EPA-454/R-12-005
August 2012
ŁEPA
United Statue
Environmental Protection
Emissions Inventory for Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document:
2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Final Rule
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Air Quality Assessment Division
Contact:
Alexis Zubrow
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS iv
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF FIGURES v
LIST OF APPENDICES vi
1 Introduction 1
2 2005 Emission inventories and their preparation 2
2.1 Custom configuration for emissions modeling for LDGHG 3
2.2 2005 Emissions Inventories and Processing 5
2.3 2005 Onroad Mobile sources 5
2.4 Nonroad mobile sources (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3) 7
2.4.1 Locomotives and commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3, seca_c3) 7
2.5 2005 point sources (ptipm and ptnonipm sectors) 7
2.5.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm) 8
2.6 2005 nonpoint sources (afdust, ag, avefire, nonpt) 8
2.6.1 Portable fuel containers 8
2.6.2 Onroad refueling 9
2.7 Other sources (biogenics, othpt, othar, and othon) 9
3 VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes 10
4 2030 Reference Case 12
4.1 Stationary source projections: EGU sector (ptipm) 18
4.2 Stationary source projections: non-EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, afdust) 18
4.2.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm) 20
4.2.2 Biodiesel plants ptnonipm) 20
4.2.3 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt) 21
4.2.4 Cellulosic fuel production (nonpt) 21
4.2.5 Ethanol transport and distribution (nonpt) 22
4.2.6 Refinery adjustments (ptnonipm) 22
4.2.7 Ethanol transport gasoline and blends (ptnonipm, nonpt) 23
4.2.8 Upstream agricultural adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm) 23
4.2.9 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust) 23
4.2.10 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt) 24
4.2.11 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm) 25
4.2.12 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm) 26
4.2.13 Stationary source control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and plant closures
(ptnonipm, nonpt) 26
4.2.14 Oil and gas projections in TX, OK, and non-California WRAP states (nonpt) 31
4.3 Mobile source projections 31
4.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm) 32
4.4 Nonroad mobile source projections (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3) 33
4.4.1 Emissions generated with the NONROAD model (nonroad) 33
4.4.2 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3) 34
4.4.3 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3) 36
4.5 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, and othpt) 37
5 2030 Control Case 37
5.1 2030 Control Case Point and Nonpoint sources 37
5.2 2030 Control Case Mobile sources 40
ii
-------
References 42
in
-------
ACRONYMS
AEO Annual Energy Outlook
BEIS Biogenic Emission Inventory System
btp Bulk plant terminal-to-pump
C3 Category 3 (commercial marine vessels)
CAP Criteria Air Pollutant
CARB California Air Resources Board
CMAQ Community Multiscale Air Quality
CSAPR Cross-State Air Pollution (formerly Transport) Rule
EO 0% Ethanol gasoline
E10 10% Ethanol gasoline
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EGU Electric Generating Utility
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
LDGHG Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas
HONO HNO2, nitrous acid
IPM Integrated Planning Model
LDGHG Light Duty Greenhouse Gas
MOBILE6 Mobile Source Emission Factor Model, version 6
MOVES Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
MY Model Year
NEEDS National Electric Energy Database System
NEI National Emission Inventory
NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model
OAQPS EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
ORL One Record per Line (a SMOKE input format)
MP Multipollutant
NO Nitric oxide
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
NOX Nitrogen oxides
PFC Portable Fuel Container
PEC Elemental carbon component of PM2.5
PMFINE Leftover "Other", or "crustal" component of PM2.5
PNO3 Particulate nitrate component of PM2.5
PSO4 Particulate sulfate component of PM2.5
POC Organic carbon component of PM2.5
rbt Refinery-to-bulk terminal
RFS2 Revised annual renewable fuel standard
SMOKE Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions
SCC Source Category Code
TAF Terminal Area Forecast
TSD Technical Support Document
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WRAP Western Regional Air Partnership
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1. List of cases run in support of the LDGHG air quality modeling 1
Table 2-1. Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the LDGHG Platform 2
Table 2-2. Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for LDGHG platform 4
Table 2-3. Description of differences in ancillary data between the LDGHG 2005 case and the 2005 v4.2
platform 5
Table 2-4. HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in LDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform 6
Table 2-5. 2005 ethanol plant emissions (tons) 8
Table 3-1. Summary of VOC speciation profile approaches by sector across cases 11
Table 4-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the LDGHG 2030 Reference case
emissions inventories from the 2005 base case 15
Table 4-2. LDGHG FRM reference case stationary non-EGU source-related projection methods 19
Table 4-3. 2030 corn ethanol plant emissions [tons] 20
Table 4-4. 2030 biodiesel plant emissions [tons] 20
Table 4-5. PFC emissions for 2030 [tons] 21
Table 4-6. 2030 cellulosic plant emissions [tons] 22
Table 4-7. 2030 VOC losses (Emissions) due to ethanol transport and distribution [tons] 22
Table 4-8. Impact of refinery adjustments on 2030 emissions [tons] 23
Table 4-9. Upstream agricultural emission increases due toRFS2 fuels in 2030 [tons] 23
Table 4-10. Growth factors from year 2005 to 2030 for animal operations 23
Table 4-11. Proj ection factors for growing year 2005 residential wood combustion sources 25
Table 4-12. Factors used to project 2005 base-case aircraft emissions to year 2030 26
Table 4-13. Summary of Non-EGU Emission Reductions Applied to the 2005 Inventory due to Unit and
Plant Closures 27
Table 4-14. Future-year ISIS-based cement industry annual reductions (tons/yr) for the non-EGU
(ptnonipm) sector 29
Table 4-15. State-level non-MACT Boiler Reductions from ICR Data Gathering 29
Table 4-16. National Impact of RICE Controls on 2030 Non-EGU Projections 30
Table 4-17. Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 2030 Non-EGU Projections 30
Table 4-18. Oil and Gas NOx and SO2 Emissions for 2005 and 2030 including additional reductions due to
the RICE NESHAP 31
Table 4-19. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and class 1 and class 2
commercial marine vessel emissions to 2030 35
Table 4-20. Additional class 1 railroad and C1/C2 CMV emissions from RFS2 fuel volume changes 36
Table 4-21. NOX, SO2, PM2.5 and VOC factors to project class 3 CMV emissions for 2030 37
Table 5-1. Adjustments to IPM Emissions to Account for Reduced Refinery Demand 38
Table 5-2. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on ptipm (Electric Power Plants from Electric and Electric
Plug-in Vehicles, and Reductions in Production of Electricity for Refinery Use) 38
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005 and 2030 33
-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Modified LDGHG Equations to adapt pre-speciated diesel emissions from MOVES to air
quality modeling species needed for CMAQ.
APPENDIX B: Summary of LDGHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non-EGU Control Programs, Closures and
Projections
APPENDIX C: Fuel Distribution SCCs in Nonpt and Ptnonipm
VI
-------
1 Introduction
This document provides the details of emissions data processing done in support of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) joint rulemaking
effort under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) to
establish fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and
medium-duty passenger vehicles, beginning with the 2017 model year (MY). This rulemaking effort is
hereafter referred to in this technical support document (TSD) as the Light Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
(LDGHG) rule and consists of three emissions cases. Table 1-1 provides of list of the emissions cases
created for this modeling effort.
Table 1-1. List of cases run in support of the LDGHG air quality modeling
Case Name
2005 Base case
2030 Reference case
2030 Control case
Internal EPA
Abbreviation
2005ct_ldghg2
2030ct_ldghg_ref
2030ct_ldghg_ctl2
Description
2005 case created using average year fires data and an
average year temporal allocation approach for Electrical
Generating Units (EGUs), used to compute relative
response factors with 2030 scenarios.
2030 "reference" (baseline) scenario representing the
best estimate for the future year without implementation
of the new light duty GHG emissions standards.
2030 "control" case scenario representing
implementation of national GHG emissions standards,
phased in from 2017 to 2025, for passenger cars, light-
duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles,
The data used in the 2005 emissions cases are often the same as those described in the Transport Rule Final
CAP-BAFM 2005-based, Version 4.2 Platform TSD (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005),
but some different emissions data are used for this rulemaking. Specifically, the LDGHG modeling used
data intended only for the rule development and not for general use. All of the documentation provided here
describes what was done differently and specifically for the LDGHG effort in contrast to what is used in the
v4.2 platform.
In LDGHG, we used a 2005 base case approach for the year 2005 emissions scenario. This approach is very
similar to that used in the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Final Rule (formerly known as the
"Transport Rule"). A base case approach uses average year fires and EGU temporal profiles from three
years of EGU data. We use a base case approach because we want to reduce year-specific variability in
some components of the inventory. For example, large fires vary in location and day of the year each year,
and EGU shutdowns and high use on high energy demand days also vary by year. By using a base case
approach, these two aspects of the inventory are maintained in future year modeling and therefore do not
introduce potentially spurious year-specific artifacts in air quality modeling estimates. For LDGHG, the
same biogenic emissions data as the v4.2 platform was used for the 2005 case, and also for both future-year
cases. The only significant data changes between the 2005 and the 2030 future-year LDGHG cases are the
emission inventories and speciation approaches.
For this effort, we have created and provided county-level emission summaries for criteria pollutants and
select hazardous air pollutants (e.g. benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3-butadiene, ethanol,
naphthalene) by emissions modeling sector for the cases listed above. Summaries were developed by month
-------
using average day emissions and separately with annual totals. These data have been provided to the EPA
docket for this rule. .
In the remainder of this document, we provide a description of the approaches taken for the emissions in
support of air quality modeling for LDGHG. In Section 2, we describe the ancillary data and 2005 inventory
differences from the v4.2 platform. In Section 3, we describe the speciation differences among each of the
cases run for LDGHG. In Section 0, we describe the 2030 Reference case as compared to the 2005 base
case, and in Section 5, we describe the 2030 Control Case in comparison to the 2030 Reference case.
2 2005 Emission inventories and their preparation
As mentioned previously, the 2005 emissions modeling approach for LDGHG used much of the same data
and approaches as the 2005 v4.2 platform. In this section, we identify the differences between the data used
for LDGHG and that used for the 2005 v4.2 platform. Section 2.1 provides ancillary data differences that
impact multiple sectors and Sections 2.2 through 2.3 provides differences for the point, area, and mobile
sectors.
Table 2-1 below lists the platform sectors used for the LDGHG modeling platform. It also indicates which
platform sectors include HAP emissions and the associated sectors from the National Emission Inventory
(NEI). Subsequent sections refer to these platform sectors for identifying the emissions differences between
the v4.2 platform and the LDGHG platform.
Table 2-1. Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the LDGHG Platform
Platform Sector
IPM sector: ptipm
Non-IPM sector:
ptnonipm
Average-fire sector:
avefire
Agricultural sector:
as
Area fugitive dust
sector: a f dust
Remaining nonpoint
sector: nonpt
Nonroad sector:
nonroad
Aircraft,
locomotive, marine:
aim no c3
2005 NEI
Sector
Point
Point+
N/A
Nonpoint
Nonpoint
Nonpoint+
Mobile:
Nonroad
Mobile:
Nonroad
Description
NEI EGU units at facilities mapped to the IPM model using the
National Electric Energy Database System (NEEDS) database.
All NEI point source units not matched to the ptipm sector,
including aircraft.
Average-year wildfire and prescribed fire emissions, county and
annual resolution.
NH3 emissions from NEI nonpoint livestock and fertilizer
application.
PM10 and PM2 5 emissions from fugitive dust sources in the NEI
nonpoint inventory.
All nonpoint sources not otherwise included in other emissions
modeling sectors.
Monthly nonroad emissions from the National Mobile Inventory
Model (NMIM) using NONROAD2005 version nr05c-BondBase,
which is equivalent to NONROAD2008a, since it incorporated
Bond rule revisions to some of the base-case inputs and the Bond
rule controls did not take effect until later. NMIM was used for all
states except California. Monthly emissions for California created
from annual emissions submitted by the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) for the 2005v2 NEI.
Primarily 2002 NEI non-rail maintenance locomotives, and
category 1 and category 2 commercial marine vessel (CMV)
emissions sources, county and annual resolution. Aircraft
emissions are no longer in this sector and are now included in the
Non-EGU sector (as point sources); also, category 3 CMV
emissions are no longer in this sector and are now contained in the
seca c3 sector.
Contains HAP
emissions?
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
-------
Platform Sector
2005 NEI
Sector
Description
Contains HAP
emissions?
C3 commercial
marine: seca c3
Mobile:
nonroad
Annual point source-formatted, year 2005 category 3 (C3) CMV
emissions, developed for the rule called "Control of Emissions
from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30
Liters per Cylinder", usually described as the Emissions Control
Area (EGA) study (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm).
Utilized final projections from 2002, developed for the C3 EGA
Proposal to the International Maritime Organization (EPA-420-F-
10-041, August 2010).
Yes
Onroad, except
gasoline PM:
on_noadj
Mobile:
onroad+
Three, monthly, county-level components:
1) California onroad, created using annual emissions for all
pollutants, submitted by GARB for the 2005v2 NEI. NH3 (not
submitted by CARB) fromMOVES2010a.
2) Onroad gasoline and diesel vehicle emissions from
MOVES2010a not subject to temperature adjustments: exhaust
CO, NOX, VOC, NH3, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde,
1,3-butadiene, acrolein, naphthalene, brake and tire wearPM, and
evaporative VOC, benzene, and naphthalene.
Yes
Onroad starting
exhaust PM:
on_moves_startpm
Mobile:
onroad+
Monthly, county-level MOVES2010a-based onroad gasoline
emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to exhaust
mode only for PM species and naphthalene. California emissions
not included. This sector is limited to cold start mode emissions
that contain different temperature adjustment curves from running
exhaust (see on_moves_runpm sector).
No
Onroad running
exhaust PM
on_moves_mnpm
Mobile:
onroad+
Monthly, county-level draft MOVES2010a-based onroad gasoline
emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to exhaust
mode only for PM species and naphthalene. California emissions
not included. This sector is limited to running mode emissions
that contain different temperature adjustment curves from cold
start exhaust (see on moves startpm sector).
No
Biogenic: biog
N/A
Hour-specific, grid cell-specific emissions generated from the
BEIS3.14 model, including emissions in Canada and Mexico.
Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform.
No
Other point sources
not from the NEI:
othpt
N/A
Point sources from Canada's 2006 inventory and Mexico's Phase
III 1999 inventory, annual resolution. Also includes annual U.S.
offshore oil 2005v2 NEI point source emissions. Unchanged from
the 2005v4 platform.
No
Other nonpoint and
nonroad not from
the NEI: othar
N/A
Annual year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999
Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) nonpoint and nonroad
mobile inventories. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform.
No
Other onroad
sources not from the
NEI: othon
N/A
Year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999 Mexico
Phase III (municipio resolution) onroad mobile inventories,
annual resolution. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform.
No
Some data included in modeling sector has been revised beyond what is included in the 2005 NEI vl or v2.
As with the 2005 v4.2 platform, the primary emissions modeling tool used to create the air quality model-
ready emissions was the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) modeling system
(http://www.smoke-model.org/index.cfm). We used SMOKE version 2.7 to create emissions files for a 36-
km national grid, and 12-km Eastern and 12-km Western grids for the 2005 base case (also known as the
"2005ct_ldghg 2_05b" case).
2.1 Custom configuration for emissions modeling for LDGHG
Unlike the 2005 v4.2 platform, the configuration for LDGHG modeling included additional hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) and used slightly revised ancillary speciation data. Both of these differences are described
in this section.
-------
Table 2-2 lists the additional HAP pollutants processed for the LDGHG platform, which were not included in
the 2005 v4.2 platform. However, since using the full multipollutant HAP version of the Community
Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model would have taken longer than the time available for our project, we
used a "lite" version of the multipollutant CMAQ (Version 4.7) that required emissions only for the species
listed in the footnote of Table 2-2.
Table 2-2. Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for LDGHG platform
Inventory Pollutant
CL2
HC1
CO
NOX
SO2
NH3
VOC
Various additional
VOC species from the
biogenics model which
do not map to the
above model species
PM10
PM25
Sea-salt species (non -
anthropogenic
emissions)
Model Species
CL2
HCL
CO
NO
NO2
HONO
SO2
SULF
NH3
ACROLEIN*
ALD2
ALD PRIMARY*
ALDX
BENZENE
BUTADIENE 13*
ETH
ETHA
ETOH
FORM
FORM PRIMARY*
IOLE
ISOP
MEOH
OLE
PAR
TOL
XYL
SESQ
TERP
PMC
PEC
PNO3
POC
PSO4
PMFINE
PCL
PNA
Model species description
Atomic gas-phase chlorine
Hydrogen Chloride (hydrochloric acid) gas
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxide
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrous acid
Sulfur dioxide
Sulfuric acid vapor
Ammonia
Acrolein from the HAP inventory
Acetaldehyde from VOC speciation
Acetaldehyde from the HAP inventory
Propionaldehyde and higher aldehydes
Benzene (not part of CB05)
1,3 -butadiene from the HAP inventory
Ethene
Ethane
Ethanol
Formaldehyde
Formaldehyde from the HAP inventory
Internal olefin carbon bond (R-C=C-R)
Isoprene
Methanol
Terminal olefin carbon bond (R-C=C)
Paraffin carbon bond
Toluene and other monoalkyl aromatics
Xylene and other polyalkyl aromatics
Sesquiterpenes
Terpenes
Coarse PM > 2.5 microns and < 10 microns
Particulate elemental carbon < 2.5 microns
Particulate nitrate < 2.5 microns
Particulate organic carbon (carbon only) < 2.5 microns
Particulate Sulfate < 2.5 microns
Other particulate matter < 2.5 microns
Particulate chloride
Particulate sodium
- ACROLEIN, ALD2_PRIMARY, BUTADIENE13, and FORM_PRIMARY are the extra "CMAQ-lite" HAPs
that are not in the v4.2 platform.
