Technical Support Document (TSD) 

for the Transport Rule 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

Emissions Inventories 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air and Radiation 

June 2010 
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Acronyms....................................................................................................................................... iii 

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................iv 

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................iv 

List of Appendices ...........................................................................................................................v 

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

2 Development of Base Case 2005 Emission Inventories .........................................................7 

2.1 Base case 2005 overview..................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Custom processing configuration for TR Emissions Modeling ...................................................... 9

3 Development of 2012 and 2014 Future Year Base Case Emission Inventories..................10 

3.1 Stationary Source Projections: IPM sector (ptipm) ..................................................................... 15

3.2 Stationary Source Projections: non-IPM sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, afdust)....................... 16

3.2.1 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust, ptnonipm) ...........................................................................................16

3.2.2 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt)....................................................................................................17

3.2.3 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm) ...................................................................................18

3.2.4 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)............................................................................................19

3.2.5 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm) ................................................................................................................................19

3.2.6 Stationary Source control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt) .....20

3.2.7 Upstream oil and gas projections in non-California WRAP states (nonpt) ........................................................23

3.2.8 Future Year VOC Speciation for gasoline-related sources (ptnonipm, nonpt) ...................................................23

3.3 Mobile source projections ................................................................................................................ 24

3.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)...................................................................24

3.3.2 Nonroad mobile (nonroad) .................................................................................................................................27

3.3.3 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3)............................................................28

3.3.4 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3) ....................................................................................................30

3.3.5 Future Year VOC Speciation (on_noadj, nonroad) ............................................................................................30

3.4 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, othpt, othar_hg, and othpt_hg)............. 31

3.5 Description of specific growth and control aspects of stationary projections for comment ...... 31

4 Source Apportionment Scenarios for 2012 ..........................................................................36 

5 EGU Control Case for 2014 ..................................................................................................37

6 Emission Summaries for the Base Cases and Control Case................................................38 

7 Summary of Projected Emissions Changes over Time and Likely Affect on 

Maintenance ..........................................................................................................................52 

8 References..............................................................................................................................64 
iii

Acronyms 

AEO Annual Energy Outlook

BEIS Biogenic Emission Inventory System 

C3 Category 3 (commercial marine vessels) 

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule 

CAMD EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division 

CAMX Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions 

CAP Criteria Air Pollutant 

CARB California Air Resources Board 

CEM Continuous Emissions Monitoring 

CMAQ Community Multiscale Air Quality 

CMV Commercial Marine Vessel 

DOE Department of Energy 

ECA Emissions Control Area

EGU Electric Generating Unit 

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 

EMFAC CARB’s Emission Factors mobile model

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard 

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant 

HWI Hazardous Waste Incinerator 

IMO International Marine Organization 

IPM Integrated Planning Model 

ITN Itinerant (aircraft operations) 

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

MOBILE6 Mobile Source Emission Factor Model, version 6 

MOVES Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator 

MSAT2 Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule 

MWC Municipal Waste Combustor 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NEEDS National Electric Energy Database System

NEI National Emission Inventory 

NLEV National Low Emission Vehicle 

NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model 

NSR New Source Review

OAQPS EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

OECA EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

ORL One Record per Line (a SMOKE input format) 

OTC Ozone Transport Commission 

MP Multipollutant 

PFC Portable Fuel Container 

RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis 

RFS2 Revised annual Renewable Fuel Standard 

RWC Residential Wood Combustion

SMOKE Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions
iv

SCC Source Category Code 

SPPD Sector Policies and Programs Division

TAF Terminal Area Forecast 

TPY Tons per Year 

TR Federal Transport Rule 

TSD Technical Support Document 

VOC Volatile Organic Compound 

WRAP Western Regional Air Partnership

List of Figures 

Figure 2-1. Air quality modeling domains................................................................................... 10 

Figure 3-1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005, 2012, and 2014........ 27 

Figure 5-1. States Covered under Annual SO2 and NOX Reductions for PM2.5. ......................... 38 

Figure 5-2. States Covered under Summer NOX Reductions for Ozone ..................................... 38 

List of Tables 

Table 1-1. List of cases run in support of the TR air quality modeling..........................................6 

Table 2-1. Sectors Used in the TR Emissions Modeling Platform.................................................8 

Table 3-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating 2012 and 2014 base case 

emissions inventories from the 2005 base case..........................................................13 

Table 3-2. Growth factors from year 2005 to future years for Animal Operations......................17 

Table 3-3. Projection Factors for growing year 2005 Residential Wood Combustion Sources 

to future years.............................................................................................................18 

Table 3-4. Factors used to project base case 2005 aircraft emissions to future years ..................20 

Table 3-5. States with post-2012 controls.....................................................................................21 

Table 3-6. Impact on Total Non-Biogenic Emissions of Not Applying “Additional” Controls 

on the 2012 Base Case................................................................................................22 

Table 3-7. Pollutants covered by the draft MOVES model in the 2005 Platform........................26 

Table 3-8. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and Class 1 and 

Class 2 Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions..........................................................28 

Table 3-9. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to grow Class 3 Commercial Marine 

Vessel emissions.........................................................................................................30 

Table 3-10. List of known local measures needing details for applying to the ptnonipm sector ..33 

Table 3-11. List of known local measures needing details, including which sectors to apply......34 

Table 3-12. List of known local measures needing details for applying to the nonpt sector.........35 

Table 6-1. State-level Total NOX Emissions (not including fires) for each TR Modeling Case 

in 48 States and Washington, D.C..............................................................................40 

Table 6-2. State-level Total SO2 Emissions(not including fires) for each TR Modeling Case in 

48 States and Washington, D.C..................................................................................42 

Table 6-3. State-level Electric Generating Unit Sector NOX Emissions for each TR Modeling 

Case in 48 States and Washington, D.C.....................................................................44 
v

Table 6-4. State-level Electric Generating Unit Sector SO2 Emissions for each TR Modeling 

Case in 48 States and Washington, D.C.....................................................................46 

Table 6-5. Group 1 and Group 2 States NOX Total Emissions (not including fires) for each 

TR Modeling Case......................................................................................................48 

Table 6-6. Group 1 and Group 2 States SO2 Total Emissions (not including fires) for each 

TR Modeling Case......................................................................................................49 

Table 6-7. Group1 and Group 2 States NOX EGU Sector Emissions for each TR Modeling 

Case ............................................................................................................................50 

Table 6-8. Group 1 and Group 2 States SO2 EGU Sector Emissions for each TR Modeling 

Case ............................................................................................................................51 

Table 6-9. 26-State Total and Electric Generating Unit Sector Summer NOX Emissions for 

each TR Modeling Case .............................................................................................51 

Table 7-1. Eastern Modeling Domain State Total Emissions for 2005, 2014, and 2020 Base 

Cases...........................................................................................................................54 

Table 7-2. Eastern Modeling Domain State-Sector Emissions for 2005, 2014, and 2020 Base 

Cases...........................................................................................................................55 

List of Appendices 

APPENDIX A: Ancillary Data Files Used for TR Case Compared to 2005 v4 Platform Data 

Files 

APPENDIX B: Inventory Data Files Used for Each TR Modeling Case – SMOKE Input 

Inventory Datasets 

APPENDIX C: OECA Consent Decrees 
6

1 Introduction 

This document provides the details of emissions data processing done in support of the Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) rulemaking effort for the Federal Transport Rule proposal (hereafter referred to 

as TR). The TR air quality modeling results were evaluated with respect to the 1997 annual and 2006 24-

hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), 

as well as the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The emissions and modeling effort for TR consists of four 

‘complete’ emissions cases: 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 base case, and 2014 Control case. Table 

1-1 provides more information on these emissions cases. The 2012 base case modeling was used to identify 

future nonattainment and maintenance locations. Not listed in Table 1-1 are source apportionment runs that 

were based on the 2012 base case to quantify the contributions of emissions in upwind states to annual 

average 24-hour PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone concentrations in other states. The modeling outputs for the 2014 

base and control cases were then used to quantify the benefits of this proposal. 

Table 1-1. List of cases run in support of the TR air quality modeling

Case Name 

Internal EPA 

Abbreviation Description 

2005 base case 2005ck 2005 case created using average-year fires data and an average-year 

temporal allocation approach for Electrical Generating Units 

(EGUs), to use for computing relative response factors with 2012 

and 2014 scenarios 

2012 base case 2012ck 2012 “baseline” scenario, representing the best estimate for the 

future year without implementation of EGU remedy controls. 

2014 base case 2014ck2 2014 “baseline” scenario, representing the best estimate for the 

future year without implementation of EGU remedy controls.

2014 Control case 2014ck2_catr1 2014 EGU “control” scenario for attaining 1997 ozone and annual 

PM standards, and 2006 daily PM standard. 

The data used in the 2005 emissions cases are the same as those described in the 2005-based, v4 platform 

document (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005). The 2005 and future-year emissions 

scenarios were processed in a form that is required by the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with extensions 

(CAMX) version 5 (Environ, 2009). CAMX is used to estimate base year, future base case and post-control 

concentrations of ozone and PM, along with deposition of nitrogen and sulfur, which are combined with 

monitoring data to estimate population-level exposures to changes in ambient concentrations for use in 

estimating health and welfare effects. 

In TR, we used a 2005 base case approach for the year 2005 emissions scenario. The base case approach 

uses an average-year fire emissions inventory and average-year EGU temporal profiles, which were based on 

3 years of hourly Continuous Emissions Monitoring (CEM) data for EGUs. We use a base case approach 

because we want to reduce year-specific variability in fires and EGUs between 2005 and the future years. 

For example, each year has different days and different locations with large fires, unplanned EGU 

shutdowns, and periods of high electricity demand. By using a base-case approach, the temporal and spatial 

aspects of the inventory for these sources are maintained into the future year modeling, which avoids 

potentially spurious year-specific artifacts in air quality modeling estimates. In addition, the v4 platform (see 

reference above) biogenic emissions data was held constant between the 2005 case for TR and all future-year 

cases run for TR. For TR, the only significant data changes between the 2005 and future-year cases are 

emission inventories (from all categories but average fires and biogenics) and speciation approaches. 
7

The future-year inventories, ancillary files, and detailed projection data used for this modeling are available 

as part of the rulemaking Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491. Since the data are large, the data files 

themselves are not posted with online access through the docket, and so a more convenient access location is 

the EPA Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse website for its 2005 platform 

(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005). The TR data files are provided as a subheading 

under this main link. 

In the remainder of this document, we provide a description of the approaches taken for the emissions in 

support of air quality modeling for TR. In Section 2, we briefly review the 2005 base case inventory, 

including ancillary data and issues related to CAMX support. In Section 3 we describe the development of 

the future year 2012 and 2014 base cases. We describe the 2012 Source Tagging scenarios in Section 4. In 

Section 5, we describe the 2014 EGU control (remedy) case as compared to the 2014 base case. In Section 6 

we provide data summaries comparing all four modeling cases and request for comments on specific issues. 

Section 7 provides a brief discussion on anticipated emissions changes over time for various source sectors 

and how those changes might impact the maintenance of the proposed standard. 

The US EPA seeks comment on growth and control approaches for all modeling sectors, particularly the 

identification of nonEGU controls or control programs that exist but have not been included in the emissions 

projections. We also seek comment on all significant source category emissions; for example, we are aware 

that our upstream oil and gas inventory can be further improved, but do not have data available to do so. The 

US EPA requests that all such comments be of a quantitative nature with supporting documentation on the 

source of the information provided. Comments with specific information or new data will supercede more 

vague comments such as “the emissions seem too low or too high.” Refer to Section 7 for an additional list 

of specific emissions issues of interest to EPA for comment. 

2 Development of Base Case 2005 Emission Inventories 

As mentioned previously, the 2005 emissions modeling approach for TR used the same data and approaches 

as the 2005 v4 base case platform. In this section, we briefly discuss the modeling sectors in the 2005 base 

case and future year cases as well as the TR-specific issues related to processing emissions for CAMX. 

2.1 Base case 2005 overview 

Table 2-1 lists the platform sectors used for the 2005 base case and all future year cases. It also indicates the 

platform sectors that include HAP emissions and the associated sectors from the National Emission 

Inventory (NEI). Subsequent sections refer to these platform sectors for identifying the emissions 

differences between the 2005 base case (v4 platform) and the TR future-year cases. The inputs to the air 

quality model; including emissions, meteorology, initial conditions, boundary conditions; along with the 

methods used to produce the inputs and the configuration of the air quality model are collectively known as a 

‘modeling platform’. 
8

Table 2-1. Sectors Used in the TR Emissions Modeling Platform 

Platform Sector 2005 NEI 

Sector 

Description and resolution of the data input to SMOKE 

IPM sector: ptipm Point 2005v2 NEI point source EGUs mapped to the Integrated Planning 

Model (IPM) model using the National Electric Energy Database 

System (NEEDS, 2006 version 3.02) database. Hourly files for 

continuous emission monitoring (CEM) sources are included only 

for the 2005 evaluation case. Day-specific emissions for non-CEM 

sources created for input into SMOKE. 

Non-IPM sector: 

ptnonipm 

Point All 2005v2 NEI point source records not matched to the ptipm 

sector, annual resolution. Includes all aircraft emissions. 

Average-fire 

sector: avefire 

N/A Average-year wildfire and prescribed fire emissions derived from 

the 2002 Platform avefire sector, county and annual resolution. 

Used for the 2005 base year and the future base model runs, but not 

for the model evaluation case. 

Agricultural 

sector: ag 

Nonpoint NH3 emissions from NEI nonpoint livestock and fertilizer 

application, county and annual resolution. 

Area fugitive dust 

sector: afdust 

Nonpoint PM10 and PM2.5 from fugitive dust sources from the NEI nonpoint 

inventory (e.g., building construction, road construction, paved 

roads, unpaved roads, agricultural dust), county/annual resolution. 

Remaining 

nonpoint sector: 

nonpt 

Nonpoint Primarily 2002 NEI nonpoint sources not otherwise included in 

other SMOKE sectors, county and annual resolution. Also includes 

updated Residential Wood Combustion emissions and year 2005 

non-California Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) oil and 

gas “Phase II” inventory. 

Nonroad sector: 

nonroad 

Mobile: 

Nonroad 

Monthly nonroad emissions from the National Mobile Inventory 

Model (NMIM) using NONROAD2005 version nr05c-BondBase 

for all states except California. Monthly emissions for California 

created from annual emissions submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB) for the 2005v2 NEI. 

locomotive, and 

non-C3 

commercial 

marine: 

alm_no_c3 

Mobile: 

Nonroad 

Year 2002 non-rail maintenance locomotives, and category 1 and 

category 2 commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions sources, 

county and annual resolution. Unlike prior platforms, aircraft 

emissions are now included in the ptnonipm sector and category 3 

CMV emissions are now contained in the seca_c3 sector 

C3 commercial 

marine: seca_c3 

Mobile : 

Nonroad 

Annual point source formatted year 2005 category 3 (C3) CMV 

emissions, developed for the EPA rule called “Control of Emissions 

from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 

Liters per Cylinder”, usually described as the Emissions Control 

Area (ECA) study, originally called SO2 (“S”) ECA. 

Onroad 

California, 

NMIM-based, and 

MOVES sources 

not subject to 

temperature 

adjustments: 

on_noadj 

Mobile: 

onroad 

Three, monthly, county-level components: 

1) Onroad emissions from NMIM using MOBILE6.2, other 

than for California. 

2) California onroad, created using annual emissions submitted 

by CARB for the 2005v2 NEI. 

Onroad gasoline non-motorcycle vehicle emissions from draft 

MOVES not subject to temperature adjustments: exhaust 

CO, NOX, VOC, some VOC HAPs, and evaporative VOC 

and some VOC Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). 

Onroad cold-start 

gasoline exhaust 

mode vehicle from 

MOVES subject 

Mobile: 

onroad 

Monthly, county-level draft MOVES-based onroad non-motorcycle 

gasoline emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to 

exhaust mode only for PM species and Naphthalene. California 

emissions not included. This sector is limited to cold start mode 
9

Platform Sector 2005 NEI 

Sector 

Description and resolution of the data input to SMOKE 

to temperature 

adjustments: 

on_moves_startpm 

emissions that contain different temperature adjustment curves from 

running exhaust (see on_moves_runpm sector). 

Onroad running 

gasoline exhaust 

mode vehicle from 

MOVES subject 

to temperature 

adjustments: 

on_moves_runpm 

Mobile: 

onroad 

Monthly, county-level draft MOVES-based onroad non-motorcycle 

gasoline emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to 

exhaust mode only for PM species and Naphthalene. California 

emissions not included. This sector is limited to running mode 

emissions that contain different temperature adjustment curves from 

cold start exhaust (see on_moves_startpm sector). 

Biogenic: biog N/A Hour-specific, grid cell-specific emissions generated from the 

BEIS3.14 model -includes emissions in Canada and Mexico. 

Other point 

sources not from 

the NEI: othpt 

N/A Point sources from Canada’s 2006 inventory and Mexico’s Phase III 

1999 inventory, annual resolution. Also includes annual U.S. 

offshore oil 2005v2 NEI point source emissions. 

Other point 

sources not from 

the NEI, Hg only: 

othpt_hg 

N/A Annual year 2000 Canada speciated mercury point source emissions. 

Other nonpoint 

and nonroad not 

from the NEI: 

othar 

N/A Annual year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999 

Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) nonpoint and nonroad 

mobile inventories, annual resolution. 

Other nonpoint 

sources not from 

the NEI, Hg only: 

othar_hg 

N/A Annual year 2000 Canada speciated mercury from nonpoint sources. 

Other onroad 

sources not from 

the NEI: othon 

N/A Year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999 Mexico 

Phase III (municipio resolution) onroad mobile inventories, annual 

resolution. 

As discussed in the 2005 v4 platform documentation, we processed all emissions data with a custom version 

of the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) modeling system, version 2.5. Users seeking to 

replicate modeling done for this effort can use version 2.6 of SMOKE. More details about SMOKE 

including user documentation are available at its website (http://www.smoke-model.org). 

For the 2005 base case, all inventory and ancillary input data files used as inputs for this rule can be found at 

the 2005-based platform website (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005). 

2.2 Custom processing configuration for Transport Rule Emissions 

Modeling 

In support of the TR proposal, EPA modeled the air quality in the East using a horizontal grid resolution of 

12 x 12 km. This Eastern 12 km modeling domain covers 37 states from Texas to North Dakota and all 

states to the east of those, and was “nested” within a modeling domain covering the remainder of the lower 

48 states using a grid resolution of 36 x 36 km1

. Therefore, unless noted to the contrary, the tables of 

emissions in this document cover the contiguous 48 states. A map of the air quality modeling domains is in 

 

1

 The air quality predictions from the 36 km Continental US (CONUS) domain were used to provide incoming “initial” and 

“boundary” concentrations for the Eastern 12 km domain. 
10

Figure 2-1. The domains relevant to TR are the 12km East domain within the blue boundary, and the 

national 36km domain. The 12km West domain is not used for TR. 

Figure 2-1. Air quality modeling domains 

36km Domain Boundary

12km East Domain Boundary

12km West Domain Boundary

All three grids use a Lambert-Conformal projection, with Alpha = 33o, Beta = 45o and Gamma = -97o, with a 

center of X = -97o and Y = 40o. Other specific parameters for these grids are provided in the TR Air Quality 

Modeling Technical Support Document. 

Emissions are first processed for the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, and then postprocessed via conversion scripts into a form appropriate for use by CAMX These conversion scripts are a 

series of programs run using shell scripts and simple programs to convert the merged 2-dimensional CMAQ 

emissions into CAMX format. These scripts also convert the elevated inline CMAQ emissions files for each 

sector into CAMX format and merge each converted sector file into one daily elevated emissions file. 

3 Development of 2012 and 2014 Future Year Base Case Emission 

Inventories 

This section describes the methods we used for developing the 2012 and 2014 future year base case 

emissions. The year 2012 source apportionment scenarios and the 2014 EGU control case are discussed in 

Sections 4 and 5, respectively. The ancillary input data are very similar in the future year scenarios as those 

in the 2005 base case except for the speciation profiles used for gasoline-related sources, which change in the 

future to account for increased ethanol usage in gasoline. Appendix A provides a table of differences 
11

between these ancillary input data between the 2005 base case and these future year scenarios. The specific 

speciation profile changes are discussed in Sections 3.2.8 and 3.3.5. 

