60851-34-5
C12H2(CI)60
374.86

9
145
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran
57117-31-4
C12H3(CI)50
340.42

9
151
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
01746-01 -6
CI 2H4(CI)402
321.97

9
183
2-butanone
00078-93-3
C4H80
72.1 1
X

5,9,45
191
2-methox y-2-methy Ipropane
01634-04-4
C5H120
88.15
X
X
X

X
X

5,9,22,30,31,43,45
220
2-propenal
00107-02-8
C3H40
56.06
X

5,35,36,45
259
4-methyl-2-pentanone
00108-10-1
C6HI20
100.16

8
358
acenaphthene
00083-32-9
C12H10
154.21

9,35
359
accnaphthylene
00208-96-8
C12H8
152.19

35
360
acelaldehyde
00075-07-0
C2H40
44.05
X

5,35,36
361
acetone
00067-64-1
C3H60
58.08
X

5,35,36
365
anthracene
00120-12-7
CI4HI0
178.23

35,36
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS INVESTIGATED BUT NOT EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES
ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
Cmpnd
Num
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Exli
Gas
Evap
IX-,1
IaIi
CNG
Kxh
I.PG
Exh
Meth
Exh
Meth
Evap
Eth
Exli
Eth
Evap
Jet
Exh
Resid
Exh
Applicable References
367
arsenic
07440-38-2
(As)
74.92

9
369
benzaldehyde
00100-52-7
C7H60
106.12
X

X
X

5,31,36,45
371
benzene
00071-43-2
C6H6
78.11
X
X

5,22,35,36
373
benzo(a)anthracene
00056-55-3
CI8HI2
228.29

35,36
374
benzo(a)phenanthrene
00218-01-9
CI8H12
228.29

35,36
375
benzo(a)pyrene
00050-32-8
C20HI2
252.31

35,36
383
benzo(ghi)perylene
00191-24-2
C22HI2
276.33

35
385
benzofluoranthene
56832-73-6
C20HI2
252.31

35
415
crotonaldehyde
00123-73-9
C4H60
70.09
X

5,31,45
426
dibenz(a,h)anthracene
00053-70-3
C22HI4
278.35

35
462
ethylbenzene
00100-41-4
C8HI0
106.17
X
X

5,22,31,35,36
478
fluoranthene
00206-44-0
CI6HI0
202.25

35,36
480
formaldehyde
00050-00-0
CM20
30.03
X

5,35,36
490
heptane
00142-82-5
C7HI6
100.20
X
X

X
X

5,22,31,35,36,45
498
hexane
00110-54-3
C6HI4
86.18
X
X

X
X

5,22,31,35,45
504
indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
00193-39-5
C22HI2
276.33

35
524
lead
07439-92-1
(Pb)
207.20

9
525
m- & p-xylene

C8HI0
106.17

22,31,35,36
527
m-xylene
00108-38-3
C8HI0
106.17
X

5
530
mercury
07439-97-6
(Hfi)
200.59

9
532
methyl alcohol
00067-56-1
CH30H
32.04
X
X

X
X
X

1,22,31,45
560
molybdenum
07439-98-7
(Mo)
95.94

9
562
n-nitrosodibutylamine
00924-16-3
C8HI8N20
158.24

9
563
n-nitrosodiethylamine
00055-18-5
C4HI0N2O
102.14

9
568
n-nitrosopyrrolidine
00930-55-2
C4H8N20
100.12

9
569
naphthalene
00091-20-3
CI0H8
128.17
X
X

1,22,31,35,36,45
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS INVESTIGATED BUT NOT EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES
ABOVE DETECTION LIMITS THAT ARE ALSO LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE
C'nipnd
Nun)
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
CAS
Number
Molecular
Formula
Mole
Weight
Gas
Kxh
(ijS
Kvap
Dsl
Kxh
CNG
Kxh
I.PG
Exh
Meih
Kxh
Melh
Kvap
Klh
Kxh
Kill
livup
Jet
l-.xli
Resid
Kxh
Applicable References

570
nickel
07440-02-0
(Ni)
58.69

9
572
nitric oxide
10102-43-9
NO
30.01

36
573
nitrogen dioxide
10102-44-0
N02
46.01

35
580
o-xylene
00095-47-6
C8H10
106.17
X
X

1,5,22,31,35,36
583
octachlorodibenzofuran
39001-02-0
CI2(CI)80
443.75

9
595
p-xylene
00106-42-3
C8HI0
106.17
X

5
599
pentachlorodibenzofuran
30402-15-4
CI2H3(0l)5O
340.42

9
61 1
phenanthrcne
00085-01-8
CI4H10
178.23

35,36
612
phenol
00108-95-2
C6H6O
94.1 1

36
625
pyrenc
00129-00-0
C16HI0
202.25

35,36
629
selenium
07782-49-2
(Se)
78.96

9
634
styrene
00100-42-5
C8H8
104.15
X
X

X
X
X

1,22,31,35,36,45
646
toluene
00108-88-3
C7H8
92.14
X
X

5,22,31,35,36
697
uranium
07440-61-1
U
238.03

9
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Tille
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

1
Auto/Oil Air Quality improvement
Program, Phase I Working Data Set
Systems Applications
International, San
Rafael, CA
Final Datasei
Release April 5,
1996
Coordinating Research Council
contractor
Coordinating Research
Council
Electronic database
2
Emission Rates and Elemental
Composition of Particles Collected
From 1995 Ford Vehicles Using the
Urban Dynamometer Driving
Schedule, the Highway Fuel Economy
Test, ajid the US06 Driving Cycle
James C. Ball
1997
Ford Motor Co.
Ford Motor Co.?
SAE Paper 97FL-376
3
Reactivity Comparison of Exhaust
Emissions from JJeavy-Dtily Engines
Operating on Gasoline, Diesel, and
Alternative Fuels
Matthew S. Ncwkirk
EJward A, Bass
1995
Southwest Research Instiiule,
San Antonio, TX
Southwest Research
Institute Advisory
Committee for
Research
SAE Paper 952442
4
Development and Comparison of
1990 and 1996 Mobile Source
Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions
Estimates
Richard Billings'
Teresa Kraus1
Joe Mangino1
Rich Cook2
Laurel Driver3
December 199$
'Eastern Research Group,
Morrisville, NC
'U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Ml
3U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Presented at the
A&WMA Emissions
Inventory Specialty
Conference, New
Orleans, LA,
December 8-10, 1998
5
Fleet Test Emissions Data.
EC-Premium Emission Control
Gasoline
K. L. Boekhaus
J. M. DeJovine
D. A. Paulsen
L. A. Rapp
J. S. Segal
D. J. Townsend
March 22, 1991
Arco Products Co., Anaheim,
CA
Arco Products Co.?
Clean Fuels Report
91-03
6
Butadiene Emission Factors
K. D. Drachand
July 17, 1991
California Air Resources Board,
Sacramenlo, CA
California Air
Resources Board
Internal
Memorandum lo
Terry McGuire and
Peter Venturini
7
Emission Tests of In- Use Small Utility
Engines
James N. Cur foil
September 1991
SoulJnvest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information
I
N>
N>
i
8
Development of Species Profiles for
Selected Organic Emission Sources
Albert C. Ccnsullo
April 30, 1991
California Polytechnic State
University, Sun Luis Obispo, CA
California Air
Resources Board
Contract no.
A832-059
9
Evaluation of Factors That Affect
Diesel Exhaust Toxicity
Timothy J. Trucx1
Joseph M. Norbeck'
Janet Arey'
Norman Kado"
Bob Okamoto"
Kenneth Kiefer
Paul Kuzmicky2
llona Holcomb2
March 16, 1998
'Center for Environmental
Research and Technology,
University of California
Riverside, CA
department of Environmental
Toxicology, University of
California
Davis, CA
California Air
Resources Board
Draft Final Report
Contract No. 94-312
10
Documentation for the 1996 Base
Year National Toxics Inventory for
Commercial Marine Vessel and
Locomotive Mobile Sources
Eastern Research
Group; Morrisville,
NC
June 2, 2000
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency contractor
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
ftp address:
fpt.epa.gov/pub/pub/
Emislnventory/
nti_96/pdf_reports/c
mvlocrp.pdf
11
Documentation for the J 996 Base
Year National Toxics Inventory for
Aircraft Sources
Eastern Research
Group; Morrisville,
NC
June 2, 2000
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency contractor
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
ftp address:
fpt. e pa. go v/pub/pub/
Emislnventory/
nti_96/pdf_reports/
aircrrpt.pdf
12
Documentation for the 1996 Base
Year National Toxics Inventory for
Nonroad Vehicle and Equipment
Mobile Sources
Eastern Research
Group; Morrisville,
NC
June 2, 2000
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency contractor
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
ftp address:
fpt.epa.gov/pub/pub/
Emislnventory/
nti_96/pdf_reports/
nonrdrpt.pdf
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

