1A-1

APPENDICES for the Technical Support Document For the Proposed Toxics Rule

Emissions Inventories

APPENDIX A

Inventory Data Files Used for Each Proposed Toxics Rule Air Quality Modeling Cases - SMOKE 

Input Inventory Datasets

In any of the following dataset names where the placeholder <mon> has been provided, this is intended to 

mean 12 separate files with the <mon> placeholder replaced with either jan, feb, mar, apr, may, jun, jul, aug, 

sep, oct, nov, or dec, each associated with a particular month of the year.

Several inventories are the same in the 2005 base case and all future year cases. These inventories are listed 

in the “All Cases” in Table A-1. 
A-2

Table A-1. List of inventory data associated with TR modeling cases.

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files

All Cases avefire arinv_avefire_2002_hap_18nov2008_v0_orl.txt

arinv_avefire_2002ce_21dec2007_v0_ida.txt

other arinv_canada_afdust_xportfrac_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_canada_ag_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_canada_aircraft_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_canada_marine_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_canada_oarea_cap_2006_02mar2009_v3_orl.txt

arinv_canada_offroad_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_canada_rail_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

arinv_nonpt_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

arinv_nonroad_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

arinv_nonroad_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

othon mbinv_canada_onroad_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

mbinv_onroad_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

othpt ptinv_canada_point_2006_orl_09mar2009_v2_orl.txt

ptinv_canada_point_cb5_2006_orl_10mar2009_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_canada_point_uog_2006_orl_02mar2009_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_mexico_border99_03mar2008_v1_ida.txt

ptinv_mexico_interior99_05feb2007_v0_ida.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_offshore_oil_cap2005v2_20nov2008_20nov2008_v0_orl.txt

2005 cases

(2005cr_05b, 

2005cr_hg_05b)

afdust arinv_afdust_2002ad_xportfrac_26sep2007_v0_orl.txt

ag arinv_ag_cap2002nei_06nov2006_v0_orl.txt

alm_no_c3 arinv_lm_no_c3_cap2002v3_20feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_lm_no_c3_hap2002v4_20feb2009_v0_orl.txt

nonpt arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_TCEQ_Oklahoma_OilGas_28may2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_WRAP_OilGas_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_pf4_cap_nopfc_28may2010_v3_orl.txt

arinv_pfc_2002_caphap_27dec2007_v0_orl.txt

nonroad arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_<mon>_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonroad_caps_2005v2_<mon>_revised_08sep2008_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonroad_haps_2005v2_<mon>_revised_05sep2008_v0_orl.txt

on_moves_runp

m mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2005cr_<mon>_06MAY2010_06may2010_v0_orl.txt

on_moves_startp mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2005cr_<mon>_06MAY2010_06may2010_v0_orl.txt
A-3

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files

m

2005 cases on_noadj mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_2005cr_<mon>_06MAY2010_06may2010_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_on_noadj_nmim_not2moves_2005cr_<mon>_04MAY2010_04may2010_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_revised_<mon>_29jun2010_v0_orl.txt

seca_c3 ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_baf_vochaps_2005_canada_24jun2010_28jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_baf_vochaps_2005_us_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_caps_2005_canada_24jun2010_28jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_caps_2005_us_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

2005cr_05b ptipm Annual: ptinv_ptipm_cap2005v2_revised12mar2009_15jul2010_v5_orl.txt

Annual: ptinv_ptipm_hap2005v2_allHAPs_revised12mar2009_14jul2010_v1_orl.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2005cr_05b_<mon>_ida.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2005cr_05b_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2005v2_revised_08jul2010_v2_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2005v2_20nov2008_revised_22jul2010_v5_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_2005hap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_caphap_ethanol_plant_additions_2005_30jun2010_v3_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_2005cap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt

2005cr_hg_05b nonpt arinv_nonpt_2005pf4_hap_nopfc_nobafmpesticidesplus_noboilermacthg_23aug2010_v0_orl.txt

other_hg arinv_area_canada_hg_2000_noduplicates_23jul2008_v0_ida.txt

othpt_hg ptinv_point_canada_hg_2000_08sep2008_v1_ida.txt

ptipm Annual: ptinv_2005_ptipm_natahg_minus_boilermacticr_17aug2010_v0_orl.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_hg_cem_2005cr_hg_05b_<mon>_ida.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_hg_noncem_2005cr_hg_05b_<mon>_ida.txt

ptnonipm ptinv_2005_ICR_BoilerMACT_Hg_ptnonipm_20aug2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_2005_ptnonipm_natahg_minus_boilermacticr_17aug2010_v0_orl.txt

2016 cases

(2016cr_05b, 

2016cr2_hg_05b, 

2016cr2_hg_control1_05b

)

afdust arinv_afdust_2016cr_24aug2010_v0_orl.tx

ag arinv_ag_2016cr_24aug2010_v0_orl.txt

alm_no_c3 arinv_lm_no_c3_cap2016cr_24aug2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_lm_no_c3_hap2016cr_24aug2010_v0_orl.txt

nonpt arinv_nonpt_2016cr_cap_2008_TCEQ_Oklahoma_OilGas_23sep2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_2016cr_cap_2018PhaseII_WRAP_OilGas_23sep2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_2016cr_hap_nopfc_nobafmpesticidesplus_noboilermacthg_23sep2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_2016cr_pf4_cap_nopfc_23sep2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_pfc_caphap2016_13jul2010_v0_orl.txt

nonroad arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2016_revised_<mon>_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonroad_caphap_2016_<mon>_07jun2010_v0_orl.txt
A-4

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files

on_moves_runp

m mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2016cr_<mon>_10JUN2010_10jun2010_v0_orl.txt

2016 cases on_moves_startp

m mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2016cr_<mon>_10JUN2010_10jun2010_v0_orl.txt

on_noadj mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_2016cr_<mon>_10JUN2010_10jun2010_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2016_<mon>_09jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_2016cr_hap2005v2_revised_06oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_2016cr_xportfrac_cap2005v2_20nov2008_revised_06oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_capHG_cementISIS_2016cr_16AUG2010_16aug2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_cornproducts17031_hap_cap_2008t_27aug2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_2005hap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_caphap_ethanol_plant_additions_2005_30jun2010_v3_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_2005cap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt

seca_c3 ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_baf_vochaps_2016_canada_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_baf_vochaps_2016_us_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_caps_2016_canada_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_FINAL_c3_caps_2016_us_24jun2010_24jun2010_v0_orl.txt

2016cr_05b ptipm Annual: 

ptinv_PTINV_EPA410_BC_15b_summer_2015_w_MH_SCC_edits_emis_reds_22SEP2010_08oct2010_nf_v1_orl.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2016cr_05b_<mon>_ida.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2016cr_05b_<mon>_ida.txt

2016cr2_hg_05b ptipm Annual: 

ptinv_PTINV_EPA410MACTAQ_BC_2b_summer_2015_w_MH_SCC_edits_emis_reds_minus_boilermacthg_20oct2010

_v0_orl.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2016cr2_hg_<mon>_ida.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2016cr2_hg_<mon>_ida.txt

ptnonipm_hg ptinv_2016cr2_ICR_BoilerMACT_Hg_ptnonipm_06oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_2016cr2_natahg_minus_boilermacticr_15oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_capHG_cementISIS_2016cr_16AUG2010_16aug2010_v0_orl.txt

2016cr2_hg_control1_0

5b

ptipm Annual: 

ptinv_PTINV_EPA410MACTAQ_BC_5d_summer_2015_w_MH_SCC_edits_emis_reds_minus_boilermacthg_09nov201

0_v0_orl.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2016cr2_hg_control1_<mon>_ida.txt

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2016cr2_hg_control1_<mon>_ida.txt

ptnonipm_hg ptinv_2016cr2_ICR_BoilerMACT_Hg_ptnonipm_06oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_2016cr2_natahg_minus_boilermacticr_15oct2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_capHG_cementISIS_2016cr_16AUG2010_16aug2010_v0_orl.txt
B-1

APPENDIX B – List of OECA Consent Decrees- Whereby Reductions Were Apportioned to Facilities 

in a Particular Corporation

Table B-1. Description of application of OECA Consent Decrees for future-year projections

Corporation Pollutant

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

Bunge

NOX 31DEC2005

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 278 tons 

per year. Combined is over select Bunge 

facilities.

942

PM 31DEC2005 Combined PM emissions reduced by 258 tons per 

year. Combined is over select Bunge facilities. 1,266

SO2 31DEC2005

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 574 tons 

per year. Combined is over select Bunge 

facilities.

2,926

VOC 31DEC2005

Combined VOC emissions reduced by 1,122 tons 

per year. Combined is over select Bunge 

facilities.

2,761

Cargill

CO 01SEP2010 Combined CO emissions reduced by 10,900 tons 

per year. Combined over select Cargill facilities. 11,167

NOX 01SEP2007 Combined NOX emissions reduced by 1,350 tons 

per year. Combined over select Cargill facilities. 4,451

SO2 01SEP2008 Combined SO2 emission reduced by 2,250 tons 

per year. Combined over select Cargill facilities. 10,527

VOC 01SEP2008

Combined VOC emissions reduced by 98% or 

10,450 tons per year. Combined over select

Cargill facilities.

6,617

Conoco Phillips

NOX 31DEC2008

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 10,000 

tons per year. Combined over select Conoco

Phillips facilities.

17,409

SO2 31DEC2008

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 37,100 tons 

per year. Combined over select Conoco Phillips 

facilities

31,003

Dupont SO2

01MAR2010 Annual SO2 emissions cap at 123 tons per year at 

James River 0

01MAR2012

Annual SO2 emissions cap at 248 tons per year at 

Wurtland 2,268

Annual SO2 emissions cap at 281 tons per year at 

Fort Hill 2,228

01SEP2009 Annual SO2 emissions cap at 1,007 tons per year

at Burnside.

9,517

Hunt

NOX 31DEC2010

Must meet heat input capacity of 150 mmBTU/hr 

or greater such that weighted average is no 

greater than 0.044 lbs/mmBTU, applied at 

Lumberton, Sandersville, and Tuscaloosa.

350

SO2 31DEC2007

No burning of fuel greater than 5 wt% sulfur. 

SO2 emissions will not exceed 20ppm or that 

weighted average H2S concentrations will not 

exceed 162 ppm H2S, applied at Lumberton, 

Sandersville, and Tuscaloosa.

939

MGP Ingredients CO 2009 CO reductions by 90% 31
B-2

Corporation Pollutant

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

VOC 2009 VOC reductions by 95% 112

Rhodia Inc SO2

01JUL2007

Annual emission limit of 2.2 lbs/ton. 240

Annual emission limit of 2.5 lbs/ton 396

Must meet SCAQMDR limit (1.7lbs/ton or less) 392

01JUL2009 Annual emission limit of 2.2 lbs/ton. 282

01MAY2012 Baton Rouge #1 -> limit of 1.9 lbs/ton. Baton 

Rouge #2 -> limit of 2.2 lbs/ton 7,920

2008

Houston #8 -> limit of 2.5 lbs/ton within 1 year 

of Date of Entry. Houston #2 -> limit of 1.8 

/lbs/ton within 1 year of Date of Entry

9,686

St. Mary's Cement NOX 30APR2009 Reduce combined NOX emissions by 2,700 tons 

per year.

1,700

Sunoco

NOX

2006

(Marcus 

Hook, PA)

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 4,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 746

31DEC2009

(Toledo, OH)

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 4,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 2,339

31DEC2010

(Philadelphia, 

PA)

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 4,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 3,390

PM

2006

(Marcus 

Hook, PA)

Combined PM emissions reduced by 300 tons per 

year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 34

31DEC2009

(Toledo, OH)

Combined PM emissions reduced by 300 tons per 

year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 391

31DEC2010

(Philadelphia

, PA)

Combined PM emissions reduced by 300 tons per 

year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 591

SO2

2006

(Marcus 

Hook, PA)

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 19,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 3,536

31DEC2009

(Toledo, OH)

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 19,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 9,072

31DEC2010

(Philadelphia

, PA)

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 19,500 tons 

per year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 3,353

Total 

Petrochemicals 

USA

CO 2007 Annual CO emissions cap at 120 tons per year. 386

NOX 31DEC2009 Annual NOX emissions cap at 180 tons per year. 798

SO2 2010 Annual SO2 emissions cap at 800 tons per year. 146
B-3

Corporation Pollutant

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

Valero

NOX

2011

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 1870 tons 

per year. Combined is over facilities: Lima, 

Memphis, and Port Arthur.