The future base case projection methodologies vary by sector. The 2012 and 2014 base cases represent 

predicted emissions in the absence of any further controls beyond those Federal measures already 

promulgated. For EGU emissions (ptipm sector), all rules and settlements that were finalized by February 3, 

2009 have been included. For mobile sources (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, and on_moves_startpm 

sectors), all national measures for which data were available at the time of modeling have been included. 

The future base case scenarios do reflect projected economic changes and fuel usage for EGU and mobile 

sectors. For nonEGU point (ptnonipm sector) and nonpoint stationary sources (nonpt, ag, and afdust 

sectors), local control programs that might have been necessary for areas to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

annual standard, 2006 PM NAAQS (24-hour) standard, and the 1997 ozone NAAQS are not included in the 

future base case projections. This is because the nonattainment areas for the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone standards 

were not announced until 2004 and 2005 respectively, and the corresponding state implementation plans 

(SIPs) were not due until 2007 and 2008, thereby preventing the inclusion of these local measures in the 

2005 emissions inventory. Whether any of these SIPs controls are included in the final rule depends on a 

couple of factors: 1) the SIPs must be approved and made available, and 2) the control measures and 

technologies are provided in such a way that they can be applied to our inventories (e.g., control efficiencies 

or emission reductions matched to specific NEI facilities, units, and/or source category codes (SCCs). The 

following bullets summarize the projection methods used for sources in the various sectors, while additional 

details and data sources are given in Table 3-1: 

• IPM sector (ptipm): Unit-specific estimates from IPM, version 3.02. 

• Non-IPM sector (ptnonipm): Projection factors and percent reductions reflect emission reductions 

due to control programs, plant closures, consent decrees and settlements. Also used projection 

approaches for point source livestock and aircraft and gasoline stage II emissions that are consistent 

with projections used for the sectors that contain the bulk of these emissions. Terminal area forecast 

(TAF) data aggregated to the national level were used for aircraft to account for projected changes in 

landing/takeoff activity. Year-specific speciation was applied to some portions of this sector and is 

discussed in Section 3.2.8. 

• Average fires sector (avefire): No growth or control. 

• Agricultural sector (ag): Projection factors for livestock estimates based on expected changes in 

animal population from 2005 Department of Agriculture data; no growth or control for NH3

emissions from fertilizer application. 

• Area fugitive dust sector (afdust): Projection factors for dust categories related to livestock estimates 

based on expected changes in animal population; no growth or control for other categories in this 

sector. 

• Remaining Nonpoint sector (nonpt): Projection factors that reflect emission reductions due to control 

programs. Residential wood combustion projections based on growth in lower-emitting stoves and a 

reduction in higher emitting stoves. PFC projection factors reflecting impact of the final Mobile 

Source Air Toxics (MSAT2) rule. Gasoline stage II projection factors based on National Mobile 

Inventory Model (NMIM)-estimated VOC refueling estimates for future years. Year-specific 

speciation was applied to some portions of this sector and is discussed in Section 3.2.8. 

• Nonroad mobile sector (nonroad): Output from the NONROAD2005 model, which was run using 

NMIM, includes final controls from the final loco-marine and small spark ignition OTAQ rules. 

California-specific data provided by the state of California. Year-specific speciation was applied to 

some portions of this sector and is discussed in Section 3.3.5. 
12

• Aircraft, locomotive, and non-Class 3 commercial marine sector (alm_no_c3): Projection factors for 

Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine and locomotives which reflect activity growth and final 

locomotive-marine controls. 

• Class 3 commercial marine vessel sector (seca_c3): base year 2002 emissions grown to future years 

without Emissions Control Area (ECA) or International Marine Organization (IMO) global NOX and 

SO2 controls. 

• Onroad no-adjustment for temperature mobile sector (on_noadj): Non-refueling NMIM-based except 

for gasoline vehicle NOX, CO, VOC, and select VOC HAPs which are from draft MOVES, and 

gasoline vehicle PM and naphthalene which are in the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm 

sectors. California-specific data provided by the state of California. VOC speciation uses same 

combination of profiles as are used for exhaust and evaporative nonroad mobile profiles. 

• Onroad PM gasoline running mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Running mode draft MOVES future 

year state-month estimates for PM and naphthalene, apportioned to the county level using NMIM 

state-county ratios matched to vehicle and road types. 

• Onroad PM gasoline start mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Cold start draft MOVES future year 

state-month estimates for PM and naphthalene, apportioned to the county level using NMIM statecounty ratios of local urban and rural roads by vehicle type. 

• Other nonroad/nonpoint (othar): No growth or control. 

• Other nonpoint speciated mercury (othar_hg): No growth or control. 

• Other onroad sector (othon): No growth or control. 

• Other nonroad/nonpoint (othar): No growth or control. 

• Other point (othpt): No growth or control. 

• Other point speciated mercury (othpt_hg): No growth or control. 

• Biogenic: 2005 emissions used for all future-year scenarios. 

Table 3-1 summarizes the control strategies and growth assumptions by source type used to create the 2012 

and 2014 base case emissions from the 2005 base case inventories. Note that mercury (Hg) is listed in the 

pollutants column; however, we did not include Hg in our future year modeling. All Mexico, Canada, and 

offshore oil emissions are unchanged in all future case scenarios from those in the 2005 base case. Emission 

summaries by sector for 2005 and future years are provided in Section 6. Note that a few controls are not 

fully promulgated by 2012 but are by 2014. For example the Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

(MACT) rule “Boat Manufacturing” has a compliance date in year 2013; therefore the VOC control 

associated with this MACT rule is not reflected in the 2012 base Case but is reflected in the 2014 base and 

control cases. 

The detailed projection factors used for these future year emissions have hundreds of thousands of records 

and are not therefore listed in this document or in a spreadsheet. Rather, the detailed projection data can be 

obtained from docket for this rule and from the Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse website listed in Section 

1. 

The remainder of this section is organized either by source sector or by specific emissions category within a 

source sector for which a distinct set of data were used or developed for the purpose of projections. This 

organization allows consolidation of the discussion of the emissions categories that are contained in multiple 

sectors, because the data and approaches used across the sectors are consistent, and do not need to be 

repeated. Sector names associated with the emissions categories are provided in parentheses. A list of 

inventory datasets used for this and all cases is provided in Appendix B. 
13

Table 3-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating 2012 and 2014 base case emissions 

inventories from the 2005 base case 

Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions 

(Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard and Approach Used to Apply 

to the Inventory) 

Pollutants 

Affected 

Approach or 

Reference: 

 Non-EGU Point (ptnonipm) Controls 

Consent decrees apportioned to several plants 

VOC, CO, 

NOx, PM, SO2

some VOC 

HAPs 

DOJ Settlements: plant SCC controls 

Alcoa, TX 

Premcor (formerly MOTIVA), DE

NOx, SO2 1 

Refinery Consent Decrees: plant/SCC controls (a few of these controls are 

promulgated in year 2013, and thus are not reflected in the 2012 base case) NOx, PM, SO2 2 

Closures, pre-2008: plant control of 100% 

Auto plants 

Pulp and Paper 

Large Municipal Waste Combustors 

Small Municipal Waste Combustors 

Plants closed after the 2005v2 point inventory was released (pre-2008 closures)

All 3 

Industrial Boiler/Process Heater plant/SCC controls for PM PM 4 

Large Municipal Waste Combustors (LMWC) PM, Hg, and 

metals 5 

Small Municipal Waste Combustors (SMWC) PM, Hg, metals, 

NOx, SO2

5 

MACT rules, national, VOC: national applied by SCC, MACT 

Boat Manufacturing (promulgated in year 2013, thus not reflected in the 2012 

base case)

Wood Building Products Surface Coating 

Generic MACT II: Spandex Production, Ethylene manufacture 

Large Appliances 

Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON): Alkyd Resins, Chelating Agents, 

Explosives, Phthalate Plasticizers, Polyester Resins, Polymerized Vinylidene 

Chloride 

Reinforced Plastics 

Asphalt Processing & Roofing 

Iron & Steel Foundries 

Metal: Can, Coil 

Metal Furniture 

Miscellaneous Metal Parts & Products 

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills 

Paper and Other Web 

Plastic Parts 

Plywood and Composite Wood Products 

Carbon Black Production 

Cyanide Chemical Manufacturing 

Friction Products Manufacturing 

Leather Finishing Operations 

Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing 

Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline) 

Refractory Products Manufacturing 

Sites Remediation

VOC EPA, 2007a 

Solid Waste Rules (Section 129d/111d) 

Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator Regulations NOx, PM, SO2 EPA, 2005 
14

Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions 

(Grouped by Affected Pollutants or Standard and Approach Used to Apply 

to the Inventory) 

Pollutants 

Affected 

Approach or 

Reference: 

MACT rules, plant-level, VOC: Auto Plants VOC 6 

MACT rules, plant-level, PM & SO2: Lime Manufacturing PM, SO2 7 

MACT rules, plant-level, PM: Taconite Ore PM 8 

Stationary Area Assumptions 

Municipal Waste Landfills: project factor of 0.25 applied VOC EPA, 2007a 

Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to years 2012 and year 2015 NH3 9 

Residential Wood Combustion Growth and Changeouts from year 2005 to 

years 2012 and 2015 all 10 

Gasoline Stage II growth and control from year 2005 to years 2012 and 2015 VOC 11 

Portable Fuel Container MSAT2 inventory growth and control from year 2005 

to years 2012 and 2015 

VOC 12 

EGU Point Controls 

Updated Title IV SO2 allowance bank assumption and Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) using IPM 3.0.2 EISA 3e NOX, SO2, PM 13 

Onroad Mobile and Nonroad Mobile Controls (list includes all key mobile 

control strategies but is not exhaustive) 

National Onroad Rules: 

Tier 2 Rule 

2007 Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule 

Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2) 

Renewable Fuel Standard

all 

Local Onroad Programs: 

National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV) 

Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV Program 

VOC 14 

National Nonroad Controls: 

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4 

Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large-Spark Ignition Engines and 

Recreational Engines (Marine and Land Based): “Pentathalon Rule” 

Clean Bus USA Program 

Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine 

Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder 

all 15, 16, 17 

Aircraft, Locomotives, and Commercial Marine Assumptions 

Aircraft: 

Itinerant (ITN) operations at airports to year 2020 all 18 

Locomotives: 

Energy Information Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for 

freight rail 

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4 

Locomotive Emissions Final Rulemaking, December 17, 1997 

Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine

all EPA, 2009; 

19; 16 

Commercial Marine: 

EIA fuel consumption projections for diesel-fueled vessels 

OTAQ ECA C3 Base 2020 inventory for residual-fueled vessels 

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4 

Emissions Standards for Commercial Marine Diesel Engines, December 29, 

1999 

Tier 1 Marine Diesel Engines, February 28, 2003 

all 19; EPA, 

2009 

APPROACHES: 

1. For ALCOA consent decree, used http:// cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/cases/index.cfm; for MOTIVA: used 

information sent by State of Delaware 

2. Used data provided by EPA, OAQPS, Sector Policies and Programs Division (SPPD) –see Section 3.2.6. 
15

3. Closures obtained from EPA SPPD sector leads; most verified using the World Wide Web –see Section 3.2.6. 

4. Used data list of plants provided by project lead from 2001-based platform; required mapping the 2001 plants 

to 2002 NEI plants due to plant id changes across inventory years. See Section 3.2.6. 

5. Used data provided by EPA, OAQPS SPPD expert –see Section 3.2.6. 

6. Percent reductions recommended and plants to apply to reduction to were based on recommendations by rule 

lead engineer, and are consistent with the reference: EPA, 2007a 

7. Percent reductions recommended are determined from the existing plant estimated baselines and estimated 

reductions as shown in the Federal Register Notice for the rule. SO2 % reduction will therefore be 

6147/30,783 = 20% and PM10 and PM2.5 reductions will both be 3786/13588 = 28% 

8. Same approach as used in the 2006 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) -estimates reductions of "PM emissions 

by 10,538 tpy, a reduction of about 62%." Used same list of plants as were identified based on tonnage and 

SCC from CAIR: http://www.envinfo.com/caain/June04updates/tiop_fr2.pdf

9. Except for dairy cows and turkeys (no growth), based on animal population growth estimates from USDA and 

Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute. See Section 3.2.1. 

10. Expected benefits of woodstoves change-out program: http://www.epa.gov/woodstoves/index.html

11. VOC emission ratios of year 2020-specific from year 2005 from the National Mobile Inventory Model 

(NMIM) results for onroad refueling including activity growth from VMT, Stage II control programs at 

gasoline stations, and phase in of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls. 

12. VOC and benzene emissions for year 2020 from year 2002 from MSAT2 rule (EPA, 2007b) 

13. http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/progsregs/epa-ipm/index.html

14. Only for states submitting these inputs: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/lev-nlev.htm

15. http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr.htm

16. http://www.epa.gov/cleanschoolbus/

17. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/marinesi.htm

18. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System, December 2007: 

http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp

19. http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr.htm

3.1 Stationary Source Projections: IPM sector (ptipm) 

The future year data for the ptipm sector were created by the IPM model version3.02 EISA. The EPA Clean 

Air Markets Division (CAMD) manages the development of this model and maintains a website that 

documents the latest IPM version used in the TR proposal “Updates to EPA Base Case v3.02 EISA Using the 

Integrated Planning Model”: 

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/index.html. 

The IPM is a multiregional, dynamic, deterministic linear programming model of the U.S. electric power 

sector. IPM Version 3.02 EISA features an updated Title IV SO2 allowance bank assumption, reflects state 

rules and consent decrees through February 3, 2009, and incorporates updates related to the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007. Units with advanced controls (e.g., scrubber, SCR) that were not 

required to run for compliance with Title IV, New Source Review (NSR), state settlements, or state-specific 

rules were allowed in IPM to decide on the basis of economic efficiency whether to operate those controls. 

We used IPM results for 2012 directly and used IPM results to represent 2014. 

OAQPS post-processed these data in the same way as described in the 2005 v4 platform documentation for 

the “base case” to create daily emissions that include temporal allocation information from three years of 

Continuous Emissions Monitoring (CEM) data. The temporal allocation approach is the same as for the 

2005 base case to eliminate artificial differences in temporal allocation between the base and future years. 
16

3.2 Stationary Source Projections: non-IPM sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, 

afdust) 

To project U.S. stationary sources other than ptipm, we applied growth factors and/or controls to certain 

categories within the ptnonipm, nonpt, ag and afdust platform sectors. This subsection provides details on 

the data and projection methods used for these sectors. In estimating future-year emissions, we assumed that 

emissions growth does not track with economic growth for many stationary non-IPM sources. This “nogrowth” assumption is based on an examination of historical emissions and economic data. While we are 

working toward improving the projection approach in future emissions platforms, we are still using the nogrowth assumption for the 2005, v4 platform. More details on the rationale for this approach can be found in 

Appendix D of the Regulatory Impact Assessment for the PM NAAQS rule (EPA, 2006). 

Year-specific projection factors for year 2012 were used for creating the 2012 base case; however, year 2015 

projection factors were used to create the 2014 base case unless noted otherwise. A 2015 base case was 

initially developed and it was decided rather late in the TR modeling process to instead use a year 2014 base 

case. Most projections are not year-specific, and most of the year-specific projections do not differ 

significantly between year 2014 and year 2015. We intend to use 2014-specific emissions for all sectors in 

the final Transport Rule modeling. 

Growth factors (and control factors) are provided in the following sections where feasible. However, some 

sectors used growth or control factors that varied geographically and their contents could not be provided in 

the following sections (e.g., gasoline distribution varies by county and pollutant and has thousands of 

records). If the growth or control factors for a sector are not provided in a table in this document, they are 

available as a “projection” or “control” packet for input to SMOKE on: 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4/projection_control_packets

3.2.1 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust, ptnonipm) 

Growth in ammonia (NH3) and dust (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions from livestock in the ag, afdust and 

ptnonipm sectors was based on projections of growth in animal population. Table 3-2 provides the growth 

factors from the base case 2005 emissions to future years 2012 and 2014 for animal categories. For example, 

year 2015 (2014) beef emissions are 1.8% larger than the 2005 base case emissions. Except for dairy cows 

and turkey production, the animal projection factors are derived from national-level animal population 

projections from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Agriculture Policy and 

Research Institute (FAPRI). For dairy cows and turkeys we assumed that there would be no growth in 

emissions. This assumption was based on an analysis of historical trends in the number of such animals 

compared to production rates. Although productions rates have increased, the number of animals has 

declined. Thus, we do not believe that production forecasts provide representative estimates of the future 

number of cows and turkeys; therefore, we did not use these forecasts for estimating future-year emissions 

from these animals. In particular, the dairy cow population is projected to decrease in the future as it has for 

the past few decades; however, milk production will be increasing over the same period. Note that the 

ammonia emissions from dairies are not directly related to animal population but also nitrogen excretion. 

With the cow numbers going down and the production going up we suspect the excretion value will be 

changing, but we assumed no change because we did not have a quantitative estimate. 

The inventory for livestock emissions used 2002 emissions values therefore, our projection method projected 

from 2002 rather than from 2005. For the 2012 base case, year 2009 and year 2014 projection factors were 

interpolated to create year 2012 projection factors. For the 2014 base case, year 2015 projection factors were 

used because of the late change from 2015 to 2014, and were developed by interpolating year 2014 and year 

2020 projection factors. We intend to update the projections in the final rule using the latest available data 

from the Department of Agriculture and for 2014 instead of 2015. 
17

Appendix E in the 2002v3 documentation provides the animal population data and regression curves used to 

derive the growth factors: 

http://www.epa.gov/scram001/reports/Emissions%20TSD%20Vol2_Appendices_01-15-08.pdf. Appendix F 

in the same document provides the cross references of livestock sources in the ag, afdust and ptnonipm 

sectors to the animal categories in Table 3-2. 

Table 3-2. Growth factors from year 2005 to future years for Animal Operations 

Projection Factors 

Animal Category 2012 2015 (used for 2014) 

Dairy Cow 1.000 1.000 

Beef 1.014 1.018 

Pork 1.060 1.077 

Broilers 1.230 1.298 

Turkeys 1.000 1.000 

Layers 1.160 1.209 

Poultry Average 1.178 1.232 

Overall Average 1.0623 1.081 

3.2.2 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt) 

We projected residential wood combustion emissions based on the expected increase in the number of lowemitting wood stoves and the corresponding decrease in other types of wood stoves. As newer, cleaner 

woodstoves replace older, higher-polluting wood stoves, there will be an overall reduction of the emissions 

from these sources. The approach cited here was developed as part of a modeling exercise to estimate the 

expected benefits of the woodstoves change-out program (http://www.epa.gov/woodstoves/index.html). 

Details of this approach can be found in Section 2.3.3 of the PM NAAQS Regulatory Impact Analysis (EPA, 

2006). 

The specific assumptions we made were: 

 Fireplaces, SCC=2104008001: increase 1%/yr 

 Old woodstoves, SCC=2104008002, 2104008010, or 2104008051: decrease 2%/yr 

 New woodstoves, SCC=2104008003, 2104008004, 2104008030, 2104008050, 2104008052 or 

2104008053: increase 2%/yr 

For the general woodstoves and fireplaces category (SCC 2104008000) we computed a weighted average 

distribution based on 19.4% fireplaces, 71.6% old woodstoves, 9.1% new woodstoves using 2002v3 

Platform (these emissions have not been updated for the 2005v4 platform used for the TR proposal) 

emissions for PM2.5. These fractions are based on the fraction of emissions from these processes in the states 

that did not have the “general woodstoves and fireplaces” SCC in the 2002 NEI. This approach results in an 

overall decrease of 1.056% per year for this source category. 