-------
In addition to the model species differences, the LDGHG platform had a few additional custom aspects in the
2005 cases. Table 2-3 lists the datasets used by the LDGHG platform that are different from the v4.2
platform.
Another consideration is the speciation across the LDGHG future-year cases as compared to 2005. Section 3
provides a detailed account of these differences. Otherwise, the future-year ancillary data were largely the
same as those in 2005, with no substantial differences. All ancillary data files can be found at the 2005-
based platform website (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.htmltf2005).
Table 2-3. Description of differences in ancillary data between the LDGHG 2005 case and the 2005 v4.2
platform
Ancillary Data Type
Speciation cross-
references and
Speciation profiles
Inventory tables
Difference between 2005 v4.2 platform and LDGHG platform
The LDGHG data files are configured to support the multi-pollutant (MP)
version of CMAQ, whereas the 2005 v4.2 platform data file is configured to
support only the non-MP version. Therefore, the LDGHG data files include
profiles for additional VOC HAP species.
The LDGHG data file is configured to support the MP "lite" version of CMAQ,
whereas the 2005 v4.2 platform data file is configured to support only the non-
MP version.
2.2 2005 Emissions Inventories and Processing
The LDGHG emissions for 2005 for many sectors except for U.S. onroad mobile sectors (on_noadj,
on_moves_runpm, and on_moves_startpm) are similar to those provided in the 2005 Version 4.2-based
Transport Rule Final TSD. Only minor adjustments were made to the point source sectors (ptnonipm, point),
nonpoint source sectors (nonpt, afdust, ag, avefire), and nonroad sectors (alm_no_c3, nonroad, seca_c3).
The Canada and Mexico sector (othar, othon, othpt) inventories are unchanged from the 2005v4.2 emissions
modeling platform except for updated gridding surrogates used in the area based emissions. The 2005v4.2
TSD provides detailed documentation on the 2005v4.2 inventories and can be found at:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefinal eitsd 28jun2011 .pdf.
2.3 2005 Onroad Mobile sources
Onroad mobile sources include three sectors for US onroad emissions (on_noadj, on_moves_startpm,
on_moves_runpm). As discussed in the previous section, the three US nonroad sectors (nonroad,
alm_no_c3, and seca_c3) and the Canada/Mexico onroad emissions (othon) are unchanged from the
2005v4.2 platform.
For onroad mobile, the MOVES-based emissions in the on_noadj sector and the on_moves_startpm and
on_moves_runpm sectors (completely MOVES-based) emissions inventory data are from the Motor Vehicle
Emission Simulator (MOVES2010, specifically, version MOVES2010a) model. In addition, for the
MOVES PM sectors, the temperature adjustment calculations applied to PM2.s species were the same as in
the v4.2 platform. The NH? onroad emissions in California (on_noadj sector) use MOVES2010(a)-based
emissions. All other pollutants in California were supplied by CARB for the 2005 NEI v2. The LDGHG
onroad emissions keep additional HAPs as described in Section 2.1.
For LDGHG, MOVES2010a was used in conjunction with an internal default databases
(MOVESDB20100913_45_corr, MOVESDB20100913_ldt, and
MOVESDB20100913_MHDHHD2b3_corr) which contained performance updates from
MOVESDB20100826, the database originally released with MOVES2010a and used in the 2005v4.2
platform. The MOVES2010a default database used to model LDGHG also included improved heavy duty
5
-------
PM exhaust estimates (particularly for future year estimates) and was further customized to allow separate
calculation of heavy duty emissions of different weight categories as described in the "Final Rulemaking to
Establish Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Engines and Vehicles Regulatory Impact Analysis"
(http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/documents/420rl 1901 .pdf).
In addition, we used NO and NO2 directly from MOVES2010a for LDGHG, rather than the default NO/NO2
speciation from NOx used in 2005v4.2 processing. Table 2-4 shows the default NO, NO2, and HONO
fractions used in 2005v4.2 versus the equations for LDGHG, where NO_MOVES and NO2_MOVES are the
MOVES2010-provided NO and NO2 emissions. The HONO, computed from total MOVES NOX (sum of
NO and NO2 from MOVES) is subtracted out of MOVES NO2 to conserve mass. The speciation of
MOVES HONO, NO and NO2 is based on the molecular weight of NO2 (46); that is, these NOx components
were speciated assuming they were inventoried as NO2-equivalent. All prior speciation of MOVES NOx
was also based on NO2 molecular weight equivalency.
Table 2-4. HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in LDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform
CMAQ Specie
NO
NO2
HONO
LDGHG
NO MOVES
0.992 * NO2 MOVES -
0.008 * (NO2 MOVES
- 0.008 * NO MOVES
+ NO MOVES)
2005v4.2
NOX * 0.9
NOX * 0.092
NOX * 0.008
With one notable exception discussed here, for onroad gasoline exhaust PM emissions, the allocation of
MOVES PM2.5 emissions to SMOKE-ready format PM species is the same as the 2005v4.2 platform and is
documented in Appendix D of the 2005v4.1 TSD:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/2005v4. l_appendices.pdf. The exception to these equations is that
for LDGHG processing, NH4 (ammonium) is removed from the computation of POC (PM2.5-based organic
carbon) in equation 9, which in turn, affects the PMFINE ("other", or "crustal" PM2.s) computation in
equation 10. In short, MOVES2010a for LDGHG included improved PM exhaust estimates, and for diesel
exhaust, the larger sulfate (PSO4) component was creating more NEL; in equation 7 than available
"PM25OM" from MOVES2010a, where MOVES-provided species are related as follows:
PM25_TOTAL = PM25EC + PM25OM + PSO4
CMAQ requires these five CMAQ species to sum to total PM2.5, i.e.:
PM2.5 = POC+PEC+PNO3+PSO4+PMFINE
Appendix A in this document contains the revised text and equations, specifically, equation 7b for diesel
exhaust. A recent study (SRI, 2009) also showed that, despite being sampled for NEL; and other ionic species
in the particle phase, no particle phase NEL was found in downstream filter tests. OTAQ experts agreed that
NH4 for diesel exhaust must therefore removed, but we did not have time to reprocess gasoline exhaust PM
(on_moves_runpm and on_moves_startpm sector) emissions with NEL; removed so the gasoline exhaust PM
emissions do include some ammonium. However, PSO4 for gasoline exhaust is considerably smaller than
diesel exhaust so the impact is likely negligible for air quality modeling. It is important to note that total
PM2.5 was conserved for both gasoline and diesel exhaust (e.g., PM2_5_TOTAL from MOVES and PM2.5
for CMAQ are identical). Note that PM emissions from these diesel sources are not subject to temperature
adjustments like the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors.
-------
2.4 Nonroad mobile sources (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3)
The nonroad sectors include a wide-range of mobile emission sources ranging from locomotives, marine
vessels, construction and farming equipment to hand-held lawn tools. Emissions for this sector are the same
as those in the 2005v4.2 emissions modeling platform. The 2005v4.2 TSD can be found at:
ftp://ftp.epa. gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefmal_eitsd_28jun2011.
2.4.1 Locomotives and commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3, seca_c3)
The year 2005 emissions for locomotive and commercial marine vessel sources used for this rule are the
same as they were for the Final Rulemaking: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency
Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles signed on August 9, 2011 and available at
http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations.htmtfl-2, and are also the same as those used for the Final
Cross-State Air Pollution (CSAPR) Rule documented in:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefmal eitsd 28jun2011 .pdf. The procedures for
calculating emissions from locomotives and C1/C2 commercial marine were developed for the Locomotive
Marine Rule (2008) and are detailed in the RIA "Final Rule: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from
Locomotives and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per Cylinder", published May
6, 2008 and republished June 30, 2008, and can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/oms/locomotives.htmtf2008fmal. The procedures used for calculating C3 commercial
marine emissions are those developed in the recent C3 "Final Rule: Control of Emissions from New Marine
Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder", published April 30, 2010 and can be
found at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/oceanvessels.htmtfcar-ems.
2.5 2005 point sources (ptipm and ptnonipm sectors)
Point sources are sources of emissions for which geographic coordinates (e.g., latitude/longitude) are
specified, as in the case of an individual facility. A facility may have multiple emission points that may be
characterized as units such as boilers, reactors, spray booths, kilns, etc. A unit may have multiple processes
(e.g., a boiler that sometimes burns residual oil and sometimes burns natural gas). Note that this section
describes only NEI point sources within the contiguous United States. The offshore oil platform (othpt
sector) and category 3 CMV emissions (seca_c3 sector) are also point source formatted inventories but are
unchanged for the LDGHG modeling from the modeling of other recent rules. Discussion of the seca_c3 and
othpt sector emissions can be found in the Final CSAPR TSD referenced in Section 2.3.2.
After removing offshore oil platforms (othpt sector), two platform sectors were created from the remaining
2005v2 NEI point sources to provide inputs into SMOKE: the EGU sector - also called the Integrated
Planning Model (IPM) sector (i.e., ptipm) and the non-EGU sector - also called the non-IPM sector (i.e.,
ptnonipm). This split facilitates the use of different SMOKE temporal processing and future-year projection
techniques for each of these sectors, along with the replacement of ptipm emissions with outputs from IPM
in emissions cases for future years. The inventory pollutants processed through SMOKE for both ptipm and
ptnonipm sectors were: CO, NOX, VOC, SO2, NH3, PMio, and PM2.5 and the following HAPs: HC1
(pollutant code = 7647010), and C12 (code = 7782505). We did not utilize BAFM from these sectors as we
chose to speciate VOC without any use (i.e., integration) of VOC HAP pollutants from the inventory.
Integration is discussed in detail in Section 3.
The ptnonipm emissions were provided to SMOKE as annual emissions. The ptipm emissions for the base
case were input to SMOKE as daily emissions. The ptipm emissions are unchanged from those in the
2005v4.2 -the basis for the Final CSAPR and Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas (HDGHG) FRM- emission
modeling platform. However, for the ptnonipm sector for all LDGHG FRM scenarios, including year 2005
emissions, additional known ethanol plants were included that were not in 2005v4.2. We also removed all
7
-------
onroad refueling emissions as these were replaced with MOVES-based onroad refueling emissions
(discussed in Section 2.5.2).
2.5.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm)
We replaced all ethanol plants that OTAQ had supplied from the RFS2 rule -see Section 2.1.2 in the CSAPR
Final TSD- with those recently compiled for the 2005 case for the LDGHG FRM. These plants all produce
corn ethanol and reflect a volume of approximately 4.1 billion gallons. All ethanol plants were assigned
coordinates based on analysis using searches of company web sites and Google Earth verification for many
sites. Emissions were calculated based on plant design capacity and emission factors based on production
process and energy source (e.g. dry mill natural gas, wet mill coal, etc.). Finally, because benzene,
acetaldehyde and formaldehyde (BAF) emissions were directly computed for these sources, we treated these
ethanol plants as VOC integrate sources, unlike the rest of the ptnonipm sector. A summary of the ethanol
plant emissions used in the 2005 scenario is provided in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5. 2005 ethanol plant emissions (tons)
Pollutant
1,3-Butadiene
Acrolein
Formaldehyde
Benzene
Acetaldehyde
CO
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
S02
VOC
Emissions
0.0003
10.5
13.3
5.7
314.4
7,023
8,204
10,107
3,691
9,001
10,754
2.6 2005 nonpoint sources (afdust, ag, avefire, nonpt)
The year 2005 area-source fugitive dust (afdust), agricultural animal and fertilizer NFb (ag), and average
(typical)-year fires (avefire) emissions are the same as those used in the CSAPR Final (2005v4.2) emission
modeling platform. Nonpoint sources that were not subdivided into the afdust, ag, or avefire sectors were
assigned to the "nonpt" sector, and most of these sources are also unchanged for LDGHG FRM modeling.
The 2005 nonpoint sources that change in this study are limited to portable fuel containers (PFCs) and
onroad refueling.
2.6.1 Portable fuel containers
Year 2005 PFC emissions are unchanged from the CSAPR Final inventory except for the addition of ethanol.
Ethanol emissions were not provided for 2005, but were supplied for future year scenarios. Therefore, we
scaled year 2017 pre-RFS2 ethanol emissions by the ratio of 2005 to 2017 pre-RFS2 VOC emissions to
compute year 2005 ethanol emissions as follows:
Ethanol_2005 = Ethanol_2017(pre-RFS2) * [VOC_2005 / VOC_2017(pre-RFS2)]
-------
2.6.2 Onroad refueling
Refueling emissions were modeled using a modified draft version of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions
Simulator (draft MOVES2010b) at the county level for all twelve months. The refueling inventory includes
emissions from spillage loss and displacement vapor loss.
In an effort to reduce MOVES runtime, the "representing counties" approach was used instead of running
every single county in the lower 48 states. We selected representing counties by grouping counties based on
Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADD), fuel parameters, usage of California emission
standards, I/M programs, altitude, and temperature.
Temperature bins with increments often degrees Fahrenheit were created for the minimum and maximum
temperatures for each month using the temperatures from the 2005 calendar year values in the
County YearMonthHour table of the NMEVI County Database (NCD) NCD20100602 NMEVI database. All
counties in each group had min and max temperatures for all twelve months in the same temperature bins.
Once counties were grouped, the representing county was chosen as the one with the highest VMT, resulting
in total of 238 counties. The same set of county groups and representing counties was used for all years and
scenarios.
MOVES was run in inventory mode for only the representing counties using the county-specific on-road
data, such as vehicle miles travelled, fleet age distribution, speed distribution, and meteorology, available
from the NCD. The customized fuel inputs, discussed in Section 2.2.2.1, were used for each of the
representing counties.
The resulting refueling emission inventories for 238 representing counties in U.S. short tons were converted
to emission factors by dividing the inventory by the corresponding activity in each representing county.
Then, the calculated emission factors from the representing counties were applied to the represented counties
and multiplied by the county-specific activity to generate the inventories for all counties.
2.7 Other sources (biogenics, othpt, othar, and othon)
All emissions from Canada, Mexico, and Offshore Drilling platforms (othpt, othar, and othon), and all non-
anthropogenic inventories (biogenics and ocean chlorine) are unchanged from the 2005v4.2 (used for the
Final CSAPR and HDGHG FRM) emissions modeling platform. The one difference between LDGHG and
these previous modeling is the use of updated gridding surrogates for othar and othon. The same emissions
are used for all LDGHG FRM scenarios and years.
The biogenic emissions were computed based on 2005 meteorology data using the BEIS3.14 model within
SMOKE. The 2002 platform used the BEIS3.13 model; otherwise, all underlying land use data and
parameters are unchanged for the 2005 platform.
The BEIS3.14 model creates gridded, hourly, model-species emissions from vegetation and soils. It estimates
CO, VOC, and NOx emissions for the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. The BEIS3.14 model is described further
in: http://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2008/slides/pouliot tale two cmasOS.ppt
The inputs to BEIS include:
• Temperature data at 2 meters which were obtained from the meteorological input files to the air
quality model,
-------
• Land-use data from the Biogenic Emissions Landuse Database, version 3 (BELD3). BELD3 data
provides data on the 230 vegetation classes at 1-km resolution over most of North America, which is
the same land-use data were used for the 2002 platform.
The emissions from Canada, Mexico, and Offshore Drilling platforms are included as part of five sectors:
othpt, othar, and othon.
The "oth" refers to the fact that these emissions are "other" than those in the 2005 NEI, and the third and
fourth characters provide the SMOKE source types: "pt" for point, "ar" for "area and nonroad mobile", and
"on" for onroad mobile.
For Canada, year 2006 inventories are used for the 2005 platform, although corresponding future-year
emissions were not available. For Mexico we continued to use emissions for 1999 (Eastern Research Group
Inc., 2006) developed as part of a partnership between Mexico's Secretariat of the Environment and Natural
Resources (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales-SEMARNAT) and National Institute of
Ecology (Instituto Nacional de Ecologia-INE), the U.S. EPA, the Western Governors' Association (WGA),
and the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). This inventory includes
emissions from all states in Mexico.
The offshore emissions include point source offshore oil and gas drilling platforms. We used updated
emissions from the 2005v2 NEI point source inventory. The offshore sources were provided by the Mineral
Management Services (MMS).
3 VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes
A significant detail that is different in each of the LDGHG modeling cases than in the 2005v4.2 emissions
modeling is the VOC speciation profiles used to split total VOC emissions into the VOC model species
needed for CMAQ. In this section, we summarize the various speciation profile information used in
configuring the various cases.