4,165

31DEC2011

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 4,000 tons 

per year. Combined over Valero facilities in 

Ardmore OK, Benicia CA, Martinez CA, 

Wilmington CA, Denver CO, St. Charles LA, 

Krotz Spring LA, Paulsboro NJ, Corpus Christi 

TX (east and west), Houston TX, Sunray TX, 

Texas City TX, and Three Rivers TX.

13,742

PM 31DEC2011

Combined PM emissions reduced by 526 tons per 

year. Combined over Valero facilities listed in 

other two lists for NOx and SO2.

3,027

SO2

2011

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 1,810 tons 

per year. Combined is over facilities: Lima, 

Memphis, and Port Arthur.

4,105

31DEC2011

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 16,000 tons 

per year. Combined over Valero facilities in 

Ardmore OK, Benicia CA, Martinez CA, 

Wilmington CA, Denver CO, St. Charles LA, 

Krotz Spring LA, Paulsboro NJ, Corpus Christi 

TX (east and west), Houston TX, Sunray TX, 

Texas City TX, and Three Rivers TX.

19,618
C-1

Appendix C

Gold Mine Mercy Reductions Due to NESHAP:

DATE FOR PROJECTION FACTOR Assume 2014 (rule done end of 2010 and 3 years compliance)

NEI_SITE_ID FIPS

pollco

de

STATE_FACILITY_

ID Facility Name

FACILIT

Y WIDE 

mercury 

emission

s (in 

tons per 

year)* 

FACILITY WIDE 

PROJECTION FACTOR 

computed from the 2016 

emissions. (base year x 

Projection Factor = Future 

Year)

2016 

emissio

ns (in 

tons per 

year) **

NEI1827

0811

9 199

80860CRPPL275

5S

CRIPPLE CREEK & 

VICTOR GOLD 

MINING CO 0.01715 1 0.01715

NEI2NV41111

6

3202

1 199

89406KNNCT55

MIL

KENNECOTT 

RAWHIDE MINING 

CO 0.02 0.215 0.0043

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2007 emissions test data

NEI2NV444.0

1

3202

3 199

89045SMKYV1S

MOK

SMOKY VALLEY 

COMMON 

OPERATION 0.03 0.388333333 0.01165

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2007 emissions test data

NEI2NVT1824

2

3201

1 199 T$18242 RUBY HILL MINE 0.018 0.166666667 0.003

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2007 emissions test data

NEIAK090997

37PGMNX38

0224

0

74399

76

99737PGMNX38

MIL POGO MINE 0.0005 1 0.0005

NEIAKT$1366

0

0209

0 199

99707FRTKN1FO

RA FORT KNOX MINE 0.000065 1

0.00006

5

NEIAKT$1366

5

0211

0 199

99801KNNCT134

01

KENNECOTT 

GREENS CREEK 

MINING 

COMPANY 0.002715 1

0.00271

5

NEIMT15320

3004

3 199

59759GLDNS453

MO

GOLDEN 

SUNLIGHT MINES 

INC. 0.00085 1 0.00085

NEINV320158

9821CRTZG

3201

5 199

89821CRTZGSTA

RA

CORTEZ GOLD 

MINES 0.42575 0.234879624 0.1

NEINVT$1249

8

3201

3 199

89414NWMNT3

5MIL

NEWMONT 

MINING CORP 

TWIN CREEKS 

MINE 0.296 0.506756757 0.15
C-2

Appendix C

Gold Mine Mercy Reductions Due to NESHAP:

DATE FOR PROJECTION FACTOR Assume 2014 (rule done end of 2010 and 3 years compliance)

NEI_SITE_ID FIPS

pollco

de

STATE_FACILITY_

ID Facility Name

FACILIT

Y WIDE 

mercury 

emission

s (in 

tons per 

year)* 

FACILITY WIDE 

PROJECTION FACTOR 

computed from the 2016 

emissions. (base year x 

Projection Factor = Future 

Year)

2016 

emissio

ns (in 

tons per 

year) **

NEINVT$1249

9

3202

7 199

89418FLRDCEXIT

1

STANDARD 

MINING INC 0.08 0.4 0.032

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2008 emissions test data

NEINVT$1250

0

3202

7 199

89419CRRCH180

EX

COEUR 

ROCHESTER INC 0.069 1 0.069

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2007 emissions test data

NEINVT$1250

6

3201

3 199

89438GLMSM3

MILE

GLAMIS 

MARIGOLD MINE 0.1638 0.018315018 0.003

NEINVT$1251

0

3201

3 199

89438NWMNTST

ONE

NEWMONT 

MINING CORP 

LONE TREE MINE 0.311 0.225080386 0.07

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2006 emissions test data

NEINVT$1252

3

3200

7 199

89801JRRTT50MI

L

JERRITT CANYON 

MINE 0.23 0.217391304 0.05

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

for the 2004-05 timeframe and is 

based on the estimate submitted 

to Nevada DEP in response to ICR 

survey sent to the company. 

NEINVT$1252

4

3203

3 199

89803BLDMN70

MIL

BALD MOUNTAIN 

MINE 0.14 0.214285714 0.03

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2008 emissions test data

NEINVT$1252

5

3200

7 199

89803BRRCK27

MIL

BARRICK 

GOLDSTRIKE 

MINES INC 0.35 0.085714286 0.03

Facility wide emissions estimate is 

based on 2007 emissions test data

NEINVT$1252

9

3200

7 199 T$12529

NEWMONT 

MINING CORP 

RAIN AREA MINE 0.0001 1 0.0001

NEINVT$1253

1

3201

1 199

89822NWMNT6

MAIL

NEWMONT 

MINING CORP 

CARLIN SOUTH 

AREA 0.345 0.405797101 0.14

* except for Pogo Mines, the pollutant code used is 199. For Pogo Mines it is 7439976. 

** These are projected emissions estimates post-MACT based on analyses of expected reductions done for the 2010 Proposed MACT rule.
D-1

Appendix D

Mercury Emission Reductions, 

2005-2016 for Particular NonEGU Categories based on

data/approaches developed by SPPD1

ELECTRIC ARC FURNACES (EAFs): Reduction to an emission level of 5 tpy (a 2.3 tpy Hg reduction) by 2016 is 

estimated based on the 2007 MACT rule )(72 FR 74108). The NATA inventory for 2005 shows 7.3 tpy Hg emissions.

For the rule, EPA estimated 5 tpy reductions (from 10 tpy). This is considered a conservative assumption at this time; 

Hg emissions could go to 0 tpy, if mercury switches are removed from the process, or Hg emissions could move 

toward 0 tpy based on vehicle fleet turnover and the increasing use of mercury-free switches. Because the source of 

mercury for EAFs is scrap metal containing mercury switches from an aging vehicle fleet that has been replaced with 

mercury-free technology, there is the potential that there will be very low levels of mercury by 2016, via mandatory 

controls and continuous monitoring as a result of the new MACT rule (an upcoming area source rule that is in the 

planning stage), and through vehicle fleet turnover.

We determined a 35.1% reduction was needed from a starting point of 7.3 tons to get to 5 tons.

However, our starting point inventory was actually lower than the NATA value of 5 tons because the following sources 

were not in the starting modeling inventory or had different emissions than the 2005 NATA due to other controls 

applied that would have contributed to getting to 5 tons in the future

nata_plant scc nata_emis Starting Emissions in projection

Northwestern Steel & Wire Co (shut 

down prior to 2005) 30300908 0.337223

0

Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc. Charlotte 

Stee 30400701 0.0144

Same, but other controls reduce 

this source

Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc. Charlotte 

Stee 30400799 0.0005

Same, but other controls reduce 

this source

Texas Industries Inc. 30300908 0.325819

0.059951 (other controls applied)

Because our pre-MACT emissions were 6.6 tons, to get to a projected value of 5 tons, the percent reduction is 24.4% 

instead of 35.1%,. Therefore our projection resulted in a 2016 value of 4.53 tons instead of 5 tons for this sector. 

However, because the actual emissions for this sector could move towards 0 in the future so the error is much smaller 

than the undcertainty. Note that the reductions for this sector were 2.12 tons.

HAZARDOUS WASTE COMBUSTORS (HWCs): A 0.2 tpy reduction of Hg by 2016 is estimated from the 2005 

MACT rule. The 2005 standards are in effect and all HWCs are required to be in compliance with them. The Hg 

reductions achieved by the 2005 standards were estimated to be 0.2 tpy. This was due in part to "interim standards" 

that were put in place in 2002, which reduced Hg emissions by 12.9 tpy. 

.Note that identifying which HWCs have reductions may not be possible.

We determine that a 6.25% reduction would be needed to achieve a 0.2 ton reduction based on a 2005 category-wide 

sum of 2.3 tons. However, we inadvertently applied a 31.5% reduction and therefore reduced emissions by 0.94 tons 

instead of 0.2 tons. Since the 0.74 extra ton reductions are spread across more than 250 counties, this is not 

expected to impact any one area of the country significantly.

 

1

transmitted by Amy Vasu of SPPD on Sept 7 and Sept 8, 2010 (email to Madeleine Strum)
D-2

One other issue is that it appeared that some HWCs are part of the ISIS model and that they should not be addressed 

both by the ISIS projection and the across-th-board HWC reduction.

Upcoming revised rule. Work to revise the rule (to replace the Hg standards, due to the remand) is at the pre-proposal 

stage, and there is not an estimate of reductions that those future standards may achieve. It is not known if the 

compliance date would be prior to 2016 for the revised rule. 

MERCURY CHLORALKALI PLANTS: Estimated emissions for 2009 are 0.3 tpy; this is a 0.8 T/yr reduction from 

2005 levels. Mercury emissions could remain at 0.3 tpy or go to 0 tpy by 2013-2016 due to facility closure or 

conversion, but is highly uncertain at this time. 

2003 MACT rule. NATA inventory for 2005 shows 1.1 tpy Hg emissions, however, this is inconsistent with the 2005 

NATA version we used because which sums to 3.1 tons. Estimates of mercury emissions under this rule are 0.3 tpy in 

2009 through 2012. Four facilities remain in operation (Augusta, GA; Charleston, TN; New Martinsville, WV; and, 

Ashtabula, OH). It is estimated that emissions could go to 0 tpy as early as 2013 

ASHTA (Ashtabula, OH facility; Ashtabula County)

OLIN - GA (Augusta, GA facility; Richmond County)

OLIN - TN (Charleston, TN facility; Bradley County)

PPG (New Martinsville, WV facility; Wetzel County)

In order to generate a Mercury Chloralkali estimate consistent with the above, we had to remove Hg from the sources 

identified as Mercury chloralkali plants based on their MACT code of 1403. These are shown below; and the sum is 

1.4 tons.

In addition, we applied facility specific reductions to the following 4 facilities 

ASHTA (Ashtabula, OH facility; Ashtabula County)

OLIN - GA (Augusta, GA facility; Richmond County)

OLIN - TN (Charleston, TN facility; Bradley County)

PPG (New Martinsville, WV facility; Wetzel County)

Such that the resultant emissions would match data provided by rule developers.

Specifically:

NEIOHT$5933 is for ASHTA (Ashtabula, OH facility; Ashtabula County) 2005 Hg is 0.4065 tons (813 lbs)

FIPS=39007, PLANTID= 44004LCPCH3509M, POLL = 7439976 (2 records for this facility)

Final emissions in Amy’s table (2008) is 62 pounds. Therefore, percent reduction is 92.4%

Actual final emissions from projection is 61.788 for ashta

NEIGAT$3892 is for OLIN - GA (Augusta, GA facility; Richmond County) 2005 Hg is 0.412 tons (824 lbs)

FIPS= 13245 PLANTID= 30913LNGST2402L, POLL = 7439976 (2 records for this facility)

Final emissions in Amy’s table (2008) is 95 pounds Therefore, percent reduction is 88.5%

Actual final emissions from projection is 94.76 pounds

NEI10894 is for OLIN - TN (Charleston, TN facility; Bradley County) 2005 Hg is 0.7675 tons (1535 lbs)

FIPS = 47011 PLANTID = ???? check leading zeroes 14??? POLL = 7439976 (2 records for this facility) Final 

emissions in Amy’s table (2008) is 327 pounds. Therefore % reduction is 78.7%

Actual final emissions from projection is 326.955 pounds

NEI42444 PPG (New Martinsville, WV facility; Wetzel County this is in Marshall county not Wetzel county Boiler 

MACT database also has it as Marshall county) 2005 Hg is 0.127 tons (254 lbs)
D-3

FIPS = 54051 PLANTID = 5405100002 check leading zeroes POLL = 199 (2 records for this facility)

Final emissions in Amy’s table is 150 pounds per the settlement Decree Amy indicated that limits their emissions to 

that level. Therefore % reduction is 40.9%

Actual final emissions from projection is 150 pounds

Overall reduction for the above plants is 1.396249 tons in addition, 1.4 tons were zeroed out so the total reduction is 

2.8 tons.