Table 3-3 presents the projection factors used to project the 2005 base case (2002 emissions) for residential 

wood combustion. For the 2012 base case, year 2009 and year 2014 projection factors were interpolated to 

create year 2012 projection factors. For example, year 2015 (2014) “Fireplaces: General” 

(SCC=2104008001) emissions are 13% higher than the base case 2005 emissions. For the 2014 base case, 

year 2015 projection factors were used because of the late change from 2015 to 2014, and were developed by 

interpolating year 2014 and year 2020 projection factors. We intend to use 2014 projects in the final rule. 
18

Table 3-3. Projection Factors for growing year 2005 Residential Wood Combustion Sources to future years 

Projection Factors 

SCC SCC Description 2012 2015 (used for 2014) 

2104008000 Total: Woodstoves and Fireplaces 0.8944 0.8627 

2104008001 Fireplaces: General 

2104008070 Outdoor Wood Burning Equipment 1.1000 1.1300 

2104008002 Fireplaces: Insert; non-EPA certified 

2104008010 Woodstoves: General 

2104008051 Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Non-EPA certified 

0.8000 0.7400 

2104008003 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; non-catalytic 

2104008004 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; catalytic 

2104008030 Catalytic Woodstoves: General 

2104008050 Non-catalytic Woodstoves: EPA certified 

2104008052 Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Low Emitting 

2104008053 Non-catalytic Woodstoves: Pellet Fired 

1.2000 1.2600 

3.2.3 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm) 

Emissions from Stage II gasoline operations in the 2005 base case are contained in both nonpt and ptnonipm 

sectors. The only SCC in the nonpt inventory used for gasoline Stage II emissions is 2501060100 (Storage 

and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage; Gasoline Service Stations; Stage II: Total). The 

following SIC and SCC codes are associated with gasoline Stage II emissions in the ptnonipm sector: 

 SIC 5541 (Automotive Dealers & Service Stations, Gasoline Service Stations, Gasoline service 

stations) 

 SCC 40600401 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum 

Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls) 

 SCC 40600402 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum 

Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Liquid Spill Loss w/o Controls) 

 SCC 40600403 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum 

Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls) 

 SCC 40600499 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum 

Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks - Stage II;Not Classified 

We used a consistent approach across nonpt and ptnonipm to projection these gasoline stage II emissions. 

The approach involved computing VOC-specific projection factors from the NMIM results for onroad 

refueling, using ratios of future–year emissions to 2005 base case emissions. The approach accounts for 

three elements of refueling growth and control: (1) activity growth (due to VMT growth as input into 

NMIM), (2) emissions reductions from Stage II control programs at gasoline stations, and (3) emissions 

reductions resulting from the phase in over time of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls. 

We assumed that all areas with Stage II controls in 2005 continue to have Stage II controls in all future 

calendar years. 

We computed the VOC projection factors at a county-specific, annual resolution as shown below: 

PF[county, future year] = VOC_RFL[county, future year]/VOC_RFL[county, 2005] 

where VOC_RFL is the VOC refueling emissions for onroad sources from NMIM. 

We applied these projection factors to both nonpt and ptnonipm sector gasoline stage II sources. 
19

Chemical speciation requires certain VOC HAPs for integrated sources, specifically, benzene, acetaldehyde, 

formaldehyde, and methanol. Therefore, for integrated sources such as this category, the VOC HAPs are 

also projected based on ratios of future year and base year VOC. However, only benzene (and naphthalene, 

a VOC HAP that does not impact speciation) refueling emissions were supplied, and so only VOC and 

benzene emissions were projected. For benzene and naphthalene projection factors, simply replace “VOC” 

in the above equation. 

For the 2012 base case, year 2012 NMIM refueling emissions were used to create county-level by-pollutant 

ratios to year 2005 NMIM refueling emissions. For the 2014 base case, year 2015 projection factors were 

used because of the late change from 2015 to 2014, developed from ratios of 2015 to 2005 NMIM refueling 

emissions. 

3.2.4 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt) 

We obtained future-year VOC emissions from Portable Fuel Containers (PFCs) from inventories developed 

and modeled for EPA’s MSAT rule (EPA, 2007b). Additional information on the PFC inventories can be 

found in Section 2.2.3, above. The future-year emissions reflect projected increases in fuel consumption, 

state programs to reduce PFC emissions, standards promulgated in the MSAT rule, and impacts of the 

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) on gasoline volatility. Future-year emissions for PFCs were available for 

2010, 2015, 2020, and 2030. In creating the inventories for the TR proposal, we created year 2012 emissions 

by linearly interpolating year 2010 and year 2015 inventories. The year 2015 PFC inventory was used as-is 

for the 2014 base case because of the late change from 2015 to 2014. Benzene future-year PFC emissions 

were also added to the inventory for the 2005 v4 platform and used in VOC speciation for CMAQ through 

HAP-CAP integration calculations. 

3.2.5 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm) 

Unlike the 2002v3 platform, aircraft emissions are contained in the ptnonipm inventory. These 2005 point 

source emissions are projected to future years using the same method, by applying activity growth using data 

on itinerant (ITN) operations at airports. The ITN operations are defined as aircraft take-offs whereby the 

aircraft leaves the airport vicinity and lands at another airport, or aircraft landings whereby the aircraft has 

arrived from outside the airport vicinity. We used projected ITN information available from the Federal 

Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System: 

http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp (publication date December 2008). This information is available 

for approximately 3300 individual airports, for all years up to 2025. We aggregated and applied this 

information at the national level by summing the airport-specific (U.S. airports only) ITN operations to 

national totals by year and by aircraft operation, for each of the four available operation types: commercial, 

general, air taxi, military. We computed growth factors for each operation type by dividing future-year ITN 

by 2005-year ITN. We assigned factors to inventory SCCs based on the operation type. 

The methods that the FAA used for developing the ITN data in the TAF are documented in: 

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/2009-

2025/media/2009%20Forecast%20Doc.pdf

Table 3-4 provides the national level growth factors for aircraft; all factors are applied to year 2005 

emissions. For example, year 2014 commercial aircraft emissions are 8.9% higher than year 2005 emissions. 

Year 2014 factors are actually year 2015 factors as the future base year was developed before we had a 

chance to rerun for a year 2014 base year. The differences between year 2014 and year 2015 factors are 

within 1-3%. 
20

Table 3-4. Factors used to project base case 2005 aircraft emissions to future years 

SCC SCC Description 

Year 2012 

factor 

Year 2014 

factor 

2275001000 Military aircraft 0.967 0.968 

2275020000 Commercial aircraft 1.019 1.089 

2275050000 General aviation 0.962 0.986 

2275060000 Air taxi 0.872 0.910 

27501015 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP-5 

0.967 0.968 

27502001 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Commercial;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas 

1.019 1.089

27502011 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Commercial;Jet Engine: Jet A 

1.019 1.089

27505001 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Civil;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas 

0.962 0.986 

27505011 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Civil;Jet Engine: Jet A 

0.962 0.986 

27601014 Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP-4 

0.967 0.968 

27601015 Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO 

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP-5 

0.967 0.968 

We did not apply growth factors to any point sources with SCC 27602011 (Internal Combustion Engines; 

Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A) because the plant names associated 

with these point sources appeared to represent industrial facilities rather than airports. This SCC is only in 

one county, Santa Barbara, California (State/County FIPS 06083). 

None of our aircraft emission projections account for any control programs. We considered the NOX

standard adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Committee on Aviation 

Environmental Protection (CAEP) in February 2004, which is expected to reduce NOX by approximately 2% 

in 2015 and 3% in 2020. However, this rule has not yet been adopted as an EPA (or U.S.) rule; therefore, the 

effects of this rule were not included in the future-year emissions projections. 

3.2.6 Stationary Source control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and 

plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt) 

We applied emissions reduction factors to the 2005 emissions for particular sources in the ptnonipm and 

nonpt sectors to reflect the impact of stationary-source control programs –including consent decrees and 

settlements- and plant closures. Our approach is very similar to what we did for the 2002v3 platform in that 

we included many of the same plant closures and controls. Here we describe the complete contents of the 

controls and closures for the 2012 and 2014 base cases. 

Controls from the NOX SIP call were assumed to have been implemented by 2005 and captured in the 2005 

base case (2005 NEI v2 point inventory). This assumption was confirmed by review of the 2005 NEI that 

showed reductions from Large Boiler/Turbines and Large Internal Combustion Engines in the Northeast 

states covered by the NOx SIP call. The future-year base controls consist of the following: 

• We did not include MACT rules where compliance dates were prior to 2005 because we assumed 

these were already been reflected in the 2005 inventory. The EPA OAQPS Sector Policies and 

Programs Division (SPPD) provided all controls information related to the MACT rules. 
21

• We included plant closures (i.e., emissions were zeroed out for future years) where information 

indicated that the plant was actually closed. However, plants projected to close in the future (post2008) were not removed in the future years because these projections can be inaccurate due to 

economic improvements. These plant closures affect the following sources: auto plants, pulp and 

paper plants, large and small municipal waste combustors (LMWC and SMWC), as well as plants 

closed before 2008 but following the release of the 2005v2 point inventory. The EPA OAQPS SPPD 

provided the closures information. 

• In addition to plant closures, we included the effects of the Department of Justice Settlements and 

Consent Decrees on ptnonipm sector emissions. We also included estimated impacts of HAP 

standards per Section 112, 129 of the Clean Air Act on ptnonipm and nonpt sector emissions, based 

on expected CAP co-benefits to sources in these sectors. 

• The same reductions were applied across all years with the exception of the Boat Manufacturing 

MACT and refinery facility/SCC reductions for the states and pollutants listed in Table 3-5. 

• Numerous controls have compliance dates beyond 2008; these include refinery and the Office of 

Compliance and Enforcement (OECA) consent decrees, Department of Justice (DOJ) settlements, as 

well as most national VOC MACT controls. Additional OECA consent decrees information is 

provided in Appendix C, and the details data used are available at the website listed in Section 1. 

• The refinery consent decrees are the only controls in which some of the compliance dates are beyond 

June 2014 and are thus not applied to either the 2012 or 2014 base cases. The EPA OAQPS SPPD 

provided these controls at the facility and SCC level. 

• We applied most of the control programs as replacement controls, which means that any existing 

percent reductions (“baseline control efficiency”) reported in the NEI were removed prior to the 

addition of the percent reductions due to these control programs. Exceptions to replacement controls 

are “additional” controls, which were applied for many settlements and consent decrees where 

specific plant and multiple-plant-level reductions/targets were desired. Applying controls as 

“additional” controls ensures that the controlled emissions match desired reductions regardless of the 

baseline control efficiencies in the NEI. Another exception is municipal waste landfills where VOC 

was reduced 75% via a MACT control using projection factors of 0.25 instead of control efficiencies 

because no other nonpt sector source category was subject to controls. 

Table 3-5. States with post-2012 controls 

Control type State NOX SO2 PM VOC 

Post-2012 controls 

Refinery controls IL X X X 

Refinery controls OK X 

Refinery controls PA X X X 

Refinery controls TX X X 

Boat Manufacturing, national MACT rule All X 

We intended to use a SMOKE “control” packet (data file) to apply all control factors that implement known 

emissions reductions and plant closures from point sources. However, many of the “additional” controls 

were inadvertently not applied for the 2012 base case. Specifically, many of the consent decrees apportioned 

to several plants (see Table 3-1) were not correctly matched with the inventory and hence were not applied. 

This emissions processing error is confined to the 2012 base case and was fixed when we processed the 2014 

base case. The impact of these “missed” reductions is very small for any given state, with the largest impact 
22

being a 2.6% overestimate of all SO2 emissions in Louisiana. The percent of the total non-biogenics 

emissions that were over-estimated are provided in Table 3-6. 

Table 3-6. Impact on Total Non-Biogenic Emissions of Not Applying “Additional” Controls on the 2012 

Base Case 

State Pollutant 

2012 Base 

Case: 

Modeled 

2012 Base 

Case: 

Corrected 

Missing 

Reductions 

Percent of Total 

non-biogenic 

Inventory 

Erroneously Not 

Reduced 

Alabama CO 1,344,754 1,344,560 194 0.0%

Indiana CO 1,639,008 1,638,902 106 0.0%

Iowa CO 770,339 761,169 9,170 1.2%

Texas CO 3,994,619 3,994,353 266 0.0%

US Total* CO 63,028,528 63,018,558 9,970 0.0%

Alabama NOX 364,171 363,942 229 0.1%

California NOX 1,103,014 1,102,114 900 0.1%

Indiana NOX 505,127 504,960 167 0.0%

Iowa NOX 251,721 251,239 482 0.2%

Pennsylvania NOX 566,418 565,213 1,205 0.2%

Texas NOX 1,343,319 1,337,590 5,729 0.4%

Washington NOX 273,839 273,115 724 0.3%

US Total* NOX 15,083,338 15,073,725 9,613 0.1%

Alabama PM10 195,954 195,828 126 0.1%

Indiana PM10 475,925 475,789 136 0.0%

Michigan PM10 288,392 288,094 298 0.1%

Minnesota PM10 512,813 511,148 1,665 0.3%

Missouri PM10 521,063 520,715 348 0.1%

US Total* PM10 12,572,792 12,569,781 3,011 0.0%

Indiana PM2.5 121,110 120,976 134 0.1%

Michigan PM2.5 83,415 83,262 153 0.2%

Minnesota PM2.5 111,407 110,725 682 0.6%

Missouri PM2.5 103,327 103,073 254 0.2%

Texas PM2.5 299,720 299,322 398 0.1%

US Total* PM2.5 3,960,713 3,958,793 1,920 0.0%

Alabama SO2 462,297 461,099 1,198 0.3%

California SO2 230,482 227,828 2,654 1.2%

Georgia SO2 676,193 676,059 134 0.0%

Illinois SO2 866,396 866,262 134 0.0%

Indiana SO2 986,626 986,458 168 0.0%

Iowa SO2 250,954 249,906 1,048 0.4%

Kentucky SO2 781,249 779,229 2,020 0.3%

Louisiana SO2 341,731 333,221 8,510 2.6%
23

State Pollutant 

2012 Base 

Case: 

Modeled 

2012 Base 

Case: 

Corrected 

Missing 

Reductions 

Percent of Total 

non-biogenic 

Inventory 

Erroneously Not 

Reduced 

Missouri SO2 570,761 569,522 1,239 0.2%

Ohio SO2 1,076,493 1,076,201 292 0.0%

Pennsylvania SO2 1,119,712 1,116,811 2,901 0.3%

Texas SO2 640,682 633,445 7,237 1.1%

US Total* SO2 13,390,283 13,362,585 27,698 0.2%

Alabama VOC 316,558 316,337 221 0.1%

Delaware VOC 26,227 26,097 130 0.5%

Illinois VOC 472,361 472,145 216 0.0%

Indiana VOC 319,116 318,217 899 0.3%

Iowa VOC 156,642 156,433 209 0.1%

Kansas VOC 187,046 186,655 391 0.2%

Kentucky VOC 221,416 221,155 261 0.1%

Michigan VOC 465,273 462,798 2,475 0.5%

Mississippi VOC 271,525 271,417 108 0.0%

Missouri VOC 277,715 276,585 1,130 0.4%

US Total* VOC 14,604,636 14,598,595 6,041 0.0%

* The US Totals represent contiguous U.S. including the District of Columbia

3.2.7 Upstream oil and gas projections in non-California WRAP states (nonpt) 

The upstream oil and gas nonpt inventory in the non-California WRAP (Western Regional Air Partnership) 

states is unchanged from the year 2005 Phase II inventory used in the 2005 base case. Year 2018 emissions 

Phase II WRAP data was available; however, we decided to not interpolate these emissions for the 2012 and 

2014 modeling scenarios. Upstream oil and gas emissions in all other states are also unchanged from the 

2005 base case. 

3.2.8 Future Year VOC Speciation for gasoline-related sources (ptnonipm, 

nonpt) 

To account for the future projected increase in the ethanol content of fuels, different future year VOC 

speciation was used for certain gasoline-related emission sources. Such sources include gasoline stage II, 

PFCs, and finished fuel storage and transport-related sources related to bulk terminals (where the ethanol 

may be mixed) and downstream to the pump. We identified this last group of sources as “btp” (from bulk 

terminals to pumps). While most of these sources are in the nonpt sector, there were also some in the 

ptnonipm. The same profiles were used for 2012 and 2014, and were developed based on AEO projections 

of ethanol fuels for the year 2022. All gasoline stage II and “btp” sources used the same combination of E0 

and E10 headspace profiles and an E85 evaporative profile (since no E85 headspace profile was available). 

The combinations used were: 10.894% E0, 89.031% E10 and 0.075% E85. The PFC emissions used only 

E10 profiles. 

VOC speciation for gasoline stage II and finished fuel storage and transport (from bulk terminals to pumps) 

utilizes a combination of E0, E10 and E85 gasoline VOC headspace profiles and an E85 evaporative VOC 

profile, instead of using all E0 gasoline profiles as did the 2005 base case. 
24

3.3 Mobile source projections 

Mobile source monthly inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile emissions were created for 2012 and 2014 

using a combination of the NMIM and draft MOVES models. Mobile source emissions were further linearly 

interpolated between 2012 and 2015 to estimate 2014 emissions. Emissions for these years reflect onroad 

mobile control programs including the Light-Duty Vehicle Tier 2 Rule, the Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule, and 

the Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT2) final rule. Nonroad mobile emissions reductions for these years 

include reductions to locomotives, various nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine 

engine types, fuel sulfur content, and evaporative emissions standards. 

Onroad mobile sources are comprised of several components and are discussed in the next subsection (3.3.1). 

Monthly nonroad mobile emission projections are discussed in subsection 3.3.2. Locomotives and Class 1 

and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) projections are discussed in subsection 3.3.3, and Class 

3 (C3) CMV projected emissions are discussed in subsection 3.3.4. 

3.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm) 

The onroad emissions were primarily based on the National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) monthly, 

county, process level emissions. For both 2012 and 2014, emissions from onroad gasoline sources were 

augmented with emissions based on the same preliminary version of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator 

(MOVES) as was used for 2005. The preliminary MOVES data more closely reflects the PM2.5 and NOX

emissions in the final release of MOVES 2010 than those from NMIM. MOVES-based emissions were 

computed for CO, NOX, VOC, PM2.5, PM10, naphthalene, and some VOC HAPs. The same MOVES-based 

PM2.5 temperature adjustment factors were applied as were used in 2005 for running mode emissions; 

however, cold start emissions used year-specific temperature adjustment factors. The temperature 

adjustments have the minor limitation that they were based on the use of MOVES national default inputs 

rather than county-specific inputs, because a county-specific database for input to MOVES was not available 

at the time this approach was needed. However, the PM2.5 temperature adjustments are fairly insensitive to 

the county-specific inputs, which is why this is characterized as a minor limitation. 

NMIM-based onroad emissions (on_noadj)

Future-year NMIM emissions are the key component to creating the future-year 2012 and 2014 onroad 

mobile emissions. These emissions were used as described here for the 2012 and 2014 cases: 

1. Used as-is for all non-California motorcycles and diesel vehicles; 

2. Used as-is for all non-California gasoline onroad vehicles except the following pollutants: CO, NOX, 

evaporative mode VOC, benzene, and naphthalene, and exhaust mode PM, 1,3-butadiene (106990), 

acetaldehyde (75070), acrolein (107028), benzene (71432), and formaldehyde (50000), and 

naphthalene (91203); 

3. Used as-is for all California NH3; 

4. Used to resolve road type resolution for California SCCs for Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV) 

class 6 & 7 (2230073XXX) emissions. California does not specify road types, so we used NMIM 

California ratios to break out vehicle emissions to the match the more detailed NMIM level. 

5. Used to allocate 2005 MOVES-based emissions from the state to the county resolution; 

Both year 2012 and 2014 NMIM emissions account for increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT) activity and 

changes in fuels, fleet turnover, and inspection and maintenance programs that account for implementation 

of national and local regulations. Future-year VMT data for year 2012 were projected from 2005 to 2012 
25

using year 2006 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) data. Year 2014 NMIM emissions are interpolated from 

year 2015 and year 2012 NMIM estimates. Since the 2015 emissions were based on newer, lower VMT 

projections using 2009-based AEO data, we first adjusted the 2015 emissions using ratios of 2006-AEO 

VMT to 2009-AEO VMT. This VMT adjustment slightly increased the 2015 emissions to create a consistent 

VMT approach with 2012 prior to interpolating to create 2014 emissions values. This explanation is 

captured in the formula for 2014 NMIM-based emissions, which is provided below. The calculations are 

performed for each month, county, and SCC: 

NMIM2014 = 1/3 × NMIM2012 + 2/3 × NMIM2015 × AEO2006-based VMT2015 / AEO2009-based VMT2015

The NMIM future-year inputs also accounted for national and some local control programs. For national 

control programs, they incorporated the expected impacts of national regulations promulgated prior to July 

2007; these include the “Tier 2 Rule,” the “2007 Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule,” the Final “Mobile Source Air 

Toxics Rule” (MSAT2 Final), and the “Renewable Fuel Standard” (RFS). 

