AirControlNet Development Report Version 4.1 September 2005


Version 4.1

Development Report

September 2005

Prepared for:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Prepared by:

E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.
5528-B Hempstead Way
Springfield, VA 22151

Pechan Report No. 05.09.008/9010.463

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Although under development for many years, AirControlNET Version 4.1 was completed for the
Innovative Strategies and Economics Group (ISEG) under EPA contract number 68-D-00-283 by
E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. Larry Sorrels was the EPA project manager. Special thanks to
ISEG staff for providing review and comments as well as to Frank Divita, Jim Wilson, Brian
Eisemann, and Tejas Shah of E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. for their efforts in the development
of this tool and this user manual.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

11

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CONTENTS

Page

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 	v

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION	I

A.	DEVELOPMENT HISTORY	1

B.	OVERVIEW OF AirControlNET	3

C.	HOW THIS REPORT IS ORGANIZED 	4

CHAPTER II

AirControlNET DATABASE DEVELOPMENT	5

A.	INPUT DATABASES: EMISSIONS INVENTORY 	5

B.	INPUT DATABASES: CONTROL MEASURE FILES 	7

C.	OVERVIEW OF MEAS ALL FILE DEVELOPMENT	8

D.	NEW DATABASE DESIGN REASONING	U

E.	OVERVIEW OF CONVERTING MEAS ALL INTO AirControlNET INPUT
FILES 	ii

F.	CALCULATION EXAMPLE 	16

CHAPTER III

AirControlNET CONTROL MEASURE CONTENT SUMMARIES 	23

CHAPTER IV

REFERENCES 	39

APPENDIX A: DATA STRUCTURE TABLES	 A-l

APPENDIX B: CONTROL MEASURE SUMMARY LIST BY POLLUTANT 	B-l

APPENDIX C: ONROAD MOBILE CONTROL MEASURES 	C-l

APPENDIX D: NONROAD MOBILE CONTROL MEASURES	 D-l

APPENDIX E: EXPORTED MEASURES COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS	EA

APPENDIX F: EXTERNAL TOOLS USED TO CREATE AIRCONTROLNET MAPPING
AND GRAPHING CAPABILITIES 	F4

TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1-1	Number of Control Measures in AirControlNET by Sector and Pollutant . . . . 1_

Table II-1	Filenames and Description of the AirControlNET Input Data Files	13

Table II-2	Cost Equations Inputs for Each Example Control Measures 	20

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	iii	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table II-3	1999 Nationwide Emissions by Pollutant and Sector	2J_

Table III-l	Control Measures Currently in AirControlNET	24

Figure II-la	Modules for Development of Non-EGU Point, EGU, and Area Source Files . 9

Figure II-lb Final Merge of Source Files 	10

Figure II-2 Overview of Core AirControlNET Database Development	12

Figure II-3 Data Relationships of the Tables listed in Table II-1 	14

Figure II-4 Example Incremental Calculation for Least Cost Module 	18

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	iv	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ABS	acrylonitrile-butadiene styrene

AF	air-to-fuel

AIM	architectural and industrial maintenance

BAAQMD	Bay Area Air Quality Management District

BARCT	best available retrofit control technology

CAA	Clean Air Act

CARB	California Air Resources Board

CENSARA	Central States Air Resource Agencies

CO	carbon monoxide

EFIG	Emission Factor and Inventory Group

EGU	electricity generating units

EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ERCAM-VOC Emission Reduction and Cost Analysis Model for Volatile Organic

Compounds

ESP	electrostatic precipitator

ETS/CEM	Emission Tracking System / Continuous Emissions Monitoring

FBC	fluidized bed combustion

FGD	flue gas desulfurization

FGR	flue gas reburning

FHWA	Federal Highway Administration

FIP	Federal Implementation Plan

FIPS	Federal Information Processing Standard

HAPs	hazardous air pollutants

Hg	mercury

I/M	inspection and maintenance

IC	internal combustion

ICI	industrial, commercial, and institutional

IR	ignition retard

ISEG	Innovative Strategies and Economics Group

L-E	low-emission

LADCO	Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

LEA	low excess air

LNB	low-NOx burner

LPG	liquefied petroleum gas

MACT	maximum achievable control technology

MARAMA	Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association

MSAs	metropolitan statistical areas

MW	megawatts

NAAQS	National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAICS	North American Industry Classification System

NEI	National Emission Inventory

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

V

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (continued)

NESCAUM

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management

NET

National Emission Trends

NGR

natural gas reburning

nh3

ammonia

NOx

oxides of nitrogen

NSCR

non-selective catalytic reduction

NSPS

New Source Performance Standards

O&M

operating and maintenance

OAQPS

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

OT

oxygen trim

OTC

Ozone Transport Commission

Pechan

E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.

PM

particulate matter

PM10

particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less

pm,5

particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less

RACT

reasonably available control technology

REMSAD

Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and Deposition

SAMI

Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative

SCAQMD

South Coast Air Quality Management District

see

Source Classification Code

SCR

selective catalytic reduction

SESARM

Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc.

SNCR

selective non-catalytic reduction

so2

sulfur dioxide

tpy

tons per year

ULNB

ultra-low NOx burner

VOCs

volatile organic compounds

WESTAR

Western States Air Resources Council

WI

water injection

WRAP

Western Regional Air Partnership

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

vi

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

AirControlNET is a control strategy and costing analysis tool developed by E.H. Pechan &
Associates, Inc. (Pechan) for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to be used in
conducting regulatory impact analyses of air pollution regulations and policies. AirControlNET
is a relational database system in which control technologies are linked to sources within
emissions inventories. It contains a database of control measures and cost information for
reducing the emissions of criteria pollutants (e.g., oxides of nitrogen [NOJ, sulfur dioxide [S02],
volatile organic compounds [VOCs], particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10
microns or less [PM10], particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less
[PM2 5], ammonia [NH3]) as well as carbon monoxide (CO) and mercury (Hg) from point (utility
and non-utility), area, nonroad, and onroad mobile sources as provided in EPA's National
Emission Inventory (NEI). As such, AirControlNET is linked to and dependent upon EPA
emission inventories as a source of emissions data. The control measure data files in
AirControlNET include the control efficiency to calculate emission reductions for that source
and cost data (annual and capital) needed to calculate the total annualized costs of applying the
control measure.

Table 1-1 summarizes the number of control measures within AirControlNET for each sector and
pollutant.

Table 1-1. Number of Control Measures in AirControlNET by Sector and Pollutant

Non-

Major Pollutant

Utility

Area

Onroad

Nonroad

Total

NH,

NOv

417

481

165

214

SO,

VOC

A. DEVELOPMENT HISTORY

Pechan first developed control measure databases for EPA that focused on individual pollutants.
In the late 1980s, Pechan developed the Emission Reduction and Cost Analysis Model for
Volatile Organic Compounds (ERCAM-VOC) to provide control measures for VOCs. A
companion model was developed in 1994 (ERCAM-NOx) to provide similar information for NOx
control measures. These models were capable of projecting 1990 emissions and costs for all
sectors of VOC and NOx emitters based upon databases of unique growth and control strategy
applications. They were used together in a wide range of analyses including examining the
national cost and emission reductions associated with the Title I General Preamble, assessing the
impact of control measures beyond Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements in support of ozone and
particulate matter (PM) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) revisions, and

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

analyses of the progress of individual non-attainment areas towards meeting reasonable further
progress requirements.

In the late 1990s, EPA asked Pechan to use ERCAM-like equations and methodologies to develop
databases of emission sources and potential control measures to support the development and
implementation of the PM2 5 and 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, Section 812 Prospective Analysis of the
CAA, and other policies. These databases were used to assist EPA in analyzing the effects of
different standards and/or control strategies. This evaluation forced a movement away from
separate single pollutant databases to a single database containing multiple pollutants, with the
associated control measures, costs, and effectiveness.

By 2001 - after several revisions and updates - the database became known as
AirControlNET-the control measure database for the National Emission Trends (NET)
inventory. However, at that time, AirControlNET consisted of more than a dozen programs. A
significant effort was undertaken to modify these programs into a relational database system.
Revisions were necessary because: 1) the programs were not user friendly when it came to
updating or adding new control measures, 2) the program logic was difficult to follow since
many of the cost equations were hard-wired into the source code, 3) it was very difficult to
calculate costs and reductions for any new emission inventories, and 4) too many steps were
necessary to process new data.

Today, AirControlNET has evolved into a more user friendly platform and offers new functions
for analyzing different types of cost scenarios. An interface was developed that provides
increased functionality. Pechan also made important program design changes to improve upon
the database input, operations, flexibility, and output generation. These include, but are not
limited, to the following:

1. Facilitate addition or revision of control measure information. This was achieved
by adding all control measure information to data tables used by the program. The
previous version had numerous numeric equations for specific control measure
scenarios hard-wired into the code. These multiple equations were replaced with a
single equation that uses variables related to the control measure databases and
emissions inventory. With this format, control measures can be added or revised
without program changes. Revisions are accomplished by changing input data files.

2. Add flexibility in using different emissions input files. Previous versions of the
AirControlNET programs could only apply control measures to the 1996 NET
inventory. Revised programs now have the ability to use different base emission
input files in order to apply control measures to other years and/or inventories. This
is an important advancement to the system, since it is anticipated that comprehensive
control measure databases will need to be developed for future year inventories.

3. Codified and automated the development of the AirControlNET input database. This
greatly reduces the time needed to process new data or emission estimates. New
versions of the AirControlNET database can now be prepared in a more timely
fashion.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

4. Generate multiple output files to meet specific user needs. AirControlNET can
generate files to meet the individual needs of users ranging from cost inputs for
economic impact modeling or emission reductions for air quality modeling, to
summary files with more general characterization of selected control measures.

These improvements are expected to make this tool better able to meet the needs of policy
analysts and others in conducting control strategy and costing analysis of environmental
regulations or policies.

B. OVERVIEW OF AirControlNET

The core of AirControlNET is a relational database system developed in Visual FoxPro version
7.0 in which control measures are linked to emission sources provided in EPA emissions
inventories. The system contains a database of control measure applicability, efficiency, and cost
information for reducing the emissions of criteria pollutants (e.g., NOx, S02, VOC, PM10, PM2 5
with organic carbon and elemental carbon components) as well as NH3 CO, and Hg from point
(utility and non-utility), area/nonroad, and onroad mobile sources. The control measure data file
in AirControlNET includes not only the control efficiency and calculated emission reductions as
applied for a particular source, but also estimates the annual and capital costs for application of
the control measure to that specific source.

AirControlNET relies on the control efficiency, throughput, fuel use, and emission factor data
provided in the EPA NEI format to perform cost-related analysis. The control measure
information was obtained by examining the technical and cost data from EPA reports and other
literature sources. As indicated in Table 1-1, AirControlNET currently contains information on
several hundred different control measure/source combinations. The control data is accessed
through a Cost POD, which is linked to sources by Source Classification Code (SCC), as
described in Appendix A of the AirControlNET Documentation Report (Pechan, 2005b).

AirControlNET was developed as a Visual FoxPro Application. The user, however, does not
need Visual FoxPro to run this tool, as all supporting data files are transferred to the user's
computer during installation. The minimum system requirements for installation and operation
of AirControlNET include: 1) Windows 98, Windows 2000, or Windows XP; 2) CPU Speed =
233 MHZ,; 3) RAM = 64 MB; 4) Hard Drive Free Space = 650 MB; and 5) Display - Mode
VGA/Colors = 256/Resolution = 800 x 600. A CD-ROM drive is required to install the software
from an installation CD-ROM. The minimum requirements stated above include those required
for the version 4.1 tool and the 1999 control measure dataset distributed with the tool. They do
not include additional hard drive free space that would be needed if additional control measure
datasets were loaded into the tool. Typical national datasets require between 200-300 MB of
additional hard drive space per dataset.

In addition to Visual FoxPro, the AirControlNET application uses two supplementary software
products to create the mapping and graphing capabilities within the tool. The first is Graphics
Server (www.graphicsserver.com) which is used to automate the creation of customizable plots
within the least cost module. The second is Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG)

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

(www.adobe.com/svg/main.html) is used to provide the mapping capabilities within
AirControlNET.

C. HOW THIS REPORT IS ORGANIZED

The remainder of this report contains the following two chapters and four appendices:

Chapter II. AirControlNET Database Development: This chapter details the development
of the relational database that serves as the core of this tool, i.e., merged database matching
of appropriate control measures to emission sources within an EPA inventory.

Chapter III. AirControlNET Control Measure Content Summaries: This chapter provides a
listing of the control measures currently in AirControlNET.

Appendix A. Database Structures for control measure data sets: This appendix provides
tables with the database structures of these key databases.

Appendix B. Control Measure Summary List By Pollutant: This appendix provides a
listing of control measures sorted by pollutant that includes details such as other affected
pollutants, control efficiency, and cost-effectiveness.

Appendix C. Onroad Mobile Control Measure Development: This appendix documents
the onroad mobile source control measures in AirControlNET.

Appendix D. Non-road Control Measure Development: This appendix documents the
nonroad mobile source control measures in AirControlNET.

Appendix E. Database Structures for the control measure exports with column descriptions
This appendix provides tables with the database structures of these key databases.

Appendix F. External Software Tools: This appendix describes the 3rd party software
products used within the AirControlNET application to create the AirControlNET mapping
and graphing capabilities.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CHAPTER II

AirControlNET DATABASE DEVELOPMENT

This chapter provides information on the development of the control measure databases that
serve as the core of AirControlNET. It includes information on the database inputs (emission
inventories and control measures), file development procedures, and data conversion routines.

A. INPUT DATABASES: EMISSIONS INVENTORY

AirControlNET provides control measure data applied to several EPA emission databases. This
section provides an overview of these emissions inventories.

EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) prepares a national database of
air emissions information called the NEI with input from numerous State and local air agencies,
Tribes, and industry. The NEI contains information on pollutant emissions from stationary and
mobile sources for criteria air pollutants and their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants
(HAPs). The NEI includes annual emission estimates for all sources of air pollutants across all
50 States and the District of Columbia. Emission estimates for individual point sources
(facilities), as well as county-level estimates for area, nonroad, and onroad mobile and other
sources are included.

The main focus of AirControlNET is criteria air pollutants for which EPA has set ambient
health-based standards (http://www.epa. gov/air/urbanair/6poll.html). Four of the six criteria
pollutants are included in the NEI database. These are CO, NOx, S02, and primary particulate
matter (PM10 and PM2 5). In addition, the NEI includes emissions of VOCs and NH3. Ozone,
which is one of the six criteria air pollutants, is created by a chemical reaction between NOx and
VOC in the presence of heat and sunlight.

Three general classifications of air pollution sources are contained in the NEI. These are point
sources, area sources, and mobile sources.

• Point sources are stationary sources of emissions, such as an electric power plant,

that can be identified by name and location. A point source emits a threshold amount
(or more) of at least one criteria pollutant, and must be inventoried and reported by
the States. Applicability limits for States reporting a facility as a point source at the
time the NEI databases were prepared were for any point source with actual
emissions greater than or equal to any one of the following levels: 100 tons per year
(tpy) for sulfur oxides, NOx, VOC, and PM10; 1,000 tpy for CO; and 5 tpy for lead
(FR, 2002). Many States also inventory and report data to EPA for stationary sources
that emit amounts below the thresholds for each pollutant. Point sources are often
broken up into two categories, Electricity Generating Units (EGU) or utilities and
Non-Electricity Generating Units (non-EGU). For EGUs, emissions data are based
on EPA's Emission Tracking System / Continuous Emissions Monitoring Data
(ETS/CEM). For non-EGUs, emissions data are based on reported State data or
older inventories in instances where no recent State data was submitted.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

• Area sources are small point sources, such as gas stations or dry cleaners, or
distributed stationary sources, such as wildfires or agricultural tilling. These sources
do not individually produce sufficient emissions to qualify as a point source. For
example, a single dry cleaner within a county will typically not qualify as a point
source, but collectively the emissions from all of the dry cleaning facilities in a
county may be significant, and therefore are included in aggregate at the county level
within the emissions inventory. For these sources, emissions data are most often
based on reported State data and supplemented by EPA estimates for some sources,
and older inventories where no State is available.

• Mobile sources are any vehicle or equipment with a gasoline or diesel engine. These
include both onroad vehicles (cars and trucks) and nonroad (tractors, lawn mowers,
airplanes, and ships) vehicles and equipment. Mobile source emissions are usually
estimated at the county level. For onroad mobile sources, emissions data are based
on the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) estimate of vehicle miles traveled
and emission factors from EPA's MOBILE Model (EPA, 2002a). For non-road mn
mobile sources, emissions data are based on EPA's NONROAD Model (EPA, 2003).

Please refer to http://www.epa. gov/ttn/chief/net/index .html for background and additional
information on national emissions inventories including current and future NEI data. Also note
that many of the quality assurance checks done on the emissions inventories are completed by the
Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) within EPA's OAQPS. EFIG staff check to ensure
that identifiers, such as Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) and SCC, are correct and
that inventory data are within acceptable ranges.

AirControlNET 4.1 offers flexibility of loading the baseline and user modified emissions data for
emission reduction and cost evaluation of control strategies. These data sets have to be in
specific defined input format to be loaded into AirControlNET. Additional databases can be
found at www.emissionsonline.org/AirControlNET/.

As currently configured, AirControlNET can not accept emissions inventory files directly and it
is not currently possible for someone to configure an emissions inventory for direct use in
AirControlNET. However, if an AirControlNET user is able to provide their emissions data to
EPA in the correct flat file format, it is relatively easy for EPA to run the pre-processing software
to create a new control measure dataset which can be subsequently imported into the Tool. As
described below, the required format by AirControlNET's pre-processing programs is a flat file
format.

EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards prepares a national database of air
emissions information called the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) with input from numerous
State and local air agencies, Tribes, and industry. The NEI database is in a defined format called
NEI Format version 3 (i.e. NIF3). The detail of this format is provided at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/nif/nif3.html. The data files found at this link provide the field
naming convention and data expectations of AirControlNET.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

As the required format of AirControlNET's pre-processing program is loosely based on the NIF3
format, the first step to performing this process is to convert the from the EPA's NIF3 emissions
data format into a flat file format used by the AirControlNET pre-processor. The conversion to
the flat file can be done using database query commands. The required data structures will be
provided by EPA upon request.

As currently configured, control measure dataset for Onroad sources are created offline using
EPA's Mobile 6.2 emissions model. Onroad control measure dataset are available for the entire
country for 1996, 1999, 2001, 2007, 2010, and 2015.

B. INPUT DATABASES: CONTROL MEASURE FILES

AirControlNET includes control measure and applicability information that are organized and
linked by Cost POD. A Cost POD is a group of source types, as defined by SCCs, which have
similar emission characteristics, control techniques, and control costs. A Cost POD may have
one or several control strategies (which consist of control options, efficiency, and cost
information). All of the emission reduction and control cost calculations are performed at the
Cost POD level as the Cost POD is the data key used to link the control applicability information
through the POD/SCC Crosswalk. The source applicability calculations are performed in a pre-
processing program that is external to AirControlNET and the details of these calculations are
not included there. The control measure data sets used with the AirControlNET tool have this
applicability built in to them, by design. The source applicability information (i.e., connection
between Cost POD and SCC) for each control measure is defined in the documentation of each
control measure. The details can be found in Pechan, 2005b.

Information for each control measure has been carefully collected and reported to the EPA
through separate reports for various sectors (i.e., area/nonroad, utility and non-utility point,
onroad mobile). Important aspects of each control measure, such as application, functionality,
cost and control efficiencies were reported at the time of analysis. In addition to the various
reports, all the control measure information is outlined in a 2005 report called the
AirControlNET Volume III: AirControlNET, Version 4.1, Control Measure Documentation
Report (Pechan, 2005b). Many of the costs for the controls were derived using information from
the EPA Control Cost Manual (EPA, 2002b).

AirControlNET calculates costs by three different methods: using a dollar per ton of pollutant
emission reduced, using an equation, or both. Most of the control cost information within this
tool has been developed as cost per ton inputs. This can be attributed to the data requirements
for estimation based on equations and the fact that parameters used in other costing methods may
not be readily available or broadly representative across sources within the inventory. The
costing equations used in AirControlNET require either plant capacity or stack flow to determine
annual, capital and/or O&M costs. Capital costs are converted to annual costs, in dollars per ton,
using the capital recovery factor. The capital recovery factor incorporates the interest rate and
equipment life (in years) of the control equipment. Control measure costs identified as "both"
use equations unless plant capacity or stack flow data is incomplete in the EPA emission
inventories. In that case, a default dollar per ton of pollutant reduced value is applied. Detailed
documentation for all costing methods is provided in AirControlNET Volume III: Control

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Measures Documentation (Pechan, 2005b) along with descriptions of control measures and
emission reductions.

AirControlNET 4.1 allows users to modify some parameters of control measures to perform
sensitivity analysis. To prevent ambiguous results, quality assurance of modified parameters is
done by allowing user to modify parameters only within certain ranges. Error messages are
reported to users and control measures with errors cannot be saved by the user. Sensitivity
analysis results can be seen on-the-fly, as well as, permanent emissions datafile with modified
controls can be made with AirControlNET 4.1.

AirControlNET 4.1 also allows users to add mobile controls through that Mobile Measures Tool.
This tool does not allow users to add duplicate controls to AirControlNET and allows creation of
new data sets with new Mobile controls. These data set can be used by Control Scenario Module
(CSM), Least Cost Module (LCM) and reporting module.

C. OVERVIEW OF MEASALL FILE DEVELOPMENT

Figure II-1 provides an overview of the two-step automated process that creates the control
measure data file required by AirControlNET. Each of the modules requires two inputs: 1) an
emissions inventory, 2) control measure information, and applicability information as described
above.

The first step, as shown in Figure II-la, involves the main program "make meas all.prg" that
runs three separate module for each of the three major sectors: non-utility point sources, utility
sources, and area sources. Each of the three modules uses a flat file format of the NEI inventory
as the starting point for the process. The three modules contain the coding necessary to link the
control measure data as described above (i.e., control measure, control efficiency, costs, and
applicability) into the EPA emission inventories. The Cost POD data field serves as the linkage
between the emissions inventory and the control measure information. As noted above, this link
is performed external to AirControlNET. Control measure reductions and costs are estimated
within each module using control efficiency, capital cost, operating and maintance costs. Please
note that the on-road mobile and nonroad sources are processed independently as detailed in
Appendix C and D, respectively.

In the second step of the MEAS ALL file development process, as shown in Figure II-lb, the
output files from each of the three module are merged with each other and the two mobile source
data files thereby creating the control measure data file named measall.dbf. A detailed
description of the structure and contents of meas all.dbf is provided in Appendix A.

As part of this development process, Pechan conducts several quality assurance/quality control
checks for each of the major sector pollutant modules used to develop the AirControlNET
database. Most of these checks determine whether the emissions inventory data are in acceptable
ranges. Examples of fields that are checked for valid ranges include control efficiencies of
current controls, stack flow rates, and capacities. Rule effectiveness, rule penetration and control
efficiency are checked to ensure that they are in percentage format (e.g., 95 instead of 0.95).

Rule effectiveness is set to a default value of 100 percent for values listed as 0 percent. Boiler

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

design capacity and stackflow are checked to ensure the proper units (megawatts [MW] and
cubic feet per minute, respectively). The pollutant modules also check for unreasonable control
efficiency values and reset them to appropriate values. The maximum control efficiencies are 95
percent for NOx, 99 percent for VOC, 99.99 percent for S02, 99.5 percent for PM and secondary
organic aerosol control efficiency values must be equal to VOC control efficiencies.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

9

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Figure 11-1 a. Modules for Development of Non-EGU Point, EGU, and Area Source Files

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

10

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Figure ll-1b. Final Merge of Source Files

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

11

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

D. NEW DATABASE DESIGN REASONING

The previous release of AirControlNET contains more than 1.5 GB of data. In 2004 Pechan was
tasked with adding three years to AirControlNET which would have doubled the size of the
current data set. Redesigning the database structure significantly cut the size of the files and
allows for improved AirControlNET functionality.

