**[Appendix 3]{.underline}**

*(Supplemental Materials to Chapter 3)*

1.  **Non-EGU and Area Source Controls applied in the baseline and
    control scenarios**

*3.1.1* Non-EGU and Area Source Control Strategies for Ozone NAAQS
Proposal

In the Non-EGU and Area Sources portion of the control strategy, maximum
control scenarios were used from the existing control measure dataset
from AirControlNET 4.1 for 2020 (for Geographic Areas defined for each
level of the standard being analyzed). This existing control measure
dataset reflects changes and updates made as a result of the reviews
performed for the final PM2.5 RIA. Following this, an internal review
was performed by the OAQPS engineers in the Sector Policies and Programs
Division (SPPD) to examine the controls applied by AirControlNET and
decide if these controls were sufficient or could be more aggressive in
their application, given the 2020 analysis year. This review was
performed for non-EGU NOx control measures. The result of this review
was an increase in control efficiencies applied for many control
measures, and more aggressive control measures for over 80 SCC's. For
example, SPPD recommended that we apply SCR to cement kilns to reduce
NOx emissions in 2020. Currently, there are no SCRs in operation at
cement kilns in the U.S, but there are several SCRs in operation at
cement kilns in France now. Based on the SCR experience at cement kilns
in France, SPPD believes SCR could be applied at U.S. cement kilns by
2020. Following this, it was recommended that supplemental controls
could be applied to 8 additional SCC's from non-EGU NOx sources. We also
looked into sources of controls for highly reactive VOC non-EGU sources.
Four additional controls were applied for highly reactive VOC non-EGU
sources not in AirControlNET.

[]{.mark}

*3.1.2 NOx Control Measures for Non-EGU Point Sources.*

Several types of NOx control technologies exist for non-EGU sources:
SCR, selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR), natural gas reburn (NGR),
coal reburn, and low-NOx burners. In some cases, LNB accompanied by flue
gas recirculation (FGR) is applicable, such as when fuel-borne NOx
emissions are expected to be of greater importance than thermal NOx
emissions. When circumstances suggest that combustion controls do not
make sense as a control technology (e.g., sintering processes, coke oven
batteries, sulfur recovery plants), SNCR or SCR may be an appropriate
choice. Finally, SCR can be applied along with a combustion control such
as LNB with overfire air (OFA) to further reduce NOx emissions. All of
these control measures are available for application on industrial
boilers.

Besides industrial boilers, other non-EGU source categories covered in
this RIA include petroleum refineries, kraft pulp mills, cement kilns,
stationary internal combustion engines, glass manufacturing, combustion
turbines, and incinerators. NOx control measures available for petroleum
refineries, particularly process heaters at these plants, include LNB,
SNCR, FGR, and SCR along with combinations of these technologies. NOx
control measures available for kraft pulp mills include those available
to industrial boilers, namely LNB, SCR, SNCR, along with water injection
(WI). NOx control measures available for cement kilns include those
available to industrial boilers, namely LNB, SCR, and SNCR.
Non-selective catalytic reduction (NSCR) can be used on stationary
internal combustion engines. OXY-firing, a technique to modify
combustion at glass manufacturing plants, can be used to reduce NOx at
such plants. LNB, SCR, and SCR + steam injection (SI) are available
measures for combustion turbines. Finally, SNCR is an available control
technology at incinerators. For more information on these measures,
please refer to the AirControlNET 4.1 control measures documentation
report.

[]{.mark}

*3.1.3 VOC Control Measures for Non-EGU Point Sources.*

VOC controls were applied to a variety of non-EGU point sources as
defined in the emissions inventory in this RIA. These controls are:
permanent total enclosure (PTE) applied to paper and web coating
operations and fabric operations, and incinerators or thermal oxidizers
applied to wood products and marine surface coating operations. A PTE
confines VOC emissions to a particular area where can be destroyed or
used in a way that limits emissions to the outside atmosphere, and an
incinerator or thermal oxidizer destroys VOC emissions through exposure
to high temperatures (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit or higher). For more
information on these measures, refer to the AirControlNET 4.1 control
measures documentation report.

*3.1.4 NOx Control Measures for Area Sources.*

There were two controls applied for NOx emissions from area sources. The
first is RACT (reasonably available control technology) to 25 tpy (LNB).
This control is the addition of a low NOx burner to reduce NOx
emissions. This control is applied to industrial oil, natural gas, and
coal combustion sources. The second control is water heaters plus LNB
space heaters. This control is based on the installation of low-NOx
space heaters and water heaters in commercial and institutional sources
for the reduction of NOx emissions. For additional information regarding
these controls please refer to the AirControlNET 4.1 control measures
documentation report.

*3.1.5 VOC Control Measures for Area Sources.*

The most frequently applied control to reduce VOC emissions from area
sources was CARB Long-Term Limits. This control, which represents
controls available in VOC rules promulgated by the California Air
Resources Board, applies to commercial solvents and commercial
adhesives, and depends on future technological innovation and market
incentive methods to achieve emission reductions. The next most
frequently applied controls was the use of low or no VOC materials for
graphic art source categories. The South Coast Air District's SCAQMD
Rule 1168 control applies to wood furniture and solvent source
categories sets limits for adhesive and sealant VOC content. The OTC
solvent cleaning rule control establishes hardware and operating
requirements for specified vapor cleaning machines, as well as solvent
volatility limits and operating practices for cold cleaners. The Low
Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valve control measure is the addition of low
pressure/vacuum (LP/V) relief valves to gasoline storage tanks at
service stations with Stage II control systems. LP/V relief valves
prevent breathing emissions from gasoline storage tank vent pipes.
SCAQMD Limits control establishes VOC content limits for metal coatings
along with application procedures and equipment requirements. Switch to
Emulsified Asphalts control is a generic control measure replacing
VOC-containing cutback asphalt with VOC-free emulsified asphalt. The
equipment and maintenance control measure applies to oil and natural gas
production. The Reformulation - FIP Rule control measure intends to
reach the VOC limits by switching to and/or encouraging the use of
low-VOC pesticides and better Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
practices. For additional information regarding these controls please
refer to the AirControlNET 4.1 control measures documentation report.

*3.1.6 Supplemental Controls*

The table below summarizes the supplemental control measures added to
our control measures database by providing the pollutant it controls and
its control efficiency. These controls were applied in the baseline
scenario to Houston and Chicago, and the Northeast as well as in the
incremental control strategy applied to the Eastern U.S.. However, these
controls are not located in AirControlNET.

Supplemental Emission Control Measures Applied in Modeled Attainment
Strategies for the Ozone NAAQS RIA -- New Control Technologies Added to
the Control Measures Database

+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
| P        | SCC     | SCC Description     | Control    | Percent    |
| ollutant |         |                     | Technology | Reduction  |
|          |         |                     |            | (%)        |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
| NOx      | 2       | Internal Comb.      | LEC (Low   | 87         |
|          | 0200252 | Engines             | Emission   |            |
|          |         | /Industrial/Natural | C          |            |
|          |         | Gas/2-cycle Lean    | ombustion) |            |
|          |         | Burn                |            |            |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
|          | 2       | Internal Comb.      | LEC (Low   | 87         |
|          | 0200254 | Engines             | Emission   |            |
|          |         | /Industrial/Natural | C          |            |
|          |         | Gas/4-cycle Lean    | ombustion) |            |
|          |         | Burn                |            |            |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
| VOC\*    | 3       | Fugitive Leaks      | Enhanced   | 50         |
|          | 018001- |                     | LDAR       |            |
|          |         | Flares              |            | 98         |
|          | 3       |                     |            |            |
|          | 0600701 |                     |            |            |
|          | and     |                     |            |            |
|          | 3       |                     |            |            |
|          | 0600999 |                     |            |            |
|          | -       |                     |            |            |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
|          | 3018001 | Fugitive Leaks      | LDAR       | 80         |
|          | -       |                     |            |            |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
|          | 30      | Cooling towers      | Monitoring | No one     |
|          | 600702- |                     | Program    | general    |
|          |         |                     |            | estimate   |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+
|          | 30      | Wastewater Drains   | Inspection | 65         |
|          | 600503- | and Separators      | and        |            |
|          |         |                     | M          |            |
|          |         |                     | aintenance |            |
|          |         |                     | Program    |            |
|          |         |                     | (S         |            |
|          |         |                     | eparators) |            |
|          |         |                     | Water      |            |
|          |         |                     | Seals      |            |
|          |         |                     | (Drains)   |            |
+----------+---------+---------------------+------------+------------+

\*Note: the cost of these measures are not included in our incremental
annualized cost estimates since these controls are found in the
Harris-Galveston-Brazoria Cos. SIP (Texas), and they will be incurred by
2020 in any event. We do quantify the emission reductions since these
controls are not accounted for in our baseline inventory for 2020,
however.