For the state and voluntary programs, we included the National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV) and 

the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV program (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/levnlev.htm) in the future 

year inventories. These were included based on state submission of the relevant NMIM input files. These 

programs affect northeastern states. We also modeled reformulated gasoline opt-in programs using statesubmitted NMIM input files and EPA fuel tables. In addition, we assumed that all state programs existing in 

2005 continued in all future calendar years. 

We included programs that might affect future VMT (e.g., public transportation, car-pooling, congestion 

pricing) only if states submitted 2005 base-year VMT that modeled these programs. We do not have 

documentation from the states describing whether or not such programs were incorporated in the states’ 

VMT estimates. 

We did not include state regulations or voluntary programs that encourage no refueling or evening refueling 

on Ozone Action Days. We also did not include diesel retrofit and anti-idling programs affecting school 

buses and diesel trucks. 

Both year 2012 and 2014 (2015) NMIM onroad inventories use NMIM version 20071009, with county 

database NCD20070912 (with 2006 meteorology copied from 2005), and MOBILE version 

M6203CHC\M6203ChcOxFixNMIM.exe. 

California onroad (on_noadj) 

We did not use NMIM to generate future-year onroad emissions for California, because the 2005 base year 

emissions were based on CARB’s Emission Factors mobile model (EMFAC), which CARB submitted for 

the 2005 NEI. For California, we chose an approach that would maintain consistency between the base year 

and future year emissions. This approach involved computing projection factors from a consistent set of 

future and 2005-year data based on the EMFAC2007 model provided by CARB. We generated projection 

factors by dividing the EMFAC2007-based emissions for the future years by the EMFAC2007-based 

emissions for 2005. California does not specify road types, so we used NMIM California ratios to break out 

vehicle emissions to the match the more detailed NMIM level. 

Like year 2005 emissions, future-year California NH3 emissions are from NMIM runs for California. In 

addition, the California onroad inventory does not use the MOVES-based emissions. Year 2012 California 

CAP emissions were linearly interpolated between year 2009 and year 2014 projections. For both 2012 and 

2014, future year HAP emissions were computed as 2005v2-based HAP-CAP ratios applied at the pollutant 
26

and Level 3 SCC (first 7 characters) to 2012 and 2014 CAP emissions. HAPs were scaled to either of three 

pollutants: exhaust PM2.5 (e.g., metals), exhaust VOC (e.g., exhaust mode VOC HAPs such as acetaldehyde 

and formaldehyde), or evaporative VOC (e.g., evaporative mode VOC HAPs such as benzene). 

MOVES-based no-adjust (on_noadj) 

As discussed in the 2005v4 documentation, a draft version2

 of the MOVES model was used to provide year 

2005 non-California emissions from onroad gasoline vehicles for several pollutants. We used this draft 

MOVES model to make sure to include the PM2.5 emissions from onroad gasoline vehicles, which include 

temperature affects and are much larger than previous estimates of onroad PM2.5. The onroad gasoline 

emissions, except for motorcycles, were based on MOVES for the pollutants listed in Table 3-7. Unlike our 

use of NMIM, we used the MOVES data to create emissions by state and month and then allocated these to 

counties based on 2005 NMIM county-level data. While EPA will eventually replace this approach with a 

county-specific implementation of MOVES, it was the best available approach for this modeling. EPA 

continues to work towards a county resolution MOVES approach by (1) reducing the run time needed for 

county resolution modeling, and (2) completing efforts to create a national database of county-specific inputs 

to MOVES. 

Table 3-7. Pollutants covered by the draft MOVES model in the 2005 Platform1

Used in all TR Year 2005, 2012, and 2014 

Cases 

Available from draft MOVES, but not used 

in TR Cases 

PM2.5; exhaust, partially speciated2 Naphthalene3 

VOC; except refueling 1,3 butadiene4 

CO Acrolein4 

NOX 

Benzene; except refueling 

Formaldehyde 

Acetaldehyde 

1

 Draft MOVES data were used only for onroad gasoline vehicles with the exception of motorcycles. Draft MOVES 

data were not used for any California onroad emissions 

2

 Exhaust mode PM2.5 species from MOVES consist of: PEC, PSO4 and the difference between PM2.5 and PEC 

(named as “PM25OC”). Brake wear and tire wear PM2.5 emissions were not available from draft MOVES. 3

 Used for the RFS2 version of the platform (EPA, 2010) 

4

 Used for the RFS2 and LD GHG versions of the platform 

Year 2012 MOVES-based emissions were estimated by scaling year 2005 MOVES emissions by ratios of 

NMIM emissions from 2012 and 2005. These ratios were computed at the pollutant and SCC-level. This 

simple scaling was done for all MOVES emissions in 2012 –including pre-temperature adjusted PM 

emissions (PM species calculated at 72 oF) discussed in the next section. The very simple formula for 

computing MOVES 2012 emissions for each month, county, SCC, pollutant, and mode is: 

MOVES2012 = MOVES2005 * NMIM2012 / NMIM2005

Year 2014 MOVES-based emissions were scaled from the 2012 MOVES (scaled from 2005) to year 2014 

using OTAQ-provided annual, national, SCC7-level (vehicle type) 2012-2014 ratios by pollutant and mode. 

These national-level adjustments, based on annual national runs of draft MOVES for years 2012 and 2014, 

were applied to the detailed 2012 MOVES level of the inventory – by month, county, pollutant, and SCC 

 

2

 As of December 2009, this draft version was replaced by the publicly released :MOVES2010 version at 

www.epag.gov/otaq/models/moves/ 
27

(vehicle and road type). The formula for computing MOVES 2014 emissions for each month, county, SCC, 

pollutant, and mode is: 

MOVES2014 = MOVES2012 * MOVES_US_ANNUAL2014 / MOVES_US_ANNUAL2012

MOVES-based cold start and running mode (on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm) 

MOVES-based cold start and running mode emissions consist of non-motorcycle gasoline exhaust speciated 

PM and naphthalene. These pre-temperature-adjusted emissions are projected to year 2012 and 2014 from 

year 2005 inventories using the same scaling equations discussed in the previous paragraphs for MOVESbased no-adjust emissions. 

MOVES-based temperature adjustment factors were applied to gridded, hourly emissions using gridded, 

hourly meteorology. As seen in Figure 3-1, for year 2012, we used the same temperature adjustment factors 

as the 2005 base case for both start and running modes. However, cold start temperature adjustment factors 

decrease slightly in future years, and for year 2014 processing, we updated the temperature adjustment 

curves for these cold start emissions. These have little impact, reducing cold-start mode temperatureadjusted PM and naphthalene by under 4% for temperatures down to 0 °F. Note that running exhaust 

temperature adjustment factors are the same for all years. Also, these running mode exhaust mode emissions 

are considerably larger than cold start mode emissions. 

Figure 3-1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005, 2012, and 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

-20

-10

0

1020

3040

506070

Temperature (F)

Adjustment Factor

Run Exhaust:

All Years

Start Exhaust:

2005 & 2012

Start Exhaust:

2014

3.3.2 Nonroad mobile (nonroad) 

This sector includes monthly exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions from nonroad engines (not 

including commercial marine, aircraft, and locomotives) derived from NMIM for all states except California. 

Like the onroad emissions, NMIM provides nonroad emissions for VOC by three emission modes: exhaust, 

evaporative and refueling. Unlike the onroad sector, nonroad refueling emissions for nonroad sources are 

not dropped from processing. 

With the exception of California, U.S. emissions for the nonroad sector (defined as the equipment types 

covered by NMIM) were created using a consistent NMIM-based approach as was used for 2005, but 

projected for 2012 and 2015. Similar to the onroad mobile NMIM inventories, year 2014 NMIM emissions 
28

were created by interpolating year 2012 and year 2015 NMIM inventories. These future-year emissions 

account for increases in activity (based on NONROAD model default growth estimates of future year 

equipment population) and changes in fuels and engines that reflect implementation of national regulations 

and local control programs. 

The national regulations incorporated in the modeling are those promulgated prior to December 2009, and 

beginning about 1990. Recent rules include: 

• “Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule - Tier 4”: (http://www.epa.gov/nonroaddiesel/2004fr.htm ), 

published June 29, 2004, and, 

• Control of Emissions From Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines 

(Marine and Land-Based), November 8, 2002 (“Pentathalon Rule”). 

• OTAQ’s Locomotive Marine Rule: (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.htm) 

• OTAQ’s Small Engine Spark Ignition (“Bond”) Rule: 

(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip-ld.htm) 

We have not included voluntary programs such as programs encouraging either no refueling or evening 

refueling on Ozone Action Days and diesel retrofit programs. NMIM version 20071009, with county 

database NCD20070912, and NONROAD model version NONROAD2008a (see 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/nonrdmdl.htm#model) was used to create NMIM inventories for 2012 and 2015. 

California nonroad emissions

Similar to onroad mobile, NMIM was not used to generate future-year nonroad emissions for California, 

other than for NH3. We used NMIM for California future nonroad NH3 emissions because CARB did not 

provide these data for any nonroad vehicle types. As we did for onroad emissions, we chose a projection 

approach that would maintain consistency between the base year and future-year emissions for nonroad 

emissions in California. 

California year 2014 nonroad CAP emissions are similar to those used in the 2002v3 projected inventory. 

However, similar to onroad mobile, California nonroad HAPs were computed as ratios to select CAPs using 

2005 NMIM CAP-HAP ratios. 

California year 2012 nonroad CAP emissions were computed by linearly interpolating year 2009 and 2014 

inventories. And 2012 HAP emissions were also computed using the same 2005-based CAP-HAP ratios 

used to create 2014 HAP emissions. 

3.3.3 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3) 

Future locomotive and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions were calculated 

using projection factors that were computed based on national, annual summaries of locomotive emissions in 

2002 and future years. These national summaries were used to create national by-pollutant, by-SCC 

projection factors; these factors include final locomotive-marine controls and are provided in Table 3-8. 

Similar to the year-specific projections as the stationary sectors (ptnonipm and nonpt), year 2015 factors 

were used for year 2014 projections. 

Table 3-8. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 

Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions 

SCC SCC Description Pollutant 

Year 

2012 

Factor 

Year 

2014 

Factor

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions CO 0.972 0.950
29

SCC SCC Description Pollutant 

Year 

2012 

Factor 

Year 

2014 

Factor

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions NH3 1.094 1.124

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions NOX 0.851 0.765

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM10 0.875 0.707

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM2.5 0.890 0.720

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions SO2 0.531 0.111

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions VOC 0.951 0.863

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations CO 1.232 1.292

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations NH3 1.223 1.283

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations NOX 0.732 0.689

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM10 0.768 0.663

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM2.5 0.778 0.672

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations SO2 0.166 0.005

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations VOC 0.839 0.707

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations CO 0.303 0.318

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations NH3 1.223 1.283

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations NOX 0.339 0.350

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM10 0.283 0.286

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM2.5 0.286 0.288

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations SO2 0.038 0.001

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations VOC 0.291 0.305

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) CO 1.030 1.054

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) NH3 1.223 1.283

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) NOX 0.667 0.572

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM10 0.660 0.541

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM2.5 0.662 0.543

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) SO2 0.156 0.005

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) VOC 0.738 0.586

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines CO 1.015 1.040

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines NH3 1.223 1.283

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines NOX 0.658 0.564

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM10 0.650 0.533

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM2.5 0.651 0.533

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines SO2 0.155 0.005

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines VOC 0.728 0.578

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives CO 1.239 1.299

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives NH3 1.223 1.283

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives NOX 1.133 1.136

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM10 0.942 0.926

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM2.5 0.962 0.946

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives SO2 0.183 0.006

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives VOC 1.548 1.539

The future-year locomotive emissions account for increased fuel consumption based on Energy Information 

Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail, and emissions reductions resulting from 

emissions standards from the Final Locomotive-Marine rule (EPA, 2007c). This rule lowered diesel sulfur 

content and tightened emission standards for existing and new locomotives and marine diesel emissions to 

lower future year PM, SO2, and NOX, and is documented at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.htm. Voluntary retrofits under the National Clean Diesel 

Campaign (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/index.htm) are not included in our projections. 
30

We applied HAP factors for VOC HAPs by using the VOC projection factors to obtain 1,3-butadiene, 

acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, and formaldehyde. The remaining HAP-metals and other non-VOC HAPs 

not already provided are held at base-year levels (the 2002 emissions estimates used in the 2005 base case). 

Class 1 and 2 CMV gasoline emissions (SCC = 2280004000) are not changed for future year processing. 

C1/C2 diesel emissions (SCC = 2280002100 and 2280002200) are projected based on the Final Locomotive 

Marine rule national-level factors provided in Table 3-8. Similar to locomotives, VOC HAPs are projected 

based on the VOC factor and other HAPs and metals are held at levels in the 2005 (2002 inventory) base 

case. 

3.3.4 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3) 

The seca_c3 sector emissions data were provided by OTAQ in an ASCII raster format used since the SO2

Emissions Control Area-International Marine Organization (ECA-IMO) project began in 2005. The (S)ECA 

C3 year 2002 base case was grown to year 2005 for the 2005 base case and to years 2012 and 2014 for the 

respective future base cases. Both future base cases do not include ECA or IMO controls and are projected 

from year 2002 using robust growth rate estimates created by EPA in 2006. These growth rates vary 

depending on geographic region and pollutant; where VOC HAPs and all criteria air pollutants (CAPs) 

except for NOX are assigned region-specific growth rates and NOx receives different rates. 

The projection factors used to create the 2012 and 2014 base case seca_c3 sector emissions are provided in 

Table 3-9. The geographic regions are described in the ECA proposal technical support document: 

http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420r09007-chap2.pdf. These regions extend up to 200 

nautical miles offshore, though less at international boundaries. North and South Pacific regions are divided 

by the Oregon-Washington border, and East Coast and Gulf Coast regions are divided east-west by roughly 

the upper Florida Keys just southwest of Miami. 

OTAQ also provided factors to compute HAP emission (based on emissions ratios) on 2/28/2008; these are 

discussed in the 2005v4 documentation. As with the 2005 base case, this sector uses CAP-HAP VOC 

integration. 

Table 3-9. Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to grow Class 3 Commercial Marine Vessel emissions 

Region 

Year 2012 factor: 

NOX

Year 2012 factor: 

other CAPs & VOC 

HAPs 

Year 2014 

factor: 

NOX

Year 2014 factor: 

other CAPs & VOC 

HAPs 

Outside U.S. 1.374 1.483 1.472 1.599 

East Coast 1.441 1.559 1.557 1.696 

Gulf Coast 1.233 1.333 1.294 1.409 

Great Lakes 1.174 1.184 1.211 1.224 

North Pacific 1.282 1.386 1.355 1.476 

South Pacific 1.513 1.637 1.649 1.796 

3.3.5 Future Year VOC Speciation (on_noadj, nonroad) 

We used speciation profiles for VOC in the nonroad and on_noadj sectors that account for the increase in 

ethanol content of fuels in future years. The same future year profiles were used for 2012 and 2014. In 

addition, there was no difference between the profiles used for onroad and nonroad exhaust and evaporative 

VOC. The nonroad refueling profiles were the same as used for stationary gasoline related sources described 
31

in Section 3.2.8. For evaporative emissions, combinations of E0 and E10 evaporative profiles were used. 

For exhaust, combinations of Tier 1 E0 and E10, and Tier 2 E0 and E10 exhaust profiles were used. The 

combinations for exhaust assumed 50% of the vehicle fleet was Tier 2. The E0 and E10 ratios were based on 

the AEO projections of E0 and E10 fuels in 2022. After the run, it was recognized that nonroad profiles 

should not include Tier 2 vehicle profiles or any E85 (nonroad refueling had a very small contribution from 

an E85 profile). However, some sensitivity runs done showed no impact on the use of the Tier 2 and E85 

profiles for nonroad on the modeling results. 

3.4 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, othpt, othar_hg, 

and othpt_hg) 

Emissions for Canada, Mexico, and offshore sources were not projected to future years, and are therefore the 

same as those used in the 2005 base case. Therefore, the Mexico emissions are based on year 1999, offshore 

oil is based on year 2005, and Canada is based on year 2006. For both Mexico and Canada, their responsible 

agencies could not provide future year emissions that were consistent with the base year emissions. 

3.5 Description of specific growth and control aspects of stationary 

projections for comment 

While the TR remedy affects EGUs, the future-year emissions of other stationary sources impact the results 

of the modeling because they impact the 2012 contribution analysis and the proportional contribution of 

EGUs in 2014. Here, EPA identified specific issues that could have impacts on our future-year modeling 

efforts. In addition, if reviewers of this work intend to provide comment on some of these issues, there is a 

specific mechanism using an Excel® file that we describe here. 

3.5.1 Impact of unavailable future-year emissions from Canada and Mexico 

For the states on the southern and northern US borders, the emissions from Canada and Mexico and any 

associated transport could be important to the assessment of TR. As described above, since neither of these 

countries were able to provide future-year emissions estimates that were projected from the available baseyear emissions, we needed to simply hold emissions constant from base year values. Therefore, we were 

unable to characterize any expected emissions reductions or increases from sources within Canada and 

Mexico, and the resulting potential changes in air quality estimates from these emissions changes are 

unknown. 

We believe that the lack of future-year emissions from Canada and Mexico would not significantly change 

the outcome of the 2012 contribution analyses. This is because those modeling runs used source 

apportionment modeling techniques to attribute the emissions from individual states to particular downwind 

nonattainment receptors, and this apportionment is independent of emissions from surrounding regions. 

For the analysis that supports the TR remedy in 2014, since the forecast air quality would be lower or higher 

with decreased or increased emissions from Canadian and Mexican sources, it is conceivable that our 2014 

analyses could change with changed emissions. We do not believe that the details of the remedy would have 

been affected, since the remedy addresses only the contribution from each state. However, our forecasts of 

continued future-year nonattainment could be affected as a result of a greater or lesser contribution from 

neighboring countries, which we would ideally be able to address in the TR final rule. Therefore, additional 

information about future-year emissions for Canada and Mexico and the impact of these country’s base and 

future-year emissions on US modeled air quality predictions would be helpful in the future. 
32

3.5.2 Possible additional improvements to base and future-year stationary point 

and nonpoint inventories for projection needs 

The future-year projections of stationary point and nonpoint inventories are an area of our work to date that 

could be improved with additional information. This subsection describes information about emissions 

projections that we were unable to use in our projections because of lack of details. 

As part of this documentation and to facilitate comments, we have created an Excel® spreadsheet that 

provides a mechanism to submit comments on our projection assumptions. This spreadsheet provides 

control programs that we know exist, but for which we need more information regarding how to apply them 

to our inventories. It also summarizes nonEGU point source facilities, units, and associated processes, which 

reviewers should use to provide comments. The state-specific tabs in the spreadsheet include only facilities 

that emit 100 tons/year or more of SO2 or NOX or PM2.5 in one of the modeled years (2005, 2012, or 2014) 

because changes to the projections at these larger facilities are most likely to have an impact on our analysis. 

The spreadsheet “TR proposal projection comments.xls” is available as part of the TR docket as well as on 

the CHIEF website at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#transport_rule_proposal. Instructions 

to use the spreadsheet for providing comments are provided in the tab called “Commenter Instructions”. 

The following elements of the nonEGU point and stationary area projections could be improved in future 

work. 

• Plant closures occurring between 2005 and 2014 

• Expected industry growth or contraction for particular plants, industries, nonpoint SCCs, counties, or 

states. As described in Section 3.2, we assumed that emissions growth held flat during the time 

period between 2005 and the future years. If reviewers have data or documentation that shows this 

assumption is poor for a particular industry, and these reductions or increases in emissions are not 

captured by plant closures, we are interested in receiving comment on this approach. 