When AirControlNET was first designed, the data set was small compared to the present.
Because of this, a database design that required one flat file to be implemented was selected
which sacrificed disk space for the fastest return of results. As time progressed, more data was
added to the initial data set.

Pechan therefore implemented a new design that reduces the size of repeated information but
retains a familiar structure so that frequently used data is quickly accessed. Implementing the
new database design required application wide changes to the code, but drastically improved the
space consumption of the AirControlNET files as well as eliminate current ambiguities in the
code.

E. OVERVIEW OF CONVERTING MEAS ALL INTO AirControlNET
INPUT FILES

With the advent of the new database design, AirControlNET input files are grouped into data sets
that represent a base or modified emission year. Each data set consists of 14 table files and two
index files which can be joined together to produce identical output as previous versions of
AirControlNET.

Figure II-2 provides the process by which the meas_all_ database (e.g.,
meas_all_1996.dbf) is converted into an AirControlNET data set. As shown, this process
involves two separate programs (i.e., acn CalculatelncrementalData.prg and
acnCreateDSFromMeasall.prg) that serve to reformat data and add information in order to
develop the data set files for AirControlNET. Table II-1 lists the file names of the
AirControlNET input data tables. Figure II-3 shows the data relationships of the tables listed in
Table II-1. The primary data keys are labeled as PK in Figure II-3.

The program acn_CalculateIncrementalData.prg:

• takes the unmodified meas_all_.dbf as an input.

• adds four fields for each pollutant:

• incremental pollutant

• percent reduction pollutant

• delete pollutant flag

• maximum pollutant flag.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Figure 11-2. Overview of Core AirControlNET Database Development



Mens all.dbf

acn_c alcnlateincrementaldata .p rg



f

Mens all increment aLdbf

1

f

a cue re ate clat aset from ine a s all.pr g

1





AirOontrolNET Data Set

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

13

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 11-1. Filenames and Description of the AirControlNET Input Data Files

FILE NAME

Description

tacn Keys .DBF

Main key table. Links to all data set tables.

tacn Keys .CDX

Key index file.

tacn Emissions .DBF

Emission and cost table.

tacn Emissions .CDX

Emission and cost index file.

tacn Effectiveness .DBF

Control Efficiency and Rule Effectiveness table.

tacn Keys IgnorePollutant .DBF

Indicates which keys should be ignored.

tacn Keys MaxtPollutant .DBF

Indicates which keys are Maxt rows.

tacn Keys RemsadTotals .DBF

REMSAD Totals for each key.

tlacn_geographic_.DBF

Geographic lookup table. Contains State, county,
and msa information.

tlacn meas .DBF

Measure lookup table.

tlacn SCCSector .DBF

SCC and Sector lookup table.

tlacn sic2 .DBF

Sic2 lookup table.

tlacn sic4naics3 .DBF

Sic4 and Naics3 lookup table.

tlacn plant .DBF

Plant lookup table.

tlacn point .DBF

Point lookup table.

tlacn stack .DBF

Stack lookup table.

tlacn segment .DBF

Segment lookup table.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

14

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Figure 11-3. Data Relationships of the Tables listed in Table 11-1

tacn_emissions

PK

keylD



TotalCost



OMCost



CapCost



CostPerTon



incre Cost



< INC Pollutant Data >



< Annual Pollutant Data >



< INCRE Pollutant Data >



boilcap



capuriits

tacn_Keys_MaxtPollutant

I'K

Ki-ylll



pollutamtlD

tlacn rneas

PK





Meas



measName



IrneasName



source



cPollutant



sector



cost_year



< QM Cost percentages >

tlacn_geographic

PK

GeolD



Fipsst



Fipscnty



stateNM



stateAbr



county NM



cbsa



cbsaType



cbsaNarne

tacnJEffectiveness

PK

kevID



<	Cost Effectiveness Data >

<	Rule Effectiveness Data >

tacn keys

PK,FK9,FK12,FK13,FK14

Keyld

FK7

sicNaicsID

FK2

MeasID

FK3

GeolD

FK8

sccsectID

FK6

remsadID

FK1

plantID

FK4

pointlD

FK5

segmentID

FK10

stackid

tlacn

_SCCSector

PK

sccSectID





see



Sector



scc12



scc34



scc67



scc810



descr12



descr34



desct67



descr810

tacn

_REMSADTotals

PK

remsadID



remsadSect



nox tot



voc tot



prn10_tot



pm25_tot



so2 tot



nh3 tot



soa tot



co tot



hg_tot

tacn_Keys_lgriorePollutant

PK

kevID



pollutamtlD

tlacn_plant

PK

ularitlD



plantlD2

plaritName

tlacn_point

PK

nointID





pointlD2

lacn stack

I'K

stackID





stack

tlacn_segment

PK

sR^mRiitlD





segment

tlacri_Sic2

PK





boxLabel

tlacn_Sic4NaicsJ

PK

sicNaicsID





sic4

naics3

n3Label

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

15

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

(NOTE: The values of these additional fields are also determined within this program. The delete pollutant flag indicates
whether or not the controls make sense in terms of cost-effectiveness criteria (i.e., it flags control/source records if they cost more
than other controls which give higher emissions reductions.)

• calculates the maximum control values, percent emissions reductions, incremental costs
and emissions reductions.

The program acnCreateDSFromMeasall.prg:

• takes the modified version of meas_all_ database that results from the first step as
an input.

• removes records with total emissions of less than 0.1 tons (over all the pollutants)

• reformats certain fields

• optimizes the flat file by splitting it into the 16 data set files.

• the pollutant value fields are changed to contain three characters instead of one (e.g., NOX
instead of N)

• the following data fields are added:

• measure name

• measure description

• source name

• North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code

• NAICS description

• regional flag fields

• Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and Deposition (REMSAD) sector key
REMSAD key.1

The regional flag fields include the following:

MSA - This field lists the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). The MSA field includes
metropolitan and consolidated areas. Further information on MSA definitions can be
obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau website at
http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/metroarea.html.

WRAP - Western Regional Air Partnership (http ://www.wrapair. org)

WESTAR - Western States Air Resources Council (http://www.westar.org)

LADCO - Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (http://www.ladco.org)

* The REMSAD sector key and key are required for the development of a Control Factor File which serves as the required input to the
REMSAD-ST air quality model. The REMSAD sector key indicates either an Area (A) or Point (P) source. The REMSAD key is a character
identifier containing FIPS State, FIPS County, 5 characters of Plant ID (for point sources), and SCC. Please refer to the AirControlNET User
Manual for more details on the development of input scripts for use in REMSAD-ST.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

NESCAUM - Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management
(http://www.nescaum.org)

MARAMA - Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association
(http://www.marama.org)

OTC - Ozone Transport Commission (http://www.otcair.org)

CENSARA - Central States Air Resource Agencies (http://www.censara.org)

SESARM - Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc.
(http://www.metro4-sesarm.org/sesarm.asp)

SAMI - Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (http://www.tva.gov/sami/)

NERC - North American Electric Reliability Council (http://www.nerc.com)
F. CALCULATION EXAMPLE

The control measure information was obtained by examining the technical and cost data from
EPA reports and other literature sources. In addition to the various reports, all the control
measure information is outlined in a 2005 report called the AirControlNET Volume III:
AirControlNET, Version 4.1, Control Measure Documentation Report (Pechan, 2005b). Many of
the costs for the controls were derived using information from the EPA Control Cost Manual
(EPA, 2002b).

These controls are assigned to specific sources (i.e., plant/point/segment) using SCC as the key.
In AirControlNET, control measure applicability information are organized and linked by Cost
POD. A Cost POD is a group of source types, as defined by SCCs, which have similar emission
characteristics, control techniques, and control costs. A Cost POD may have one or several
control strategies (which consist of control options, efficiency, and cost information). All of the
emission reduction and control cost calculations are performed at the Cost POD level. The Cost
POD is used to link the control applicability information through the POD/SCC Crosswalk.

The control measure data file in AirControlNET includes not only the control efficiency and
calculated emission reductions as applied for a particular source, but also estimates the annual
and capital costs for application of the control measure to that specific source.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

AirControlNET relies on the control efficiency, throughput, fuel use, and emission factor data
provided in the EPA NEI format to perform cost-related analysis. The control data is accessed
through a Cost POD, which is linked to sources by SCC, as described in Appendix A of the
AirControlNET Documentation Report (Pechan, 2005b).

In the least-cost module, when multiple controls are applied to the same source (i.e., plant/point/
segment), incremental calculations are performed as described below.

The first step for least cost calculation is to sort all applicable controls in increasing order of
S/ton number. They are sorted on an incremental cost $ per incremental reduction basis.

Consider following filtering criteria for least cost module query:

Inventory year:	1999

Cost Year:	1999

Pollutant:	NOx

% Reduction:	100

State:	North Caroline (37)

County:	Chatham Co. (37037)

Sector:	All utility & nonutility points

Consider following boiler as an example:

Plant:	CP&L CAPE FEAR PLANT

Plantid:	0063

Pointid:	6

Annual emissions from the boiler are 3086.3 tons
Applicable controls for the boiler are as follows:

1.	Combustion Optimization (CE = 20%) (In Figure II-4, Record No: 2)

2.	LNC1 (CE = 33.1%) (In Figure II-4, Record No: 3)

3.	LNC3 (CE = 53.1%) (In Figure II-4, Record No: 4)

4.	SCR (CE = 90%>) (In Figure II-4, Record No: 9)

Incremental reduction for Combustion Optimization (CE = 20%) is calculated as follows:
Incremental reduction for Combustion Optimization = 3086.3 x 0.2 = 617.3 tons
Total Reduction = 617.3 tons

Incremental reduction for LNC1 (CE = 33.1%) is calculated as follows:

Incremental reduction for LNC1 = 3086.3 x 0.331- 617.3 = 404.3 tons
Total reduction = 1021.6 tons

Incremental reduction for LNC3 (CE - 53.1%) is calculated as follows:

Incremental reduction from LNC3 = 3086.3 x 0.531 - 1021.6 = 617.3 tons

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

18

Report

-------
PECIiAN

September 2005

Total reduction = 1638.9 tons

Incremental reduction for SCR (CE - 90%) is calculated as follows:

Incremental reduction from SCR = 3086.3 x 0.9 - 1638.9 = 1138.8 tons
Total reduction = 2777.7 tons

Figure 11-4. Example Incremental Calculation for Least Cost Module

AirControlNET v4.0 - LpzA i_ost Moauie nei_1999, Cost Year: 1999

File Edit Tools Affaysis Data Help

JJji

RunlQuery

Export File

Export Script

Reset Criteria

Show Criteria

Number

State

purity

Measure



$/Ton

Inc. Reductic

Cum. Inc. Re

Cum. Inc. C(

MSA

SIC

1

37

037V

Combustion Optimization

£oal-fired Plants with Productic

50

455.3

455.3

22,765

39581

49

2

37

037

Combu'siion upiimization

Coal-fired Plants with Productic

50

617.3

1,072.6

53,628

39581

49

3

37

037

LNC1

Utility Boiler - Coal^Tangential

238

404.3

1,476.9

266,093

39581

49

4

37

037

LNC3

Utility Boiler - Coal^Tangential

248

617.3

2,094.1

430,684

39581

49

5

37

037

LNC1

Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

278

298.2

2,392.3

615,990

39581

49

6

37

037

LNC3

Utility Boiler - CoalfTangential

287

455.3

2,847.6

755,492

39581

49

7

37

037

OT + WI

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

898

1.6

2,849.2

755,940

39581

28

8

37

037

OT + Wl

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

898

5.2

2,854.4

757,403

39581

28

9

37

037

SCR

Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

937

1,138.8

3,993.2

3,360,141

39581

49

10

37

037

SCR

Utility Boiler - CoaUTangential

1,054

840.0

4,833.3

5,520,837

39581

49

11

37

037

LNB

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

1,082

5.3

4,838.6

5,526,576

39581

28

12

37

037

LNB

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

1,082

17.3

4,855.9

5,545,338

39581

28

13

37

037

LNB

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil

1,558

6.3

4,862.2

5,555,140

39581

28

14

37

037

SCR

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

2,944

1.6

4,863.8

5,573,926

39581

28

15

37

037

SCR

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

2,945

5.2

4,869.0

5,635,336

39581

28

16

37

037

LNB + FOR

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil

3,288

1.3

4,870.2

5,650,355

39581

28

17

37

037

SCR

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil

3,671

2.5

4,872.7

5,662,482

39581

28















































































































Total Controllable Tons

Tons Reduced

Total Annual Cost

Average Annual Cost / Ton

So if SCR control is required to reach to target reduction, the incremental reduction (1138.8 tons)
from SCR is added to cumulative reduction and total reduction for SCR is 2777.7 tons and
selected control will be SCR.

The most stringent control applied to a source is the actual control for the source. The output
results of Least Cost Module give maximum applicable controls for a source required to reach to
specified reduction target on least cost basis. In the Least Cost Module database grid, maximum
controls for the source are highlighted.

In the least cost module, cost calculation is done in similar way as reduction. As the control gets
selected by the Least Cost Module, its incremental cost is added to the cumulative cost and total

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

19

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

cumulative cost to calculate the cost of controls to achieve the desired reductions. An average
cost per ton is the ratio of total cost and total reduction.

In the above example, cost of Combustion Optimization control measure was calculated using
cost information of $50 / ton of pollutant reduced. Cost of LNC1, LNC3 and SCR control
measures was calculated using cost equations as described in Pechan 2005b. These cost
equations and input variables are listed below. Table II-2 provides the input parameters used in
the cost equations. These can be found for each control measure can also be found in At-A-
Glance tables for the Source Category: Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential in Pechan's 2005 report
called the AirControlNET Volume III: AirControlNET Control Measure Documentation Report
(see Pechan, 2005b).

Cost Equations Inputs:

Nameplate Capacity: netdc in MW
Total Capital Cost: TCC in $ per KW
Scaling Factor Numerator: sfn in MW
Scaling Factor Exponential: sfe
Scaling Factor (SF) = (sfn / netdc)Asfe

Capital Cost:

Capital Cost (CC) (For netdc < Threshold Capacity in MW) = TCC * netdc * 1000 * SF
Capital Cost (CC) (For netdc > Threshold Capacity in MW) = TCC * netdc * 1000

Operating & Maintenance (O&M):

Fixed O&M: omf in $ per KW per year
Variable O&M: omv in $ mills per KW-hr
Capacity Factor: capfac

O&M = (omf* netdc * 1000) + ( omv * netdc * 1000 * capfac * 8760 / 1000)

Equipment Life: Equiplife in years
interest rate: I in %

Capital Recovery Factor: CRF = [i * (1 +i) AEquiplife] / [((1 + i)AEquiplife) - 1]

Total Cost = (CRF * CC) + O&M

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

20

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 11-2 Cost Equations Inputs for Each Example Control Measures

Parameter

LNC1

LNC3

SCR

omf ($ per KW per year)

0.14

0.22

0.66

omv (mills per KW-hr)

0

0.02

0.6

sfn

300

300

243

sfe

0.359

0.359

0.270

capfac

0.85

0.85

0.65

Equipment Life (years)

15

15

20

TCC

9.1

14.5

100

Threshold Capacity

500

500

600

For Combustion Optimization:

Total Annualized Cost = Tons Reduced * Cost per ton = 617.3 tons * $50 / ton = $30,863

Netdc of the example boiler = 182.298 MW
Interest Rate = 7%

For SCR:

Total Capital Cost = $ 100 /KW

Scaling Factor: SF = (243 / 182.298 ) A0.27 = 1.081

Capital Cost (for netdc < 600 MW )

CC = TCC * netdc * 1000 * SF
= 100 * 182.298 * 1000 * 1.081
= $19,700,828

Operating & Maintenance (O&M) Cost:

O&M Cost = (omf * netdc * 1000) + (omv * netdc * 1000 * capfac * 8760 / 1000)
= (0.66 * 182.298 * 1000) + (0.6 * 182.298 * 1000 * 0.65 * 8760 / 1000)
= $ 743,119

Capital Recovery Factor:

CRF = [i * (1 + i)AEquiplife] / [((1 + i)AEquiplife) - 1]

= [0.07 * (1 + 0.07)A20] / [((1 + 0.07)A20) - 1]

= 0.094393

Total Annual Cost:

= (CRF * CC) + O&M
= (0.09439 * 19,700,828) + 743,119
= $2,602,738

Similarly for LNC1 & LNC3:

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

21

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

LNC1:

Scaling Factor: SF = (300 / 182.298 ) A0.359 = 1.1958
Capital Cost: CC = 9.1 * 182.298 * 1000 * 1.1958 = $1,983,760
O&M Cost: O&M = 0.14 * 182.298 * 1000 + (0 * 182.298 * 1000 * 0.85 * 8760 / 1000)
= $25,522

Capital Recovery Factor: CRF = [0.07 * (1 + 0.07)A15] / [((1 + 0.07)A15) - 1] = 0.10979
Total Annual Cost: TC = $1,983,760 * 0.10979+ $25,522 = $ 243,319

LNC3:

Scaling Factor: SF = (300 / 182.298 ) A0.359 = 1.1958
Capital Cost: CC = 14.5 * 182.298 * 1000 * 1.1958 = $3,160,883

O&M Cost: O&M = 0.22 * 182.298 * 1000 + (0.02 * 182.298 * 1000 * 0.85 * 8760 / 1000)
= $67,253

Capital Recovery Factor: CRF = [0.07 * (1 + 0.07)A15] / [((1 + 0.07)A15) - 1] = 0.10979
Total Annual Cost: TC = $3,160,883 * 0.10979 + $67,253 = $ 414,307

The control measure data file in AirControlNET includes not only the control efficiency and
calculated emission reductions as applied for a particular source, but also estimates the annual
and capital costs for application of the control measure to that specific source.

AirControlNET relies on the control efficiency, throughput, fuel use, and emission factor data
provided in the EPA NEI format to perform cost-related analysis. As indicated in Table III-1,
AirControlNET currently contains information on several hundred different control
measure/source combinations. The control data is accessed as described in Appendix A of the
AirControlNET Documentation Report (Pechan, 2005b).

Total Controllable Tons:

In Least Cost Module, total controllable tons are defined as the sum of emissions from sources
(i.e., plant/point/segment) that have been controlled within AirControlNET and selected for the
specified query criteria.

For 1999 emissions inventory, nationwide total controllable tons for each pollutant by sector are
listed in Table II-3.

Table 11-3. 1999 Nationwide Emissions by Pollutant and Sector

Area	Onroad	Point

Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled Uncontrolled Controlled
Pollutant Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions

VOC	10,812,750 5,459,791 5,564,026	5,564,026	2,061,167	99,820

NOx	7,767,324 4,425,712 8,470,270	8,470,270	9,037,572 6,579,473

S02	2,226,341 192,671	322,189	322,189 16,297,280 1,668,378

PM	5,869,957 4,557,568	188,328	188,328	673,288	310,873

NH3	4,507,679 3,518,580	265,533	265,533	195,345	0_

Consider following filtering criteria as an example for Least Cost Module query:

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	22	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

State:

County:

Pollutant:

Cost per ton:

Target Reductions:

Sector:

Cost Year:

Inventory year:

North Carolina (37)
Chatham Co. (37037)

NOx

All

100%

All Point sources (i.e., EGUs and NEGUs)

1999
1999

Following control summary results are obtained for the query.

Total Controllable Tons = 5,420 tons
Tons Reduced = 4,870 tons

When Percentage Reduction target is defined to say 50 percent, target reduction is calculated to
50 percent of total available reductions (i.e., 4,870 tons). So reduction target in absolute tons
would be 2,436 tons. Due to the discrete nature of control reductions, tons reduced would be
equal to or greater than 2,436 tons. Actual reductions achieved for 50 percent target reduction
are 2,847 tons.

The most stringent control applied to a source is the actual control for the source. The output
results of Least Cost Module give maximum applicable controls for a source required to reach to
specified reduction target on least cost basis. Most stringent controls for the sources selected by
least cost query are highlighted in the database grid. Only maximum control applied to the
source (i.e., plant/point/segment) is exported to the output file.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

23

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CHAPTER III

AirControlNET CONTROL MEASURE CONTENT SUMMARIES

Since 1997, information for each control measure has been collected and reported to EPA
through separate reports. Important aspects of each control measure, such as application,
functionality, cost and control efficiencies were reported at the time of analysis. In addition to
the various reports, detailed control measure information is provided in a 2005 report called the
AirControlNET Volume III: AirControlNET Control Measure Documentation Report (Pechan,
2005b).