Plants to shut down 

nata_uniq fips plantid scc poll

nata_emis 

Hg (tons)

nei_emis 

Hg (tons) emis_diff nata_plant

nata_mact

code

NEIAL0330002 1033 2 30100802 199 0.27 0.27 0

Occidental 

Chemical 

Corporation 1403

NEI26211 10003 1000300030 30100899 7439976 0.002387 0.002387 0

OCCIDENTAL 

CHEMICAL 

CORPORATION 1403

NEI26211 10003 1000300030 30100899 7439976 5.40E-05 5.40E-05 0

OCCIDENTAL 

CHEMICAL 

CORPORATION 1403

NEI26211 10003 1000300030 30100802 7439976 0.1263 0.1263 0

OCCIDENTAL 

CHEMICAL 

CORPORATION 1403

NEI26211 10003 1000300030 30100899 7439976 0.000254 0.000254 0

OCCIDENTAL 

CHEMICAL 

CORPORATION 1403

NEI6076 22019 5200004 30100802 7439976 0.0795 0.0795 0

PPG INDUSTRIES 

INC/LAKE 

CHARLES 

COMPLEX 1403

NEI6076 22019 5200004 30100802 7439976 0.0005 0.0005 0 , five 1403

NEI6076 22019 5200004 30100802 7439976 0.5225 0.5225 0

PPG INDUSTRIES 

INC/LAKE 

CHARLES 

COMPLEX 1403

NEI6076 22019 5200004 30100802 7439976 0.0005 0.0005 0

PPG INDUSTRIES 

INC/LAKE 

CHARLES 

COMPLEX 1403

NEI6076 22019 5200004 30100802 7439976 0.0005 0.0005 0

PPG INDUSTRIES 

INC/LAKE 

CHARLES 

COMPLEX 1403

NEILAT$10650 22047 70776STFFRRIVER 39999999 7439976 0.36525 0.36525 0

PIONEER 

AMERICAS 

LLC/CHLOR-ALKALI 

PLANT 1403

NEILAT$10650 22047 70776STFFRRIVER 39999999 7439976 0.024 0.024 0

PIONEER 

AMERICAS 

LLC/CHLOR-ALKALI 

PLANT 1403

NEI42973 55141 772010470 30100802 7439976 0.00465 0.00465 0

ERCO 

WORLDWIDE 

(USA) 1403

NEI42973 55141 772010470 30100802 7439976 0.003 0.003 0

ERCO 

WORLDWIDE 

(USA) 1403

Pulp and Paper: A Hg emission reduction of 0.7 tpy is estimated as a result of replacement of a smelter at G-P Big 

Island (Beford County, VA) with a recovery furnace. This results in 0.4 tpy Hg emissions for Pulp and Paper. 

REDUCTION = 0.728172
D-4

Implementation: Zero out Hg emissions from the following unit 

nata_uniq fips plantid pointid stackid segment scc poll nata_emis nata_plant nata_mact

NEI42211 51019 00003 10 10 3 30700399 199 0.728172

GP Big 

Island LLC 1626-2

Upcoming rules, not yet proposed. Possible future Hg controls (should EPA regulations dictate Hg controls - which 

remains to be seen) are activated carbon injection or more likely a wet scrubber applied to recovery furnaces. If we 

assume a 99% Hg reduction associated with these controls, then the recovery furnace Hg emissions from the NEI 

(totaling 0.177 tpy for DCE + NDCE) would be reduced by 0.175 tpy.

Thus, the best-case Hg reduction estimated for the P&P industry is rounded to 0.18 tpy based on current NEI data 

(corrected for a shut-down smelter) and a 99% reduction of Hg emissions from recovery furnaces. These possible 

future Hg controls are not currently accounted for in the projections done for nonEGU.
E-1

Appendix E

Ptnonipm (Non EGU) Plant Closures Included in the 2016 Base Case and the Resulting Emissions Changes 

Due to the Closures (impacts on emissions from these closures are provided in the main document).

fips plantid pointid stackid segment plant effective_date

1073 10730360 U.S. Pipe N. Birmingham , Walter Coke, I 7/31/2010

1073 35207NTDST30003

U. S. PIPE & FOUNDRY COMPANY LLC.(NO. 

B' 12/11/2009

1073 10730350

SLOSSINDUSTRIESCORPORATIONMINERALW 12/11/2009

1073 35207SLSSN35003

SLOSSINDUSTRIESCORPORATIONMINERALW 12/11/2009

1073 10730068 W.J. Bullock 10/31/2009

1073 35224WJBLL1501E W.J. Bullock 10/31/2009

12105 1050059 MOSAICFERTILIZERLLCNEWWALESPLANT 12/31/2008

12105 33860MCFRTHIGHW MOSAICFERTILIZERLLCNEWWALESPLANT 12/31/2008

12105 T$15385 MOSAICFERTILIZERLLCNEWWALESPLANT 12/31/2008

13051 5100008 TronoxPigments(Savannah)Inc 12/31/2006

13051 31404KMRWCEASTP TronoxPigments(Savannah)Inc 12/31/2006

17031 031012ABI CornProductsInternationalInc 6/30/2010

18167 22 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO. 12/31/2007

19111 56-02-004

INTERNATIONALPAPERCORPFORTMADISON 8/31/2005

19111 52632THHBNONPR 2 ROQUETTEAMERICA,INC 3/1/2008

19111 56-01-009 242710 ROQUETTEAMERICA,INC 3/1/2008

19111 56-01-009 242802 ROQUETTEAMERICA,INC 3/1/2008

19111 56-01-009 242828 ROQUETTEAMERICA,INC 3/1/2008

22067 1 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/LOUISIANAMILL 11/30/2008

22067 19200001 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/LOUISIANAMILL 11/30/2008

22067 7122ONTRNT705CO INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/LOUISIANAMILL 11/30/2008

22079 1 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/PINEVILLEMILL 5/30/2010

22079 23600001 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/PINEVILLEMILL 5/30/2010

22079 T$10715 INTERNATIONALPAPERCO/PINEVILLEMILL 5/30/2010

23007 2300700007 WAUSAUPAPEROTISMILL 5/31/2009

23019 1900056 KATAHDINPAPERCO-WESTMILL 8/31/2008

23019 2301900056 KATAHDINPAPERCO-WESTMILL 8/31/2008

25003 01238KMBRLGREYL SCHWEITZERMAUDUITINTERNATIONALINC. 5/31/2008

25003 1170016 SCHWEITZERMAUDUITINTERNATIONALINC. 5/31/2008

25003 1170014 MWCUSTOMPAPERS,LLC-LAURELMILL 7/31/2007

25003 T$14390 MWCUSTOMPAPERS,LLC-LAURELMILL 7/31/2007

25017 01760NTCKP90NMA NATICKPAPERBOARD 11/30/2005

25017 1190241 NATICKPAPERBOARD 11/30/2005

26121 A4203 SDWARRENMUSKEGONMIOPERATIONS 8/31/2009
E-2

fips plantid pointid stackid segment plant effective_date

26121 T$7810 SDWARRENMUSKEGONMIOPERATIONS 8/31/2009

33007 03570JMSRV650MA FRASERNHLLC 4/30/2008

33007 3300700001 FRASERNHLLC 4/30/2008

36083 4382800006 BENNINGTONPAPERBOARDCO 4/30/2009

37119 583 CaraustarMillGroup,Inc. 3/31/2009

39153 1677010193 B101 GOODYEARTIRE&RUBBERCO. 12/31/2007

39153 1677010193 B102 GOODYEARTIRE&RUBBERCO. 12/31/2007

39153 1677010193 B103 GOODYEARTIRE&RUBBERCO. 12/31/2007

39153 T$6196 1 GOODYEARTIRE&RUBBERCO. 12/31/2007

47063 197 LIBERTYFIBERSCORPORATION 7/31/2010

47063 37778LNZNGTENNE LIBERTYFIBERSCORPORATION 7/31/2010

47063 T$4972 LIBERTYFIBERSCORPORATION 7/31/2010

48141 5 ELPASOPLANT 6/1/2010

48141 1 ELPASOPLANT 6/1/2010

55075 438039360 STORAENSONORTHAMERICANIAGARAMILL 12/31/2008

55075 54151NGRFW1101M STORAENSONORTHAMERICANIAGARAMILL 12/31/2008

55075 T$8508 STORAENSONORTHAMERICANIAGARAMILL 12/31/2008

55141 772010580 DOMTARA.W.CORP.-PORTEDWARDS 6/30/2008

55141 772010580 DOMTARA.W.CORP.-PORTEDWARDS 6/30/2008

55141 T$8586 DOMTARA.W.CORP.-PORTEDWARDS 6/30/2008
F-iii

APPENDIX F

Approach to Apply RICE reductions to 

project 2005 Emissions in the 2005v4.1 

modeling Platform: 2004 and 2010 rules

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................... v

1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................6

2 Source Coverage .....................................................................................................................8

3 Spark Ignition (SI) Engines .................................................................................................11

3.1 Four Stroke Rich Burn Engines (4SRB) ..................................................................................................... 13

3.2 Two Stroke Lean Burn Engines (2SLB)...................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Four Stroke Lean Burn Engines (4SLB)..................................................................................................... 14

4 Compression Ignition (CI) Engines.....................................................................................15

5 Approach For Addressing Already-Controlled Sources......................................................16

6 Percent Reduction Calculations to be applied to NEI.........................................................16

6.1 SI Engines....................................................................................................................................................... 16

6.2 CI Engines...................................................................................................................................................... 18
F-iv

7 Percent Reduction Calculations to be applied to NEI accounting for only the 2004 RICE rule

19

7.1 SI Engines....................................................................................................................................................... 19

7.2 CI Engines...................................................................................................................................................... 20

8 Results....................................................................................................................................20
F-v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1. Summary of Existing Source RICE Reductions Reflected in the Projection Methodology............6

Table 2-1. SCCs representing the point source and non-point source universe of RICE .................................9

Table 3-1. Distribution of NOX by engine and HP type for major and area sources .....................................12

Table 3-2. Distribution of CO by engine and HP type for major and area sources.........................................12

Table 3-3. Distribution of VOC by engine and HP type for major and area sources......................................12

Table 4-1. Distribution of CO, PM and VOC emissions from Compression Ignition Engines by Engine and 

HP type for major and area sources..................................................................................................................15

Table 6-1. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to SI SCCs for Projection Years of 2014 

and Beyond.......................................................................................................................................................16

Table 6-2. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to Compression Ignition (CI) SCCs for 

Projection Years of 2014 and later...................................................................................................................18

Table 7-1. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to SI SCCs for the 2012 projection.......19

Table 8-1. Summary of Percent Reductions and Emissions reduced from the 2005 Platform resulting from 

all 3 RICE rules (Future years 2014 and later).................................................................................................21

Table 8-2. Summary of Percent Reductions and Emissions reduced from the 2005 Platform resulting from 

the 2004 RICE NESHAP..................................................................................................................................21

Table 9-1. SO2 emissions and reductions resulting from ultra low sulfur fuel requirement (compliance date 

May 2013) for CI engines greater or equal to 300 HP. ....................................................................................24
F-6

1 Introduction

There are three rulemakings for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. These rules reduce hazardous air 

pollutant (HAPs) from existing and new stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines 

(RICE). In order to meet the standards, existing sources with certain types of engines will need 

to install controls. In addition to reducing HAPs, these controls also reduce criteria air pollutants 

(CAPs). 

This document presents a methodology for incorporating the CAP reductions from the three 

RICE NESHAP in the future year projection of the 2005 v4.1 modeling platform. The 

methodology addresses the following future years: 2012, and 2014 and beyond. In 2014 and 

beyond, all 3 rules’ compliance dates have passed; thus all 3 rules are included in the emissions 

projection. In 2012 only the earliest rule’s compliance date has passed so only one rule is 

included. 