13
Documentation for the 1996 Base
Year National Toxics Inventory for
Onroad Sources
Eastern Research
Group; Morrisville,
NC
June 2, 2000
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency contractor
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
ftp address:
fpt.epa.gov/pub/pub/
Emislnventory/
nti_96/pdf_reports
onrdrpt.pdf
14
Estimation of Motor Vehicle Toxic
Emissions and Exposure in Selected
Urban Areas
Sierra Research, Inc.,
Sacramento, CA;
Radian International,
Austin, TX; and
Energy and
Environmental
Analysis, Inc.
March 1999
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency contractors
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
EPA 420 D-99-002a.
15
Determining POM/PA // Emission
Factors for Mobile Sources
Pam Brodowicz
December 19, 1996
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

16
1990 Emissions Inventory of Forty
Potential Section Il2(k) Pollutants:
Supporting Data for EPA V Section
112(k) Regulatory Strategy'
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
May 21,1999
Not stated
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

17
Source Identification and Base Year
1990 Emission Inventory Guidance
for Mobile Source HAPs on the
OAQPS List of 40 Priority HAPs
Rich Cook
June 11, 1997
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

18
Guidance on Mobile Source Emission
Estimates in the 1996 National Toxics
Inventory.
Rich Cook
June 9, 1998
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

19
Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for
Reformulated Gasoline
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
December 13, 1993
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

20
Speciation for SA1 Runs
Chris Lindhjem
Penny Carey
Joe Somers
April 14, 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Internal
Memorandum
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information
i
K>
4^
i
21
//% MTBE Exhaust Special ion
Rich Cook
August 14, 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, MI
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

22
Exhaust. Evaporative, and Running
Loss Speciation
Chris Lindhjcm
Penny Carey
Joe Somers
July 10, 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Internal
Memorandum
23
Motor Vehicle-Related Air Toxics
Study
Pamela Brodowicz
Penny Carey
Richard Cook
Joseph Somers
April 1993
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
EPA 420-R-93-005.
24
Volatile Organic Compound
(VOC)/Particulate Matter (PM)
Speciation Data System (SPEC/ATE),
Version 3.1
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
July 2000
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Electronic dataset
25
Derivation of Mobile Source Toxic
Fraction Applied to the Gridded
Houston VOC Inventory, Appendix
IIl.Cfrom "Air Dispersion Modeling
of Toxic Air Pollutants in Urban
Areas "
Rich Cook
Pam Brodowicz
July 1998
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

26
Revisions to Nonroad Toxic Emission
Estimates in "National Inventory of
Sources of Emissions for Five
Candidate Title III Section 112(k)
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene,
1,3-Butadiene, Formaldehyde,
Hexavalent Chromium, and
Polycyclic Organic Matter
Richard Cook
February 20, 1997
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

27
Estimating Exposure to Dioxin-I.ike
Compounds - Volume II: Properties,
Sources, Occurrence and Background
Exposures.
Jerry Blancato1
David Cleverly1
Gregory Kew1
Matt Lorber1
John L. Schaum1
Elizabeth Brown2
Jeff Dawson2
Keith Drewes2
Carl D'Ruiz2
Robert Fares2
Geoffrey Huse2
Tim Leighton2
Nica Mostaghim2
Linda Phillips2
Greg Schweer2
June 1994
'U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
"Versar, Inc.
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
EPA/600/6-88/005C
b
28
Piston Engine Particulate Matter
Emission Factors, Toxic Emission
Fractions, and VOC to TOG
Correction Factor for Aircraft
Richard Cook
February 17, 1993
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency,
Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency

29
Exhaust Emissions from Four-Stroke
Lawn Mower Engines
Peter Gabele
September 1997
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and
North American
Research Strategy for
Tropospheric Ozone
(NARSTO)
Journal of the Air &
Waste Management
Association, Vol. 47,
pp. 945-952
30
Toward the Environmentally-Friendly
Small Engine: Fuel, Lubricant, anil
Emission Measurement Issues
Charles T. Hare
Jeff J. White
October 1991
Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX
Southwest Research
Institute
SAE Paper No.
911222
31
Speciation of Organic Emissions to
Study Fuel Dependence of Small
Engine Exhaust Photochemical
Reactivity
Charles T. Hare
James N. Carroll
John P. Latusek
Robert W. Burrahm
July 1993
Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX
Southwest Research
Institute Advisory
Committee for
Research
Southwest Research
Institute Report 9702
32
On-Road Motor Vehicle National
Toxics Exposure Estimates
Philip Heirigs
October 15, 1998
Sierra Research, Sacramento,
CA
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Memorandum to
Rich Cook
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Auihor
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