A list of the control measures, by major pollutant and source category, currently in
AirControlNET is provided in Table III-1. Further details of the control measures are provided
in Appendix B, including other affected pollutants, control efficiency and cost effectiveness.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

24

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1. Control Measures Currently in AirControlNET



Major





Source Category

Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Adhesives - Industrial

voc

SCAQMD Rule 1168



Agricultural Burning

NOX

Seasonal Ban (Ozone Season Daily), Bale
Stack/Propane Burning



Agricultural Tilling

PM

Soil Conservation Plans

OC, EC

Aircraft Surface Coating

VOC

MACT, OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing
Rule



Ammonia - NG-Fired Reformers

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, OT + Wl, SCR, SNCR

NH3

Ammonia Prod; Feedstock Desulfurization

NOX

LNB + FGR



Architectural Coatings

VOC

AIM Coating Federal Rule, South Coast Phase I, South
Coast Phase II, South Coast Phase III, OTC AIM
Coating Rule



Asphalt Manufacture

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech.
Shaker Type), Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type), Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM
Control, CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Asphaltic Cone; Rotary Dryer; Conv Plant

NOX

LNB



Automobile Refinishing

VOC

Federal Rule, CARB BARCT Limits, FIP Rule (VOC
content & TE), OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and
Refinishing Rule



Bakery Products

VOC

Incineration >100,000 lbs bread



Beef Cattle Feedlots

PM

Watering

OC, EC

Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal

S02

FGD



(Commercial/Institutional Boilers)







Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal (Industrial

S02

FGD, IDIS, SDA, Wet FGD



Boilers)







By-Product Coke Manufacturing (Coke Oven

S02

Vacuum Carbonate plus Sulfur Recovery Plant



Plants)







By-Product Coke Mfg; Oven Underfiring

NOX

SNCR

NH3

Cattle Feedlots

NH3

Chemical Additives



Cement Kilns

NOX

Biosolid Injection Technology



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

25

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)



Major





Source Category

Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Cement Manufacturing - Dry

NOX

Mid-Kiln Firing, LNB, SNCR - NH3 Based, SCR, SNCR
- Urea Based

NH3

Cement Manufacturing - Wet

NOX

Mid-Kiln Firing, LNB, SCR

NH3

Ceramic Clay Mfg; Drying

NOX

LNB



Chemical Manufacture

PM

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type, Increased Monitoring
Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM Upgrade and
IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Coal Cleaning-Thrml Dryer; Fluidized Bed

NOX

LNB



Coal-fired Plants with Production

NOX

Combustion Optimization



Capacities>100MW







Cold Cleaning

VOC

OTC Solvent Cleaning Rule



Combustion Turbines - Jet Fuel

NOX

Water Injection, SCR + Water Injection



Combustion Turbines - Natural Gas

NOX

Water Injection, Steam Injection, Dry Low NOx
Combustor, SCR + LNB, SCR + Steam Injection, SCR
+ Water Injection

NH3

Combustion Turbines - Natural Gas - Large

NOX

Dry Low NOx Combustor



Sources







Combustion Turbines - Oil

NOX

Water Injection, SCR + Water Injection



Comm./Inst. Incinerators

NOX

SNCR



Commercial Adhesives

VOC

Federal Consumer Solvents Rule, CARB Mid-Term
Limits, CARB Long-Term Limits



Commercial Institutional Boilers

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate
Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type)



Commercial Institutional Boilers - Coal

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Commercial Institutional Boilers - Liquid Waste

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Commercial Institutional Boilers - LPG

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Commercial Institutional Boilers - Natural Gas

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

26

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Commercial Institutional Boilers - Oil

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Commercial Institutional Boilers - Process Gas

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Commercial Institutional Boilers - Solid Waste

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Commercial Institutional Boilers - Wood

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Commercial/Institutional - NG

NOX

Water Heater Replacement, Water Heater + LNB
Space HeatersWater Heater + LNB Space Heaters



Construction Activities

PM

Dust Control Plan

OC, EC

Consumer Adhesives

voc

OTC Consumer Products Rule



Consumer Solvents

voc

OTC Consumer Products Rule, Federal Consumer
Solvents Rule, CARB Mid-Term Limits, CARB Long-
Term Limits



Conv Coating of Prod; Acid Cleaning Bath

NOX

LNB



Conveyorizd Charbroilers

PM

Catalytic Oxidizer

VOC, OC, EC

Cutback Asphalt

VOC

Switch to Emulsified Asphalts



Diesel Locomotives

NOX

SCR



Distillate Oil (Industrial Boiler)

S02

Wet FGD



Electric Generation - Coke

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Bagasse

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Coal

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Liquid Waste

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - LPG

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Natural Gas

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

27

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Electric Generation - Oil

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Solid Waste

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electric Generation - Wood

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Electrical/Electronic Coating

VOC

MACT, SCAQMD Rule



Fabric Printing, Coating and Dyeing

voc

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Fabricated Metal Products - Abrasive Blasting

PM

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge Collector Type

OC, EC

Fabricated Metal Products - Welding

PM

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge Collector Type

OC, EC

Ferrous Metals Processing - Coke

PM

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type), Fabric Filter
(Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Venturi Scrubber,
Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Ferrous Metals Processing - Ferroalloy
Production

PM

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate
Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type),
Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Ferrous Metals Processing - Gray Iron
Foundries

PM

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type), CEM Upgrade and
IMF of PM Controls, Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Control, Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Fabric
Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Impingement-Plate
Scrubber, Impingement-Plate Scrubber, Venturi
Scrubber

OC, EC

Ferrous Metals Processing - Iron & Steel
Production

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls, Fabric Filter
(Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type),
Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type,
Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Venturi
Scrubber

OC, EC

Ferrous Metals Processing - Other

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

28

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)



Major





Source Category

Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Ferrous Metals Processing - Steel Foundries

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech.
Shaker Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Wet ESP -
Wire Plate Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type), Venturi Scrubber, Increased Monitoring
Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM Upgrade and
IMF of PM Controls



Fiberglass Mfg; Textile -Type Fbr; Recup Furn

NOX

LNB



Flexographic Printing

VOC

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Fluid Cat Cracking Units

NOX

LNB + FGR



Fuel Fired Equip; Furnaces; Natural Gas

NOX

LNB



Fuel Fired Equip; Process Htrs; Process Gas

NOX

LNB + FGR



Glass Manufacturing - Containers

NOX

Electric Boost, Cullet Preheat, LNB, SNCR, SCR, OXY-
firing

NH3

Glass Manufacturing - Flat

NOX

Electric Boost, LNB, SNCR, SCR, OXY-Firing

NH3

Glass Manufacturing - Flat - Large

NOX

Electric Boost, OXY-Firing



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

NOX

Electric Boost, Cullet Preheat, LNB, SNCR, SCR, OXY-
firing

NH3

Grain Milling

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Paper/Nonwoven Filters
- Cartridge Collector Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air
Cleaned Type)

OC, EC

Graphic Arts

VOC

Use of Low or No VOC Materials



Highway Veh - HD Diesels

PM

HDDV Retrofit Program



Highway Veh - LD Gas Trucks

VOC

Tier 2 Standards for 1996



Highway Veh - LD Gasoline

VOC

Fleet ILEV



Highway Vehicles - Gasoline

NOX

High Enhanced l/M, Transportation Control Package
for 1996, RFG and High Enhanced l/M, Federal
Reformulated Gasoline, RVP 7.8 Limit, Basic l/M

CO

Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty and Diesel-

NOX

2010 Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards, 2015



Fueled Vehicles



Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards, 2020
Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards, 2030
Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

29

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty Diesel Engines

NOX

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program: Selective Catal,
Voluntary Diesel Retrofit: Diesel Partulate Filter,
Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Diesel Oxidation Cat,
Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program: Biodiesel Fuel

CO, S02, VOC, PM25,
PM10

Highway Vehicles - Light Duty and Gasoline-
Fueled Vehicles

NOX

2010 Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Gasoline S,
2015 Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Gasoline S,
2020 Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Gasoline S,
2030 Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Gasoline S

CO, S02, VOC, PM25,
PM10

Hog Operations

NH3

Chemical Additives



IC Engines - Gas

NOX

L-E (Low Speed), SCR



IC Engines - Gas, Diesel, LPG

NOX

Ignition Retard, SCR



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone

NOX

SNCR, Coal Reburn, SCR, NGR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone - Large Sources

NOX

Coal Reburn



ICI Boilers - Coal/FBC

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/FBC - Large Sources

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/Stoker

NOX

SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/Stoker - Large

NOX

SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall

NOX

SNCR, LNB, SCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Large

NOX

SNCR, LNB, SCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Coke

NOX

SNCR, LNB, SCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SCR, SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil - Large Sources

NOX

SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Liquid Waste

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SCR, SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - LPG

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SCR, SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - MSW/Stoker

NOX

SNCR - Urea

NH3

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, OT + Wl, SCR, SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas - Large Sources

NOX

SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Process Gas

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, OT + Wl, SCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SCR, SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil - Large Sources

NOX

SNCR

NH3

ICI Boilers - Wood/Bark/Stoker

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based

NH3

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

30

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

ICI Boilers - Wood/Bark/Stoker - Large
Sources

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based

NH3

Indust. Incinerators

NOX

SNCR

NH3

Industrial Boilers - Coal

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate
Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Venturi
Scrubber, Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM
Control

OC, EC

Industrial Boilers - Coke

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Industrial Boilers - Liquid Waste

PM

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Increased Monitoring
Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM Upgrade and
IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Industrial Boilers - LPG

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Industrial Boilers - Natural Gas

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Industrial Boilers - Oil

PM

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Venturi Scrubber, Increased
Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM
Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Industrial Boilers - Process Gas

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Industrial Boilers - Solid Waste

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls



Industrial Boilers - Wood

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate
Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Venturi
Scrubber, Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM
Control, CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Industrial Coal Combustion

NOX

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB), RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)



Industrial Maintenance Coating

VOC

AIM Coating Federal Rule, South Coast Phase 1, South
Coast Phase II, South Coast Phase III



Industrial NG Combustion

NOX

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB), RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)



Industrial Oil Combustion

NOX

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB), RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

31

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Inorganic Chemical Manufacture

S02

FGD



In-process Fuel Use -
Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal

S02

FGD



In-Process Fuel Use; Natural Gas

NOX

LNB



In-Process Fuel Use; Residual Oil

NOX

LNB



In-Process Fuel Use; Bituminous Coal

NOX

SNCR



In-Process; Bituminous Coal; Cement Kilns

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based



In-Process; Bituminous Coal; Lime Kilns

NOX

SNCR - Urea Based



In-Process; Process Gas; Coke Oven Gas

NOX

LNB + FGR



In-Process; Process Gas; Coke Oven Gas

NOX

LNB



Internal Combustion Engines - Gas

NOX

L-E (Medium Speed), AF RATIO, AF + IR, L-E
(Medium Speed), Ignition Retard



Internal Combustion Engines - Gas - Large

NOX

AF RATIO, AF + IR



Internal Combustion Engines - Oil

NOX

Ignition Retard, SCR

NH3

Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, LNB + SNCR, SCR, LNB +
SCR

NH3

Iron & Steel Mills - Galvanizing

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR



Iron & Steel Mills - Reheating

NOX

LEA, LNB, LNB + FGR



Iron Prod; Blast Furn; Blast Htg Stoves

NOX

LNB + FGR



Lignite (Industrial Boilers)

S02

FGD, 1DIS, SDA, Wet FGD



Lime Kilns

NOX

Mid-Kiln Firing, LNB, SNCR - NH3 Based, SCR, SNCR
- Urea Based

NH3

Machn, Electric, Railroad Ctng

VOC

MACT, SCAQMD Limits, OTC Mobile Equipment
Repair and Refinishing Rule



Marine Surface Coating

VOC

OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing Rule,
MACT, Add-On Controls



Medical Waste Incinerators

NOX

SNCR

NH3

Metal Furniture, Appliances, Parts

VOC

MACT, SCAQMD Limits



Metal Can Surface Coating

VOC

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Metal Coil & Can Coating

VOC

MACT, BAAQMD Rule 11 Amended, Incineration



Metal Furniture Surface Coating

VOC

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

32

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Mineral Products - Cement Manufacture

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech.
Shaker Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type,
Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge Collector Type,
Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Increased
Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM
Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Mineral Products - Coal Cleaning

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech.
Shaker Type), Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type), Venturi Scrubber, Increased Monitoring
Frequency (IMF) of PM Control, CEM Upgrade and
IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Mineral Products - Other

PM

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech.
Shaker Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Wet ESP -
Wire Plate Type, Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type, Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type), Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM
Control, CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Mineral Products - Stone Quarrying &
Processing

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls, Fabric Filter
(Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type),
Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type,
Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned Type),
Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge Collector Type,
Venturi Scrubber

OC, EC

Mineral Products Industry

S02

FGD



Motor Vehicle Coating

VOC

MACT, Incineration



Municipal Solid Waste Landfill

VOC

Gas Collection (SCAQMD/BAAQMD)



Municipal Waste Combustors

NOX

SNCR

NH3

Municipal Waste Incineration

PM

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

OC, EC

Natural Gas Prod; Compressors

NOX

SCR

NH3

Nitric Acid Manufacturing

NOX

Extended Absorption, SCR, SNCR

NH3

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

33

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing

PM

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type), Dry ESP-Wire Plate
Type, Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type, Fabric Filter
(Reverse-Air Cleaned Type)

OC, EC

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing - Aluminum

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing - Copper

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing - Lead

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing - Other

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Non-Ferrous Metals Processing - Zinc

PM

Increased Monitoring Frequency (IMF) of PM Control,
CEM Upgrade and IMF of PM Controls

OC, EC

Nonroad Diesel Engines

PM

Heavy Duty Retrofit Program

OC, EC

Nonroad Gasoline Engines

VOC

Federal Reformulated Gasoline



Off-Highway Diesel Vehicles

NOX

2010 C-l Engine Standards, 2015 C-l Engine
Standards, 2020 C-l Engine Standards, 2030 C-l
Engine Standards

CO, VOC, PM25, PM 10

Off-Highway Gasoline Vehicles

NOX

2010 Large S-l Engine Standards, 2015 Large S-l
Engine Standards, 2020 Large S-l Engine Standards,
2030 Large S-l Engine Standards

CO, VOC, PM25, PM 10

Off-Highway Vehicles: Motorcycles

VOC

2010 Off-Highway Motorcycle Standards, 2015 Off-
Highway Motorcycle Standards, 2020 Off-Highway
Motorcycle Standards, 2030 Off-Highway Motorcycle
Standards

CO, VOC, PM25, PM 10

Off-Highway Vehicles: Snowmobiles

VOC

Recreational Gasoline Snowmobile Standards

CO, VOC, PM25, PM 10

Off-Highway Vehicles: All Terrain Vehicles
(ATVs)

VOC

2010 Recreational Gasoline ATV Standards, 2015
Recreational Gasoline ATV Standards, 2020
Recreational Gasoline ATV Standards, 2030
Recreational Gasoline ATV Standards

CO, VOC, PM25, PM 10

Oil and Natural Gas Production

VOC

Equipment and Maintenance



Open Burning

NOX

Episodic Ban (Daily Only)



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

34

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)



Major





Source Category

Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Open Top Degreasing

voc

MACT, SCAQMD 1122 (VOC content limit), Airtight
Degreasing System



Paper and Other Web Coating

voc

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Paper Surface Coating

voc

Incineration



Paved Road

PM

Vacuum Sweeping

OC, EC

Pesticide Application

VOC

Reformulation - FIP Rule



Petroleum Industry

S02

FGD



Plastics Prod-Specific; (ABS)

NOX

LNB + FGR



Portable Gasoline Containers

VOC

OTC Portable Gas Container Rule



Poultry Operations

NH3

Chemical Additives



Prescribed Burning

PM

Increase Fuel Moisture

OC, EC

Primary Metals Industry

S02

Sulfuric Acid Plant



Primary Zinc Smelters - Sintering

S02

Dual absorption



Process Heaters - Distillate Oil

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters - LPG

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters - Natural Gas

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters - Other Fuel

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters - Process Gas

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters - Residual Oil

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SNCR, ULNB, SCR, LNB + SNCR,
LNB + SCR

NH3

Process Heaters (Oil and Gas Production

S02

FGD



Industry)







Product and Package Roto and Screen Prin

VOC

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Publication Rotogravure Printing

VOC

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)



Pulp and Paper Industry (Sulfate Pulping)

S02

FGD



Residential NG

NOX

Water Heater Replacement



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

35

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Residential NG

NOX

Water Heater + LNB Space Heaters



Residential Wood Combustion

PM

Education and Advisory Program

OC, EC

Residential Wood Stoves

PM

NSPS Compliant Wood Stoves

OC, EC

Residual Oil (Commercial/Institutional Boilers)

S02

FGD



Residual Oil (Industrial Boilers)

S02

FGD, Wet FGD



Rich Burn IC Engines - Gas

NOX

NSCR

NH3, CO, VOC

Rich Burn IC Engines - Gas, Diesel, LPG

NOX

NSCR

NH3

Rich Burn Internal Combustion Engines - Oil

NOX

NSCR

NH3

Rubber and Plastics Mfg

VOC

SCAQMD - Low VOC



Sand/Gravel; Dryer

NOX

LNB + FGR



Sec Alum Prod; Smelting Furn

NOX

LNB



Secondary Metal Production

S02

FGD



Solid Waste Disp; Gov; Other Inc

NOX

SNCR

NH3

Space Heaters - Distillate Oil

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, SCR, SNCR

NH3

Space Heaters - Natural Gas

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, OT + Wl, SCR, SNCR

NH3

Stage II Service Stations

VOC

Low Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve



Stage II Service Stations - Underground Tanks

VOC

Low Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve



Starch Mfg; Combined Operation

NOX

LNB + FGR



Steam Generating Unit-Coal/Oil

S02

FGD



Steel Foundries; Heat Treating

NOX

LNB



Steel Prod; Soaking Pits

NOX

LNB + FGR



Sulfate Pulping - Recovery Furnaces

NOX

LNB, LNB + FGR, OT + Wl, SCR, SNCR

NH3

Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur
(Claus: 2 Stage w/o control (92-95% removal))

S02

Amine Scrubbing



Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur
(Claus: 2 Stage w/o control (92-95% removal))

S02

Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas treatment



Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur
(Claus: 3 Stage w/o control (95-96% removal))

S02

Amine Scrubbing



Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur
(Claus: 3 Stage w/o control (95-96% removal))

S02

Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas treatment



Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur

S02

Amine Scrubbing



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

36

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)



Major





Source Category

Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

(Claus: 3 Stage w/o control (96-97% removal))







Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur

S02

Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas treatment



(Claus: 3 Stage w/o control (96-97% removal))







Sulfur Recovery Plants - Elemental Sulfur

S02

Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas treatment



Production (Not Classified)







Sulfur Recovery Plants - Sulfur Removal

S02

Sulfur Recovery and/or Tail Gas treatment



Process (99.9% removal)







Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact Absorber (93%

S02

Increase % Conversion ro Meet NSPS (99.7)



Conversion)







Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact Absorber (97%

S02

Increase % Conversion ro Meet NSPS (99.7)



Conversion)







Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact Absorber (98%

S02

Increase % Conversion ro Meet NSPS (99.7)



Conversion)







Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact Absorber (99%

S02

Increase % Conversion ro Meet NSPS (99.7)



Conversion)







Surf Coat Oper; Coating Oven Htr; Nat Gas

NOX

LNB

NH3

Traffic Markings

VOC

AIM Coating Federal Rule, South Coast Phase 1, South
Coast Phase II, South Coast Phase III



Unpaved Rd

PM

Hot Asphalt Paving

OC, EC

Unpaved Road

PM

Chemical Stabilization

OC, EC

Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

NOX

SNCR, NGR, SCR, LNC1, LNC2, LNC3

Hg, NH3

Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

NOX

SNCR, NGR, SCR, LNB, LNBO

NH3

Utility Boiler - Cyclone

NOX

SNCR, NGR, SCR

NH3

Utility Boiler - Oil-Gas/Tangential

NOX

SNCR, NGR, SCR

NH3

Utility Boiler - Oil-Gas/Wall

NOX

SNCR, NGR, SCR

NH3

Utility Boilers - Coal

PM

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker
Type), Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type), Fabric Filter
(Reverse-Air Cleaned Type), Fabric Filter

HG, OC, EC

Utility Boilers - Coal-Fired

S02

Repowering, Fuel Switching, Coal Washing

PM25, PM 10, Hg, NOx

Utility Boilers - Gas/Oil

PM

Fabric Filter



Utility Boilers - High Sulfur Content

S02

FGD Wet Scrubber

Hg

Utility Boilers - Medium Sulfur Content

S02

FGD Wet Scrubber

Hg

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

37

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table 111-1 (continued)

Source Category

Major
Pollutant

Control Measures

Other Pollutant

Utility Boilers - Very High Sulfur Content

S02

FGD Wet Scrubber

Hg

Wood Furniture Surface Coating

VOC

MACT, New CTG, Add-On Controls



Wood Product Surface Coating

VOC

MACT, SCAQMD Rule 1104, Incineration



Wood Pulp & Paper

PM

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type, Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

OC, EC

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

38

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

39

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CHAPTER IV
REFERENCES

EPA, 2002a: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "User's Guide to MOBILE6.1 and

MOBILE6.2: Mobile Source Emission Factor Model," EPA-420-R-02-028, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor, MI, October 2002.

EPA, 2002b: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, "EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual," 6th ed., EPA/452/B-02-001,
Research Triangle Park, NC, January 2002.

EPA, 2003: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NONROAD2002b Model [Computer
Software], Ann Arbor, MI, April 23, 2003.

67 FR 39602, 2002: Federal Register, "Consolidated Emissions Reporting," Vol. 67, No. Ill,
June 10, 2002.

Pechan, 2005a: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "AirControlNET User's Guide, Version 4.1,"
Draft Report, prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC, Pechan Report No. 05.08.002/9010.463, September 2005.

Pechan, 2005b: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "AirControlNET, Version 4.1 Control Measure
Documentation Report," Draft Report, prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, Pechan Report No. 05.08.003/9010.463, September
2005.

Pechan and ENVIRON, 2001: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. and ENVIRON International

Corporation, "Development of a REMSAD-Based Modeling Tool for Use in Particulate
Regulatory Impact Analyses," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2001.

Pechan and ENVIRON, 2002: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. and ENVIRON International
Corporation, "Updates to REMSAD-ST: A Modeling Tool for Use in Particulate
Regulatory Impact Analyses," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 2002.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

40

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	41	Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

APPENDIX A: DATA STRUCTURE TABLES

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-1. Data Structure of meas_all_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

MEASREC

Unique Measure Number

C

7



SECTOR

Sector

C

5



POLLUTANT

Pollutant

c

1



MEAS

Measure Code

c

6



FIPSST

FIPS State

c

2



FIPSCNTY

FIPS County

c

3



PLANTID

Plant ID

c

15



POINTID

Point ID

c

15



STACKID

Stack ID

c

12



ORISID

ORIS ID

c

6



BLRID

Boiler ID

c

6



SEGMENT

Segment

c

2



see

Source Classification Code

c

10



PLANT

Plant Name

c

40



SIC

Standard Industrial Classification

c

4



INCVOC

VOC Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCNOX

NOx Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCS02

S02 Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCPM10

PM10 Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCPM25

PM25 Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCNH3

NH3 Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCCO

CO Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCOC

OC Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCEC

EC Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

INCHG

HG Reduced by Measure (tpy)

N

8

3

TCOST

Total Cost (1997$)

N

12



CPTON

Cost per Ton Reduced(1997$)

N

10



CAPCOST

Capital Cost (1997$)

N

12



OMCOST

O&M Cost (1997$)

N

12



VOCCE

Current VOC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

VOCRE

Current VOC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



VOCRP

Current VOC Rule Penetration

N

3



VOCANN

Current VOC Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

V_M EASCE

Measure VOC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

V_MEAS_RE

Measure VOC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



V_M EAS_RP

Measure VOC Rule Penetration

N

3



NOXCE

Current NOx Control Efficiency

N

7

2

NOXRE

Current NOx Rule Effectiveness

N

3



NOXRP

Current NOx Rule Penetration

N

3



NOXANN

Current NOx Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

NMEASCE

Measure NOx Control Efficiency

N

7

2

N_MEAS_RE

Measure NOx Rule Effectiveness

N

3



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

A-1

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-1 (continued)

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

N_MEAS_RP

Measure NOx Rule Penetration

N

3



PM10_CE

Current PM10 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

PM25_CE

Current PM25 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

PM 10_RE

Current PM10 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



PM25_RE

Current PM25 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



PM 10_RP

Current PM10 Rule Penetration

N

3



PM25_RP

Current PM25 Rule Penetration

N

3



PM 10_ANN

Current PM10 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

PM25_ANN

Current PM25 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

P1_M EAS_CE

Measure PM10 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

P2_M EASCE

Measure PM25 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

P1_M EAS_RE

Measure PM10 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



P2_M EAS_RE

Measure PM25 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



P1_M EAS_RP

Measure PM10 Rule Penetration

N

3



P2_M EAS_RP

Measure PM25 Rule Penetration

N

3



S02CE

Current S02 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

S02RE

Current S02 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



S02RP

Current S02 Rule Penetration

N

3



S02ANN

Current S02 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

S_M EASCE

Measure S02 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

SMEASRE

Measure S02 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



S_M EAS_RP

Measure S02 Rule Penetration

N

3



NH3CE

Current NH3 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

NH3RE

Current NH3 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



NH3_RP

Current NH3 Rule Penetration

N

3



NH3_ANN

Current NH3 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

AMEASCE

Measure NH3 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

AMEASRE

Measure NH3 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



A_MEAS_RP

Measure NH3 Rule Penetration

N

3



COCE

Current CO Control Efficiency

N

7

2

CORE

Current CO Rule Effectiveness

N

3



CORP

Current CO Rule Penetration

N

3



COANN

Current CO Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

13

4

C M EAS CE

Measure CO Control Efficiency

N

7

2

CMEASRE

Measure CO Rule Effectiveness

N

3



C_M EAS_RP

Measure CO Rule Penetration

N

3



OCCE

Current OC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

OCRE

Current OC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



OCRP

Current OC Rule Penetration

N

3



OMEASCE

Measure OC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

OMEASRE

Measure OC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



0_MEAS_RP

Measure OC Rule Penetration

N

3



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-1 (continued)

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

m

0

1

o
m

Current EC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

ECRE

Current EC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



ECRP

Current EC Rule Penetration

N

3



EMEASCE

Measure EC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

EMEASRE

Measure EC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



E_MEAS_RP

Measure EC Rule Penetration

N

3



HGCE

Current Hg Control Efficiency

N

7

2

HGRE

Current Hg Rule Effectiveness

N

3



HG_RP

Current Hg Rule Penetration

N

3



HMEASCE

Measure Hg Control Efficiency

N

7

2

H_MEAS_RE

Measure Hg Rule Effectiveness

N

3



H_MEAS_RP

Measure Hg Rule Penetration

N

3



COSTYEAR

Dollar Year that Costs are expressed in

C

4



EXPER

Experimental Flag (Y= Yes, blank = No)

C

1



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-2. Data Structure of tacn_keys_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

