# Draft, Version 1.0



# Lists of Potential Control Measures

for PM 2.5 

# and Precursors

These informational documents are in tended to provide a broad, though not

comprehensive, listing of potential emissions reduction measures for direct PM2.5 and

precursors. The purpose is primarily to a ssist states in identifying and evaluating

potential measures as States devel op plans for attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS.

Before examining control measures, an important step for States is to identify the nature

of the PM2.5 problem in their areas and the sources contributing to that problem. The

severity, nature and sources of the PM2.5 problem vary in each nonattainment area, so

the measures that are effective and cost-effective will also vary by area. Similarly, the

geographic area in which measures are eff ectively applied will vary depending on the

extent to which pollution sources outside the nonattainment area contribute to the area’s

PM2.5 problem.

Similarly, the costs of applying a given control measure will have case-specific

considerations. While the tabl es here provide overall contro l costs and control efficiency

estimates derived from the references, there is inherent uncertainty in any estimates of

this nature. We do not attempt in these tabl es to provide any rigor ous treatment of these

uncertainties, but rather provide the contro l efficiency and cost estimates as a rough

“ballpark” starting point. These documents also do not provide specific emissions

monitoring and testing information, such as costs. We encourag e the use of sourcespecific assessments which will be more reliable.

This document contains several tabular li sts of PM2.5 control measures. For most

measures, the tables provide an estimate of th e control efficiency a nd the cost per ton of

pollutant reduced. The tables also identify re ference sources that the user may wish to

consult for more information. In the interest of making the lists as relevant as possible,

we have omitted some measures that we believe are already em ployed by virtually all

sources. For example, for direct PM2.5 s ources we did not include an encyclopedic

listing of add-on controls such as baghouses , electrostatic precipi tators, and venturi

scrubbers, since these contro ls are generally well-known and widely implemented.

Note that this technical document is focu sed on identification of measures and does not

address mechanisms for implementation, such as whether a measure would be

implemented on a mandatory or voluntary basi s, or whether state adoption of certain

mobile measures on a mandatory basis would be pre-empted or require a fuels waiver

under the Clean Air Act.

The following control meas ure lists are included:

1. Stationary Source Measures Lists. Separate tables of measures are provided for

three pollutants:

# Draft, Version 1.0

o PM2.5

o SO2

o NOx

In addition, for direct PM2.5, the tabl e suggests a number of possible plantspecific engineering evaluations that ma y yield additional emissions reductions.

We have also included a table of references

.

2. On-road Mobile Source Measures Lists. Separate tables of measures are

provided for three pollutants:

o PM2.5

o SO2

o NOx

We have also included a table of references

.

3. Non-road Mobile Source Measures Lists. Separate tables of measures are

provided for three pollutants:

o PM2.5

o SO2

o NOx

We have also included a table of references and a detailed control measures list

.

4. Supplemental Appendix on On-road Ammonia and VOC Measures. In the

notice of proposed rulemaking for PM2.5 im plementation (Clean Air Fine Particle

Implementation Rule), EPA proposed to ma ke a legal presumption that VOC and

ammonia would not be regulat ed precursors for purposes of a nonattainment area’s

PM2.5 plan, unless the state or EPA makes a de termination to the contrary. In light

of this, information on certain selected m easures that reduce emissions of ammonia

and/or VOC is provided in a separate, s upplemental appendix. Tables are provided

for:

o On-road VOC measures - measures that are listed in the on-road measures

table for PM, SO2 and/or NOx, and that also reduce VOC.

o On-road ammonia measures - measures that are listed in the on-road

measures table for PM, SO2 and/or NOx, and that also reduce ammonia.

We have also included a table of references

.

5. Fugitive Dust Measures List

. For completeness, we include a separate table of

measures, including references, for sources of fugitive dust. Fugitive dust measures

generally have a greater impact on reduci ng ambient concentrations of PM10 than

PM2.5, because crustal material is usually a relatively small fraction of monitored

PM2.5. However, dust measures might, in some circumstances, be helpful at

reducing ambient PM2.5 concentrations.

Note that some emission reduction measures (e.g., many of the mobile source measures)

are listed in more than one table of measur es, because they reduce multiple pollutants.

For example, a measure that reduces both direct PM and NOx appears once in the PM

measures table, and once in the NOx measures table.

# Draft, Version 1.0

EPA has developed a website, at http://www.epa.gov/pm/measures.html , intended to

provide information on emissions reducti on measures and programs for PM2.5 and

precursors. It is our intent to include on this website the information in these tables,

including weblinks to the refe rences, in the near future.

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Measures List. A list currently under

development will include energy efficiency and renewable energy measures that can help

reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precursors.

Agricultural Sources Measures List. Another separate list u nder development, being

coordinated with the Department of Agricu lture, will include control measures for

agricultural sources, such as di esel engine retrofits and ot her measures that can help

reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precursors.

Improved Source Monitoring. For many of the stationary source measures, it is

fundamental to the effectiveness of the meas ure that implementation include appropriate

source monitoring. Effective monitoring to assure ongoing compliance should include

periodic emissions testing or other direct m easures of compliance, as applicable, and less

reliance on generic emissions factors (e.g., fr om AP-42) for estimating emissions or

demonstrating compliance. Moreover, impr ovements to existing monitoring (e.g., use of

fabric filter leak detectors, see EPA-454/ R-98-015), or in the frequency of existing

monitoring (see Barr and Schaffner, 2003, cited in Stationary Source reference table) will

assure that control measures operate within compliance limits and may in fact increase

the effectiveness of control measures already in place.

Contacts. These documents are a joint effort of EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Atmospheric

Programs, and Office of Policy Analysis and Review. Contractor assistance was

provided by ICF Consulting and subcontractor E. H. Pechan. We regard these as “living

documents” and have labeled them as “Draft” to indicate that as we use these documents,

we expect to make ongoing revisions as we receive additional information. We invite

users to provide suggestions for additional m easures, or additional sources of information

on measures, that they believe s hould be included. Please contact:

Tim Smith, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 919-541-4718,

Smith.Tim@epa.gov , (stationary sources)

Rudolph Kapichak, Office of Tran sportation Air Quality, 734-214-4574

Kapichak.Rudolph@epa.gov (mobile sources)

Sam Waltzer, Office of Atmo spheric Programs, 202-343-9175,

Waltzer.Sam@epa.gov (EGUs)