The rules can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html and are listed below:

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines; Final Rule (69 FR 33473) published 06/15/04

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal

Combustion Engines; Final Rule (FR 9648 ) published 03/03/10

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines; Final Rule (75 FR 51570) published 08/20/2010

The difference among these three rules is that they focus on different types of engines, different 

facility types (major for HAPs, versus area for HAPs) and different engine sizes based on 

horsepower (HP). In addition, the they have different compliance dates. We project CAPs from 

the 2005 NEI RICE sources, based on the requirements of the rule for existing sources,. We 

consider only existing sources, since the inventory includes only existing sources and the current 

projection approach does not estimate emissions from new sources. As indicated earlier, for the 

2012 projections, only the requirements associated with the June 15, 2007 compliance date are 

incorporated. All of the Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference. requirements are 

incorporated in projections for 2014 and beyond.

Table 1-1summarizes the rule information that was used for the emissions projection. As 

indicated earlier, for the 2012 projections, only the requirements associated with the June 15, 

2007 compliance date are incorporated. All of the Error! Not a valid bookmark selfreference. requirements are incorporated in projections for 2014 and beyond.

Table 1-1. Summary of Existing Source RICE Reductions Reflected in the Projection 

Methodology
F-7

Engine 

Type

Control and 

Pollutant 

Reductions

Horse Power 

Range 

Affected 

(Existing 

Sources 

Only)

Publication 

Date of the 

RICE 

NESHAP 

Compliance 

Date

Reductions for 

Existing 

Sources, Rule 

Documentation 

(tons)**

Spark 

Ignition: 

Four stroke 

rich burn 

(SI: 4SRB)

Nonselective 

catalytic 

reduction

97% NOX, 

49% CO *

76% VOC

Nonemergency, 

Major, HP > 

500

06/15/04 June 15, 

2007

CO: 98,040 

NOX: 69,862 

VOC:1461***

SI: 4SRB Same as 

above

Nonemergency, 

Area, HP 

>500

08/20/10 October 19, 

2013

NOX: 96,479

CO: 109,321

SI: Four VOC: 30,907

stroke lean 

burn (4SLB)

Oxidation 

Catalyst

94% CO, 

71% VOC

Nonemergency

Major, 100-

500 HP, Area 

> 500 HP

08/20/10 October 19, 

2013

Compression 

Ignition (CI)

Oxidation 

Catalyst

70% CO and 

VOC 

30% PM2.5 

Nonemergency

Major and 

Area, HP 

>300

03/03/10 May 3, 2013 CO: 14,342

VOC: 27,395

PM: 2,844

*% CO used in 6/2004 rule was 90%

**Total Reductions across these rules: NOX (tons)= 166,379; CO (tons) 

= 221,703; VOC (tons) = 58,402; and PM (tons) = 2,844.

*** VOC reductions weren't estimated for the 2004 rule. Used 2010 

approach: estimated the VOC emissions as a function of the HAP 

emissions by dividing HAP by 0.1944 to get the VOC emissions. 

Based on analyses done in support of the rules, the RICE NESHAP published 06/15/04 estimated

69,862 tons of NOX would be reduced, and the RICE NESHAP published 08/20/10 estimates 

96,479 tons NOX to be reduced. Total NOX to be reduced from existing sources for the two 

rules is therefore 166,379 tons. The sum of reductions for all rules for CO is 221,703; for VOC 

is 58,402 and for PM is 2,844.

Our projection approaches generally try to maintain the percent reductions for a category rather 

than match the absolute mass of the reductions. This is because the inventories used to estimate 

reductions from the rules are often inconsistent with the inventories that we use for modeling. 
F-8

The rule-specific inventories generally come from industry survey data, and the NEI comes from 

state-reported data. So, rather than attempting to remove the tonnages listed in above, we used a 

percent reduction approach.

The percent reduction approach is to determine and apply the appropriate percent reductions to 

RICE sources in the modeling platform. RICE emissions are identified based on the source 

classification codes (SCCs) in the modeling inventory. As explained earlier, because the 

modeling inventory was not used as the basis for determining the air impacts of the rule, the 

tonnage reductions achieved by applying percent reductions associated with the RICE 

requirements to the platform are not expected to provide exactly the values cited above. 

The percentage reduction to be applied is determined as a function of the efficiency of the 

control device, and the fraction of emissions in the SCC estimated to be impacted by the rule 

requirements. The remainder of this document presents the data and equations used to estimate 

the overall percent reductions to apply to each SCC. Section 2 discusses the source coverage as 

a function of the inventory SCCs. Sections 3 and 4 present the data used to determine the 

percentage of emissions from these SCCs to apply the control device efficiencies. Section 5 

discusses the approach for addressing the already controlled engines, and Section 6 provides the 

equations for percent reduction, and summarizes the values of the parameters used to compute 

the percent reduction by pollutant and by engine type for years past 2014; Section 7 provides this 

information for the 2012 projection year which includes reductions only from the rule published 

in 2004. Section 8 provides a summary of the results.

2 Source Coverage 

The engine types affected by the NESHAP are Spark Ignition (SI) and Compression Ignition 

(CI). Spark Ignition engines can be classified as Four Stroke Rich Burn Engines (4SRB), Two 

Stroke Lean Burn Engines (2SLB) and Four Stroke Lean Burn Engines (4SLB). Because the 

requirements of the rules differ between SI engine types, we must be able to distinguish among 

these types in the inventory.

The inventory source classification codes (SCCs) that represent SI and CI engines in the NEI are 

shown in Table 2-1, along with emissions (50-state sums) from the 2005 modeling platform 

(case=2005cr). The SI SCCS are assigned to one of five “reduction” categories depending upon 

the specificity of the type of SIC engine. These are: 4SRB, 4SLB, 2SLB and “SI, generic”, 

“boiler + engine” and “RICE + turbine.” Note that all of the gasoline engines are considered to 

be 100% 4SRB. A method and data to apportion the fraction of emissions from the non-specific 

engine type categories of “SI, generic”, “boiler+engine” and “RICE+turbine” to 4SRB and 

4SLB engine types is presented in the next section. The CI SCCs only need to be apportioned 

to non-emergency engines, and not by any specific CI engine type, therefore the “Category for 

Application of Reduction” is CI.

There are also SCCs in the inventory for oil and gas operations that include emissions from the 

use of RICE. We denote these as “oil&gas” in Table 2-1. We do not have any data to apportion 

the amount of emissions from SI nor CI RICE from these SCCs. Focusing on NOX reductions, 

we can determine the amount of NOX reductions needed from the oil&gas SCCs in order to 
F-9

bring the total NOX to equal the estimates provided in the rule. The total NOX reductions from 

the non oil&gas SCCs sum to 80,597 tons and the total NOX reductions estimated by the two 

rules is 166,379 tons. If the remaining NOX from oil&gas SCCs were to make up this 

difference, 26% of the total oil&gas NOX would need to be reduced. Since this fraction turns 

out higher than the fraction of reduction to be applied to “SI, generic” SCCs, and it is expected 

that oil&gas SCCs would have more NOX emitting operations than the “SI,generic” SCCs, we 

have chosen to apply the “SI, generic” SCC fraction to the oil&gas SCCS. Because it is likely 

that the vast majority of oil&gas VOC is from operations other than RICE, we will not compute 

any VOC reduction from oil&gas SCCs. We will use the same fraction as “SI,generic” for CO.

Table 2-1. SCCs representing the point source and non-point source universe of RICE 

SCC Description

Engine 

Type

Category for 

Application of 

Reduction NOX 2005

(tons)

CO 

2005 (tons) 

VOC 2005

(tons)

PM2.5 

2005 (tons)

20100102

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate 

Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating

CI CI

 17,662 3,792 1,294 645 

20100105

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate 

Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: Crankcase Blowby

CI CI

 87 22 10 9 

20100107

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate 

Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: Exhaust

CI CI

 221 79 9 10 

20100202

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 7,490 3,675 909 115 

20100207

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating: Exhaust

SI SI, generic

 1 0 0 0 

20200102

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating

CI CI

 11,785 3,323 908 772 

20200104

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Cogeneration

CI CI

 494 128 18 31 

20200107

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Exhaust

CI CI

 254 74 15 7 

20200202

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 215,888 74,610 16,560 2,339 

20200204

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating: Cogeneration

SI SI, generic

 704 413 110 14 

20200207

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating: Exhaust

SI SI, generic

 15 50 1 0 

20200252 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural Gas;2-cycle 

Lean Burn

SI 2SLB

 153,857 27,103 9,089 2,216 

20200253

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural Gas;4-cycle 

Rich Burn

SI 4SRB

 66,871 53,724 5,337 512 

20200254 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural Gas;4-cycle 

Lean Burn

SI 4SLB

 47,932 20,287 5,333 385 

20200255 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural Gas;2-cycle 

Clean Burn

SI 2SLB

 591 288 70 22 

20200256 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Natural Gas;4-cycle 

Clean Burn

SI 4SLB

 1,719 1,924 365 29 

20200301

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Industrial;Gasoline;Reciprocating

SI 4SRB

 660 1,966 110 26 

20200307

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Industrial;Gasoline;Reciprocating: Exhaust

SI 4SRB

 56 54 9 3 

20201001 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Liquified Petroleum 

Gas (LPG);Propane: Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 101 130 52 9 

20201002 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Liquified Petroleum 

Gas (LPG);Butane: Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 13 22 0 0 

20201702

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Industrial;Gasoline;Reciprocating Engine

SI 4SRB

 3 31 9 0 

20201707

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Industrial;Gasoline;Reciprocating: Exhaust

SI 4SRB

 0 4 0 0 

20300101

Internal Combustion

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating

CI CI

 4,476 1,512 455 330 

20300105

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

CI CI

 0 0 0 0 
F-10

SCC Description

Engine 

Type

Category for 

Application of 

Reduction NOX 2005

(tons)

CO 

2005 (tons) 

VOC 2005

(tons)

PM2.5 

2005 (tons)

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Crankcase Blowby

20300107

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Exhaust

CI CI

 9 1 0 6 

20300201

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Natural Gas;Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 17,532 6,165 1,883 113 

20300204

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Natural Gas;Cogeneration

SI generic

 170 200 22 4 

20300207

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Natural 

Gas;Reciprocating: Exhaust

SI SI, generic

 17 2 1 0 

20300301

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Gasoline;Reciprocating

SI 4SRB

 348 4,250 245 80 

20300307

Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Gasoline;Reciprocating: 

Exhaust

SI 4SRB

 4 21 3 - 

20301001 Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Liquified Petroleum Gas 

(LPG);Propane: Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 61 28 12 2 

20301002 Internal Combustion 

Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Liquified Petroleum Gas 

(LPG);Butane: Reciprocating

SI SI, generic

 0 0 0 - 

20400401 Internal Combustion Engines;Engine Testing;Reciprocating 

Engine;Gasoline

SI 4SRB

 647 11,538 738 44 

20400402

Internal Combustion Engines;Engine Testing;Reciprocating 

Engine;Diesel/Kerosene

CI CI

 3,935 968 235 163 

20400403

Internal Combustion Engines;Engine Testing;Reciprocating 

Engine;Distillate Oil

CI CI

 2 1 0 0 

31000203

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production;Natural Gas 

Production;Compressors

SI SI, generic

 29,605 10,849 2,333 272 

50100421

Waste Disposal;Solid Waste Disposal - Government;Landfill 

Dump;Waste Gas Recovery: Internal Combustion Device

SI SI, generic

 914 1,220 103 53 

2101004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Distillate 

Oil;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

CI Boiler+engine

 258 60 4 1 

2101004002

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Distillate 

Oil;All IC Engine Types

CI CI

 2,218 462 112 9 

2101006000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Natural 

Gas;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

SI Boiler+engine

 2,413 4,500 1,294 8 

2101006002

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Natural 

Gas;All IC Engine Types

SI RICE+turbine

 6,089 1,347 52 148 

2102004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Industrial;Distillate 

Oil;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

CI Boiler+engine

 89,906 20,956 3,223 6,494 

2102006000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Industrial;Natural 

Gas;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

SI Boiler+engine

 150,642 99,171 6,733 775 

2102006002

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Industrial;Natural 

Gas;All IC Engine Types

SI RICE+turbine

 14,845 5,791 1,543 9 

2103004000

Stationary Source Fuel 

Combustion;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil;Total:

Boilers and IC Engines

CI Boiler+engine

 43,266 10,520 1,340 6,461 

2103006000

Stationary Source Fuel 

Combustion;Commercial/Institutional;Natural Gas;Total: 

Boilers and IC Engines

SI Boiler+engine

 138,027 95,914 8,684 933 

2199004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Total Area Source Fuel 

Combustion;Distillate Oil;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

CI Boiler+engine

 199 210 12 15 

2199004002

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Total Area Source Fuel 

Combustion;Distillate Oil;All IC Engine Types

CI RICE+turbine

 11,327 5,227 1,158 797 

2199006000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Total Area Source Fuel 

Combustion;Natural Gas;Total: Boilers and IC Engines

SI Boiler+engine

 2,592 600 124 166 

2310020600

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Exploration and 

Production;Natural Gas;Compressor Engines

SI SI, generic

 48,393 29,980 5,300 - 

2310000000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All 

Processes;Total: All Processes

oil&gas

 14,456 2,654 26,308 - 

2310000220 Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Exploration and oil&gas 85,302 26,575 5,579 2,945 
F-11

SCC Description

Engine 

Type

Category for 

Application of 

Reduction NOX 2005

(tons)

CO 

2005 (tons) 

VOC 2005

(tons)

PM2.5 

2005 (tons)

Production;All Processes;Drill Rigs

2310000440

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Exploration and 

Production;All Processes;Saltwater Disposal Engines

oil&gas

 121 17 7 - 

2310001000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All

Processes : On-shore;Total: All Processes

oil&gas

 193,183 226,478 286,654 - 

2310002000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All 

Processes : Off-shore;Total: All Processes

oil&gas

 1,859 - 310 - 

2310020000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;Natural 

Gas;Total: All Processes

oil&gas

 7,253 3,114 17,584 101 

2310023000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Exploration and 

Production;Natural Gas;Cbm Gas Well - Dewatering Pump 

Engines

oil&gas

 4,104 - - - 

3 Spark Ignition (SI) Engines

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3 provides the distribution of emissions by source type (major 

versus area), engine type and HP range for NOX, CO and VOC, respectively. The data are from 

the rule analyses and were provided by Melanie King, EPA, Sector Policies and Programs 

Division. These tables provide the information needed to apportion the emissions from generic 

reciprocating engine SI SCCs in Table 2-1 to the particular engine type requiring controls. For 

example, the proportion of NOX emissions from major 4SRB Non-emergency engines from all 

major reciprocating engines is 91,657/278,460 = 33%. The emissions in these tables are also 

broken out by HP; thus they also provide the data needed to apportion the emissions to the HP 

range requiring the controls. Furthermore, we have used them to create a ratio of major to area 

emissions for SI engines. We had previously used the NEI’s SRCTYPE data field which 

indicates the facility’s status- major vs area- with respect to HAPs (based on the major/area 

definitions in Section 112 of the Clean Air Act). This approach, which used for the 

2016cr1_hg_05 case and related source apportionment case (both of these were used for the 

Boiler MACT Regulatory Impact Assessment, and no other modeling) resulted in major/area 

splits heavily weighted to major sources: 77%/23%, 81%/19% and 75%/25% for 4SRB for 

NOX, CO and VOC, respectively and 91%/9% for both CO and VOC for 4 SLB. However, we 

have chosen to update this as we have more confidence in the major/area breakout done for the 

rule analysis than the value reported in the inventory for which we have discovered errors in the 

SCRTYPE value or found it missing. Using the data Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3, we 

determine that 27% of the emissions are from major sources and 73% are from area sources. 

This is approximately the same for all pollutants, and we also use it for all SI engine types.

The below subjections provide the apportionment factors for both engine type and HP ranges for 

the SI engines.
F-12

Table 3-1. Distribution of NOX by engine and HP type for major and area sources

Baseline NOX emissions from major and area sources (with 20% 4SRB have NSCR), SI engines

HP Range

Total NOx 

Emissions-major 

sources

2SLB Nonemergencymajor sources4SLB Nonemergencymajor sources

4SRB Nonemergencymajor 

sources

Emerg

encymajor 

sourc

es

Landfill/ 

Digester Gas 

Nonemergencymajor 

sources

Total NOx 

Emissionsarea 

sources

2SLBarea 

sources

4SLBarea 

sources

4SRBarea 

sources

Emerge

ncyarea 

sources

Landfill/ 

Digester 

Gas- area 

sources

25-50 41,751 12,806 15,054 13,853 38 0 68,566 21,031 24,722 22,750 63 0

50-100 22,363 6,859 8,063 7,420 21 0 58,985 18,092 21,268 19,571 54 0

100-175 64,914 19,911 23,405 21,538 60 0 133,065 40,815 47,978 44,150 123 0

175-300 24,168 7,413 8,714 8,019 22 0 82,359 25,261 29,695 27,326 76 0

300-500 25,106 7,700 9,052 8,330 23 0 99,679 30,574 35,940 33,073 92 0

500-600 19,426 5,825 6,847 6,301 18 436 69,094 19,760 23,228 21,375 59 4,671

600-750 4,097 1,228 1,444 1,329 4 92 14,438 4,328 5,087 4,682 13 327

>750 76,635 22,971 27,002 24,848 71 1744 227,890 68,313 80,303 73,896 210 5,169

Total 278,460 84,713 99,581 91,637 256 2,272 754,077 228,175 268,222 246,822 690 10,167

Table 3-2. Distribution of CO by engine and HP type for major and area sources

Baseline CO emissions from major and area sources (with 20% 4SRB have NSCR), SI engines

HP 

Range

Total CO 

Emissionsmajor 

sources

2SLB 

Nonemergenc

y-major 

sources

4SLB 

Nonemergen

cymajor 

sources

4SRB 

Nonemergenc

y-major 

sources

Emer

gency

-

majo

r 

sourc

es

Landfill/ 

Digester 

Gas 

Nonemergen

cymajor 

sources

Total 

CO 

Emissio

ns- area 

sources

2SLBarea 

source

s

4SLBarea 

source

s

4SRBarea 

sources

Eme

rgen

cyarea 

sour

ces

Landfill/ 

Digester 

Gas- area 

sources

25-50 28,798 3,247 5,131 20,368 51 46,898 5,333 8,031 33,450 83

50-100 15,425 1,739 2,748 10,910 27 40,344 4,588 6,909 28,776 71

100-175 44,774 5,049 7,978 31,668 79 91,013 10,350 15,586 64,917 161

175-300 16,670 1,880 2,970 11,791 29 56,331 6,406 9,646 40,179 100

300-500 17,316 1,953 3,086 12,248 30 68,178 7,753 11,675 48,629 121

500-600 13,402 1,477 2,334 9,264 23 303 47,273 5,011 7,546 31,429 78 3,209

600-750 2,826 312 492 1,954 5 64 9,876 1,097 1,653 6,884 17 225

>750 52,851 5,825 9,204 36,535 93 1,194 155,890 17,323 26,086 108,654 275 3,551

Total 192,062 21,482 33,944 134,738 337 1,561 515,803 57,862 87,132 362,918 906 6,985

Table 3-3. Distribution of VOC by engine and HP type for major and area sources

Baseline VOC emissions from major and area sources (with 20% 4SRB have NSCR), SI engines
F-13

HP 

Range

Total 

VOC 

Emissi

ons -

major 

sources

2SLB 

Nonemerge

ncy -

major 

sources

4SLB 

Nonemergenc

y -major 

sources

4SRB 

Nonemergen

cy -

major 

sources

Emerge

ncy -

major 

sources

Landfill/ 

Digester 

Gas 

Nonemergen

cy -

major 

sources

Total 

VOC 

Emissio

ns - area 

sources

2SLB 

Nonemergenc

y- area 

sources

4SLB 

Nonemergenc

y - area 

sources

4SRB 

Nonemergenc

y - area 

sources

Emerge

ncy -

area 

sources

Landfill/ 

Digester 

Gas 

Nonemergen

cy - area 

sources

25-50 5,696 939 3,513 1,240 3.3 9,354 1,543 5,770 2,036 5.4

50-100 3,051 503 1,882 664 1.8 8,047 1,327 4,964 1,751 4.6

100-175 8,855 1,460 5,463 1,927 5.1 18,153 2,994 11,198 3,951 10.4

175-300 3,297 544 2,034 718 1.9 11,235 1,853 6,931 2,445 6.5

300-500 3,425 565 2,113 745 2.0 13,598 2,242 8,388 2,960 7.8

500-600 2,650 427 1,598 564 1.5 59 9,415 1,449 5,421 1,913 5.0 627

600-750 559 90 337 119 0.3 12 1,969 317 1,187 419 1.1 44

>750 10,450 1,685 6,302 2,224 6.0 233 31,076 5,010 18,742 6,613 17.8 693

Total 37,982 6,213 23,241 8,200 22 305 102,846 16,736 62,600 22,088 58.7 1,364

Note that this table accounts for changes to VOC baseline values made on August 16, 2010

3.1 Four Stroke Rich Burn Engines (4SRB)

For 4SRB, non-selective catalytic reduction (NSCR) is expected to be required to meet the 

formaldehyde limit. In addition to reducing NOX, NSCR reduces CO and VOC. The control 

device efficiency for NOX, CO and VOC, denoted Rpoll is based on the average value in Table 4 

of the memo “CO Removal Efficiency as a Surrogate for HAP Removal Efficiency”. For 4SRB, 

RNOX = 97%, RCO = 49%; and RVOC = 76%

As discussed earlier, the point source inventory source classification codes (SCCs) that represent 

or could include these engines in the NEI are shown in Table 2-1. To determine the fraction of 

4SRB in the “SI, generic” SCCs, we compute the percent of NOX, CO and VOC emissions from 

rich burn engines from “baseline estimates” (considering existing controls --- 20% 4SRB have 

NSCR) of NOX, CO and VOC from 4SRB. We denote this fraction as F4SRB, poll. Using the total 

NOX emissions from all SI RICE and 4SRB in Table 3-1, the proportion of NOX from 4SRB 

from major source SI engines is computed as 91,637/278,460 = 33% and the proportion of 

NOX from 4SRB from area source SI engines is computed as 246,822/754,077 = 33%. Thus, 

F4SRB, NOX = 0.33. Using Table 3-2, F4SRB, CO = 0.7 (same for both major and area sources) and 

using Table 3-3, F4SRB, VOC = 0.216 (same for both major and area sources). As discussed 

previously, we use the same F4SRB for oil&gas SCCs other than for VOC, for which we use 

F4SRB, VOC = 0

To apportion the “engine+boiler” SCCs to 4SRB, we use the inventory estimates of boiler and 

engine emissions stationary RICE, to apportion to “SI, generic” and then use the factors 

discussed above to apportion to 4SRB. Using the 2005 emission estimates for SCCs associated 

with natural gas boilers, natural gas RICE and turbine RICE, we compute that 63% of the NOX 

are from natural gas RICE, 54% of the CO are from natural gas RICE and 70% of the VOC are 

from natural gas RICE. Therefore, for engine and boiler SCCs: F4SRB, NOX = 0.63x0.33 = 0.21, 

F4SRB, CO = 0.54x0.7 = 0.38 and F4SRB, VOC = 0.70x0.216= 0.15. 
F-14

We apportion “RICE+turbine” SCCs using 2005 Platform emissions as well. In this case, F4SRB, 

NOX = 0.78x0.33 = 0.26, F4SRB, CO = 0.79x0.7= 0.55 and F4SRB, VOC = 0.89x0.216 = 0.19

The August 2010 regulation requires engines at area sources greater than 500 HP to have NSCR. 

Major sources that are of that size are subject to limits that require NSCR from the 2004 rule. To 

determine the fraction of 4SRB emissions that are greater than 500 HP, we use the data in Table 

3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. Since the size cutoffs and emissions distributions are different for 

major and area sources, we denote the fraction as Fsizecut,major,poll and Fsizecut,area,poll for major and 

area sources, respectively. The values from the tables are as follows,

Fsizecut,major,NOX = Fsizecut,major,CO = Fsizecut,major,VOC = 0.354 and

Fsizecut,area,NOX = Fsizecut,area,CO = Fsizecut,area,VOC = 0.405

3.2 Two Stroke Lean Burn Engines (2SLB)

For 2SLB, the only engines that would be required to meet limits based on catalysts would be 

new (meaning constructed 2003 and later) non-emergency >500 HP at major sources. As a result, 

we will not apply any reductions to 2SLB in the 2005 NEI. 