[Low Emission Combustion (LEC)]{.underline}

> *Overview:* LEC technology is defined as the modification of a natural
> gas fueled, spark ignited, reciprocating internal combustion engine to
> reduce emissions of NOx by utilizing ultra‑lean air‑fuel ratios, high
> energy ignition systems and/or pre‑combustion chambers, increased
> turbocharging or adding a turbocharger, and increased cooling and/or
> adding an intercooler or aftercooler, resulting in an engine that is
> designed to achieve a consistent NO~x~ emission rate of not more than
> 1.5‑3.0 g/bhp‑hr at full capacity (usually 100 percent speed and 100
> percent load). This type of retrofit technology is fairly widely
> available for stationary internal combustion engines.
>
> For control efficiency, EPA estimates that it ranges from 82 to 91
> percent for LEC technology applications. The EPA believes application
> of LEC would achieve average NO~x~ emission levels in the range of
> 1.5-3.0 g/bhp-hr. This is an 82-91 percent reduction from the average
> uncontrolled emission levels reported in the ACT document. An EPA
> memorandum summarizing 269 tests shows that 96 percent of IC engines
> with installed LEC technology achieved emission rates of less than 2.0
> g/bhp-hr.[^1] The 2000 EC/R report on IC engines summarizes 476 tests
> and shows that 97% of the IC engines with installed LEC technology
> achieve emission rates of 2.0 g/bhp-hr or less.[^2]
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* The EPA acknowledges that specific values will
> vary from engine to engine. The amount of control desired and number
> of operating hours will make a difference in terms of the impact had
> from a LEC retrofit. Also, the use of LEC may yield improved fuel
> economy and power output, both of which may affect the emissions
> generated by the device.

[Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) for Fugitive Leaks]{.underline}

> *Overview:* This control measure is a program to reduce leaks of
> fugitive VOC emissions from chemical plants and refineries. The
> program includes special "sniffer" equipment to detect leaks, and
> maintenance schedules that affected facilities are to adhere to. This
> program is one that is contained within the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria
> 8-hour Ozone SIP.
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* The degree of leakage from pipes and processes
> at chemical plants is always difficult to quantify given the large
> number of such leaks at a typical chemical manufacturing plant. There
> are also growing indications based on tests conducted by TCEQ and
> others in Harris County, Texas that fugitive leaks have been
> underestimated from chemical plants by a factor of 6 to 20 or greater.
> [^3]

[Enhanced LDAR for Fugitive Leaks]{.underline}

> *Overview:* This control measure is a more stringent program to reduce
> leaks of fugitive VOC emissions from chemical plants and refineries
> that presumes that an existing LDAR program already is in operation.
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* The calculations of control efficiency and cost
> presume use of LDAR at a chemical plant. This should not be an
> unreasonable assumption, however, given that most chemical plants are
> under some type of requirement to have an LDAR program. However, as
> mentioned earlier, there is growing evidence that fugitive leak
> emissions are underestimated from chemical plants by a factor of 6 to
> 20 or greater.[^4]

[Flare Gas Recovery]{.underline}

> *Overview:* This control measure is a condenser that can recover 98
> percent of the VOC emitted by flares that emit 20 tons per year or
> more of the pollutant.
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* Flare gas recovery is just gaining commercial
> acceptance in the US and is only in use at a small number of
> refineries.

[Cooling Towers]{.underline}

> *Overview*: The control measure is continuous monitoring of VOC from
> the cooling water return to a level of 10 ppb. This monitoring is
> accomplished by using a continuous flow monitor at the inlet to each
> cooling tower.
>
> There is not a general estimate of control efficiency for this
> measure; one is to apply a continuous flow monitor until VOC emissions
> have reached a level of 1.7 tons/year for a given cooling tower.[^5]
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* The amount of VOC leakage from each cooling
> tower can greatly affect the overall cost-effectiveness of this
> control measure.

[Wastewater Drains and Separators]{.underline}

> *Overview:* This control measure includes an inspection and
> maintenance program to reduce VOC emissions from wastewater drains and
> water seals on drains. This measure is a more stringent version of
> measures that underlie existing NESHAP requirements for such sources.
>
> *Major Uncertainties:* The reference for this control measures notes
> that the VOC emissions inventories for the five San Francisco Bay Area
> refineries whose data was a centerpiece of this report are incomplete.
> In addition, not all VOC species from these sources were included in
> the VOC data that is a basis for these calculations.[^6]

In addition to the new supplemental controls presented above, there were
a number of changes made to existing AirControlNET controls. These
changes were made based upon an internal review performed by EPA
engineers to examine the controls applied by AirControlNET and determine
if these controls were sufficient or could be more aggressive in their
application, given the 2020 analysis year. This review was performed for
non-EGU NOx control measures. The result of this review was an increase
in control efficiencies applied for many control measures, and more
aggressive control measures for over 70 SCCs. The changes apply to the
control strategies performed for the Eastern US only. These changes are
listed in the table below.

Supplemental Emission Control Measures Applied in Modeled Attainment
Strategies for the Ozone NAAQS RIA -- Changes to Control technologies
currently in our Control Measures Database

+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| *      | *      | **A          | **Ai        | **New    | **New    |
| *Pollu | *SCC** | irControlNET | rControlNET | Control  | Control  |
| tant** |        | Source**     | Control**   | Tech     | Ef       |
|        |        |              |             | nology** | ficiency |
|        |        | **D          | **T         |          | (%)**    |
|        |        | escription** | echnology** |          |          |
+========+========+==============+=============+==========+==========+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200104 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Coal-Stoker  |             |          |          |
|        | 200204 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200205 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300207 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300209 |              |             |          |          |
|        |        |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200217 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300216 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200901 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Wood/Bark/   |             |          |          |
|        | 200902 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Waste        |             |          |          |
|        | 200903 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200907 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300902 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300903 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200401 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Residual Oil |             |          |          |
|        | 200402 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200404 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200405 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300401 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200501 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Distillate   |             |          |          |
|        | 200502 | Oil          |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200504 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200601 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Natural Gas  |             |          |          |
|        | 200602 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200603 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200604 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300601 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300602 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300603 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 500106 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 500206 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Cement       | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 500606 | Man          |             |          |          |
|        |        | ufacturing - |             |          |          |
|        |        | Dry          |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Cement       | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 500706 | Man          |             |          |          |
|        |        | ufacturing - |             |          |          |
|        |        | Wet          |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Iron & Steel | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 300934 | Mills -      |             |          |          |
|        |        | Annealing    |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200701 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Process Gas  |             |          |          |
|        | 200704 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200707 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200710 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200799 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 201402 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300701 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 10     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300799 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 200802 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Coke         |             |          |          |
|        | 200804 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 201002 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        |        | LPG          |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 10     | ICI          | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 201301 | Boilers -    |             |          |          |
|        | 10     | Liquid Waste |             |          |          |
|        | 201302 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Sulfate      | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 700110 | Pulping -    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Recovery     |             |          |          |
|        |        | Furnaces     |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Ammonia      | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 100306 | Production   |             |          |          |
|        |        | --           |             |          |          |
|        |        |              |             |          |          |
|        |        | Pri.         |             |          |          |
|        |        | Reformer,    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Nat. Gas     |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
|        | 30     | Cement Kilns | Biosolid    | Biosolid | 40.0     |
|        | 500622 |              | Injection   | I        |          |
|        |        |              |             | njection |          |
|        | 30     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 500623 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Industrial   | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 590013 | and          |             |          |          |
|        | 30     | M            |             |          |          |
|        | 190013 | anufacturing |             |          |          |
|        | 30     | Incinerators |             |          |          |
|        | 190014 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 39     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 990013 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Nitric Acid  | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 101301 | M            |             |          |          |
|        | 30     | anufacturing |             |          |          |
|        | 101302 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Fluid Cat.   | LNB + FGR   | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 600201 | Cracking     |             |          |          |
|        |        | Units        |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Process      | LNB + SCR   | LNB +    | 90.0     |
|        | 590003 | Heaters -    |             | SCR      |          |
|        |        | Process Gas  |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Process      | LNB + SCR   | LNB +    | 90.0     |
|        | 600101 | Heaters -    |             | SCR      |          |
|        | 30     | Distillate   |             |          |          |
|        | 600103 | Oil          |             |          |          |
|        | 30     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 600111 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Process      | LNB + SCR   | LNB +    | 90.0     |
|        | 600106 | Heaters -    |             | SCR      |          |
|        | 30     | Residual Oil |             |          |          |
|        | 600199 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Process      | LNB + SCR   | LNB +    | 90.0     |
|        | 600102 | Heaters -    |             | SCR      |          |
|        | 30     | Natural Gas  |             |          |          |
|        | 600105 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Sulfate      | SCR         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 700104 | Pulping -    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Recovery     |             |          |          |
|        |        | Furnaces     |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 30     | Pulp and     | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 790013 | Paper -      |             |          |          |
|        |        | Natural      |             |          |          |
|        |        | Gas -        |             |          |          |
|        |        | Incinerators |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process;  | SNCR - urea | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000201 | Bituminous   | based       |          |          |
|        |        | Coal; Cement |             |          |          |
|        |        | Kiln         |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process;  | SNCR - urea | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000203 | Bituminous   | based       |          |          |
|        |        | Coal; Lime   |             |          |          |
|        |        | Kiln         |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process   | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000289 | Fuel         |             |          |          |
|        |        | Us           |             |          |          |
|        |        | e;Bituminous |             |          |          |
|        |        | Coal; Gen    |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process   | LNB         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000489 | Fuel Use;    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Residual     |             |          |          |
|        |        | Oil; Gen     |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process   | LNB         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000689 | Fuel Use;    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Natural Gas; |             |          |          |
|        |        | Gen          |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-          | LNB + FGR   | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000701 | Proc;Process |             |          |          |
|        |        | Gas;Coke     |             |          |          |
|        |        | Oven/Blast   |             |          |          |
|        |        | Furn         |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 39     | In-Process;  | LNB         | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 000789 | Process Gas; |             |          |          |
|        |        | Coke Oven    |             |          |          |
|        |        | Gas          |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+
| NOX    | 50     | Solid Waste  | SNCR        | SCR      | 90.0     |
|        | 100101 | Di           |             |          |          |
|        | 50     | sp;Gov;Other |             |          |          |
|        | 100506 | Incin;Sludge |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 200506 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300101 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300102 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300104 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 300506 |              |             |          |          |
|        | 50     |              |             |          |          |
|        | 100102 |              |             |          |          |
+--------+--------+--------------+-------------+----------+----------+

The last category of supplemental controls are control technologies
currently in our control measures database being applied to SCCs not
controlled currently in AirControlNET.