33
Methodologies Used to Generate
Emission Estimates for Five Motor
Vehicle HAPs in the 1996 National
Toxics Inventory
Philip Heirigs
July 23, 1999
Sierra Research, Sacramento,
CA
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Memorandum to
Rich Cook
34
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from 46 In-Use Passenger
Cars
John E. Sigsby, Jr. 1
Silvcstre Tcjudu1
William Ray'
John M. Lang2
John W. Duncan2
1987
1 Environmental Sciences
Research Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC
2 Northrop Services, Inc.
Research Triangle Park, NC
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Environmental
Science &
Technology, Vol. 21,
pp. 466-475
35
Chemical Composition of Exhaust
From Aircraft Turbine Engines
C. W. Spicer'
M.W. Holdren'
D. L. Smith1
D. P. Hughs2
M. D. Smith3
January 1992
'Battellc, Columbus, Oi l
2Tinker AFB, Oklahoma City,
OK
JTyndall AFB, Panama City, FL
U.S. Air Force?
Journal of
Engineering for Gas
Turbines and Power,
Vol. 114, pp.
111-117
36
Chemical composition and
photochemical reactivity of exhaust
from aircraft turbine engines
C. W. Spicer1
M.W. Holdren'
R.M. Riggin"
T. F. Lyon3
1994
2Battelle, Columbus, OH
2Eli Lilly and Company,
Indianapolis, IN
3General Electric Company,
Evendale, OH
U.S. Air Force,
U.S. Navy, and
Federal Aviation
Administration
Annates
Gcophysicae, Vol,
12, pp. 944-955
37
Sun Fuels A laska II Study -
unpublished data.
Fred Stump
September 29,
1997
National Exposure Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Unknown
Series of
undocumented data
sheets. Lacking .
supporting
documentation.
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

38
The Influence of Ambient
Temperature on Tailpipe Emissions
from 1984-1987 Model Year
Light-Duty Gasoline Motor Vehicles
Fred Stump'
Silvestre Tejada1
William Ray'
David Dropkin'
Frank Black1
William Crews2
Richard Snow2
Paula Siudak2
C. 0. Davis2
Linnie Baker2
Ned Perry2
1989
'Atmospheric Sciences Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC
:Northrop Services, Inc.,
Research Triangle Park, NC
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Atmospheric
Environment
Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.
307-320
39
Influence oj Ethunol- Mended Fuels
on the Emissions from Three
Pre-1985 Light-Duty Passenger
Vehicles
Fred D. Slump
Kenneth T. Knapp
William D. Ray
December 1996
Atmospheric Research and
Exposure Assessment
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Journal of the Air &
Waste Management
Association, Vol. 46,
pp. 1149-1161
40
The Influence of Ambient
Temperature on Tailpipe Emissions
From 1985 to 1987 Model Year
Light-Duty Gasoline Motor
Vehicles—II
Fred Stump1
Silvestre Tejada1
William Ray1
David Dropkin'
Frank Black1
Richard Snow2
William Crews2
Paula Siudak2
C. 0. Davis2
Phillip Carter2
1990
'Atmospheric Sciences Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC
"Northrop Services, Inc.,
Research Triangle Park, NC
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Atmospheric
Environment
Vol. 24A, No. 8, pp.
2105-2112
41
Influence of Oxygenated Fuels on the
emissions from three pre-1985
liglit-duty passenger vehicles.
Fred D. Stump'
Kenneth T. Knapp'
William D. Ray
Paula D. Siudak2
Richard F. Snow"
June 1994
'U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
2ManTech Environmental
Technology, Inc.
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Journal of the Air &
Waste Management
Association, Vol. 44,
pp. 781-786
42
Measurements of Toxic Exhaust
Emissions from Gasoline-I'owered
Light-Duty Vehicles
Mary Ann
Warner-Selph'
Joseph Dc Vita2
September 1989
'Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX
California Air Resources Board,
El Monte, CA
California Air
Resources Board
SAE Paper No.
892075
-------
TABLE 3. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Reference Title
Reference Author
Reference Date
Author Affiliation
Reference Sponsor
Other Bibliographic
Information

43
Assessment of Unregulated Emissions
from Gasoline Oxygenated Blends
Mary Ann
Warner-Selph1
Craig A. Harvey"
1991
'Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, TX
2U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
SAE Paper No.
902131
44
Methyl Tertiaiy Butyl Etlier (MTBE)
Emissions from Passenger Cars
Lester Wyborny 1!
April 1998
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Ml
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Draft Technical
Report
45
Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement
Program. Phase II Working Data Set
Systems Applications
International, San
Rafael, CA
Final Dataset
Release April 5,
1996
Coordinating Research Council
Coordinating Research
Council

46
CARB Unified Cycle Database
California Air
Resources Board
Undated
California Air Resources Board
California Air
Resources Board
Unpublished
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

1
58 light duty vehicles
(1983-1991 model
years)
Various gasoline and
alternative fuels
FTP (UDDS),
including evaporative
and running loss
testing.
General Motors and
Ford emissions
certification
laboratories
Standard FTP
techniques with GC/FID
and LC/UV used for
speciation
A
Federal certification test
procedures performed at a
federally recognized
emissions test facility
2
4 in-use rental vehicles
from San Antonio, TX -
mileage less than 10,000
miles
Industry average
gasoline (RF-A) - no
fuel specification
provided
Urban Dynamometer
Driving Schedule
(UDDS), Highway
Fuel Economy Test
(HFET), and US06
Emissions testing
(Southwest Research
Institute); particle
composition analysis
(Desert Research
Institute)
Particulate emissions
(Pallflex and Fluoropore
fillers); particle
composition (X-ray
fluorescence
spectroscopy)
B
Particulate composition
analysis is fairly detailed, but
only average and standard
deviation values arc given.
Some documentation missing
3
5 heavy-duty engines
Gasoline (industry
average and California
Phase 2 Reformulated
blends), Diesel, LPG,
and CNG
Federal certification
engine test schedule
(Otto cycle or Diesel
cycle)
Southwest Research
Institute
THC(FID), NOx (CL),
CO and C02(NDIR),
HC spcciations
(GC/FID), and
aldehydes/ketones
(LC/UV)
A
Federal certification test
procedures performed at a
federally recognized
emissions test facility.
Full speciated test results not
included in reference.
Companion reference (SwRI
Report 9856) is likely to have
full speciation profiles.
However, speciation profiles
are not likely to include
compounds not already
identified through other
reviewed references
4
All on-road and off-road
vehicles and engines,
excluding locomotives
and commercial marine
vessels
Gasoline, Diesel, and jet
fuel - no fuel
specifications provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Emissions not directly
measured.
Other references used to
derive speciation profiles.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