The VOC speciation approach used for the 2005 base-year case has some notable differences from the 2005
v4.2 platform for many emissions modes (e.g., evaporative, exhaust) and processes (e.g., diesel, gasoline,
refueling). Two significant updates in the 2005 LDGHG are: 1) headspace vapor speciation utilizes a
combination of the E10 headspace vapor profile (8763) and EO headspace vapor profile (8762) as opposed to
using solely EO for 2005 *, and 2) a new Heavy Duty Diesel vehicle exhaust mode profile (8774) for pre-2007
model year (MY) vehicles that replaces an older 2004-vintage medium-duty diesel profile (4674). See Table
3-1 for more details.
The VOC speciation approach used for each of the future-year cases is customized to account for the impact
of fuel changes. These changes affect the on_noadj sector, the nonroad sector, and parts of the nonpt and
ptnonipm sectors. The speciation changes from fuels in the nonpt sector are for portable fuel containers
(PFCs), onroad refueling, and fuel distribution operations associated with the bulk-plant-to-pump (btp)
distribution. The speciation changes from fuels in the ptnonipm sector include btp distribution operations
inventoried as point sources. Refinery to bulk terminal (rbt) fuel distribution and bulk plant storage (bps)
speciation does not change across the modeling cases because this is considered upstream from the
introduction of ethanol into the fuel. Mapping of fuel distribution SCCs to btp, bps, and rbt emissions
categories can be found in Appendix C.
1 This was an oversight in the 2005v4.2 platform corrected for this modeling effort.
10
-------
To differentiate when a source was integrating BAFM versus EBAFM (ethanol in addition to BAFM), the
speciation profiles which do not include ethanol are referred to as an "E-profile", for example E10 headspace
gasoline evaporative speciation profile 8763 where ethanol is speciated from VOC, versus 8763E where
ethanol is obtained directly from the inventory. For fuel distribution operations associated with the bulk-
plant-to-pump (btp) distribution, ethanol is speciated from VOC -thus a "BAFM" profile- because the fuel
distribution operations in the nonpoint inventories are NEI-based and therefore do not include ethanol
specifically because the NEI does not provide ethanol as a pollutant. For PFC and refueling, ethanol was
present in the inventories and therefore EBAFM profiles were used to integrate ethanol in the speciation.
Table 3-1 summarizes the different profiles utilized for the fuel-related sources in each of the sectors for
2005 and the future year cases. A comparison of the 2005v4.2 platform with the LDGHG 2005 case is also
included. This table does not indicate when "E-profiles" were used.
Table 3-1. Summary of VOC speciation profile approaches by sector across cases
Inventory
Type and
Mode
Mobile
Exhaust
Diesel
Mobile
Exhaust
Gasoline
Mobile
Evaporative
Diesel
Mobile
Evaporative
Gasoline
Mobile
Refueling,
PFCs, gas
distribution
VOC speciation approach by fuels
medium-duty diesel exhaust, 2004-vintage
pre-2007 Heavy Duty profile
pre-2007 Medium Duty
weighted year 2030 heavy-duty start
(parking area) emissions with HD controls
weighted year 2030 medium-duty start
(parking area) emissions with HD controls
Tier 1 EO and E10 combinations
Tier 1 E10
Tier 2 E 10
diesel evap headspace profile, Circle K
Diesel single -sample
EO and E10 combinations
E10
EO headspace
EO headspace and E10 headspace
combinations
EO headspace or El 5 2
VOC
Profile
Codes
4674
8774
8775
877CH
877CM
8750
8751
8751
8757
4547
8753
8754
8754
8762
8762
8763
8869
8871
2005
V4.2
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
All listed
2005
LDGHG
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
All listed
2030
Reference
& Control
onroad
except Class
6,7 & 8 start
onroad
class 8 start
only
onroad class
6 & 7 start
only
nonroad
onroad
onroad
nonroad
onroad
nonroad
All listed
PFC and BTP are post addition of ethanol and hence use El 5 profile (8871) and BTP and RPT are before the addition of ethanal
and hence use EO profile (8869).
11
-------
4 2030 Reference Case
The 2030 reference case represents emissions in the future. The reference and control cases assume fuel and
emission changes from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) and RFS2 for upstream
sources. For highway vehicles, we assume all gasoline use is E10. The 2030 reference case uses many of the
same growth and control assumptions as those for the Final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). There
are some differences between the shared projection inputs from the 2012 and 2014 base case projections in
CSAPR and the 2030 reference case for LDGHG:
1) The 2030 reference case includes the HDGHG controls. That is, we use the onroad HDGHG control
case emission inventory as the reference case emissions for the LDGHG rule.
2) Some additional controls that were promulgated after 2014, (e.g., post-2014 consent decrees and fuel
sulfur rules in a couple of states) are included.
3) Growth factors for several sources are year-specific; so while the methodology is the same as
CSAPR, the future year emissions estimates differ (e.g., oil and gas in a couple states, residential
wood combustion).
4) Onroad refueling uses year and scenario-specific (i.e., reference versus control) MOVES emissions,
rather than NEI emissions.
5) There is a new dataset of ethanol plants that replaces a limited set of NEI ethanol plants in 2005v4.2-
based CSAPR 2012 and 2014 projections.
6) Minor errors identified after CSAPR modeling was complete were fixed (e.g, we include agricultural
dust projections for the couple of states that provided point source farms).
There are other new inputs unique to the LDGHG reference case that were not part of the CSAPR
projections. Examples of these are RFS2 upstream inputs such as biodiesel and cellulosic ethanol plants, and
adjustments to refinery emissions and fuel transport and distribution emissions to account for impacts of
EISA. These new inputs and projections for the reference case are discussed later in this section. The
remainder of Section 4 is very similar to Section 4 in the CSAPR emissions modeling TSD, available from
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefinal eitsd 28jun2011 .pdf, but with the updates just
discussed.
The future base-case projection methodologies vary by sector. The 2030 reference case represents predicted
emissions in the absence of any further controls beyond those Federal and State measures already
promulgated before emissions processing on the Transport Rule began in December, 2010. For EGU
emissions (ptipm sector), the emissions reflect state rules and federal consent decrees through December 1,
2010. For mobile sources (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, and on_moves_startpm sectors), all national
measures for which data were available at the time of modeling have been included. The future base-case
scenarios do reflect projected economic changes and fuel usage for EGU and mobile sectors. For nonEGU
point (ptnonipm sector) and nonpoint stationary sources (nonpt, ag, and afdust sectors), local control
programs that might have been necessary for areas to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS annual standard, 2006
PM NAAQS (24-hour) standard, and the 1997 ozone NAAQS are generally not included in the future base-
case projections for most states. One exception are some NOx and VOC reductions associated with the New
York, Virginia, and Connecticut State Implementation Plans (SIP), which were added as part of the
comments received from the CSAPR and a larger effort to start including more local control information on
stationary non-EGU sources; this is described further in Section 4.2. The following bullets summarize the
projection methods used for sources in the various sectors, while additional details and data sources are given
in Table 4-1.
12
-------
IPM sector (ptipm): Unit-specific estimates from IPM, version 4.10, including CSAPR and the
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS).
Non-IPM sector (ptnonipm): Projection factors and percent reductions reflect CSAPR (Transport
Rule) comments and emission reductions due to control programs, plant closures, consent decrees
and settlements, and 1997 and 2001 ozone State Implementation Plans in NY, CT, and VA. We also
used projection approaches for point-source livestock, and aircraft and gasoline stage II emissions
that are consistent with projections used for the sectors that contain the bulk of these emissions.
Terminal area forecast (TAP) data aggregated to the national level were used for aircraft to account
for projected changes in landing/takeoff activity. Year-specific speciation was applied to some
portions of this sector and was discussed in Section 3.
Average fires sector (avefire): No growth or control.
Agricultural sector (ag): Projection factors for livestock estimates based on expected changes in
animal population from 2005 Department of Agriculture data; no growth or control for NHs
emissions from fertilizer application.
Area fugitive dust sector (afdust): Projection factors for dust categories related to livestock estimates
based on expected changes in animal population; no growth or control for other categories in this
sector.
Remaining Nonpoint sector (nonpt): Projection factors that implement Transport Rule Proposal
comments and reflect emission reductions due to control programs. Residential wood combustion
projections based on growth in lower-emitting stoves and a reduction in higher emitting stoves. PFC
projection factors reflecting impact of the final Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT2) rule. Gasoline
stage II projection factors based on National Mobile Inventory Model (NMEVI)-estimated VOC
refueling estimates for future years. Oil and gas projection estimates are provided for the non-
California Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) states as well as Oklahoma and Texas. Year-
specific speciation was applied to some portions of this sector and was discussed in Section 3.
Nonroad mobile sector (nonroad): Other than for California, this sector uses data from a run of
NMEVI that utilized the NR05d-Bond-final version of NONROAD (which is equivalent to
NONROAD2008a), using future-year equipment population estimates and control programs to the
year 2030 and using national level inputs. Final controls from the final locomotive-marine and small
spark ignition OTAQ rules are included. California-specific data provided by the state of California,
except NHs used 2030 NMEVI. Year-specific speciation was applied to some portions of this sector
and is discussed in Section 4.3.5.
Locomotive, and non-Class 3 commercial marine sector (alm_no_c3): Projection factors for Class 1
and Class 2 commercial marine and locomotives which reflect Transport Rule comments and activity
growth and final locomotive-marine controls.
Class 3 commercial marine vessel sector (seca_c3): Base-year 2005 emissions grown and controlled
to 2030, incorporating Transport Rule comments and controls based on Emissions Control Area
(EGA) and International Marine Organization (EVIO) global NOx and SO2 controls.
Onroad mobile sector with no adjustment for daily temperature (on_noadj): MOVES2010a run
(state-month) for 2030 with results disaggregated to the county level in proportion to NMIM 2030
emissions estimates. The reference case does not include LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include
HDGHG impacts. Temperature impacts at the monthly average resolution. California-specific data
provided by the state of California, except NHs which was obtained from MOVES2010a. Other than
California, this sector includes all non-refueling onroad mobile emissions (exhaust, evaporative,
brake wear and tire wear modes) except exhaust mode gasoline PM and naphthalene emissions that
are provided in the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors.
13
-------
• Onroad PM gasoline running mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Running mode MOVES2010a year
2030 future-year state-month estimates for PM and naphthalene, apportioned to the county level
using NMIM 2030 state-county ratios matched to vehicle and road types. The reference case does
not include 2017-LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include HDGHG impacts. Use future-year
temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 72°F emissions to ambient temperatures (for elemental
and organic carbon) based on grid cell hourly temperature (note that lower temperatures result in
increased emissions).
• Onroad PM gasoline start mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Cold start MOVES2010a future-year
2012 and 2014 state-month estimates for PM and naphthalene, apportioned to the county level using
NMEVI2030 state-county ratios of local urban and rural roads by vehicle type. The reference case
does not include 2017LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include HDGHG impacts. Use future-year
temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 72°F emissions (for elemental and organic carbon) to
ambient temperatures based on grid cell hourly temperatures (lower temperatures result in increased
emissions).
• Other nonroad/nonpoint (othar): No growth or control.
• Other onroad sector (othon): No growth or control.
• Other point (othpt): No growth or control.
• Biogenic: 2005 emissions used for all future-year scenarios.
Table 4-1 summarizes the control strategies and growth assumptions by source type that were used to create
the 2030 base-case emissions from the 2005v4.2 base-case inventories. All Mexico, Canada, and offshore
oil emissions are unchanged in all future cases from those in the 2005 base case. Note that mercury (Hg) is
listed in the pollutants column; however, we did not include Hg in our v4.2-based LDGHG modeling.
Lists of the control, closures, projection packets (datasets) used to create the LDGHG 2030 future reference
case scenario inventories from the 2005 LDGHG base case are provided in Appendix B.
The remainder of this section is organized either by source sector or by specific emissions category within a
source sector for which a distinct set of data were used or developed for the purpose of projections for the
LDGHG Rule. This organization allows consolidation of the discussion of the emissions categories that are
contained in multiple sectors, because the data and approaches used across the sectors are consistent and do
not need to be repeated. Sector names associated with the emissions categories are provided in parentheses.
14
-------
Table 4-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the LDGHG 2030 Reference case
emissions inventories from the 2005 base case
Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions
(grouped by affected pollutants or standard and approach used to
apply to the inventory)
Pollutants
affected
Approach/
Reference
Non-EGU Point (ptnonipm sector) projection approaches
MACT rules, national, VOC: national applied bv SCC, MACT
Boat Manufacturing
Wood Building Products Surface Coating
Generic MACT II: Spandex Production, Ethylene manufacture
Large Appliances
Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON): Alkyd Resins, Chelating Agents, Explosives,
Phthalate Plasticizers, Polyester Resins, Polymerized Vinylidene Chloride
Reinforced Plastics
Asphalt Processing & Roofing
Iron & Steel Foundries
Metal: Can, Coil
Metal Furniture
Miscellaneous Metal Parts & Products
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
Paper and Other Web
Plastic Parts
Plywood and Composite Wood Products
Carbon Black Production
Cyanide Chemical Manufacturing
Friction Products Manufacturing
Leather Finishing Operations
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)
Refractory Products Manufacturing
Sites Remediation
Consent decrees on companies (based on information from the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance - OECA) apportioned to plants owned/operated by the
companies
DOJ Settlements: plant SCC controls for:
Alcoa, TX
Premcor (formerly Motiva), DE
Refinery Consent Decrees: plant/SCC controls
Hazardous Waste Combustion
Municipal Waste Combustor Reductions -plant level
Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator Regulations
Large Municipal Waste Combustors - growth applied to specific plants
MACT rules, plant-level, VOC: Auto Plants
MACT rules, plant-level, PM & SO2: Lime Manufacturing
MACT rules, plant-level, PM: Taconite Ore
Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to year 2030 (some farms in the point
inventory)
NESHAP: Portland Cement (09/09/10) - plant level based on Industrial Sector
Integrated Solutions (ISIS) policy emissions in 2013. The ISIS results are from the
ISIS-Cement model runs for the NESHAP and NSPS analysis of July 28, 2010 and
include closures.
New York ozone SIP controls
Additional plant and unit closures provided by state, regional, and the EPA agencies and
additional consent decrees. Includes updates from CSAPR comments.
Emission reductions resulting from controls put on specific boiler units (not due to
MACT) after 2005, identified through analysis of the control data gathered from the
VOC
VOC, CO, NOx,
PM, SO2
All
NOx, PM, SO2
PM
PM
NOX, PM, SO2
All (including Hg)
VOC
PM, SO2
PM
NH3, PM
Hg, NOX, SO2,
PM, HC1
VOC, NOX,
HAP VOC
All
NOX, SO2, HC1
EPA, 2007a
1
2
o
J
4
5
EPA, 2005
5
6
7
8
9
10; EPA,
2010
11
12
Section
4.2.13.2
15
-------
Information Collection Request (ICR) from the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
Boiler NESHAP.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP
Ethanol plants that account for increased ethanol production due to RFS2 mandate
State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil -effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New
York
NOX, CO, PM,
SO2
All
SO2
13
14
15
Nonpoint (nonpt sector) projection approaches
Municipal Waste Landfills: projection factor of 0.25 applied
Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to year 2030
New York, Connecticut, and Virginia ozone SIP controls
RICE NESHAP
State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil -effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New
York
Residential Wood Combustion Growth and Change-outs from year 2005 to year 2030
Gasoline and diesel fuel Stage II refueling via MOVES2010 LDGHG month-specific
inventories for 2030 with assumed RFS2 and LDGHG fuels
Portable Fuel Container Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule 2 (MSAT2) inventory growth
and control from year 2005 to year 2030
Use Phase II WRAP 2018 Oil and Gas for year 2030
Use 2008 Oklahoma and Texas Oil and Gas, and apply year 2021 projections for TX
(last year available used as surrogate for 2030), and RICE NESHAP controls to
Oklahoma emissions.
All
NH3,PM
voc
NOX, CO, VOC,
PM, SO2
S02
All
VOC, Benzene,
Ethanol
VOC
VOC, SO2, NOX,
CO
VOC, SO2, NOX,
CO,PM
EPA, 2007a
9
11, 16
13
15
17
18
19
Section
4.2.14
Section
4.2.14
APPROACHES/REFERENCES- Non-EGU Stationary Sources:
1. Appendix B in the MATS Proposal TSD:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed toxics rule appendices.pdf
2. For Alcoa consent decree, used http:// cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/cases/index.cfm; for Motiva: used information sent by
State of Delaware
3. Used data provided by the EPA, OAQPS, Sector Policies and Programs Division (SPPD).
4. Obtained from Anne Pope, the US EPA - Hazardous Waste Incinerators criteria and hazardous air pollutant controls
carried over from 2002 Platform, v3.1.
5. Used data provided by the EPA, OAQPS SPPD expert.
6. Percent reductions and plants to receive reductions based on recommendations by rule lead engineer, and are consistent
with the reference: EPA, 2007a
7. Percent reductions recommended are determined from the existing plant estimated baselines and estimated reductions as
shown in the Federal Register Notice for the rule. SO2 percent reduction are computed by 6,147/30,783 = 20% and
PM10 and PM2 5 reductions are computed by 3,786/13,588 = 28%
8. Same approach as used in the 2006 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which estimated reductions of "PM emissions by
10,538 tpy, a reduction of about 62%." Used same list of plants as were identified based on tonnage and SCCfrom
CAIR: http://www.envinfo.com/caain/June04updates/tiop fr2.pdf
9. Except for dairy cows and turkeys (no growth), based on animal population growth estimates from the US Department
of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute. See Section 4.2.10.