Supplemental Emission Control Measures Applied in Modeled Attainment
Strategies for the Ozone NAAQS RIA --Control technologies currently in
our Control Measures Database Applied to New Source types

  --------------- ---------- ------------------------------------- -------------- --------------
  **Pollutant**   **SCC**    **SCC Description**                   **Control      **Control
                                                                   Technology**   Efficiency**

  NOX             39000602   Cement Manufacturing - Dry            SCR            90.0

  NOX             30501401   Glass Manufacturing - General         OXY-Firing     85.0

  NOX             30302351   Taconite Iron Ore Processing -        SCR            90.0
                  30302352   Induration - Coal or Gas                             
                  30302359                                                        

  NOX             10100101   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           40.0
                             Generation;Anthracite Coal;Pulverized                
                             Coal                                                 

  NOX             10100202   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           40.0
                             Generation;Bituminous/Subbituminous                  
                             Coal;Pulverized Coal: Dry Bottom                     
                             (Bituminous Coal)                                    

  NOX             10100204   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           40.0
                             Generation;Bituminous/Subbituminous                  
                             Coal;Spreader Stoker (Bituminous                     
                             Coal)                                                

  NOX             10100212   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           40.0
                             Generation;Bituminous/Subbituminous                  
                             Coal;Pulverized Coal: Dry Bottom                     
                             (Tangential) (Bituminous Coal)                       

  NOX             10100401   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           50.0
                             Generation;Residual Oil;Grade 6 Oil:                 
                             Normal Firing                                        

  NOX             10100404   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           50.0
                             Generation;Residual Oil;Grade 6 Oil:                 
                             Tangential Firing                                    

  NOX             10100501   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           50.0
                             Generation;Distillate Oil;Grades 1                   
                             and 2 Oil                                            

  NOX             10100601   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  NGR            50.0
                             Generation;Natural Gas;Boilers \> 100                
                             Million Btu/hr except Tangential                     

  NOX             10100602   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  NGR            50.0
                             Generation;Natural Gas;Boilers \< 100                
                             Million Btu/hr except Tangential                     

  NOX             10100604   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  NGR            50.0
                             Generation;Natural Gas;Tangentially                  
                             Fired Units                                          

  NOX             10101202   External Combustion Boilers;Electric  SNCR           50.0
                             Generation;Solid Waste;Refuse Derived                
                             Fuel                                                 

  NOX             20200253   Internal Comb.                        NSCR           90
                             Engines/Industrial/Natural                           
                             Gas/4-cycle Rich Burn                                
  --------------- ---------- ------------------------------------- -------------- --------------

2.  **Mobile Controls/Rules used in baseline and control scenarios**

*3.2.1 Diesel Retrofits and Vehicle Replacement*

Retrofitting heavy-duty diesel vehicles and equipment manufactured
before stricter standards are in place -- in 2007-2010 for highway
engines and in 2011-2014 for most nonroad equipment -- can provide NO~X~
and HC benefits. The retrofit strategies included in the RIA retrofit
measure are:

-   Installation of emissions after-treatment devices called selective
    catalytic reduction ("SCRs")

-   Rebuilding nonroad engines ("rebuild/upgrade kit")

We chose to focus on these strategies due to their high NOx emissions
reduction potential and widespread application. Additional retrofit
strategies include, but are not limited to, lean NOx catalyst systems --
which are another type of after-treatment device -- and alternative
fuels. Additionally, SCRs are currently the most likely type of control
technology to be used to meet EPA's NOx 2007-2010 requirements for HD
diesel trucks and 2008-2011 requirements for nonroad equipment. We
looked at options of applying this measure to 50% and 100% of the fleet
that do not meet EPA's more stringent standards and are still expected
to be operating in 2020. Actual emissions reductions may vary
significantly by strategy and by the type and age of the engine and its
application.

To estimate the potential emissions reductions from this measure, we
applied a mix of two retrofit strategies (SCRs and rebuild/upgrade kits)
for the 2020 inventory of:

-   Heavy-duty highway trucks class 6 & above, Model Year 1995-2009

-   All diesel nonroad engines, Model Year 1991-2007, except for
    locomotive, marine, pleasure craft, & aircraft engines

Class 6 and above trucks comprise the bulk of the NOx emissions
inventory from heavy-duty highway vehicles, so we did not include trucks
below class 6. We chose not to include locomotive and marine engines in
our analysis since EPA has proposed regulations to address these
engines, which will significantly impact the emissions inventory and
emission reduction potential from retrofits in 2020. There was also not
enough data available to assess retrofit strategies for existing
aircraft and pleasure craft engines, so we did not include them in this
analysis. In addition, EPA is in the process of negotiating standards
for new aircraft engines.

The lower bound in the model year range -- 1995 for highway vehicles and
1991 for nonroad engines -- reflects the first model year in which
emissions after-treatment devices can be reliably applied to the
engines. Due to a variety of factors, devices are at a higher risk of
failure for earlier model years. We expect the engines manufactured
before the lower bound year that are still in existence in 2020 to be
retired quickly due to natural turnover, therefore, we have not included
strategies for pre-1995/1991 engines because of the strategies'
relatively small impact on emissions. The upper bound in the model year
range reflects the last year before more stringent emissions standards
will be fully phased-in.

We chose the type of strategy to apply to each model year of highway
vehicles and nonroad equipment based on our technical assessment of
which strategies would achieve reliable results at the lowest cost.
After-treatment devices can be more cost-effective than rebuild and vice
versa depending on the emissions rate, application, usage rates, and
expected life of the engine. The performance of after-treatment devices,
for example, depends heavily upon the model year of the engine; some
older engines may not be suitable for after-treatment devices and would
be better candidates for rebuild/upgrade kit. In certain cases, nonroad
engines may not be suitable for either after-treatment devices or
rebuild, which is why we estimate that retrofits are not suitable for 5%
of the nonroad fleet. The mix of strategies employed in this RIA for
highway vehicles and nonroad engines are presented in Table 1 and Table
2, respectively. The groupings of model years for highway vehicles
reflect changes in EPA's published emissions standards for new engines.

Table 1: Application of Retrofit Strategy for Highway Vehicles by
Percentage of Fleet

  ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------
  ***Model Year ***                  ***SCR***

  \<1995                             0%

  1995-2006                          100%

  2007-2009                          50%

  \>2009                             0%
  ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------

Table 2: Application of Retrofit Strategy for Nonroad Equipment by
Percentage of Fleet

  -------------------- ----------------------------------- --------------
  ***Model Year***     ***Rebuild/Upgrade kit***           ***SCR***

  1991-2007            50%                                 50%
  -------------------- ----------------------------------- --------------

The expected emissions reductions from SCR's are based on data derived
from EPA regulations (Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from 2004
and Later Model Year Heavy-duty Highway Engines and Vehicles published
October 2000), interviews with component manufacturers, and EPA's
Summary of Potential Retrofit Technologies available at
[www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retropotentialtech.htm](http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retropotentialtech.htm).
The estimates for highway vehicles and nonroad engines are presented in
Table 3 and Table 4, respectively.

Table 3: Percentage Emissions Reduction by Highway Vehicle Retrofit
Strategy

  ----------------- ----------------- ---------- ------------------- -----------
  *** ***           ***PM***          ***CO***   ***HC***            ***NOx***

  SCR (+DPF)        90%               90%        90%                 70%
  ----------------- ----------------- ---------- ------------------- -----------

Table 4: Percentage Emissions Reduction by Nonroad Equipment Retrofit
Strategy

  ------------------------- ------------ ------------ ---------- -----------
  ***Strategy***            ***PM***     ***CO***     ***HC***   ***NOx***

  SCR (+DPF)                90%          90%          90%        70%

  Rebuild/Upgrade Kit       30%          15%          70%        40%
  ------------------------- ------------ ------------ ---------- -----------

It is important to note that there is a great deal of variability among
types of engines (especially nonroad), the applicability of retrofit
strategies, and the associated emissions reductions. We applied the
retrofit emissions reduction estimates to engines across the board (e.g.
retrofits for bulldozers are estimated to produce the same percentage
reduction in emissions as for agricultural mowers). We did this in order
to simplify model runs, and, in some cases, where we did not have enough
data to differentiate emissions reductions for different types of
highway vehicles and nonroad equipment. We believe the estimates used in
the RIA, however, reflect the best available estimates of emissions
reductions that can be expected from retrofitting the heavy-duty diesel
fleet.

Using the retrofit module in EPA's National Mobile Inventory Model
(NMIM) available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/nmim.htm, we calculated the
total percentage reduction in emissions (PM, NOx, HC, and CO) from the
retrofit measure for each relevant engine category (source category
code, or SCC) for each county in 2020. To evaluate this change in the
emissions inventory, we conducted both a baseline and control analysis.
Both analyses were based on NMIM 2005 (version NMIM20060310),
NONROAD2005 (February 2006), and MOBILE6.2.03 which included the updated
diesel PM file PMDZML.csv dated March 17, 2006.