5
20 vehicles tested for
EC-Premium pilot vs.
URP; subset of 14
vehicles tested for
EC-Premium pilot vs.
EC-Premium production
ARCO EC-Premium
(pilot and production)
and URP (gasoline
representing typical
non-reformulated Los
Angeles premium
unleaded gasoline -
1988-1989)
Federal Test Procedure
(FTP); Scaled Housing
for Evaporative
Emissions
Determination (SHED)
Exhaust emissions
testing at Southwest
Research Institute;
exhaust and
evaporative emissions
testing at National
Institute of Petroleum
and Energy Research
HC speciation (GC
analysis); aldehydes
(impingers and High
Pressure Liquid
Chromatography)
A
Detailed speciations provided
for individual vehicles; fleet
average emission factors
given for benzene (exhaust
and evaporative) and
1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde,
and acetaldehyde (exhaust
only)
6
80 light-duty passenger
vehicles (16
non-catalyst, 62 catalyst,
and 2 Diesel); 1
heavy-duty Diesel truck
engine
Mainly "as received"
gasoline (light-duty); 6
Diesel fuels for
heavy-duty Diesel truck
engine - no fuel
specifications provided
Unknown for gasoline
and light-duty Diesel;
EPA hot transient and
cold transient tests for
heavy-duty Diesel
Unknown
CVS and GC analysis
C
Limited emissions testing
with few details provided.
Many emission factors
derived by multiplying TOG
emissions by the
1,3-butadiene/TOG ratio
from analogous emission
control technologies.
Emission factors adjusted for
decay of 1,3-butadiene
samples.
7
S pieces of lawn and
garden equipment
Unleaded certification
gasoline
CARB-modified J1088
procedure
Southwest Research
Institute
HC, CO, NOx, C02, and
02 (per J1088
requirements), PM
(fabricated dilution
tunnel), HC speciations
(GC/FID), and
aldehydes/ketones
(LC/UV)
A
J1088 and certification
equivalent test procedures
performed at a federally
recognized emissions test
facility.
8
13 pieces of lawn and
garden equipment, 8
pieces of farm
equipment. All engines
tested "as received."
Exxon unleaded
gasoline (87 octane) and
Arco Diesel fuel from
California Polytechnic
State University motor
pool - no fuel
specifications provided
Steady state
conditions; 10-15
minute sample
collection period
Emissions testing
(California Polytechnic
State University);
chemical analyses
(Environmental
Analytical Service,
Inc.)
CI0
hydrocarbons (XAD-2
resin cartridges),
aldehydes (impingers);
GC-MS analysis
A
Detailed speciations provided
for individual equipment
tests.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

9
Cummins LIO
heavy-duty test engine
Pre-1993, low aromatic,
and alternative Diesel
Heavy-duty engine
transient FTP
Emissions testing at
Los Angeles County
Metropolitan
Transportation
Authority; particle
composition analysis
(Desert Research
Institute)
HC(HFID), NO, (CL
analyzer), CO and C02
(NDIR), PM (filters),
GC/LC, and particle
composition (x-raiy
fluorescence
spectroscopy)
A
Detailed emissions data
provided for individual fuel
tests.
10
Commercial marine
vessels and locomotives
See comments
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Commercial marine vessels
and locomotives not directly
tested.
Other references used to
derive emission speciations
and factors.
1 1
Aircraft
See comments
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Aircraft not directly tested.
Other references used to
derive emission speciations
and factors.
12
Nonroad vehicles and
equipment
Sec comments
Sec comments
See comments
See comments
D
Nonroad vehicles and
equipment not directly tested.
Other references used to
derive emission speciations
and factors.
13
On-road vehicles
See comments
See comments
See comments
Sec comments
D
On-road vehicles not directly
tested.
Other references used to
derive emission speciations
and factors.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
• Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

14
On-road vehicles
Gasoline and Diesel;
typical gasoline
parameters assumed for
summer RFG, winter
RFG, oxygenated
non-RFG, and
non-oxygenated fuel
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
On-road vehicles not directly
tested.
Estimated emission rates are
presented, but they represent
fleetwide average emission
rates and not specific
emission rates for any one
particular vehicle.
The study does make use of
reference 46 test data to
determine off-cycle emission
correction factors. That
database is reviewed
separately in this report.
15
40 LDGV and HDDV
vehicles
Unleaded gasoline,
leaded gasoline, and
Diesel
Except for some general
aromatic content values,
fuel specifications not
provided
Cold Start FTP
(UDDS), 1972
18-cycle test, 7-mode
test, and various
chassis dynamometer
transient tests
See comments
See comments
D/F
Summary of previous testing
studies.
Most tested vehicles are no
longer in current vehicle
fleet.
All catalyst-equipped
vehicles used experimental
design equipment rather than
actual production catalysts.
16
All on- and off-road
vehicles and engines,
aircraft, marine vessels,
and locomotives
See comments
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
No actual emissions testing
was performed. "Top-down"
emission estimates only.
17
All on-road and off-road
vehicles and engines,
excluding locomotives
and commercial marine
vessels
Gasoline, Diesel, and jet
fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
No actual emissions testing
was performed; analysis of
test data collected in other
studies.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Mobile Source
Characterisiics
Test Fuel
Characteristics
Drive Schedule/
Drive Cycle
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Technique
Assessment of
Test Quality
Comments

18
All on-road and off-road
vehicles and engines
Gasoline, Diesel, and jet
fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
Sec comments
See comments
D
No actual emissions testing
was performed.
Test data collected in other
studies used in procedural
guidance for development of
a modeling inventory.
19
All on-road vehicles
Gasoline and Diesel
Fuel specifications not
provided
Sec comments
Sec comments
See comments
D
No actual emissions testing
was performed.
Test data collected in other
studies used in modeling
study to estimate emission
impacts on the basis of fuel
relationships.
20
Sec comments
Base gasoline, 10%
ethanol blend, and 11 %
MTBE blend
Sec comments
Sec comments
See comments
D
Emissions not directly
measured.
Other references used to
derive speciation profiles, but
limited documentation.
21
On-road light duty
gasoline vehicles
Gasoline
Some partial fuel
specifications provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Emissions not directly
measured.
Basic test data collected in
other studies were used.
However, these data were not
actually provided or
adequately referenced.
22
On-road motor vehicles
Base gasoline, 10%
ethanol blend, and 11%
MTBE blend
See comments
See comments
Sec comments
C
Emissions not directly
measured.
Other references used to
derive speciation profiles.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measuremeni
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characterisiics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

23
6 on-road vehicles
(1989-1990 model
years)
Gasoline and Diesel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Emissions not directly
measured.
Utilized test data collected in
other studies to estimate the
potential magnitude of
on-road vehicle toxic
emission species. Emission
species and impacts
normalized to total VOC
emissions.
24
Given a large
amount of
data of
varying
quality,
reference 24
is treated as
two datasets.
The first
includes data
of quality A
through C.
the second
includes data
of quality D
through F.
All on- and off-road
vehicles and engines,
aircraft, marine vessels;
and locomotives
Gasoline, Diesel, CNG,
and jet fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
A-C
(varies with
specific mobile
source category
and speciation
profile selected)
Emissions not directly
measured.
Compendium of mobile
source VOC and PM
speciation data collected by
various researchers. A total
of 44 VOC speciation
profiles and 27 PM
specification profiles are
included.
All on- and off-road
vehicles and engines,
aircraft, marine vessels;
and locomotives
Gasoline, Diesel, LPG,
and jet fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D-F
(varies with
specific mobile
source category
and speciation
profile selected)
Emissions not directly
measured.
Compendium of mobile
source VOC and PM
speciation data collected by
various researchers. A total
of 79 VOC speciation
profiles and 10 PM
specification profiles are
included.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Mobile Source
Characteristics
Test Fuel
Characteristics
Drive Schedule/
Drive Cycle
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Technique
Assessment of
Test Quality
Comments