• Emission controls that are not represented (or are improperly represented) in 2012 or 2014. EPA did 

not include any expected reductions described by SIPs that are not due to federal measures. Table 3-

10 lists measures that we learned about for potential application to the ptnonipm sector, but that did 

not have specific information that we could use to determine affected plants and units. Table 3-11 

lists additional measures that we do not know whether they affect point sources, nonpoint sources, or 

both. Finally, Table 3-12 lists measures that we assume are relevant for nonpoint sources, but for 

which we did not have enough information to apply them in our projections. We seek comment 

using our Excel® spreadsheet that clarifies how these programs can be used to characterize futureyear nonEGU emissions. 

• Emissions controls at cement facilities that EPA has identified as possible controls, but were not 

applied in our 2012 or 2014 inventories. We had the following information and are interested in 

comment on how to apply this information to our TR final inventory. We are also interested in 

cement controls on other facilities. 

o In Georgia, CEMEX burns tires to reduce NOX emissions up to 60% in some cases, which is 

now required by their permit 

o In VA, conversations with state representatives suggest that at least one cement facility in that 

state has reduced their emissions or plans to do so. Comments on these units in relation to the 

reductions from our 2005 NEI v2 would be welcomed. 
33

o The NOx SIP call budget demonstration from Missouri, dated 4/26/2005, calls for a 30% 

reduction in NOx from cement kilns, but we need more specific information about actual 

reductions on specific units rather than planned reductions. 

• Emission controls based on OECA consent decrees (see Section 3.2.6) that are represented 

improperly. This can easily happen because of assumptions EPA needed to make to lieu of more 

specific information in the decree documentation. For example, since a company can have latitude in 

how reductions are distributed across its facilities, EPA may have assumed reductions at facilities that 

are not expected to receive controls because controls are applied at other facilities to achieve the 

required company-wide reductions. 

Table 3-10. List of known local measures needing details for applying to the ptnonipm sector 

State Description 

Effective 

Date 

Pollutants 

affected 

NOX

Reductions

SO2

Reductions 

PM2.5

Reductions Source* 

IL 

Section 214.421 Combination of fuels 

at Steel Mills in Metropolitan Areas: 

regulates the emission of SO2 in any 

one hour period from any fuel 

combustion emission source at a steel 

mill located in the Chicago or St. Louis 

(IL) major metropolitan area 

2006 NOX, SO2, 

PM2.5

 8 

IL 

Section 214.162 Combination of fuels: 

Regulates the emission of SO2 in any 

one hour period from any fuel 

combustion emission source 

2006 SO2 7 

IL 

Section 217.388 Control and 

Maintenance Requirements: Regulates 

NOX emissions from stationary 

reciprocating internal combustion 

engines and turbines 

2007 NOX 9 

MN 

Cargill Inc. Consent Decree: Implement 

enforceable emissions reductions of 

SO2 and NOX from its corn processing 

and oilseed processing plants of at least 

40,000 tpy. 

? NOX, SO2 2,500 tpy 15,000 tpy 5 

MO 

10 CSR 10-5.570 Restriction of Sulfur 

Emissions from Stationary Boilers: 

Controls sulfur emissions from station 

boilers located in Franklin, Jefferson, 

St. Charles, St. Louis Counties and the 

City of St. Louis 

2009 SO2 14 

MO 

10 CSR 10-6.260 Restriction of 

Emission of Sulfur Compounds: 

Restricts sulfur compound emissions 

from any installation except those 

under CSR 10-6.070 or combustion 

equipment that uses only pipeline grade 

natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas 

2009 SO2 13 

MO 

Controls NOX emissions from any large 

stationary internal combustion engine 

located in Billinger, Butler, Cape 

Girardeau, Carter, Clark, Crawford, 

Dent, Dunklin, Franklin, Gasconade, 

Iron, Jefferson, Lewis, Lincoln, 

Madison, Marion, Mississippi, 

Montgomery 

2009 NOX 14 

MO 10 CSR 10-6.400 Restriction of 2009 PM2.5 12 
34

State Description 

Effective 

Date 

Pollutants 

affected 

NOX

Reductions

SO2

Reductions 

PM2.5

Reductions Source* 

Emission of PM from Industrial 

Processes: Regulates industrial 

operation process or activity that emits 

particulate matter 

OH 

Paulding County Emission Limits: Sets 

emission limits of SO2 on any coalfired steam generating unit 2006 PM2.5 11 

PA Consent decree, Sunoco Chemicals 2007 SO2 1,350 tpy 

PA 

Cement Kilns – proposed rulemaking 

approved by the Environmental Quality 

Board (EQB) on 2/19/2008 

? NOX 1,180 tpy 

PA Glass Furnaces - proposed rulemaking 

approved by the EQB on 2/19/2008 ? NOX 1,300 tpy 

PA Anti Idling– final rulemaking to the 

EQB on 8/19/2008 ? NOX 3.2 tpd 

PA 

Consent decree, Sunoco Refinery 

Signed 3/20/06, Heater and Boiler NOX

Reduction Plan July 2008 

2008 (?) NOX 

TX Control of Emissions of NOX from 

Cement Kilns ? 

WV 

Permit issued to Capitol Cement in 

2006. It requires the shutdown of 

existing Kiln 9, which is a BART 

subject source. Low NOX burners were 

installed on Kiln 9 in 2004. 

2004 NOX 

* See Source codes listed below Table 3-12 

Table 3-11. List of known local measures needing details, including which sectors to apply 

State Description 

Effective 

Date 

Pollutants 

affected 

NOX

Reductions

SO2

Reductions 

PM2.5

Reductions Source* 

CT 

NOX Reductions from ICI Boilers: Sets 

emission limitations for NOX from 

reciprocating engines of at least 

3MMBtu/hr, fuel-burning equipment of 

at least 5 MMBtu/hr, and waste 

combustors with capacity of at least 1 

ton of waste per hour 

2009 NOX 2 

IN 

Regulations of Emissions from Outdoor 

Furnaces and Outdoor Boilers: 

Regulates the emissions from outdoor 

furnaces and outdoor boilers; proposed 

in 2005 

? PM2.5 10 

MA 

Amendments to 310CMR 7.00 

Combined heat and power: 

Amendments to provide an adjustment 

to CHP emission limits creating 

“emission credits, ” which are intended 

to encourage new facilities to capture 

and use heat from the electrical 

generating equipment and avoid the 

installation of a new boiler. 

? NOX, SO2

NOX

neutral 

reductions as 

facilities 

shift from 

oil to nat. 

gas 

 2 

MD Diesel Particulate Reductions ? 

Chapter 

5 Control 

Measures 

30708 

WI NR 428.05 Requirements and 2007 NOX 6 
35

performance standards for existing 

sources: Regulates NOX emissions for 

emission units located in Kenosha, 

Milwaukee, Manitowoc, Racine, 

Ozaukee, Washington or Waukesha 

County that are constructed or last 

modified before 2/1/2001 

WI 

NR 428.22 Emission limitation 

requirements: Provides NOX emission 

limitations on a 30-day rolling average 

basis 

2007 NOX 6 

* See Source codes listed below Table 3-12 

Table 3-12. List of known local measures needing details for applying to the nonpt sector 

State Description 

Effective 

Date 

Pollutants 

affected 

NOX

Reductions

SO2

Reductions 

PM2.5

Reductions Source* 

DE 

Regulation No. 1144 Control of 

Stationary Generator Emission: Ensures 

emissions of NOX, PM and SO2 (among 

other pollutants) from stationary 

generators do not adversely impact 

public health, safety and welfare. 

? NOX, SO2, 

PM2.5

 4 

IL 

Section 214.162 Combination of fuels: 

Regulates the emission of SO2 in any 

one hour period from any fuel 

combustion emission source. 

2006 SO2 7 

MA 

Amendments (to 310CMR 7.00) to 

control of air pollution in Berkshire, 

Pioneer Valley, Merrimack Valley, 

Metropolitan Boston, Central Mass., 

and SE Mass. Air pollution control 

districts; boilers must use natural gas or 

LSDF only beginning in 2009; PM and 

NOX emission limit. 

2009 NOX, SO2, 

PM2.5

 1 

NJ 

NOx RACT Rule 2009: the proposed 

multi-pollutant (VOC, NOX, SO2, 

PM2.5) rule will impact 13 source 

categories including sources with 

alternative or facility specific maximum 

allowable NOX emission rates; asphalt 

used for paving; asphalt pavement 

production plants; and boilers. 

2009 - 

2015, 

PHASE

D 

NOX, SO2, 

PM2.5

 3 

PA 

Consent decree, Temple Signed on 

8/16/2007, Temple modified NOX

controls on three boilers at the Health 

Science Campus. NOX emission 

reduction expected is 27.4 tons. SEPs 

included lighting retrofit, diesel retrofit 

and purchasing wind power. 

2008 NOX 

* See Source codes below 

Reference codes for Tables 3-10, 3-11, and 3-12

1) "310 CMR 7.00: Air Pollution Control", Section 7.26: Outdoor Hydronic Heater, Massachusetts 

Department of Environmental Protection 

2) Section 10, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 

http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2684&q=331196&depNav_GID=1619. 
36

3) "State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the Attainment and Maintenance of the Fine 

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard PM2.5 Attainment Demonstration 

Proposal, Chapter 4: Control Measures", The State of New Jersey Depart 

4) "Delaware Administrative Code Title 7, 1100 Air Quality Management Section, Sub-Section 1144 

Control of Stationary Generator Emissions", State of Delaware, January 2006, 

http://regulations.delaware.gov/AdminCode/title7/1000/1100/1144.shtml. 

5) "Regional Haze State Implementation Plan for the State of Alabama", Alabama Department of 

Environmental Management Air Division, February, 2008. 

6) "Chapter NR 428: Control of Nitrogen Compound Emissions", Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources, NR 428.04, Register No. 619, July 2007. 

7) "Title 35, Subtitle B, Chapter 1, Subchapter c, Part 214, Subpart D, Section 162: Combination of 

Fuels", Illinois Pollution Control Board, 

http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/SLR/IPCBandIEPAEnvironmentalRegulations-Title35.asp. 

8) "Title 35, Subtitle B, Chapter 1, Subchapter C, Part 214, Subpart Q, Section 421: Combination of 

Fuels", Illinois Pollution Control Board, 

http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/SLR/IPCBandIEPAEnvironmentalRegulations-Title35.asp. 

9) "Title 35, Subtitle B, Chapter 1, Subchapter C, Part 217, Subpart Q, Section 388: Control and 

Maintenance Requirements", Illinois Pollution Control Board, 

http://www.ipcb.state.il.us/SLR/IPCBandIEPAEnvironmentalRegulations-Title35.asp. 

10) "Development of New Rules Concerning Regulations of Emissions from Outdoor Furnaces and 

Outdoor Boilers", IC 13-14-9 Notice, Register Page Number 29 IR 901, December 2005, Indiana 

Register Volume 29 Number 3. 

11) "Paulding County Emission Limits", OAC 3745-18-69, Ohio Division of Air Pollution Control, 

January 2006. 

12) "DRAFT 10 CSR 10-6.400 Restriction of Emission of Particulate Matter from Industrial Processes", 

Missouri Department of Natulra Resources, 2009 

13) "DRAFT 10 CSR 10-6.260 Restriction of Emission of Sulfur Compounds", Missouri Department of 

Natulra Resources, 2009 

14) "DRAFT 10 CSR 10-5.570 Control of Sulfur Emissions from Stationary Boilers", Missouri 

Department of Natulra Resources, 2009 

4 Source Apportionment Scenarios for 2012 

EPA prepared special emissions inputs for the CAMX model to allow CAMX to be used for source 

apportionment modeling. Source apportionment modeling was used to quantify the impact of emissions in 

specific upwind states on projected downwind nonattainment and maintenance receptors for both PM2.5 and 

8-hour ozone. To prepare these emissions, EPA prepared special tagging input files called GSTAG files for 

the SMOKE speciation processor. 

The tagging input files and custom SMOKE scripts implemented tagging by state of all source emissions 

except for biogenic and wildfire emissions for all ozone and PM2.5 precursors. Separate tagging runs were 

done for ozone and PM2.5 precursors. Biogenic and wildfire emissions were not tagged by state because they 

are generally considered not feasible for emissions controls, but these were tagged as “other sources” and 

their contributions could be tracked in total without association with individual states. Prescribed burning 

and agricultural burning were included in the tagged emissions. The states EPA analyzed using source 

apportionment for ozone and for PM2.5 are: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, 

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, 

Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, 

North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, 

Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington D.C., and Wisconsin. There were also several other 
37

states that are only partially contained within the 12 km modeling domain (i.e., Colorado, Montana, New 

Mexico, and Wyoming). However, EPA did not individually track the emissions or assess the contribution 

from emissions in these states. 

5 EGU Control Case for 2014 

The 2014 TR Control Case was intended to represent the implementation of NOX and SO2 reductions to 

attain the existing ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS standards in the eastern U.S. For the control case modeling, the 

emissions for all sectors were unchanged from the base case modeling except for those from EGUs (the 

ptipm sector). EPA used the IPM model to prepare the 2014 control case EGU emissions. The changes in 

EGU SO2 and NOx emissions as a result of the control case for the lower 48 states are summarized in Section 

6. Section 6 also provides state-specific summaries of EGU NOX and SO2 for the lower 48 states. 

Additional details on the changes that resulted from the control case are provided in the TR Proposal 

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), Chapter 7 (Cost, Economic, and Energy Impacts), which describes the 

modeling conducted to estimate the cost, economic, and energy impacts to the power sector. 

States covered by the annual SO2 and NOX reductions for annual and/or 24-hour PM2.5 standard in the 

control case are colored in blue and green in Figure 5-1. The 15 “group 1” states in blue are in a stringent 

SO2 tier and the 12 (+ D.C.) green “group 2” states are in a moderate SO2 tier. Each group of states is of 

uniform stringency which would lead to two exclusive SO2 trading groups; that is, states in SO2 group 1 

could not trade with states in SO2 group 2. The smaller SO2 budgets would begin in 2012 for both groups 

and become smaller for the group 1 states in 2014. All 27 states (+ D.C.) would be in one NOX tier with 

uniform stringency beginning in 2012. Section 6 provides annual SO2 and NOX summaries for these selected 

groups/tiers of states. 

States covered by the summer-only NOX reductions for attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in the 

control case are highlighted in Figure 5-2. These 25 “group 1” states NOX reductions would begin after the 

2012 ozone season. Section 6 also provides summer-only NOX summaries for this selected group of states. 
38

Figure 5-1. States Covered under Annual SO2 and NOX Reductions for PM2.5.

Figure 5-2. States Covered under Summer NOX Reductions for Ozone

6 Emission Summaries for the Base Cases and Control Case 

The following tables summarize emissions differences between the 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 

base case, and 2014 EGU control case at various levels of geographic, temporal, and emission sector 

resolution. 
39

Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 provide NOX and SO2 emissions, respectively (except for biogenic emissions, 

wildfires, and prescribed burning) by state for the 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 base case, and 2014 

EGU control cases, as well as differences and percent differences between these cases. The TR proposal 

preamble contains similar summaries but unlike the summaries here, the preamble summaries differ in the 

following: 1) they include emissions from wildfires and prescribed burning, and 2) are restricted to only the 

eastern states –all states are provided in the tables here. See Table 7-2 in Section 7 for state-level summaries 

containing wildfire and prescribed burning emissions. Note that these “fires” emissions are the same for all 

emissions cases. Table 6-3 and Table 6-4 provide EGU sector only (ptipm) NOX and SO2 emissions 

(respectively) by state for the 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 base case, and 2014 EGU control cases, 

as well as differences and percent differences between these cases. 

Table 6-5 and Table 6-6 provide NOX and SO2 emissions, respectively (except for biogenic emissions, 

wildfires and prescribed burning) for the 15 state “group 1”,12 state + D.C. “group 2”, as well as 27 state + 

D.C. sum of emissions that TR covers for PM2.5. See Figure 5-1 for a map of the group 1 and group 2 states. 

Note that these emissions summaries are different in the TR proposal preamble in the following: 1) we do 

not include emissions from fires (see Table 7-2 for the contribution from fires), and 2) Oklahoma is in the 

25-state “group 2” summaries in these tables. Emissions are provided for the 2005 base case, 2012 base 

case, 2014 base case, and 2014 EGU control (“remedy”) cases, as well as differences and percent differences 

between these cases. We also provide summaries for all “Eastern Modeling Domain” states and “All 

Western States”. The western states are defined as Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, 

New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. States in the eastern modeling domain are defined 

as the rest of the contiguous (lower 48 states) U.S. plus the District of Columbia. 

Table 6-7 and Table 6-8 provide EGU sector only (ptipm) NOX and SO2 emissions (respectively) for the 

same 15 state “group 1”,12 state + D.C. “group 2”, as well as 27 state + D.C. sum of emissions that TR 

covers for PM2.5. See Figure 5-1 for a map of the group 1 and group 2 states. Emissions are provided for 

the 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 base case, and 2014 EGU control case, as well as differences and 

percent differences between these cases. Summaries for the eastern modeling domain states and western 

states are also provided. Note that unlike the TR proposal preamble, Oklahoma is included in the “eastern 

modeling domain states” in these tables. 

Table 6-9 provides summer (defined as May through September) EGU and Total Anthropogenic NOX for the 

26 states that TR covers for ozone. See Figure 5-2 for a map of these 26 states. Emissions are provided for 

the 2005 base case, 2012 base case, 2014 base case, and 2014 EGU control (“remedy”) cases, as well as 

differences and percent differences between these cases. 
40

Table 6-1. State-level Total NOX Emissions (not including fires) for each TR Modeling Case in 48 States an

2012 Base minus 2005 

Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Differenc

Alabama 443,748 360,357 337,924 280,763 -83,391 -18.8% -22,433 -6.2Arizona 326,613 246,578 218,261 218,219 -80,036 -24.5% -28,316 -11.5Arkansas 238,845 197,438 186,969 168,438 -41,407 -17.3% -10,468 -5.3California 1,408,585 1,078,451 1,005,519 1,005,553 -330,135 -23.4% -72,932 -6.8Colorado 298,619 237,869 221,796 222,172 -60,751 -20.3% -16,073 -6.8Connecticut 116,673 74,786 67,070 67,082 -41,887 -35.9% -7,717 -10.3Delaware 58,879 39,664 37,330 37,750 -19,215 -32.6% -2,334 -5.9District of Columbia 15,904 9,802 8,568 8,568 -6,101 -38.4% -1,234 -12.6Florida 1,038,937 837,914 769,998 699,801 -201,023 -19.3% -67,916 -8.1Georgia 577,858 405,825 341,695 337,889 -172,032 -29.8% -64,130 -15.8Idaho 97,636 83,046 77,617 77,616 -14,590 -14.9% -5,429 -6.5Illinois 773,276 542,886 503,605 480,743 -230,390 -29.8% -39,281 -7.2Indiana 614,861 505,039 474,770 386,251 -109,822 -17.9% -30,269 -6.0Iowa 312,015 251,632 236,602 221,442 -60,383 -19.4% -15,030 -6.0Kansas 365,907 294,634 289,452 250,489 -71,273 -19.5% -5,183 -1.8Kentucky 435,837 345,073 324,465 247,270 -90,764 -20.8% -20,608 -6.0Louisiana 670,571 583,659 561,795 553,494 -86,912 -13.0% -21,864 -3.7Maine 78,680 63,994 59,337 59,333 -14,687 -18.7% -4,656 -7.3Maryland 294,519 181,595 171,843 171,923 -112,924 -38.3% -9,752 -5.4Massachusetts 270,987 191,570 181,754 182,151 -79,417 -29.3% -9,816 -5.1Michigan 638,546 478,625 444,639 410,319 -159,921 -25.0% -33,986 -7.1Minnesota 466,985 350,394 327,977 311,544 -116,591 -25.0% -22,417 -6.4Mississippi 288,816 218,968 202,800 188,757 -69,848 -24.2% -16,168 -7.4Missouri 505,195 353,407 332,634 317,092 -151,787 -30.0% -20,774 -5.9Montana 132,627 104,539 99,054 99,044 -28,088 -21.2% -5,485 -5.2Nebraska 244,225 193,852 182,029 164,126 -50,374 -20.6% -11,823 -6.1Nevada 137,862 85,527 88,356 88,358 -52,335 -38.0% 2,829 3.3New Hampshire 65,086 43,930 39,746 39,687 -21,156 -32.5% -4,183 -9.5New Jersey 323,327 220,188 203,784 200,233 -103,140 -31.9% -16,403 -7.4
41