For the control analysis, we applied the retrofit measure corresponding
to the percent reductions of the specified pollutants in Tables 3 and 4
to the specified model years in Tables 1 and 2 of the relevant SCCs.
Fleet turnover rates are modeled in the NMIM, so we applied the retrofit
measure to the 2007 fleet inventory, and then evaluated the resulting
emissions inventory in 2020. The timing of the application of the
retrofit measure is not a factor; retrofits only need to take place
prior to the attainment date target (2020 for this RIA). For example, if
retrofit devices are installed on 1995 model year bulldozers in 2007,
the only impact on emissions in 2020 will be from the expected inventory
of 1995 model year bulldozer emissions in 2020.

We then compared the baseline and control analyses to determine the
percent reduction in emissions we estimate from this measure for the
relevant SCC codes in the targeted nonattainment areas.

[Pollutants and Source Categories Affected by Measure (SCC)]{.underline}

NOx, and HC

###### *3.3.2 Implement Continuous Inspection and Maintenance Using Remote Onboard Diagnostics (OBD)*

Continuous Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) is a new way to check the
status of OBD systems on OBD-equipped vehicles. It involves equipping
subject vehicles with some type of transmitter that attaches to the OBD
port. The device transmits the status of the OBD system to receivers
distributed around the I/M area. Transmission may be through
radio-frequency, cellular or wi-fi means. Radio frequency and cellular
technologies are currently being used in the states of Oregon,
California and Maryland.

Current I/M programs test vehicles on a periodic basis -- either
annually or biennially. Emission reduction credit is assigned based on
test frequency. Using Continuous I/M, vehicles are continuously
monitored as they are operated throughout the non-attainment area. When
a vehicle experiences an OBD failure, the motorist is notified and is
required to get repairs within the normal grace period -- typically
about a month. Thus, Continuous I/M will result in repairs happening
essentially whenever a malfunction occurs that would cause the check
engine light to illuminate. Currently, MOBILE6 provides an increment of
benefit when going from a biennial program to an annual program. The
same increment of credit applies going from an annual program to a
continuous program.

Pollutants and Source Categories Affected by Measure (SCC):

-   All 1996 and newer light-duty gasoline vehicles and trucks:

-   All 1996 and newer 2201001000 Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV),
    Total: All Road Types

-   All 1996 and newer 2201020000 Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 (LDGT1),
    Total: All Road Types

-   All 1996 and newer 2201040000 Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 2 (LDGT2),
    Total: All Road Types

OBD systems on light duty vehicles are required to illuminate the
malfunction indicator lamp whenever emissions of HC, CO or NOx would
exceed 1.5 times the vehicle's certification standard. Thus, the
benefits of this measure will affect all three criteria pollutants.
MOBILE6 was used to estimate the emission reduction benefits of
Continuous I/M, using the methodology discussed above.

*3.2.3 Eliminating Long Duration Truck Idling*

Virtually all long duration truck idling -- idling that lasts for longer
than 15 minutes -- from heavy-duty diesel class 8a and 8b trucks can be
eliminated with two strategies:

-   truck stop & terminal electrification (TSE)

-   mobile idle reduction technologies (MIRTs) such as auxiliary power
    units, generator sets, and direct-fired heaters

TSE can eliminate idling when trucks are resting at truck stops or
public rest areas and while trucks are waiting to perform a task at
private distribution terminals. When truck spaces are electrified, truck
drivers can shut down their engines and use electricity to power
equipment which supplies air conditioning, heat, and electrical power
for on-board appliances.

MIRTs can eliminate long duration idling from trucks that are stopped
away from these central sites. For a more complete list of MIRTs see
EPA's Idle Reduction Technology page at
<http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/idlingtechnologies.htm>. 

This measure demonstrates the potential emissions reductions if every
class 8a and 8b truck is equipped with a MIRT or has dependable access
to sites with TSE in 2020.

 

To estimate the potential emissions reduction from this measure, we
applied a reduction equal to the full amount of the emissions attributed
to long duration idling in the MOBILE model, which is estimated to be
3.4% of the total NOx emissions from class 8a and 8b heavy duty diesel
trucks. Since the MOBILE model does not distinguish between idling and
operating emissions, EPA estimates idling emissions in the inventory
based on fuel conversion factors. The inventory in the MOBILE model,
however, does not fully capture long duration idling emissions. There is
evidence that idling may represent a much greater share than 3.4% of the
real world inventory, based on engine control module data from long haul
trucking companies. As such, we believe the emissions reductions
demonstrated from this measure in the RIA represent ambitious but
realistic targets. For more information on determining baseline idling
activity see EPA's \"Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long-Duration
Truck Idling Emission Reductions in State Implementation Plans and
Transportation Conformity" available at
[http://www.epa.gov/smartway/idle-guid.htm]{.underline}.

Pollutants and Source Categories Affected by Measure (SCC) : NO~x~

All class 8a and 8b heavy duty diesel trucks (decrease NOx for all
SCCs):

  ------------ --------------------------------------------------------------
  **SCC**      **Note: All SCC Descriptions below begin with \"Mobile
               Sources; Highway Vehicles - Diesel;\"**

  2230074110   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural
               Interstate: Total

  2230074130   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2230074150   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2230074170   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural Major
               Collector: Total

  2230074190   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural Minor
               Collector: Total

  2230074210   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Rural Local:
               Total

  2230074230   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban
               Interstate: Total

  2230074250   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban Other
               Freeways and Expressways: Total

  2230074270   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2230074290   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2230074310   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban
               Collector: Total

  2230074330   Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) Class 8A & 8B;Urban Local:
               Total
  ------------ --------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated Emissions Reduction from Measure (%): 3.4 % decrease in NOx
for all SCCs affected by measure

*3.2.4 Commuter Programs*

Commuter programs recognize and support employers who provide incentives
to employees to reduce light-duty vehicle emissions. Employers implement
a wide range of incentives to affect change in employee commuting habits
including transit subsidies, bike-friendly facilities, telecommuting
policies, and preferred parking for vanpools and carpools. The commuter
measure in this RIA reflects a mixed package of incentives.

This measure demonstrates the potential emissions reductions from
providing commuter incentives to 10% and 25% of the commuter population
in 2020.

We used the findings from a recent Best Workplaces for Commuters survey,
which was an EPA sponsored employee trip reduction program, to estimate
the potential emissions reductions from this measure.[^7] The BWC survey
found that, on average, employees at workplaces with comprehensive
commuter programs emit 15% fewer emissions than employees at workplaces
that do not offer a comprehensive commuter program.

We believe that getting 10-25% of the workforce involved in commuter
programs is realistic. For modeling purposes, we divided the commuter
programs measure into two program penetration rates: 10% and 25%. This
was meant to provide flexibility to model a lower penetration rate for
areas that need only low levels of emissions reductions to achieve
attainment.

According to the 2001 National Household Transportation Survey (NHTS)
published by DOT, commute VMT represents 27% of total VMT. Based on this
information, we calculated that BWC would reduce light-duty gasoline
emissions by 0.4% and 1% with a 10% and 25% program penetration rate,
respectively.

Pollutants and Source Categories Affected by Measure (SCC): NO~x~, and
VOC

All light-duty gasoline vehicles and trucks:

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  **SCC**      **Note: All SCC Descriptions below begin with \"Mobile Sources;
               Highway Vehicles - Gasoline;\"**
  ------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------
  2201001110   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Interstate: Total

  2201001130   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Other Principal
               Arterial: Total

  2201001150   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Minor Arterial: Total

  2201001170   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Major Collector:
               Total

  2201001190   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Minor Collector:
               Total

  2201001210   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Rural Local: Total

  2201001230   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Interstate: Total

  2201001250   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Other Freeways and
               Expressways: Total

  2201001270   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Other Principal
               Arterial: Total

  2201001290   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Minor Arterial: Total

  2201001310   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Collector: Total

  2201001330   Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV);Urban Local: Total

  2201020110   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural
               Interstate: Total

  2201020130   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2201020150   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2201020170   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural Major
               Collector: Total

  2201020190   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural Minor
               Collector: Total

  2201020210   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Rural Local:
               Total

  2201020230   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban
               Interstate: Total

  2201020250   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban Other
               Freeways and Expressways: Total

  2201020270   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2201020290   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2201020310   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban
               Collector: Total

  2201020330   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 & 2 (M6) = LDGT1 (M5);Urban Local:
               Total

  2201040110   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural
               Interstate: Total

  2201040130   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2201040150   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2201040170   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural Major
               Collector: Total

  2201040190   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural Minor
               Collector: Total

  2201040210   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Rural Local:
               Total

  2201040230   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban
               Interstate: Total

  2201040250   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban Other
               Freeways and Expressways: Total

  2201040270   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban Other
               Principal Arterial: Total

  2201040290   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban Minor
               Arterial: Total

  2201040310   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban
               Collector: Total

  2201040330   Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 3 & 4 (M6) = LDGT2 (M5);Urban Local:
               Total
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated Emissions Reduction from Measure (%):

With a 10% program penetration rate: 0.4%

With a 25% program penetration rate: 1%

###### 

###### *3.2.5 Reduce Gasoline RVP from 7.8 to 7.0 in Remaining Nonattainment Areas*

Volatility is the property of a liquid fuel that defines its evaporation
characteristics. RVP is an abbreviation for \"Reid vapor pressure,\" a
common measure of gasoline volatility, as well as a generic term for
gasoline volatility. EPA regulates the vapor pressure of all gasoline
during the summer months (June 1 to September 15 at retail stations).
Lower RVP helps to reduce VOCs, which are a precursor to ozone
formation. This control measure represents the use of gasoline with a
RVP limit of 7.0 psi from May through September in counties with an
ozone season RVP value greater than 7.0 psi.