25
All on- and off-road
vehicles and engines,
aircraft, marine vessels;
and locomotives
Gasoline, Diesel and jet
fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
Sec comments
See comments
D
Emissions were not directly
measured.
Various methodologies from
other studies were used in
modeling study to estimate
toxic emissions from
particular source categories.
26
All off-road gasoline
and Diesel engines
Gasoline and Diesel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Emissions were not directly
measured.
Test data from other studies
were used in modeling study
to estimate toxic emission
fractions for particular
off-road vehicle source
categories.
27
26 non-U.S. (i.e.,
Sweden, Germany, and
New Zealand) LDGV
and HDDV vehicles
Leaded gasoline,
unleaded gasoline, and
Diesel
Incomplete fuel
specifications provided;
however, fuels do not
appear to be
representative of U.S.
fuels
AIO/FTP-73 cycle,
U.S. 13-mode Diesel
truck cycle,
unspecified cycle
portrayed as an
FTP-73 equivalent,
and roadside
measurement
Unknown
Unknown
D/F
Initial recommendations for
dioxin emission factors from
gasoline and Diesel motor
vehicles on the basis of data
from several independent
emission studies.
Significant uncertainty due to
concerns regarding the
representativeness of tested
vehicles and fuels, as well as
limited test data.
28
Turbine aircraft, piston
aircraft, and non-catalyst
light duty gasoline
vehicles
Gasoline and jet fuel
Fuel specifications not
provided
See comments
See comments
See comments
D
Aircraft and vehicles not
directly tested.
Other references used to
derive speciation profiles.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

29
10 4-stroke lawn mower
engines (3 new; 7
between 2 and 16 years
old)
1990 baseline reference
gasoline (RF-A) and a
California Phase 2
reformulated gasoline
(CaRFG)
Composite Six Mode
(C6M) lest cycle
U.S. EPA, Mobile
Source Emissions
Laboratory
CO(NDIR), NOx(CL),
speciated HC (GC/FID),
and aldcliydes/ketones
(LC/UV) using engine
dynamometer based
CVS sampling
A
Data collected in accordance
with EPA laboratory
procedures and standards
30
4-stroke Tecumseh
Model OVRM40;
2-stroke Yamaha CG-50
Industry average
gasoline (RF-A), MTI3E
reformulated gas
(RF-N), ethanol
reformulated gas
(RF-T), and European
aliphatic gasoline (for
chainsaws)
" 1 -bag" or "integrated
sample" J1088 test
Southwest Research
Institute
I1C speciation (GC
analysis); aldehydes and
ethanol (impingers and
High Pressure Liquid
Chromatography)
A/B
Detailed emissions data
provided, but only a limited
number of reported HAP
species.
31
2-stroke McCulloch
EB285BC string
trimmer, 4-stroke
Tecumseh TVS-90 lawn
mower.
Industry average
reference gasoline
(RF-A), aliphatic
gasoline (AG),
commercial LPG, and
propane
Self-weighting test
equivalent to J1088
6-mode non-handheld
and 2-mode handheld
test tests.
Southwest Research
Institute
Criteria pollutants
(standard J1088
measurement methods);
HC speciation (GC/FID
and LC/FID)
A
J1088 and certification
equivalent test procedures
performed at a federally
recognized emissions test
facility.
32
U.S. average, urban, and
rural fleets
See comments
Sec comments
See comments
See comments
D
Motor vehicles were not
directly tested.
Fleet average emission rates
for entire U.S., urban areas,
and rural areas were
estimated using an indirect
mapping approach.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

33
U.S. average, urban, and
rural fleets
See comments
See comments
See comments
See comments
D/F
Motor vehicles were not
directly tested.
Emission factors not
provided in document.
Fleet average emission rates
for entire U.S., urban areas,
and rural areas were
estimated using an indirect
mapping approach.
34
46 in-use LDGVs
(1975-1982 model
years)
Mix of GM, Ford,
Chrysler, AMC, Imports
Two gasoline test fuels
(Summer grade
premium and winter
grade regular)
FTP (no diurnals),
NYCC, and Crowded
Urban Expressway
(CUE)
Mot soak evaporative
test
U.S. EPA,
Environmental
Sciences Research Lab
HC speciation (GC);
aldehyde measurement
by reverse phase
gradient programming
A
Highly detailed, well
documented
35
F10I and F110 aircraft
engines
JP-4
4 power settings (idle,
44%, 75%, and 107%)
in indoor test cell
measured using
12-port exhaust
sampling probe
Tinker AFB
(Oklahoma City, OK)
Methane and C2-C15
HC (gas
chromatograph),
carbonyls (HPLC),
PAHs (GC/MS)
B
Recognized poor relationship
between calculated and
measured fuel/air ratio.
Emission rate units are
ppmC.
36
TF-39 and CFM-56
aircraft engines
JP-5
3 power settings (idle,
30%, and 80%) in
indoor test cell
measured using
12-port exhaust
sampling probe
General Electric
testing facility
Methane and C2-CI5.
HC (F! GC), PAHs
(GC/MS), carbonyls
(HPLC)
B
Emission rate units are
ppmC.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Mobile Source
Characleristics
Tesi Fuel
Characteristics
Drive Schedule/
Drive Cycle
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Technique
Assessment of
Test Quality
Comments

37
5 light-duly gas vehicles
(1977-1991 model
years)
Reformulated gasoline,
unspecified
non-oxygenated,
unspecified ethanol
oxygenated gasoline,
and specified MTBE
oxygenated gasoline
FTP (UDDS)
Not specified, but
likely U.S. EPA
Atmospheric Research
and Exposure
Assessment
Laboratory
Not specified, but likely
criteria pollutants
(standard FTP
measurement methods)
and HC speciation
(GO/FID and LC/FID)
A/B
Likely that federal
certification test procedures
were performed at a federally
recognized emissions test
facility.
Some documentation
missing.
38
9 gasoline-powered
vehicles (1984-1987
model years)
70°F tests
(summer-grade), 40°F
tests (summer- and
winter-grade), and 20°F
tests (winter-grade)
Urban Dynamometer
Driving Schedule
(UDDS) and Modified
FTP (UDDS
U.S. EPA Atmospheric
Sciences Research Lab
THC(FID), CO
(ND1R), NOx
(chemiluminescence),
and HC species
(4-column GC)
A
Pollutants measured directly
and some general sensitivity
analysis performed.
39
3 gasoline-powered
vehicles (1977-1984
model years)
Base non-oxygcnalcd
gasoline and an ethanol
oxygenated gasoline
FTP (UDDS)
U.S. EPA Atmospheric
Research and Exposure
Assessment
Laboratory
Criteria pollutants
(standard FTP exhaust
and evaporative test
procedures) and HC
speciation (GC/FID and
LC/UV)
A
Federal certification test
procedures performed at a
federally recognized
emissions test facility.
40
11 gasoline-powered
vehicles (1985-1987
model ye^rs)
70°F tests
(summer-grade), 40°F
tests (summer- and
winter-grade), and 20°F
tests (winter-grade)
Urban Dynamometer
Driving Schedule
(UDDS) and Modified
FTP(UDDS
U.S. EPA Atmospheric
Sciences Research Lab
THC (FID), CO
(NDIR), NOx
(chemiluminescence),
and HC species
(2-column GC)
A
Pollutants measured directly
and some general sensitivity
analysis performed.
41
3 gasoline-powered
vehicles (1977-1984
model years)
Base non-oxygenated
gasoline and an MTBE
oxygenated gasoline
FTP (UDDS)
U.S. EPA Atmospheric
Research and Exposure
Assessment
Laboratory
Criteria pollutants
(standard FTP exhaust
and evaporative test
procedures) and HC
speciation (GC/FID and
LC/UV)
A
Federal certification test
procedures performed at a
federally recognized
emissions test facility.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Mobile Source
Test Fuel
Drive Schedule/
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Assessment of
Comments
Number
Characteristics
Characteristics
Drive Cycle