Tom Driscoll, Office of Air Qualit y Planning and Standards, 919-541-5135

driscoll.tom@epa.gov (emissions monitoring and testing)Stationary Source Control Measures for PM2.5See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reduction measure Controlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationGenerallyapplicable measuresAll industrial and commercialsources emitting direct PM2.5Review uncontrolled or undercontrolled stack sources forimprovementsVariable VariableEPA 2002, EPA 1998b,AWMA2000,STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006,Pechan and RTI 2005a, Pechan andRTI 2005b.All industrial and commercialsources currently controlling PMwith cyclones or multicylonesUpgrade to high-efficiencycollection device to collect finefraction of PMVariable VariableEPA 1998b,AWMA 2000, EPA 2002All industrial and commercialsources currently controlled byelectrostatic precipitators (ESPs)Upgrade ESP to improveefficiency on fine fraction of PM,for example by increasingsize/SCA, flue gas conditioning,use of hybrid technologies toimprove performance, orreplacement with fabric filter attime of rebuild.Variable VariablePechan and RTI 2005b,EPA 1992,Southern Research Institute 1993.Industrial process fugitives andopen dust fugitive emissionssourcesImprove fugitive emissions capture Variable VariableWRAP 2004, STAPPA/ALAPCO2006All sources of condensablePM2.5Evaluate whether can feasiblyreduce temperature of gas streamand increase collection ofcondensables, and whether cancollect with wet ESPs, afterburner,or other devicesVariable Variable [We are looking for references onthis topic]Category specificCement Manufacturing Process equipment vented tobaghouse.Various controls for open storagepiles, primary crushing operations,and conveying systems.Not Available Not available Process equipmentlimits:0.01 gr/dscf forexisting equipment;0.005 gr/dscf fornew equipmentSCAQMD, 2005aPage 1 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for PM2.5See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reduction measure Controlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationFerrous Metals Processing - Ironand Steel Production - BlastFurnace CasthouseCapture Hood Vented to aBaghouse85 Not available Based onengineeringjudgments and datawhich for someplants may beoutdated.EPA 2006a, Pechan 2006Ferrous Metals Processing - Ironand Steel Production - BOFSecondary Capture and ControlSystem85 $5,000 Based onengineeringjudgments and datawhich for someplants may beoutdated.EPA 2006a, Pechan 2006Ferrous Metals Processing - Ironand Steel Production - SinterPlantInstall baghouse to controlemissions from sinter cooler99 $5,000 2001$ Based onengineeringjudgments and datawhich for someplants may beoutdated.EPA 2006a, Pechan 2006Petroleum Refinery Catalytic andThermal Cracking UnitsWet Scrubbing 85 - 95 Not AvailableMARAMA, 2006Petroleum Refinery Catalytic andThermal Cracking UnitsElectrostatic Precipitators >95% $3,500 - $6,600MARAMA, 2006;SCAQMD, 2003Petroleum Refinery Catalytic andThermal Cracking UnitsSodium bisulfite (SBS) injection Not Available Not AvailableMARAMA, 2006Stationary diesel enginesincluding generators and otherprime service enginesDiesel oxidation catalyst (whereDPF not feasible)20 $1,000-$2,000 2003$ Cost effectiveness isbased on thecombined CO, HC,NOx and PMreductionNESCAUM 2003, STAPPA andALAPCO 2006Stationary diesel enginesincluding generators and otherprime service enginesDiesel particulate filter 80-90 $2,000-$19,000 2003$ Cost effectiveness isbased on thecombined CO, HCand PM reduction.NESCAUM 2003, STAPPA andALAPCO 2006.Coal-fired Utility Boiler currentlycontrolled by ESPsIndigo Agglomerator 40 Cost effectiveness isvariable and based onplant size: the totalcapital cost of $8 per kW2005$Khan, EPA. August 21, 2006.Coal-fired Utility Boiler currentlycontrolled by ESPsAdd enough collection area toequal one field44 Cost effectiveness isvariable and based onplant size: the totalcapital cost of $13.75 perkW2005$Khan, EPA, August 21, 2006Page 2 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for PM2.5See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reduction measure Controlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationCoal-fired Utility Boiler currentlycontrolled by ESPsAdd enough collection area toequal two fields67 Cost effectiveness isvariable and based onplant size: the totalcapital cost of $17.50 perkW2005$ CE is incremental toESP controlsKhan, EPA, August 21, 2006Residual Oil-Fired Utility andIndustrial Boilers currentlywithout add-on controlsESP Not Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Ferroalloy production Improve capture on open furnaces Not Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Ferroalloy production Capture of fugitive emissions frompouring and castingNot Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Refractory productsmanufacturing - non-clay withorganic bindersthermal oxidizer on plants belowMACT applicability cutoffNot Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Refractory productsmanufacturing - non-clay withchromiumFabric filter Not Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Refractory productsmanufacturing - clayWet or dry lime scrubber for plantsbelow MACT applicability limitNot Available Not availableEPA, 2006b.Commercial Cooking --conveyorized charbroilerCatalytic Oxidizer 83 $3,000 2001$ 90 % cocontrol ofVOCsVentura County 2004,CE-ERT2002Commercial Cooking -- largeunderfired grilling operationsSmall ESP (e.g., SMOG-HOG) orscrubber99 $6,000 2003$Sorrels 2006Open Burning of Land ClearingDebrisSubstitution of landfilling for openburning50 to 100 $3,500 1999$ Developmentmeasure from PMNAAQS RIAEPA 2006a, Pechan 2006Residential Wood Combustion Education and Advisory Program 5-10 Variable, depending onavailability andeffectiveness ofresources allocated.1990$ Includes allprograms other thanwoodstovechangeout programsPechan 1997Residential Wood Stoves Woodstove Changeout Program,including financial incentives andinformation/encouragement whenhouses are soldvariabledepending onoutreach andincentives$2,000 1999$ 'Developmentmeasure from PMNAAQS RIAEPA CommunicationResidential Wood Stoves Mandatory changeout whenhouses are sold5-7% per year Not available 5-7% is based ontypical rates ofhousing turnoverResidential Fireplaces Promote use of Gas Logs/elimination of wood burningNot Available Not availableOutdoor wood hydronic heaters Emissions standards or sitingrequirementsNot Available Not availableNESCAUM 2007Page 3 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for SO2See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency(%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationCement Kilns - Wet Process Wet Gas Scrubber 90 $6,000-$8,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns - Long Dry Process Wet Gas Scrubber 90 $3,000-$5,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns - Long Dry Process Spray Dryer Absorber 90 $3,000-$5,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns - PreheaterProcess KilnWet Gas Scrubber 90 $20,000-$50,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns - PreheaterProcess KilnSpray Dryer Absorber 90 $20,000-$50,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns -Preheater/Precalciner KilnWet Gas Scrubber 90 $20,000-$30,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aCement Kilns -Preheater/Precalciner KilnSpray Dryer Absorber 90 $20,000-$30,000 2002$NESCAM 2005aICI Boilers-Coal--High Sulfur In duct sorbent injection 40 $633-$1,292 2003$EPA 2003aICI Boilers-Coal--High Sulfur Flue Gas Desulfurization 90 $373-$1,046 2003$EPA 2003aICI Boilers-Coal--Low Sulfur In duct Sorbent Injection 40 $697-$1,504 2003$EPA 2003aICI Boilers-Coal--Low Sulfur Flue Gas Desulfurization 90 $461-$1,326 2003$EPA 2003aICI Boilers-Residual Oil Flue Gas Desulfurization 90 $2,295-$3,500 1999$ The cost effectiveness is afunction of boiler capacity.For boilers below 100million BTU the cost perton is $4524, for 100-250million BTU the cost perton is 3489 and for largerthan 250 million BTU thecost per ton is $2295.EPA 2003aICI Boiler - Distillate Oil Reduce sulfur contentfrom 2500 ppm to 500ppm80 $2,350 1999$Developmental measurefrom PM NAAQS RIA80% PM2.5 co-benefitEPA 2006aInorganic Chemical ManufactureOperations--Carbon BlackProductionReduce Sulfur inFeedstockup to 50? Not available EPA information indicatesUS facilities use feedstockwith about 4% sulfur, whileEuropean facilities usefeedstock with about 2 %sulfur.EPA 2006bPage 1 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for SO2See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency(%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationIron and Steel--Coke Ovens Coke oven gasdesulfurization90+ Not availablePechan 2006Oil and Gas Production--ProcessheatersFlue Gas Desulfurization 90 Not availableEPA 1981Petroleum refining--catalytic andthermal cracking unitsCatalyst additives 35 - 50 $ 1,096 - $1,889 This type of SO2 control isrequired in some refineryindustry cases andsettlementsMARAMA 2006,Eaglesonet al., 2004,Petroleum refining--catalytic andthermal cracking unitsWet gas scrubbers 95 - 99.9 $ 499 - 880 2004$ This type of SO2 control isrequired in some refineryindustry cases andsettlementsMARAMA 2006,Eaglesonet al., 2004,Petroleum refining -- catalyticand thermal cracking unitsFeed hydrotreatment Not available Not availableMARAMA, 2006Petroleum refining--flares Process changes toreduce flaringVariabledepending onsuite ofmeasuresselectedVariable dependingon suite of measuresselectedMARAMA, 