Under section 211(c)(4)(C) of the CAA, EPA may approve a non-identical
state fuel control as a SIP provision, if the state demonstrates that
the measure is necessary to achieve the national primary or secondary
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) that the plan implements. EPA can
approve a state fuel requirement as necessary only if no other measures
would bring about timely attainment, or if other measures exist but are
unreasonable or impracticable.

Pollutants and Source Categories Affected by Measure (SCC):

-   All light-duty gasoline vehicles and trucks: Affected SCC:

-   2201001000 Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles (LDGV), Total: All Road
    Types

-   2201020000 Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 1 (LDGT1), Total: All Road
    Types

-   2201040000 Light Duty Gasoline Trucks 2 (LDGT2), Total: All Road
    Types

-   2201070000 Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicles (HDGV), Total: All Road
    Types

-   2201080000 Motorcycles (MC), Total: All Road Types

*3.2.6 Application order for Onroad and Nonroad Mobile Controls*

**Application order- 0.084 Mobile**

-   Eliminate Long Duration Idling

-   ONRetrofit

-   LOWRVP

-   Best Workplaces for Commuters

**Application order- 0.084 Nonroad**

-   Diesel C1&C2 Marine/Diesel C3 Marine - 90% Rule (adding controls for
    SCCs for residual fuel)

-   ICAO Engine NOx Standards for Commercial Aircraft

-   NRRetrofit

-   LOWRVP

**Application order- 0.070 Mobile**

-   Eliminate Long Duration Idling

-   Inspection and Maintenance

-   ONRetrofit

-   LOWRVP

-   Best Workplaces for Commuters

**Application order -- 0.070 Nonroad**

-   Diesel C1&C2 Marine/Diesel C3 Marine - 90% Rule (adding controls for
    SCCs for residual fuel)

-   ICAO Engine NOx Standards for Commercial Aircraft

-   NRRetrofit

-   LOWRVP

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

**3.3 EGU controls used in the control strategy**

[]{.mark}

[CAIR]{.underline}

The data and projections presented in Section 3.2.2 cover the electric
power sector, an industry that will achieve significant emission
reductions under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) over the next 10
to 15 years. Based on an assessment of the emissions contributing to
interstate transport of air pollution and available control measures,
EPA determined that achieving required reductions in the identified
States by controlling emissions from power plants is highly cost
effective. CAIR will permanently cap emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO~2~)
and nitrogen oxides (NO~x~) in the eastern United States. CAIR achieves
large reductions of SO~2~ and/or NO~x~ emissions across 28 eastern
states and the District of Columbia.

![](media/image1.wmf){width="4.345833333333333in" height="3.56875in"}

**Figure 3-3A:** CAIR Affected Region

When fully implemented, CAIR will reduce SO~2~ emissions in these states
by over 70% and NO~x~ emissions by over 60% from 2003 levels (some of
which are due to NOx SIP Call). This will result in significant
environmental and health benefits and will substantially reduce
premature mortality in the eastern United States. The benefits will
continue to grow each year with further implementation. CAIR was
designed with current air quality standard in mind, and requires
significant emission reductions in the East, where they are needed most
and where transport of pollution is a major concern. CAIR will bring
most areas in the Eastern US into attainment with the current ozone and
current PM~2.5~ standards. Some areas will need to adopt additional
local control measures beyond CAIR. CAIR is a regional solution to
address transport, not a solution to all local nonattainment issues. The
large reductions anticipated with CAIR, in conjunction with reasonable
additional local control measures for SO~2~, NO~x~, and direct PM, will
move States towards attainment in a deliberate and logical matter.

Based on the final State rules that have been submitted and the proposed
State rules that EPA has reviewed, EPA believes that all States intend
to use the CAIR trading programs as their mechanism for meeting the
emission reduction requirements of CAIR.

The analysis in this section reflects these realities and attempts to
show, in an illustrative fashion, the costs and impacts of meeting a
proposed 8-hr ozone standard of 0.070 for the power sector.

#### Model and Background

CAIR was designed to achieve significant emissions reductions in a
highly cost-effective manner to reduce the transport of fine particles
that have been found to contribute to nonattainment. EPA analysis has
found that the most efficient method to achieve the emissions reduction
targets is through a cap-and-trade system on the power sector that
States have the option of adopting. The modeling done with IPM assumes a
region-wide cap and trade system on the power sector for the States
covered.

It is important to note that the analysis herein uses the Integrated
Planning Model (IPM) v2.1.9 to ensure consistency with the analysis
presented in 2006 PM NAAQS RIA and report incremental results. EPA's IPM
v2.1.9 incorporates Federal and State rules and regulations adopted
before March 2004 and various NSR settlements. A detailed discussion of
uncertainties associated with the EGU sector can be found in 2006 PM
NAAQS RIA (pg. 3-50). A newer version of the model (IPM v3.0) is
available which includes input and model assumption updates in modeling
power sector. IPM v3.0 will be used in the Final Ozone NAAQS RIA as part
of the updated modeling platform. Additionally, other control strategies
are being considered that may be applicable to the EGU sector, which
would be presented in the final Ozone RIA.

The economic modeling using IPM presented in this and other chapters has
been developed for specific analyses of the power sector. EPA's modeling
is based on its best judgment for various input assumptions that are
uncertain, particularly assumptions for future fuel prices and
electricity demand growth. To some degree, EPA addresses the uncertainty
surrounding these two assumptions through sensitivity analyses. More
detail on IPM can be found in the model documentation, which provides
additional information on the assumptions discussed here as well as all
other assumptions and inputs to the model
([**http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/past-modeling.html**](http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/past-modeling.html)).

[EGU NOx Emission Control Technologies]{.underline}

The Integrated Planning Model v2.1.9 (IPM) includes SO~2~, NO~x~, and
mercury (Hg) emission control technology options for meeting existing
and future federal, regional, and state, SO~2~, NO~x~ and Hg emission
limits. The NOx control technology options include Selective Catalytic
Reduction (SCR) system and Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)
systems. It is important to note that beyond these emission control
options, IPM offers other compliance options for meeting emission
limits. These include fuel switching, re-powering, and adjustments in
the dispatching of electric generating units.

Table 3-3B summarizes retrofit NOx emission control performance
assumptions.

**Table 3-3B. Summary of Retrofit NOx Emission Control Performance
Assumptions**

+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | **Selective |             | **Selective |             |
|             | Catalytic   |             | No          |             |
|             | Reduction** |             | n-Catalytic |             |
|             |             |             | Reduction** |             |
|             | **(SCR)**   |             |             |             |
|             |             |             | **(SNCR)**  |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Unit Type   | Coal        | Oil/Gas\*   | Coal        | Oil/Gas\*   |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Percent     | 90%         | 80%         | 35%         | 50%         |
| Removal     |             |             |             |             |
|             | down to     |             |             |             |
|             | 0.06        |             |             |             |
|             | lb/mmBtu    |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Size        | Units  100 | Units  25  | Units  25  | Units  25  |
| Ap          | MW          | MW          | MW          | MW          |
| plicability |             |             |             |             |
|             |             |             | and         |             |
|             |             |             |             |             |
|             |             |             | Units \<    |             |
|             |             |             | 200 MW      |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

\* Controls to oil- or gas-fired EGUs are not applied as part of the EGU
control strategy included in this RIA.

Existing coal-fired units that are retrofit with SCR have a NOx removal
efficiency of 90%, with a minimum controlled NOx emission rate of 0.06
lb/mmBtu in IPM v2.1.9.. Potential (new) coal-fired, combined cycle, and
IGCC units are modeled to be constructed with SCR systems and designed
to have emission rates ranging between 0.02 and 0.06 lb NOx/mmBtu.

Detailed cost and performance derivations for NOx controls are discussed
in detail in the EPA's documentation of IPM
(http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/past-modeling.html).