3.3 Four Stroke Lean Burn Engines (4SLB)

These engines will require an oxidation catalyst, which in addition to reducing HAP, reduces CO 

and VOC. Per information emailed by Melanie King (7/7/2010): For 4SLB, RCO = 94%; and 

RVOC = 71%

To apportion emissions of “SI,generic” SCCs to 4SLB , we use the total CO emissions from all 

SI RICE and 4SLB in Table 3-1. The proportion of CO from 4SLB from major source SI 

engines is computed as 33,944 / 192,062 = 18% and the proportion of CO from 4SLB from area 

source SI engines is computed as 87,132/515,803 = 17%. Since these values are close, we chose 

17%. (F4SLB, CO = 0.17.) Using Table 3-2, F4SLB, VOC = 0.61 (roughly the same fraction for both 

major and area sources). The F4SLB, CO value also applies to oil&gas SCCs. F4SLB, VOC from 

oil&gas SCCs =0. 

We also need to determine F4SLB, CO and F4SLB, VOC for SCCs with categories of 

“Boiler+engine” and “RICE+turbine”. We can use the same approach as for 4SRB. In this case, 

for “Boiler+engine” SCCs, F4SLB, CO = 0.54x 0.17 = 0.10 and F4SLB, VOC = 0.70 x 0.61 = 0.43. 

For “RICE+turbine” SCCs: F4SLB, CO = 0.79 x.0.17 = 0.13 and F4SLB, VOC = 0.89 x0.61 = 0.54. 

The August 20, 2010 rule requires existing non-emergency engines 100-500 HP at major 

sources and existing non-emergency engines >500 HP at area sources to meet limits based on 

oxidation catalyst. Engines greater than 500 HP at major sources were regulated under the 2004 

rule and we didn't put any emission limits on them, and therefore would not need an oxidation 

catalyst.

To determine the fraction of 4SLB emissions that in those HP ranges, we use the data in Table 

3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. Since these fractions are different for major and area sources, we 
F-15

denote the fraction as Fsizecut,major,poll and Fsizecut,area,poll for major and area sources, respectively. 

The values from the tables are as follows,

Fsizecut,major ,CO = Fsizecut, major,VOC = 0.41 and Fsizecut,area,CO = Fsizecut,area,VOC = 0.40

4 Compression Ignition (CI) Engines

Compression ignition engines are not distinguished further (by burn type) as are Spark Ignition. 

However, the amount of emissions from emergency engines, for which existing engines would 

not be required to apply oxidation catalyst, is significant relative to non-emergency engines. 

Therefore the fraction of emissions from non-emergency engines will be applied to all SCCs 

identified as CI in Table 2-1 in addition to the fraction that will be subject to oxidation catalyst 

based on the size. Since the regulation that promulgated in March would require non-emergency 

existing CI engines >300 HP that are located at both major and area sources of HAP to install 

oxidation catalyst. Since major and area sources have the same requirements, we can use data on 

the proportion of emissions of the total CI population, presented in Table 4-1. The data are from 

the rule analyses and were provided by Melanie King, EPA, Sector Policies and Programs 

Division.

Table 4-1. Distribution of CO, PM and VOC emissions from Compression Ignition Engines by 

Engine and HP type for major and area sources

Per the rule, there would be 70% reduction of HAP, CO, and VOC and 30% reduction of PM 

from the catalyst. We also assume that the control achieves the same reduction from PM2.5 as 

PM. There are no NOX reductions. Therefore, For CI, RCO = 70%; RVOC = 70% and RPM2.5 = 

30%. 

Number of Engines - 

nonemergency

CO - 

nonemergency 

PM - 

nonemergency

VOC - 

nonemergency 

Number of 

Emergency 

Engines

CO 

emergency 

PM 

emergency 

VOC 

emergency

Major Sources

50-100 18,547 6,454 487 2,010 74,187 1,291 97 402

100-175 24,301 8,457 1,170 4,828 97,206 1,691 234 966

175-300 18,429 6,413 1,532 6,324 73,715 1,283 306 1,265

300-500 9,696 3,374 1,357 5,604 38,785 675 271 1,121

500-600 860 299 165 683 3,438 60 33 137

600-750 440 153 104 429 1,760 31 21 86

>750 971 338 340 1,402 3,882 68 68 280

Total 73,243 25,489 5,155 21,281 292,974 5,098 1,031 4,256

Area Sources

50-100 27,820 9,681 730 3,015 111,281 1,936 146 603

100-175 36,452 12,685 1,754 7,242 145,808 2,537 351 1,448

175-300 27,643 9,620 2,298 9,486 110,573 1,924 460 1,897

300-600 21,816 7,592 3,436 14,186 87,266 1,518 687 2,837

600-750 3,657 1,273 864 3,567 14,628 255 173 713

>750 6,479 2,255 2,268 9,361 25,914 451 454 1,872

Total 123,867 43,106 11,350 46,857 495,470 8,621 2,270 9,371

Size Range (HP)

Baseline Emissions (tpy) Baseline Emissions (tpy)

Summary of Major Source and Area Source Baseline Emissions for the RICE NESHAP
F-16

The fraction of emissions for CO and VOC that are both non-emergency and greater than 300HP 

are computed from the above Table 4-1

FnonE,sizecut,major,CO = 0.14. FnonE,sizecut,major,VOC = FnonE,sizecut,major,PM2.5 =0.32

FnonE,sizecut,area,CO = 0.40 FnonE,sizecut,area,VOC = FnonE,sizecut,area,PM2.5 = 0.65

We also need to apportion the fraction of emissions from SCCs with categories of 

“Boiler+engine” and “RICE+turbine” that are attributed to CI engines. We can use a similar 

approach as for 4SRB and 4SLB. In this case, we only need to break out CI RICE (and not a 

type of CI) so we only need the fraction of “Boiler+engine” emissions that are CI RICE. Using 

2005 Platform emissions from diesel SCCs for boilers, RICE and turbine engines, we compute 

the following fractions to apportion “Boiler+engine” SCCs to CI RICE:, FCI, CO = 0.61 and 

FCI, VOC = 0.84 and FCI, PM2.5 = 0.50

For “RICE+turbine” SCCs: FCI, CO = 0.83 and FCI, VOC = 0.92 and FCI, PM2.5 = 0.78

5 Approach For Addressing Already-Controlled Sources

Although we know that a certain percentage of engines are already controlled (they set the basis 

of the MACT floor), we will use the existing control information in the inventory (and the 

capability for the software applying the controls to not apply additional controls to alreadycontrolled sources) rather than account for already-controlled sources by pro-rating the percent 

reduction we apply to all sources. While this approach will overestimate reductions for alreadycontrolled sources that are missing the control information in the inventory, it will be less of an 

impact than the pro-rating approach which would underestimate the reductions for the 

uncontrolled sources. 

6 Percent Reduction Calculations to be applied to NEI That 

Account for all Three RICE rules

The next sections provide the calculations and data to determine the percent reductions to apply 

to the 2005 v4.1 modeling platform for projecting these emissions to2014 and beyond. By 2014 

all three of the RICE rules’ compliance dates have passed 

6.1 SI Engines

Table 6-1shows the reduction to be applied to the SI engine SCCs identified in Table 2-1 based 

on the parameters computed from the baseline emissions in Table 3-1, Table 3-2 and Table 3-3

and discussed in Section 3. The formula for the percent reduction is provided in the first row:

Table 6-1. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to SI SCCs for Projection 

Years of 2014 and Beyond

PERCENT REDUCTIONSI,poll = PERCENT REDUCTION4SRB,poll + PERCENT REDUCTION4SLB,poll
F-17

Where:

PERCENT REDUCTION4SRB,poll = Rpoll x F4SRB x Fsizecut,major,poll x Fmajor,poll + Rpoll x F4SRB x Fsizecut,area,poll

x Farea,poll

PERCENT REDUCTION4SLB,poll = Rpoll x F4SLB x Fsizecut,major,poll x Fmajor,poll + Rpoll x F4SLB x Fsizecut,area,poll

x Farea,poll

Note that Rpoll Fmajor Farea Fsizecut,major,poll Fsizecut,area,poll are all dependent upon the engine (4SRB versus 

4SLB) . Values for these and the other parameters are provided below. 

Parameter Description Value and How Determined, 4SRB Value and How Determined, 4SLB

Rpoll The estimated reduction of 

pollutant “poll” (e.g., 

NOX, VOC, CO) resulting 

from application of the 

control device needed to 

meet the standard

NSCR: Use same values used in rule.

NOX reduction, RNOX is 97% 

CO reduction, RCO is 49%

VOC reduction, RVOC is 76%

Oxidation Catalyst: Use same 

reductions values used in rule.

CO reduction, RCO is 94%

VOC reduction, RVOC is 71%

Fmajor,poll the fraction of emissions 

from SI engines that 

attributable to major 

sources

As discussed in Section 3, we used Tables 

3-1 to 3-3 to compute the fraction and used 

the same for all pollutants and all SI 

engine types

Fmajor,NOX =, Fmajor,CO =, Fmajor,VOC= 0.27

As discussed in Section 3, we used 

Tables 3-1 to 3-3 to compute the 

fraction and used the same for all 

pollutants and all SI engine types

Fmajor,CO =,Fmajor,VOC= 0.27

F area,poll the fraction of emissions 

from rich burn engines 

attributable to area sources

1 - Fmajor 1 - Fmajor

Fsizecut,major,poll the fraction of emissions 

equal or above the size 

cutoff for which the 

control device will be 

required for major sources

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. 

Cutoff is 500 HP Compute fraction of

emissions for 4SRB engines at 500 and 

above HP to total 4SRB; major sources.

Fsizecut,major,NOX = Fsizecut,major,CO = 

Fsizecut,major,VOC =0.354 

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. 

Assume 100-500 HP. Compute fraction

of emissions for 4SLB engines between 

100 and 500HP to total 4SLB; major 

sources.

Fsizecut,major ,CO = Fsizecut,major VOC = 0.41 

Fsizecut,area,poll the fraction of emissions 

equal or above the size 

cutoff for which SNCR 

will be required for area 

sources

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. 

Assume 300 HP (final rule Aug 2010). 

Compute fraction of emissions for 4SRB 

engines at 300 and above HP to total 

4SRB; area sources.

Fsizecut,area,NOX = F sizecut,area,CO = 

Fsizecut,area,VOC =0.405

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3.. 

Assume 500 HP. Compute fraction of 

emissions for 4SLB engines at 500 and 

above HP to total 4SLB; area sources.

Fsizecut,area,CO = F sizecut,area,VOC = 0.40

F4SRB, poll

F4SLB, poll

Fraction of emissions 

within the SCC that are 

rich burn and 4 stroke lean 

burn, respectively

Use 100% for 4SRB SCCs. 

For “SI, generic” SCCs, use Table 3-1, 

Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. Percent of 

emissions of 4SRB out of all SI. 

F4SRB, NOX = .33, F4SRB, CO = .70

F4SRB, VOC= .216

Note that same values apply to “oil&gas” 

SCCs except F4SRB, VOC= 0

For “Boiler+engine” SCCs” :

F4SRB, NOX = .21, F4SRB, CO = .38

F4SRB, VOC= .151

For ““RICE+turbine” SCCs:

F4SRB, NOX = .26, F4SRB, CO = .55

F4SRB, VOC= .192

Use 100% for 4SLB SCCs . For “SI, 

generic” SCCs, use Table 3-1, Table 

3-2, and Table 3-3. Percent of emissions 

of 4SLB out of all SI. 

F4SLB, CO = .17, F4SLB, VOC= .59

Note that same values apply to 

“oil&gas” SCCs except for VOC.

For “Boiler+engine” SCCs” :

F4SLB, CO = .10, F4SLB, VOC= .41

For ““RICE+turbine” SCCs:

F4SLB, CO = .13, F4SLB, VOC= .52
F-18

6.2 CI Engines

Table 6-1 shows the reduction to be applied to the CI engine SCCs identified in Error! 

Reference source not found. based on the parameters computed from the baseline emissions in 

Table 4-1.