10. Data files for the cement sector provided by Elineth Torres, the EPA-SPPD, from the analysis done for the Cement
NESHAP: The ISIS documentation and analysis for the cement NESHAP/NSPS is in the docket of that rulemaking-
docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-005. The Cement NESHAP is in the Federal Register: September 9, 2010 (Volume 75,
Number 174, Page 54969-55066
11. New York NOx and VOC reductions obtained from Appendix J in NY Department of Environmental Conservation
Implementation Plan for Ozone (February 2008): http://www.dec.nv.gov/docs/airjdf/NYMASiP7final.pdf.
12. Appendix D of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefmal eitsd appendices 28jun2011 .pdf
13. Appendix F in the Proposed (Mercury and Air) Toxics Rule TSD:
16
-------
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed toxics rule appendices.pdf
14. The 2008 data used came from Illinois' submittal of 2008 emissions to the NEI.
15. Based on available, enforceable state sulfur rules as of November, 2010:
http://www.ilta.org/LegislativeandRegulatorvMVNRLM/NEUSASulfur%20Rules 09.2010.pdf.
r^://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bmsybms_124th/bmpdfs/SP062701 .pdf.
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel/governor_paterson signs new la.html.
http://green.blogs.nvtimes.com/2010/07/20/new-vork-mandates-cleaner-heating-oil/
16. VOC reductions in Connecticut and Virginia obtained from CSAPR comments.
17. Growth and Decline in woodstove types based on industry trade group data, See Section 4.2.11.
18. MOVES (2010a) results for onroad refueling including activity growth from VMT, Stage II control programs at gasoline
stations, and phase in of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm
19. VOC, benzene, and ethanol emissions for 2030 based on MSAT2 rule and ethanol fuel assumptions (EPA, 2007b)
Onroad mobile and nonroad mobile controls
(list includes all key mobile control strategies but is not exhaustive)
National Onroad Rules:
Tier 2 Rule: Signature date February, 2000
2007 Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule: February, 2009
Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2): February, 2007
Renewable Fuel Standard: March, 2010
Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule: May, 2010
Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for 2008-201 1
Heavy -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Rule: August 2011
Local Onroad Programs:
National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV): March, 1998
Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV Program: January, 1995
National Nonroad Controls:
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule - Tier 4 : June, 2004
Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large-Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational
Engines (Marine and Land Based): "Pentathalon Rule": November, 2002
Clean Bus USA Program: October, 2007
Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Compression-Ignition
Engines Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder: October, 2008
Locomotive and marine rule (May 6, 2008)
Marine SI rule (October 4, 1996)
Nonroad large SI and recreational engine rule (November 8, 2002)
Nonroad SI rule (October 8, 2008)
Phase 1 nonroad SI rule (July 3, 1995)
Tier 1 nonroad diesel rule (June 17, 2004)
Aircraft (emissions are in the nonEGU point inventory):
Itinerant (ITN) operations at airports to year 2030
Locomotives:
Energy Information Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule - Tier 4 : June 2004
Locomotive Emissions Final Rulemaking, December 17, 1997
Locomotive rule: April 16, 2008
Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine: May 2008
Commercial Marine:
Category 3 marine diesel engines Clean Air Act and International Maritime Organization
standards (April, 30, 2010) -also includes CSAPR comments.
EIA fuel consumption projections for diesel-fueled vessels
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule - Tier 4
Emissions Standards for Commercial Marine Diesel Engines, December 29, 1999
Locomotive and marine rule (May 6, 2008)
Tier 1 Marine Diesel Engines, February 28, 2003
all
VOC
all
all
all
all
1
2
3,4,5
6
EPA, 2009;
3; 4; 5
7, 3; EPA,
2009
17
-------
APPROACHES/REFERENCES - Mobile Sources
1. http ://epa. go v/otaq/hwv. htm
2. Only for states submitting these inputs: http://www.epa. gov/otaq/lev-nlev.htm
3. http ://www. epa. gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr. htm
4. http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/
5. http ://www. epa. gov/otaq/marinesi. htm
6. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAP) System, January 2010:
http ://www. apo. data.faa. gov/main/taf.asp
7. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm
4.1 Stationary source projections: EGU sector (ptipm)
The future-year data for the ptipm sector used in the air quality modeling were created using version 4.10
(v4.10) of the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) (http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/progsregs/epa-
ipm/index.html). The IPM is a multiregional, dynamic, deterministic linear programming model of the U.S.
electric power sector. Version 4.10 reflects state rules and consent decrees through December 1, 2010 and
incorporates information on existing controls collected through the Information Collection Request (ICR),
and information from comments received on the IPM-related Notice of Data Availability (NOD A) published
on September 1, 2010. The 2030 IPM emissions reflect the CSAPR as finalized in July 2011 and the final
Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule. They do not reflect the Boiler MACT regulatory assumptions because
the rule was stayed at the time the modeling was performed. IPM v4.10 Final included the addition of over
20 GW of existing Activated Carbon Injection (ACI) reported to the EPA via the ICR. Units with 862 or
NOx advanced controls (e.g., scrubber, SCR) that were not required to run for compliance with Title IV,
New Source Review (NSR), state settlements, or state-specific rules were modeled by IPM to either operate
those controls or not based on economic efficiency parameters.
IPM 4.10 includes adjustments to assumptions regarding the performance of acid gas control technologies,
new costs imposed on fuel-switching (e.g., bituminous to sub-bituminous), correction of lignite availability
to some plants, incorporation of additional planned retirements, a more inclusive implementation of the
scrubber upgrade option, and the availability of a scrubber retrofit to waste-coal fired fluidized bed
combustion units without an existing scrubber. Further details on the future-year EGU emissions inventory
used for this rule can be found in the incremental documentation of the IPM v.4.10 platform, available at
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/BaseCasev410.html. A complete list of state regulations,
NSR settlements, and state settlements included in the IPM modeling is given in Appendices 3-2, 3-3, and 3-
4 beginning on p. 68 of http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-
ipm/CSAPR/docs/DocSuppv410 FTransport.pdf.
Directly emitted PM emissions (i.e., PM2.5 and PMio) from the EGU sector are computed via a post
processing routine which applies emission factors to the IPM-estimated fuel throughput based on fuel,
configuration and controls to compute the filterable and condensable components of PM. This methodology
is documented in the IPM CSAPR TSD.
4.2 Stationary source projections: non-EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag,
afdust)
To project U.S. stationary sources other than the ptipm sector, we applied growth factors and/or controls to
certain categories within the ptnonipm, nonpt, ag and afdust platform sectors. This subsection provides
details on the data and projection methods used for these sectors. In estimating future-year emissions, we
assumed that emissions growth does not track with economic growth for many stationary non-IPM sources.
18
-------
This "no-growth" assumption is based on an examination of historical emissions and economic data. More
details on the rationale for this approach can be found in Appendix D of the Regulatory Impact Assessment
for the PM NAAQS rule (EPA, 2006).
The starting point was the emission projections done for the 2005v4.2 platform for the CSAPR, which
incorporated responses to public comments on the modeling inventories. The 2012 and 2014 projection
factors developed for the CSAPR (see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.htmltffmal) were updated to
reflect year 2030 projections.
Year-specific projection factors for year 2030 were used for creating the 2030 reference case unless noted
otherwise. Growth factors (and control factors) are provided in the following sections where feasible.
However, some sectors used growth or control factors that varied geographically and their contents could not
be provided in the following sections (e.g., gasoline distribution varies by state and pollutant and has
hundreds of records).
Table 4-2 lists the stationary non-EGU inputs and projection factors that were applied to account for year
2030 RFS2 mandate impacts on emissions to the reference and control cases. These inputs are discussed in
more detail in Section 4.2.1 through Section 4.2.9. All other stationary non-EGU projections, controls and
plant closure information not related to the RFS2 impacts are discussed in Section 4.2.10 through Section
4.2.14.
Table 4-2. LDGHG FRM reference case stationary non-EGU source-related projection methods
Input
Corn ethanol plants
Biodiesel plants
Cellulosic fuel
production
Ethanol transport
and distribution
Portable Fuel
Containers (PFCs)
Onroad refueling
Refinery
adjustments
Type
SMOKE ORL file that
replaces 2005 base case
ORL file
SMOKE ORL file
SMOKE ORL file
SMOKE ORL file
SMOKE ORL
SMOKE ORL file
Projection factors
Sector(s)
ptnonipm
ptnonipm
nonpt
nonpt
nonpt
nonpt
ptnonipm
Description
Based on RFS2 analysis and production
volumes. Point source format.
Accounts for facilities with current production
capacities, to support RFS2 biodiesel
production. Point source format.
Accounts for cellulosic ethanol and cellulosic
diesel to support RFS2 cellulosic production.
County-level (nonpoint) format.
Accounts for ethanol vapor losses and
spillage at any point in the transport and
distribution chain. County-level (nonpoint)
format.
NONROAD-model based emissions from
PFCs, including vapor displacement, tank
permeation, and diurnal evaporation. County-
level (nonpoint) format.
MOVES-based gasoline and diesel fuel
spillage and displacement vapor losses.
County-level (nonpoint) format, monthly
resolution.
Not in base cases, accounts for changes in
various refinery processes due to
incorporation of RFS2 fuels.
19
-------
Ethanol transport
gasoline & ethanol
blends
Upstream
agricultural
adjustments
Projection factors
Projection factors
nonpt,
ptnonipm
afdust, ag,
nonpt,
ptnonipm
Not in base cases, accounts for RFS impacts
on emissions from bulk plant storage, refinery
to bulk terminal, and bulk terminal to pump.
Not in base cases, accounts for changes in ag
burning/dust, fertilizer application/production,
livestock dust/waste and pesticide
appli cati on/producti on .
4.2.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm)
As discussed in Section 2.4.1, for 2005 we replaced all corn ethanol plants that OTAQ had supplied from the
RFS2 rule -see Section 2.1.2 in the CSAPR Final TSD- with an updated list. Additional ethanol plants cited
for development in support of increased ethanol production for RFS2 are the cause for the increased number
of facilities and emissions. Table 4-3 provides the summaries for the corn ethanol plants in the 2030 cases.
Table 4-3. 2030 corn ethanol plant emissions [tons]
Pollutant
1,3 -Butadiene
Acrolein
Formaldehyde
Benzene
Acetaldehyde
CO
NOX
PMio
PM2.5
S02
VOC
2030
0.0003
10.5
13.3
5.7
314.4
7,023
7,396
10,107
3,691
9,001
10,754
4.2.2 Biodiesel plants ptnonipm)
OTAQ developed an inventory of biodiesel plants for 2030 that were sited at existing plant locations in
support of producing biodiesel fuels for the RFS2 mandate. The RFS2 calls for 1.67 billion gallons per year
(Bgal) of biodiesel fuel production by year 2030. Only plants with current production capacities were
assumed to be operating in 2030. Total plant capacity at these existing facilities is limited to just over 1
Bgal. There was no attempt to site future year plants to account for the need to match biodiesel production
needed for RFS2. Therefore, OTAQ applied scalar adjustments to each individual biodiesel plant to match
the 2030 production level of 1.67 Bgal.. Once facility-level production capacities were scaled, emission
factors were applied based on soybean oil feedstock. Inventories were modeled as point sources with Google
Earth and web searching validating facility coordinates and correcting state-county FIPS. Table 4-4 provides
the 2030 biodiesel plant emissions estimates.
Table 4-4. 2030 biodiesel plant emissions [tons]
Pollutant
Acrolein
Formaldehyde
Benzene
2030
3.56E-04
2.56E-03
5.42E-05
20
-------
Acetaldehyde
CO
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
SO2
VOC
4.14E-04
836
1,349
114
114
10
73
4.2.3 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)
We obtained future-year VOC emissions from Portable Fuel Containers (PFCs) from inventories developed
and modeled for the EPA's MSAT2 rule (EPA, 2007b). The 10 PFC SCCs are summarized below (note that
the full SCC descriptions for these SCCs include "Storage and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product
Storage" as the beginning of the description).
2501011011 Residential Portable Fuel Containers:
2501011012 Residential Portable Fuel Containers:
2501011013 Residential Portable Fuel Containers:
2501011014 Residential Portable Fuel Containers:
2501011015 Residential Portable Fuel Containers:
2501012011 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers
2501012012 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers
2501012013 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers
2501012014 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers
2501012015 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers
Permeation
Evaporation
Spillage During Transport
Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement
Refilling at the Pump: Spillage
: Permeation
: Evaporation
: Spillage During Transport
: Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement
: Refilling at the Pump: Spillage
Additional information on the PFC inventories is available in Section 2.2.3 of the documentation for the
2002 Platform (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.htmltf2002).
The future-year emissions reflect projected increases in fuel consumption, state programs to reduce PFC
emissions, standards promulgated in the MSAT2 rule, and impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) on
gasoline volatility. OTAQ provided year 2030 PFC emissions that include estimated Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP) and oxygenate impacts on VOC emissions, and more importantly, large increases in ethanol
emissions from RFS2. These emission estimates also include refueling from the NONROAD model for gas
can vapor displacement, changes in tank permeation and diurnal emissions from evaporation. Because these
PFC inventories contain ethanol and benzene, we developed a VOC E-profile that integrated ethanol and
benzene, see Section 3 for more details. Emissions for 2030 are provided in Table 4-5.
Table 4-5. PFC emissions for 2030 [tons]
Pollutant
VOC
Benzene
Ethanol
2030
146,593
1,622
31,632
4.2.4 Cellulosic fuel production (nonpt)
OTAQ developed county-level inventories for cellulosic diesel and cellulosic ethanol production for 2030 to
satisfy RFS2 requirements. The methodology for building cellulosic plant emissions inventories is fairly
similar conceptually to that for building the biodiesel plant inventories. First, we assume that cellulosic
21
-------
diesel and cellulosic ethanol are produced in the same counties where current production capacity exists,
based on RFS2 FRM inventories. The total county production capacity was over 16 Bgal; therefore, OTAQ
applied a scalar adjustment to each county's production capacity to match the 2030 production estimate of
11.44 Bgal (6.5 Bgal diesel and 4.92Bgal ethanol): 0.715 for 2030. Once county-level cellulosic production
capacities were scaled, emission factors were applied. Table 4-6 provides the year 2030 cellulosic plant
emissions estimates. These emission factors were obtained from the RFS2 rule for criteria pollutants;
emission factors for toxics were derived from 2005 NEI data.
Table 4-6.
Pollutant
Acrolein
Formaldehyde
Benzene
Acetaldehyde
CO
Ethanol
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
SO2
VOC
2030
61
168
79
2,286
124,336
5,530
1.6
185,745
21,862
10,986
14,475
15,489
We had no refined information on potential VOC speciation differences between cellulosic diesel and
cellulosic ethanol sources. Therefore, we summed up cellulosic diesel and cellulosic ethanol sources and
used the same SCC (30125010: Industrial Chemical Manufacturing, Ethanol by Fermentation production) for
VOC speciation as was used for corn ethanol plants. However, these cellulosic inventories contain ethanol;
therefore we developed a VOC E-profile that integrated ethanol, see Section 3 for more details.
4.2.5 Ethanol transport and distribution (nonpt)
OTAQ developed county-level inventories for ethanol transport and distribution for 2030 to account for
losses for the processes such as truck, rail and waterways loading/unloading and intermodal transfers such as
highway-to-rail, highways-to-waterways, and all other possible combinations of transfers. Emission rates
were applied based on June 2008 AP-42 factors and ethanol versus gasoline vapor mass equations. These
emissions are entirely evaporative and therefore limited to VOC and are summarized in Table 4-7. The
leading descriptions are "Industrial Processes; Food and Agriculture; Ethanol Production" for each SCC.
Table 4-7. 2030 VOC losses (Emissions) due to ethanol transport and distribution [tons]
SCC
30205031
30205052
30205053
Description
Denatured Ethanol Storage Working Loss
Ethanol Loadout to Truck
Ethanol Loadout to Railcar
2030
34,642
23,794
11,991
4.2.6 Refinery adjustments (ptnonipm)
Refinery emissions were adjusted for changes in fuels due to the RFS2 mandate. These adjustments were
provided by OTAQ and impact processes such as process heaters, catalytic cracking units, blowdown
22
-------
systems, wastewater treatment, condensers, cooling towers, flares and fugitive emissions. The impact of the
RFS2-based reductions is shown in Table 4-8.
Table 4-8. Impact of refinery adjustments on 2030 emissions [tons]
Pollutant
CO
NOX
PMio
PM2.5
SO2
VOC
Reductions 2030
13,602
34,850
7,550
4,365
24,014
6,428
4.2.7 Ethanol transport gasoline and blends (ptnonipm, nonpt)
Emissions changes in the transport of changing fuels from the RFS2 mandate impact several processes
including bulk plant storage (EPS), refinery to bulk terminal (RBT) and bulk terminal to pump (BTP). These
impacts, provided by OTAQ, result in approximately 46,000 tons of VOC reductions in 2030 for these
processes. See Appendix E for cross-walk between SCC and each type of petroleum transport and storage.