Technique
Test Quality

42
2 California vehicles
(1986 and 1987 model
years)
Chevron unleaded
gasoline without ethanol
or methanol
Federal Test Procedure
(FTP), Highway Fuel
Economy Test
(HFET), and New
York City Cycle
(NYCC)
Southwest Research
Institute
CVS (HC, CO, C02,
NO,, 1,3-butadiene),
traps and impingers
(aldehydes, ketones,
phenols, semi-volatiles,
volatiles, and
nitrosamines)
B
Pollutants measured directly,
but some documentation of
test methodology was
lacking.
43
5 vehicles with different
emission control
technology:
• pre-catalyst
• oxidation catalyst
• 3-way catalyst with
carburetor and air
pump
• 3-way catalyst with
throttle body fuel
injection
• 3-way catalyst with
port fuel injection
Aromatic enriched
gasoline; 10% ethanol
blend; 16.4% MTBE
blend; 19.1% ETBE
blend
Federal Test Procedure
(FTP)
Southwest Research
Institute
Criteria pollutants and
some unregulated
pollutants (Constant
Volume Sampler and
Tedlar bags); aldehydes
and ethanol (impingers)
A/B

44
881 exhaust data points
(Auto Oil - 156; ATL -
592; UNOCAL-26;
ARCO- 12; API-8;
Chevron - 87); 149
diumal/hot soak data
points (Auto Oil - 133;
ARCO - 10; ATL-6).
Various fuels with
MTBE content ranging
from 0.6% to 18.6%
Federal Test Procedure
(FTP).
See comment
See comment
D
Motor vehicles were not
directly tested.
Regression analyses similar
to those used in the Complex
Model were used to derive
emission factors.
45
58 light duty vehicles
(1983-1994 model years
plus "future technology"
vehicles)
Various gasoline and
alternative fuels
FTP (UDDS),
including evaporative
and running loss
testing.
General Motors and
Ford emissions
certification
laboratories
Criteria pollutants
(standard FTP exhaust
and evaporative test
procedures) and HC
speciation (GC/FID and
LC/UV)
A
Federal certification test
procedures performed at a
federally recognized
emissions test facility.
-------
TABLE 4. TESTING METHODOLOGY INFORMATION
Reference
Number
Mobile Source
Characteristics
Test l-'uel
Characteristics
Drive Schedule/
Drive Cycle
Testing Laboratory
Measurement
Technique
Assessment of
Test Quality
Comments

46
13 light duty vehicles
(1982-1996 model
years)
Various combinations
of California Phase 2
reformulated,
commercial unleaded,
and certification (i.e.,
indolene) gasolines
Fuel specifications not
provided
Paired FTP (UDDS)
and Unified cycle tests
California Air
Resources Board
motor vehicle
emissions certification
test laboratory
Criteria pollutants
(standard FTP exhaust
and evaporative test
procedures) and HC
speciation (GC/FID and
LC/UV)
A
California certification test
procedures performed at the
CARB laboratory.
-------
APPENDIX A
SUPPORTING DATA
-------
TABLE A-l. COMPOUNDS LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE THAT
WERE IDENTIFIED IN REVIEW MATERIALS
Compound Name in
IRIS Database
CAS
Number
Included in
Table 1
Included in
Table 2
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
used in this report

Formaldehyde
00050-00-0
Yes
Yes
formaldehyde
Benzo[a]pyrene
00050-32-8
Yes
Yes
benzo(a)pyrene
Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
00053-70-3

Yes
dibenz(a,h)anthracene
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
00055-18-5

Yes
n-nitrosodiethylamine
Benz[a]anthracene
00056-55-3
Yes
Yes
benzo(a)anthracene
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
00062-75-9
Yes

n-nitrosodimethylamine
Methanol
00067-56-1
Yes
Yes
methyl alcohol
Acetone
00067-64-1
Yes
Yes
acetone
Chloroform
00067-66-3

trichloromethane
Benzene
00071-43-2
Yes
Yes
benzene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
00071-55-6

1,1,1-trichloroethane
Bromomethane
00074-83-9

methyl bromide
Acetaldehyde
00075-07-0
Yes
Yes
acetaldehyde
Dichloromethane
00075-09-2

dichloromethane
Methyl ethyl ketone
00078-93-3
Yes
Yes
2-butanone
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
00079-00-5
Yes

1,1,2-trichloroethane
Acenaphthene
00083-32-9

Yes
acenaphthene
Phenanthrene
00085-01-8
Yes
Yes
phenanthrene
Fluorene
00086-73-7
Yes

fluorene
Naphthalene
00091-20-3
Yes
Yes
naphthalene
1,1-Biphenyl
00092-52-4
Yes

1,1 -biphenyl
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
00095-50-1

Yes
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cumene
00098-82-8
Yes
Yes
(1 -methylethyl)-benzene
Ethylbenzene
00100-41-4
Yes
Yes
ethylbenzene
Styrene
00100-42-5
Yes
Yes
styrene
Benzaldehyde
00100-52-7
Yes
Yes
benzaldehyde
1,2-Dibromoethane
00106-93-4

1,2-dibromoethane
1,3-Butadiene
00106-99-0
Yes
Yes
1,3-butadiene
Acrolein
00107-02-8
Yes
Yes
2-propenal
Methyl isobutyl ketone
00108-10-1
Yes
Yes
4-methyl-2-pentanone
Toluene
00108-88-3
Yes
Yes
toluene
Chlorobenzene
00108-90-7
Yes

chlorobenzene
Cyclohexanone
00108-94-1
Yes

cyclohexanone
Phenol
00108-95-2
Yes
Yes
phenol
n-Hexane
00110-54-3
Yes
Yes
hexane
Anthracene
00120-12-7
Yes
Yes
anthracene
Crotonaldehyde
00123-73-9
Yes
Yes
crotonaldehyde
Pyrene
00129-00-0
Yes
Yes
pyrene
n-Heptane
00142-82-5
Yes
Yes
heptane
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene
00191-24-2
Yes
Yes
benzo(ghi)perylene
lndeno[ 1,2,3-cd]pyrene
00193-39-5
Yes
Yes
indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzo[b]fluoranthene
00205-99-2

benzo(b)fl uoranthene
Fluoranthene
00206-44-0
Yes
Yes
fluoranthene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
00207-08-9

benzo(k)fluoranthene
A-l
-------
TABLE A-l. COMPOUNDS LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE THAT
WERE IDENTIFIED IN REVIEW MATERIALS
Compound Name in
IRIS Database
CAS
Number
Included in
Table 1
Included in
Table 2
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
used in this report