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

4.  **Change in ozone concentrations between Baseline and post 0.070 ppm
    Control Strategy Modeling**

  --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------------
  **State**       **County**      **Baseline\     **Control       **Change
                                  8-hour ozone DV Scenario\       (ppm)**
                                  (ppm)**         8-hour ozone DV 
                                                  (ppm)**         

  Alabama         Baldwin         0.067           0.066           0.001

  Alabama         Clay            0.060           0.056           0.004

  Alabama         Elmore          0.062           0.060           0.002

  Alabama         Jefferson       0.064           0.063           0.001

  Alabama         Madison         0.063           0.061           0.002

  Alabama         Mobile          0.068           0.068           0.000

  Alabama         Montgomery      0.061           0.060           0.001

  Alabama         Morgan          0.066           0.065           0.001

  Alabama         Shelby          0.066           0.065           0.001

  Alabama         Tuscaloosa      0.057           0.056           0.001

  Arizona         Maricopa        0.078           0.077           0.001

  Arizona         Pinal           0.072           0.071           0.001

  Arkansas        Crittenden      0.075           0.072           0.003

  Arkansas        Pulaski         0.069           0.068           0.001

  California      Alameda         0.067           0.067           0.000

  California      Amador          0.068           0.068           0.000

  California      Butte           0.069           0.069           0.000

  California      Calaveras       0.073           0.073           0.000

  California      Colusa          0.059           0.059           0.000

  California      Contra Costa    0.070           0.070           0.000

  California      El Dorado       0.080           0.080           0.000

  California      Fresno          0.092           0.092           0.000

  California      Glenn           0.060           0.060           0.000

  California      Imperial        0.072           0.072           0.000

  California      Kern            0.096           0.096           0.000

  California      Kings           0.079           0.079           0.000

  California      Lake            0.053           0.053           0.000

  California      Los Angeles     0.105           0.105           0.000

  California      Madera          0.075           0.075           0.000

  California      Mariposa        0.073           0.073           0.000

  California      Merced          0.080           0.080           0.000

  California      Monterey        0.054           0.054           0.000

  California      Napa            0.051           0.051           0.000

  California      Nevada          0.076           0.076           0.000

  California      Orange          0.066           0.065           0.001

  California      Placer          0.076           0.076           0.000

  California      Riverside       0.102           0.102           0.000

  California      Sacramento      0.076           0.076           0.000

  California      San Benito      0.067           0.067           0.000

  California      San Bernardino  0.129           0.129           0.000

  California      San Diego       0.077           0.077           0.000

  California      San Joaquin     0.067           0.067           0.000

  California      San Luis Obispo 0.053           0.053           0.000

  California      Santa Barbara   0.065           0.065           0.000

  California      Santa Clara     0.065           0.065           0.000

  California      Santa Cruz      0.054           0.055           -0.001

  California      Shasta          0.058           0.058           0.000

  California      Solano          0.057           0.057           0.000

  California      Sonoma          0.049           0.049           0.000

  California      Stanislaus      0.076           0.076           0.000

  California      Sutter          0.065           0.065           0.000

  California      Tehama          0.066           0.066           0.000

  California      Tulare          0.088           0.088           0.000

  California      Tuolumne        0.073           0.073           0.000

  California      Ventura         0.079           0.080           -0.001

  California      Yolo            0.064           0.064           0.000

  Colorado        Adams           0.061           0.060           0.001

  Colorado        Arapahoe        0.073           0.072           0.001

  Colorado        Boulder         0.066           0.064           0.002

  Colorado        Denver          0.068           0.067           0.001

  Colorado        Douglas         0.076           0.076           0.000

  Colorado        El Paso         0.064           0.063           0.001

  Colorado        Jefferson       0.078           0.076           0.002

  Colorado        Larimer         0.069           0.067           0.002

  Colorado        Weld            0.067           0.065           0.002

  Connecticut     Fairfield       0.088           0.087           0.001

  Connecticut     Hartford        0.069           0.067           0.002

  Connecticut     Litchfield      0.063           0.061           0.002

  Connecticut     Middlesex       0.081           0.080           0.001

  Connecticut     New Haven       0.084           0.083           0.001

  Connecticut     New London      0.072           0.070           0.002

  Connecticut     Tolland         0.071           0.069           0.002

  D.C.            Washington      0.076           0.073           0.003

  Delaware        Kent            0.072           0.070           0.002

  Delaware        New Castle      0.075           0.073           0.002

  Delaware        Sussex          0.070           0.068           0.002

  Florida         Bay             0.067           0.066           0.001

  Florida         Brevard         0.055           0.053           0.002

  Florida         Duval           0.058           0.057           0.001

  Florida         Escambia        0.069           0.069           0.000

  Florida         Hillsborough    0.072           0.071           0.001

  Florida         Manatee         0.067           0.065           0.002

  Florida         Pasco           0.061           0.060           0.001

  Florida         Pinellas        0.064           0.063           0.001

  Florida         Santa Rosa      0.065           0.064           0.001

  Florida         Sarasota        0.063           0.061           0.002

  Georgia         Bibb            0.073           0.069           0.004

  Georgia         Chatham         0.057           0.056           0.001

  Georgia         Cherokee        0.055           0.052           0.003

  Georgia         Cobb            0.072           0.068           0.004

  Georgia         Coweta          0.072           0.064           0.008

  Georgia         Dawson          0.058           0.055           0.003

  Georgia         De Kalb         0.076           0.072           0.004

  Georgia         Douglas         0.071           0.067           0.004

  Georgia         Fayette         0.069           0.066           0.003

  Georgia         Fulton          0.080           0.076           0.004

  Georgia         Glynn           0.058           0.057           0.001

  Georgia         Gwinnett        0.067           0.064           0.003

  Georgia         Henry           0.072           0.068           0.004

  Georgia         Murray          0.062           0.059           0.003

  Georgia         Muscogee        0.065           0.061           0.004

  Georgia         Paulding        0.068           0.065           0.003

  Georgia         Richmond        0.067           0.063           0.004

  Georgia         Rockdale        0.071           0.067           0.004

  Illinois        Adams           0.062           0.057           0.005

  Illinois        Champaign       0.064           0.062           0.002

  Illinois        Clark           0.057           0.056           0.001

  Illinois        Cook            0.083           0.083           0.000

  Illinois        Du Page         0.065           0.064           0.001

  Illinois        Effingham       0.062           0.061           0.001

  Illinois        Hamilton        0.066           0.064           0.002

  Illinois        Jersey          0.074           0.069           0.005

  Illinois        Kane            0.067           0.066           0.001

  Illinois        Lake            0.074           0.073           0.001

  Illinois        Macon           0.060           0.059           0.001

  Illinois        Macoupin        0.064           0.060           0.004

  Illinois        Madison         0.071           0.066           0.005

  Illinois        McHenry         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Illinois        McLean          0.063           0.061           0.002

  Illinois        Peoria          0.066           0.064           0.002

  Illinois        Randolph        0.065           0.062           0.003

  Illinois        Rock Island     0.058           0.057           0.001

  Illinois        Sangamon        0.060           0.058           0.002

  Illinois        St Clair        0.072           0.069           0.003

  Illinois        Will            0.068           0.067           0.001

  Illinois        Winnebago       0.061           0.060           0.001

  Indiana         Allen           0.070           0.068           0.002

  Indiana         Boone           0.072           0.069           0.003

  Indiana         Carroll         0.066           0.064           0.002

  Indiana         Clark           0.076           0.074           0.002

  Indiana         Delaware        0.069           0.067           0.002

  Indiana         Floyd           0.071           0.070           0.001

  Indiana         Gibson          0.056           0.054           0.002

  Indiana         Greene          0.069           0.067           0.002

  Indiana         Hamilton        0.076           0.073           0.003

  Indiana         Hancock         0.074           0.071           0.003

  Indiana         Hendricks       0.071           0.069           0.002

  Indiana         Huntington      0.067           0.065           0.002

  Indiana         Jackson         0.068           0.065           0.003

  Indiana         Johnson         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Indiana         La Porte        0.075           0.073           0.002

  Indiana         Lake            0.084           0.083           0.001

  Indiana         Madison         0.071           0.068           0.003

  Indiana         Marion          0.075           0.072           0.003

  Indiana         Morgan          0.070           0.066           0.004

  Indiana         Perry           0.071           0.071           0.000

  Indiana         Porter          0.078           0.077           0.001

  Indiana         Posey           0.071           0.070           0.001

  Indiana         Shelby          0.077           0.074           0.003

  Indiana         St Joseph       0.069           0.067           0.002

  Indiana         Vanderburgh     0.068           0.066           0.002

  Indiana         Vigo            0.070           0.065           0.005

  Indiana         Warrick         0.068           0.067           0.001

  Iowa            Clinton         0.063           0.062           0.001

  Iowa            Scott           0.066           0.065           0.001

  Kansas          Wyandotte       0.070           0.069           0.001

  Kentucky        Bell            0.063           0.062           0.001

  Kentucky        Boone           0.067           0.066           0.001

  Kentucky        Boyd            0.072           0.067           0.005

  Kentucky        Bullitt         0.067           0.064           0.003

  Kentucky        Campbell        0.077           0.073           0.004

  Kentucky        Carter          0.064           0.061           0.003

  Kentucky        Christian       0.066           0.065           0.001

  Kentucky        Daviess         0.062           0.062           0.000

  Kentucky        Edmonson        0.067           0.066           0.001

  Kentucky        Fayette         0.063           0.061           0.002

  Kentucky        Graves          0.068           0.066           0.002

  Kentucky        Greenup         0.068           0.064           0.004

  Kentucky        Hancock         0.067           0.067           0.000

  Kentucky        Hardin          0.068           0.065           0.003

  Kentucky        Henderson       0.066           0.065           0.001

  Kentucky        Jefferson       0.072           0.070           0.002

  Kentucky        Jessamine       0.062           0.063           -0.001

  Kentucky        Kenton          0.073           0.069           0.004

  Kentucky        Livingston      0.071           0.069           0.002

  Kentucky        McCracken       0.069           0.067           0.002

  Kentucky        McLean          0.065           0.064           0.001

  Kentucky        Oldham          0.072           0.070           0.002

  Kentucky        Pulaski         0.065           0.064           0.001

  Kentucky        Scott           0.056           0.055           0.001

  Kentucky        Simpson         0.066           0.065           0.001

  Kentucky        Trigg           0.060           0.058           0.002

  Kentucky        Warren          0.066           0.065           0.001

  Louisiana       Ascension       0.071           0.066           0.005

  Louisiana       Bossier         0.073           0.070           0.003

  Louisiana       Caddo           0.068           0.065           0.003

  Louisiana       Calcasieu       0.072           0.067           0.005

  Louisiana       East Baton      0.077           0.074           0.003
                  Rouge                                           