2012 Base minus 2005 

Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Differenc

New Mexico 305,732 240,892 230,868 230,886 -64,840 -21.2% -10,024 -4.2New York 609,630 423,170 393,753 393,996 -186,460 -30.6% -29,417 -7.0North Carolina 536,639 384,430 362,593 360,509 -152,209 -28.4% -21,837 -5.7North Dakota 175,182 135,870 130,012 130,003 -39,312 -22.4% -5,858 -4.3Ohio 816,239 552,864 518,780 453,167 -263,375 -32.3% -34,084 -6.2Oklahoma 426,907 367,457 346,081 315,393 -59,450 -13.9% -21,376 -5.8Oregon 212,698 186,809 174,782 174,782 -25,890 -12.2% -12,026 -6.4Pennsylvania 704,936 566,301 535,515 454,248 -138,635 -19.7% -30,786 -5.4Rhode Island 26,926 20,936 19,581 19,577 -5,990 -22.2% -1,355 -6.5South Carolina 300,083 236,546 222,148 209,141 -63,538 -21.2% -14,398 -6.1South Dakota 81,625 65,334 60,551 60,546 -16,290 -20.0% -4,783 -7.3Tennessee 471,705 338,154 310,870 270,171 -133,550 -28.3% -27,284 -8.1Texas 1,736,276 1,338,429 1,253,464 1,235,289 -397,847 -22.9% -84,965 -6.3Utah 199,580 160,744 151,272 151,254 -38,836 -19.5% -9,473 -5.9Vermont 21,801 17,611 15,534 15,534 -4,189 -19.2% -2,078 -11.8Virginia 461,689 340,933 313,546 311,867 -120,756 -26.2% -27,387 -8.0Washington 326,857 272,354 250,161 250,146 -54,503 -16.7% -22,193 -8.1West Virginia 294,016 206,630 196,923 144,970 -87,385 -29.7% -9,707 -4.7Wisconsin 358,787 257,290 241,488 228,637 -101,496 -28.3% -15,803 -6.1Wyoming 222,878 185,963 181,502 181,492 -36,915 -16.6% -4,461 -2.4Grand Total 19,531,805 14,879,959 13,906,813 13,087,712 -4,651,846 -23.8% -973,146 -6.5
42

Table 6-2. State-level Total SO2 Emissions(not including fires) for each TR Modeling Case in 48 States and 

2012 Base minus 2005 Base

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Differenc

Alabama 592,389 461,314 446,070 296,138 -131,075 -22.1% -15,244 -3.3Arizona 88,334 50,335 48,282 50,815 -37,998 -43.0% -2,053 -4.1Arkansas 114,021 126,532 128,986 160,744 12,511 11.0% 2,454 1.9California 217,595 223,748 217,669 217,669 6,152 2.8% -6,079 -2.7Colorado 79,956 81,377 81,086 97,290 1,421 1.8% -291 -0.4Connecticut 34,316 27,389 27,419 24,493 -6,928 -20.2% 30 0.1Delaware 85,167 38,963 39,629 40,742 -46,203 -54.3% 665 1.7District of Columbia 3,914 2,296 2,291 2,291 -1,618 -41.3% -5 -0.2Florida 649,114 460,481 431,641 376,723 -188,633 -29.1% -28,840 -6.3Georgia 748,020 674,183 295,607 214,726 -73,837 -9.9% -378,575 -56.2Idaho 23,165 20,332 20,264 20,263 -2,832 -12.2% -68 -0.3Illinois 516,950 866,376 340,576 304,834 349,427 67.6% -525,800 -60.7Indiana 1,047,371 986,601 960,098 396,403 -60,770 -5.8% -26,503 -2.7Iowa 221,877 250,930 244,423 182,875 29,053 13.1% -6,507 -2.6Kansas 195,902 109,812 114,915 101,037 -86,090 -43.9% 5,103 4.6Kentucky 572,424 780,885 798,392 182,630 208,462 36.4% 17,506 2.2Louisiana 353,597 340,839 326,979 327,046 -12,758 -3.6% -13,860 -4.1Maine 36,934 48,310 44,490 44,508 11,376 30.8% -3,820 -7.9Maryland 379,842 142,640 136,078 136,198 -237,202 -62.4% -6,563 -4.6Massachusetts 158,152 91,564 93,797 86,838 -66,588 -42.1% 2,233 2.4Michigan 490,190 415,042 402,783 300,560 -75,148 -15.3% -12,259 -3.0Minnesota 154,550 95,366 102,374 89,746 -59,184 -38.3% 7,008 7.3Mississippi 118,965 80,116 81,026 95,233 -38,850 -32.7% 910 1.1Missouri 421,979 570,575 623,287 315,283 148,595 35.2% 52,712 9.2Montana 37,950 26,484 27,192 29,421 -11,467 -30.2% 708 2.7Nebraska 121,484 157,817 151,967 111,367 36,332 29.9% -5,849 -3.7Nevada 71,535 28,375 35,117 35,493 -43,160 -60.3% 6,742 23.8New Hampshire 63,533 18,146 17,439 18,121 -45,388 -71.4% -707 -3.9New Jersey 101,380 81,266 82,524 59,410 -20,114 -19.8% 1,258 1.5New Mexico 46,711 24,930 25,036 24,354 -21,781 -46.6% 105 0.4
43

2012 Base minus 2005 Base

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Differenc

New York 391,103 341,705 337,581 253,274 -49,398 -12.6% -4,124 -1.2North Carolina 648,485 264,544 282,484 238,822 -383,940 -59.2% 17,940 6.8North Dakota 159,713 93,656 96,341 104,341 -66,057 -41.4% 2,686 2.9Ohio 1,276,270 1,076,470 969,383 361,138 -199,799 -15.7% -107,088 -9.9Oklahoma 165,819 201,322 210,800 211,021 35,503 21.4% 9,478 4.7Oregon 47,228 48,244 47,971 54,791 1,016 2.2% -273 -0.6Pennsylvania 1,173,296 1,119,680 1,122,844 303,071 -53,616 -4.6% 3,164 0.3Rhode Island 8,986 9,068 9,321 9,321 82 0.9% 253 2.8South Carolina 303,747 234,200 242,482 217,515 -69,547 -22.9% 8,282 3.5South Dakota 28,183 25,649 25,614 41,053 -2,534 -9.0% -35 -0.1Tennessee 388,191 708,905 711,369 218,065 320,714 82.6% 2,464 0.3Texas 934,009 639,505 677,484 771,299 -294,505 -31.5% 37,979 5.9Utah 51,593 36,160 36,479 40,182 -15,433 -29.9% 319 0.9Vermont 6,987 6,383 6,390 6,390 -603 -8.6% 7 0.1Virginia 344,860 263,564 254,359 176,114 -81,296 -23.6% -9,205 -3.5Washington 65,834 75,906 76,087 75,795 10,072 15.3% 181 0.2West Virginia 535,586 645,431 553,002 184,341 109,845 20.5% -92,429 -14.3Wisconsin 263,615 181,760 191,391 159,927 -81,855 -31.1% 9,631 5.3Wyoming 122,253 84,508 82,655 87,405 -37,745 -30.9% -1,853 -2.2Grand Total 14,663,076 13,339,684 12,281,475 7,857,117 -1,323,392 -9.0% -1,058,208 -7.9
44

Table 6-3. State-level Electric Generating Unit Sector NOX Emissions for each TR Modeling Case in 48 States a

2012 Base minus 2005 Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Difference D

Alabama 133,051 121,809 118,420 61,259 -11,241 -8.4% -3,389 -2.8% Arizona 79,776 80,323 72,747 72,705 546 0.7% -7,576 -9.4% Arkansas 35,407 43,222 44,792 26,260 7,815 22.1% 1,570 3.6% California 6,992 20,196 18,394 18,429 13,204 188.9% -1,802 -8.9% Colorado 73,909 61,534 61,641 62,018 -12,375 -16.7% 107 0.2% Connecticut 6,865 2,770 2,821 2,833 -4,094 -59.6% 51 1.8% Delaware 11,917 4,639 4,513 4,933 -7,278 -61.1% -126 -2.7% District of Columbia 492 2 1 1 -491 -99.7% 0 -14.3% Florida 217,263 195,673 180,801 110,603 -21,590 -9.9% -14,873 -7.6% Georgia 111,017 78,011 48,091 44,285 -33,006 -29.7% -29,921 -38.4% Idaho 19 397 398 397 377 1961.3% 1 0.3% Illinois 127,923 77,920 80,228 57,366 -50,003 -39.1% 2,308 3.0% Indiana 213,503 203,107 200,899 112,379 -10,397 -4.9% -2,208 -1.1% Iowa 72,806 66,316 68,146 52,986 -6,490 -8.9% 1,830 2.8% Kansas 90,220 70,823 78,920 39,958 -19,397 -21.5% 8,097 11.4% Kentucky 164,743 149,179 148,509 71,314 -15,564 -9.4% -670 -0.4% Louisiana 63,791 44,773 45,457 37,156 -19,018 -29.8% 684 1.5% Maine 1,100 3,139 2,535 2,530 2,039 185.3% -604 -19.2% Maryland 62,574 17,376 19,990 20,070 -45,199 -72.2% 2,614 15.0% Massachusetts 25,618 6,312 6,619 7,016 -19,305 -75.4% 306 4.9% Michigan 120,005 96,874 97,455 63,135 -23,131 -19.3% 580 0.6% Minnesota 83,836 51,285 51,859 35,426 -32,551 -38.8% 574 1.1% Mississippi 45,166 37,517 37,142 23,099 -7,649 -16.9% -375 -1.0% Missouri 127,431 77,571 82,979 67,437 -49,860 -39.1% 5,408 7.0% Montana 39,858 36,761 36,800 36,789 -3,097 -7.8% 39 0.1% Nebraska 52,426 52,820 52,970 35,067 394 0.8% 149 0.3% Nevada 47,297 20,059 29,198 29,200 -27,237 -57.6% 9,138 45.6% New Hampshire 8,827 2,514 2,515 2,456 -6,312 -71.5% 1 0.0% New Jersey 30,114 15,987 16,268 12,717 -14,128 -46.9% 282 1.8% New Mexico 75,483 51,324 51,340 51,358 -24,159 -32.0% 16 0.0% 
45

2012 Base minus 2005 Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Difference D

New York 63,465 25,755 28,350 28,593 -37,709 -59.4% 2,595 10.1% North Carolina 111,576 61,643 61,747 59,663 -49,932 -44.8% 104 0.2% North Dakota 76,381 59,547 59,556 59,548 -16,834 -22.0% 9 0.0% Ohio 258,687 159,627 164,945 99,333 -99,060 -38.3% 5,318 3.3% Oklahoma 86,204 86,858 81,122 50,434 654 0.8% -5,735 -6.6% Oregon 9,383 13,780 13,889 13,889 4,396 46.9% 110 0.8% Pennsylvania 176,870 193,032 196,151 114,884 16,163 9.1% 3,119 1.6% Rhode Island 545 221 281 278 -324 -59.4% 60 27.1% South Carolina 53,823 47,762 47,512 34,505 -6,061 -11.3% -251 -0.5% South Dakota 15,650 15,493 15,514 15,509 -157 -1.0% 21 0.1% Tennessee 102,934 68,425 68,779 28,079 -34,509 -33.5% 354 0.5% Texas 176,170 159,738 166,177 148,002 -16,432 -9.3% 6,439 4.0% Utah 65,261 64,073 64,088 64,070 -1,188 -1.8% 14 0.0% Vermont 297 0 0 0 -297 -100.0% 0 0.0% Virginia 62,512 36,036 32,115 30,436 -26,475 -42.4% -3,921 -10.9% Washington 17,634 18,214 18,374 18,359 579 3.3% 160 0.9% West Virginia 159,804 102,725 100,103 48,149 -57,079 -35.7% -2,622 -2.6% Wisconsin 72,170 49,351 53,774 40,923 -22,819 -31.6% 4,423 9.0% Wyoming 89,315 73,911 73,919 73,908 -15,404 -17.2% 7 0.0% Grand Total 3,728,112 2,926,427 2,908,844 2,089,743 -801,685 -21.5% -17,583 -0.6% 
46

Table 6-4. State-level Electric Generating Unit Sector SO2 Emissions for each TR Modeling Case in 48 States an

2012 Base minus 2005 Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Difference D

Alabama 460,123 335,734 322,130 172,198 -124,389 -27.0% -13,604 -4.1% Arizona 52,733 22,773 20,945 23,477 -29,960 -56.8% -1,828 -8.0% Arkansas 66,384 85,068 88,187 119,945 18,683 28.1% 3,119 3.7% California 622 5,052 5,052 5,052 4,430 712.1% 0 0.0% Colorado 64,174 72,269 72,119 88,324 8,095 12.6% -149 -0.2% Connecticut 10,356 5,493 5,512 2,586 -4,863 -47.0% 19 0.3% Delaware 32,378 7,841 7,806 8,919 -24,538 -75.8% -35 -0.4% District of Columbia 1,082 0 0 0 -1,082 -100.0% 0 0.0% Florida 417,321 228,360 192,903 137,985 -188,960 -45.3% -35,458 -15.5% Georgia 616,054 552,007 173,210 92,329 -64,048 -10.4% -378,796 -68.6% Idaho 0 0 1 0 0 -100.0% 1 N/A Illinois 330,382 724,657 200,475 164,733 394,274 119.3% -524,182 -72.3% Indiana 878,978 829,988 804,294 240,599 -48,990 -5.6% -25,694 -3.1% Iowa 130,264 169,039 163,966 102,419 38,775 29.8% -5,073 -3.0% Kansas 136,520 59,567 65,125 51,248 -76,953 -56.4% 5,558 9.3% Kentucky 502,731 718,980 739,592 123,831 216,249 43.0% 20,612 2.9% Louisiana 109,851 100,239 94,824 94,892 -9,612 -8.8% -5,415 -5.4% Maine 3,887 15,759 11,650 11,669 11,872 305.4% -4,109 -26.1% Maryland 283,205 49,078 42,635 42,756 -234,127 -82.7% -6,443 -13.1% Massachusetts 85,768 16,299 16,299 9,340 -69,468 -81.0% 0 0.0% Michigan 349,877 287,807 275,637 173,414 -62,070 -17.7% -12,170 -4.2% Minnesota 101,666 53,596 61,447 48,819 -48,071 -47.3% 7,852 14.6% Mississippi 74,117 46,432 48,149 62,356 -27,685 -37.4% 1,717 3.7% Missouri 284,384 445,643 500,649 192,644 161,259 56.7% 55,006 12.3% Montana 19,715 15,893 16,863 19,093 -3,822 -19.4% 971 6.1% Nebraska 74,955 120,790 115,695 75,094 45,836 61.2% -5,095 -4.2% Nevada 53,363 13,323 20,155 20,531 -40,040 -75.0% 6,832 51.3% New Hampshire 51,445 7,290 6,608 7,290 -44,155 -85.8% -682 -9.4% New Jersey 57,044 37,746 37,669 14,555 -19,298 -33.8% -78 -0.2% New Mexico 30,628 13,211 13,708 13,027 -17,417 -56.9% 497 3.8% 
47

2012 Base minus 2005 Base 

2014 Base minus 2012 

Base 

State 2005 Base 2012 Base 2014 Base 

2014 

Control Difference % Difference Difference % Difference D

New York 180,847 144,074 141,354 57,047 -36,773 -20.3% -2,720 -1.9% North Carolina 512,231 126,620 140,585 96,924 -385,611 -75.3% 13,965 11.0% North Dakota 137,371 77,383 80,320 88,320 -59,988 -43.7% 2,937 3.8% Ohio 1,116,084 946,667 841,194 232,948 -169,418 -15.2% -105,473 -11.1% Oklahoma 110,081 156,032 165,773 165,994 45,950 41.7% 9,741 6.2% Oregon 12,304 14,381 13,366 20,187 2,077 16.9% -1,015 -7.1% Pennsylvania 1,002,202 966,136 972,977 153,204 -36,066 -3.6% 6,841 0.7% Rhode Island 176 0 0 0 -176 -100.0% 0 0.0% South Carolina 218,782 149,515 156,096 131,128 -69,267 -31.7% 6,581 4.4% South Dakota 12,215 13,453 13,459 28,897 1,237 10.1% 6 0.0% Tennessee 266,148 596,987 600,066 106,762 330,839 124.3% 3,079 0.5% Texas 534,949 327,873 373,950 467,765 -207,076 -38.7% 46,077 14.1% Utah 34,813 24,972 25,414 29,117 -9,842 -28.3% 442 1.8% Vermont 9 0 0 0 -9 -100.0% 0 0.0% Virginia 220,248 145,452 135,741 57,496 -74,796 -34.0% -9,711 -6.7% Washington 3,409 19,663 19,155 18,863 16,255 476.9% -508 -2.6% West Virginia 469,456 588,392 496,307 127,646 118,936 25.3% -92,085 -15.7% Wisconsin 180,200 107,365 117,253 85,788 -72,836 -40.4% 9,888 9.2% Wyoming 89,874 55,025 53,505 58,254 -34,849 -38.8% -1,520 -2.8% Grand Total 10,381,408 9,499,923 8,469,819 4,045,461 -881,485 -8.5% -1,030,103 -10.8% 
48

Table 6-5. Group 1 and Group 2 States NOX Total Emissions (not including fires) for each TR Mod

2005 Base 

Year 

2012 Base 

Case 

2014 Base 

Case 

2014 

Remedy 

2014 

Remedy - 

2012 Base 

Case 

Percen

Change

2014 

Remed

vs 2012 

Base 

Case 

Annual Total NOX Emissions for 15 States 

in Group 1 8,111,227 5,952,260 5,531,877 5,018,570 -933,690 -15.7% 

Annual Total NOX Emissions for 12 States 

+ DC in Group 2 4,610,746 3,574,961 3,361,673 3,137,064 -437,897 -12.2% 

Annual Total NOX for 27 States + DC 12,721,973 9,527,221 8,893,550 8,155,634 -1,371,587 -14.4% Annual Total NOX Emissions for All States 

Fully within the Eastern Modeling Domain 15,862,117 11,997,188 11,207,626 10,388,190 -1,608,998 -13.4% 

Annual Total NOX Emissions for All 

Western States 3,669,688 2,882,771 2,699,187 2,699,522 -183,249 -6.4% 
49

Table 6-6. Group 1 and Group 2 States SO2 Total Emissions (not including fires) for each TR Mod

2005 Base 

Year 

2012 Base 

Case 

2014 Base 

Case 

2014 

Remedy 

2014 

Remedy - 

2012 Base 

Case 

Percent 

Change: 

2014 

Remedy 

vs 2012 

Base 

Case 

Annual Total SO2 Emissions for 15 States 

in Group 1 9,040,217 9,146,651 8,087,579 3,792,063 -5,354,589 -58.5% 

Annual Total SO2 Emissions for 12 States + 

DC in Group 2 3,133,554 2,243,946 2,198,166 1,869,543 -374,403 -16.7% 

Annual Total SO2 for 27 States + DC 

Covered for PM2.5 12,173,771 11,390,598 10,285,746 5,661,606 -5,728,992 -50.3% 

Annual Total SO2 Emissions for All States 

Fully within the Eastern Modeling Domain 13,810,921 12,639,283 11,583,637 7,123,638 -5,515,645 -43.6% 

Annual Total SO2 Emissions for All 

Western States 852,154 700,400 697,838 733,479 33,079 4.7% 
50

Table 6-7. Group 1 and Group 2 States NOX EGU Sector Emissions for each TR Modeling C

2005 Base 

Year 

2012 Base 

Case 

2014 Base 

Case 

2014 

Remedy 

2014 

Remedy 

- 2012 

Base 

Case 

Percent 

Change: 