2006Petroleum refining--processheatersScrubbing: WetScrubbers, Spray DryScrubbers, DryScrubbers90 - 99.9 $7,674 - $45,384MARAMA, 2006Petroleum refining--oil-burningprocess heatersEliminate the combustionof fuel oil (>0.05% sulfurby weight)>95 Not availableMARAMA, 2006Petroleum refining--sulfurrecovery unitsIncreased recoveryefficiency, tail gastreatment such that H2 Scontent of fuels meets0.10 gr/dscf (162 ppm)limitvariabledepending oncurrentrecoveryefficiencyVariable dependingon current recoveryefficiencyMARAMA, 2006Primary aluminum plants Addition of scrubbers tocontrol system forcaptured emissions fromanode bake furnacesNot available Not availableEPA, 2006bPrimary aluminum plants Use of coke and pitchwith lower sulfur contentNot available Not availableEPA, 2006bPage 2 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for SO2See cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency(%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationPrimary Lead Smelters -SinteringDual Absorption AcidPlant90 Not availableEPA 1981Primary Zinc Smelters - Sintering Dual Absorption AcidPlant90 Not availableEPA 1981Pulp and Paper--acid sulfitepulpingAlkaline scrubber Not available Not availableSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Pulp and Paper--acid sulfitepulpingRaise pH of digesterbefore releasing excessgasNot available Not availableSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Pulp and paper--recoveryfurnacesReduce sulfur content ofblack liquor beforecombustionNot available Not availableAWMA 2000Pulp and paper--recoveryfurnacesRegulate temperaturesin the furnace tominimize SO2 formationNot available Not availableSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Residential fuel combustion--Home Heating OilReduce sulfur contentfrom 2500 ppm to 500ppm80 $2,350 1999$ Some areas currentlyhave 500 ppm limits.NESCAUM 2005Sulfur Recovery Plants atElemental Sulfur Plants, Oil andGas Production, and other sulfurrecovery plants not located atrefineriesIncreased recoveryefficiency, tail gastreatmentVariabledepending oncurrentrecoveryefficiencyVariable dependingon current recoveryefficiencyEPA 2002Sulfuric Acid Plants Increased recoveryefficiencyVariabledepending oncurrentrecoveryefficiencyVariable dependingon current recoveryefficiencyPechan 2006Utility Boilers * (see footnote)* This document does notaddress SO2 and NOx controlsfor EGU. These controls arerelatively well known and are thesubject of policy discussionsamong states, multi-state bodiesand the EPA.Page 3 of 3Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationAmmonia - Natural Gas - FiredReformersLow NOx Burner 50 $820 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Ammonia - Natural Gas - FiredReformersLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $2,560 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Ammonia - Natural Gas - FiredReformersOxygen Trim + Water Injection 65 $680 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Ammonia - Natural Gas - FiredReformersSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $2,230 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Ammonia - Natural Gas - FiredReformersSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)50 $3,780 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Ammonia Products; FeedstockDesulfurizationLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $2,560 1990$EPA 1994a, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Asphalt Plant Manufacture Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation30-50 Not availableAsphaltic Conc; Rotary Dryer;Conv PlantLow NOx Burner 50 $2,200 1990$EPA 1993, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998By-Product Coke Manufacturing;Oven UnderfiringSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)60 $1,640 1990$EPA 1994, EPA 2002,Pechan 1998, Pechan 2001Cement Kilns Biosolids injection 23 $310 1999$Pechan 2006Cement Kilns Changing feed composition Not availableLADCO 2005Cement Kilns Low NOx Burner 27-40 $166-$1,299 2004$LADCO 2005Cement Kilns Mid-Kiln Firing 33-41 -$460 to $730 2004$LADCO 2005Cement Kilns Process control systems Not availableLADCO, 2005Cement Kilns Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)31-95 $600-$3,700 1999$ Uncertain -- currentlyused on cement kilns inFrance; may apply to U.S.cement kilns in futurePechan 2006,STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Cement Kilns SNCR-ammonia based 50 $850 1999$EC/R 2000Cement Kilns SNCR-urea based 50 $770 1999$EC/R 2000Ceramic Clay Manufacturing;Drying - Small SourcesLow NOx Burner 50 $2,200 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Coal Cleaning-Thrml Dryer;Fluidized Bed - Small SourcesLow NOx Burner 50 $200-$1,000 2003$Reaction EngineeringInternational and Energy &Environmental StrategiesCombustion TurbineAeroderivative Gas TurbinesWater Injection 40 $44,000 2005$NJDEP 2005Page 1 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationCombustion Turbines - Jet Fuel,OilSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR) + Water Injection90 $2,300 1990$EPA 2002Combustion Turbines - Jet Fuel,OilWater Injection 68 $1,290 1990$EPA 2002Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasDry Low NOx Combustors 84 $100 (large) $490(small)1990$EPA 2002Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR) + Low NOx Burner(LNB)95 $2,570 1990$ Cost effectivness is$19,120 per ton NOxreduced from RACTbaselineEPA 2002Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR) + Steam Injection95 $2,010 1990$ Cost effectiveness is$8,960 per ton NOxreduced from RACTbaselineEPA 2002Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR) + Water Injection95 $2,730 1990$EPA 2002Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasSteam Injection 80 $1,040 1990$Pechan 1998 and Pechan2001Combustion Turbines - NaturalGasWater Injection 76 $1,510 1990$Pechan 1998 and Pechan2001Commercial/Institutional -Natural GasWater Heaters + LNB SpaceHeaters7 $1,230 1990$SCAQMD 1996Commercial/InstitutionalIncineratorsSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)45 $1,130 1990$EPA 2002Conv Coating of Prod; AcidCleaning BathLow NOx Burner 50 $2,200 1990$EPA 2002Fiberglass Manufacture; TextileType; Recuperative FurnacesLow NOx Burner 40 $1,690 1990$EPA 2002Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation55 $3,190 1990$EPA 2002Fuel Fired Equipment - ProcessHeatersLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation50 $570 1990$EPA 2002Fuel Fired Equipment; Furnaces;Natural GasLow NOx Burner 50 $570 1990$EPA 2002Glass Manufacturing -ContainersCullet Preheat 25 $490 1990$Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing -ContainersElectric Boost 10 $7,150 1990$Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing -ContainersLow NOx Burner 40 $1,690 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Page 2 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationGlass Manufacturing -ContainersOXY-Firing 85 $4,590 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing -ContainersSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)75 $2,200 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing -ContainersSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $1,770 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - Flat Glass Low NOx Burner 40 $700 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - Flat Glass OXY-Firing 85 $1,900 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - Flat Glass Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)75 $710 (large), $3,370(small)1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - Flat Glass Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $740 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassCullet Preheat 25 $810 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassElectric Boost 10 $2,320 - $8,760 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassLow NOx Burner 40 $1,500 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassOXY-Firing 85 $3,900 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)75 $2,530 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Glass Manufacturing - PressedGlassSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $1,640 1990$EPA 1994c and Pechan 2006IC Engines - Gas Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)90 $2,769 1990$EPA 1993bIC Engines - Gas, Diesel, LPG Ignition Retard 25 $770 1990$EPA 1993bIC Engines - Gas, Diesel, LPG Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $2,340 1990$EPA 1993bIC Engines - Gas--Lean burn Low emission combustion 87 $422 1993$ The cost effectiveness isin ozone season dollarsper ton.Pechan 2000IC Engines-Gas--Rich burn Non-Selective CatalyticReduction90 $342 1993$ The cost effectiveness isin ozone season dollarsper ton.Pechan 2000ICI Boilers-Coal Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $876-$2,141 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Coal Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $1,285-$2,073 2003$EPA 2003Page 3 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationICI Boilers-Coal-bituminous Low NOx Burner plus OverfireAir51 $392-$1,239 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Coal-subbituminous Low NOx Burner 51 $256-$850 2003$ The cost effectiveness isfor boilers operating atcapacity factors in therange of 50-83 percent.Unit sizes range from 100million BTU/hr (highestcost per ton) to 1000million BTU/Hr (lowestcost per ton)EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Coal-subbituminous Low NOx Burner plus OverfireAir65 $306-$972 