Table 6-2. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to Compression Ignition (CI) 

SCCs for Projection Years of 2014 and later

PERCENT REDUCTIONCI,poll = Rpoll x FCI, POLL x FnonE,sizecut,major x Fmajor + 

 Rpoll x FCI, POLL x FnonE,sizecut,area x Farea

Parameter Description Value and How Determined, CI

Rpoll the estimated reduction of pollutant “poll” 

(e.g., NOX, VOC, CO) resulting from 

application of the control device needed to 

meet the standard

Oxidation Catalyst: Use same values used in rule. 

(specific to CI)

CO reduction, RCO is 70%

VOC reduction, RVOC is 70%

PM2.5 reduction, RPM2.5 is 30%

FCI, POLL 

The fraction of emissions that are CI RICE.

This value is 1 except for CI engines that are 

in “Boiler+Engine” or “turbine+RICE”

Use 2005 Platform emissions of RICE, nonRICE engines and boilers to compute 

fractions

Value is 1 except for CI engines that are characterized in 

“Boiler+Engine” or “turbine+RICE”

For “Boiler+Engine” SCCs, FCI, CO = 0.61 and FCI, VOC = 0.84 

and FCI, PM2.5 = 0.50

For “RICE+turbine” SCCs: FCI, CO = 0.83 and FCI, VOC = 0.92 

and FCI, PM2.5 = 0.78

Fmajor the fraction of emissions from CI engines 

attributable to major sources

Based on an analysis of the 2005 NEI using the 

“SRCTYPE” field (01 are the major, 02 are area).

Since so much unknown, renormalize

Fmajor,CO =0.42, Fmajor,VOC= 0.38, Fmajor,PM2.5 = 0.44

That fraction will be used for all pollutants.

F area the fraction of emissions from CI engines 

attributable to area sources

1 - Fmajor

FnonE,sizecut,major,poll The fraction of emissions from major sources 

from the CI SCCs that will require oxidation 

catalyst to meet the standard because they are 

non-Emergency and meet the size cutoff.

Table 4-1. The fraction of emissions of non-emergency 

engines from major sources equal or above 300 HP 

FnonE,sizecut,major,CO = 0.14. 

FnonE,sizecut,major,VOC = FnonE,sizecut,major,PM2.5 =0.32

FnonE,sizecut,area,poll The fraction of emissions from area sources 

from the CI SCCs that will require oxidation 

catalyst to meet the standard because they are 

non-Emergency and meet the size cutoff.

Table 4-1. The fraction of emissions of non-emergency 

engines from major sources equal or above 300 HP 

FnonE,sizecut,area,CO = 0.40. 

FnonE,sizecut,area,VOC = FnonE,sizecut,area,PM2.5 =0.65
F-19

7 Percent Reduction Calculations to be applied to NEI 

accounting for only the 2004 RICE rule

This section presents the formula and values to use when projecting emissions to 2012; in this 

situation, only the SI 4SRB engines greater than 500 HP at major sources are reduced because 

the compliance date for the rule that affects these engines in June 2007 which is prior to 2012. 

The other engines’ reductions are not anticipated until the compliance dates (2013) of the most 

recent rules. Because these dates are after 2012, they are not incorporated into the emission 

projection for 2012. 

7.1 SI Engines

Table 7-1 shows the reduction to be applied to the SI engine SCCs identified in Table 2-1 based 

on the parameters computed from the baseline emissions in Table 3-1, Table 3-2 and Table 3-3

and discussed in Section 3. The formula for the percent reduction is provided in the first row:

Table 7-1. Formula for determining the percent reduction to apply to SI SCCs for the 2012 

projection

PERCENT REDUCTIONSI,poll = PERCENT REDUCTION4SRB,poll 

PERCENT REDUCTION4SRB,poll = Rpoll x F4SRB x Fsizecut,major,poll x Fmajor,poll 

Parameter Description Value and How Determined, 4SRB

Rpoll The estimated reduction of pollutant “poll” 

(e.g., NOX, VOC, CO) resulting from 

application of the control device needed to 

meet the standard

NSCR: Use same values used in rule.

NOX reduction, RNOX is 97% 

CO reduction, RCO is 49%

VOC reduction, RVOC is 76%

Fmajor,poll the fraction of emissions from SI engines 

that attributable to major sources

Based on an analysis of the 2005 NEI using the “SRCTYPE” 

field (01 are the major, 02 are area)

Fmajor,NOX = 0.77, Fmajor,CO =0.81, Fmajor,VOC= 0.75

Fsizecut,major,poll the fraction of emissions equal or above the 

size cutoff for which the control device will 

be required for major sources

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. Assume 300 HP (final rule 

Aug 2010). Compute fraction of emissions for 4SRB engines at 

300 and above HP to total 4SRB; major sources.

Fsizecut,major,NOX = Fsizecut,major,CO = 

Fsizecut,major,VOC =0.445

Fsizecut,area,poll the fraction of emissions equal or above the 

size cutoff for which SNCR will be required 

for area sources

Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. Assume 300 HP (final rule 

Aug 2010). Compute fraction of emissions for 4SRB engines at 

300 and above HP to total 4SRB; area sources.

Fsizecut,area,NOX = F sizecut,area,CO = 

Fsizecut,area,VOC =0.405\

F4SRB, poll

F4SLB, poll

Fraction of emissions within the SCC that 

are rich burn and 4 stroke lean burn, 

respectively

Use 100% for 4SRB SCCs. 

For “SI, generic” SCCs, use Table 3-1, Table 3-2, and Table 3-3. 

Percent of emissions of 4SRB out of all SI. 

F4SRB, NOX = .33, F4SRB, CO = .7

F4SRB, VOC= .37

Note that same values apply to “oil&gas” SCCs except F4SRB, 

VOC= 0

For “Boiler+engine” SCCs” :
F-20

F4SRB, NOX = .21, F4SRB, CO = .38

F4SRB, VOC= .26

For ““RICE+turbine” SCCs:

F4SRB, NOX = .26, F4SRB, CO = .55

F4SRB, VOC= .34

7.2 CI Engines

For a 2012 projection there are no reductions to apply to existing CI engines since they are 

impacted only by the 2010 NESHAP. 

8 Results

A summary of the percent reductions by Engine Type and Reduction Category for the SCCs 

shown in Table 2-1 resulting from the implementation of the RICE rule as amended in August 

2010 is presented in Table 8-1. A summary associated with just the 2004 RICE rule (which is 

applicable to a 2012 projection) is shown in Table 8-2.
F-21

Table 8-1. Summary of Percent Reductions and Emissions reduced from the 2005 Platform resulting from all 3 RICE rules (Future 

years 2014 and later)

engine 

type 

reduction 

category

NOX 

reductio

n

CO 

reducti

on 

VOC 

reductio

n

PM2.5 

Reduct

ion 

NOX

2005cr

emis

(tons)

NOX_re

duction

s (tons)

CO

2005cr

emis 

(tons)

CO_reduction

s (tons)

VOC

2005cr

emis 

(tons)

VOC_reduct

ions (tons)

PM2.5 

2005cr

emis (tons)

PM25_reducti

ons (tons)

CI

Boiler+engine 0.0% 12.4% 30.8% 7.6% 133,629 - 31,746 3,942 4,579 1,412 12,971 982

CI 0.0% 20.4% 36.7% 15.1% 38,941 - 9,903 2,016 2,945 1,081 1,974 299

RICE+turbine 0.0% 16.9% 33.8% 11.8% 13,545 - 5,689 961 1,270 429 806 95

oil&gas 12.5% 19.9% 0.0% 0.0% 306,278 38,367 258,838 51,400 336,442 - 3,046 0

SI

2SLB 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 154,448 - 27,391 - 9,159 - 2,238 0

4SLB 0.0% 37.9% 28.6% 0.0% 49,651 - 22,211 8,408 5,698 1,629 414 0

4SRB 38.0% 19.2% 29.7% 0.0% 68,589 26,036 71,588 13,727 6,451 1,919 665 0

Boiler+engine 8.0% 11.1% 16.7% 0.0% 293,674 23,410 200,185 22,165 16,835 2,812 1,882 0

RICE+turbine 9.9% 15.5% 21.2% 0.0% 20,934 2,066 7,138 1,104 1,595 339 157 0

SI, generic 12.5% 19.9% 23.9% 0.0% 320,904 40,199 127,344 25,288 27,286 6,512 2,921 0

Grand 

Total 1,400,593 130,078 762,033 129,011 412,260 16,134 27,074 1,376

Table 8-2. Summary of Percent Reductions and Emissions reduced from the 2005 Platform resulting from the 2004 RICE NESHAP 

engine 

type 

reduction 

category

NOX 

reduction CO reduction 

VOC 

reduction

NOX

2005cr

emis

(tons)

NOX_

reductions 

(tons)

CO

2005cr

emis (tons)

CO_reductions 

(tons)

VOC

2005cr

emis (tons)

VOC_

reductions 

(tons)

CI

Boiler+engine 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 133,629 0 31,746 0 4,579 0

CI 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 38,941 0 9,903 0 2,945 0

RICE+turbine 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13,545 0 5,689 0 1,270 0

oil&gas 3.1% 3.3% 0.0% 306,278 9,381 258,838 8,495 336,442 0

SI

2SLB 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 154,448 0 27,391 0 9,159 0

4SLB 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 49,651 0 22,211 0 5,698 0

4SRB 9.3% 4.7% 7.3% 68,589 6,366 71,588 3,357 6,451 469 

Boiler+engine 1.9% 1.8% 1.1% 293,674 5,724 200,185 3,567 16,835

 

185 

RICE+turbine 2.4% 2.6% 1.4% 20,934 505 7,138 184 1,595 22 

SI, generic 3.1% 3.3% 1.6% 320,904 9,829 127,344 4,180 27,286 429 

Grand 

Total 1,400,593 31,806 762,033 19,782 412,260 1,105 
F-22

9 SO2 reductions resulting from the Ultra-low Sulfur Diesel

Requirement for CI engines

This section discusses an approach to project the impact of the Ultra-low Sulfur diesel 

requirement for CI engines greater than 300 HP that was part of the requirements published 

3/30/2010. These reductions were not accounted for in the rule due to the expectation that 

engine owners/operators would make the switch anyway because ULSD is what would primarily 

be available. On page 9669 of Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4: 

We have not quantified the SOX reductions that would occur as a result of engines switching to ULSD because we are unable to 

estimate the number of engines that already use ULSD and therefore we are unable to estimate the percentage of engines that 

may switch to ULSD due to this rule. If none of the affected engines would use ULSD without this rule, then we estimate the

SOX reductions are 31,000 tpy in the year 2013. If all of the affected engine would use ULSD regardless of the rule then the 

additional SOX reduction would be zero.

We are aware2of several state rules on the books or in the proposal stage that will limit the sulfur 

content of home heating oil. However, some do not go into effect until after the RICE ULSD 

limits. Because of this timing and because we have received comments on the need to account 

for SO2 reductions resulting from the RICE ULSD limits (MOG), we have chosen, in addition to 

applying applicable state rule fuel sulfur limits, to estimate the reduction due to RICE and apply 

the reduction in the future year projection. The RICE limits apply to CI greater than 300 HP. 

Based on a summary of Baseline SO2 Emissions by Engine Size for the RICE NESHAP

provided by the project lead, Melanie King3, it was determined that approximately 50% of SO2 

emissions are from engines greater than 300 HP.