4.2.8 Upstream agricultural adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm)
Changes in domestic biofuel volumes, resulting from the RFS2 fuels mandate, impact upstream agricultural-
related source categories in several emissions modeling sectors. These source categories include fertilizer
application, pesticide application and livestock waste (NHs only), agricultural tilling, unloading and livestock
dust (PM only) and fertilizer production mixing and blending, pesticide production and agricultural burning
(all pollutants). As seen in Table 4-9, the cumulative impact of these source-specific changes is a net
increase in emissions for upstream agricultural sources.
Table 4-9. Upstream agricultural emission increases due to RFS2 fuels in 2030 [tons]
Pollutant
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
SO2
VOC
Increases 2030
416
61,793
500
59,004
8,972
95
23
4.2.9 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust)
Growth in ammonia (NHs) and dust (PMio and PM2.s) emissions from livestock in the ag, afdust and
ptnonipm sectors was based on projections of growth in animal population. Error! Reference source not
found, provides the growth factors from the 2005 base-case emissions to year 2030 scenarios for animal
categories applied to the ag, afdust, and ptnonipm sectors for livestock-related SCCs.
Table 4-10. Growth factors from year 2005 to 2030 for animal operations
Animal Category
Dairy Cow
Beef
2030
1.0000
1.0385
23
-------
Pork
Broilers
Turkeys
Layers
Poultry Average
Overall Average
1.1666
1.6426
1.0000
1.4491
1.4991
1.1745
Except for dairy cows and turkey production, the animal projection factors are derived from national-level
animal population projections from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USD A) and the Food and
Agriculture Policy and Research Institute (FAPRI). For dairy cows and turkeys, we assumed that there
would be no growth in emissions. This assumption was based on an analysis of historical trends in the
number of such animals compared to production rates. Although productions rates have increased, the
number of animals has declined. Thus, we do not believe that production forecasts provide representative
estimates of the future number of cows and turkeys; therefore, we did not use these forecasts for estimating
future-year emissions from these animals. In particular, the dairy cow population is projected to decrease in
the future as it has for the past few decades; however, milk production will be increasing over the same
period. Note that the ammonia emissions from dairies are not directly related to animal population but also
nitrogen excretion. With the cow numbers going down and the production going up we suspect the excretion
value will be changing, but we assumed no change because we did not have a quantitative estimate.
The inventory for livestock emissions used 2002 emissions values therefore, our projection method projected
from 2002 rather than from 2005.
Appendix E in the 2002v3 platform documentation provides the animal population data and regression
curves used to derive the growth factors:
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/reports/Emissions%20TSD%20Vol2 Appendices__01-15-08.pdf. Appendix F
in the same document provides the cross references of livestock sources in the ag, afdust and ptnonipm
sectors to the relevant animal categories.
4.2.10 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt)
We projected residential wood combustion (RWC) emissions based on the expected increase in the number
of low-emitting wood stoves and the corresponding decrease in other types of wood stoves. As newer,
cleaner woodstoves replace older, higher-polluting wood stoves, there will be an overall reduction of the
emissions from these sources. The approach cited here was developed as part of a modeling exercise to
estimate the expected benefits of the woodstoves change-out program (http://www.epa.gov/burnwise).
Details of this approach can be found in Section 2.3.3 of the PM NAAQS Regulatory Impact Analysis (EPA,
2006).
The specific assumptions we made were:
• Fireplaces, source category code (SCC)=2104008001: increase 1%/year
• Old woodstoves, SCC=2104008002, 2104008010, or 2104008051: decrease 2%/year
• New woodstoves, SCC=2104008003, 2104008004, 2104008030, 2104008050, 2104008052 or
2104008053: increase 2%/year
For the general woodstoves and fireplaces category (SCC 2104008000) we computed a weighted average
distribution based on 19.4% fireplaces, 71.6% old woodstoves, 9.1% new woodstoves using 2002v3
Platform missions for PM2.5. These fractions are based on the fraction of emissions from these processes in
the states that did not have the "general woodstoves and fireplaces" SCC in the 2002v3 NEI. This approach
24
-------
results in an overall decrease of 1.056% per year for this source category. Table 4-11 presents the projection
factors used to project the 2005 base case (2002 emissions) for RWC.
Table 4-11. Projection factors for growing year 2005 residential wood combustion sources
sec
2104008000
2104008001
2104008070
2104008002
2104008010
2104008051
2104008003
2104008004
2104008030
2104008050
2104008052
2104008053
SCC Description
Total: Woodstoves and Fireplaces
Fireplaces: General
Outdoor Wood Burning Equipment
Fireplaces: Insert; non-EPA certified
Woodstoves: General
Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Non-EPA certified
Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; non-catalytic
Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; catalytic
Catalytic Woodstoves: General
Non-catalytic Woodstoves: EPA certified
Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Low Emitting
Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Pellet Fired
2030
0.70
1.28
0.44
1.56
4.2.11 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm)
Emissions from Stage II gasoline operations in the 2005 v4.2 platform are contained in both nonpt and
ptnonipm sectors. The only SCC in the nonpt inventory used for gasoline Stage II emissions is 2501060100
(Storage and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage; Gasoline Service Stations; Stage II:
Total). The following SIC and SCC codes are associated with gasoline Stage II emissions in the ptnonipm
sector:
• SIC 5541 (Automotive Dealers & Service Stations, Gasoline Service Stations, Gasoline service
stations)
• SCC 40600401 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum
Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II; Vapor Loss w/o Controls)
• SCC 40600402 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum
Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Liquid Spill Loss w/o Controls)
• SCC 40600403 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum
Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II; Vapor Loss w/o Controls)
• SCC 40600499 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum
Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Not Classified
In the LDGHG modeling, these SCCs were removed from the nonpt and ptnonipm inventories and replaced
with a separate refueling inventory in the nonpt sector. This refueling inventory was generated from draft
MOVES2010b, provided monthly emissions for both gasoline and diesel refueling, and was year and
scenario specific. The speciation of the refueling emissions integrated ethanol as well as BAFM (EBAFM)
and was speciated using E-profiles, see Section 3 for more details.
For the 2030 reference case, the MOVES refueling results account for projected fuel properties, VMT
growth over time, the phase-in of onboard vapor control, and the phase-in of previously finalized fuel
consumption regulations.
25
-------
4.2.12 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm)
These 2005 point-source emissions are projected to future years by applying activity growth using data on
itinerant (ITN) operations at airports. The ITN operations are defined as aircraft take-offs whereby the
aircraft leaves the airport vicinity and lands at another airport, or aircraft landings whereby the aircraft has
arrived from outside the airport vicinity. We used projected ITN information available from the Federal
Aviation Administration's (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAP) System:
http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp (publication date January 2010). This information is available for
approximately 3,300 individual airports, for all years up to 2030. We aggregated and applied this
information at the national level by summing the airport-specific (U.S. airports only) ITN operations to
national totals by year and by aircraft operation, for each of the four available operation types: commercial,
general, air taxi and military. We computed growth factors for each operation type by dividing future-year
ITN by 2005-year ITN. We assigned factors to inventory SCCs based on the operation type.
The methods that the FAA used for developing the ITN data in the TAP are documented in:
http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/2009-
2025/media/2009%20Forecast%20Doc.pdf
Table 4-12 provides the national growth factors for aircraft; all factors are applied to year 2005 emissions.
For example, year 2030 commercial aircraft emissions are 50.59% higher than year 2005 emissions.
Table 4-12. Factors used to project 2005 base-case aircraft emissions to year 2030
sec
2275001000
2275020000
2275050000
2275060000
27501015
27502001
27502011
27505001
27505011
27601014
27601015
SCC Description
Military aircraft
Commercial aircraft
General aviation
Air taxi
Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Military; Jet Engine: JP-5
Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Commercial;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas
Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Commercial;Jet Engine: Jet A
Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Civil;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas
Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust; Civil; Jet Engine: Jet A
Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Military; Jet Engine: JP-4
Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO
Exhaust;Military; Jet Engine: JP-5
Projection Factor
1.0275
1.5059
0.9916
1.0259
1.0275
1.5059
1.5059
0.9916
0.9916
1.0275
1.0275
We did not apply growth factors to any point sources with SCC 27602011 (Internal Combustion Engines;
Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A) because the facility names
associated with these point sources appeared to represent industrial facilities rather than airports. This SCC
is only in one county, Santa Barbara, California (State/County FIPS 06083).
4.2.13 Stationary source control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and
plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt)
We applied emissions reduction factors to the 2005 emissions for particular sources in the ptnonipm and
nonpt sectors to reflect the impact of stationary-source control programs including consent decrees,
26
-------
settlements, and plant closures. Some of the controls described in this section were obtained from comments
on the CSAPR proposal. Here we describe the contents of the controls and closures for the 2030 reference
case. Detailed summaries of the impacts of the control programs are provided in Appendix D of the CSAPR
TSD: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefmal eitsd appendices 28jun2011.pdf
Controls from the NOx SIP call were assumed to have been implemented by 2005 and captured in the 2005
base case (2005v2 point inventory). This assumption was confirmed by review of the 2005 NEI that showed
reductions from Large Boiler/Turbines and Large Internal Combustion Engines in the Northeast states
covered by the NOx SIP call. The future-year base controls consist of the following:
• We did not include MACT rules where compliance dates were prior to 2005, because we assumed
these were already reflected in the 2005 inventory. The EPA OAQPS Sector Policies and Programs
Division (SPPD) provided all controls information related to the MACT rules, and this information is
as consistent as possible with the preamble emissions reduction percentages for these rules.
• Various emissions reductions from the CSAPR comments, including but not limited to: fuel
switching at units, shutdowns, future-year emission limits, ozone SIP VOC controls for some sources
in Virginia and Connecticut, and state and local control programs.
• Evolutionary information gathering of plant closures (i.e., emissions were zeroed out for future years)
were also included where information indicated that the plant was actually closed after the 2005 base
year and prior to CSAPR and LDGHG modeling that began in the fall of 2010. We also applied unit
and plant closures received from the CSAPR comments. However, plants projected to close in the
future (post-2010) were not removed in the future years because these projections can be inaccurate
due to economic improvements. We also applied cement kiln (unit) and cement plant closures
discussed later in Section 4.2.6.1. More detailed information on the overall state-level impacts of all
control programs and projection datasets, including units and plants closed in the 2012 and 2014
base-case ptnonipm inventories are provided in Appendix D of the CSAPR TSD:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventoiy/2005v4_2/transportrulefmal_eitsd_appendices_28jun2011.pdf The
magnitude of all unit and plant closures on the non-EGU point (ptnonipm) sector 2005 base-case
emissions is shown in Table 4-13 below.
Table 4-13. Summary of Non-EGU Emission Reductions Applied to the 2005 Inventory due to Unit and
Plant Closures
Reductions
CO
125,162
NH3
636
NOX
109,237
PM10
21,143
PM25
12,600
S02
190,734
VOC
26,750
• In addition to plant closures, we included the effects of the Department of Justice Settlements and
Consent Decrees on the non-EGU (ptnonipm) sector emissions. We also included estimated impacts
of HAP standards per Section 112, 129 of the Clean Air Act on the non-EGU (ptnonipm) and
nonpoint (nonpt) sector emissions, based on expected CAP co-benefits to sources in these sectors.
• Numerous controls have compliance dates beyond 2008; these include refinery and the Office of
Compliance and Enforcement (OECA) consent decrees, Department of Justice (DOJ) settlements, as
well as most national VOC MACT controls. Additional OECA consent decree information is
provided in Appendix B of the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed toxics rule appendices.pdf The detailed data
used are available at the website listed in Section 1.
27
-------
• Refinery consent decrees controls at the facility and SCC level (collected through internal
coordination on refineries by the EPA).
• Fuel sulfur fuel limits were enforceable for Maine, New Jersey and New York. These fuel limits
were incremental and not applicable until after 2012.
• Criteria air pollutant (cap) reductions a cobenefit to RICE NESHAP controls, including 862 RICE
cobenefit controls.
• We applied New York State Implementation Plan available controls for the 1997 8-hour Ozone
standard for non-EGU point and nonpoint NOx and VOC sources based on NY State Department of
Environmental Conservation February 2008 guidance. These reductions are found in Appendix J in:
http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/air_pdf/NYMASIP7fmal.pdf See Section 3.2.6 in the CSAPR TSD:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4 2/transportrulefmal eitsd 28jun2011 .pdf
Most of the control programs were applied as replacement controls, which means that any existing percent
reductions ("baseline control efficiency") reported in the NEI were removed prior to the addition of the
percent reductions due to these control programs. Exceptions to replacement controls are "additional"
controls, which ensure that the controlled emissions match desired reductions regardless of the baseline
control efficiencies in the NEI. We used the "additional controls" approach for many permit limits,
settlements and consent decrees where specific plant and multiple-plant-level reductions/targets were desired
and at municipal waste landfills where VOC was reduced 75% via a MACT control using projection factors
ofO.25.
4.2.13.1 Reductions from the Portland Cement NESHAP
As indicated in Table 4-1, the Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) model (EPA, 2010) was used to
project the cement industry component of the ptnonipm emissions modeling sector to 2013. There were no
future year estimates for year 2030, so 2013 estimates were used for the 2030 Reference case. This approach
provided reductions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants, including mercury. The ISIS cement emissions
were developed in support for the Portland Cement NESHAPs and the NSPS for the Portland cement
manufacturing industry.
The ISIS model produced a Portland Cement NESHAP policy case of multi-pollutant emissions for
individual cement kilns (emission inventory units) that were relevant for years 2013 through 2017. These
ISIS-based emissions included information on new cement kilns, facility and unit-level closures, and updated
policy case emissions at existing cement kilns. The units that opened or closed before 2010 were included in
the projections as were the ISIS-based policy case predictions of emissions reductions and activity growth.
The ISIS model results for the future show a continuation of the recent trend in the cement sector of the
replacement of lower capacity, inefficient wet and long dry kilns with bigger and more efficient preheater
and precalciner kilns. Multiple regulatory requirements such as the NESHAP and NSPS currently apply to
the cement industry to reduce CAP and HAP emissions. Additionally, state and local regulatory
requirements might apply to individual cement facilities depending on their locations relative to ozone and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas. The ISIS model provides the emission reduction strategy that balances: 1)
optimal (least cost) industry operation, 2) cost-effective controls to meet the demand for cement, and 3)
emission reduction requirements over the time period of interest. Table 4-14 shows the magnitude of the
ISIS-based cement industry reductions in the future-year emissions that represent 2013 (and 2030 for
LDGHG), and the impact that these reductions have on total stationary non-EGU point source (ptnonipm)
emissions.
28
-------
Table 4-14. Future-year ISIS-based cement industry annual reductions (tons/yr)
for the non-EGU (ptnonipm) sector
Pollutant
NOX
PM2.5
S02
VOC
HC1
Cement Industry
emissions in 2005
193,000
14,400
128,400
6,900
2,900
Decrease in cement
industry emissions
in 2030 vs 2005
56,740
7,840
106,000
5,570
2,220
% decrease in
ptnonipm from
cement reduction
2.4%
1.8%
5.0%
0.4%
4.5%
4.2.13.2 Boiler reductions not associated with the MACT rule
The Boiler MACT ICR collected data on existing controls. We used an early version of a data base
developed for that rulemaking entitled "survey_database_2008_results2.mdb" (EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058-
0788) which is posted under the Technical Information for the Boiler MACT major source rule
(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html). We extracted all controls that were installed after 2005,
determined a percent reduction, and verified with source owners that these controls were actively in use. In
many situations we learned that the controls were on site but were not in use. A summary of the plant-unit
specific reductions that were verified to be actively in use are summarized in Table 4-15.
Table 4-15. State-level non-MACT Boiler Reductions from ICR Data Gathering
State
Michigan
North Carolina
Virginia
Washington
North Carolina
Pollutant
NOX
SO2
SO2
S02
HC1
Pre-controlled
Emissions
(tons)
907
652
3379
639
31
Controlled
Emissions
(tons)
544
65
338
383
3
Reductions
(tons)
363
587
3041
256
28
Percent
Reduction
%
40
90
90
40
90
4.2.13.3 RICE NESHAP
There are three rulemakings for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE). These rules reduce HAPs from existing and new RICE
sources. In order to meet the standards, existing sources with certain types of engines will need to install
controls. In addition to reducing HAPs, these controls also reduce CAPs, specifically, CO, NOx, VOC, PM,
and SO2. In 2014 and beyond, compliance dates have passed for all three rules; thus all three rules are
included in the 2030 LDGHG emissions projection.
The rules can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html and are listed below:
• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines; Final Rule (69 FR 33473) published 06/15/04
• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines; Final Rule (FR 9648 ) published 03/03/10
• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines; Final Rule (75 FR 51570) published 08/20/2010
29
-------
The difference among these three rules is that they focus on different types of engines, different facility types
(major for HAPs, versus area for HAPs) and different engine sizes based on horsepower (HP). In addition,
they have different compliance dates. We project CAPs from the 2005 NEI RICE sources, based on the
requirements of the rule for existing sources only because the inventory includes only existing sources and
the current projection approach does not estimate emissions from new sources.