2014 

Remedy 

vs 2012 

Base 

Case 

Annual EGU NOX Emissions for 15 States in 

Group 1 1,945,446 1,445,575 1,432,270 918,963 -526,613 -36.4% 

Annual EGU NOX Emissions for 12 States + DC 

in Group 2 831,991 632,031 626,150 401,542 -230,489 -36.5% 

Annual EGU NOX for 27 States + DC Covered 

for PM2.5 2,777,437 2,077,606 2,058,421 1,320,505 -757,101 -36.4% 

Annual EGU NOX Emissions for All States Fully 

within the Eastern Modeling Domain 3,223,184 2,485,856 2,468,057 1,648,621 -837,234 -33.7% 

Annual EGU NOX Emissions for All Western 

States 504,928 440,572 440,787 441,121 550 0.1% 
51

Table 6-8. Group 1 and Group 2 States SO2 EGU Sector Emissions for each TR Modeling C

2005 Base 

Year 

2012 Base 

Case 

2014 Base 

Case 

2014 

Remedy 

2014 

Remedy - 

2012 Base 

Case 

Percent 

Change: 

2014 

Remedy 

vs 2012 

Base 

Case 

Annual EGU SO2 Emissions for 15 States in 

Group 1 7,040,088 7,349,814 6,303,300 2,007,783 -5,342,031 -72.7% 

Annual EGU SO2 Emissions for 12 States + 

DC in Group 2 1,989,050 1,164,259 1,118,141 789,518 -374,740 -32.2% 

Annual EGU SO2 for 27 States + DC Covered 

for PM2.5 9,029,138 8,514,073 7,421,441 2,797,302 -5,716,771 -67.1% 

Annual EGU SO2 Emissions for All States 

Fully within the Eastern Modeling Domain 10,019,774 9,243,362 8,209,536 3,749,537 -5,493,825 -59.4% 

Annual EGU SO2 Emissions for All Western 

States 361,634 256,561 260,283 295,924 39,364 15.3% 

Table 6-9. 26-State Total and Electric Generating Unit Sector Summer NOX Emissions for each TR M

2005 Base 

Year 

2012 Base 

Case 

2014 Base 

Case 

2014 

Remedy 

2014 

Remedy 

- 2012 

Base 

Case 

Percent 

Change: 

2014 

Remedy 

vs 2012 

Base 

Case 

Summer EGU NOx Emissions for 26 States 

Included for Ozone 905,345 718,142 698,827 585,584 -132,559 -18.5% 

Summer Total NOx Emissions for 26 States 

Included for Ozone 5,363,278 4,085,516 3,784,430 3,671,187 -414,329 -10.1% 
52

7 Summary of Projected Emissions Changes over Time and 

Likely Affect on Maintenance 

The purpose of this section is to illustrate the overall change in emissions from our TR base case 

years 2005 and 2014 to those in year 2020. The 2020 base case was developed using a similar 

projections methodology as described in Section 3 for the 2012 and 2014 base cases. The 

primary difference in 2020 base case emissions is the continued overall decrease in SO2

emissions in 2020 compared to 2014. This is primarily due to EGU reductions between 2014 

and 2020. However, several states without EGU reductions show small SO2 increases resulting 

from increasing Class 3 Commercial Marine Vessel emissions (the C3 CMV control case will 

significantly reduce these emissions in 2020 but was not signed prior to TR modeling) and other 

minor source categories. NOX emissions decrease between 2014 and 2020 in all states because 

of continued EGU reductions and mobile source reductions. Showing emissions totals for 2014 

and 2020 gives a sense as to whether control strategies for TR in 2014 will be enough to 

maintain air quality improvements in subsequent future years (such as 2020). 

Table 7-1 summarizes emissions as they are projected to change over time in the eastern 

modeling domain states. Note that unlike the TR preamble, Oklahoma is in the eastern modeling 

domain here. This information is important because it shows that for the most part, total 

emissions of NOX and SO2, considering both EGU and nonEGU sectors, are significantly 

decreasing over time. Therefore, the reductions and corresponding benefits achieved from the 

EGU sector as a result of the proposed rule should be maintained over time. Table 7-2 provides 

details for projected changes to each of the sectors. 

As noted in the preamble to the proposed transport rule, EPA considers the maintenance concept 

to have two components: (1) year-to-year variability in emissions and air quality, and (2) 

continued maintenance of the air quality standard over time. Regarding component (2), for 

example, if emissions increases were expected during the time period after the rule took effect, 

these increases might call into question whether there were sufficient emissions reductions 

required by the rule to provide for continued maintenance of the NAAQS. EPA uses the 

information in Table 7-1 to address this issue and to conclude that component (2) does not 

suggest the need for any further emission reductions requirements. 

Table 7-2 shows that: 

• Region-wide emissions of both SO2 and NOX are substantially decreased between 2014 

and 2020. 

• Emissions of NOX are reduced between 2014 and 2020 by a significant degree across the 

US, largely due to decreases in the mobile source sector, and are reduced in every state. 

• Emissions of SO2 are reduced substantially over the region, about 1/3, and also in most 

states, with small increases seen in a few generally low-emitting states. 

We acknowledge that there are some SO2 increases projected in some states, such as Arkansas 

and New York. Therefore, we cannot claim that there will be no maintenance problems 

anywhere in the country. We propose to review this issue when we do the final rule modeling. 

At that time, additional information, such as inclusion of new federal rules that have recently 
53

been or will be promulgated in the intervening time (e.g., ECA-IMO, Boiler MACT, Portland 

Cement NESHAP, RICE and Compression Engines and Spark Engines, and Light Duty 

Greenhouse Gas Rule), will be available that will give us a more realistic estimate of the 

probable level of emissions in 2020. 

In our current future base case platform, there are no additional rules between years 2014 and 

2020 that would impact the future year baseline inventories, with the exception that full 

implementation for some mobile rules (Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule) does not occur until 

2020 -well after year 2014. The turnover rate for units (EGUs) and vehicles and equipment 

(onroad mobile and nonroad mobile) results in a lower proportion of mobile emissions to overall 

anthropogenic emissions in year 2020 than year 2014. 
54

Table 7-1. Eastern Modeling Domain State Total Emissions for 2005, 2014, and 2020 Base C

State 2005 NOX 2014 NOX 2020NOX

% Change NOX

 2020-2014 2005 SO2 2014 SO2 2020 S

Alabama 447,562 341,738 257,883 -24.5% 593,372 447,053 299Arkansas 241,499 189,623 151,411 -20.2% 114,749 129,714 144Connecticut 116,688 67,084 58,314 -13.1% 34,320 27,423 27Delaware 58,902 37,353 36,216 -3.0% 85,173 39,635 44District of Columbia 15,904 8,568 7,117 -16.9% 3,914 2,291 2Florida 1,064,537 795,599 672,868 -15.4% 656,131 438,658 410Georgia 585,812 349,650 311,804 -10.8% 750,031 297,618 231Illinois 773,347 503,676 415,949 -17.4% 516,969 340,596 272Indiana 614,949 474,858 326,615 -31.2% 1,047,396 960,123 438Iowa 312,105 236,692 187,129 -20.9% 221,902 244,448 187Kansas 366,285 289,829 263,644 -9.0% 196,005 115,018 115Kentucky 437,163 325,791 218,884 -32.8% 572,787 798,755 260Louisiana 673,824 565,049 529,047 -6.4% 354,489 327,871 340Maine 79,246 59,903 55,524 -7.3% 37,084 44,640 49Maryland 294,656 171,980 166,535 -3.2% 379,874 136,109 135Massachusetts 271,327 182,095 182,258 0.1% 158,245 93,890 103Michigan 638,876 444,969 358,917 -19.3% 490,280 402,874 330Minnesota 469,286 330,278 274,942 -16.8% 155,181 103,005 93Mississippi 292,649 206,633 162,685 -21.3% 120,016 82,077 77Missouri 505,873 333,312 276,041 -17.2% 422,165 623,473 316Nebraska 244,607 182,410 157,071 -13.9% 121,589 152,072 160New Hampshire 65,223 39,884 34,249 -14.1% 63,571 17,476 18New Jersey 323,550 204,007 194,489 -4.7% 101,441 82,585 70New York 610,042 394,165 363,885 -7.7% 391,216 337,694 355North Carolina 548,064 374,018 359,664 -3.8% 649,181 283,180 288Ohio 816,321 518,861 395,051 -23.9% 1,276,292 969,405 463Oklahoma 428,617 347,791 326,642 -6.1% 166,288 211,268 207Pennsylvania 705,053 535,631 410,031 -23.4% 1,173,328 1,122,876 476Rhode Island 26,930 19,585 18,987 -3.1% 8,987 9,323 10South Carolina 302,441 224,505 199,164 -11.3% 304,393 243,129 225
55

Tennessee 472,717 311,882 227,363 -27.1% 388,468 711,647 232Texas 1,741,166 1,258,354 1,132,869 -10.0% 935,187 678,662 665Vermont 21,980 15,713 12,808 -18.5% 7,036 6,439 6Virginia 463,145 315,002 297,581 -5.5% 345,259 254,758 220West Virginia 294,801 197,708 139,731 -29.3% 535,802 553,218 181Wisconsin 359,042 241,743 200,083 -17.2% 263,685 191,461 163TOTAL 15,684,185 11,095,937 9,383,453 -15.4% 13,641,806 11,480,463 7,626

Table 7-2. Eastern Modeling Domain State-Sector Emissions for 2005, 2014, and 2020 Base C

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

NonEGU 74,830 74,622 74,654 32 70,346 69,150 Nonpoint 32,024 31,939 31,906 -33 52,325 52,313 Nonroad 61,623 45,932 37,278 -8,654 6,397 1,873 Onroad 142,221 67,011 48,606 -18,405 3,199 605 Fires 3,814 3,814 3,814 0 983 983 

Alabama Southeast 

EGU 133,051 118,420 61,625 -56,795 460,123 322,130 

NonEGU 37,478 37,491 37,512 21 13,066 13,055 Nonpoint 21,453 21,422 21,410 -12 27,260 27,256 Nonroad 63,493 44,299 34,187 -10,112 5,678 142 Onroad 81,014 38,965 30,917 -8,048 1,632 347 Fires 2,654 2,654 2,654 0 728 728 

Arkansas Southeast 

EGU 35,407 44,792 24,731 -20,061 66,384 88,187 

NonEGU 5,824 5,854 5,896 42 1,831 1,834 Nonpoint 12,554 12,451 12,411 -40 18,455 18,440 Nonroad 21,785 14,410 11,686 -2,724 2,548 1,294 Onroad 69,645 31,534 25,654 -5,880 1,128 340 Fires 14 14 14 0 4 4 

Connecticut Northeast 

EGU 6,865 2,821 2,654 -167 10,356 5,512 
56

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

NonEGU 5,567 5,567 5,568 1 34,859 10,974 Nonpoint 3,259 3,245 3,239 -6 5,859 5,857 Nonroad 15,567 15,270 15,657 387 11,648 14,891 Onroad 22,569 8,736 7,623 -1,113 422 101 Fires 23 23 23 0 6 6 

Delaware Northeast 

EGU 11,917 4,513 4,107 -406 32,378 7,806 

NonEGU 501 501 501 0 686 686 Nonpoint 1,740 1,738 1,738 0 1,559 1,559 Nonroad 3,494 2,398 1,637 -761 414 4 Onroad 9,677 3,929 3,240 -689 172 42 Fires 0 0 0 0 0 0 

District of Columbia 

Southeast 

EGU 492 1 0 -1 1,082 0 

NonEGU 53,778 55,343 55,901 558 57,475 57,521 Nonpoint 29,533 29,457 29,428 -29 70,490 70,480 Nonroad 277,888 278,920 286,675 7,755 93,543 108,579 Onroad 460,474 225,478 170,403 -55,075 10,285 2,159 Fires 25,600 25,600 25,600 0 7,018 7,018 

Florida Southeast 

EGU 217,263 180,801 104,861 -75,940 417,321 192,903 

NonEGU 53,297 53,557 54,038 481 56,116 56,014 Nonpoint 38,919 38,797 38,750 -47 56,829 56,813 Nonroad 95,175 71,011 58,421 -12,590 13,331 8,263 Onroad 279,449 130,240 107,567 -22,673 5,690 1,307 Fires 7,955 7,955 7,955 0 2,010 2,010 

Georgia Southeast 

EGU 111,017 48,091 45,072 -3,019 616,054 173,210 

NonEGU 97,504 93,059 94,160 1,101 156,154 133,109 Nonpoint 47,645 47,540 47,500 -40 5,395 5,381 Nonroad 223,697 151,373 114,002 -37,371 19,302 390 

Illinois Midwest 

Onroad 276,507 131,403 104,549 -26,854 5,716 1,221 
57

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

Fires 71 71 71 0 20 20 

EGU 127,923 80,228 55,666 -24,562 330,382 200,475 

NonEGU 73,647 73,523 73,590 67 95,200 95,037 Nonpoint 30,185 30,107 30,077 -30 59,775 59,764 Nonroad 110,100 76,024 57,512 -18,512 9,436 193 Onroad 187,426 94,217 67,816 -26,401 3,981 810 Fires 88 88 88 0 24 24 

Indiana Midwest 

EGU 213,503 200,899 97,533 -103,366 878,978 804,294 

NonEGU 39,299 38,831 38,852 21 61,241 60,195 Nonpoint 15,150 15,038 14,995 -43 19,832 19,817 Nonroad 92,965 65,751 48,701 -17,050 8,838 85 Onroad 91,795 48,836 34,104 -14,732 1,702 360 Fires 90 90 90 0 25 25 

Iowa Midwest 

EGU 72,806 68,146 50,387 -17,759 130,264 163,966 

NonEGU 70,785 70,730 70,739 9 13,142 13,048 Nonpoint 42,286 42,238 42,219 -19 36,381 36,375 Nonroad 86,553 61,613 46,797 -14,816 8,035 54 Onroad 76,062 35,950 26,255 -9,695 1,824 313 Fires 378 378 378 0 103 103 

Kansas Midwest 

EGU 90,220 78,920 77,257 -1,663 136,520 65,125 

NonEGU 35,432 34,979 35,157 178 25,811 23,804 Nonpoint 17,557 17,413 17,358 -55 34,229 34,210 Nonroad 90,669 65,805 51,233 -14,572 6,942 258 Onroad 127,435 57,759 43,037 -14,722 2,711 528 Fires 1,326 1,326 1,326 0 364 364 

Kentucky Southeast 

EGU 164,743 148,509 70,773 -77,736 502,731 739,592 

Louisiana Southeast NonEGU 165,162 161,766 161,836 70 165,737 151,216 

Nonpoint 27,559 27,515 27,498 -17 2,378 2,372 
58

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

Nonroad 301,170 274,697 261,499 -13,198 73,233 78,097 Onroad 112,889 52,360 38,760 -13,600 2,399 470 Fires 3,254 3,254 3,254 0 892 892 

EGU 63,791 45,457 36,200 -9,257 109,851 94,824 

NonEGU 18,309 18,316 18,326 10 18,519 18,520 Nonpoint 7,423 7,257 7,192 -65 9,969 9,945 Nonroad 13,379 13,169 13,591 422 3,725 4,215 Onroad 38,469 18,061 13,552 -4,509 834 160 Fires 566 566 566 0 150 150 

Maine Northeast 

EGU 1,100 2,535 2,296 -239 3,887 11,650 

NonEGU 24,621 24,687 24,794 107 34,988 34,994 Nonpoint 21,715 21,626 21,592 -34 40,864 40,851 Nonroad 55,812 52,501 53,050 549 17,819 16,966 Onroad 129,796 53,040 49,679 -3,361 2,966 631 Fires 137 137 137 0 32 32 

Maryland Northeast 

EGU 62,574 19,990 17,284 -2,706 283,205 42,635 

NonEGU 18,429 18,527 18,664 137 19,620 19,624 Nonpoint 34,373 34,207 34,143 -64 25,261 25,237 Nonroad 74,419 75,654 82,257 6,603 25,335 32,043 Onroad 118,148 46,748 40,814 -5,934 2,168 594 Fires 341 341 341 0 93 93 

Massachusetts Northeast 

EGU 25,618 6,619 6,039 -580 85,768 16,299 

NonEGU 94,139 94,079 94,294 215 76,510 76,437 Nonpoint 43,499 43,360 43,306 -54 42,066 42,066 Nonroad 101,087 73,939 58,797 -15,142 14,533 7,536 Onroad 279,816 135,806 98,222 -37,584 7,204 1,107 Fires 330 330 330 0 91 91 

Michigan Midwest 

EGU 120,005 97,455 63,968 -33,487 349,877 275,637 
59

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

NonEGU 64,438 64,372 64,580 208 25,169 25,112 Nonpoint 56,700 56,545 56,485 -60 14,747 14,728 Nonroad 115,873 84,040 64,212 -19,828 10,410 468 Onroad 146,138 71,161 53,790 -17,371 2,558 618 Fires 2,300 2,300 2,300 0 631 631 

Minnesota Midwest 

EGU 83,836 51,859 33,575 -18,284 101,666 61,447 

NonEGU 53,985 52,440 52,454 14 29,892 24,427 Nonpoint 12,212 12,133 12,103 -30 6,796 6,785 Nonroad 79,394 58,559 46,391 -12,168 6,003 1,280 Onroad 98,060 42,525 29,583 -12,942 2,158 385 Fires 3,833 3,833 3,833 0 1,051 1,051 

Mississippi Southeast 

EGU 45,166 37,142 18,322 -18,820 74,117 48,149 

NonEGU 38,604 38,744 38,988 244 78,307 77,086 Nonpoint 32,910 32,677 32,588 -89 44,573 44,543 Nonroad 123,228 88,233 68,567 -19,666 10,464 214 Onroad 183,022 90,001 69,493 -20,508 4,251 796 Fires 678 678 678 0 186 186 

Missouri Midwest 

EGU 127,431 82,979 65,727 -17,252 284,384 500,649 

NonEGU 12,156 12,173 12,196 23 6,429 6,431 Nonpoint 13,820 13,779 13,763 -16 29,575 29,570 Nonroad 107,180 75,252 58,478 -16,774 9,199 55 Onroad 58,643 27,856 19,134 -8,722 1,326 217 Fires 381 381 381 0 105 105 

Nebraska Midwest 

EGU 52,426 52,970 53,119 149 74,955 115,695 

NonEGU 3,241 3,255 3,275 20 3,245 3,246 Nonpoint 11,235 11,129 11,088 -41 7,408 7,393 Nonroad 9,246 6,587 5,115 -1,472 805 45 

New Hampshire Northeast 

Onroad 32,537 16,260 12,101 -4,159 630 148 
60

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

Fires 137 137 137 0 38 38 

EGU 8,827 2,515 2,533 18 51,445 6,608 

NonEGU 20,598 19,089 19,249 160 7,640 6,756 Nonpoint 26,393 26,298 26,261 -37 10,726 10,712 Nonroad 88,486 78,875 76,768 -2,107 23,484 26,589 Onroad 157,736 63,254 59,180 -4,074 2,486 799 Fires 223 223 223 0 61 61 

New Jersey Northeast 

EGU 30,114 16,268 12,809 -3,459 57,044 37,669 

NonEGU 55,122 55,359 55,688 329 58,562 58,584 Nonpoint 87,608 87,826 87,910 84 125,158 125,196 Nonroad 121,363 92,841 82,308 -10,533 20,908 10,853 Onroad 282,072 129,376 115,246 -14,130 5,628 1,594 Fires 412 412 412 0 113 113 

New York Northeast 

EGU 63,465 28,350 22,322 -6,028 180,847 141,354 

NonEGU 44,502 44,573 44,766 193 66,150 66,046 Nonpoint 18,869 18,669 18,591 -78 22,020 21,994 Nonroad 135,936 133,455 142,195 8,740 42,743 52,897 Onroad 225,756 104,150 80,908 -23,242 5,341 961 Fires 11,424 11,424 11,424 0 696 696 

North Carolina Southeast 

EGU 111,576 61,747 61,780 33 512,231 140,585 

NonEGU 71,715 69,157 69,297 140 118,468 105,123 Nonpoint 41,466 41,352 41,307 -45 19,810 19,810 Nonroad 173,988 120,900 92,379 -28,521 15,615 2,085 Onroad 270,383 122,426 93,881 -28,545 6,293 1,171 Fires 81 81 81 0 22 22 