KEYID

Used to join with all tables

N

6

0

MEASID

Unique Measure Number

N

3

0

GEOID

Select Field

N

4

0

SCCSECTID

Pollutant

N

5

0

PLANTID

Control

N

5

0

POINTID

Source

N

4

0

SICNAICSID

Emission Reduction NOx

N

5

0

STACKID

Emission Reduction VOC

N

3

0

SEGMENTID

Emission Reduction S02

N

3

0

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-3. Data Structure of tacn emissions .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

KEYID

Used to join with Key table

N

6

0

TOTALCOST

Unique Measure Number

N

10

0

OMCOST

Select Field

N

10

0

CAPCOST

Pollutant

N

10

0

COSTPERTON

Control

N

10

0

INCRECOST

Source

N

10

0

INCNOX

Emission Reduction NOx

N

7

3

INCVOC

Emission Reduction VOC

N

7

3

INCS02

Emission Reduction S02

N

7

3

INCPM10

Emission Reduction PM10

N

7

3

INCPM25

Emission Reduction PM25

N

7

3

INCNH3

Emission Reduction NH3

N

7

3

INCOC

Emission Reduction OC

N

7

3

INCEC

Emission Reduction EC

N

7

3

INCCO

Emission Reduction CO

N



2

INCHG

Emission Reduction Hg

N

7

5

NOXANN

Current NOx Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

VOCANN

Current VOC Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

S02ANN

Current S02 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

PM10_ANN

Current PM10 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

PM25_ANN

Current PM25 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

NH3_ANN

Current NH3 Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

OCANN

Current OC Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

ECANN

Current EC Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

3

COANN

Current CO Annual Emissions (tpy)

N



2

HG_ANN

Current Hg Annual Emissions (tpy)

N

7

5

INCRE_NOX

Incremental Control Reductions: NOx

N

7

3

INCREVOC

Incremental Control Reductions: VOC

N

7

3

INCRES02

Incremental Control Reductions: S02

N

7

3

INCRE_PM 10

Incremental Control Reductions: PM10

N

7

3

INCRE_PM25

Incremental Control Reductions: PM25

N

7

3

INCRENH3

Incremental Control Reductions: NH3

N

7

3

INCREOC

Incremental Control Reductions: OC

N

7

3

INCREEC

Incremental Control Reductions: EC

N

7

3

INCRECO

Incremental Control Reductions CO

N

8

2

INCREHG

Incremental Control Reductions: Hg

N

7

5

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-4. Data Structure of tacn_keys_maxtpollutant_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

KEYID

Used to join with all tables

N

6



MAXTPOLL

Pollutant name used in conjunction with keyid to
indicate which pollutant for keyid's row is the
maximum reduction

C

4



Table A-5. Data Structure of tlacn_segment_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

SEGMENTID

Segment ID

N

3



SEGMENT

Segment

C

4



Table A-6. Data Structure of tacn_keys_ignorepollutant_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

KEYID

Used to join with all tables

N

6



DELETEPOLL

Pollutant name used in conjunction with keyid to
indicate which pollutant for keyid's row should
be ignored

C

4



Table A-7. Data Structure of tlacn sccsector .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

SCCSECTID

SCC Sector ID

N

5



see

Source Classification Code

C

10



SECTOR

Sector

C

5



SCC12

SCC Tiers 1-2

c

2



SCC34

SCC Tiers 3-4

c

2



SCC67

SCC Tiers 6-7

c

3



SCC810

SCC Tiers 8-10

c

3



DESC12

Description of SCC Tiers 1-2

c

54



DESC34

Description of SCC Tiers 3-4

c

54



DESC67

Description of SCC Tiers 6-7

c

70



DESC810

Description of SCC Tiers 8-10

c

70



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-8. Data Structure of tacn remsadtotals .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

REMSADSECT

Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and
Deposition Sector

C

1



REMSADKEY

Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and
Deposition Key

C

23



NOXTOT

Total NOx emissions for NEI

N

13

4

VOCTOT

Total VOC emissions for NEI

N

13

4

PM10_TOT

Total PM 10 emissions for NEI

N

13

4

PM25_TOT

Total PM25 emissions for NEI

N

13

4

S02TOT

Total S02 emissions for NEI

N

13

4

NH3_TOT

Total NH3 emissions for NEI

N

13

4

SOATOT

Total

N

13

4

COTOT

Total CO emissions for NEI

N

13

4

HGTOT

Total Hg emissions for NEI

N

13

4

Table A-9. Data Structure of tlacn_geographic_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

GEOID

Unique geographic identifier

N

4



FIPSST

FIPS State

C

2



FIPSCNTY

FIPS County

C

3



STATENM

State Name

c

15



STATEABR

State Abbreviation

c

2



COUNTYNM

County Name

c

25



CBSA

Census Bureau Statistical Area

c

5



CBSATYPE

CBSA type

c

6



CBSANAME

CBSA name

c

80



Table A-10. Data Structure of tlacn_point_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

POINTID

Unique Point Identifier (determined by us)

N

4



POINTID2

Text Point Identifier (determined by EPA, the
States, someone else?)

C

15



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-11. Data Structure of tacn effectiveness .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

KEYID

Used to join with all tables

N

6



NOXCE

Current NOx Control Efficiency

N

7

2

VOCCE

Current VOC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

S02CE

Current S02 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

NH3CE

Current NH3 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

PM10_CE

Current PM10 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

PM25_CE

Current PM25 Control Efficiency

N

7

2

OCCE

Current OC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

m

0

1

o
m

Current EC Control Efficiency

N

7

2

COCE

Current CO Control Efficiency

N

7

2

HGCE

Current Hg Control Efficiency

N

7

2

NOXRE

Current NOx Rule Effectiveness

N

3



VOCRE

Current VOC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



S02RE

Current S02 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



NH3RE

Current NH3 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



PM 10_RE

Current PM10 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



PM25_RE

Current PM25 Rule Effectiveness

N

3



OCRE

Current OC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



ECRE

Current EC Rule Effectiveness

N

3



CORE

Current CO Rule Effectiveness

N

3



HGRE

Current Hg Rule Effectiveness

N

3



Table A-12. Data Structure of tlacn_plant_.dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

PLANTID

Unique Plant Identifier (determined by us)

N

5



PLANTID2

Text Plant Identifier (determined by EPA, the
States, someone else?)

C

15



PLANTNAME

Plant Name

C

40



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-13. Data Structure of tlacn sic4naics3 .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

SICNAICSID

Unique SIC/NAICS Identifier

N

3



SIC4

Standard Industrial Classification Code

C

4



NAICS3

North American Industry Classification System Code

C

3



N3LABEL

NAICS3 description

c

123



Table A-14. Data Structure of tlacn meas .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

MEASID

Unique Measure Identifier

N

3



MEAS

Measure Code

C

6



MEASNAME

Measure Name

C

50



LMEASNAME

Long Measure Name / Description

c

95



SOURCE

Source

c

88



CPOLLUTANT

Criteria Pollutant

c

3



SECTOR

Sector

c

6



COSTYEAR

Cost Year

c

4



EDITABLE

Indicates whether the current measure is editable

L

1



I

Interest Rate

N

8

4

CE

Control Efficiency

N

6

3

ELECRT

Electricity Rate ($ per kWh)

N

8

4

NG_RT

Natural Gas Rate ($ per cf)

N

6

3

OPLBR_RT

Operating Labor Rate ($ per hour)

N

6

3

MNTLBR_RT

Maintenance Labor Rate ($ per hour)

N

6

3

EQPLIFE

Equipment Life (years)

N

3



OPLBR_PCT

Operating Labor (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

MNTLBR_PCT

Maintenance Labor (% ofOM COST)

N

8

4

SPVLBR_PCT

Supervisory Labor (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

MNTMTL_PCT

Maintenance Materials (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

RPLMTL_PCT

Replacement Materials (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

ELECPCT

Electricity (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

STEAM_PCT

Steam (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

FUEL_PCT

Fuel (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

W STDSP_PCT

Waste Disposal (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

CHEM_PCT

Chemicals (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

OMATL_PCT

Other Materials (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

OTHR_PCT

Other (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

UTIL_PCT

Other Utility Percentage of O&M Costs (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

TDIR_PCT

Total Direct Costs (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

OVRHD_PCT

Overhead (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

ADMIN_PCT

Administrative (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

PROPTX_PCT

Property Tax (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

INSRNC_PCT

Insurance (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

TINDIR PCT

Total Indirect Costs (% of OM COST)

N

8

4

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table A-15. Data Structure of tlacn sic2 .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

SIC2

Standard Industrial Classification Code

C

2



BOXLABEL

SIC2 Description

C

45



Table A-16. Data Structure of TLACN STACK .dbf

Field Name

Description

Type

Width

Decimals

STACKID

Stack ID

N

4



STACK

Stack Name

C

12



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

A-10

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

APPENDIX B: CONTROL MEASURE SUMMARY LIST BY
POLLUTANT

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
Appendix B Control Measure Summary List by Source Category (1999 Baseline) - Sorted alphabetically by Pollutant and Source Category

Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Cattle Feedlots

Chemical Additives to Waste















V*







50%





228



Hog Operations

Chemical Additives to Waste















V*







50%





73



Poultry Operations

Chemical Additives to Waste















V*







75%





1,014



Agricultural Burning

Seasonal Ban (Ozone Season Daily)









¦V*













100%





N/A



Ammonia - Natural Gas - Fired
Reformers - Small Sources

Oxygen Trim + Water Injection









¦V*













65%





680



Ammonia - Natural Gas - Fired
Reformers - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





820



Ammonia - Natural Gas - Fired
Reformers - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



2,900

3,870

3,870

Ammonia - Natural Gas - Fired
Reformers - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,230

2,230

2,860

Ammonia - Natural Gas - Fired
Reformers - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Flue Gas
Recirculation (FGR)









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

Ammonia Products; Feedstock
Desulfurization - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

Asphaltic Cone; Rotary Dryer;
Conv Plant - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



B-1

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

By-Product Coke
Manufacturing; Oven
Underfiring

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





1,640



Cement Kilns

Biosolid Injection









¦V*













23%





310



Cement Manufacturing - Dry

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













25%



300

440

620

Cement Manufacturing - Dry

Mid-Kiln Firing









¦V*













25%



-460

55

730

Cement Manufacturing - Dry

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





3,370



Cement Manufacturing - Dry

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Ammonia Based









¦V*





X







50%





850



Cement Manufacturing - Dry

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







50%





770



Cement Manufacturing - Wet

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













25%



300

440

620

Cement Manufacturing - Wet

Mid-Kiln Firing









¦V*













25%



-460

55

730

Cement Manufacturing - Wet -
Large Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





2,880



Cement Manufacturing - Wet -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





2,880



B-2

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Ceramic Clay Manufacturing;
Drying - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



Coal Cleaning-Thrml Dryer;
Fluidized Bed - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,460



Coal-fired Plants with
Production Capacities>100MW

Combustion Optimization









¦V*













20%





-25



Combustion Turbines - Jet
Fuel - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
+ Water Injection









¦V*













90%





2,300



Combustion Turbines - Jet
Fuel - Small Sources

Water Injection









¦V*













68%





1,290



Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Large Sources

Dry Low NOx Combustors









¦V*













50%



100

100

140

Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Water Injection









¦V*













76%





1,510



Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
+ Steam Injection









¦V*





X







95%



2,010

2,010

8,960

Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
+ Low NOx Burner (LNB)









¦V*





X







94%



2,570

2,570

19,120

Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Dry Low NOx Combustors









¦V*













84%



490

490

540

Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Steam Injection









¦V*













80%





1,040



B-3

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Combustion Turbines - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
+ Water Injection









¦V*













95%





2,730



Combustion Turbines - Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
+ Water Injection









¦V*













90%





2,300



Combustion Turbines - Oil -
Small Sources

Water Injection









¦V*













68%





1,290



Commercial/Institutional -
Natural Gas

Water Heaters + LNB Space Heaters









¦V*













7%





1,230



Commercial/Institutional -
Natural Gas

Water Heater Replacement









¦V*













7%





N/A



Commercial/Institutional
Incinerators

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







45%





1,130



Conv Coating of Prod; Acid
Cleaning Bath - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



Diesel Locomotives

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*













72%





1,400



Fiberglass Manufacture; Textile-
Type; Recuperative Furnaces

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













40%





1,690



Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

Fuel Fired Equipment -
Process Heaters

Low Nox Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













50%





570



B-4

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Fuel Fired Equipment;
Furnaces; Natural Gas

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





570



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





2,200



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

Electric Boost









¦V*













10%





7,150



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

Cullet Preheat









¦V*













25%





940



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













40%





1,690



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





1,770



Glass Manufacturing -
Containers

OXY-Firing









¦V*













85%





4,590



Glass Manufacturing - Flat

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













40%





700



Glass Manufacturing - Flat

OXY-Firing









¦V*













85%





1,900



Glass Manufacturing - Flat

Electric Boost









¦V*













10%





2,320



Glass Manufacturing - Flat -
Large Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





740



B-5

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Glass Manufacturing - Flat -
Large Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





710



Glass Manufacturing - Flat -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





710



Glass Manufacturing - Flat -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





740



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

OXY-Firing









¦V*













85%





3,900



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





2,530



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













40%





1,500



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

Cullet Preheat









¦V*













25%





810



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

Electric Boost









¦V*













10%





8,760



Glass Manufacturing - Pressed

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





1,640



Highway Vehicles - Gasoline
Engine

Low Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)
Limit in Ozone Season









¦V

¦V*





V



0.1%

5.5%

11.1%

125

1,548

25,671

Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
and Diesel-Fueled Vehicles

Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle
Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V





76%





10,561



B-6

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
and Diesel-Fueled Vehicles

Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle
Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V





19%





9,301



Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
and Diesel-Fueled Vehicles

Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle
Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V





44%





10,561



Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
and Diesel-Fueled Vehicles

Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle
Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel
Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V





61%





10,561



Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
Diesel Engines

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program:
Selective Catalytic Reduction

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V





19.26%





50,442



Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
and Gasoline-Fueled Vehicles

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and
Gasoline Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V



28%

34%

40%



6,297



Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
and Gasoline-Fueled Vehicles

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and
Gasoline Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

¦V

V



V



74%

83%

92%



6,297



Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
and Gasoline-Fueled Vehicles

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and
Gasoline Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

V

V



V



52%

64.5%

77%



6,297



Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
and Gasoline-Fueled Vehicles

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions and
Gasoline Sulfur Controls

V

V





¦V*

V

V



V



43%

54.5%

66%



6,297



Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
Gasoline Engines

High Enhanced Inspection and
Maintenance (l/M) Program









¦V*

V





V



0.4%

6.5%

13.4%

3,900

7,949

218,369

IC Engines - Gas

L-E (Low Speed)









¦V*













87%





176



IC Engines - Gas - Small
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*













90%





2,769



B-7

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

IC Engines - Gas, Diesel,
LPG - Small Sources

Ignition Retard









¦V*













25%





770



IC Engines - Gas, Diesel,
LPG - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*













80%





2,340



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone -
Large Sources

Coal Reburn









¦V*













50%





300



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone -
Small Sources

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













55%





1,570



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







35%





840



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone -
Small Sources

Coal Reburn









¦V*













50%





1,570



ICI Boilers - Coal/Cyclone -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*













80%





820



ICI Boilers - Coal/FBC - Large
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







40%





670



ICI Boilers - Coal/FBC - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







75%





900



ICI Boilers - Coal/Stoker -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





817



ICI Boilers - Coal/Stoker -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%



873

1,015

1,015

B-8

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Large
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,090



ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Large
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





840



ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Large
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







70%





1,070



ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,460



ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%



400

1,040

1,040

ICI Boilers - Coal/Wall - Small
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*













70%





1,260



ICI Boilers - Coke - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%



400

1,040

1,040

ICI Boilers - Coke - Small
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







70%





1,260



ICI Boilers - Coke - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,460



ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil -
Large Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%





1,890



ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,180



B-9

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



1,090

2,490

2,490

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



3,470

4,640

4,640

ICI Boilers - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,780

2,780

3,570

ICI Boilers - Liquid Waste

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



1,480

1,480

1,910

ICI Boilers - Liquid Waste -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





400



ICI Boilers - Liquid Waste -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



1,120

1,120

1,080

ICI Boilers - Liquid Waste -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



1,940

2,580

2,580

ICI Boilers - LPG - Small
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,780

2,780

3,570

ICI Boilers - LPG - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



3,470

4,640

4,640

ICI Boilers - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,180



ICI Boilers - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



1,090

2,490

2,490

B-10

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

ICI Boilers - MSW/Stoker-
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







55%





1,690



ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Large Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%





1,570



ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Oxygen Trim + Water Injection









¦V*













65%





680



ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,230

2,230

2,860

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



2,900

3,870

3,870

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

ICI Boilers - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





820



ICI Boilers - Process Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





820



ICI Boilers - Process Gas -
Small Sources

Oxygen Trim + Water Injection









¦V*













65%





680



ICI Boilers - Process Gas -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,230

2,230

2,860

ICI Boilers - Process Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

B-11

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil -
Large Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%





1,050



ICI Boilers - Residual Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



1,480

1,480

1,910

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



1,120

1,120

1,080

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



1,940

2,580

2,580

ICI Boilers - Residual Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





400



ICI Boilers -

Wood/Bark/Stoker - Large
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







55%





1,190



ICI Boilers -

Wood/Bark/Stoker - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







55%





1,440



Industrial Coal Combustion

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













21%





1,350



Industrial Coal Combustion

RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













21%





1,350



Industrial Incinerators

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







45%





1,130



Industrial Natural Gas
Combustion

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













31%





770



B-12

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Industrial Natural Gas
Combustion

RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













31%





770



Industrial Oil Combustion

RACT to 50 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













36%





1,180



Industrial Oil Combustion

RACT to 25 tpy (LNB)









¦V*













36%





1,180



In-Proc; Process Gas; Coke
Oven/Blast Ovens

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

In-Process Fuel Use -
Bituminous Coal - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







40%





1,260



In-Process Fuel Use; Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



In-Process Fuel Use; Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













37%





2,520



In-Process; Bituminous Coal;
Cement Kilns

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







50%





770



In-Process; Bituminous Coal;
Lime Kilns

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







50%





770



In-Process; Process Gas;
Coke Oven Gas

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas

L-E (Medium Speed)









¦V*













87%





380



B-13

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Large Sources

Air/Fuel + Ignition Retard









¦V*













30%



150

460

460

Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Large Sources

Air/Fuel Ratio Adjustment









¦V*













20%





380



Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Large Sources

Ignition Retard









¦V*













20%





550



Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Small Sources

Air/Fuel + Ignition Retard









¦V*













30%



270

1,440

1,440

Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Small Sources

Air/Fuel Ratio Adjustment









¦V*













20%





1,570



Internal Combustion Engines -
Gas - Small Sources

Ignition Retard









¦V*













20%





1,020



Internal Combustion Engines -
Oil - Small Sources

Ignition Retard









¦V*













25%





770



Internal Combustion Engines -
Oil - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





2,340



Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + SCR









¦V*





X







80%



1,320

1,720

1,720

Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





1,640



Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





570



B-14

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



250

750

750

Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







85%





3,830



Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







90%



3,720

4,080

4,080

Iron & Steel Mills - Galvanizing

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





490



Iron & Steel Mills - Galvanizing

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



190

580

580

Iron & Steel Mills - Reheating

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













77%



150

380

380

Iron & Steel Mills - Reheating

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













66%





300



Iron & Steel Mills - Reheating

Low Excess Air (LEA)









¦V*













13%





1,320



Iron Production; Blast
Furnaces; Blast Heating Stoves

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













77%





380



Lime Kilns

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Urea Based









¦V*





X







50%





770



Lime Kilns

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





3,370



B-15

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Lime Kilns

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR) Ammonia Based









¦V*





X







50%





850



Lime Kilns

Mid-Kiln Firing









¦V*













30%





460



Lime Kilns

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













30%





560



Medical Waste Incinerators

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







45%





4,510



Municipal Waste Combustors

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







45%





1,130



Natural Gas Production;
Compressors - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







20%





1,651



Nitric Acid Manufacturing -
Small Sources

Extended Absorption









¦V*













95%





480



Nitric Acid Manufacturing -
Small Sources

Non-Selective Catalytic Reduction
(NSCR)









¦V*





X







98%



510

550

710

Nitric Acid Manufacturing -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







97%





590



Off-Highway Diesel Vehicles

Final Compression-Ignition (C-l)
Engine Standards

V

V





¦V*

¦V





V



65%

72%

79%



N/A



Off-Highway Diesel Vehicles

Final Compression-Ignition (C-l)
Engine Standards

V

V





¦V*

¦V





V



21%

30%

59%



N/A



B-16

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Off-Highway Diesel Vehicles

Final Compression-Ignition (C-l)
Engine Standards

V

V





¦V*

¦V





V



34%

45.5%

57%



N/A



Off-Highway Diesel Vehicles

Final Compression-Ignition (C-l)
Engine Standards

V

V





¦V*

¦V





V



49%

62%

75%



N/A



Off-Highway Gasoline Vehicles

Large Spark-Ignition (S-l) Engine
Standards

V

V





¦V*

¦V





V



-26%

35.5%

77%



N/A



Off-Highway Gasoline Vehicles

Large Spark-Ignition (S-l) Engine
Standards

V

V





¦V*

V





V



-26%

33.5%

93%



N/A



Off-Highway Gasoline Vehicles

Large Spark-Ignition (S-l) Engine
Standards

V

V





¦V*

V





V



-32%

33.5%

91%



N/A



Off-Highway Gasoline Vehicles

Large Spark-Ignition (S-l) Engine
Standards

V

V





¦V*

V





V



-31%

29%

95%



N/A



Open Burning

Episodic Ban (Daily Only)









¦V*













100%





N/A



Plastics Prod-Specific; (ABS) -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













74%





2,140



Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







92%



9,120

9,120

15,350

Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





9,230



B-17

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





3,180



Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













48%



4,250

4,250

19,540

Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner - Selective Non-
Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)









¦V*





X







78%



3,620

3,620

3,830

Process Heaters - Distillate
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













45%





3,470



Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + SNCR









¦V*





X







78%



3,620

3,620

3,830

Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





3,180



Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













74%





2,140



Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







92%



9,120

9,120

15,350

Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













48%



4,250

4,250

19,540

Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













45%





3,470



Process Heaters - LPG - Small
Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





9,230



B-18

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













75%





1,500



Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







88%



11,560

11,560

27,910

Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





2,850



Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



3,190

3,190

15,580

Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





12,040



Process Heaters - Natural
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + SNCR









¦V*





X







80%



3,520

3,520

6,600

Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







91%



5,420

5,420

7,680

Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





5,350



Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + SNCR









¦V*





X







75%



2,230

2,300

2,860

Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













73%





1,290



B-19

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





1,930



Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













37%





2,520



Process Heaters - Other Fuel -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













34%





3,490



Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





2,200



Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







88%



11,560

11,560

27,910

Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) +Selective
Reduction SNCR









¦V*





X







80%



3,520

3,520

6,600

Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





12,040



Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













75%





1,500



Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





2,850



Process Heaters - Process
Gas - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Ultra Low NOx Burner









¦V*













73%





1,290



B-20

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













34%





3,490



Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













37%





2,520



Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + SCR









¦V*





X







75%



2,230

2,300

2,860

Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner (LNB) + Selective
Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







91%



5,420

5,420

7,680

Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







60%





1,930



Process Heaters - Residual
Oil - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







75%





5,350



Residential Natural Gas

Water Heater Replacement









¦V*













7%





N/A



Residential Natural Gas

Water Heater + LNB Space Heaters









¦V*













7%





1,230



Rich-Burn Stationary
Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines

Non-selective catalytic reduction









¦V*













90%





342



Rich-Burn Stationary
Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines

Non-selective catalytic reduction









¦V*













90%





342



Rich-Burn Stationary
Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines (RICE)

Non-selective catalytic reduction
(NSCR)









¦V*

V





V





90%





342



B-21

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Sand/Gravel; Dryer - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

Secondary Aluminum
Production; Smelting Furnaces

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





570



Solid Waste Disposal;
Government; Other

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







45%





1,130



Space Heaters - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



1,090

2,490

2,490

Space Heaters - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,780

2,780

3,570

Space Heaters - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



3,470

4,640

4,640

Space Heaters - Distillate Oil -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