Acenaphthylene
00208-96-8
Yes
Yes
acenaphthylene
Chrysene
00218-01-9
Yes
Yes
benzo(a)phenanthrene
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
00540-84-1
Yes
Yes
2,2,4-trimethylpentane
N-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine
00621-64-7
Yes

n-nitrosodipropylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
00924-16-3

Yes
n-nitrosodibutylamine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
00930-55-2

Yes
n-nitrosopyrrolidine
Tricresol
01319-77-3

cresol
Xylenes
01330-20-7
Yes

o-,m-,p-xylene
Methyl tert-butyl ether
01634-04-4
Yes
Yes
2-methoxy-2-methylpropane
Dioxins/furans
01746-01-6

Yes
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Lead and compounds (inorganic)
07439-92-1
Yes
Yes
lead
Manganese
07439-96-5
Yes

manganese
Mercury, elemental
07439-97-6
Yes
Yes
mercury
Molybdenum
07439-98-7
Yes
Yes
molybdenum
Nickel
07440-02-0
Yes
Yes
nickel
Silver
07440-22-4
Yes

silver
Strontium
07440-24-6
Yes

strontium
Antimony
07440-36-0
Yes

antimony
Arsenic, inorganic
07440-38-2
Yes
Yes
arsenic
Barium and Compounds
07440-39-3
Yes

barium
Beryllium and Compounds
07440-41-7

beryllium
Boron (Boron and Borates only)
07440-42-8
Yes

boron
Cadmium
07440-43-9
Yes

cadmium
Chromium
07440-47-3
Yes

chromium
Copper
07440-50-8
Yes

copper
Uranium, natural
07440-61-1
Yes
Yes
uranium
Zinc and Compounds
07440-66-6
Yes

zinc
White phosphorus
07723-14-0
Yes

phosphorus
Selenium and Compounds
07782-49-2
Yes
Yes
selenium
Chlorine
(V7S2-50-5
Yes

chlorine
Nitric oxide
10102-43-9
Yes
Yes
nitric oxide
Nitrogen dioxide
10102-44-0

Yes
nitrogen dioxide
Nitrate
14797-55-8
Yes

nitrates
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, mixture
19408-74-3

Yes
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Diesel engine emissions

Yes

diesel engine emissions
Expansion of listed compounds ".xylenes "
(01330-20-7) to include specific isomers,
"tlioxins'funms " (no CAS) to include specific
congeners, and "benzo(b)fluoranthene"
(00205-99-2) and "benzo(k)fluoranthene"
(00207-08-9) to include an overarching
generic equivalent as measured in various
reviewed materials
00095-47-6
Yes
Yes
o-xylene
00106-42-3
Yes
Yes
p-xylene
00108-3S-3
Yes
Yes
m-xylene

Yes
Yes
m- & p-xylene
56832-73-6
Yes
Yes
benzofluoranthene
03268-87-9
Yes

octachlorodibenzodioxin
30402-14-3
Yes

tetrachlorodibenzofuran
30402-15-4
Yes
Yes
pentachlorodibenzofuran
34465-46-8
Yes

hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
35822-46-9
Yes

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
A-2
-------
TABLE A-l. COMPOUNDS LISTED IN THE IRIS DATABASE THAT
WERE IDENTIFIED IN REVIEW MATERIALS
Compound Name in
IRIS Database
CAS
Number
Included in
Table 1
Included in
Table 2
IUPAC Name (or alternative)
used in this report

Expansion of listed compounds "xylenes "
(01330-20-7) to include specific isomers,
"dioxins/furans " (no CAS) to include specific
congeners, and "henzo(b)fItioranlhene"
(00205-99-2) and "benzo(k)Jhtoranlhene"
(00207-08-9) lo include an overarching
generic equivalent as measured in various
reviewed materials
36088-22-9
Yes

pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
37871-00-4
Yes

heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
38998-75-3
Yes

heptachlorodibenzofuran
39001-02-0

Yes
octach lorodibenzofuran
39227-28-6

Yes
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
40321-76-4

Yes
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
41903-57-5
Yes

tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
51207-31-9
Yes

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran
55673-89-7

Yes
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran
55684-94-1
Yes

hexachlorodibenzofuran
57117-31-4

Yes
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran
57117-41-6

Yes
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran
57117-44-9

Yes
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran
57653-85-7
Yes
Yes
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
60851-34-5

Yes
2,3,4,6,7,8 -hexach lorodibenzofuran
67562-39-4
Yes

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachIorodibenzofuran
70648-26-9
Yes
Yes
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran
72918-21-9

Yes
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexach lorod i benzofuran
A-3
-------
TABLE A-2. SYNOPSIS OF DETECTION LIMIT TELEPHONE CONTACTS
Reference
Number
Contact
Date
Spoke
Response

1
Walt Kruecher,
Ford Motor Co.
10/26/00
Confirmed that a non-zero emissions measurement
indicates that the element was present at levels above the
applicable detection limit of the test equipment. A zero
value emissions measurement indicates that the element
was not present at levels above the detection limit.
2
James Ball,
Ford Motor Co,
10/24/00
Stated that zero values were reported in either of two cases.
If the average measurement of the element on an exhaust
filter was less than the average measurement of that same
element on an unused (i.e., control) filter, then the element
was considered to be not detected and zero value emissions
were reported. Additionally, if the average concentration of
an element from all the vehicle tests was less than twice the
standard deviation of corresponding measurements taken
for 3 control filters, then the element was considered to be
below the detection threshold and a zero value
measurement was reported. When a non-zero value is
given, the element was present on the filter in quantities
that allowed quantification.
3
Charles Hare,
Southwest Research
Institute
10/18/00
Where a non-zero emissions value is reported, it indicates
that the element was present in quantities that exceeded the
applicable detection limit. Zero values indicate quantities
below the applicable limit. For Diesel exhaust, a significant
portion of the emissions is Cl 2 or greater, where detection
limits are very high. As a result, reported values may be
low. With LPG, speciation is so diverse that most specific
compounds are present at only very low levels.
4
No specific emissions testing performed
5
Repeated requests
for information
from ARCO were
not successful.