A complete discussion on the methodology to estimate RICE controls is provided in Appendix F in the
Proposed MATS Rule TSD:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf Impacts of the RICE
controls on stationary non-EGU emissions (nonpt and ptnonipm sectors), excluding WRAP, Texas, and
Oklahoma oil and gas emissions (see Section 4.2.7) are provided in Table 4-16.
Table 4-16. National Impact of RICE Controls on 2030 Non-EGU Projections
Reductions
CO
116,434
NOX
111,749
PM10
1,595
PM25
1,368
SO2
21,957
voc
14,669
4.2.13.4 Fuel sulfur rules
Fuel sulfur rules that were signed (enforceable) at the time of the LDGHG emissions processing are limited
to Maine, New Jersey and New York. Several other states have fuel sulfur rules that were in development
but not finalized prior to CSAPR and LDGHG Rule emissions processing:
http://www.ilta.org/LegislativeandRegulatorv/MVNRLM/NEUSASulfur%20Rules 09.2010.pdf.
The fuel sulfur content for all home heating oil SCCs in 2005 is assumed to by 3000 part per million (ppm).
Effective July 1, 2012, New York requires all heating oil sold in New York to contain no more than 15ppm
of sulfur, thus reducing SC>2 emissions by 99.5% for post-2012 (2030) projections. These New York sulfur
content reductions are further discussed here:
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel/governor_paterson signs new la.html.
The New Jersey year 2017 standard of 15ppm (assuming SOOppm baseline for Kersone) sulfur content yields
a 96.25% SC>2 emissions reduction for kersone (fuel #1). The New Jersey sulfur content reductions are
discussed here: http://njtodav.net/2010/09/01/nj-adopts-rule-limiting-sulfur-content-in-fuel-oil/.
The Maine fuel sulfur rule effective January 1, 2014 reduces sulfur to 15ppm, resulting in a 99.5% reduction
from 3000 ppm. These Maine sulfur content reductions are discussed here:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills _124th/billpdfs/SP062701.pdf.
The impact of these fuel sulfur content reductions on SO2 is shown in Table 4-17.
Table 4-17. Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 2030 Non-EGU Projections
State
Maine
New Jersey
New York
Total
SOi Reductions
18,470
998
54,431
73,898
30
-------
4.2.14 Oil and gas projections in TX, OK, and non-California WRAP states
(nonpt)
For the 2005v4.2 platform, we incorporated updated 2005 oil and gas emissions from Texas and Oklahoma.
For Texas oil and gas production, we used the last available future year, year 2021, estimates from the Texas
Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and used them as described in:
http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/am/contracts/reports/ei/5820783985FY0901-
20090715-ergi-Drilling Rig El.pdf.
We also received 2008 data for Oklahoma that we used as the best available data to represent 2030. We
utilized the latest available future year, year 2018, Phase II WRAP oil and gas emissions data for the non-
California Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) states to represent year 2030. RICE NESHAP
reductions, which are effective by year 2014, were applied to the year 2008 Oklahoma oil and gas inventory
but not applied to the 2021 TCEQ oil and gas estimates or 2018 WRAP Phase II oil and gas inventory.
For Oklahoma, we applied CO, NOx, SO2 and VOC emissions reductions from the RICE NESHAP, which
we assumed has some applicability to this industry (see Appendix F in the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf). Table 4-18 shows the
2005 and 2030 NOX and SO2 emissions including RICE reductions for Oklahoma.
Table 4-18. Oil and Gas NOx and SO2 Emissions for 2005 and 2030 including additional reductions due to
the RICE NESHAP
Alaska
Arizona
Colorado
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Oregon
South Dakota
Texas
Utah
Wyoming
Total
NOX
2005
836
13
32,188
10,617
71
61,674
6,040
39,668
61
566
42,854
6,896
36,172
237,656
2030
453
15
33,517
13,880
63
74,648
20,869
42,402
44
557
26,061
6,297
34,142
252,948
PM2.5
2005
1,918
2,945
4,862
2030
2,231
435
2,666
SO2
2005
62
350
640
1
369
688
1,014
43
5,977
149
541
9,834
2030
1
11
6
0
12
4
2
0
33
1
3
73
VOC
2005
68
37
35,500
9,187
105
215,636
8,988
155,908
19
370
4,337
43,403
166,939
640,498
2030
12
49
43,639
14,110
163
267,846
17,968
163,598
14
562
1,504
81,890
304,748
896,104
4.3 Mobile source projections
Mobile source monthly inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile emissions were created for 2030 using a
the NMEVI and MOVES2010a models. Future-year emissions reflect onroad mobile control programs
including the Light-Duty Vehicle Tier 2 Rule, the Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule, and the Mobile Source Air
Toxics (MSAT2) final rule. Nonroad mobile emissions reductions for these years include regulations
affecting locomotives, various nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine engine types,
fuel sulfur content, and evaporative emissions.
Onroad mobile sources are comprised of several components and are discussed in the next subsection (4.3.1).
Nonroad mobile emission projections are discussed in subsection 4.4. Locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2
11
-------
commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) projections are discussed in subsection 4.4.2, and Class 3 (C3)
CMV projected emissions are discussed in subsection 4.4.3.
4.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)
The onroad emissions for states other than California were generated with the 2010 version of the Motor
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES2010a) - the same version that was used for the 2005 baseline
inventory and the 2030 control case. For all three cases, the model was run with custom default inputs that
accounted for the Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas standards and allowed for the separate calculation of heavy
duty emissions of different weight categories as described in the "Final Rulemaking to Establish Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles
Regulatory Impact Analysis" (http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/documents/420rl 1901 .pdf).
California onroad (on_noadj)
California onroad inventory: California year 2030 complete CAP/HAP onroad inventories are monthly
onroad emissions and are based on March 2007 California Air Resources Board (CARB) data (Martin
Johnson: mjohnson@arb.ca.gov). Like year 2005 emissions, future-year California NHa emissions are from
MOVES runs for California, disaggregated to the county level using NMIM. We estimated HAP emissions
by applying HAP-to-CAP ratios computed from California 2005 NEI submittal provided by EPA in 12/2007.
This was done because the CARB submittal from March 2007 did not include estimates for HAPs. We
retained only those HAPs that were also estimated by NMIM for nonroad mobile sources; all other HAPs
were dropped.
Onroad mobile sector with no adjustment for daily temperature (on_noadj)
As discussed in Section 2, the MOVES2010a model was used for all vehicles, road types, and pollutants.
Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) was projected using growth rates from the Department of Energy's
AEO2011. We used MOVES2010a to create emissions by state, SCC, pollutant, emissions mode and month.
We then allocated these emissions to counties using ratios based on 2030 NMEVI county-level data by state,
SCC, pollutant, and emissions mode.
Onroad PM gasoline running and cold start mode sectors (on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm)
MOVES-based cold start and running mode emissions consist of gasoline exhaust speciated PM and
naphthalene. These pre-temperature-adjusted emissions at 72°F are projected to year 2030 from year 2005
inventories using the 2030-specific runs of MOVES2010a. VMT were projected using growth rates from the
AEO2009. As with the on_noadj sector, the 2030 MOVES2010a data were created at the state-month level,
and the 2030 NMEVI results were used to disaggregate the state level results to the county level.
MOVES-based temperature adjustment factors were applied to gridded, hourly emissions using gridded,
hourly meteorology. As seen in Figure 4-1, for year 2030, we used the same temperature adjustment factors
as the 2005 base case for both start and running modes. However, cold start temperature adjustment factors
decrease in future years, and for year 2030 processing, we updated the temperature adjustment curves for
these cold start emissions. Note that running exhaust temperature adjustment factors are the same for all
years. Also, it is worth noting that the running mode gasoline exhaust emissions are considerably larger than
cold start mode gasoline exhaust emissions before application of the temperature adjustments.
32
-------
Figure 4-1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005 and 2030
^^^— Run Exhaust Both Years
--- Start Exhaust 2005
— — Start Exhaust 2030
-20-15-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Temperature(F)
4.4 Nonroad mobile source projections (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3)
The components of the nonroad mobile sectors are discussed in Section 2.3. Nonroad mobile emissions
reductions for the LDGHG reference case includes year-specific regulations affecting locomotives, various
nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine engine types, fuel sulfur content, and
evaporative emissions. This section discusses the changes due to the NONROAD/NMEVI system (nonroad
sector) and additional C1/C2 CMV and locomotive emissions from volume increases resulting from
incorporation of larger amounts of renewable fuels in the 2030 reference case.
4.4.1 Emissions generated with the NONROAD model (nonroad)
OTAQ provided several runs of NMEVI emissions that were blended together to create the 2030 nonroad
sector emissions. We used these same nonroad emissions for both the reference and control cases. Table 4-11
shows how the various NMEVI runs were combined to create the non-California nonroad mobile inventories.
The first component "2002v3-based 2030 Base Case" is from the 2030 Base case in our 2002v3 platform for
the SCCs listed in Table 4-11. OTAQ also provided diesel recreational marine (pleasure craft) emissions in
November 2009.
Table 4-11. Components of 2030 HDGHG Nonroad Sector
NMIM file
2002v3 -based 2030 Base Case
LdGhgN2030eO_nponzsegl Idie
s.txt
SCCs
2267x
2268x
2270x
2285002015,
2285006015
22820200x
Description of Nonroad
SCCs
LPG equipment
CNG equipment
Diesel engines
Railway maintenance
Diesel recreational-marine
33
-------
LdGhgN2030el0.txt
2260x
2265x
228200x, 22820 Ix
2-stroke gasoline engines
4-stroke gasoline engines
Gasoline recreational
marine
We have not included voluntary nonroad programs in our projections such as programs encouraging either
no refueling or evening refueling on Ozone Action Days and diesel retrofit programs. The national nonroad
regulations are those promulgated prior to December 2009, and beginning about 1990. Recent rules include:
• "Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule - Tier 4": (http://www.epa.gov/nonroaddiesel/2004fr.htm ),
published June 29, 2004, and,
• Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines (Marine
and Land-Based), November 8, 2002 ("Pentathalon Rule").
• OTAQ's Locomotive Marine Rule, March 2008:
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.htm)
• OTAQ's Small Engine Spark Ignition ("Bond") Rule, November 2008:
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip-ld.htm)
All future year nonroad emissions used NMEVI data that are based on AEO2009 fuels and the same NMEVI
county database NCD20101201Tier3. We converted emissions from monthly totals to monthly average-day
values based the on number of days in each month. Only criteria and select HAPs (benzene, acetaldehyde,
butadiene, acrolein, and formaldehyde) were retained when creating SMOKE one record per line (ORL)
files.
California monthly nonroad emissions are year 2030 and are based on March 2007 California Air Resources
Board (CARB) data (Martin Johnson: mjohnson@arb.ca.gov). NH3 emissions are from NMIM runs for
California (same data as were used in 2030 from the 2002 v3 platform). We allocated refueling emissions to
the gasoline equipment types based on evaporative mode VOC emissions from the 2002 v3 platform 2030
NMIM data, and the refueling emissions were computed by multiplying SCC 2505000120 emissions by
0.61, to adjust to remove double counting with Portable Fuel Container inventory for California. We
estimated HAP emissions by applying HAP-to-CAP ratios computed from the California data provided for
the 2005 NEI v2, collected by EPA on 12/2007. This was done because the CARB submittal from March
2007 did not include estimates for HAPs. We retained only those HAPs that are also estimated by NMEVI for
nonroad mobile sources; all other HAPs were dropped.
4.4.2 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3)
Aircraft emissions reside in the nonEGU point inventory (ptnonipm), and the projection factors used to
create year 2030 estimates, are discussed in Section 4.2. The remaining 2005 NEI emissions for locomotives
and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) use year-specific projection estimates.
Base future year locomotive and C1/C2 CMV emissions were calculated using projection factors that were
computed based on national, annual summaries of emissions in 2005 and 2030. Some additional emissions
were then factored in due to changes in fuels. These national summaries were used to create national by-
pollutant, by-SCC projection factors; these factors include final locomotive-marine controls and are provided
in Table 4-19. Modest additive Class I railroad and C1/C2 CMV emissions that account for RFS2 volume
increases in the LDGHG future year reference scenarios were then added into the reference case due to the
volume differences in corn, cellulosic and imported ethanol and cellulosic diesel fuels. These additional
emissions are summarized in Table 4-20.
34
-------
Table 4-19. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and class 1 and class 2
commercial marine vessel emissions to 2030
sec
2280002X00
2280002X00
2280002X00
2280002X00
2280002X00
2280002X00
2280002X00
2285002006
2285002006
2285002006
2285002006
2285002006
2285002006
2285002006
2285002007
2285002007
2285002007
2285002007
2285002007
2285002007
2285002007
2285002008
2285002008
2285002008
2285002008
2285002008
2285002008
2285002008
2285002009
2285002009
2285002009
2285002009
2285002009
2285002009
2285002009
2285002010
2285002010
2285002010
2285002010
2285002010
2285002010
2285002010
SCC Description
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak)
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives
Pollutant
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
voc
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
VOC
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
VOC
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
VOC
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
VOC
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM25
S02
VOC
2030
0.956
1.285
0.372
0.350
0.356
0.045
0.402
1.640
1.627
0.357
0.260
0.263
0.006
0.293
0.403
1.627
0.350
0.272
0.275
0.001
0.387
1.188
1.627
0.241
0.148
0.149
0.005
0.136
1.172
1.627
0.237
0.146
0.146
0.005
0.134
1.649
1.627
0.851
0.690
0.704
0.007
1.074
35
-------
Table 4-20. Additional class 1 railroad and C1/C2 CMV emissions from RFS2 fuel volume changes
Pollutant
1,3 -Butadiene
Acrolein
Formaldehyde
Benzene
Acetaldehyde
CO
NH3
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
S02
VOC
2030 Class 1
Rail (tons)
0.56
0.54
7.50
0.45
3.26
1,906
5.99
4,298
86
83
4.51
173
2030 C1/C2
CMV (tons)
0.01
0.05
2.23
0.30
1.11
272
0.95
642
21
20
5.99
15
The future-year locomotive emissions account for increased fuel consumption based on Energy Information
Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail, and emissions reductions resulting from
emissions standards from the Final Locomotive-Marine rule (EPA, 2009). This rule lowered diesel sulfur
content and tightened emission standards for existing and new locomotives and marine diesel emissions to
lower future-year PM, 862, and NOx, and is documented at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.htm. Voluntary retrofits under the National Clean Diesel
Campaign (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/index.htm) are not included in our projections.
We applied HAP factors for VOC HAPs by using the VOC projection factors to obtain 1,3-butadiene,
acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, and formaldehyde.
Class 1 and 2 CMV gasoline emissions (SCC = 2280004000) were not changed for future-year processing.
C1/C2 diesel emissions (SCC = 2280002100 and 2280002200) were projected based on the Final
Locomotive Marine rule national-level factors provided in Table 4-19. Similar to locomotives, VOC HAPs
were projected based on the VOC factor.
Delaware provided updated future-year NOx, SO2, and PM emission estimates for C1/C2 CMV as part of the
Transport Rule comments. These updated emissions were applied to the 2030 inventory and override the
C1/C2 projection factors in Table 4-19.
4.4.3 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3)
The seca_c3 sector emissions data were provided by OTAQ in an ASCII raster format used since the SO2
Emissions Control Area-International Marine Organization (ECA-EVIO) project began in 2005. The (S)ECA
Category 3 (C3) commercial marine vessel 2002 base-case emissions were projected to year 2005 for the
2005 base case and to 2030, which includes ECA-EVIO controls. An overview of the ECA-EVIO project and
future-year goals for reduction of NOx, SO2, and PM C3 emissions can be found at:
http ://www. epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420f09015 .htm
The resulting coordinated strategy, including emission standards under the Clean Air Act for new marine
diesel engines with per-cylinder displacement at or above 30 liters, and the establishment of Emission
Control Areas is at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/oceanvessels.htm
36
-------
These projection factors vary depending on geographic region and pollutant; where VOC HAPs are assigned
the same growth rates as VOC. The projection factors used to create the 2030 seca_c3 sector emissions are
provided in Table 4-21. Note that these factors are relative to 2002. Factors relative to 2005 can be
computed from the 2002-2005 factors.
The geographic regions are described in the EGA Proposal technical support document:
http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420r09007-chap2.pdf. These regions extend up to 200
nautical miles offshore, though less at international boundaries. North and South Pacific regions are divided
by the Oregon-Washington border, and East Coast and Gulf Coast regions are divided east-west by roughly
the upper Florida Keys just southwest of Miami.
The factors to compute HAP emission are based on emissions ratios discussed in the 2005v4 documentation
(ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4/2005 emissions tsd 07jul2010.pdf). As with the 2005 base case,
this sector uses CAP-HAP VOC integration.