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Gas LNB plus Overfire air plus gasrecirculation80 $368-$1,278 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Gas Low NOx Burner plus OverfireAir60 $280-$1,052 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Gas Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $986-$2,933 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Gas Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $280-$1,052 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Oil Low NOx Burner plus OverfireAir30-50 $306-$1,052 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Oil Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $760-$2,014 2003$EPA 2003ICI Boilers-Oil Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)40 $1,485-$2,367 2003$EPA 2003Internal Combustion Engines -GasAir/Fuel + Ignition Retard 30 $460 1990$EPA 1993bInternal Combustion Engines -GasAir/Fuel Ratio Adjustment 20 $380 1990$EPA 1993bInternal Combustion Engines -GasIgnition Retard 20 $550 1990$EPA 1993bIron & Steel Mills - Annealing Low NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction90 $4,080 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing Low NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction80 $1,720 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)85 $3,830 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Page 4 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationIron & Steel Mills - Annealing Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)60 $1,640 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing,Galvanizing, ReheatingLow NOx Burner 50 - 65 $300 -$570 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron & Steel Mills - Annealing,Galvanizing, ReheatingLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 - 77 $380-$750 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron & Steel Mills - Reheating Low Excess Air 13 $1,320 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Iron Production; Blast Furnaces;Blast Heating StovesLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation77 $380 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Lime Kilns Low NOx Burner 30 $560 1999$EPA 1994Medical Waste Incinerators Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)45 $4,510 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Municipal Waste Combustors Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)45 $1,130 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Natural Gas Production;CompressorsSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)20 $1,650 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Nitric Acid Manufacturing Extended Absorption 95 $480 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Nitric Acid Manufacturing Non-Selective CatalyticReduction98 $550 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Nitric Acid Manufacturing Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)97 $590 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Open Burning Episodic Ban Daily controlefficiency is100%Not availablePechan 2006Process Heaters - Distillate andResidual OilLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation34-48 $3,500-$4,500 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate andResidual OilLow NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction75 $2,300 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate andResidual OilSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)75 $5,350-$9,230 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate andResidual OilSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)60 $1,930-$3,180 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate andResidual OilUltra Low NOx Burner 74 $1,290-$2,140 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Page 5 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationProcess Heaters - Distillate Oil Low NOx Burner 37 - 45 $2,500 - $3,740 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate Oil Low NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction92 $9,120 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Distillate Oil Low NOx Burner + SelectiveNon-Catalytic Reduction(SNCR)78 $3,620 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)75 $5350-$12,040 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasLow NOx Burner 45-50 $2,200 -$3,740 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation48-55 $3,200-$4,200 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasLow NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction88- 92 $9,120-$11,500 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasLow NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction80 $2,320-$3,620 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)60 $1,930-$3,180 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - LPG, NG,Process GasUltra Low NOx Burner 75 $1,290-$2,140 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Process Gas Low NOx Burner + SelectiveNon-Catalytic Reduction(SNCR)80 $3,520 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Process Heaters - Residual Oil Low NOx Burner + SelectiveCatalytic Reduction90 $5,420 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Reciprocating InternalCombustion Engines - Oil -AllSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $1,066 1993$Pechan 2000Reciprocating InternalCombustion Engines-Oil-AllIgnition retard 25 $770 1999$Pechan 2006Residential Natural Gas Water Heater + LNB SpaceHeaters7 $1,230Pechan 2006Rich-Burn StationaryReciprocating InternalCombustion Engines (RICE)Non-Selective CatalyticReduction90 $342 1990$ VOC and COemissions are alsoreduced.EPA 1993Sand/Gravel; Dryer Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation55 $3,190 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Secondary AluminumProduction; Smelting FurnacesLow NOx Burner 50 $570 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Solid Waste Disposal;GovernmentSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)45 $1,130 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Distillate Oil Low NOx Burner 50 $1,180 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Distillate Oil Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $2,500 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Page 6 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures for NOxSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source category Emissions reductionmeasureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationSpace Heaters - Distillate Oil Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $2,780 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Distillate Oil Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)50 $4,640 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Natural Gas Low NOx Burner 50 $820 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Natural Gas Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $2,650 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Natural Gas Oxygen Trim + Water Injection 65 $680 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Natural Gas Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $2,860 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Space Heaters - Natural Gas Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)50 $3,870 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Starch Manufacturing;Combined OperationLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation55 $3,190 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Steel Foundries; Heat Treating Low NOx Burner 50 $570 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Steel Production; Soaking Pits Low NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $750 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Sulfate Pulping - RecoveryFurnacesLow NOx Burner 50 $820 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Sulfate Pulping - RecoveryFurnacesLow NOx Burner + Flue GasRecirculation60 $2,560 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Sulfate Pulping - RecoveryFurnacesOxygen Trim + Water Injection 65 $680 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Sulfate Pulping - RecoveryFurnacesSelective Catalytic Reduction(SCR)80 $2,230 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Sulfate Pulping - RecoveryFurnacesSelective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)50 $3,870 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Surface Coat Oper; CoatingOven Htr; Nat GasLow NOx Burner 50 $2,200 1990$EPA 2002 and Pechan 1998Utility Boilers** This document does not address SO2and NOx controls for EGU. Thesecontrols are relatively well known andare the subject of policy discussionsamong states, multi-state bodies andthe EPA.Page 7 of 7Stationary Source Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceARB 2004 State of California, Califrornia Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Proposed List of Measures to Reduce Particulate Matter--PM-10 and PM-2.5 (Implmentation of Senate Bill 656, Sher 2003), Staff Report, Planning and Technical Support Division, October18, 2004.AWMA 2000 Air Pollution Engineering Manual, second edition, Air&Waste Management Association. 