Ohio Midwest 

EGU 258,687 164,945 98,106 -66,839 1,116,084 841,194 

Oklahoma Southwest NonEGU 73,465 72,525 72,567 42 40,482 36,924 

Nonpoint 94,574 94,513 94,490 -23 7,542 7,534 
61

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

Nonroad 55,424 39,539 30,318 -9,221 5,015 45 Onroad 117,240 58,382 43,889 -14,493 2,699 524 Fires 1,709 1,709 1,709 0 469 469 

EGU 86,204 81,122 83,669 2,547 110,081 165,773 

NonEGU 89,208 84,111 84,363 252 85,411 76,256 Nonpoint 53,435 53,246 53,173 -73 68,349 68,324 Nonroad 118,774 83,885 65,340 -18,545 11,972 4,117 Onroad 266,649 118,122 95,864 -22,258 5,363 1,169 Fires 117 117 117 0 32 32 

Pennsylvania Northeast 

EGU 176,870 196,151 111,174 -84,977 1,002,202 972,977 

NonEGU 2,164 2,186 2,217 31 2,743 2,745 Nonpoint 2,964 2,957 2,955 -2 3,365 3,364 Nonroad 7,798 7,384 7,762 378 2,494 3,128 Onroad 13,456 6,772 5,816 -956 208 85 Fires 4 4 4 0 1 1 

Rhode Island Northeast 

EGU 545 281 233 -48 176 0 

NonEGU 29,069 28,969 28,998 29 31,495 31,453 Nonpoint 20,281 20,271 20,267 -4 30,016 30,002 Nonroad 68,146 62,400 63,242 842 20,477 24,380 Onroad 128,765 62,996 49,708 -13,288 2,976 551 Fires 2,357 2,357 2,357 0 646 646 

South Carolina Southeast 

EGU 53,823 47,512 34,592 -12,920 218,782 156,096 

NonEGU 60,353 59,694 59,864 170 78,206 77,605 Nonpoint 18,676 18,542 18,490 -52 32,714 32,696 Nonroad 82,331 59,145 45,448 -13,697 6,288 173 Onroad 207,410 104,711 74,911 -29,800 4,834 829 Fires 1,012 1,012 1,012 0 277 277 

Tennessee Southeast 

EGU 102,934 68,779 27,638 -41,141 266,148 600,066 
62

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

NonEGU 292,806 282,509 283,203 694 223,625 155,720 Nonpoint 274,338 274,163 274,096 -67 109,215 109,194 Nonroad 377,246 289,605 239,110 -50,495 52,749 36,109 Onroad 615,715 241,009 193,768 -47,241 13,470 2,511 Fires 4,890 4,890 4,890 0 1,178 1,178 

Texas Southwest 

EGU 176,170 166,177 137,803 -28,374 534,949 373,950 

NonEGU 799 803 808 5 902 903 Nonpoint 3,438 3,397 3,382 -15 5,385 5,380 Nonroad 3,951 2,771 2,112 -659 385 7 Onroad 13,316 8,563 6,328 -2,235 305 101 Fires 179 179 179 0 49 49 

Vermont Northeast 

EGU 297 0 9 

NonEGU 60,101 60,216 60,412 196 69,440 69,177 Nonpoint 53,605 53,464 53,409 -55 32,923 32,899 Nonroad 91,298 75,461 68,679 -6,782 18,420 15,624 Onroad 194,173 92,291 78,824 -13,467 3,829 918 Fires 1,456 1,456 1,456 0 399 399 

Virginia Southeast 

EGU 62,512 32,115 34,801 2,686 220,248 135,741 

NonEGU 36,913 35,700 35,703 3 48,314 41,817 Nonpoint 14,519 14,459 14,436 -23 14,589 14,581 Nonroad 32,739 23,798 18,943 -4,855 2,133 96 Onroad 50,040 22,863 17,787 -5,076 1,095 201 Fires 785 785 785 0 215 215 

West Virginia Southeast 

EGU 159,804 100,103 52,077 -48,026 469,456 496,307 

NonEGU 40,688 40,729 40,789 60 66,807 66,456 Nonpoint 21,994 21,974 21,967 -7 6,369 6,370 Nonroad 75,981 53,848 41,958 -11,890 7,129 638 

Wisconsin Midwest 

Onroad 147,952 71,163 56,315 -14,848 3,110 675 
63

 NOX SO2State Region Sector 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

2020 Base Case 

2020 Base - 

2014 Base 

2005 Base Case 

2014 Base Case 

20Ca

Fires 256 256 256 0 70 70 

EGU 72,170 53,774 38,799 -14,975 180,200 117,253 

Grand Total 15,684,185 11,095,937 9,383,453 -1,712,484 13,641,806 11,480,463 7
64

8 References 

Arunachalam S., 2009: Peer Review of Source Apportionment Tools in CAMx and CMAQ, EPD-07-102. University of North Carolina, Institute for the Environment, August 2009. 

Environ, 2009: Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions Version 5 User’s Guide. 

Environ International Corporation. Novato, CA. March 2009. 

EPA, 2005. Clean Air Interstate Rule Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, March 

005. Available at http://www.epa.gov/cair/pdfs/finaltech01.pdf. 

EPA, 2006. Regulatory Impact Analyses, 2006 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Particle Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, October, 2006. Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017, # EPAHQ-OAR-2006-

0834. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html. 

EPA, 2007a. Guidance for Estimating VOC and NOx Emission Changes from MACT Rules, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Policy Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA-457/B-07-001, May 2007. 

Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/documents/guidance/200705_epa457_b- 07-

001_emission_changes_mact_rules.pdf. 

EPA. 2007b. National Scale Modeling for the Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA 454/R-07-002, February 2007. Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/454r07002.pdf

EPA, 2007c. Regulatory Impact Analysis for Final Rule: Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants 

from Mobile Sources, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and 

Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-07-002, 

February 2007. Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/420r07002.pdf. 

EPA, 2009. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from 

Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters Per 

Cylinder. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 

Assessment and Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-08-001a, May 2009. 

Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420r08001a.pdf 

EPA, 2010. RFS2 Emissions Inventory for Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document, 

February, 2010. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420r10005.pdf. 
A-1

APPENDIX A 

Ancillary Data Files Used for TR 2005 Case Compared to 2012 and 2014 Base Case 

Scenarios 

To match the Datasets and Versions listed in this table to actual data files, combine the Dataset 

name and the version number in the following pattern: <Dataset Name>_<Date>_<Version 

number>.txt, where <Date> is the last date of change for that version and will have a unique 

value for the combination of Dataset Name and Version number. 
A-1

Table A-1. Detailed list of ancillary file data differences between the TR 2005 Base Case and the 2012 and 

Input 

Environment Variable 

Dataset 2005 base case 

Version 2005 Base Sector Dataset 2012 base case 

Version 2012 cases Dataset 2014 cases 

Onroad temperature adjustments ADJ_FACS 

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdj Factors 2005 1 on_moves_runpm 

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdj Factors 2005 

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdjFactors_2014_JAN2010 

Onroad temperature adjustments ADJ_FACS 

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdj Factors 2005 1 on_moves_startpm

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdj Factors 2005 

MOVESPmOcEcTempAdjFactors_2014_JAN2010 

nonpoint & nonroad surrogate xref AGREF amgref_us_can_mex_revised 5 All sectors amgref_us_can_mex_revised 7 same as 2012 Grid Description List GRIDDESC griddesc_lambertonly 24 All sectors griddesc_lambertonly 13 same as 2012 GSCNV - pollutant to pollutant conversions GSCNV gscnv_cmaq_cb05_tx_pf4 2 All sectors gscnv_cmaq_cb05_tx_pf4 3 same as 2012 GSCNV - pollutant to pollutant conversions tier2 GSCNV N/A All sectors 

gscnv_cmaq_cb05_tier2_ nontoxic 0 same as 2012 

GSCNV - pollutant to pollutant conversions tier2 NONHAPVOC GSCNV N/A All sectors gscnv_cmaq_cb05_tier2_toxic 0 same as 2012 Combination profiles 

GSPRO_COMBO gspro_combo_2005 2 All sectors replaced with many datasets -- same as 2012 

Combination profiles for onroad 

GSPRO_COMBO N/A on_noadj 

gspro_combo_2012_onroad_ nonroad_exhevp 1 same as 2012 

Combination profiles for nopt 

GSPRO_COMBO N/A nonpt 

gspro_combo_stationary _aeo.TXT 0 same as 2012 

Combination profiles for nonroad rfl 

GSPRO_COMBO N/A nonroad gspro_combo_nonroadrefuel_aeo 0 same as 2012 

Combination profiles for ptnonipm 

GSPRO_COMBO N/A ptnonipm gspro_combo_stationary_aeo.TXT 0 same as 2012 
A-2

Input 

Environment Variable 

Dataset 2005 base case 

Version 2005 Base Sector Dataset 2012 base case 

Version 2012 cases Dataset 2014 cases 

Combination profiles for nonroad exh-evp 

GSPRO_COMBO N/A nonroad 

gspro_combo_2012_onroad_ nonroad_exhevp 1 same as 2012 

Speciation profiles for TOG -noBAFtier 2 mobile profiles used for future year only GSPRO N/A All sectors 

gspro_cmaq_cb05_tier2_ nontoxic 1 same as 2012 

Speciation profiles for TOGBAF - tier 2 mobile profiles used for future year only GSPRO N/A All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_tier2_BAF 2 same as 2012 Speciation profiles for NONHAPTOG - tier 2 mobile profiles for future only GSPRO N/A All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_tier2_toxic 0 same as 2012 Speciation xref static NOX -- HONO for mobile sources GSREF gsref_static_nox_hono_pf4 3 All sectors gsref_static_nox_hono_pf4 3

gsref_static_nox_hono_pf4 

Speciation xref for VOC, not yearspecific GSREF gsref_voc_general 19 All sectors gsref_voc_general_rfs2_2022 3 same as 2012 Speciation xref for VOC, year-specific GSREF gsref_voc_2005 2 All sectors gsref_voc_future_rfs2_mobile 1 same as 2012 Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, not year-specific GSREF 

gsref_nonhapvoc_general_ update 3 All sectors 

gsref_nonhapvoc_general_ rfs2_2022 4 same as 2012 

Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, year-specific GSREF gsref_nonhapvoc_2005 1 All sectors N/A same as 2012 Speciation xref HG GSREF gsref_hg 5 All sectors gsref_hg 7 same as 2012 Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, year-specific, mobile records GSREF N/A All sectors 

gsref_nonhapvoc_future_ rfs2_mobile 0 same as 2012 
A-3

Input 

Environment Variable 

Dataset 2005 base case 

Version 2005 Base Sector Dataset 2012 base case 

Version 2012 cases Dataset 2014 cases 

Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, year-specific, stationary records GSREF N/A All sectors 

gsref_nonhapvoc_future_rfs2 _nomobile 0 same as 2012 

Speciation xref for speciated VOC GSREF gsref_speciated_voc 1 othpt 

gsref_voc_future_rfs2_ nomobile 3 same as 2012 

Inventory Table - HAPCAP integration but no toxics INVTABLE 

invtable_hapcapintegate_ cb05soa_nomp 4 All sectors 

invtable_hapcapintegate_ cb05soa_nomp 4

invtable_hapcapintegate_ cb05soa_nomp 

onroad surrogate xref default MGREF amgref_us_can_mex_revised 7 All sectors amgref_us_can_allmex3 10 same as 2012 
 1 B-1

APPENDIX B 

Inventory Data Files Used for Each TR Modeling Case - 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 B-1. In addition, only the EGU sector (ptipm) emissions are different between 

the 2014 base case and 2014 control case. 
B-2

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

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files 

Annual: ptinv_ptipm_hap2005v2_allHAPs_revised12mar2009_12mar200Annual: ptinv_ptipm_cap2005v2_revised12mar2009_12mar2009_v0_orl.Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2005ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptipm 

Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2005ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2005v2_20nov2008_revised_20jan2009_v0

ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2005v2_revised_24feb2009_v0_orl.txt 

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 

arinv_nonpt_pf4_cap_nopfc_04feb2009_v1_orl.txt arinv_pfc_2002_caphap_27dec2007_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_pf4_hap_nopfc_20feb2009_v1_orl.txt 

nonpt 

arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_WRAP_OilGas_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt 

arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_<mon>_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonroad_caps_2005v2_<mon>_revised_08sep2008_v0_orl.txt 

nonroad 

arinv_nonroad_haps_2005v2_<mon>_revised_05sep2008_v0_orl.txt 

mbinv_on_noadj_moves_<mon>_14NOV08_14nov2008_v0_orl.txt mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_<mon>_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt 

on_noadj 

mbinv_onroad_capshaps_2005v2_nmim_not2moves_<mon>_08sep2008_

on_moves_runpm mbinv_onroad_moves_runpm_<mon>_20oct2008_v0_orl.txt on_moves_startpm mbinv_onroad_moves_startpm_<mon>_20oct2008_v0_orl.txt 

ptinv_seca_c3_caps2005pf4_31jul2008_v0_orl.txt ptinv_seca_c3_haps_NonUS_central2005pf4_09sep2008_v0_orl.txt ptinv_seca_c3_haps_NonUS_east2005pf4_09sep2008_v0_orl.txt ptinv_seca_c3_haps_NonUS_west2005pf4_09sep2008_v0_orl.txt ptinv_seca_c3_haps_central2005pf4_31jul2008_v0_orl.txt ptinv_seca_c3_haps_east2005pf4_31jul2008_v0_orl.txt 

2005 Base (2005ck_05b) 

seca_c3 

ptinv_seca_c3_haps_west2005pf4_31jul2008_v0_orl.txt 

avefire arinv_avefire_2002ce_21dec2007_v0_ida.txt 

arinv_avefire_2002_hap_18nov2008_v0_orl.txt 

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 

All Cases 

othar 

arinv_canada_marine_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt 
B-3

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files 

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 

othar_hg arinv_area_canada_hg_2000_noduplicates_23jul2008_v0_ida.txt 

mbinv_canada_onroad_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt mbinv_onroad_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt 

othon 

mbinv_onroad_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt 

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 

othpt 

ptinv_ptnonipm_offshore_oil_cap2005v2_20nov2008_20nov2008_v0_orl

othpt_hg ptinv_point_canada_hg_2000_08sep2008_v1_ida.txt 

ptinv_ptipm_2012ck_05b_summer_23apr2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptipm_2012ck_05b_winter_23apr2009_v0_orl.txt ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2012ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptipm 

ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2012ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_2012ck_05b_BASE_17Apr2009_orl_17apr2009_v0_orl.afdust arinv_afdust_2012ck_05b_BASE_09apr2009_v0_orl.txt ag arinv_ag_2012ck_05b_BASE_09apr2009_v0_orl.txt alm_no_c3 arinv_alm_no_c3_2012ck_05b_BASE_13apr2009_v0_orl.txt nonpt arinv_nonpt_2012ck_05b_BASE_09apr2009_v0_orl.txt nonroad arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2012_<mon>_07apr2009_v0_orl.txt 

arinv_nonroad_caphap_2012_<mon>_27mar2009_v0_orl.txt 

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2012_<mon>_07apr2009_v0_orl.txt mbinv_onroad_caphap_not2moves_2012_<mon>_13apr2009_v0_orl.txt 

on_noadj 

mbinv_onroad_moves_noadj_2012_<mon>_13apr2009_v0_orl.txt 

on_moves_runpm mbinv_onroad_moves_runpm_2012_aug_07apr2009_v0_orl.txt on_moves_startpm mbinv_onroad_moves_startpm_2012_aug_07apr2009_v0_orl.txt 

ptinv_eca_c3_caps2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt 

2012 Base (2012ck_05b) 

seca_c3 

ptinv_eca_c3_haps_NonUS_central2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt 
B-4

Case Sector SMOKE Input Files 

ptinv_eca_c3_haps_NonUS_east2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_c3_haps_NonUS_west2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_c3_haps_central2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_c3_haps_east2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_c3_haps_west2012pf4_16mar2009_v0_orl.txt 

ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2015ck1_CoST_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt 

ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2015ck1_CoST_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt 

afdust arinv_afdust_xportfrac_2015ck_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt ag arinv_ag_cap2015ck_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt alm_no_c3 arinv_lm_no_c3_cap2015ck_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt 

arinv_lm_no_c3_hap2015ck_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt 

arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_WRAP_OilGas_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_pf4_cap_nopfc_2015ck1_27nov2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_pf4_hap_nopfc_2015ck1_fixed_no_wrap_oilgas_07dec2009_

nonpt 

arinv_pfc_caphap2015_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt 

arinv_nonroad_calif_cap2014_<mon>_29jun2007_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonroad_calif_hap_2014_<mon>_15dec2009_v0_orl.txt 

nonroad 

arinv_nonroad_caphap_2014ck_<mon>_07jan2010_v0_orl.txt 

mbinv_onroad_calif_cap2014_<mon>_10aug2007_v0_orl.txt mbinv_onroad_calif_hap_2014_<mon>_13jan2010_v0_orl.txt mbinv_on_noadj_caps_hg_baf2014ck_<mon>_07JAN2010_07jan2010_v

on_noadj 

mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_2014ck2_<mon>_11feb2010_v0_orl.txt 

on_moves_runpm mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2014ck2_<mon>_11feb2010_v0_orl.txt on_moves_startpm mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2014ck2_<mon>_11feb2010_v0_orl.txt 

ptinv_eca_c3_BAF_HAPs2014pf31_08jan2010_v0_orl.txt 

2014 Base + Control (2014ck_05b + 2014ck2_catr1_05b) 

seca_c3 

ptinv_eca_c3_CAPs2014pf31_08jan2010_v0_orl.txt 

ptinv_PTINV_EPA302_EISA_3e_summer_2015_18MAY2009_12jan201ptinv_PTINV_EPA302_EISA_3e_winter_2015_18MAY2009_12jan2010_ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2014ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

2014 Base (2014ck2_05b) 

ptipm 

ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2014ck_<mon>_ida.txt 

ptinv_PTINV_EPA302_EISA_98_summer_2015_25JAN2010_25jan2010ptinv_PTINV_EPA302_EISA_98_winter_2015_25JAN2010_25jan2010_ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2014ck_catr1_<mon>_ida.txt 

2014 Control(2014ck2_catr1_05b) 

ptipm 

ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2014ck_catr1_<mon>_ida.txt 
C-1

APPENDIX C – OECA Consent Decrees 

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

Corporation Pollutant 

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions 

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

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

Bunge 

VOC 31DEC2005 

Combined VOC emissions reduced by 1,122 tons 

per year. Combined is over select Bunge 

facilities. 

2,761

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 Cargill 

VOC 01SEP2008 

Combined VOC emissions reduced by 98% or 

10,450 tons per year. Combined over select 

Cargill facilities. 

6,617

NOX 31DEC2008 

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 10,000 

tons per year. Combined over select Conoco 

Phillips facilities. 

17,409

Conoco Phillips 

SO2 31DEC2008 

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 37,100 tons 

per year. Combined over select Conoco Phillips 

facilities 

31,003

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

James River 0

Annual SO2 emissions cap at 248 tons per year at 

Wurtland 2,268

01MAR2012 Annual SO2 emissions cap at 281 tons per year at 

Fort Hill 2,228

Dupont SO2

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

at Burnside. 9,517

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

Hunt 

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

CO 2009 CO reductions by 90% 31 MGP Ingredients VOC 2009 VOC reductions by 95% 112
C-2

Corporation Pollutant 

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions 

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

Annual emission limit of 2.2 lbs/ton. 240

01JUL2007 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

Rhodia Inc SO2

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

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. NOX 2,339

31DEC2010 

(Philadelphia, 

PA) 

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 4,500 tons 

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

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. PM 391

31DEC2010 

(Philadelphia

, PA) 

Combined PM emissions reduced by 300 tons per 

year. Combined over select Sunoco facilities. 591

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

Sunoco 

SO2

31DEC2010 

(Philadelphia

, PA) 

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 19,500 tons 

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

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

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

Total 

Petrochemicals 

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

Corporation Pollutant 

Compliance 

Date Description of reductions 

2005 

Emissions 

(tons/year)

2011 

Combined NOX emissions reduced by 1870 tons 

per year. Combined is over facilities: Lima, 

Memphis, and Port Arthur. 

4,165

NOX

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

2011 

Combined SO2 emissions reduced by 1,810 tons 

per year. Combined is over facilities: Lima, 

Memphis, and Port Arthur. 

4,105

Valero 

SO2

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