1,180



Space Heaters - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





820



Space Heaters - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



2,900

3,870

3,870

Space Heaters - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,230

2,230

2,860

Space Heaters - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

B-22

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Space Heaters - Natural Gas -
Small Sources

Oxygen Trim + Water Injection









¦V*













65%





680



Starch Manufacturing;
Combined Operation - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













55%



1,430

3,190

3,190

Steel Foundries; Heat Treating

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





570



Steel Production; Soaking Pits

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



250

750

750

Sulfate Pulping - Recovery
Furnaces - Small Sources

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%



2,900

3,870

3,870

Sulfate Pulping - Recovery
Furnaces - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*













50%





820



Sulfate Pulping - Recovery
Furnaces - Small Sources

Oxygen Trim + Water Injection









¦V*













65%





680



Sulfate Pulping - Recovery
Furnaces - Small Sources

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%



2,230

2,230

2,860

Sulfate Pulping - Recovery
Furnaces - Small Sources

Low NOx Burner + Flue Gas
Recirculation









¦V*













60%



2,470

2,560

2,560

Surface Coat Oper; Coating
Oven Htr; Nat Gas - Small
Sources

Low NOx Burner









¦V*





X







50%





2,200



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
separated Overfire Air (LNC2)









¦V*













48%





N/A



B-23

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
cross-Coupled Overfire Air (LNC1)









¦V*













33%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
separated Overfire Air (LNC2)









¦V*













38%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
Close-Coupled and Separated
Overfire Air (LNC3)









¦V*













53%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
cross-Coupled Overfire Air (LNC1)









¦V*













43%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Low Nox Coal-and-Air Nozzles with
Close-Coupled and Separated
Overfire Air (LNC3)









¦V*













58%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







35%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X



V



90%
(Hg 95%)





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Tangential

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Low Nox Burner without Overfire Air









¦V*













41





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Low Nox Burner with Overfire Air









¦V*













56%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Low Nox Burner with Overfire Air









¦V*













55%





N/A



B-24

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Low Nox Burner without Overfire Air









¦V*













40%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







90%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







35%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Coal/Wall

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Cyclone

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







35%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Cyclone

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Cyclone

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Oil-
Gas/Tangential

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Oil-
Gas/Tangential

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Oil-
Gas/Tangential

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Oil-Gas/Wall

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
(SNCR)









¦V*





X







50%





N/A



B-25

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Utility Boiler - Oil-Gas/Wall

Natural Gas Reburn (NGR)









¦V*













50%





N/A



Utility Boiler - Oil-Gas/Wall

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)









¦V*





X







80%





N/A



Agricultural Burning

Bale Stack/Propane Burning

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V













49%

63%

63%



2,591



Agricultural Tilling

Soil Conservation Plans

¦V

¦V

¦V

V















11.7%





138



Asphalt Manufacture

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Asphalt Manufacture

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Asphalt Manufacture

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



85

147

256

Asphalt Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Asphalt Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Asphalt Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Beef Cattle Feedlots

Watering

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















50%





307



B-26

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Chemical Manufacture

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Chemical Manufacture

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Chemical Manufacture

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



55

220

550

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Coal

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Coal

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Coal

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















98%



40

110

250

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Liquid Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Liquid Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - LPG

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



B-27

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - LPG

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Natural Gas

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Natural Gas

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Oil

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Oil

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Oil

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

V

V*

V

V















98%



40

110

250

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Process Gas

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Process Gas

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Solid Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Solid Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Wood

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-28

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Wood

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Wood/Bark

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



42

117

266

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Wood/Bark

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



53

148

337

Commercial Institutional
Boilers - Wood/Bark

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Construction Activities

Dust Control Plan

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















62.5%





3,600



Conveyorized Charbroilers

Catalytic Oxidizer

¦V*

¦V*







V









80%

83%

90%



2,966



Electric Generation - Coke

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Coke

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Bagasse

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Bagasse

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Coal

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-29

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Electric Generation - Coal

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Liquid
Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Liquid
Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - LPG

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - LPG

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Natural
Gas

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Natural
Gas

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Oil

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Electric Generation - Oil

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Solid
Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Solid
Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



B-30

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Electric Generation - Wood

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Electric Generation - Wood

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Fabricated Metal Products -
Abrasive Blasting

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



85

142

256

Fabricated Metal Products -
Welding

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



85

142

256

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Coke

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Coke

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Coke

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



37

126

303

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Coke

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Coke

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















93%



75

751

2,100

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Ferroalloy Production

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Ferroalloy Production

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



B-31

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Ferroalloy Production

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Ferroalloy Production

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Ferroalloy Production

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Impingement-Plate Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















64%



46

431

1,200

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















94%



76

751

2,100

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Gray Iron Foundries

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron & Steel Production

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



B-32

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron & Steel Production

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















73%



76

751

2,100

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



42

117

266

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



37

126

303

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Iron and Steel Production

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Other

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Other

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-33

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















73%



76

751

2,100

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



37

126

303

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Ferrous Metals Processing -
Steel Foundries

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Grain Milling

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Grain Milling

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Grain Milling

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



85

142

256

Highway Vehicles - Gasoline
Engine

RFG and High Enhanced l/M
Program









V

¦V*





V



-9.1%

11.4%

31.9%

484

16,164



Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
Diesel Engines

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program:
Diesel Particulate Filter

¦V

¦V*









V



V





61.99%





727,689



B-34

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
Diesel Engines

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program:
Biodiesel Fuel

¦V

¦V*







V





V





7%





209,913



Highway Vehicles - Heavy Duty
Diesel Engines

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program:
Diesel Oxidation Catalyst

¦V

¦V*







V

V



V





24.01%





167,640



Industrial Boilers - Coal

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Coal

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



42

117

266

Industrial Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



53

148

337

Industrial Boilers - Coal

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















82%



76

751

2,100

Industrial Boilers - Coal

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

















98%



40

110

250

Industrial Boilers - Coke

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Coke

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Liquid Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-35

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Industrial Boilers - Liquid Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Liquid Waste

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

V

V*

¦V

¦V















98%



40

110

250

Industrial Boilers - LPG

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - LPG

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Natural Gas

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Natural Gas

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Oil

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Oil

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

V*

V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Oil

Venturi Scrubber

V

V*

¦V

¦V















92%



76

751

2,100

Industrial Boilers - Oil

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

V

V*

¦V

¦V















98%



40

110

250

Industrial Boilers - Process Gas

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

V*

V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-36

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Industrial Boilers - Process Gas

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Solid Waste

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Solid Waste

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Wood

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Industrial Boilers - Wood

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Industrial Boilers - Wood

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















93%



76

751

2,100

Industrial Boilers - Wood

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















98%



40

110

250

Industrial Boilers - Wood

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



53

148

337

Industrial Boilers - Wood

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

















99%



42

117

266

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-37

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



85

142

256

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Mineral Products - Cement
Manufacture

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



76

751

2,100

Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*



V















99%



85

142

256

B-38

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Mineral Products - Coal
Cleaning

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Mineral Products - Other

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Mineral Products - Other

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Mineral Products - Other

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



85

145

256

Mineral Products - Other

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Mineral Products - Other

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Mineral Products - Other

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Mineral Products - Other

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Mineral Products - Other

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*



V















99%



37

126

303

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying & Processing

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying & Processing

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



B-39

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



42

117

266

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Venturi Scrubber

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















95%



76

751

2,100

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Paper/Nonwoven Filters - Cartridge
Collector Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



85

142

256

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Wet ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Mineral Products - Stone
Quarrying and Processing

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Municipal Waste Incineration

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

B-40

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















99%



53

148

337

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Aluminum

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Copper

Wet ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



B-41

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Lead

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



53

148

337

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Other

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*



V















99%



37

1,260

303

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

Increased Monitoring Frequency
(IMF) of PM Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















6.5%





620



B-42

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

CEM Upgrade and Increased
Monitoring Frequency of PM
Controls

¦V*

¦V*



















7.7%





5,200



Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



37

126

303

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















98%



40

110

250

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

Wet ESP - Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















99%



55

220

550

Non-Ferrous Metals
Processing - Zinc

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

V

V















99%



53

148

337

Nonroad Diesel Engines

Heavy Duty Retrofit Program

¦V

¦V*

V

V















1%





9,500



Paved Roads

Vacuum Sweeping

¦V

¦V*

V

V















50.5%





485



Prescribed Burning

Increase Fuel Moisture

¦V

¦V*

V

V















50%





2,617



Residential Wood Combustion

Education and Advisory Program

¦V

¦V*

¦V

V















50%





1,320



Residential Wood Stoves

NSPS compliant Wood Stoves

¦V*

¦V*



















98%





2,000



Unpaved Roads

Chemical Stabilization

¦V

¦V*



















37.5%





2,753



B-43

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

>l I ut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficient

from base I

Typical

/

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Unpaved Roads

Hot Asphalt Paving

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V















67.5%





537



Utility Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Mech. Shaker Type)

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V











V



99.5%



37

126

303

Utility Boilers - Coal

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

V

V











V

(Hg 3%)

98%
(Hg 20%)

Hg 36%)

40

110

250

Utility Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter

¦V

¦V*

V

V











V



95%
(Hg 80%)





N/A



Utility Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Pulse Jet Type)

¦V

¦V*

V

V











V



99%



42

117

266

Utility Boilers - Coal

Fabric Filter (Reverse-Air Cleaned
Type)

¦V

¦V*

V

V











V



99%



53

148

337

Utility Boilers - Gas/Oil

Fabric Filter

¦V

¦V*

¦V

¦V











V



95%





N/A



Wood Pulp & Paper

Wet ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

V

V















99%



55

220

550

Wood Pulp & Paper

Dry ESP-Wire Plate Type

¦V

¦V*

V

V















98%



40

110

250

Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal

Flue Gas Desulfurization













V*









90%





N/A



Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal

Flue Gas Desulfurization













V*









90%





N/A



B-44

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

ed

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Bituminous/Subbituminous
Coal (Industrial Boilers)

Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%



1,027

1,536

1,980

Bituminous/Subbituminous
Coal (Industrial Boilers)

Spray Dryer Abosrber













¦V*









90%



804

1,341

1,973

Bituminous/Subbituminous
Coal (Industrial Boilers)

In-duct Dry Sorbent Injection













¦V*









40%



1,111

1,526

2,107

By-Product Coke Manufacturing

Vacuum Carbonate Plus Sulfur
Recovery Plant













¦V*









82%





N/A



Distillate Oil (Industrial Boiler)

Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%



2,295

3,489

4,524

Inorganic Chemical
Manufacture

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



In-process Fuel Use -
Bituminous Coal

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Lignite (Industrial Boiler)

Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%



1,027

1,536

1,980

Lignite (Industrial Boiler)

Spray Dryer Abosrber













¦V*









90%



804

1,341

1,973

Lignite (Industrial Boiler)

In-duct Dry Sorbent Injection













¦V*









40%



1,111

1,526

2,107

Lignite (Industrial Boilers)

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



B-45

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

ed

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Mineral Products Industry

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Petroleum Industry

Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD)













¦V*









90%





N/A



Primary Lead Smelters -
Sintering

Dual Absorption













¦V*









99%





N/A



Primary Metals Industry

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Primary Zinc Smelters -
Sintering

Dual Absorption













¦V*









99%





N/A



Process Heaters (Oil and Gas
Production)

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Pulp and Paper Industry
(Sulfate Pulping)

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Residual Oil

(Commercial/Institutional
Boilers)

Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%



2,295

3,489

4,524

Residual Oil

(Commercial/Institutional
Boilers)

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Residual Oil (Industrial Boilers

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Secondary Metal Production

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



B-46

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

ed

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Steam Generating Unit-Coal/Oil

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing + Flue Gas
Desulfurization













¦V*









99.7%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing













¦V*









97.8%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing + Flue Gas
Desulfurization













¦V*









99.8%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing + Flue Gas
Desulfurization













¦V*









99.8%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing













¦V*









97.1%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Amine Scrubbing













¦V*









98.4%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants -
Elemental Sulfur

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Sulfur Recovery Plants - Sulfur
Removal

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%) +
Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









85%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%)













¦V*









75%





N/A



B-47

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

ed

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficient

from base I

Typical

/

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%) +
Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









75%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%)













¦V*









95%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%)













¦V*









85%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%) +
Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









95%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%)













¦V*









90%





N/A



Sulfuric Acid Plants - Contact
Absorbers

Increase Absorption Efficiency from
Existing to NSPS Level (99.7%) +
Flue Gas Desulfurization













¦V*









90%





N/A



Utility Boilers - Coal-Fired

Fuel Switching - High-Sulfur Coal to
Low-Sulfur Coal

V

V









¦V*









60%



113

140

167

Utility Boilers - Coal-Fired

Coal Washing

V

V









¦V*





V



40%



70

320

563

Utility Boilers - Coal-Fired

Repowering to IGCC









V



¦V*





V



99%





N/A



Utility Boilers - High Sulfur
Content

Flue Gas Desulfurization (Wet
Scrubber Type)













¦V*





V

(Hg 29%)

90%
(Hg 64%)

Hg 98%)



N/A



B-48

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficient

from base I

Typical

/

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Utility Boilers - Medium Sulfur
Content

Flue Gas Desulfurization (Wet
Scrubber Type)













V*





V

(Hg 29%)

90%
(Hg 64%)

Hg 98%)



N/A



Utility Boilers - Very High Sulfur
Content

Flue Gas Desulfurization (Wet
Scrubber Type)













V*





V



90%





N/A



Adhesives - Industrial

SCAQMD Rule 1168











¦V*











73%





2,202



Aircraft Surface Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











60%





165



Architectural Coatings

OTC AIM Coating Rule











¦V*











55%





6,628



Architectural Coatings

South Coast Phase I











¦V*











34%



3,300

1,443

4,600

Architectural Coatings

South Coast Phase III











¦V*











73%





10,059



Architectural Coatings

AIM Coating Federal Rule











¦V*











20%





228



Architectural Coatings

South Coast Phase II











¦V*











47%





4,017



AREA

OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and
Refinishing Rule











¦V*











61%





2,534



AREA

OTC Solvent Cleaning Rule











¦V*











66%





1,400



B-49

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc
VOC

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

Drimary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

AREA

OTC Consumer Products Rule











¦V*











39.2%





1,032



AREA

OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and
Refinishing Rule











¦V*











61%





2,534



AREA

OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and
Refinishing Rule











¦V*











61%





2,534



AREA

OTC Consumer Products Rule











¦V*











39.2%





1,032



AREA

OTC Mobile Equipment Repair and
Refinishing Rule











¦V*











61%





2,534



Automobile Refinishing

Federal Rule











¦V*











37%





118



Automobile Refinishing

California FIP Rule (VOC content &
TE)











¦V*











89%





7,200



Automobile Refinishing

CARB BARCT Limits











¦V*











47%





750



Bakery Products

Incineration >100,000 lbs bread











¦V*











39.9%





1,470



Commercial Adhesives

CARB Long-Term Limits











¦V*











85%





2,880



Commercial Adhesives

CARB Mid-Term Limits











¦V*











55%





2,192



B-50

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc
VOC

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Commercial Adhesives

Federal Consumer Solvents Rule











¦V*











25%





232



Consumer Solvents

CARB Long-Term Limits











¦V*











85%





2,880



Consumer Solvents

CARB Mid-Term Limits











¦V*











55%





2,192



Consumer Solvents

Federal Consumer Solvents Rule











¦V*











25%





232



Cutback Asphalt

Switch to Emulsified Asphalts











¦V*











100%





15



Electrical/Electronic Coating

SCAQMD Rule











¦V*











70%





5,976



Electrical/Electronic Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











36%





5,000



Fabric Printing, Coating and
Dyeing

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*

















N/A



Flexographic Printing

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





9,947



Graphic Arts

Use of Low or No VOC Materials











¦V*











65%



3,500

4,150

4,800

Highway Vehicles - Gasoline
Engine

Federal Reformulated Gasoline
(RFG)









X

¦V*





V



0%

7.65%

15.3%

2,498

25,093



B-51

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Highway Vehicles - Light Duty
Gasoline Engines

Basic Inspection and Maintenance
Program

V

V





V

¦V*

V

V

V











N/A



Industrial Maintenance Coating

South Coast Phase III











¦V*











73%





10,059



Industrial Maintenance Coating

AIM Coating Federal Rule











¦V*











20%





228



Industrial Maintenance Coating

South Coast Phase II











¦V*











47%





4,017



Industrial Maintenance Coating

South Coast Phase 1











¦V*











34%



3,300

1,443

4,600

Machinery, Equipment, and
Railroad Coating

SCAQMD Limits











¦V*











55.2%





2,027



Marine Surface Coating
(Shipbuilding)

Add-On Controls











¦V*











90%





8,937



Marine Surface Coating
(Shipbuilding)

MACT Standard











¦V*











24%





2,090



Metal Can Surface Coating
Operations

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





8,469



Metal Coil & Can Coating

Incineration











¦V*











90%





8,937



Metal Coil & Can Coating

BAAQMD Rule 11 Amended











¦V*











42%





2,007



B-52

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Metal Coil & Can Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











36%





1,000



Metal Furniture Surface
Coating Operations

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





19,321



Metal Furniture, Appliances,
Parts

MACT Standard











¦V*











36%





1,000



Metal Furniture, Appliances,
Parts

SCAQMD Limits











¦V*











55.2%





2,027



Miscellaneous Metal Products
Coatings

MACT Standard











¦V*











36%





1,000



Motor Vehicle Coating

Incineration











¦V*











90%





8,937



Motor Vehicle Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











36%





118



Municipal Solid Waste Landfill

Gas Collection (SCAQMD/BAAQMD)











¦V*











70%





700



Nonroad Gasoline Engines

Federal Reformulated Gasoline











¦V*











1.4%



440

4,854

9,250

Off-Highway Vehicles: All
Terrain Vehicles (ATVs)

Recreational Gasoline ATV
Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





V



27%

40%

73%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles: All
Terrain Vehicles (ATVs)

Recreational Gasoline ATV
Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





V



33%

64%

95%



N/A



B-53

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

Pc

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

primary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Off-Highway Vehicles: All
Terrain Vehicles (ATVs)

Recreational Gasoline ATV
Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



14%

24%

34%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles: All
Terrain Vehicles (ATVs)

Recreational Gasoline ATV
Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



33%

65%

97%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Motorcycles

Recreational Gasoline Off-Highway
Motorcycle Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



10%

25%

40%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Motorcycles

Recreational Gasoline Off-Highway
Motorcycle Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



5%

12.5%

20%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Motorcycles

Recreational Gasoline Off-Highway
Motorcycle Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



12%

31%

50%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Motorcycles

Recreational Gasoline Off-Highway
Motorcycle Standards

V

V





¦V

¦V*





¦V



12%

32%

52%



N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Snowmobiles

Recreational Gasoline Snowmobile
Standards

V

V





X

¦V*





¦V





45%





N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Snowmobiles

Recreational Gasoline Snowmobile
Standards

V

V





X

¦V*





¦V





69%





N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Snowmobiles

Recreational Gasoline Snowmobile
Standards

V

V





X

¦V*





¦V





62%





N/A



Off-Highway Vehicles:
Snowmobiles

Recreational Gasoline Snowmobile
Standards

V

V





X

¦V*





¦V





20%





N/A



Oil and Natural Gas Production

Equipment and Maintenance











¦V*











37%





317



B-54

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc
VOC

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

Drimary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Open Top Degreasing

Title III MACT Standard











¦V*











31%





-69



Open Top Degreasing

SCAQMD 1122 (VOC content limit)











¦V*











76%





1,248



Open Top Degreasing

Airtight Degreasing System











¦V*











98%





9,789



Paper and other Web Coating
Operations

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





1,503



Paper Surface Coating

Incineration











¦V*











78%





4,776



Pesticide Application

Reformulation - FIP Rule











¦V*











20%





9,300



Portable Gasoline Containers

OTC Portable Gas Container Rule











¦V*











33%





581



Product and Packaging
Rotogravure and Screen
Printing

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





12,770



Publication Rotogravure
Printing

Permanent Total Enclosure (PTE)











¦V*











95





2,422



Rubber and Plastics
Manufacturing

SCAQMD - Low VOC











¦V*











60%





1,020



Stage II Service Stations

Low Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve











¦V*











91.6%



930

1,080

1,230

B-55

-------
Source Category

Control Measure Name

V = po
PM2.5

Mutant
PM10

PC

reduc
EC

)llut

io, X

oc

ant(

= pollut
NOx

s) Af

ant inc

voc

fecti

rease,
S02

sd

* = ma
NH3

jor pol
CO

utant
Hg

E

(%
Low

Control
Efficienc

from base I

Typical

y

ne)

High

Averac
Eff

($/ton

Low

je Annuc
ectivene

Drimary po

Typical

il Cost
ss

I utant)

High

Stage II Service Stations -
Underground Tanks

Low Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve











¦V*











73%



930

1,080

1,230

Traffic Markings

South Coast Phase III











¦V*











73%





1,059



Traffic Markings

AIM Coating Federal Rule











¦V*











20%





228



Traffic Markings

South Coast Phase 1











¦V*











34%



8,600

1,443

12,800

Traffic Markings

South Coast Phase II











¦V*











47%





4,017



Wood Furniture Surface
Coating

Add-On Controls











¦V*









67%

75%

98%

468

20,000

22,100

Wood Furniture Surface
Coating

New CTG











¦V*











47%



462

967

22,100

Wood Furniture Surface
Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











30%





446



Wood Product Surface Coating

Incineration











¦V*











86%





4,202



Wood Product Surface Coating

SCAQMD Rule 1104











¦V*











53%





881



Wood Product Surface Coating

MACT Standard











¦V*











30%





446



B-56

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

APPENDIX C: ONROAD MOBILE CONTROL MEASURES

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

INTRODUCTION

The focus of AirControlNET has primarily been to evaluate control measures for stationary
sources (i.e., EGUs, nonEGUs, and area sources) and estimate emissions reduction and the
associated costs. However, in order to gain a more complete picture of available control
measures for policy consideration and for conducting "what if' scenarios we found it necessary
to include control measures available for onroad and nonroad mobile sources. Thus, the purpose
of this appendix is to document the development and implementation of a capability within
AirControlNET to evaluate onroad mobile source control measures, i.e., estimate emission
reductions and costs from a baseline emissions inventory. For onroad mobile sources, we
conducted model simulations of MOBILE 6.2 to develop control measure data for inclusion into
AirControlNET. This initial effort focused on including only data associated with the
implementation of the following three programs for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030:

1)	Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur Final Rulemaking (Provide Federal Register citation from 2/10/2000
and place in references)

2)	Heavy Duty Diesel Engine and Fuel Standards (provide Federal Register citation from
1/18/2001 and place in references)

3)	Voluntary Diesel Retrofit programs(i.e., particulate filters, oxidation catalyst, SCR, and
biodiesel fuel)

In order to develop additional mobile source inputs using the methods described below, the
MOBILE 6.2 model would need to be run to estimate the emissions reductions. EPA is currently
developing the National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) which is a consolidated emissions
modeling system for mobile and nonroad emissions inventory development. It is expected that at
some time in the future, NMIM will replace these models. However, as currently configured,
AirControlNET is not connected to NMIM..

This appendix begins with a detailed example for the Tier 2 program to illustrate the data and
methods used in developing the emission reductions and costs associated with the control
strategy. This example is followed by an overview of the steps and assumptions made for
estimating these data for the Tier 2 Rulemaking, HD Engine/Fuel Standards, and Voluntary
Diesel retrofit programs. Future efforts are expected to incorporate additional federal programs
as well as other control options that are technically feasible to achieve criteria air pollutant
reductions from onroad mobile sources now and in the future.

TIER 2 EXAMPLE

This example is included in order to illustrate the steps followed in developing emissions
reductions and costs for each of the onroad control measures. The necessary steps are as follows:

1) Pick a representative scenario condition (e.g., temperature, RVP, speed, etc.).