Table 4-21. NOX, SO2, PM2.5 and VOC factors to project class 3 CMV emissions for 2030
Region
Alaska East
Alaska West (AW)
East Coast
Gulf Coast
Hawaii East (HE)
Hawaii West (HW)
North Pacific (NP)
South Pacific (SP)
Great Lakes (GL)
Outside ECA
NOX
1.702
2.052
1.072
0.688
1.416
2.783
0.874
1.232
1.09
2.427
SO2
0.095
0.456
0.123
0.079
0.147
0.733
0.098
0.166
0.057
0.623
PM25
0.312
0.571
0.47
0.303
0.506
0.871
0.348
0.589
0.214
0.745
VOC
2.487
2.396
3.464
2.217
3.839
3.842
2.528
4.225
1.621
3.417
4.5 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, and othpt)
Emissions for Canada, Mexico, and offshore sources were not projected to future years, and are therefore the
same as those used in the 2005 base case. Therefore, the Mexico emissions are based on year 1999, offshore
oil is based on year 2005, and Canada is based on year 2006. For both Mexico and Canada, their responsible
agencies did not provide future-year emissions that were consistent with the base year emissions.
5 2030 Control Case
The LDGHG control case represents the future with implementation of new LDGHG standards. Similar to
the 2030 base case discussed in Section 4, the control case also includes MSAT2 and HDGHG.
This section will address only those components that are different between the reference and control
scenarios. VOC speciation is identical in the control and the reference cases as discussed in Section 3.
5.1 2030 Control Case Point and Nonpoint sources
The point sources for the 2030 LDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference
Case for the sources from Mexico, Canada, and the Gulf of Mexico (othpt). The nonpoint sources for the
37
-------
2030 LDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following
nonpoint source emissions modeling sectors: area fugitive dust (afdust), agricultural ammonia (ag), average-
year fires (avefire) and sources from Mexico and Canada (othar).
The LDGHG year 2030 control case includes changes to the EGU emissions (ptipm). IPM version 4.10 was
run to simulate additional electricity demand from electric vehicles as detailed in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis for this rule. Additional pollutant-specific adjustment factors were applied to the ptipm results to
reflect the reduction in EGU emissions due to a decrease in petroleum refinery production. These
adjustments are provided in Table 5-1. Table 5-2 provides total air quality inventory impacts on electrical
power plants from electric and electric plug-in vehicles as well as reductions in production of electricity for
refinery use.
Table 5-1. Adjustments to IPM Emissions to Account for Reduced Refinery Demand
Pollutant
CO
NOx
PMio
PM2.5
SO2
VOC
Adjustment
Factor
0.99912
0.99892
0.99660
0.99871
0.99884
0.99513
Table 5-2. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on ptipm (Electric Power Plants from Electric and Electric
Plug-in Vehicles, and Reductions in Production of Electricity for Refinery Use).
Pollutant
PM2.5
PM10
NOX
VOC
CO
SOX
NH3
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Benzene
1,3 -Butadiene
Formaldehyde
Tons
-136
-923
459
-7
7618
3131
541
0
0
-12
0
112
Percent of Total
Ptipm Inventory
0.06
0.31
0.02
0.01
0.72
0.15
1.10
0.49
0
0.24
0
1.25
The control case also includes inventory adjustments to the following upstream processes: domestic crude
production and transport losses during transport to refineries, petroleum production and refining emissions,
production of energy for refinery use, combustion emissions from transport of refinery products, and
gasoline transport, storage and distribution losses.3
These upstream adjustments were supplied by OTAQ in the Excel" workbook "upstream scalars LD GHG_ram_RC.xlsx" with
additional adjustments on 6/13/2012 in the workbook "Upstream_Scalars_Rerun_v6.xlsx".
38
-------
To adjust inventories for domestic crude production and transport, we assumed 50% of the change in
gasoline and diesel supply would come from domestic refineries, and (b) 10% of the change in crude being
used by domestic refineries would be domestic crude. Using the assumption that 1.0 gallon less of gasoline
equates to approximately 1.0 gallon less crude throughput, the reduction in crude extraction and transport
from this rule would equal about 5% of the change in gasoline volume. Since the reduction in fuel
consumption is estimated at 31.6 billion gallons for this rule, the reduction in crude production is about 1.58
billion gallons for this rule. To generate the emission inventory adjustment factors for air quality modeling
these reductions were applied to the projected crude supply of 230 billion gallons to US refineries in 2030,
per AEO 2011.1 Thus, the adjustment is 0.68%. In addition, petroleum refinery emissions were reduced by
21% to account for lower gasoline production resulting from the rule.
Decreased petroleum refinery output also resulted in reduced emissions from energy feedstock production.
Table 5-3 presents adjustment factors for emissions associated with residual oil production, natural gas
production and coal, due to decreased petroleum refinery production. Methods used to develop these
adjustments are described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis.
Table 5-3. Upstream Refinery Emission Impacts in Tons and Inventory Scalars
Pollutant
voc
CO
NOX
PMio
PM2.5
sox
Residual Oil
Production
Impact
-51
-93
-351
-36
-17
-179
Scalar
0.9992
0.9990
0.9943
0.9997
0.9990
0.9913
Natural Gas
Production
Impact
-474
-676
-2010
-51
-39
-1168
Scalar
0.9883
0.9758
0.9583
0.9199
0.9353
0.9753
Coal
Production
Impact
-270
-97
-551
-6366
-1584
-325
Scalar
0.9026
0.9817
0.9136
0.7195
0.7874
0.8947
Decreased gasoline production also results in lower emissions of VOC and benzene produced by storage and
transfer activities associated with distribution of gasoline. Emissions from these storage and transfer
activities were partitioned into a refinery to bulk terminal component (RBT), a bulk plant storage (BPS)
component, and a bulk terminal to gasoline dispensing pump (BTP) component (see Appendix C for SCCs).
One set of scalars was applied to RBT/BPS emissions and another to BTP emissions. These scalars are
provided in Table 5-4. The scalars for BTP emissions reflect the change in total gasoline plus ethanol
volume in gasoline and gasoline/ethanol blends. However, it does not account for changes in
gasoline/ethanol blends used. Impacts were assumed to be spread evenly across the U. S. Methods used to
develop these scalars are described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis.
Table 5-4. Scalars Applied to Base Inventory (2005 Platform with RFS2 Impacts) to Obtain Reference and
Control Case Gasoline Storage, Transport and Distribution Emissions
Process
Refinery to Bulk Terminal/
Bulk Plant Storage
Bulk Terminal to Pump
Reference Case (Impacts of
Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Greenhouse Gas Rule)
0.9972
0.9976
Control Case (Impacts of
Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Greenhouse Gas Rule Plus
this Rule)
0.7944
0.8234
39
-------
Finally, in addition to non-combustion emissions associated with storage, transport and distribution, there are
combustion emissions associated with transport of gasoline by pipeline, commercial marine vessel, rail, and
tanker truck. Estimates of emission impacts by transport model were developed using methods detailed in
the Regulatory Impact Analysis for this rule and applied to total emissions from transport sources to develop
scaling factors. Emission inventory and inventory scalars for pipelines (pumps and other equipment) are
given in Table 5-5. Impacts for mobile sources are discussed in the next section.
Table 5-5. Gasoline Transport Pipeline Emission Impacts in Tons and Inventory Scalars
Pollutant
voc
CO
NOX
PM10
PM2.5
sox
Impact
-287
-1447
-6137
-241
-130
-1292
Scalar
0.9959
0.9864
0.9192
0.9895
0.9932
0.9890
Total air quality inventory impacts for the ptnonipm and nonpt sources described above are provided in
Table 5-6.
Table 5-6. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on Ptnonipm and Nonpt Inventory
Pollutant
PM2.5
PM10
NOX
VOC
CO
S02
NH3
Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Benzene
1,3-Butadiene
Formaldehyde
Tons
-3,578
-8,412
-15,538
-149,193
-13,004
-14,714
0
-5
0
-1499
-2
-687
Percent of Total
Ptnonipm and
Nonpt Inventory
0.26
0.45
0.40
1.76
0.13
0.55
0
0.01
0
1.42
0.04
0.19
5.2 2030 Control Case Mobile sources
The onroad mobile and nonroad mobile sources for the 2030 LDGHG Control Case include the same
emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following emissions modeling sectors: US nonroad mobile
(nonroad), C3 commercial marine (seca_c3), Canada and Mexico onroad mobile emissions (othon) and
Canada and Mexico nonroad emissions (also in the othar sector with Canada and Mexico stationary sources).
40
-------
The LDGHG year 2030 control case changes to the mobile sectors are limited to US locomotives and non-C3
commercial marine (alm_no_c3), the MOVES2010a-based onroad non-California (except NHa) inventories
(on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm and on_noadj sectors), and the California onroad mobile emissions.
The 2030 control case for onroad (MOVES and California based) includes a rebound effect (increased VMT
due to improved fuel efficiency), and a decrease in 862 and 864 emissions due to decrease fuel usage. An
adjustment factor accounting for rebound impact was calculated by running MOVES2010a at the national
level with output by model year. Model-year specific rebound-related VMT changes were applied, and
emissions were summed across model years and divided by the original emissions to develop pollutant-
specific adjustment factor for the the exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear modes. Similarly, the SO2 and SO4
reductions were calculated by applying appropriate reductions to national emissions by model year and using
these reductions to compute SCC-specific reduction ratios. These adjustment factors were applied to the
2030 reference onroad inventories (on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm, and on_noadj including CA).
These updated inventories were then processed through SMOKE in the same manner as the reference and
base cases.
The control case also includes Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) year2010-based upstream adjustments:
refinery supply estimates and estimated reductions in consumption that impact the transport/distribution fuel
via rail, marine vessels (cl and c2), and heavy and medium duty trucks.4 These adjustments impact the
aim no c3 and onroad sectors from the 2030 reference case.
4 These upstream adjustments to alm_no_c3 due to decreased petroleum refinery production were supplied by OTAQ on 6/13/2012
in the workbook "Upstream_Scalars_Rerun_v7.xlsx". The adjustment to onroad including rebound, SO2/SO4 reductions, and
refinery upstream impacts on medium and heavy duty truck were provide by OTAQ on 6/8/2012 in
"LDGHGctl2030_adj_080612.csv"
41
-------
6 References
EPA, 2005. Clean Air Interstate Rule Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, March 005.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/cair/pdfs/fmaltechO 1 .pdf.
EPA, 2006. Regulatory Impact Analyses, 2006 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle
Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
October, 2006. Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017, # EPAHQ-OAR-2006-0834. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html.
EPA, 2007a. Guidance for Estimating VOC and NOx Emission Changes from MACT Rules, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy
Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA-457/B-07-001, May 2007. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/documents/guidance/200705 epa457 b-07-
001_emission_changes_mact__rules.pdf
EPA. 2007b. National Scale Modeling for the Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711, EPA 454/R-07-002, February 2007. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/454r07002.pdf
EPA, 2009. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotive Engines
and Marine Compression Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters Per Cylinder. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division,
Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-08-001a, May 2009. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420r08001a.pdf
EPA, 2010. Technical Support Document: The Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) Model and the
Analysis for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source
Performance Standards for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Sectors Policies and Program Division and Air Pollution Prevention and Control
Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, August 2010.
SRI, 2009. Southwest Research Insititute, Final Report prepared for Coordinating Research Council, Inc.:
ACES Phase I: Phase 1 of the Advanced Collaborative Emissions Study, June 2009. Available at:
http ://www. crcao.org/reports/recentstudies2009/ACES%20Phase%201/ACES%20Phase 1 %20Final%
20Report%2015 JUN2009.pdf
42
-------
APPENDIX A
Modified LDGHG Equations to adapt pre-speciated diesel emissions from MOVES to air quality
modeling species needed for CMAQ
As shown in equation (1) below, MOVES provides total PM2 5, PEC and PSO4. A remainder term, R, makes
up the difference between the two species and the total PM2 5.
MOVES total PM2.5 = PEC + PSO4 + R (1)
The R term includes POM, which consists of POC and the hydrogen and oxygen atoms attached to the
carbon as part of the organic matter, PNO3, soil oxides and metals (also known as "crustal" and called
METAL here), ammonium, and water, and thus can be also written as:
R = POM + PNO3 + METAL + NH4 + H20 (2)
To correctly calculate the five PM2 5 species needed for CMAQ, we first needed to break out the POC,
PNO3, and PMFINE from R. Different calculations are used for light-duty diesel vehicles and heavy-duty
diesel vehicles, since the speciation profiles for these are different. The speciation profiles used for these
calculations are:
For both light duty diesel vehicles and heavy duty diesel vehicles, the SPECIATE 4.0 PM2.5 speciation
profiles "3914" (HHDV) and "92042" (LDDV) will be used to help calculate the other species. At the time,
OTAQ did not provide a justification for choosing this profile, but the fractions of metals and PNO3 are
small and so presumably the choice does not matter too much as long as the smallest of those fractions is
representative.
We computed the primary nitrate based on speciation profile 92011 from the SPECIATE4.1 database (Hsu et
al., 2006) using equation (3) shown below.
PN03 = PEC x FN03 /FEC (3)
where,
FEC = Fraction of elemental carbon in speciation profile:
- LDDV: 57.4805% (based on profile 92042)5
- HDDV: 77.1241% (based on profile 3914)
FNOS = Fraction of nitrate in speciation profile
LDDV: 0.1141% (based on profile 3914, intentionally inconsistent)
- HDDV: 0.1141% (based on profile 3914)
To identify which sources should get the LDDV and which should get the HDDV approach, see Table 1,
below.
Since CMAQ's PMFINE species is the sum of soil oxides, metals, ammonium, and water, we needed to
calculate all of its components. First, the metals and ammonium are computed using equations (4) and (5).
Equation (5) is based on stoichiometric calculations.
5 All profile fractions provided in email from Catherine Yanca on 11/6/2009, 1:49pm in attachment "Equations for diesel MOVES
speciation use in CMAQ 110609.doc"
43
-------
METAL = PEC x Fmetd /FEC (4)
NH4 = (PNOS/Mffe +2 x PSO4/A4WSO4) x MWNH4 (5)
where,
F metal = Fraction of metals in speciation profile (0. 002663 6)
MWS04 = Molecular weight of sulfate (96.0576)
MWN03 = Molecular weight of nitrate (62.0049)
= Molecular weight of ammonium (18.0383)
The final component of PMFINE is the non-carbon mass of organic carbon. To calculate the non-carbon
mass, we first needed to compute organic carbon from the remainder term, R.
A key assumption is that POM is a factor of 1.2 greater than the mass of primary organic carbon, which is
also used in the CMAQ postprocessing software at EPA.
POM = 1.2 x POC (6)
Using this assumption and assuming that the H^O is negligible, the equation needed for the calculation of
POC is shown in equations 7a and 7b for gasoline exhaust and diesel exhaust, respectively. As discussed in
Section 2.3, for LDGHG, the NH4 component was removed for diesel exhaust only.
Gasoline Exhaust: POC = 5/6 x (R - METAL - NH4 - PNO3) (7a)
Diesel Exhaust: POC = 5/6 x (R - METAL - PNO3) (7b)
See Appendix B of the 2005v4 TSD for more complete discussion on PM speciation for gasoline exhaust
processes: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventorv/2005v4/2005 emissions tsd appendices Ilmav2010.pdf
From equation (6), the non-carbon portion of the organic carbon matter is 20%, of the POC. By definition,
PMFINE is the sum of the non-carbon portion of the mass, METAL and NH4. Thus, we computed
PMFINE_72 using equations (8a and 8b) shown below for gasoline and diesel exhaust.
Gasoline Exhaust: PMFINE_72 = METAL + NH4 + 0.2 x POC_72 (8a)
Diesel Exhaust: PMFINE_72 = METAL + 0.2 x POC_72 (8b)
Equations 7a and 8a (with NH4) will be obsolete in all subsequent MOVES post-processing; we did not have
time to reprocess the gasoline exhaust emissions for LDGHG; however, the computed NH4 component in
gasoline exhaust was much smaller than for diesel exhaust so this impact should be negligible.
For mobile sources, we assumed that PMC is 8.6% of the PM2.5 mass. Equation (9) shows how we
calculated it.
PMC = 0.086 x (PMFINE + PEC + POC + PSO4 + PNO3) (9)
Table A-l. List of SCC groups for application of LDDV or HDDV approach
Approach
LDDV
HDDV
SCC list
2230001000 through 2230060334
2230071 1 10 through 2230075330
6 Value provided by Catherine Yanca and Joe Somers to OAQPS in email provided 11/5/2009
44
-------
APPENDIX B
Summary of LDGHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non-EGU Control Programs, Closures and
Projections
45
-------
Lists of control, closure, projection packet datasets used to create LDGHG year 2030 Reference case inventories from the 2005 LDGHG base case
are provided in Tables B-l and B-2.