2000.BAAQMD 2005 Exersky, A. 2005, "Staff Report: Proposed Regulation: Regulation 12, Miscellaneous Standards of Performance, Rule12, Flares at PetroleumRefineries," Bay Area Air Quality Management District.BLS 1994 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Producer Price Indices, Washington DC. Various issues 1985 through 1994.CE-CERT 2002 CE-CERT, UC-Riverside: "Assessment of Emissions from a Chain-Driven Charbroilers using a Catalytic Control device."Final Report forEngelhard Corp., September 13, 2002DOE 1994 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels, "Electric Utility Phase I AcidRain Compliance Strategies for the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990," Washington, DC, March 1994Eagleson et al. 2004 Eagleson, Scott T., Hutter, Edward, Dharia, Dilip J., John, Ramash B. and Singhania, Sudhanshu, "Economic Advantages in Controlling RefineryFCCU Atmospheric Emissions", presented at the XII Refinery Technology Meet, September 23-25, 2004.EC/R 2000 EC/R Incorporated, "NOx Control Technologies for the Cement Industry," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research TrianglePark, NC, September 2000.EPA 1981 EPA, 1981: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Control Techniques for Sulfur Oxide Emissionsfrom Stationary Sources," Second Edition, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1981.EPA 1983 EPA, 1983: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, “Review of New Performance Standards forPetroleum Refinery Claus Sulfur Recovery Plants,” EPA-450/3-83-014, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1983.EPA 1992 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ESPVI 4.0 Electrostatic Precipitator V-I and Performance Model (EPA-600/SR-92/104). Air and EnergyEngineering Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC. August 1992EPA 1993a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Alternative ControlTechniques Document-- NOx Emissions from Process Heaters," EPA-453/R-93-034, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1993.EPA 1993b EPA, 1993: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "AlternativeControl Techniques Document-- NOx Emissions from Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines," EPA-453/R-93EPA 1994a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Alternative ControlTechniques Document-- NOx Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers," EPA-453/R-94-022, Research Triangle Park, NC,June 1994.Page 1 of 5Stationary Source Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceEPA 1994b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Alternative ControlTechniques Document-- NOx Emissions from Cement Manufacturing," EPA-453/R-94-004, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1994.EPA 1994c U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emissions Standard Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Alternative ControlTechniques Document-- NOx Emissions from Glass Manufacturing," EPA-453/R-94-037, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 1994.EPA 1997a EPA, 1997: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Mercury Study Report to Congress, Volume III: Fate and Transport of Mercury in theEnvironment," EPA/452/R-97-005, December 1997.EPA 1997b EPA/OAQPS. Fabric Filter Lead Detection Guidance, EPA-454/R-98-015. September 1997EPA 1998a EPA CEMS Cost Model, Version 3.0, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.EPA 1998b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Stationary 'Source Control Techniques Document for Fine Particulate 'Matter (EPA-68-D-98-026),October 1998. www.epa.gov/'ttn/catc/dir1/fi nepmtech.pdf.EPA 1998c EPA, 1998: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Analyzing Electric Power Generation Under the Clean Air Act Amendments, Appendix 3,"March 1998.EPA 1999 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Technology Center (MD-12) Information Transfer and Program IntegrationDivision Office of AirQuality Planning and Standard, "Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Why and How They Are Controlled," EPA-456/F-99-006R, Research Triangle Park, NC,November 1999.EPA 2000b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Controlling SO2 Emissions: A Review of Technologies, EPA/600/R-00/093, November2000.EPA 2002 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual," 6th ed., EPA/452/B02-001, Research Triangle Park, NC, January 2002.EPA 2002a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Documentation of EPA Modeling Applications (v.2.1) Using The Integrated Planning Model," EPA 430/R02-004, March 2002.EPA 2003 EPA, 2003: Methodology, Assumptions, and References--Preliminary NOx Controls Cost Estimates for Industrial Boilers, November 2003.EPA 2003a Methodology, Assumptions and References -- Preliminary SO2 Controls Cost Estimates for Industrial Boilers, November 2003.EPA 2004 U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Market Division, "Updating Performance and Cost of NOx Control Technologies in the IntegratedPlanning Model" Paper # 137EPA 2006a Regulatory Impact Analysis: 2006 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution. October 6, 2006.http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.htmlPage 2 of 5Stationary Source Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceEPA 2006b Tim Smith, EPA OAQPS, personal communication with OAQPS/SPPD Project Leads.EPA 1986 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Engineering Research Laboratory Identification, Assessment, and Control of Fugitive ParticulateEmissions, EPA/600/8-86/023, prepared by Midwest Research Institute, August 1986.EPRI 2002. Electric Power Research Institute. Electrostatic Precipitator Performance Model (ESPM).ERG 2000 Palo Alto, CAKhan, EPA. August 21, 2006. Sikander Khan, EPA/CAMD. Cost Estimates for Modification Measures to Improve Existing ESP PerformanceLADCO 2005 LADCO, 2005: White Paper for Source Category: Electric Generating Units.MARAMA, 2006 Assessment of Control Technology Options for Petroleum Refineries in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Draft Final Technical Support Document.Prepared by MACTEC Federal Programs, Inc. for MARAMA. October 13, 2006.MACTEC 2005 Interim White Paper: Electric Generating Units, Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control MEasures, prepared for the Midwest RegionalPlanning Organization by MACTEC Federal Programs, December 2005.http://www.ladco.org/reports/rpo/Regional%20Air%20Quality/White%20Papers%20March%202006/EGU_Ver4.pdfNESCAUM 2005 Low Sulfur Heating Oil in the Northeast States: An Overview of Benefits, Costs, and Implementation Issues. NESCAUM, Boston, MA. December2005.NESCAUM 2005a Assessment of Technology Options for BART - eligible sources. Steam Electric Boilers, Cement Plants and Paper andPulp Facilities. Prepared byNESCAUM in partnership with the mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union. March 2005.NESCAUM 2006 Information from development of NESCAUM model rule for outdoor hydronic heaters. Presentation at November 16, 2006Stakeholder Meeting.NESCAUM 2007 Outdoor Hydronic Heater Model Regulation. http://www.nescaum.org/outdoor-hydronic-heatersNeuffer 2006 Draft Control Table prepared by Bill Neuffer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planningand Standards, MS Worddocument entitled "stationary NOx list with control effieiency & cost effectiveness.doc", dated August 21, 2006NJDEP 2005 State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: Stationary Combustion Sources Workgroup, "A Collaborative ReportPresenting Air Quality Startegies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey. October 31, 2005. downloaded fromwww.state.nj.us/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_scs_workgroup_report.pdfPage 3 of 5Stationary Source Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferencePechan 1997 E.H. Pechan & Associates, "Additional Control Measure Evaluation for the Integrated Implementation of the Ozone andParticulate Matter NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards, and Regional Haze Program," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1997.Pechan 1998 E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Ozone Transport Rulemaking Non-Electricity Generating Unit Cost Analysis," prepared for U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Research Triangle Park, September1998Pechan 2001 E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Revisions to AirControlNET, and Particulate Matter Control Strategies and Cost Analysis," Revised Report,prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Research Triangle Park, September2001.Pechan and RTI 2005a E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., and RTI International, Evaluation of Potential PM2.5 Reductions by Improving Performance of Control Devices:Final Report. September 2005Pechan and RTI 2005b E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., and RTI International, Evaluation of Potential PM2.5 Reductiosn by Improving Performance of Control Devices:Conclusions and Recommendations. Draft Report, September 2005.Pechan 2006 E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "AirControlNET, Version 4.1 Control Measure Documentation Report," Draft Report, prepared for U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, Pechan Report No. 06.05.003/9011.002, May 2006.Reaction EngineeringInternational and Energy &Environmental Strategies 2003Summary of Emission Controls Available for Large Stationary Sources of NOx and PM, prepared for the Western Governor's Association byReaction Engineering International and Energy & Environemntal Strategies, June 30, 2003.San Joaquin Valley UAPCD2003San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (UAPCD). Final BACM Technological and Economic Feasibility Analysis,prepared bySierra Research, March 