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-l

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

2) Calculate MOBILE6.2 emission factors for the base year (1999) by model year and vehicle
type at the conditions selected in Step 1. Using the default fleet information from MOBILE6.2,
calculate a weighted average emission factor for each vehicle type.

3) Calculate MOBILE6.2 emission factors by applying a given emission standard or control
measure for each model year and vehicle type for all vehicle types that might be affected by the
selected control measure at the conditions selected in Step 1. This must be modeled carefully so
that each of the 25 model years included in the MOBILE6.2 output are modeled with full
implementation of the selected control measure.

4) Determine the degree of implementation of the new control measure (e.g., 25 percent of
vehicles, simulate 2020 phase-in, etc.).

5) Combine emission factors by model year from Steps 2 and 3 such that the appropriate model
years or vehicle ages receive the selected control measures. Using the default fleet information
from MOBILE6.2, calculate the weighted average emission factor for each affected vehicle type.

6) Calculate the percent difference between the Step 5 weighted average emission factor and the
Step 2 weighted average emission factor for each vehicle type.

7) Apply the percent difference estimated in Step 6 to the baseline AirControlNET emissions at
the county/vehicle type level of detail.

For this example, in Step 1, the representative conditions selected were those typical of a summer
day. A minimum daily temperature of 70°F and a maximum daily temperature of 90°F were
chosen. The RVP was set to 8.7 psi. This is the typical summertime RVP level, based on the
Phase II RVP regulations, for a majority of the country in 1999. Southern nonattainment areas,
reformulated gasoline areas, and other areas implementing low RVP programs would have lower
RVP levels. An average speed of 35 mph on arterial roadways was modeled.

Under Step 2, a MOBILE6.2 input file was developed for 1999 at the conditions described above.
This input file is shown in Figure C-l.

After running MOBILE6.2 with the input file shown in Figure C-l, the emission factors were
obtained in the database output format. For each of the 25 model years included in the database
output file, two emission factors were obtained-one representing the exhaust running emission
factor and one representing the exhaust engine start emission factor. Both emission factors are
expressed in grams per mile and can be added for a given model year to obtain the total NOx
emission factor for that model year. These emission factors were totaled by model year, with the
results shown in Table C-l. In Table C-l, the columns labeled model year, vehicle age, miles
traveled per day, registration distribution fraction, and fuel economy are obtained directly from
the MOBILE6.2 database output. The LDGV NOx emission factor column was obtained by
adding the MOBILE6.2 emission factors for exhaust running and engine start emissions within a
model year. The column labeled weighted NOx emission factor was calculated by multiplying
the LDGV NOx emission factor by the miles traveled per day and the registration distribution
fraction within the given model year. The column labeled weighted miles per day was calculated

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-2

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

as the product of the miles traveled per day and the registration distribution fraction. To obtain
the composite 1999 base case LDGV NOx emission factor, the sum of the weighted NOx
emission factors was divided by the sum of weighted miles per day. As shown in Table C-l, the
1999 base case LDGV NOx emission factor under the conditions described above is 1.3075
grams per mile.

Figure C-1. 1999 Base Case MOBILE6.2 Input File

MOBILE6 INPUT FILE :

DAILY OUTPUT
DATABASE OUTPUT :

WITH FIELDNAMES :

DATABASE VEHICLES : 21111 11111111 1 111 11111111 111
DATABASE FACILITIES: ARTERIAL none
POLLUTANTS : NOX

RUN DATA

EXPRESS HC AS VOC :

NO REFUELING

>SCENARIO: 1, AirControlNET BASE CASE
SCENARIO RECORD : SUMMER 99 BASE
CALENDAR YEAR :1999
EVALUATION MONTH :7
AVERAGE SPEED : 35 Arterial
MIN/MAXTEMP : 70. 90.

FUEL RVP : 8.7

END OF RUN

To follow Step 3, a second MOBILE6.2 input file was prepared. This input file is similar to that
shown in Figure C-l. The only difference is that six scenarios were included, each modeling a
different calendar year. The calendar years modeled were 2007, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, and
2050. The MOBILE6.2 output for each of these scenarios was processed in the same way as the
base case file to obtain the total NOx emission factors by model year for each of these calendar
years. These emission factors are shown in Table C-2. The 2050 emission factors are the same
as the 2040 emission factors by age, so they are not shown in this table. Model years from 2004
through 2008, shown in dark shading in Table C-2, represent the years that the Tier 2 standard is
being phased in. Model years 2009 and later are shown in light shading in Table C-2. These are
the model years where the Tier 2 standard has been completely phased in. Emission factors for
the years that are not shaded on this table will not be used. To capture the low sulfur gasoline
effects of the Tier 2 program on the model years not being replaced in 1999, a third MOBILE6.2
input file was developed. This input file simulated calendar year 1999 emission factors, using a
30 ppm sulfur gasoline. The input file is identical to that shown in Figure C-l, with the
following additional command line added in the scenario section:

SULFUR CONTENT : 30.0

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-3

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table C-1. 1999 Base Case NOx LDBF Emission Factors by Model Year





LDGV NOx









Weighted





Emission

Miles

Registration

Fuel

Weighted NOx

Miles per

Model

Vehicle

Factor

Traveled per

Distribution

Economy

Emission

Day

Year

Age

(g/mi)

Day (miles)

Fraction

(mpg)

Factor (grams)

(miles)

1975

24

7.213

12.2868

0.0102

16.8

0.904

0.1253

1976

23

7.7188

12.9232

0.0036

16.8

0.3591

0.0465

1977

22

8.5972

13.5945

0.0045

16.8

0.5259

0.0612

1978

21

8.0843

14.3001

0.0057

16.8

0.659

0.0815

1979

20

7.7857

15.0433

0.007

17.1

0.8199

0.1053

1980

19

6.1404

15.8235

0.0087

19.8

0.8453

0.1377

1981

18

2.898

16.6448

0.0106

21.2

0.5113

0.1764

1982

17

2.8338

17.5086

0.0137

22

0.6797

0.2399

1983

16

2.6799

18.4183

0.0177

21.9

0.8737

0.326

1984

15

2.6203

19.3732

0.0225

22.2

1.1422

0.4359

1985

14

2.5342

20.3781

0.0286

22.9

1.477

0.5828

1986

13

2.3167

21.4357

0.0363

23.7

1.8027

0.7781

1987

12

2.2502

22.5488

0.0459

23.8

2.3289

1.035

1988

11

1.8635

23.7195

0.0541

24.3

2.3913

1.2832

1989

10

1.7515

24.9498

0.059

23.9

2.5783

1.472

1990

9

1.64

26.2458

0.0629

23.9

2.7074

1.6509

1991

8

1.5373

27.6082

0.0657

23.9

2.7884

1.8139

1992

7

1.4175

29.0406

0.0678

23.9

2.791

1.969

1993

6

1.3131

30.5476

0.0692

23.9

2.7758

2.1139

1994

5

1.0542

32.1327

0.0701

23.9

2.3746

2.2525

1995

4

0.8123

33.8006

0.0705

23.9

1.9357

2.3829

1996

3

0.6353

35.5549

0.0707

23.9

1.597

2.5137

1997

2

0.5157

37.4003

0.0708

23.9

1.3655

2.6479

1998

1

0.4238

39.3409

0.0708

23.9

1.1804

2.7853

1999

0

0.3465

40.8534

0.0532

23.9

0.7531

2.1734

Total







0.9998



38.167

29.1903

Weighted NOx Emission Factor (g/mi):





1.3075



Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-4

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Emission factors resulting from this MOBILE6.2 run are also shown in Table C-2 in the column
labeled 1999. The medium shading in this column indicates the model years affected in 1999 by
the low sulfur gasoline. As shown in this table, only model years 1981 and newer are assumed to
be affected by lower sulfur gasoline in MOBILE6.2.

Once the implementation year is selected in Step 4, Step 5 involves appropriately combining
emission factors from Tables C-l and C-2. This must be done so that the model years from the
selected year of implementation subject to Tier 2 replace the emission factors of the vehicles of
corresponding ages in Table C-l. For example, to simulate the Tier 2 2020 implementation
schedule in 1999, start with the LDGV NOx emission factors in Table C-l. Replace the emission
factors for vehicles of age 16 and newer with the corresponding 2020 emission factors from
Table C-2 for vehicles of the same age. These are the vehicles that would have been subject to
Tier 2 emission standards in 2020 (e.g., model years 2004 and later). The remaining model
years, aged 17 years and older, would be meeting the same emission standards that they would
have met in the 1999 base case. However, vehicles aged 17 and 18 years, or from the 1981 and
1982 model years, would be affected by Tier 2 low sulfur gasoline in 1999. Thus, these emission
factors receive the medium shading in Table C-3. Vehicles of age 12 through 16 represent the
vehicles from model years 2004 through 2008 that represent phase-in Tier 2 emission standards.
The vehicles 11 years and newer meet the full Tier 2 emission standards. Vehicles older than 18
years are not affected at all by the Tier 2 program in 1999. Thus, vehicles of 19 years of age and
older receive their natural 1999 base case emission factors and are unaffected by the Tier 2
control.

Next, the emission factors shown in Table C-3 need to be combined with the daily VMT data and
the registration distribution data shown in Table C-l. The same procedure applied to the
emission factors in Table C-l to obtain the weighted 1999 base case NOx LDGV emission factor
needs to be applied to the Table C-3 emission factors representing various degrees of Tier 2
implementation in 1999. As in Table C-l, each emission factor is first multiplied by the miles
traveled per day and the registration distribution fraction shown in Table C-l for vehicles of the
same age. These products are summed for all 25 years of vehicles and divided by the sum of the
25 products of the miles traveled per day multiplied by the registration distribution fraction for
each vehicle age. Table C-4 shows the resulting weighted emission factors for each of the years
shown in Table C-3.

Under Step 6, the percent reduction from the 1999 base case NOx emission factors to the
weighted emission factors representing the various degrees of Tier 2 implementation in 1999 are
calculated. These percent reductions are shown in Table C-4. The reductions shown for 1999
represent only the reductions that would be achieved by replacing conventional gasoline with 30
ppm sulfur gasoline with the current 1999 fleet of vehicles. By 2033, the full Tier 2 emission
reduction potential would be reached, and all years thereafter would achieve the benefits shown
in Table C-4 for 2040.

The final step involves applying the reduction percentages from Table C-4 to the 1999 base case
AirControlNET emissions.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-5

Report

-------
PECIiAN

September 2005

Table C-2. LDGV NOx Emission Factors with Tier 2 in Various Calendar Years



1999

2007

2010

2020

2030





Emission







Emission



Emission



Emission



Vehicle

Model

Factor

Model

Emission

Model

Factor

Model

Factor

Model

Factor

Model

Aqe

Year

(q/ mi)

Year

Factor (q/mi)

Year

(q/mi)

Year

(q/mi)

Year

(q/mi)

Year

24

1975

7.213

1983

3.147

1986

2.9167

1996

2.2013

2006

1.1842

2016

23

1976

7.7188

1984

3.072

1987

2.8789

1997

2.1313

2007

1.0726

2017

22

1977

8.5972

1985

2.9936

1988

2.5845

1998

2.0637

2008

0.9987

2018

21

1978

8.0843

1986

2.7241

1989

2.4847

1999

1.9922

2009

0.9096

2019

20

1979

7.7857

1987

2.6816

1990

2.4289

2000

1.9208

2010

0.8504

2020

19

1980

6.1404

1988

2.3707

1991

2.3583

2001

1.7965

2011

0.7933

2021

18

1981



1989

2.2724

1992

2.2668

2002

1.6727

2012

0.7378

2022

17

1982



1990

2.2089

1993

2.1963

2003

1.5323

2013

0.685

2023

16

1983



1991

2.1342

1994

1.9116

2004

1.1158

2014

0.6327

2024

15

1984



1992

2.0398

1995

1.6462

2005

0 8718

2015

0.582

2025

14

1985



1993

1.9628

1996

1.4808

2006

0.5996

2016

0.5327

2026

13

1986



1994

1.6805

1997

1.4071

2007

0.513

2017

0.4849

2027

12

1987



1995

1.4197

1998

1.3359

2008

0.461

2018

0.4391

2028

11

1988



1996

1.2546

1999

1.2573

2009

0.3938

2019

0.3938

2029

10

1989



1997

1.1757

2000

1.1767

2010

0.3497

2020

0.3497

2030

9

1990



1998

1.0957

2001

1.0491

2011

0.3067

2021

0.3067

2031

8

1991



1999

1.0102

2002

0.9233

2012

0.2648

2022

0.2648

2032

7

1992



2000

0.9233

2003

0.7851

2013

0.2242

2023

0.2242

2033

6

1993



2001

0.7929

2004

0.4442

2014

0.1843

2024

0.1843

2034

5

1994



2002

0.665

2005

0.2765

2015

0.1452

2025

0.1452

2035

4

1995



2003

0.5313

2006

0.1425

2016

0.1097

2026

0.1097

2036

3

1996



2004

0.2517

2007

0.0865

2017

0.0749

2027

0.0749

2037

2

1997



2005

0.1184

2008

0.0496

2018

0.0408

2028

0.0408

2038

1

1998



2006

0.0485

2009

0.0282

2019

0.0282

2029

0.0282

2039

0

1999



2007

0.0293

201 0

0.0224

2020

0.0224

2030

0.0224

2040

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-6

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table C-3. 1999 Base Year LDGV NOx Emission Factors Under
Various Tier 2 Implementation Years by Vehicle Age





1999 Base

1999 with















Emission

Tier 2











Vehicle Model

Factor

Emission

2007 Emission

2010 Emission

2020 Emission

2030 Emission

2040 Emission

Age

Year

(g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

Factor (g/mi)

24?

1975:

7.213

7.213

7.213

7.213

7.213

1.1842

1.0985

23;

1976

7.7188

7.7188

7.7183

7.7188

7.7188

1.0726

1.0335

	22

1977

8.5972

8.5972

8.5972

8.5972

8.5972

0,9987

0.9705

	211

1978

8.0843

8.0843

8.0843

8.0843

8.0843

	0.9096

	0.9096

	20 r

1979

7.7857

7.7857'

7.7857

	7.7857

7.7857

0.8504

0.8504

19

1980

6.1404

6.1404

6.1404

6.1404

6.1404

0.7933

0.7933

18

1981

2.898

2.7314

2.7314

2.7314

2.7314

0,7378

0.7378

17

1982

2.8338

2.6717

2.6717

2.6717

2.6717

0.685

0.685

16

1983

2.6799

2.5209

2.5209

2.5209

1.1158

0.6327

0.6327

	15

1984

2.6203

2.4453

2.4453

2.4453

0.8718

0.582

	0 582

14

1985

2.5342

2.3652

2.3652

2.3652

0.5996

0.5327

0.5327

	13]'

1986

2.3167

2.1613

	2.1613

	2.1613

	0.513

0.4849

0.4849

	12 r

1987

2.2502

2.0997

2 0997

	2.0997

0.461

0.4391

0.4391

	11

1988

1 8635

1.7414

1.7414

1.7414

0.3938

0.3938

0.3938

	10

1989

1.7515

1.6378

1.6378

	1.6378

0.3497

0.3497

0.3497

	9i

¦1990

1.64

	1.5345

1.5345

1.5345

0.3067

0.3067

0.3067

	8

1991

1.5373

1.4385

1.4385

1.4385

0.2648

0.2648

0.2648

l\

1992

1.4175

1.3271

1.3271

1.3271

0.2242

0.2242

0.2242

	6:

1993

1.3131

1.2293

1.2293

0.4442

0.1843

0.1843

0.1843

	5;

1994

1.0542

0.9584

0.9584

0.2765

0.1452

0.1452

0.1452

	4

1995;

	0.8123

0.7084

0.7084

0.1425

0.1097

0.1097

0.1097

3!

1996

0.6353

0 5371

0.2517

0,0865

0.0749

0.0749

0,0749

	2\

1997

0.5157

0.4335

0.1184

0.0496

0.0408

0.0408

0.0408

1

1998

0.4238

0.3556

0.0485

0.0282

0.0282

0.0282

0.0282

	0

1999

	0.3465

	0.2907

	0.0293

	0.0224

0.0224

0.0224

	0.0224

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-7

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table C-4. Weighted LDGV NOx Emission Factors in 1999
with Varying Degrees of Tier 2 Implementation

Year of Tier 2
Implementation

Weighted 1999 LDGV
NOx Emission Factor
(g/mi)

Percent Reduction
from 1999 Base Case
Emission Factor (%)

1999 Base Case

1.3075



1999*

1.2101

7.4

2007

1.1082

15.2

2010

0.9296

28.9

2020

0.3787

71.0

2030

0.2151

83.5

2040

0.2146

83.6

*1999 represents only gasoline sulfur effects of Tier 2 program.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-8

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

The example shown here illustrated only reductions obtained from NOx for LDGVs. These same
steps would be applied to all of the other pollutants included in AirControlNET. The only
difference for other pollutants would be under Steps 2 and 3. In processing the MOBILE6.2
output file for NOx, emission factors for two emission types were added together for each model
year. In this case, the emission types were exhaust running emissions and exhaust engine start
emissions. These same two components would be processed for CO, S02, and NH3. However,
the processing of the VOC output must also include the evaporative emission types: hot soak,
diurnal, resting loss, running loss, and crankcase emission factors. Both the PM10 and PM2 5
processing must also include the brake wear and tire wear emission types in addition to the
exhaust emission types. The procedures would not change for any of the other vehicle types.
However, diesel vehicles do not have any evaporative emission components and heavy duty
vehicles do not include a separate exhaust engine start component.

An advantage to this procedure is the ease with which it can be adapted to additional base years,
beyond 1999. For a different base year, Step 2 would need to be recalculated using a different
base year MOBILE6.2 input file. However, the emission factors calculated for the projection
years, as shown in Table C-2, would not need to be changed. The combination of emission
factors from the base year and projection years would need to change. For example, if 2010 were
the new base year, and a 2020 year of Tier 2 implementation in 2010 were desired, the Table C-2
emission factors for 2010 from vehicles of age 17 and older would be combined with the 2020
emission factors for vehicles of age 16 and newer.

The steps laid out in this example are applicable for any control measure that could be modeled
in MOBILE6.2. This includes both fuel and emission standard control measures, as well as
vehicle inspection programs. In addition, the model year-specific emission factors obtained from
MOBILE6.2 can be adjusted to account for other control measures that cannot be explicitly
modeled in MOBILE6.2. This would include measures like retrofitting HDDVs with particulate
traps, replacing a portion of the fleet with hybrid or electric vehicles, or scrapping a portion of
the older model year vehicles or trucks. Control measures that involve changes in activity
(VMT) to specific vehicle types, but that are not specific to model year, would be modeled in
AirControlNET by reducing emissions in direct proportion to the reduction in VMT. However,
if an activity-based control measure is more specific to particular model years of vehicles, the
emission factors would first be adjusted for the necessary model years.

Tier 2

Representative scenario conditions were chosen based on their influence on emissions with Tier2
control measures in place. The conditions that were determined to significantly influence Tier2
emissions as a result of this sensitivity testing are temperature, speed, and presence or absence of
enhanced inspection/maintenance (I/M) and anti-tampering programs. Input files were prepared
that modeled the base case and Tier 2 effects under each of these conditions, both with and
without low sulfur gasoline fuel. Emission factors were combined by model year and vehicle
type such that the appropriate model years and vehicle types received the appropriate control
measures. Specifically, the Tier 2 engine and vehicle control measure is applicable to all light
duty vehicles beginning with the 2004 model year; the Tier 2 low sulfur gasoline control measure

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-9

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

is applicable to all gasoline vehicles beginning with the 1981 model year. Heavy duty diesel
vehicles and motorcycles are not affected by this control.

A percent difference was calculated based on the difference in the weighted average emission
factor between the control and base cases for each vehicle type. In this case, because there were
multiple control cases (temperature and speed), the percent reductions were combined in order to
get a single control efficiency for each vehicle type in each model year for counties with and
without I/M programs. The percent reductions from the various temperature runs (summer and
winter) were combined by weighting the two values equally (for base speed, low speed and high
speed). Then, the adjusted percent reductions for each speed were combined in the following
way to get a single percent reduction for those with and without I/M programs: 50.46% for base
speed, 39.87% for low speed, and 9.61% for high speed, based on the fraction of VMT expected
to occur under these conditions in the 1999 base emissions. These percent reductions were then
applied directly to the 1999 base case emissions based on whether or not an I/M program was
active in that county. Please note that there is a separate percent reduction for each vehicle type,
model year (2010, 2015, 2020, 2030), pollutant, and I/M status.

The costs of the Tier 2 program were summarized as per vehicle and per gallon costs from the
Regulatory Impact Analysis prepared by the EPA (EPA, 1999). In order to summarize these
costs, the degree of implementation among each vehicle type was determined. An estimate of the
number of vehicles affected by the control was calculated by dividing the VMT by the average
annual mileage accumulation rate for each affected vehicle type and model year. This fraction of
vehicles was then applied to the number of vehicles reported in the 1999 base case data, and
multiplied by the cost per vehicle. The cost per vehicle was summarized from the cost reported
in the EPA report to the vehicle type level that is reported in AirControlNET. This was done by
weighting each vehicle type by the relevant VMT fraction, and then summing to a new vehicle
type summary level. These per vehicle and per gallon costs were then applied to all relevant
vehicle types for each model year. The cost per ton was estimated by identifying the major
pollutant controlled by this measure as NOx and dividing the cost of the measure by the tons of
NOx emissions controlled.

Heavy Duty Diesel

In the case of the heavy duty diesel control measure, Pechan made the assumption that varying
the modeling conditions would have little effect on the emissions reductions achieved by this
measure. In other words, other factors such as temperature, speed and the presence or absence of
enhanced I/M and ATP programs were not taken into account. Therefore, input files that
represented the base case and diesel control measures were prepared, including those with and
without low sulfur diesel fuel. Emission factors were combined by model year and vehicle type
such that the appropriate model years and vehicle types received the appropriate control
measures. The heavy duty diesel engine and vehicle control measures are applicable to all heavy
duty diesel vehicles beginning with the 2007 model year, and all heavy duty gasoline vehicles
beginning with the 2008 model year. Light duty diesel vehicles also felt the effects of the low
sulfur diesel fuel standard. Light duty gasoline vehicles and motorcycles are not affected by this
control.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-10

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

A percent difference was calculated based on the difference in the weighted average emission
factor between the control and base cases for each vehicle type. These percent reductions were
then applied directly to the 1999 base case emissions. Please note that there is a separate percent
reduction for each vehicle type, model year (2010, 2015, 2020, 2030), and pollutant. This
modeling effort is simpler than the Tier 2 scenario because there are fewer conditions that have
to be taken into account as having an effect on the emissions reductions received by the control
measure.

The costs of the heavy duty diesel program were summarized as per vehicle and per gallon costs
from the Regulatory Impact Analysis prepared by the EPA (EPA, 2000). In order to summarize
these costs, the degree of implementation among each vehicle type was determined. An estimate
of the number of vehicles affected by the control was calculated by dividing the VMT by the
average annual mileage accumulation rate for each affected vehicle type and model year. This
fraction of vehicles was then applied to the number of vehicles reported in the 1999 base case
data, and multiplied by the cost per vehicle. The cost per vehicle was summarized from the cost
reported in the EPA report to the vehicle type level that is reported in AirControlNET. This was
done by weighting each vehicle type by the relevant VMT fraction, and then summing to a new
vehicle type summary level. These per vehicle and per gallon costs were then applied to all
relevant vehicle types for each model year. The cost per ton was estimated by identifying the
major pollutant controlled by this measure as NOx and dividing the cost of the measure by the
tons of NOx emissions controlled.