  Louisiana       Grant           0.063           0.059           0.004

  Louisiana       Iberville       0.076           0.072           0.004

  Louisiana       Jefferson       0.072           0.069           0.003

  Louisiana       Lafayette       0.070           0.064           0.006

  Louisiana       Lafourche       0.072           0.068           0.004

  Louisiana       Livingston      0.072           0.068           0.004

  Louisiana       Orleans         0.060           0.058           0.002

  Louisiana       Ouachita        0.068           0.064           0.004

  Louisiana       Pointe Coupee   0.064           0.060           0.004

  Louisiana       St Bernard      0.067           0.065           0.002

  Louisiana       St Charles      0.068           0.066           0.002

  Louisiana       St James        0.069           0.065           0.004

  Louisiana       St John The     0.072           0.069           0.003
                  Baptist                                         

  Louisiana       St Mary         0.068           0.062           0.006

  Louisiana       West Baton      0.074           0.071           0.003
                  Rouge                                           

  Maine           Cumberland      0.065           0.063           0.002

  Maine           Hancock         0.070           0.067           0.003

  Maine           Kennebec        0.060           0.057           0.003

  Maine           Knox            0.063           0.060           0.003

  Maine           Penobscot       0.062           0.059           0.003

  Maine           York            0.069           0.066           0.003

  Maryland        Anne Arundel    0.076           0.074           0.002

  Maryland        Baltimore       0.077           0.075           0.002

  Maryland        Calvert         0.065           0.063           0.002

  Maryland        Carroll         0.068           0.066           0.002

  Maryland        Cecil           0.078           0.075           0.003

  Maryland        Charles         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Maryland        Frederick       0.067           0.065           0.002

  Maryland        Harford         0.084           0.082           0.002

  Maryland        Kent            0.075           0.072           0.003

  Maryland        Montgomery      0.072           0.070           0.002

  Maryland        Prince Georges  0.075           0.072           0.003

  Maryland        Washington      0.067           0.063           0.004

  Massachusetts   Barnstable      0.072           0.070           0.002

  Massachusetts   Berkshire       0.067           0.066           0.001

  Massachusetts   Bristol         0.072           0.069           0.003

  Massachusetts   Essex           0.071           0.070           0.001

  Massachusetts   Hampden         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Massachusetts   Hampshire       0.068           0.066           0.002

  Massachusetts   Middlesex       0.067           0.064           0.003

  Massachusetts   Suffolk         0.067           0.065           0.002

  Massachusetts   Worcester       0.064           0.062           0.002

  Michigan        Allegan         0.075           0.072           0.003

  Michigan        Benzie          0.070           0.068           0.002

  Michigan        Berrien         0.072           0.070           0.002

  Michigan        Cass            0.069           0.067           0.002

  Michigan        Clinton         0.066           0.062           0.004

  Michigan        Genesee         0.067           0.064           0.003

  Michigan        Huron           0.070           0.067           0.003

  Michigan        Ingham          0.066           0.062           0.004

  Michigan        Kalamazoo       0.065           0.062           0.003

  Michigan        Kent            0.067           0.064           0.003

  Michigan        Lenawee         0.069           0.063           0.006

  Michigan        Macomb          0.080           0.078           0.002

  Michigan        Mason           0.072           0.070           0.002

  Michigan        Missaukee       0.064           0.061           0.003

  Michigan        Muskegon        0.074           0.071           0.003

  Michigan        Oakland         0.077           0.075           0.002

  Michigan        Ottawa          0.070           0.067           0.003

  Michigan        St Clair        0.073           0.071           0.002

  Michigan        Washtenaw       0.076           0.072           0.004

  Michigan        Wayne           0.076           0.073           0.003

  Minnesota       Anoka           0.058           0.057           0.001

  Minnesota       Washington      0.059           0.059           0.000

  Mississippi     De Soto         0.069           0.067           0.002

  Mississippi     Hancock         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Mississippi     Harrison        0.064           0.067           -0.003

  Mississippi     Hinds           0.055           0.053           0.002

  Mississippi     Jackson         0.069           0.070           -0.001

  Mississippi     Warren          0.054           0.051           0.003

  Missouri        Clay            0.070           0.068           0.002

  Missouri        Jefferson       0.076           0.072           0.004

  Missouri        Platte          0.069           0.068           0.001

  Missouri        St Charles      0.076           0.072           0.004

  Missouri        St Louis        0.079           0.075           0.004

  Missouri        St Louis City   0.078           0.075           0.003

  Missouri        Ste Genevieve   0.068           0.064           0.004

  Nevada          Clark           0.072           0.072           0.000

  Nevada          Washoe          0.063           0.063           0.000

  New Hampshire   Hillsborough    0.063           0.060           0.003

  New Hampshire   Rockingham      0.063           0.061           0.002

  New Jersey      Atlantic        0.071           0.069           0.002

  New Jersey      Bergen          0.077           0.075           0.002

  New Jersey      Camden          0.082           0.080           0.002

  New Jersey      Cumberland      0.073           0.071           0.002

  New Jersey      Essex           0.056           0.055           0.001

  New Jersey      Gloucester      0.080           0.078           0.002

  New Jersey      Hudson          0.074           0.073           0.001

  New Jersey      Hunterdon       0.078           0.077           0.001

  New Jersey      Mercer          0.083           0.081           0.002

  New Jersey      Middlesex       0.081           0.079           0.002

  New Jersey      Monmouth        0.078           0.077           0.001

  New Jersey      Morris          0.077           0.075           0.002

  New Jersey      Ocean           0.084           0.081           0.003

  New Jersey      Passaic         0.071           0.069           0.002

  New Mexico      Dona Ana        0.071           0.070           0.001

  New Mexico      San Juan        0.071           0.068           0.003

  New York        Albany          0.064           0.063           0.001

  New York        Bronx           0.069           0.068           0.001

  New York        Chautauqua      0.074           0.070           0.004

  New York        Dutchess        0.067           0.066           0.001

  New York        Erie            0.079           0.075           0.004

  New York        Jefferson       0.075           0.072           0.003

  New York        Monroe          0.073           0.072           0.001

  New York        Niagara         0.076           0.075           0.001

  New York        Orange          0.063           0.061           0.002

  New York        Putnam          0.070           0.068           0.002

  New York        Queens          0.068           0.067           0.001

  New York        Richmond        0.074           0.072           0.002

  New York        Saratoga        0.066           0.065           0.001

  New York        Suffolk         0.086           0.084           0.002

  New York        Ulster          0.065           0.063           0.002

  New York        Wayne           0.070           0.068           0.002

  New York        Westchester     0.075           0.074           0.001

  North Carolina  Alexander       0.066           0.064           0.002

  North Carolina  Buncombe        0.065           0.065           0.000

  North Carolina  Camden          0.063           0.062           0.001

  North Carolina  Caswell         0.063           0.059           0.004

  North Carolina  Chatham         0.063           0.061           0.002

  North Carolina  Cumberland      0.065           0.063           0.002

  North Carolina  Davie           0.067           0.065           0.002

  North Carolina  Durham          0.063           0.060           0.003

  North Carolina  Edgecombe       0.066           0.064           0.002

  North Carolina  Forsyth         0.068           0.065           0.003

  North Carolina  Franklin        0.063           0.060           0.003

  North Carolina  Granville       0.067           0.065           0.002

  North Carolina  Guilford        0.064           0.061           0.003

  North Carolina  Johnston        0.062           0.059           0.003

  North Carolina  Lincoln         0.069           0.067           0.002

  North Carolina  Mecklenburg     0.074           0.072           0.002

  North Carolina  New Hanover     0.062           0.061           0.001

  North Carolina  Northampton     0.067           0.064           0.003

  North Carolina  Person          0.071           0.068           0.003

  North Carolina  Randolph        0.063           0.060           0.003

  North Carolina  Rockingham      0.064           0.061           0.003

  North Carolina  Rowan           0.073           0.071           0.002

  North Carolina  Union           0.065           0.063           0.002

  North Carolina  Wake            0.066           0.064           0.002

  Ohio            Allen           0.071           0.067           0.004

  Ohio            Ashtabula       0.077           0.073           0.004

  Ohio            Butler          0.073           0.070           0.003

  Ohio            Clark           0.068           0.063           0.005

  Ohio            Clermont        0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Clinton         0.074           0.070           0.004

  Ohio            Cuyahoga        0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Delaware        0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Franklin        0.076           0.073           0.003

  Ohio            Geauga          0.080           0.076           0.004

  Ohio            Greene          0.068           0.062           0.006

  Ohio            Hamilton        0.074           0.070           0.004

  Ohio            Jefferson       0.067           0.064           0.003

  Ohio            Knox            0.069           0.065           0.004

  Ohio            Lake            0.076           0.073           0.003

  Ohio            Lawrence        0.069           0.065           0.004

  Ohio            Licking         0.069           0.066           0.003

  Ohio            Lorain          0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Lucas           0.072           0.069           0.003

  Ohio            Madison         0.068           0.063           0.005

  Ohio            Mahoning        0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Medina          0.069           0.066           0.003