We assume that CI use high sulfur fuel (3000 ppm) in 2005 and switch to ULSD by the 

compliance date for this RICE requirement (May 2013). In that we don’t have the distribution 

of SO2 emissions from the various size engines as we do other pollutants (see Table 4-1), we 

assumed 50% of the SO2 comes from 300 HP and larger engines. Note that for other pollutants 

the fraction of emissions with size cutoff greater or equal to 300 HP ranges from 14% 

(FnonE,sizecut, major, co) to 65% (FnonE,sizecut, major, PM2.5)

A switch from a 3000 ppm sulfur content (home heating oil average) to 15 ppm would result in a 

99.5% SO2 reduction. We apply this to all diesel RICE and the portion of SO2 emission from 

RICE-related SCCs that are estimated to be RICE. Using the 2005 point source inventory for 

industrial, commercial and institutional diesel boilers and internal combustion engines (turbines 

plus RICE) we computed that 81% of the SO2 emissions from internal combustion engines are 

from RICE and 12% of the SO2 emissions from engines+boilers are from RICE. For Oil and gas 

production, there is only one SCC with significant SO2 emissions: SCC=2310000220 (Industrial 

 

2 Email from Jeff Hertzog, OTAQ, USEPA Nov 22, 2010

3 Email from Melanie King, OAQPS, USEPA, Nov 23, 2010 (filename: Existing CI RICE NESHAP Impacts 2-16-

10 FINAL 3000 ppm sulfur estimate.xlsx)
F-23

Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13; Drill rigs). Since we have no information to 

determine the amount of SO2 from RICE versus other SO2-emitting processes associated with 

drill rigs, we assume that all of the SO2 is associated with RICE and that 50% of the emissions 

are associated with RICE greater than 300 HP. Therefore, the reductions we apply are the 

following:

CI SCCs: 50%*99.5%=49.75%

CI Boiler+Engine SCCs: 50%*99.5%*12%= 5.97%

CI RICE + turbine SCCs: 50%*99.5%*81%= 40.30%

Oil and Gas, SCC=2310000220 (drill rigs): 50%*99.5%=49.75%
F-24

Table 9-1. SO2 emissions and reductions resulting from ultra low sulfur fuel requirement (compliance date May 2013) for CI engines greater 

or equal to 300 HP in the RICE NESHAP (75 FR 9648, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.html). % reductions Based on: 1) A 

switch from a 3000 ppm sulfur content (home heating oil average) to 15 ppm would result in a 99.5% SO2 reduction and 2) 50% of SO2 from RICE are from 

engines greater than 300HP, and 3) Percent of RICE from SCCs that include RICE and/or boilers and other engines as a combined SCC was estimated based on 

analysis of detailed RICE, engine and boiler SCCs in 2005 platform. 

scc scc_desc

2005 SO2 

(tons) type

percent 

reduction

SO2 

reduce

d 

(tons)

2101004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Distillate Oil;Total: Boilers and IC 

Engines 358.6 boilers+engines 5.97%

 

21 

2101004002 Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Electric Utility;Distillate Oil;All IC Engine Types 84.4 engines 40.30% 34 

2102004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Industrial;Distillate Oil;Total: Boilers and IC 

Engines 125250.5 boilers+engines 5.97%

 

7,477 

2103004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil;Total: Boilers 

and IC Engines 114818.1 boilers+engines 5.97%

 

6,855

2199004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Total Area Source Fuel Combustion;Distillate 

Oil;Total: Boilers and IC Engines 215.8 boilers+engines 5.97%

 

13 

2199004002

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Total Area Source Fuel Combustion;Distillate 

Oil;All IC Engine Types 17691.0 engines 40.30%

 

7,129 

2310000000 Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All Processes;Total: All Processes 0.0 oil and gas - 

2310000220 Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13; Drill rigs 8749.8 oil and gas 49.75%

 

4,353 

2310000440 Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13; Saltwater disposal engines 0.0 oil and gas 49.75% 0 

2310001000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All Processes : On-shore;Total: All 

Processes 0.0 oil and gas

 

- 

2310002000

Industrial Processes;Oil and Gas Production: SIC 13;All Processes : Off-shore;Total: All 

Processes 0.0 oil and gas

 

- 

20100102 Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating 267.6 rice 49.75% 133 

20100105

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: 

Crankcase Blowby 7.0 rice 49.75%

 

3 

20100107

Internal Combustion Engines;Electric Generation;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: 

Exhaust 9.8 rice 49.75%

 

5 

20200102 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating 807.7 rice 49.75% 402 

20200104

Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: 

Cogeneration 18.5 rice 49.75%

 

9 

20200107 Internal Combustion Engines;Industrial;Distillate Oil (Diesel);Reciprocating: Exhaust 14.6 rice 49.75% 7 

20300101

Internal Combustion Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating 934.7 rice 49.75%

 

465 

20300105

Internal Combustion Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Crankcase Blowby 0.0 rice 49.75%

 

0 

20300106 Internal Combustion Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 1.0 rice 49.75% 
F-25

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Evaporative Losses (Fuel Storage and Delivery System) 0 

20300107

Internal Combustion Engines;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil 

(Diesel);Reciprocating: Exhaust 0.1 rice 49.75%

 

0 

20400402 Internal Combustion Engines;Engine Testing;Reciprocating Engine;Diesel/Kerosene 315.5 rice 49.75% 157 

20400403 Internal Combustion Engines;Engine Testing;Reciprocating Engine;Distillate Oil 0.1 rice 49.75% 0 

2103004000

Stationary Source Fuel Combustion;Commercial/Institutional;Distillate Oil;Total: Boilers 

and IC Engines 18.0 boilers+engines 5.97%

 

1 

Total SO2 reduced = 27,066 tons
G-1

Appendix G

Mercury Speciation Fractions Used to Speciate the Future Year EGU Mercury 

Emissions

Category Particulate

Divalent 

Gaseous Elemental

Bituminous Coal and Pet. Coke, PC Boiler with ESP-CS 0.0117 0.4656 0.5227

Bituminous Coal, Coal Gasification 0.0051 0.0847 0.9102

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with Dry Sorbent Injection 

and ESP-CS 0.0016 0.6710 0.3274

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS 0.0611 0.6820 0.2570

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS and Wet FGD 0.0022 0.0778 0.9200

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-HS 0.0490 0.5784 0.3726

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-HS and Wet FGD 0.0063 0.2068 0.7870

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with FF Baghouse 0.0398 0.6258 0.3344

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with FF Baghouse and Wet 

FGD 0.0648 0.3300 0.6052

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with PM Scrubber 0.0180 0.1951 0.7869

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with SCR and SDA/FF 

Baghouse 0.0506 0.4604 0.4890

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with SDA/FF Baghouse 0.0917 0.2886 0.6197

Bituminous Coal, PC Boiler with SNCR and ESP-CS 0.2032 0.2712 0.5256

Bituminous Coal, Stoker Boiler with SDA/FF Baghouse 0.1996 0.1794 0.6211

Bituminous Coal/Pet. Coke, Cyclone with ESP-CS and 

Wet FGD 0.0007 0.1130 0.8863

Bituminous Coal/Pet. Coke, PC Boiler with FF Baghouse 0.0220 0.7841 0.1939

Bituminous Coal/Pet.Coke, Fludized Bed Combustor with 

SNCR and FF Baghouse 0.4244 0.2787 0.2970

Bituminous Waste, Fludized Bed Combustor with FF 

Baghouse 0.0212 0.3881 0.5907

Lignite Coal, Cyclone Boiler with ESP-CS 0.0004 0.1699 0.8297

Lignite Coal, Cyclone Boiler with SDA/FF Baghouse 0.0995 0.1707 0.7298

Lignite Coal, Fludized Bed Combustor with ESP-CS 0.0137 0.1164 0.8700

Lignite Coal, Fludized Bed Combustor with FF Baghouse 0.0042 0.7118 0.2840

Lignite Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS 0.0009 0.0362 0.9629

Lignite Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS and FF Baghouse 0.0019 0.6449 0.3532

Lignite Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS and Wet FGD 0.0082 0.1345 0.8574

Lignite Coal, PC Boiler with PM Scrubber 0.0016 0.0298 0.9686

Lignite Coal, PC Boiler with SDA/FF Baghouse 0.0036 0.1262 0.8702

Subbituminous Coal, Fludized Bed Combustor with SNCR 

and FF Baghouse 0.0027 0.0342 0.9632
G-2

Category Particulate

Divalent 

Gaseous Elemental

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS 0.0016 0.3083 0.6901

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-CS and Wet 

FGD 0.0043 0.0294 0.9663

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-HS 0.0006 0.1252 0.8741

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with ESP-HS and Wet 

FGD 0.0117 0.0446 0.9437

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with FF Baghouse 0.0149 0.8283 0.1568

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with PM Scrubber 0.0145 0.0511 0.9344

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with SDA/ESP 0.0032 0.0382 0.9586

Subbituminous Coal, PC Boiler with SDA/FF Baghouse 0.0099 0.0435 0.9467

Subbituminous Coal/Pet. Coke, Cyclone Boiler with ESPHS 0.0093 0.0752 0.9155
H-1

Appendix H

Details Regarding the PM2.5 Natural Gas Emission Factor error in IPM Post 

Processing 

The error came about by attempting to improve estimates of natural gas emissions based on 

studies using a new PM test method that directly measures primary PM. Unfortunately, an 

incorrect value was taken from the study. It should be noted that it was also discovered that 

the correction factor from those studies, while intended to be used in the 2005 year, was 

actually not used. Another error was the value for the Gassified Coal turbines, which was 

intended to be updated to use newer data (unrelated to the natural gas combustion study) but 

was updated with the wrong value.

The Incorrect Emission factors and the SCCs it affected are listed here. The middle two 

columns are the emission factors that are consistent with the emission factors that were used 

for the base year (2005 inventory), as documented in 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/point/egu2002doc.pdf . The 

last two columns are the emission factors that would incorporate the improved estimates 

discussed above, and correctly use the newer data on Gasified Coal /Turbines. 

SCC Description

ERRONE

OUS PM10

Primary 

EF Used in 

IPM Post 

Processing 

lb/MMBtu

ERRONEO

US PM2.5 

Primary EF 

Used in 

IPM Post 

Processing 

lb/MMBtu

PM10 

primary 

EF 

consiste

nt with 

2005 

lb/MMB

tu1

PM25 

primary 

EF 

consiste

nt with 

2005 

lb/MMB

tu

Corrected 

PM10 

Primary EF 

lb/MMBtu 

(using 1000 

btu/scf)

Correcte

d PM25 

Primary 

EF 

lb/MMB

tu (using 

1000 

btu/scf)

10100601

Ext Comb

/Electric Gen 

/Natural Gas 

/Boilers : 100 

Million Btu/hr 

except 

Tangential 0.068 0.057 7.51E-03 7.51E-03 5.20E-04 4.30E-04

10100604

Ext Comb 

/Electric Gen 

/Natural Gas 

/Boilers < 100 

Million Btu/hr 

except 

Tangential 0.068 0.057 7.51E-03 7.51E-03 5.20E-04 4.30E-04

10100701

Ext Comb 

/Electric Gen 

/Process Gas 

/Boilers : 100 

Million Btu/hr 0.06 0.058 5.74E-03 5.74E-03 5.20E-04 4.30E-04
H-2

SCC Description

ERRONE

OUS PM10

Primary 

EF Used in 

IPM Post 

Processing 

lb/MMBtu

ERRONEO

US PM2.5 

Primary EF 

Used in 

IPM Post 

Processing 

lb/MMBtu

PM10 

primary 

EF 

consiste

nt with 

2005 

lb/MMB

tu1

PM25 

primary 

EF 

consiste

nt with 

2005 

lb/MMB

tu

Corrected 

PM10 

Primary EF 

lb/MMBtu 

(using 1000 

btu/scf)

Correcte

d PM25 

Primary 

EF 

lb/MMB

tu (using 

1000 

btu/scf)

20100201

Int Comb 

/Electric Gen 

/Natural Gas 

/Turbine 0.046 0.028 6.55E-03 6.55E-03 3.10E-04 1.90E-04

20100301b

Int Comb 

/Electric Gen 

/Gasified Coal 

/Turbine 0.11 0.11 1.57E-02 1.57E-02 1.10E-02 1.10E-02

a. . note that it was determined that the 2005 PM emissions used in the 2005v4 andv4.1 platforms were 

not corrected to use updated information posted at 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/point/pm_adjustment_2002_nei.pdf. 

The updates were based on testing using a dilution method that is similar to conditional test method 

(CTM) 39 (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/ctm.html) that measures PM10-PRI and PM2.5-PRI directly. 

The data come from limited testing sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and 

Development Authority (NYSERDA). See 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/point/pm_adjustment_2002_nei.pdf for 

more documentation and see 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/point/augmentation_point/ratios_to_adj

ust_pmvalues_in_nei_for_naturalgas_combustion082005.xls for the SCCs impacted by the adjustment. 

The updated factors have been recommended by Ron Myers but have not been put into AP-42 (for 

natural gas, it was last updated in 1998)

b. The corrected value comes from: The EPA Tutorial provided by Gary J. Stiegel, Gasification 

Technologies Product Manager National Energy Technology Laboratory Nov 5, 2001 (power point 

presentation), reports 0.002 lbs of PM10/MMBtu for a state-of-the-art IGCC unit; for Polk Power 

(ORISPL=7242, BLRID=1), they report <0.015 lbs of PM10/MMBtu; for Wabash River, they report <0.012 

lbs of PM10/MMBtu; and George Lynch has suggested 0.011 lbs of PM102.MMBtu. It was also 

recommend to Recommend to set PM2.5=PM10