21, 2003. www.soiltac.com/PDF/Final_BACM_Chapter 20 - Fugitive Dust 287Feasibility_Analysis.pdf.SCAQMD 1996 South Coast Air Quality Management District, "1997 Air Quality Management Plan, Appendix IV-A: Stationary and Mobile Source ControlMeasures," August 1996.SCAQMD 2003 Synopsis of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1105.1 - Reduction of PM10 and Ammonia Emissions FromFluid CatalyticCracking Units. November 7, 2003. http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/2003/031128a.htmlSCAQMD 2005 Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Amended Rule 1118 -- Control of Emissions from Refinery Flares. SCAQMD, October 2005.SCAQMD 2005a Synopsis of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1156 - Further Reductions of Particulate Emissions from Cement ManufacturingFacilities. November 4, 2005. http://www.aqmd.gov/hb/2005/051136a.htmlSorrels 2006 Information provided by Larry Sorrels (sorrels.larry@epamail.epa.gov), US EPA, March 2006Southern Research Institute1993Southern Research Institute. A Mathematical Model of Electrostatic Precipitation (Revision) Volume I, Modeling and Programming.Birmingham,AL. 1993.Page 4 of 5Stationary Source Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006 Controlling Fine Particulate Matter Under the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options, STAPPA/ALAPCO, March 2006.Staudt 1998 Staudt, James E., “Status Report on NOx Control Technologies and Cost Effectiveness for Utility Boilers,” Andover Technology Partners, NorthAndover, MA, prepared for NESCAUM and MARAMA, June 1998.Ventura County 2004 Ventura County, "Final Staff Report: Proposed New Rule 74.25, Restaurant Cooking Operations Proposed Revisions to Rule 23, ExemptionsFrom Permit", August 31, 2004.WRAP 2006 Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP). WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook, prepared by Countess Environmental, September 7,2006.References Related toImproved Source MonitoringBarr and Schaffner 2003 Barr, Leigh and Karen Schaffner, “Impact of Improved Monitoring on PM2.5 Emissions,” RTI International,memorandum to Barrett Parker, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 8, 2003.EPA 2000a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Current Knowledge of Particulate Matter (PM) Continuous Emissions Monitoring,”Chapter 9, PM CEMSCost, September 8, 2000.EPA 1998d U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Technical Guidance Document: Compliance Assurance Monitoring and appendices. Office of Air QualityPlanning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. August 1998. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cam.html.McRanie, 2000. McRanie, R. Electrostatic Precipitator Compliance Assurance Monitoring Protocol. RMB Consulting and Research, Inc., Raleigh, NC. March 2000EPRI, 1999. Electric Power Research Institute. Compliance Assurance Monitoring Field Test Program (TE-114178). Palo Alto, CA. November 1999.EPA, 2005 Technical Support Document for Title V Permitting of Printing Facilities Including Appendices A-G, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, January 2005, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cam.html).EPA, 2006c EPA Monitoring Knowledge Base (http://cfpub.epa.gov/mkb/), Technology Transfer Network, Monitoring information presented by industry type andby control technique, 2006.Page 5 of 5Onroad PM Control MeasuresSee cover note from important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationSchool Bus Diesel Retrofit - Diesel Oxidation Catalysts 20 12000 - 49100 Applies to 1990-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006School Bus Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 12400 - 50500 Applies to 1995-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 6 & 7 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Diesel Oxidation Catalysts 20 27600 - 67900 Applies to 1990-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b,EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 6 & 7 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 28400 - 69900 Applies to 1995-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 8B HDDV Diesel Retrofit - Diesel Oxidation Catalysts 20 11100 - 40600 Applies to 1990-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b, EPA2006d, EPA 2006Class 8B HDDV Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 12100 - 44100 Applies to 1995-2006 model years VOC, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Active Diesel ParticulateFilter80 - 90+ VOC, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA 2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Lean NOx Catalyst andDiesel Particulate Filter85 Applies to 1993 - 2003 modelyears; needs 15 ppm sulfur dieselNOX CARB 2006a, EPA 2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Exhaust GasRecirculation/Diesel Particulate Filter85 Applies to specific engine familiesfrom 1998-2002 model years;needs 15 ppm sulfur dieselNOX CARB 2006a, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Flow Through Filter 50 - 76 Applies to 1991 - 2002 modelyears; needs 15 ppm sulfur dieselor CARB dieselVOC, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006; CARB 2006a, EPA2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Diesel Oxidation Catalysts+ Flow Through Filters50 Applies to 1988 - 1993 modelyears; needs 15 ppm sulfur dieselCARB 2006a, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Closed CrankcaseVentilation10EPA 2006e, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Closed Crankcase FilterSystem5 - 10STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA 2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Diesel Oxidation Catalyst +Crankcase Filter25 Applies to 1988-2002 modelyears; needs 15 ppm sulfur dieselCARB 2006a, EPA 2006Class 5 and above HDDVs andbusesReplacement 90 - 98 Applies to 1990-2006 model years NOX, VOC EPA 2006dClass 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling with TruckStop Electrification3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fullyrecovered by fuel savingsNOX, VOC,SO2, COEPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling with MobileIdle Reduction Technologies3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fullyrecovered by fuel savingsNOX, VOC,SO2, COEPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Intermodal - shift of transportation of goodsfrom truck to rail transport1.0 0 Would result in a 0.3-0.4%increase in all pollutants fromlocomotive and rail SCCs;represents a 1% shift from truckonly transport to railNOX, SO2,NH3, VOCEPA 2006dHDDVs Alternative Fuel - Oxygenated Diesel 0 - 50 Oxygenated with ethanol; Noxemissions likely to increaseVOC, CO,CO2STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Page 1 of 3Onroad PM Control MeasuresSee cover note from important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationHDDVs Alternative Fuel - Fuel-borne Catalyst 0 - 50 NOX, VOC,COSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Class 8 HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Lubrizol PuriNOX 50 Applies to 1988 - 2003 modelyearsNOX CARB 2006aHDDVs Alternative Fuel - Emulsified Diesel 16 - 58 Increases VOC, CO NOX EPA 2006e; STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Biodiesel 10 - 12 Increases NOX VOC, CO EPA 2006e; STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006LDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters-allmeasures combinedReductions based on thefollowing measures: RegionalRideshare, Vanpool Programs,Park-and-ride lots, Regional TDM,Employer trip reduction programs;control efficiency depends onpenetration--0.4% reduction at10% penetration and 1.0%reduction at 25% penetrationNOX, VOC,SO2, NH3,COEPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs MPG/Emissions Requirements for LargeFleetsVOC, NOX,SO2NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Registration fee based on VMTVOC, NOX,SO2 NH3NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Shuttles in Structured Communities VOC, NOX,SO2, NH3NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Vehicle Charging StationsVOC, NOX,SO2NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Expansion of Bike/hiking trailsVOC, NOX,SO2 NH3NJDEP 2005bHDDVs Voluntary Programs - National Clean DieselCampaignNOX EPA 2005HDDVs Voluntary Programs - SmartWay TransportPartnershipNOX EPA 2005HDDVs Driver incentive/training program to reduceidlingVOC, NOX,SO2NJDEP 2005aHDDVs and Diesel Buses Heavy-Duty Vehicle Inspection Program NOx benefits result from reflashingvehicles subject to the heavy dutydiesel consent decreeNOX CARB 2006b, NJDEP 2005aHDDV Fleet and Diesel BusFleetPeriodic Smoke Inspection Program NOx benefits result from reflashingvehicles subject to the heavy dutydiesel consent decreeNOX CARB 2006bHDDVs Incentive Programs (e.g., Carl MoyerProgram)NOX CARB 2006bLDGVs and LDGTs Incentives for hybrids and other ULEV,SULEV, ZEV vehiclesVOC, NOX,SO2CARB 2006bPage 2 of 3Onroad PM Control MeasuresSee cover note from important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats OtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationAll Highway Vehicles Smoking Vehicle HotlineNOX, VOC CARB 2006bNotes:LDGV=Light-duty Gasoline VehicleLDGT=Light-duty Gasoline TruckHDGV=Heavy-duty Gasoline VehicleMC=MotorcycleLDDV=Light-duty Diesel VehicleLDDT=Light-duty Diesel TruckHDDV=Heavy-duty Diesel VehiclePage 3 of 3Onroad SO2 Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for moreinformationClass 