Voluntary Diesel Retrofit

The voluntary diesel retrofit program was approached differently than the other two control
measures. The main reason for this is that the emission factors cannot be modeled using
MOBILE6.2, as the conditions in the model do not allow for this control. Therefore, Pechan
conducted extensive research on the various retrofit techniques available to those interested in
participating in the program. Control efficiencies and costs were collected for a variety of
controls. In the end, Pechan chose four retrofit controls to estimate the costs of benefits of for
this program: 1) diesel particulate filter; 2) diesel oxidation catalyst; 3) selective catalytic
reduction; and 4) biodiesel fuel. These four controls represent the variety of retrofit controls in
terms of type, function, and cost. More detailed information on the methodology of including the
retrofit controls in this analysis can be found in the Pechan memo prepared for US EPA's Tyler
Fox in July 2003 (Pechan, 2003).

The range of control efficiencies researched for each retrofit technology was averaged, and a
single percent reduction was applied to the 1999 base emissions for each vehicle type. Due to the
fact that there are four controls for this measure, multiple years were not modeled here. A
similar methodology was employed for the costs: the range of researched costs was averaged and
applied to all relevant vehicles (i.e., all heavy duty diesel vehicles). Please note that the first
three retrofit technologies require the use of low sulfur diesel fuel, so the percent reductions and
costs of this fuel are included in these analyses. In order to determine the percent reductions
achieved from the fuel alone, MOBILE6.2 input files were prepared with base high sulfur diesel
fuel and base low sulfur diesel fuel. The percent reductions were calculated and this control

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-ll

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

efficiency was incorporated into the control efficiency for the retrofit technology alone to achieve

a combined control efficiency.

REFERENCES

EPA, 1999: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis - Control of
Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and
Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements," EPA420-R-99-023, December 1999.

EPA, 2000: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of

Emissions of Air Pollution from Highway Heavy-Duty Engines," EPA420-R-00-010, July
2000.

Pechan, 2003: E.H. Pechan & Associates, "Methodology to Implement Voluntary Diesel Retrofit
Program in AirControlNET," memo prepared for Tyler Fox of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, July 2003.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

C-12

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

APPENDIX D: NONROAD MOBILE CONTROL MEASURES

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

INTRODUCTION

The focus of AirControlNET has primarily been to evaluate control measures for stationary
sources (i.e., EGUs, nonEGUs, and area sources) and estimate emissions reduction and the
associated costs. However, in order to gain a more complete picture of available control
measures for policy consideration and for conducting "what if' scenarios we found it necessary
to include control measures available for onroad and nonroad mobile sources. Thus, the purpose
of this appendix is to document the development and implementation of a capability within
AirControlNET to evaluate nonroad source control measures, i.e., estimate emission reductions
and costs from a baseline emissions inventory. For nonroad sources, we conducted model
simulations of EPA's NONROAD model to develop control measure data for inclusion into
AirControlNET (provide cite for this model). This initial effort focused on including such
data associated with the implementation of the following engine standards for the years 2010,
2015, 2020, and 2030:

1) Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 emission standards for nonroad C-I engines at or above 50 hp, not
including recreational marine (63 FR 56968, 1998).

2) Final emission standards for nonroad large S-I engines and land-based recreational engines
(67 FR 68242, 2002).

For each of these standards, a database of year-specific control efficiencies and costs per engine
by category (i.e., 7- or 10-digit SCC) was developed for application to a 1999 base year inventory
(i.e., NEI v2.0). This appendix provides the steps taken to estimate the emission reductions,
applicability, and costs associated with each of the above control programs for inclusion
into AirControlNET.

In order to develop additional mobile source inputs using the methods described below, the
NONROAD model would need to be run to estimate the emissions reductions. EPA is currently
developing the National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) which is a consolidated emissions
modeling system for mobile and nonroad emissions inventory development. It is expected that at
some time in the future, NMIM will replace these models. However, as currently configured,
AirControlNET is not connected to NMIM..

Table D-l shows a summary of the federal emission standards affecting NONROAD model
category engines as well as the corresponding source classification codes (SCCs), engine size or
horsepower (hp), and pollutants. As shown, the NONROAD model category controls include the
following spark-ignition (S-I) (i.e., gasoline) and compression-ignition (C-I) (i.e., diesel) engine
emission standards:

• Phase I and Phase II emission standards for new nonroad S-I engines at or below

25 horsepower (hp). Promulgated July 1995 (Phase I), March 30, 1999 (Phase II Non-
handheld), and April 2000 (Phase II Handheld).

• Emission standards for new gasoline S-I marine engines (61 FR 52088, 1996).

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-l

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

• Tier 1 and Tier 2 emission standards for nonroad C-I engines below 50 hp, including
recreational marine (61 FR 58101, 1996).

• Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 emission standards for nonroad C-I engines at or above 50 hp,
not including recreational marine (63 FR 56968, 1998).

Additional final and proposed controls not reflected in EPA's NONROAD model include:

• Final emission standards for nonroad large S-I engines, and marine and land-based
recreational engines (67 FR 68242, 2002).

• Proposed emission standards for evaporative emissions from gasoline-fueled recreational
boats (67 FR 53050, 2002).

• Proposed Tier 4 emission standards and low sulfur diesel fuel requirements (68 FR
28328, 2003).

Future efforts are expected to incorporate those federal programs not accounted for in the current
version of AirControlNET as well as other control options that are technically feasible to achieve
criteria air pollutant reductions from nonroad sources now and in the future.

EMISSION REDUCTIONS

Pechan ran the NONROAD2002b version of the model at the national level for 1999, 2010,
2015, 2020, and 2030. Pechan used model default values for temperature, and Reid vapor
pressure (RVP). For the diesel fuel sulfur, EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality
(OTAQ) recommended using a default national average diesel fuel sulfur content of 2,318 parts
per million (ppm) for 1999, and a value of 2,217 ppm for all future year runs. Revised model
input files to reflect the above-mentioned large S-I and recreational standards were also provided
by OTAQ, since the NONROAD2002b version does not include the effects of these standards.

NONROAD outputs emissions and accounts for changes in the distribution of engine technology
types as new, cleaner engines are phased in. We estimated emission reductions (i.e., control
efficiencies) associated with a specific standard and year of implementation in 1999 by
comparing changes in pollutant emissions between a base year of 1999 and each future year,
while holding growth in equipment populations constant (i.e., growth factor of 1). This was
accomplished by revising the growth input file (nation.grw) to reflect a constant level of growth.

In the case of SCCs affected by the large S-I standards, there may be overlap between the large S-
I and small S-I standards, if an SCC includes engines that are both above and below 25
horsepower. To determine the actual reduction associated with only the large S-I standards, we
adjusted the technology file to remove all technology fractions associated with the small S-I
standards. In this manner, a control factor is calculated that already accounts for the rule
penetration that should be applied to SCC-level emissions, given that emissions for all engines
within the SCC may not be subject to the large S-I standard. Because the C-I standards and

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-2

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

recreational gasoline standards apply to all horsepower ranges within an SCC, this adjustment
was not needed for standards other than large S-I.

Tables D-2a through D-2d present the year-specific control efficiencies by equipment category
(i.e., 7-digit SCC) or by equipment application (10-digit SCC). These values were calculated by
taking the difference between the pollutant emissions for 2010 (or alternate implementation year)
and pollutant emissions for 1999, dividing by pollutant emissions for 1999, and multiplying by
100. Pechan estimated emission reductions for a given year at the equipment category, or 7-digit
SCC level, for most categories, with some exceptions. Therefore, most base year SCC emissions
for NONROAD model engines will be aggregated to the 7 digit SCC-level of detail (i.e., with 7-
digit specificity, followed by three zeroes). This approach simplifies calculations without losing
needed resolution and decreases the storage needed to house a county-level nonroad inventory for
the nation, which typically comprises over 200 SCCs.

NUMBER OF AFFECTED ENGINES

This section discusses how Pechan estimated the number of affected engines by technology type
(i.e., by Phase or Tier) for each implementation year, using results from the NONROAD runs
described in Section II, and scrappage rate data from the model. Since we are modeling future
year reductions in 1999, we do not want to reflect growth in engines, and therefore set the growth
to 1. The output data used from the model are equipment populations by SCC and technology
type. These steps are described by presenting an example of these calculations for commercial
C-I engines less than 50 hp for the year 2010, relative to 1999.

Table D-3 presents the total number of commercial sector C-I engines of less than 50 hp in each
tier category for years 1999 and 2010. Because the effect of growth has been removed, the
number of engines turned over to a higher Tier category can be obtained from these results. The
total number of engines is the same for 1999 and 2010 (449,154), but the distribution of engines
among tiers differs and indicates the number of engines that have turned over to that Tier, with
the exception of Tier 1 engines. Since Tier 1 engines are present in the 1999 base year, an
adjustment is needed, as described below.

The table shows a count of 178,062 engines affected by Tier 2. This estimate represents engines
that are turned over from Base emission levels to Tier 2 levels and engines that are turned over
from Tier 1 levels to Tier 2 levels. (To simplify the calculations, we estimated control costs for
all Tier 2 engines by multiplying the total number of Tier 2 engines that have been turned over
from higher-emitting levels by the incremental cost of achieving Tier 2 emission standards from
Base emission levels.) There are also 165,530 engines emitting at Base levels in 2010 from the
442,464 engines emitting at that level in 1999.

Since Tier 1 engines are present in the 1999 base year, it is necessary to calculate the number of
Tier 1 engines that are still operating in 2010. This step is accomplished by multiplying the 1999
count of engines (6,690) by one minus the scrappage rate (1 - 0.849). The resulting engine count
(1,010) is then subtracted from the number of Tier 1 engines in 2010 (105,563). These steps
leave an estimate of 104,552 engines that have turned over from Base emission levels to Tier 1
levels by 2010. To represent the 2010 year implementation of the C-I engine standards, the per

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-3

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

engine costs associated with each Tier level are multiplied by the number of engines that have
turned over to each standard between 1999 and 2010, which is 178,062 Tier 2 engines and
104,552 Tier 1 engines.

Table D-4 presents the C-I scrappage rates by equipment category, hp range and implementation
year for adjusting the number of Tier 1 C-I engines. The scrappage rates were derived by first
calculating the average annual hours of use, the average load factor, and the average median life
for each equipment category, based on the NONROAD model data for these variables. For a
given implementation year, the average annual hours of use was multiplied by the number of
years between the base year 1999 and the future year of interest to calculate the percent of
median life used. These values were then correlated to the default scrappage curve shown in
Table D-5, also obtained from the NONROAD model (EPA, 2002a). For large S-I engines and
recreational equipment, the number of engines can be obtained directly from the model results,
since there are no standard-based technology types in the base year (i.e., none of the standards
come into affect by 1999).

COSTS PER ENGINE

This section discusses the per engine costs applied to the number of affected engines. All costs
represent the production and compliance costs for an engine to meet the standard, and do not
include costs associated with fuel savings. As mentioned in Section III, all costs applied are
incremental to the base case. For example, Tier 2 costs that are incremental to Tier 1 costs are
added to the reported Tier 1 costs to estimate the cost involved in converting an engine from
Base level to Tier 2.

Table D-6 provides the combined engine and equipment costs from the Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) for the Federal Tier 1, 2, and 3 nonroad diesel standards (EPA, 1998). Costs
represent first-year costs, and differ by engine horsepower ranges. Long-term costs are also
available, but first-year, or near-term costs will be used for modeling future reductions occurring
in a base year of 1999. EPA developed a cost estimate for a single engine near the middle of the
ranges presented, so these are approximations, and the costs will be higher for engines on the
high end of the power range, and vice versa.

Tier 1 costs for engines greater than 50 hp are presented in the Regulatory Support Document
(RSD) for the 1994 rulemaking (EPA, 1994). These annualized costs are presented in Table 3-07
of the RSD on a present value per engine basis, expressed in 1992 dollars. Unlike the costs for
the 1998 rulemaking, which are presented by hp range, per engine costs are based on a weighted
average variable cost methodology, and are not broken out by hp range. Therefore the costs to
comply with Tier 1 standards for all engines greater than 50 hp are assumed to be the same
($229) for all sized engines.

Tables D-7 and D-8 provide the near-term incremental engine costs obtained from the final RSD
for the Large S-I and Recreational Equipment Standards (EPA, 2002b). First year costs for
meeting Phase 1 (2004) and Phase 2 (2007) standards for large gasoline and compressed natural
gas (CNG)/liquefied petroleum gasoline (LPG) S-I engines were obtained from Table 5.2.2-6 of
the RSD. Since CNG and LPG engines use comparable technologies, a single set of costs is

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-4

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

presented for application to both fuels. In addition, costs associated with permeation control are
subtracted from the costs per engine since NONROAD does not model the effect of the large S-I
gasoline evaporative standards in reducing future year evaporative hydrocarbon emissions. Note
that a limitation of the costs for large S-I engines for application to SCC-level emissions in the
inventory is that costs for large 2-stroke engines to meet the standards are not available. The near
term cost will, therefore, underestimate costs for 2-stroke engines, since it does not account for
the cost of 4-stroke conversion. However, the population of large 2-stroke gasoline engines is
considerably less compared to the population of large 4-stroke engines.

First year costs for meeting Phase 1 (2006) standards for all-terrain vehicle (ATV) and off-
highway motorcycle engines were obtained from Table 5.2.2-23 and 5.2.2-24 of the RSD,
respectively. Costs for 2-stroke to 4-stroke conversion were available for the recreational vehicle
categories, so these costs will be applied to 2-stroke engine SCCs. Costs for this engine
conversion, as well as pulse air/recalibration technology, are weighted by sales within a
displacement class. Also, costs associated with permeation control are subtracted from the costs
per engine since NONROAD does not model the effect of the recreational gasoline evaporative
standards.

Unlike other technology types included in the NONROAD model that typically represent a mix
of several technologies to meet a specified Tier or Phase standards, the technology types for
snowmobiles represent distinct technologies (Carlson, 2003). These same technologies are used
by the affected engines in varying proportions to meet each of the three Phases of the rule (Phase
1 in 2006, Phase 2 in 2010, and Phase 3 in 2012). First year costs for meeting the Phase 1
through Phase 3 standards for snowmobile engines were obtained from data in Tables 5.2.2-20
through 5.2.2-22. Table D-8 shows costs weighted by sales within a displacement class, and
describes the basis of the costs. In addition, costs associated with permeation control are
subtracted from the costs per engine since NONROAD does not model the effect of snowmobile
evaporative standards.

For the final step, costs per county associated with the emission reductions were estimated.

Since the NONROAD model runs were done on a national basis, the number of affected engines
were available at the national level only. Per engine costs were applied to the number of engines
to estimate total costs by equipment category. These costs were then allocated to the county level
based on the total number of engines per county, developed previously for the 1999 NEI,

Version 2.0.

REFERENCES

61 FR 52088, 1996: Federal Register, "Final Rule for New Gasoline Spark-Ignition Marine
Engines; Exemptions for New Nonroad Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 37
kW and New Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines at or Below 19 kW," Vol. 61, No. 194,
October 4, 1996.

61 FR 58101, 1996: Federal Register, "Determination of Significance for Nonroad Sources and
Emission Standards for New Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines at or above 37
Kilowatts (kW)," Vol. 61, No. 219, November 12, 1996.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-5

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

63 FR 56968, 1998: Federal Register, "Control of Emissions fromNonroad Diesel Engines,"
Vol. 63, No. 205, October 23, 1998.

67 FR 53050, 2002: Federal Register, "Control of Emissions from Spark-Ignition Marine

Vessels and Highway Motorcycles; Proposed Rule," Vol. 67, No. 157, August 14, 2002.

67	FR 68242, 2002: Federal Register, "Final Rule for Control of Emissions From Nonroad

Large Spark-Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines (Marine and Land-Based)," Vol.
67, No. 217, November 8, 2002.

68	FR 28328, 2003: Federal Register, "Control of Emissions and Air Pollution From Nonroad

Diesel Engines and Fuel," Vol. 68, No. 100, May 23, 2003.

EPA, 1994: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis and

Regulatory Support Document, Control of Air Pollution; Determination of Significance
for Nonroad Sources and Emission Standards for New Nonroad Compression-Ignition
Engines at or Above 37 Kilowatts (50 Horsepower)," FINAL, Office of Mobile Sources,
Certification Division, Ann Arbor, MI, May 27, 1994.

EPA, 1998: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Final Regulatory Impact Analysis:

Control of Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines," EPA420-R-98-016, Office of Air
and Radiation, Office of Mobile Sources, Engine Programs and Compliance Division.
August 1998.

EPA, 2002a: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Calculation of Age Distributions in the
NONROAD Model: Growth and Scrappage," EPA420-P-02-017, OAR, OTAQ, June
2002.

EPA, 2002b: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Final Regulatory Support Document:

Control of Emissions from Unregulated Nonroad Engines," EPA420-R-02-022, Office of
Air and Radiation, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, September 2002.

Carlson, 2003: Philip Carlson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Assessment and

Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, personal communication
with K. Thesing, E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., August 18, 2003.

Pechan, 2003: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Proposed Approach for Modeling Nonroad
Controls in ControlNET (Revised)," Draft Reports, prepared for Innovative Strategies
and Economics Group, OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, April 1 and May
27, 2003.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-6

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-1. Summary of NONROAD Model Category Control Programs

see

Description

Standard

Applicable
HP

Pollutants

Specific applications
of 2260*

Gasoline Class III, IV, and
V engines1

Phase l/ll Small Spark-
Ignition Handheld Engines

<25 hp

HC, NOx

Specific
applications of
2265*

Gasoline Class I and II
engines1

Phase l/ll Small Spark-
Ignition Non-handheld
Engines

<25 hp

HC, NOx

2260xxxxxx
2265xxxxxx
2267xxxxxx
2268xxxxxx

2-stroke gasoline
4-stroke gasoline
Liquefied petroleum
gasoline (LPG)
Compressed natural
gasoline (CNG)

Tier 1 /Tier 2 Large Spark-
Ignition

>=25 hp

HC, NOx, CO

2260001010

Gasoline Off-highway
Motorcycles

Recreational Vehicles

All hp

HC, NOx, CO

2260001020

Gasoline Snowmobiles

Recreational Vehicles

All hp

HC, CO

2260001030

Gasoline ATVs

Recreational Vehicles

All hp

HC, NOx, CO

2282005xxx
228201Oxxx

Gasoline Pleasure Craft -
Outboard, Personal
Watercraft, and Inboard

Recreational Marine
Exhaust Emission Standards

All hp

Exhaust HC

2282005xxx
228201Oxxx

Gasoline Pleasure Craft -
Outboard, Personal
Watercraft, and Inboard

Evaporative Emission
Standards(Proposed)

All hp

Evaporative
HC

2270xxxxxx

Diesel Equipment
Diesel Pleasure Craft

Tier >2/3 Compression-
Ignition

Tier % Compression-Ignition

All hp

<50 hp

HC, NOx, PM

2282020xxx

Diesel Pleasure Craft

Diesel Recreational Marine

>50 hp

HC, NO„, CO,
PM

1EPA established technology classes based on use (hand-held versus non-handheld and displacement)
that are predominantly 2-stroke (Class III, IV, and V), or 4-stroke (Class I and II) engines.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-7

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-2a. Control Factors by Nonroad Equipment Category for 2010

Federal Control Factor (%)1

see

Description

Measure

voc

PM,„

PM?s

CO

NO„

2260001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

20%

20%

20%

9%

-27%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2260001020

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Snowmobile

20%

10%

10%

17%

-66%



Equipment; Snowmobiles













2260001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

34%

34%

34%

6%

-27%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2260001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

13%

0%

0%

4%

-23%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2260006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

1%

0%

0%

1%

-1%



Equipment













2265001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

5%

0%

0%

14%

7%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2265001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

14%

0%

0%

5%

16%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2265001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

17%

7%

7%

6%

-26%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2265002000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Construction and

Large S-l

9%

5%

5%

5%

17%



Mining Equipment













2265004000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Lawn and Garden

Large S-l

10%

6%

6%

1%

1%



Equipment













2265005000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Agricultural

Large S-l

19%

1%

1%

12%

28%



Equipment













2265006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

5%

-4%

-4%

3%

-2%



Equipment













2265008000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Airport Ground

Large S-l

30%

0%

0%

31%

59%



Support Equipment













2267001060

Off-highway LPG; Recreational Equipment; Specialty

Large S-l

21%

0%

0%

14%

23%



Vehicles/Carts













2267002000

Off-highway LPG; Construction and Mining Equipment

Large S-l

58%

0%

0%

44%

61%

2267003000

Off-highway LPG; Industrial Equipment

Large S-l

69%

6%

6%

52%

73%

2267004000

Off-highway LPG; Lawn and Garden Equipment

Large S-l

72%

0%

0%

54%

76%

2267005000

Off-highway LPG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

51%

0%

0%

38%

55%

2267006000

Off-highway LPG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

42%

0%

0%

28%

44%

2267008000

Off-highway LPG; Airport Ground Support Equipment

Large S-l

73%

0%

0%

54%

77%

2268002000

Off-highway CNG; Construction and Mining Equipment

Large S-l

34%

0%

0%

23%

37%

2268005000

Off-highway CNG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

54%

0%

0%

36%

60%

2268006000

Off-highway CNG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

78%

0%

0% 75%

73%

2270001000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Recreational Equipment

C-l

26%

22%

22% 23%

14%

2270002000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Construction and Mining

C-l

53%

42%

42% 47%

41%



Equipment













2270003000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Industrial Equipment

C-l

60%

42%

42%

37%

40%

2270004000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Lawn and Garden Equipment

C-l

60%

48%

48%

46%

33%

2270005000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Agricultural Equipment

C-l

56%

50%

50%

49%

36%

2270006000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Commercial Equipment

C-l

42%

33%

33%

33%

23%

2270007000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Logging Equipment

C-l

55%

40%

40%

53%

49%

2270008000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Airport Ground Support

C-l

59%

50%

50%

52%

46%



Equipment













2285002015

Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Railway Maintenance

C-l

40%

41%

41%

40%

30%

2285004015

Railroad Equipment; Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Railway

Large S-l

4%

0%

0%

2%

0%



Maintenance













2285006015

Railroad Equipment; LPG; Railway Maintenance

Large S-l

43%

0%

0%

30%

47%

1 The control factor incorporates values for both control efficiency and rule penetration.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-8

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-2b. Control Factors by Nonroad Equipment Category for 2015





Federal

Control Factor (%)1

see

Description

Measure

VOC

PM,„

PM?,

CO

NO.