Table B-l. Datasets used to Create LDGHG 2030 Inventories for Non-EGU Point Sources
Name
CLOSURES LotusNotes, ABCG, plus Timin
2016cr
CLOSURES TR1 comments and consent decrees
2014cs
CLOSURES cement ISIS 2013 policy
closures: 2005 to 20 12ck
CONTROL ADDITIONAL OECA 2005cr to
2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE DOJ 2005cr to 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE HWI 2005cr to 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE IndustrialBoiler
nonMACT 2005crto 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE LMWC 2005cr to 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE MACT 2005cr to 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE NY SIP 2005cr to 2016cr
CONTROL REPLACE Refineries 2005cr to
2016cr
CONTROL RICE 20 16cr 05b
CONTROL RICE SO2 2014cs 05b
CONTROL SULF rules: ME, NY, NJ 2018 and
beyond
CONTROL St Gobain and LaFarge 2017
CONTROL TR1 Final CONTROL packet: 2021
CONTROL TR1 Final consent decrees 2019
Type
Plant
Closure
Plant
Closure
Plant
Closure
Plant
Closure
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Dataset
CLOSURES LotusNotes Linda Timin 2016
cr 23AUG2010
CLOSURES TR1 2014cs 01FEB2011
CLOSURES cementlSIS 2016cr 17AUG201
0
CLOSURES_2005ck_to_2012ck_CoST_form
at
CONTROLS additional NEIpf4 OECA 200
5cr 2016cr 29JUL2010
CONTROLS replacement NEIpf4 DOJ 200
5cr 2016cr 02AUG2010.txt
CONTROLS replacement NEIpf4 HWI 200
5cr 2016cr 02AUG2010.txt
CONTROLS replacement IndBoilers nonM
ACT by2008 20AUG2010
CONTROLS replacement NEIpf4 LMWC
2005cr 2016cr 02AUG2010.txt
CONTROLS replacement NEIpf4 MACT 2
005cr 2016cr 02AUG2010.txt
CONTROLS replacement NYSIP O3 SCC
2016cr 26AUG2010
CONTROLS replacement NEIpf4 refineries
2005cr 2016cr 02AUG2010.txt
CONTROLS replacement RICE 2016cr 21
SEP2010
CONTROLS replacement RICE SO2 2014c
s 05JAN2011
CONTROLS SULF rules 2018 and beyond
03FEB2011
CONTROLS rep Lafarge StGobain 2017cs
25JAN2011.txt
CONTROLS TR1 2021 09FEB2011
CONTROLS_additional_TRlfmal_consent_d
ecrees 2005cs to 2019cs
Version
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
Description
Plant and unit closures identified through EPA
review.
Plant and unit closures through 2014 identified as
a result of Transport Rule comments.
Cement plant and unit closures identified via the
ISIS 2013 policy case.
Plant and unit closures identified 2008 or before.
Controls that implement OECA consent decrees.
Controls resulting from the 2002v3 DOJ Texas
settlement.
Hazardous Waste Incinerator controls for CAPs
and Haps carried over from 2002v3 1.
Industrial boiler controls not related to application
of the MACT but derived from the Boiler MACT
ICR database dated 4/30/10.
Controls for large municipal combustors carried
over from 2002v31.
MACT controls carried over from 2002v3 and
updated as appropriate.
Controls that reflect enforceable controls for NOx
and VOC from the New York ozone SIP.
Controls for refineries specified by EPA expert
refinery staff.
Controls for 2014 and 2016 that represent three
separate RICE NESHAPs
SO2 reductions from the Ultra-low Sulfur Diesel
requirement for CI engines
SO2 reductions due to state sulfur content rules for
fuel oil.
Controls for NOx, SO2, PM., and HC1 resulting
from Saint Gobain and Lafarge consent decrees
Controls for TCEQ oil and gas and non-ISIS
related cement controls.
Controls related to consent decrees identified
during the Transport Rule comment period.
46
-------
CONTROL cement ISIS 2013 policy
PROJECTION 2005 to 2030 ag emissions
PROJECTION LMWC 2005cr to 2016cr
PROJECTION TR1 comments 2005cs to 20XXcs
-ptnonipm
PROJECTION aircraft 2005cs to 2030 JAN2010
FAATAF
PROJECTION cement ISIS 2013 policy
PROJECTION refueling 2005cs to
2030cs LDGHG ref
Control
Project!
on
Project!
on
Projecti
on
Projecti
on
Projecti
on
Projecti
on
CONTROLS replacement cementlSIS 2016
cr 17AUG2010
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030 ag 09FEB2011
PROJECTION 2005cr 2016cr LMWC 29J
UL2010
PROJECTION 2005cs 20XX TRl_ptnonip
m 01FEB2011
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030 aircraft JAN20
10 based FAATAF 10FEB2011
PROJECTION cementlSIS 2016cr 17AUG2
010
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030cs LDGHG ref
onroad refueling 04FEB2011
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Controls for cement plants based on 2013 ISIS
policy case
Projection factors for agriculture based on animal
population stats.
Projection factors for Solid and Liquid Municipal
Waste Combustors.
Projection factors derived from Transport Rule
comments.
Projection factors for aircraft derived from the
FAA Terminal Area Forecast System.
Projection factors that implement the 2013 ISIS
policy case for cement.
Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling.
Table B-2. Datasets used to Create LDGHG 2030 Inventories for Nonpoint Sources
Control Program Name
CONTROL REPLACE NY
SIP2005crto2016cr
CONTROL RICE
2016cr 05b
CONTROL RICE SO2
2014cs 05b
CONTROL SULF rules:
ME, NY, NJ 2018 and
beyond
CONTROL TR1 Final
CONTROL packet: 2021
PROJECTION 2005 to 2030
ag sector
PROJECTION RWC and
landfills 2005 to 2030
PROJECTION refueling
2005cs to
2030cs LDGHG ref
Type
Control
Control
Control
Control
Control
Projection
Projection
Projection
Dataset
CONTROLS replacement NYSIP O3 SC
C 2016cr 26AUG2010
CONTROLS replacement RICE 2016cr
21SEP2010
CONTROLS replacement RICE SO2 20
14cs 05JAN2011
CONTROLS SULF rules 2018 and beyo
nd 03FEB2011
CONTROLS TR1 2021 09FEB2011
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030 ag 09FEB20
11
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030cs RWC land
fills 08FEB2011
PROJECTION 2005cs 2030cs LDGHG r
ef onroad refueling 04FEB2011
Version
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Description
Controls that reflect enforceable controls for NOx and VOC from the
New York ozone SIP.
Controls for 2014 and 2016 that represent three separate RICE
NESHAPs
SO2 reductions from the Ultra-low Sulfur Diesel requirement for CI
engines
SO2 reductions due to state sulfur content rules for fuel oil.
Controls for TCEQ oil and gas and non-ISIS related cement controls.
Projection factors for agriculture based on animal population stats.
Projection factors for residential wood combustion and landfills.
Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling.
47
-------
Appendix C
Fuel distribution SCCs in nonpt and ptnonipm
Cross-walk between SCC and portable fuel containers (PFC), bulk plant storage (BPS), refinery to bulk terminal (RBT) and bulk terminal to pump
(BTP).
SCC description
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of'.Petroleum Prpductsjjank Cars and Trucks;undefined
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;undefined
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGaspline RVP 7: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Storage and Transport;Petroleurn and Petroleum Product SJpragejGasoline Service StationsjStage 1: Splash Filling
Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product StpragejGasoline Service StationsjStage 2: Total
Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product StoragejBulk Terminals: All Evaporative LpssesjGaspline
Storage and Transport;Petroleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejResidential Portable Gas Cans;Permeation
Storage and Transport;Petroleum, and Petroleum Product Transport;Pipeline;Gasoline
Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product StoragejGasoline Service Stations;Underground Tank: Breathing and Emptying
Storage and TranspprtjPetrpleum and Petroleum Product StpragejResidential Portable Gas Cans;Evaporation (includes Diurnal losses)
Storage and Transpprt;Petrpleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejBulk Plants: All Evaporative LpssesjGaspline
Storage and Transpprt;Petrpleum and Petroleum Product StpragejGasoline Service StatipnsjStage 1: Balanced Submerged Filling
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejGasoline Service StatipnsjStage 1: Submerged Filling
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejResidential Portable Gas Cans;Spillage During Transport
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product Transport;Marine Vessel;Gasoline
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejResidential Portable Gas Cans; Refilling at the Pump -Vapor Displacement
Petroleum and Solvent EvappratipnjTranspprtatipn and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage ll;Vappr Loss w/p Controls
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product StpragejResidential Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump - Spillage
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Product Transpprt;AII Transport TypesjGaspline
Storage and TransportjPetroleurn and Petroleum Prod uct StpragejCpmmercial Portable Gas CansjPerrneatipn
Storage and Transport; Petro.le.urn. and Petroleum Prod uct TranspprtjTruck; Gasoline
Petroleum and Solvent EyappratipnjTranspprtatipn and Marketing of Petroleum Prpductsjjank: Cars andI Trucks;Gaspline: Submerged Loading (Normal Service)
Petroleum and Solvent EyappratipnjPetroleurn Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Plants;Loading Racks
Storage and Transport;Petro.le.urn. and Petroleum Product StpragejCpmmercial Portable Gas CansjEvappratipn (includes Diurnal losses]
Cod
e
BTP
RBT
RBT
BTP
BTP
RBT
PFC
RBT
BTP
PFC
BPS
BTP
BTP
PFC
RBT
PFC
BTP
PFC
RBT
PFC
BTP
BTP
BPS
PFC
48
-------
40600141
40400148
40301102
40688801
2501012014
40600501
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gaspline: Submerged Loading (Balanced Service)
Waste Disposal, Treatment, and Recovery.;Leaking Underground Storage Tanks;Leaking Underground Storage TanksjTptal: All Storage Types
Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product StpragejCpmmercial Portable Gas CansjSpillage During Transport
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Prpductsjjank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Splash Loading (Normal Service)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage ll;\/apor Loss w/o Controls
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)-Floating Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFlpating Roof Tanks (Varying Sjzes);Gasoline: Standing Loss - Internal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Miscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Loading Racks
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminalsjyappr Control Unit Losses
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjGaspline: Barges Loading - Uncleaned Tanks
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Internal Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;See Comment **
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminalsjyalyes, Flanges, and Pumps
Petroleum and Solvent Eva poration; Transport at ion and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Gasoline Retail Operations - Stage I; Underground Tank Breathing and Emptying
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss - Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFlpating Roof Tanks (Varying Sjzes);Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;TransŁortatipn and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments Field
Storage and Transport;Petroleurn and Petroleum Product sjorage;Cornmercial Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump - Vapor Displacement
Petroleum and SolventEva poration; Transport at ion and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Gasoline Retail Operations - Stage I; Ba]ancjd Submerged L'"'n9
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportatipn and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjGasoline: Barge Loading - Average Tank Condition
Petroleum and Solvent Eva poration; Transport at ion and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Pipeline Petroleum Transport - General - AN Products; Pipeline Leaks
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of .Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ship Loading - Uncleaned Tanks
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss - Int. Float Roof (Pri/Sec Seal)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjNpt Classified **
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Working Loss (Diameter Independent) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjNpt Classified **
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;.Pjtro]eum Product Storage at Refineries;Deleted - Dp Not Use (See 4-03-011 and 4-07];Gasoline **
BTP
BTP
RFC
.BTP
BTP
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
BTP
...RBT...
...R...B.L
RBT
RBT
RBT
BTP
PFC
.BI.P...
RBT
RBT
RBT
...R...B.I....
RBT
RBT
RBT
...R...B.L
RBT
49
-------
40400152
40600163
2501012015
_40400118_
40600232
.19190.113...
460302
...49490130.
440101
40301101
...49490149.
4040021 0
4400279
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terrninals;\/apor Collection Losses
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Return with Vapor (Transit Losses)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)-Flqating Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent EyaporaWon;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments Field
Storage and Transport;Petroleurn and Petroleum Product sjorage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump - Spillage
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations - Stage |;Splash Filling
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.) - Variable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ocean Barges Loading
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and Trucks;Not Classified **
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.) - Floating Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum PrpductsjGasoline Retail Operations - Stage ^Submerged Filling w/o Controls
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk PlantsjValyes, Flanges, and Pumps
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss - External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and TrucksjGasoline: Splash Loading **
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;FJoating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizesj;Gasoiine RVP 13: Standing Loss (67000 Bbi. Tank
Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: Working Loss (Tank Diameter
Independent)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss - Ext. Float Roof Tank w/ Second'y Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporatipn;Petrpleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: External Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal)
i
Petroleum and SolyentEyap
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: Internal Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Working Loss (Diarn. Independent) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
40301105
40600199
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss (67000 gy Capacity)- Floating Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk PlantsjGaspline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.) - Floating Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and Trucks;Not Classified **
RBT
BTP
...R.§.L
BTP
PFC
...HP.....
RBT
RBT
RBT
BTP
RBT
BTP
BPS
RBT
RBT
RBT
BTP
RBT
RBT
RBT
RBT
BPS
BPS
RBT
RBT
BTP
RBT
RBT
RBT
BPS
RBT
BTP
50
-------
404001 1 7
40400401
40600231
404001 02
40400232
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.) - Float Rf Ink
Storage and Transport;Petroleurn and Petroleum Product storage;AII Storage Types: yyorking LossjTotal: All Products
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Tanker Ship - Ballasted Tank Condition
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 10: yyorking Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjSpecify Liquid: Standing Loss - External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Pipeline Petroleum Transport - General - All Products; Pipeline Venting
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ocean Barges Loading - Uncleaned Tanks
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and TrucksjGasoline: Submerged Loading **
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent. .Evaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes); Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (67000 gy Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground TanksjGasoline RVP 10: yyorking Loss
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and TrucksjGasoline: Submerged Loading (Clean Tanks)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ship Loading - Ballasted Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjSpecify Liquid: Standing Loss - Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Gasoline Retail Operations - Stage |;Npt Classified **
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at Refineriesjyariable Vapor SpacejGasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFixed Roof Tanks .(Varying Sizes); Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: yyorking Loss (67000 gy Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjSpecify Liquid: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground TanksjGasoline RVP 13: yyorking Loss
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjSpecify Liquid: External Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ship Loading - Cleaned and Vapor Free Tanks
petro!e,,u,,m,,,a,nd,,,S,olyentEyaporation;Petroleum
Petroleum and Solvent. Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
P.etroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
RBT
BTP
RBT
BTP
RBT
RBT
BTP
RBT
BTP
RBT
BTP
BTP
BTP
BTP
RBT
BTP
RBT
RBT
BPS
RBT
BTP
BTP
RBT
RBT
RBT
BPS
RBT
51
-------
40400233
40600241
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
and Emptying
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Petroleum and
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation:
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation:
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation;
Solvent Evaporation:
Solvent Evaporation;
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Working. Loss (Diameter Independent) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground TanksjGasoline RVP 7: Working Loss
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Plants;Miscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Vapor Control Unit Losses
Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries; Deleted - Do Not Use (See 4-03-01 1 and 4-07); Gasoline **
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.) - Floating Roof Tank
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and TrucksjGasoline: Loaded with Fuel (Transit Losses)
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling - Stage i;Underground Tank Breathing
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.) - Floating Roof Tank
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground TanksjGasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Pipeline Petroleum Transport - General - All ProductsjPump Station
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjGasoline Retail Operations - Stage |;Unloading **
Petroleum yquids Storage (non:Refin
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 7: Working Loss (67000 Bbj Capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl Capacity)-Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbj Capacity)-Fixed Roof Tank
Petroleum yquids Storage (non:Refin
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Fugitive Emissions; Specify in Comments Field
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbj capacity) - Fixed Roof Tank
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and TrucksjGasoline: Splash Loading (Balanced Service)
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum ProductsjTank Cars and Trucks; Not Classified **
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Barge Loading - Cleaned and Vapor Free Tanks
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Marine yesselsjGasoline: Tanker Ship - Ballasting
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Petroleum Products - Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Fugitive Emissions; Specify in Comments Field
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjSpecify Liquid: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling - Stage ^Submerged Filling w/o Controls
BTP
RBT
RBT
BTP
BPS
RBT
BTP
BTP
BPS
BTP
RBT
BTP
BTP
BPS
BTP
RBT
RBT
BTP
BTP
RBT
BTP
BTP
BTP
BTP
RBT
BTP
BTP
BTP
52
-------
^06020121
40400120
j40400273
40600235
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-RefineryJliBulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss [110500 Bbl Cap.) - Variable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids; Storagei (non-ReJnery);BulkTerminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - External Floating Roof w/.Primary Sea]
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk TerminalsjGasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk PlantsjMiscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Vapor Collection Losses
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss - Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary, Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.) - Variable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids; Storagei (non-Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.) - yariable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl. Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling - Stage |;Balanced Submerged Filling
Petroleum and SolventEva porat ion; Transportat ion and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling - Stage I; Splash Filling
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at RefineriesjFixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl. Tank Size)
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk PlantsjGasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.) - yariable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineriesyariable Vapor SpacejGasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss
Petroleum and SolventEva porat ion; Transport at ion and Marketing of Petroleum Products; Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling - Stage l|; Li quid Spill Loss w/q Controls
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Pipeline Petroleum Transport - General - All Products;Pump Station Leaks
Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;Marine Vessel;Gasoline - Barge
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss (ipspp Bbl Cap.) - yariable Vapor Space
Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation; Petroleum Liquids Storage (non-Refinery); Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss - Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal
Petroleum and Solvent Eyaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine yesselsjGasoline: Ocean Barges Loading - Ballasted Tank
RBT
RBT
BPS
BPS
BPS
BTP .....
BTP
BTP .....
BTP
RBT
BTP .....
RBT
BTP
RBT
RBT
RBT
BPS
BTP
'U. S. Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2011 with Projections to 2035. Report No. DOE/EIA-0383. April 2011.
http://205.254.135.7/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2011).pdf
53
------- |