  Ohio            Miami           0.065           0.061           0.004

  Ohio            Montgomery      0.068           0.062           0.006

  Ohio            Portage         0.074           0.070           0.004

  Ohio            Preble          0.061           0.058           0.003

  Ohio            Stark           0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Summit          0.075           0.071           0.004

  Ohio            Trumbull        0.073           0.070           0.003

  Ohio            Warren          0.071           0.068           0.003

  Ohio            Washington      0.064           0.061           0.003

  Ohio            Wood            0.070           0.067           0.003

  Oklahoma        Cleveland       0.065           0.064           0.001

  Oklahoma        Marshall        0.069           0.067           0.002

  Oklahoma        Mc Clain        0.067           0.065           0.002

  Oklahoma        Oklahoma        0.067           0.065           0.002

  Oklahoma        Tulsa           0.073           0.070           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Allegheny       0.079           0.076           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Armstrong       0.072           0.069           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Beaver          0.076           0.073           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Berks           0.071           0.068           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Blair           0.065           0.063           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Bucks           0.084           0.082           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Cambria         0.071           0.068           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Centre          0.066           0.064           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Chester         0.075           0.073           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Clearfield      0.068           0.065           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Dauphin         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Delaware        0.074           0.073           0.001

  Pennsylvania    Erie            0.069           0.067           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Franklin        0.070           0.068           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Greene          0.069           0.066           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Lackawanna      0.064           0.062           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Lancaster       0.071           0.068           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Lawrence        0.063           0.059           0.004

  Pennsylvania    Lehigh          0.071           0.069           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Luzerne         0.064           0.063           0.001

  Pennsylvania    Lycoming        0.059           0.057           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Mercer          0.073           0.069           0.004

  Pennsylvania    Montgomery      0.078           0.076           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Northampton     0.072           0.070           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Perry           0.063           0.061           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Philadelphia    0.080           0.078           0.002

  Pennsylvania    Washington      0.070           0.067           0.003

  Pennsylvania    Westmoreland    0.070           0.067           0.003

  Pennsylvania    York            0.071           0.067           0.004

  Rhode Island    Kent            0.074           0.072           0.002

  Rhode Island    Providence      0.071           0.068           0.003

  Rhode Island    Washington      0.075           0.072           0.003

  South Carolina  Anderson        0.067           0.065           0.002

  South Carolina  Berkeley        0.058           0.057           0.001

  South Carolina  Charleston      0.057           0.055           0.002

  South Carolina  Cherokee        0.063           0.061           0.002

  South Carolina  Chester         0.064           0.061           0.003

  South Carolina  Edgefield       0.063           0.058           0.005

  South Carolina  Pickens         0.065           0.063           0.002

  South Carolina  Richland        0.069           0.066           0.003

  South Carolina  Spartanburg     0.066           0.063           0.003

  South Carolina  Union           0.062           0.059           0.003

  South Carolina  York            0.063           0.061           0.002

  Tennessee       Anderson        0.064           0.061           0.003

  Tennessee       Blount          0.071           0.067           0.004

  Tennessee       Davidson        0.064           0.063           0.001

  Tennessee       Hamilton        0.066           0.063           0.003

  Tennessee       Haywood         0.067           0.063           0.004

  Tennessee       Jefferson       0.068           0.065           0.003

  Tennessee       Knox            0.071           0.066           0.005

  Tennessee       Meigs           0.066           0.063           0.003

  Tennessee       Rutherford      0.065           0.063           0.002

  Tennessee       Shelby          0.072           0.069           0.003

  Tennessee       Sullivan        0.072           0.062           0.010

  Tennessee       Sumner          0.068           0.067           0.001

  Tennessee       Williamson      0.068           0.066           0.002

  Tennessee       Wilson          0.066           0.065           0.001

  Texas           Brazoria        0.078           0.076           0.002

  Texas           Collin          0.075           0.072           0.003

  Texas           Dallas          0.079           0.077           0.002

  Texas           Denton          0.078           0.075           0.003

  Texas           El Paso         0.070           0.069           0.001

  Texas           Ellis           0.074           0.069           0.005

  Texas           Galveston       0.078           0.075           0.003

  Texas           Gregg           0.079           0.073           0.006

  Texas           Harris          0.092           0.090           0.002

  Texas           Harrison        0.065           0.062           0.003

  Texas           Hood            0.068           0.066           0.002

  Texas           Jefferson       0.079           0.072           0.007

  Texas           Johnson         0.073           0.069           0.004

  Texas           Marion          0.069           0.065           0.004

  Texas           Montgomery      0.072           0.070           0.002

  Texas           Orange          0.068           0.064           0.004

  Texas           Parker          0.068           0.066           0.002

  Texas           Rockwall        0.067           0.063           0.004

  Texas           Smith           0.071           0.068           0.003

  Texas           Tarrant         0.079           0.076           0.003

  Utah            Box Elder       0.066           0.065           0.001

  Utah            Cache           0.055           0.054           0.001

  Utah            Davis           0.071           0.070           0.001

  Utah            Salt Lake       0.073           0.072           0.001

  Utah            Utah            0.070           0.069           0.001

  Utah            Weber           0.067           0.066           0.001

  Vermont         Bennington      0.060           0.059           0.001

  Virginia        Alexandria City 0.072           0.069           0.003

  Virginia        Arlington       0.078           0.075           0.003

  Virginia        Caroline        0.063           0.062           0.001

  Virginia        Charles City    0.074           0.073           0.001

  Virginia        Chesterfield    0.071           0.070           0.001

  Virginia        Fairfax         0.077           0.074           0.003

  Virginia        Fauquier        0.062           0.061           0.001

  Virginia        Frederick       0.067           0.064           0.003

  Virginia        Hampton City    0.077           0.076           0.001

  Virginia        Hanover         0.074           0.072           0.002

  Virginia        Henrico         0.074           0.073           0.001

  Virginia        Loudoun         0.070           0.068           0.002

  Virginia        Madison         0.067           0.065           0.002

  Virginia        Prince William  0.066           0.064           0.002

  Virginia        Roanoke         0.069           0.067           0.002

  Virginia        Stafford        0.064           0.062           0.002

  Virginia        Suffolk City    0.080           0.080           0.000

  West Virginia   Berkeley        0.068           0.063           0.005

  West Virginia   Cabell          0.073           0.069           0.004

  West Virginia   Hancock         0.068           0.065           0.003

  West Virginia   Kanawha         0.069           0.064           0.005

  West Virginia   Monongalia      0.064           0.063           0.001

  West Virginia   Ohio            0.067           0.064           0.003

  West Virginia   Wood            0.065           0.062           0.003

  Wisconsin       Brown           0.065           0.063           0.002

  Wisconsin       Columbia        0.062           0.061           0.001

  Wisconsin       Dane            0.062           0.060           0.002

  Wisconsin       Dodge           0.063           0.062           0.001

  Wisconsin       Door            0.074           0.072           0.002

  Wisconsin       Fond Du Lac     0.061           0.060           0.001

  Wisconsin       Jefferson       0.066           0.065           0.001

  Wisconsin       Kenosha         0.086           0.085           0.001

  Wisconsin       Kewaunee        0.074           0.072           0.002

  Wisconsin       Manitowoc       0.074           0.072           0.002

  Wisconsin       Milwaukee       0.075           0.073           0.002

  Wisconsin       Outagamie       0.059           0.057           0.002

  Wisconsin       Ozaukee         0.079           0.077           0.002

  Wisconsin       Racine          0.079           0.077           0.002

  Wisconsin       Rock            0.069           0.068           0.001

  Wisconsin       Sheboygan       0.082           0.080           0.002

  Wisconsin       Walworth        0.066           0.065           0.001

  Wisconsin       Washington      0.065           0.063           0.002

  Wisconsin       Waukesha        0.067           0.065           0.002

  Wisconsin       Winnebago       0.063           0.062           0.001
  --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------------

[^1]: "Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines Technical
    Support Document for NOx SIP Call Proposal," U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency. September 5, 2000. Available on the Internet at
    <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/rto/sip/data/tsd9-00.pdf>.

[^2]: "Stationary Internal Combustion Engines: Updated Information on
    NOx Emissions and Control Techniques," Ec/R Incorporated, Chapel
    Hill, NC. September 1, 2000. Available on the Internet at
    <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/ozonetech/ic_engine_nox_update_09012000.pdf>.

[^3]: VOC Fugitive Losses: New Monitors, Emissions Losses, and Potential
    Policy Gaps. 2006 International Workshop. U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and
    Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. October 25-27, 2006.

[^4]: VOC Fugitive Losses: New Monitors, Emissions Losses, and Potential
    Policy Gaps. 2006 International Workshop. U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and
    Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. October 25-27, 2006.

[^5]: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Proposed
    Revision of Regulation 8, Rule 8: Wastewater Collection Systems.
    Staff Report, March 17, 2004.

[^6]: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Proposed
    Revision of Regulation 8, Rule 8: Wastewater Collection Systems.
    Staff Report, March 17, 2004.

[^7]: Herzog, E., Bricka, S., Audette, L., and Rockwell, J., 2005. *Do
    Employee Commuter Benefits Reduce Vehicle Emissions and Fuel
    Consumption? Results of the Fall 2004 Best Workplaces for Commuters
    Survey*, Transportation Research Record, Journal of the
    Transportation Research Board: Forthcoming.