2260001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

40%

41%

41%

18%

-54%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2260001020

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Snowmobile

45%

31%

31%

38%

-180%



Equipment; Snowmobiles













2260001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

73%

73%

73%

14%

-57%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2260001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

14%

0%

0%

4%

-23%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2260006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

1%

0%

0%

1%

0%



Equipment













2265001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

10%

0%

0%

29%

14%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2265001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

27%

0%

0%

9%

30%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2265001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

22%

7%

7%

8%

-32%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2265002000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Construction

Large S-l

10%

5%

5%

6%

24%



and Mining Equipment













2265004000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Lawn and

Large S-l

10%

6%

6%

1%

2%



Garden Equipment













2265005000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Agricultural

Large S-l

24%

0%

0%

16%

38%



Equipment













2265006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

6%

-4%

-4%

4%

1%



Equipment













2265008000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Airport Ground

Large S-l

40%

0%

0%

43%

77%



Support Equipment













2267001060

Off-highway LPG; Recreational Equipment; Specialty

Large S-l

38%

0%

0%

31%

41%



Vehicles/Carts













2267002000

Off-highway LPG; Construction and Mining Equipment

Large S-l

81%

0%

0%

73%

81%

2267003000

Off-highway LPG; Industrial Equipment

Large S-l

92%

6%

6%

86%

91%

2267004000

Off-highway LPG; Lawn and Garden Equipment

Large S-l

92%

0%

0%

86%

91%

2267005000

Off-highway LPG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

74%

0%

0%

66%

75%

2267006000

Off-highway LPG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

67%

0%

0%

55%

67%

2267008000

Off-highway LPG; Airport Ground Support Equipment

Large S-l

93%

0%

0%

87%

91%

2268002000

Off-highway CNG; Construction and Mining Equipment

Large S-l

60%

0%

0%

49%

63%

2268005000

Off-highway CNG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

88%

0%

0%

80%

88%

2268006000

Off-highway CNG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

83%

0%

0%

79%

79%

2270001000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Recreational Equipment

C-l

38%

33%

33%

34%

21%

2270002000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Construction and Mining

C-l

65%

46%

46%

52%

53%



Equipment













2270003000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Industrial Equipment

C-l

70%

40%

40%

37%

50%

2270004000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Lawn and Garden

C-l

71%

55%

55%

52%

41%



Equipment













2270005000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Agricultural Equipment

C-l

68%

59%

59%

57%

48%

2270006000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Commercial Equipment

C-l

57%

44%

44%

43%

33%

2270007000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Logging Equipment

C-l

64%

37%

37%

53%

59%

2270008000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Airport Ground Support

C-l

69%

52%

52%

56%

59%



Equipment













2285002015

Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Railway Maintenance

C-l

54%

50%

50%

52%

43%

2285004015

Railroad Equipment; Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Railway

Large S-l

5%

0%

0%

2%

3%



Maintenance













2285006015

Railroad Equipment; LPG; Railway Maintenance

Large S-l

74%

0%

0%

62%

77%

The control factor incorporates values for both control efficiency and rule penetration.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-9

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-2c. Control Factors by Nonroad Equipment Category for 2020





Federal

Control Factor (%)1

see

Description

Measure

VOC PM10

PM?,

CO

NO„

2260001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

50%

51%

51%

22%

-66%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2260001020

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Snowmobile

62%

49%

49%

51%

-264%



Equipment; Snowmobiles













2260001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

95%

95%

95%

19%

-72%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2260001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

14%

0%

0%

4%

-23%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2260006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

1%

0%

0%

1%

0%



Equipment













2265001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

12%

0%

0%

36%

17%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2265001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

33%

0%

0%

11%

36%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2265001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

25%

6%

6%

10%

-31%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2265002000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Construction

Large S-l

11%

5%

5%

7%

27%



and Mining Equipment













2265004000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Lawn and

Large S-l

10%

6%

6%

1%

2%



Garden Equipment













2265005000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Agricultural

Large S-l

28%

-2%

-2%

19%

44%



Equipment













2265006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

6%

-4%

-4%

4%

3%



Equipment













2265008000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Airport

Large S-l

42%

0%

0%

46%

81%



Ground Support Equipment













2267001060

Off-highway LPG; Recreational Equipment; Specialty

Large S-l

55%

0%

0%

47%

58%



Vehicles/Carts













2267002000

Off-highway LPG; Construction and Mining

Large S-l

90%

0%

0%

84%

89%



Equipment













2267003000

Off-highway LPG; Industrial Equipment

Large S-l

95%

6%

6%

90%

93%

2267004000

Off-highway LPG; Lawn and Garden Equipment

Large S-l

95%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2267005000

Off-highway LPG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

83%

0%

0%

77%

82%

2267006000

Off-highway LPG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

80%

0%

0%

70%

79%

2267008000

Off-highway LPG; Airport Ground Support Equipment

Large S-l

95%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2268002000

Off-highway CNG; Construction and Mining

Large S-l

82%

0%

0%

73%

83%



Equipment













2268005000

Off-highway CNG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

93%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2268006000

Off-highway CNG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

87%

0%

0%

82%

84%

2270001000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Recreational Equipment

C-l

49%

43%

43%

44%

28%

2270002000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Construction and Mining

C-l

70%

48%

48%

54%

57%



Equipment













2270003000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Industrial Equipment

C-l

72%

40%

40%

37%

52%

2270004000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Lawn and Garden

C-l

75%

58%

58%

55%

45%



Equipment













2270005000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Agricultural Equipment

C-l

75%

63%

63%

61%

56%

2270006000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Commercial Equipment

C-l

67%

50%

50%

49%

41%

2270007000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Logging Equipment

C-l

65%

37%

37%

53%

61%

2270008000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Airport Ground Support

C-l

72%

51%

51%

57%

64%



Equipment













2285002015

Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Railway Maintenance

C-l

65%

57%

57%

61%

53%

2285004015

Railroad Equipment; Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Railway

Large S-l

5%

0%

0%

3%

4%



Maintenance













2285006015

Railroad Equipment; LPG; Railway Maintenance

Large S-l

89%

0%

0%

84%

88%

1 The control factor incorporates values for both control efficiency and rule penetration.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-10

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-2d. Control Factors by Nonroad Equipment Category for 2030





Federal

Control Factor (%)1

see

Description

Measure

VOC PM10

PM?,

CO

NO„

2260001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

52%

52%

52%

23%

-68%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2260001020

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Snowmobile

69%

58%

58%

56%

-305%



Equipment; Snowmobiles













2260001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

97%

97%

97%

20%

-73%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2260001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

16%

0%

0%

4%

-23%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2260006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 2-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

1%

0%

0%

1%

0%



Equipment













2265001010

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Motorcycle

12%

0%

0%

37%

17%



Equipment; Motorcycles: Off-road













2265001030

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

ATVs

33%

0%

0%

12%

37%



Equipment; All Terrain Vehicles;













2265001060

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Recreational

Large S-l

27%

6%

6%

11%

-26%



Equipment; Specialty Vehicles/Carts













2265002000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Construction

Large S-l

12%

5%

5%

8%

29%



and Mining Equipment













2265004000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Lawn and

Large S-l

10%

6%

6%

0%

2%



Garden Equipment













2265005000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Agricultural

Large S-l

32%

3%

3%

23%

53%



Equipment













2265006000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Commercial

Large S-l

6%

4%

4%

4%

3%



Equipment













2265008000

Off-highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Airport

Large S-l

42%

0%

0%

46%

81%



Ground Support Equipment













2267001060

Off-highway LPG; Recreational Equipment; Specialty

Large S-l

83%

0%

0%

77%

83%



Vehicles/Carts













2267002000

Off-highway LPG; Construction and Mining

Large S-l

94%

0%

0%

90%

92%



Equipment













2267003000

Off-highway LPG; Industrial Equipment

Large S-l

95%

6%

6%

91%

93%

2267004000

Off-highway LPG; Lawn and Garden Equipment

Large S-l

95%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2267005000

Off-highway LPG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

92%

0%

0%

87%

90%

2267006000

Off-highway LPG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

91%

0%

0%

84%

91%

2267008000

Off-highway LPG; Airport Ground Support Equipment

Large S-l

95%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2268002000

Off-highway CNG; Construction and Mining

Large S-l

93%

0%

0%

88%

91%



Equipment













2268005000

Off-highway CNG; Agricultural Equipment

Large S-l

94%

0%

0%

90%

92%

2268006000

Off-highway CNG; Commercial Equipment

Large S-l

92%

0%

0%

88%

90%

2270001000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Recreational Equipment

C-l

67%

60%

60%

61%

41%

2270002000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Construction and Mining

C-l

74%

49%

49%

55%

59%



Equipment













2270003000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Industrial Equipment

C-l

74%

41%

41%

38%

53%

2270004000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Lawn and Garden

C-l

78%

60%

60%

57%

49%



Equipment













2270005000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Agricultural Equipment

C-l

79%

66%

66%

64%

63%

2270006000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Commercial Equipment

C-l

76%

57%

57%

55%

49%

2270007000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Logging Equipment

C-l

65%

37%

37%

53%

61%

2270008000

Off-highway Vehicle Diesel; Airport Ground Support

C-l

73%

51%

51%

58%

66%



Equipment













2285002015

Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Railway Maintenance

C-l

75%

61%

61%

66%

64%

2285004015

Railroad Equipment; Gasoline, 4-Stroke; Railway

Large S-l

5%

0%

0%

3%

4%



Maintenance













2285006015

Railroad Equipment; LPG; Railway Maintenance

Large S-l

94%

0%

0%

90%

92%

1 The control factor incorporates values for both control efficiency and rule penetration.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-ll

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-3. Commercial Sector Compression Ignition Engines < 50 HP

Tier Category

1999

2010

2010
Adjusted1

Tier 2



178062

178062

Tier 1

6690

105563

104552

Base

442464

165530



Total

449154

449154



1Tier 1 engines adjusted to reflect the fraction of 1999 engines that
are still operating in 2010, since some percentage will be scrapped.
These are the number of engines to which costs are applied.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-12

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-4. Percentage of Engines Scrapped by Equipment Category, Horsepower
Range and Implementation Year For Adjusting Turnover Rates for Tier 1 C-l

Engines







2010 %

2015 %

2020 %

2030 %

see

Equipment Description

HP Range

Scrapped

Scrapped

Scrapped

Scrapped

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

< 50 hp

7.9

12.7

19.3

75.5

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

>=100 <175 hp

3.9

5.9

8.1

13.4

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

>=175 <600 hp

3.9

5.9

8.1

13.4

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

7.9

12.7

I 19.3

75.5

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

>=600 <750 hp

2.5

3.8

I 5.1

8

2270001000

Recreational Equipment

>=750 hp

2.5

3.8

I 5.1

8

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

< 50 hp

88.2

100

I 100

100

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

>=100 <175 hp

24.8 I

82.2

93.6

100

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

>=175 <600 hp

34.3 I

87.1

97.3

100

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

92.0

100

I 100

100

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

>=600 <750 hp

16.6 I

63.3

I 84.8

99.6

2270002000

Construction and Mining Equipment

>=750 hp

21.0 I

77.6

I 90.6

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

< 50 hp

93.6

100

I 100

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

>=100 <175 hp

55.2

88.5

98.5

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

67.1 I

90.0

99.8

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

97.7

100

I 100

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

19.0 I

73.7

I 88.4

100

2270003000

Industrial Equipment

>=750 hp

19.1 I

73.9

88.5

100

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

< 50 hp

70.9 I

91.2

I 100

100

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

11.0 I

19.1

I 57.1

89.2

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

12.0 I

21.5

I 70.4

91.6

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

36.6

87.6

97.8

100

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

8.7

14.2

I 22.4

80.5

2270004000

Lawn and Garden Equipment

>=750 hp

5.9

9.2

13.2

25.8

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

< 50 hp

81.4 I

96.7

I 100

100

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

9.4 I

15.7

25.9

83.8

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

9.4 I

15.7

25.9

83.8

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

62.4 I

89.1

I 99.0

100

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

6.5

10.3

I 14.9

34.0

2270005000

Aqricultural Equipment

>=750 hp

9.8

16.5

28.2

85.3

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

< 50 hp

84.9 I

99.1

I 100

100

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

93.8

100

I 100

100

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

8.6

14.0

I 21.8

79.7

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

100 I

100

I 100

100

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

74.4 I

92.7

I 100

100

2270006000

Commercial Equipment

>=750 hp

4.8 I

7.4

I 10.4

18.1

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

< 50 hp

100 I

100

I 100

100

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

95.9

100

I 100

100

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

95.9

100

I 100

100

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

96.6

100

I 100

100

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

78.4 I

94.8

I 100

100

2270007000

Loqqinq Equipment

>=750 hp

78.4 I

94.8

I 100

100

2270008000

Airport Equipment

< 50 hp

98.3

100

I 100

100

2270008000

Airport Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

63.1 I

89.2

I 99.0

100

2270008000

Airport Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

63.1 I

89.2

I 99.0

100

2270008000

Airport Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

98.3

100

I 100

100

2270008000

Airport Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

15.8 I

38.4

83.3

98.5

2270008000

Airport Equipment

>=750 hp

15.8 I

38.4

83.3

98.5

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

< 50 hp

24.8 I

82.2

93.6

100

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

>=100 <175 ho

9.5

15.8

26.2

84.0

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

>=175 <600 ho

9.5

15.8

26.2

84.0

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

>=50 <100 hp

24.8 I

82.2

93.6

100

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

>=600 <750 hp_

5.9

9.1

I 13.0

25.1

2285002015

Railroad Equipment

>=750 hp

5.9

9.1

I 13.0

25.1

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-13

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-5. NONROAD Model Default Scrappage Curve

Frac Median Life Used I Percent Scrapped

0.0588

1

0.1694 I

3

0.271 I

5

0.3639

7

0.4486 I

9

0.5254 I

11

0.5948 I

13

0.657 I

15

0.7125 I

17

0.7617 I

19

0.8049 I

21

0.8425 I

23

0.875 I

25

0.9027 I

27

0.9259

29

0.9451 I

31

0.9607 I

33

0.973

35

0.9824 I

37

0.9894 I

39

0.9942 I

41

0.9973

43

0.999 I

45

1 I

50

1.001 I

55

1.0027 I

57

1.0058 I

59

1.0106 I

61

1.0176 I

63

1.027 I

65

1.0393 I

67

1.0549 I

69

1.0741 I

71

1.0973 I

73

1.125 I

75

1.1575 I

77

1.1951 I

79

1.2383

81

1.2875 I

83

1.343 I

85

1.4052 I

87

1.4746 I

89

1.5514 I

91

1.6361 I

93

1.729 I

95

1.8306 I

97

1.9412 I

99

2

100

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-14

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-6. Near-term Costs for Compression-Ignition Engines

Engine HP Range

Costs

per Engine,

$ 1998*



Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

< 50 hp

56

136

NA

> or = 50 and < 100 hp

229

478

760

> or = 100 and < 175

229

1,095

1,753

> or = 175 and < 600 hp

229

1,033

1,905

> or = 600 and < 750 hp

229

2,899

5,195

> or = 750 hp

229

1,316

NA

"Costs apply to all C-l engine categories/applications, and are
incremental to the base technology type.

Table D-7. Near-term Costs for Large Spark-Ignition Engines

see

Tech Type*

Costs per Engii

2260000000

G4GT251

800

2260000000

G4GT252

847

2265000000

G4GT251

800

2265000000

G4GT252

847

2285004015

G4GT251

800

2285004015

G4GT252

847

2267000000

LGT251

550

2267000000

LGT252

577

2268000000

NGT251

550

2268000000

NGT252

577

2285006015

LGT251

550

2285006015

LGT252

577

*Technology types ending in "1" correspond to Phase I of the
standards, with an implementation year of 2004, while technology types
ending in "2" correspond to Phase II of the standards, with an
implementation year of 2007.

**Costs are incremental to the base technology type.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-15

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Table D-8. Near-term Costs for Land-Based Recreational Engines

see

2260001010 2-Stroke Gasoline Off-
Highway Motorcycles

2265001010 4-Stroke Gasoline Off-
Highway Motorcycles

2260001020 2-Stroke Gasoline
Snowmobiles

2260001020 2-Stroke Gasoline
Snowmobiles

2260001020 2-Stroke Gasoline
Snowmobiles

Tech
Type

R14S1

R14S1

R12S1

R14S

R12S2

2260001030 2-Stroke Gasoline ATVs > R14S1

2265001030 4-Stroke Gasoline ATVs R14S1

Cost per
engine,
2001 $*

296

Cost Basis

Sum of 2-stroke to 4-stroke conversion,
pulse air/recalibration, and compliance
costs

46	Sum of pulse air/recalibration and
compliance costs

57 Sum of engine modifications, modified
carburetor, and compliance costs

823 jSum of 2-stroke to 4-stroke conversion,
[electronic fuel injection, and compliance
costs

317 Sum of direct fuel injection costs and
compliance costs

378 Sum of 2-stroke to 4-stroke conversion,
pulse air, and compliance costs

47	Sum of pulse air and compliance costs

*AII costs are weighted by sales in displacement categories, and are incremental to the base technology
type

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

D-16

Report

-------
PECHAN	September 2005

APPENDIX E: EXPORTED MEASURES COLUMN
DESCRIPTIONS

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

CSM Export

Column Name

Description

capcost

Capital Cost

cpton

Cost Per Ton

msa

MSA

fipsst

State FIPS

fipscnty

County FIPS

sic

SIC

naics

NAICS

sector

sector

see

see

plantid

Plant ID

plantname

Plant Name

pointid

Point ID

boilcap

Boiler Capacity

capunits

Capacity Unit

oplbr

Operating Labor Costs

mntlbr

Maintenance Labor Costs

spvlbr

Supervisor Labor Costs

mntmtl

Maintenance Material Costs

rplmtl

Replacement Material Costs

elec

Electricity Costs

steam

Steam Costs

fuel

Fuel Costs

wstdsp

Waste Disposal Costs

chem

Chemical Costs

omatl

Other Raw Material Costs

util

Other Utility Costs

tdir

Total Direct Annual Costs

ovrhd

Overhead Costs

admin

Administrative Costs

proptx

Property Tax Costs

insrnc

Insurance Costs

tindir

Total Indirect Annual Costs

The grey columns are only exported if the OM Cost checkbox is selected.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

E-l

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

LCM Export

Column Name

Description

rec number

Record Number

cntl meas

Control Measure

source

ACN Source Category

em is tpy

Annual Baseline Emissions(Tons)

reduction

Current Control Reduction

inc redn

Incremental Control Reduction

final emis

Emissions After Control

prct CE

Control Efficiency (%)

tcost

Total Annualized Cost

incre cost

Incremental Annualized Cost

cpton

Cost Per Ton

MSA

MSA

fipsst

State FIPS

fipscnty

County FIPS

sic

SIC

naics

NAICS

sector

sector

see

see

plantid

Plant ID

plantname

Plant Name

pointid

Point ID

stack

Stack

segment

Segment

c emis

Cumulative Emissions

c redn

Cumulative Reduction

c inc redn

Cumulative Incremental Reduction

c final em

Cumulative Final Emissions

c tcost

Cumulative Annual Cost

c inc cost

Cumulative Incremental Annual Cost

c cpton

Cumulative Annual Cost Per ton

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

E-2

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

Report Export

Column Name

Description

cntl meas

Control Measure

source

ACN Source Category

em is tpy

Annual Baseline Emissions(Tons)

reduction

Current Control Reduction

final emis

Emissions After Control

prct CE

Control Efficiency (%)

tcost

Total Annualized Cost

cpton

Cost Per Ton

c emis

Cumulative Emissions

c redn

Cumulative Reduction

c final em

Cumulative Final Emissions

c tcost

Cumulative Annual Cost

c cpton

Cumulative Annual Cost Per ton

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

E-3

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	E-4	Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

APPENDIX F: EXTERNAL TOOLS USED TO CREATE
AIRCONTROLNET MAPPING AND GRAPHING
CAPABILITIES

In addition to Microsoft Visual FoxPro, the AirControlNET application uses two supplementary
software products to create the mapping and graphing capabilities within the tool. The first is
Graphics Server (www.graphicsserver.com) which is used to automate the creation of
customizable plots within the least cost module. The second is Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG)
(www.adobe.com/svg/main.html) is used to provide the mapping capabilities within
AirControlNET.

Graphics Server and AirControlNET Graphs

AirControlNET can create two types of graphs from LCM query - "Annualized Total Cost vs.
Total Reductions (in tons)" and "$ / ton vs. Total Reductions (in tons)". The two graphs
available for display and export from the LCM are created using a third-party module named
"Graphics Server". Graphic Server is a graphing tool used by Windows developers to automate
the creation of numeric graphs. It is used for adding graphs and charts to Windows and Web
applications in Visual Studio, Visual Basic, C++, Delphi, FoxPro and other languages. This
robust graphing module can display a wide variety of graphs and provides a runtime property
page for dynamically altering settings, and export several image formats.

For Annualized Total Cost vs. Total Reductions graph, cumulative incremental cost and
cumulative incremental reductions data are used as dependent and independent data of the graphs
respectively. For $ / ton vs. Total Reductions (in tons) graph, Cost per ton and total reductions
(in tons) are used as dependent and independent data of graphs respectively. Cumulative
calculation for incremental cost and incremental reduction are performed in Least Cost Module.
AirControlNET only displays graphs for the Least Cost Module. Since graph calculation uses
cumulative incremental data, graphs can only be created from data query in Least Cost Module.

When AirControlNET is instructed to display a graph, the specified data is extracted from the
currently displayed grid in the LCM and is inserted into the graphs data arrays. Due to a
limitation in Graphics Server, all graphs are capped at having 32,000 entries. This means that all
graphs will display up to the first 32,000 rows in any LCM grid. Once the data has been inserted
into the graph, ACN sets default labels and displays the graph window. The AirControlNET
graph window contains an instance of the Graph ActiveX control, a edit box used for listing the
query criteria, a properties button, and an export button. The graph properties can be altered by
clicking the properties button which launches the graphics server property pages. Exporting is
also handled by a graph function and is initiated by clicking the Export button.

Scalable Vector Graphic and AirControlNET Mapping Capabilities

Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) is used to create real-time mapping capabilities within
AirControlNET. SVG is a text-based graphics language that describes images with vector
shapes, text, and embedded raster graphics. SVG files are compact and provide high-quality

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

graphics on the Web, in print, and on resource-limited handheld devices. In addition, SVG
supports scripting and animation, so is ideal for interactive, data-driven, personalized graphics.
SVG is a royalty-free vendor-neutral open standard developed under the W3C (World Wide Web
Consortium) Process.

When controls are selected in the Control Scenarios Module or displayed in the Least Cost
Module grid, the AirControlNET mapping module becomes available. The map setup window
that is displayed allows the user to set various map options. When the View Map or Save Map
button is clicked, a SVG map file is created containing the specified data from either the CSM or
LCM.

AirControlNET maps are composed by concatenating intermediate SVG files developed by
Pechan. Before runtime map creation can happen, these intermediate SVG files, which will be
dubbed "the base map" from here on, need to be created. The first step in creating the base map
is accomplished using ESRI's ArcView, a GIS application, to extract all necessary geographic
objects.

First, ArcView is used to create a map containing states, counties, MSAs, and all of the optional
map layers (Tribal areas, National Parks, Classl Tribes, Classl NPS, Classl Forest Service,
Classl Fish and Wildlife Services, Interstates, Railroads, Rivers, and Lakes). Then, an extraction
script is used to export every layer to an initial SVG file. The extraction script, using the
ArcView API, creates a SVG text file, determines the map's coordinate system, and then exports
all shapes layers by layer by executing the following steps:

Obtain and iterate through the layer list

1. For the current layer, obtain and iterate through the shape list (e.g. a list of the counties in
the county layer)

2. If the current shape is a collection of points, create a SVG point object, otherwise create a
SVG path object

3. For the current shape, obtain, iterate through, and write out all vertices in the vertex list

The second step in creating the base SVG map is to separating each of the exported layers into
their own files. Currently, this is a manual process accomplished using any text editor. Now, the
initial map is ready to be developed.

AirControlNET maps are composed of a title bar and a tab controlled view which has two
modes: map (default) and notes. The notes view is filled at runtime and during development is a
blank page. The map view is split into two areas: the control panel and the map canvas. The
control panel contains the map thumbnail, pollutant combo box, legend, and layer check boxes.
The map thumbnail is used to zoom and pan the viewable area of the map canvas. The pollutant
combo box allows the user to switch the pollutant the map is shaded by. When a new pollutant is
selected, the legend is also updated. The legend consists of eight entries each consisting of a
color indicator and a value. All features (states, counties, or MSAs) with data less than the
specified legend value and greater than the previous value use the specified color. At runtime,
the user has an option to specify the number of ranges, or legend entries, to use which is always
between there and eight. The layer check boxes are used to show and hide the map layers. Every

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

F-2

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

map has a state layer, which is always on, county layer, and a MSA layer. The optional layers,
also selected at run time, can be turned on an off if they are loaded into the map.

Once the initial SVG and script code is written, the map is split into intermediate SVG files (i.e.
the "base map"). These files are split around two main sections of the initial map: the script
section and optional layers section. When creating a map, AirControlNET concatenates the first
intermediate file with the map data which is represented as arrays at the beginning of the script
section. The resulting text and the next intermediate file are appended. This process is repeated
with the optional SVG layers and the final intermediate file. When complete, the new
AirControlNET map is displayed.

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463

F-3

Report

-------
PECHAN

September 2005

[This page intentionally left blank.]

Document No. 05.09.008/9010.463	F-4	Report

-------