Emissions values for criteria pollutants and four major toxic
compounds (benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, and
acetaldehyde) assumed to be "detected" as all were at least
as large as values demonstrated to be above the detection
limit in other studies. Other species assumed to be "not
detected" in the absence of specific information from
ARCO.
6
Joseph De Vita,
California Air
Resources Board
10/17/00
Confirmed that non-zero values indicated that the
compound was present at levels that exceeded the
applicable detection limit. "Trace" designations indicated
that there was evidence of the element being present, but
not at levels quantifiable above the detection limits
7
James Carroll,
Southwest Research
Institute
10/26/00
Zero value emission levels indicate that the compound
could not be quantified above the detection limit. Non-zero
values indicate that the compound was present and
measured in quantities above the applicable detection limit.
A-4
-------
TABLE A-2. SYNOPSIS OF DETECTION LIMIT TELEPHONE CONTACTS
Reference
Number
Contact
Date
Spoke
Response

8
Albert Censullo,
Ph.D., California
Polytechnic State
University
11/2/00
A reported zero value indicates that the compound was
either not present at levels that allowed quantification above
the applicable detection limit or that identification of the
compounds chromatography "peak" was not possible. A
non-zero emissions value indicates that the compound was
both identified and quantified above the detection limit.
9
Janet Arey,
University of
California at
Riverside
10/23/00
A reported zero value indicates a distinct likelihood that the
applicable compound was present, but not at levels that
exceeded the applicable detection limit. Where a "
-------
TABLE A-2. SYNOPSIS OF DETECTION LIMIT TELEPHONE CONTACTS
Reference
Number
Contact
Date
Spoke
Response
22
Joe Somers,
EPA OMS
10/23/00
Confirmed that zero values reported on the speciation
profile indicated that there were no quantifiable
measurements over the detection limits. Where non-zero
data are reported, the compound is believed to have been
quantified above the detection limit. Nevertheless, this
reference involved no actual vehicle testing, instead relying
on speciated test data developed and reported by previous
researchers. Moreover, it is not possible to be confident in
the procedures and methods employed by those researchers.
As a result, all compounds in this reference were treated as
"not detected" pending an affirmative statement from the
original data researchers to the contrary. The net impact of
this determination may be null since the bulk of the data
utilized in this reference is believed to have been developed
through the Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research
Program, the program data from which are included in their
entirety in this report as references 1 and 45.
23
No specific emissions testing performed
24
No specific emissions testing performed. However, this particular source reference was treated
differently than other references for which no original emissions testing was performed. Sierra
was advised by EPA that all data are subjected to a method detection limit acceptance verification
prior to their inclusion in the SPECIATE database. As a result, EPA requested that this reference
be treated such that all reported compounds are assumed to be above the detection limit.
25
No specific emissions testing performed
26
No specific emissions testing performed
27
No specific emissions testing performed
28
No specific emissions testing performed
29
Peter Gabele,
EPA RTP
11/1/00
Stated that all compounds measured in this reference were
detectable at levels at least as low as 8 ppb, but that the
equipment in use at the time could only quantify values
measured over about 25 ppb. As a result, where a non-zero
value is reported, the compound was measured at levels that
exceed the applicable detection limit.
30
Charles Hare,
Southwest Research
Institute
10/18/00
Comprehensive list of compounds in the reference is
indicative of every compound that could have been
observed by the equipment, as opposed to specific
compounds expected to be found in test engine emissions.
As such, a reported zero value indicates that the applicable
compound was not measured above the equipment
detection limit. Conversely, a reported non-zero value
indicates that the element was both identified and quantified
above the detection limit.
A-6
-------
TABLE A-2. SYNOPSIS OF DETECTION LIMIT TELEPHONE CONTACTS
Reference
Number
Contact
Date
Spoke
Response

31
Charles Hare,
Southwest Research
Institute
10/18/00
Comprehensive list of compounds in the reference is
indicative of every compound that could have been
observed by the equipment, as opposed to specific
compounds expected to be found in test engine emissions.
As such, a reported zero value indicates that the applicable
compound was not measured above the equipment
detection limit. Conversely, a reported non-zero value
indicates that the element was both identified and quantified
above the detection limit.
32
No specific emissions testing performed
33
No specific emissions testing performed
34
Silvestre Tejada,
EPA RTP
10/24/00
Stated that reported zero values are indicative of
compounds that were thought to be present, but not
measured at values above the detection limit of the test
equipment. Non-zero emission measurements are
indicative of compounds that were both identified and
quantified above the applicable detection limit.
35
C.W. Spicer
Battelle
10/23/00
Various analytical instruments were used, each with its own
detection limits. Where a zero reading is reported, the
measured level of the compound was below the applicable
detection limit. The average of the detection limits of the
various instruments was about 1 ppb. Where a non-zero
value is reported, the compound was measured above the
detection limit.
36
C.W. Spicer
Battelle
10/23/00
Various analytical instruments were used, each with its own
detection limits. Where a zero reading is reported, the
measured level of the compound was below the applicable
detection limit. The average of the detection limits of the
various instruments was about 1 ppb. Where a non-zero
value is reported, the compound was measured above the
detection limit.
37
Fred Stump,
EPA RTP
10/18/00
All reported non-zero values indicate a compound
measured at levels greater than the applicable detection
limit. Zero value or absent data indicate that despite
expectations or indications that the compound would be
present, it could not be quantified over the detection limit.
38
Fred Stump,
EPA RTP
10/18/00
All reported non-zero values indicate a compound
measured at levels greater than the applicable detection
limit. Zero value or absent data indicate that despite
expectations or indications that the compound would be
present, it could not be quantified over the detection limit.
39
Fred Stump,
EPA RTP
10/18/00
All reported non-zero values indicate a compound
measured at levels greater than the applicable detection
limit. Zero value or absent data indicate that despite
expectations or indications that the compound would be
present, it could not be quantified over the detection limit.
A-7
-------
TABLE A-2. SYNOPSIS OF DETECTION LIMIT TELEPHONE CONTACTS
Reference
Number
Contact
Date
Spoke
Response

40
Fred Stump,
EPARTP
10/18/00
All reported non-zero values indicate a compound
measured at levels greater than the applicable detection
limit. Zero value or absent data indicate that despite
expectations or indications that the compound would be
present, it could not be quantified over the detection limit.
41
Fred Stump,
EPARTP
10/18/00
All reported non-zero values indicate a compound
measured at levels greater than the applicable detection
limit. Zero value or absent data indicate that despite
expectations or indications that the compound would be
present, it could not be quantified over the detection limit.
42
Joseph De Vita,
California Air
Resources Board
10/17/00
Confirmed that all reported values were above the detection
limits, while "trace" is used to indicate that a compound or
element was detected, but not quantifiable above applicable
detection limits. Alternatively, an indicator of "ND" (none
detected) indicates that the detection limit was not reached
for a particular compound or element.
43
Craig Harvey,
EPA OMS
10/24/00
Confirmed that an "ND" (not detected) indicator signifies
that a compound was not measured above the applicable
detection limit, although the compound is likely to have
been present in some quantity. An indicator of "Trace"
signifies a compound that was detected, but not at levels
quantifiably above the detection limit. Where a non-zero
value is reported, the compound was both identified and
quantifiable at levels above the applicable detection limit.
44
No specific emissions testing performed
45
Walt Kruecher,
Ford Motor Co.
10/26/00
Confirmed that a non-zero emissions measurement
indicates that the element was present at levels above the
applicable detection limit of the test equipment. A zero
value emissions measurement indicates that the element
was not present at levels above the detection limit.
46
Repeated calls to
Jerry Ho of the
California Air
Resources Board
have not been
returned.

Despite the inability to have confirmatory discussions with
the Air Resources Board representative responsible for the
unified cycle database, this dataset has been processed such
that all non-zero values were deemed to have exceeded the
applicable detection limit. These data were collected in
accordance with California regulatory certification
requirements for NMOG speciation by the state-run
certification laboratory. As such, there is a high degree of
confidence that reported test measurements were above
detection limits.
A-8
-------