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling with Truck StopElectrification3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fully recovered by fuelsavingsPM, NOX, VOC,COEPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling with Mobile IdleReduction Technologies3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fully recovered by fuelsavingsPM, NOX, VOC,COEPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Intermodal - shift of transportation of goodsfrom truck to rail transport1.0 0 Would result in a 0.3-0.4% increase in allpollutants from locomotive and rail SCCs;represents a 1% shift from truck-only transport torailPM, NOX, NH3,VOCEPA 2006dLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters-all measurescombined0.4-1.0 Reductions based on the following measures:Regional Rideshare, Vanpool Programs, Park-andride lots, Regional TDM, Employer trip reductionprograms; control efficiency depends onpenetration--0.4% reduction at 10% penetrationand 1.0% reduction at 25% penetrationPM, NOX, VOC,NH3, COEPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs MPG/Emissions Requirements for LargeFleetsVOC, NOX, PM NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Fee based on VMTVOC, NOX, PM,NH3NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Shuttles in Structured CommunitiesVOC, NOX, PM,NH3NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Vehicle Charging StationsVOC, NOX, PM NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Expansion of Bike/hiking trailsVOC, NOX, PM,NH3NJDEP 2005bHDDVs Driver incentive/training program to reduceidlingVOC, NOX, PM NJDEP 2005aLDGVs and LDGTs Incentives for hybrids and other ULEV,SULEV, ZEV vehiclesVOC, NOX, PM CARB 2006bNotes:LDGV=Light-duty Gasoline VehicleLDGT=Light-duty Gasoline TruckHDGV=Heavy-duty Gasoline VehicleMC=MotorcycleLDDV=Light-duty Diesel VehicleLDDT=Light-duty Diesel TruckHDDV=Heavy-duty Diesel VehiclePage 1 of 1Onroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationHDDVs Diesel Retrofit - NOX ReducingCatalyst20 - 30STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - NOX Adsorber 90+ PM, VOC, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Selective CatalyticReduction (SCR)70 to 99 3000 - 15000 Cost effectiveness based on pre-1989 to2006 model yearsENVIRON 2006, EPA 2006Class 5 and aboveHDDVs and Diesel BusesReplacement 90 - 97 Applies to 1990-2006 model years PM, VOC EPA 2006dClass 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling withTruck Stop Electrification3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fully recovered by fuelsavingsPM, VOC, SO2, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling withMobile Idle Reduction Technologies3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fully recovered by fuelsavingsPM, VOC, SO2, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Intermodal - shift of transportationof goods from truck to rail transport1.0 0 Would result in a 0.3-0.4% increase in allpollutants from locomotive and rail SCCs;represents a 1% shift from truck-onlytransport to railPM, SO2, NH3, VOC EPA 2006dClass 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Lean NOx Catalystand Diesel Particulate Filter25 Applies to 1993 - 2003 model years; needs15 ppm sulfur dieselPM CARB 2006a, EPA 2006Class 8 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Exhaust GasRecirculation/Diesel ParticulateFilter40Applies to specific engine families from 1998-2002 model years; needs 15 ppm sulfurdieselPM CARB 2006a, EPA 2006Class 8 HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Lubrizol PuriNOX 15 Applies to 1988 - 2003 model years PM CARB 2006aLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters-allmeasures combined0.4-1.0 19200 Average cost effectiveness based on thefollowing measures: Regional Rideshare,Vanpool Programs, Park-and-ride lots,Regional TDM, Employer trip reductionprograms; control efficiency depends onpenetration--0.4% reduction assumes 10%penetration and 1.0% reduction assumes25% reductionPM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters -Regional Rideshare1200 -16000*(seenotes)Control efficiency depends on penetration;Cost effectiveness based on weighted sumof Nox and VOC reductions (i.e., totalcost/((VOC*1)+(NOx*4))PM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters -Vanpool Programs5200 -89000*(seenotes)Control efficiency depends on penetration;Cost effectiveness based on weighted sumof Nox and VOC reductions (i.e., totalcost/((VOC*1)+(NOx*4))PM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2005bPage 1 of 3Onroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters -Park-and-ride lots8600 -70700*(seenotes)Control efficiency depends on penetration;Cost effectiveness based on weighted sumof Nox and VOC reductions (i.e., totalcost/((VOC*1)+(NOx*4))PM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters -Regional Transportation DemandManagement (TDM)2300 -33200*(seenotes)Control efficiency depends on penetration;Cost effectiveness based on weighted sumof Nox and VOC reductions (i.e., totalcost/((VOC*1)+(NOx*4))PM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Best Workplaces for Commuters -Employer trip reduction programs5800 -175500*(seenotes)Control efficiency depends on penetration;Cost effectiveness based on weighted sumof Nox and VOC reductions (i.e., totalcost/((VOC*1)+(NOx*4))PM, VOC, SO2, NH3, CO EPA 2006d, 2005bHDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Lean NOX Catalyst 5 - 40 6000 - 28000ENVIRON 2006, EPA 2006e, EPA2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Exhaust GasRecirculation40 - 50EPA 2006e, EPA 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Emulsified Diesel 9 - 20 Increases VOC, CO PM EPA 2006eLDGVs, LDGTs, HDGVs,and MCsFederal Reformulated Gasoline(RFG)7VOC, CO Pechan 2006, EPA 1999LDGVs and LDGTs High Enhanced I/M Program 0.4 - 13.4 Reduction is based on emissions from entirefleetVOC, CO Pechan 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Fuel-borneCatalyst0 - 10 PM, VOC, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006LDGVs and LDGTs Repair assistance for low-incomeowners of older poorly maintainedvehiclesVOC NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs MPG/Emissions Requirements forLarge FleetsVOC, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Fee based on VMTVOC, PM, SO2, NH3 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Shuttles in StructuredCommunitiesVOC, PM, SO2, NH3 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Vehicle Charging StationsVOC, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Expansion of Bike/hiking trailsVOC, PM, SO2, NH3 NJDEP 2005bHDDVs Voluntary Programs - NationalClean Diesel CampaignPM EPA 2005HDDVs Voluntary Programs - SmartWayTransport PartnershipPM EPA 2005HDDVs Driver incentive/training program toreduce idlingVOC, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005aPage 2 of 3Onroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationAll Highway Vehicles Intelligent Transport System -Speed Limit Restriction (65 mph)TCEQ2006HDDVs and Diesel Buses Heavy-Duty Vehicle InspectionProgramNOx benefits result from reflashing vehiclessubject to the heavy duty diesel consentdecreePM CARB 2006b, NJDEP 2005aHDDV Fleet, and DieselBus FleetPeriodic Smoke InspectionProgramNOx benefits result from reflashing vehiclessubject to the heavy duty diesel consentdecreePM CARB 2006bHDDVs Software Upgrade for Diesel Trucks("Chip Reflash")1800 - 2500 Rebuild kits are free to any truck operatorrequesting one from truck manufacturer as aresult of the Consent Decree with EPA.Each kit costs about $20-$30/vehicle.CARB 2006b, OTC 2006HDDVs Incentive Programs (e.g., CarlMoyer Program)PM CARB 2006bLDGVs and LDGTs Incentives for hybrids and otherULEV, SULEV, ZEV vehiclesVOC, PM, SO2 CARB 2006bAll Highway Vehicles Smoking Vehicle HotlineVOC, PM CARB 2006bNotes:LDGV=Light-duty Gasoline VehicleLDGT=Light-duty Gasoline TruckHDGV=Heavy-duty Gasoline VehicleMC=MotorcycleLDDV=Light-duty Diesel VehicleLDDT=Light-duty Diesel TruckHDDV=Heavy-duty Diesel VehiclePage 3 of 3Onroad Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0KeyReferenceCARB 2006aCalifornia Air Resources Board, "Currently Verified Diesel Emission Control Technologies," as of September 6, 2006http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verifiedtechnologies/cvt.htmCARB 2006bCalifornia Air Resources Board, "ARB Programs," updated May 4, 2006 http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/programs.htmENVIRON 2006ENVIRON International Corporation, "Evaluation of Candidate Mobile Source Control Measures", Final Report, prepared for Lake Michigan Air DirectorsConsortium, 2250 E. Devon Ave., #250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, February 28, 2006.http://www.ladco.org/reports/rpo/Regional%20Air%20Quality/LADCO%20Control%20Report_Final.pdfEPA 1999U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, "Phase II Reformulated Gasoline: The Next Major Step Toward Cleaner Air", EPA420-F-99-042, November 1999. http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/rfg/f99042.pdfEPA 2004Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long DurationTruck Idling Emission Reductions In State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity, EPA420-B04-001, January 2004. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/truckidlingguidance.pdfEPA 2005Draft list of potential RACT and RACM from PM rule preamble (see EPA websites on verified retrofit technologies)http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retroverifiedlist.htmEPA 2005bGuidance for Quantifying and Using Emissions Reductions from Best Workplaces for Commuter Programs in State Implementation Plans and TransportationConformity Determinations, EPA420-B-05-016, October 2005, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/policy/transp/commuter/420b05016.pdfEPA 2006Diesel Retrofits: Quantifying and Using Their Benefits in SIPs and Conformity, EPA420-B-06-005, June 2006.http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/420b06005.pdfEPA 2006bU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, "Diesel Retrofit Technology, An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of ReducingParticulate Matter Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines Through Retrofits", EPA420-S-06-002, March 2006.http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420s06002.pdfEPA 2006dEPA Staff Communication: "Mobile Source Control Measures in PM NAAQS RIA", EPA, 2006EPA 2006eClean Ports USA, "Emission Reduction Strategies by Application, Trucks," as of September 2006 http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/ports/stratapp.htm#highwayNJDEP 2005aNJDEP Diesel Initiatives Workgroup, "A Collaborative Report Presenting Air Quality Strategies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey," October31, 2005. http://www.nj.gov/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_di_workgroup_report.pdfNJDEP 2005bNJDEP Gasoline Cars & Trucks Workgroup, "A Collaborative Report Presenting Air Quality Strategies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey,"October 31, 2005. http://www.state.nj.us/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_gct_report.pdfOTC 2006Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) “Candidate Control Measures.” http://www.otcair.org/projects_details.asp?FID=93&fview=stationaryPechan 2006E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "AirControlNET, Version 4.1 Control Measure Documentation Report," Draft Report, prepared for U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, Pechan Report No. 06.05.003/9011.002, May 2006.San Joaquin Valley UAPCD, 2003San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (UAPCD). Final BACM Technological and Economic Feasibility Analysis, prepared by Sierra Research,March 21, 2003. www.soiltac.com/PDF/Final_BACM_Chapter 20 - Fugitive Dust 287Feasibility_Analysis.pdf.STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006The State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, "Controlling Fine Particulate MatterUnder the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options, " March 2006 http://www.4cleanair.org/PM25Menu-Final.pdfTCEQ 2006Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Texas Air Quality Control Measures, as of September 2006http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipstrategies.html#mobileNonroad PM Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesSource Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency (%)Cost Effectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences for More InformationNonroad Diesel Engines except locomotive,marine, pleasure craft, and aircraft engineNonroad Retrofit DOC 20 11,600 - 63,300 Low end of range represents most cost-effective retrofits (first 50% ofretrofit potential). High end of range represents least cost-effectiveretrofits (second 50% of retrofit potential). PM cost effectiveness valuesapply for all retrofit measures combined (DOC, DPF, and rebuild). Costeffectiveness values were calculated by EPA based on the cost for DOCapplied to a 250 hp bulldozer. However, this measure is intended toapply to all nonroad engines, model year 1988-2007, except forlocomotive, marine, pleasure craft, and aircraft engines.VOC EPA, 2006aEPA, 2006bNonroad Diesel Engines except locomotive,marine, pleasure craft, and aircraft engineNonroad Retrofit DPF 90 9,700 - 52,700 Low end of range represents most cost-effective retrofits (first 50% ofretrofit potential). High end of range represents least cost-effectiveretrofits (second 50% of retrofit potential). PM cost effectiveness valuesapply for all retrofit measures combined (DOC, DPF, and rebuild). Costeffectiveness values were calculated by EPA based on the cost for DOCapplied to a 250 hp bulldozer. However, this measure is intended toapply to all nonroad engines, model year 1988-2007, except forlocomotive, marine, pleasure craft, and aircraft engines.VOC EPA, 2006aEPA, 2006bNonroad Diesel Engines except locomotive,marine,pleasure craft,and aircraft engineNonroad Engine Upgrade 20NOx, VOC EPA, 2006aNonroad Diesel Engines EarlyUse of Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Some direct PM reductions would result due to lower S content of fuel SO2 EPA, 2006cNonroad Diesel Engines Early Use of Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel +RetrofitSome retrofits that rely on ULSD (e.g., DPFs) that have been verified byEPA and/or CARB require a S content of no more than 15-50ppm.SO2 EPA, 2006cNonroad Diesel Construction Engine/Equipment Replacement(Scrappage)2,000-25,000 Only emission reductions reported, no control efficiencies. Emissionreductions and Cost effectiveness values by equipment application,horsepower and technology type are reported in Appendices to LADCOreport. Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton NOx reduced.NOx ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Nonroad Diesel Engines Establish Opacity or other EmissionStandards for "Gross-Emitting" DieselEquipment or VesselsEPA, 2005Nonroad Engines Low Emission Specifications - Limitemissions for construction projects,industrial facilities, ship yards, airportsEPA, 2005Nonroad Engines Expand Use of Clean BurningFuelsEPA, 2005Nonroad Gasoline Equipment Replacement - LawnMower BuyBack ProgramProgram encourages trading of gasoline-powered mowers by providingfunds to offset the purchase cost of electric mowers.SCAQMD, 2006Recreational Marine Variable Registration Fees for BoatEnginesThis control measure would require owners to register boat engines. Theboat engine registration fee schedule would be designed so that lowerfees would be assessed for the newest engines.VOC NJDEP, 2005Nonroad Diesel Industrial Operational Changes at Ports -Reduce Use of Mobile Dieselpowered Material-Handling EquipmentReduce use of mobile diesel-powered material-handling equipment infavor of electric-powered stationary cranes. No emission reduction orcost information provided.STAPPA/ALAPCO, 2006CARB, 2005Nonroad Diesel IndustrialARB Cargo Handling Equipment Rule-Application of Best Available ControlTechnology25-85 6,500-18,000 Range of CE values represents Level 1, 2 and 3, which are threebenchmarks that control systems can be verified to. Cost effectivenessexpressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.NOx CARB, 2006Locomotives Idling Reduction - SmartStart andDiesel Driven Heating System40-60 809 Idle reduction technologies can reduce idling up to 90 percent, dependingon which technology is employed in which application. Control efficienciesprovided correspond to a 90 percent reduction in idling, which is expectedto reduce fuel consumption by 40 to 60 percent. PM and NOx cost perton is an upper bound value, since savings due to reduced maintenancecosts not accounted for.NOx NJDEP, 2005Union Pacific, 2006Vancouver, 2005, EPA 2004Locomotives Reduce Idlingfor LocomotivesEPA, 2005; EPA 2004Locomotives I&M for Locomotives - ConductOpacity Testing and Conduct RepairsThis program is a voluntary agreement with the BNSF Railway Companyand the Union Pacific Railroad Company to reduce PM emissions inCalifornia railyards.STAPPA/ALAPCO, 2006CARB, 2005Switch Locomotive Upgrade Engines in SwitcherLocomotives - Diesel-electric hybridlocomotives80 6,500-18,000 Hybrid switch locomotives have significantly reduced diesel PM and NOxemissions, idling time, and fuel use compared to conventional switchers.Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PMreduced.NOx CARB, 2006Page 1 of 2Nonroad PM Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesSource Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency (%)Cost Effectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences for More InformationSwitch Locomotive Upgrade Engines in SwitcherLocomotives - Install multiple off-roaddiesel engines80 6,500-18,000 Remanufactured switchers are powered with two or three (700 hp) Tier 3non-road diesel engines call gen-sets instead of conventional diesellocomotive engines. Gen-set locomotive manufacturers report that theselocomotives can reduce fuel consumption by 20 to 35 percent. Costeffectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.NOx CARB, 2006Locomotives Locomotive Retrofit - DPF >85 Has not been tested or used in railyard applications in the U.S. CARB, 2006Locomotives Locomotive Retrofit - DOC 20-50 Has not been tested or used in railyard applications in the U.S. CARB, 2006Locomotives Use of Alternative Fuels - Biodiesel >50 6,500-18,000 Biodiesel generally results in a NOx increase, and is best used incombination with NOx control strategies. Cost effectiveness expressedas dollarper ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.CARB, 2006Locomotives Use of Alternative Fuels - FisherTropsch Diesel6,500-18,000 Made from converting synthetic gas to a liquid hydrocarbon diesel, thissynthetic diesel fuel contains less than 10 ppm sulfur, which directlyreduces diesel PM and SOx emissions. Cost effectiveness expressed asdollarper ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsAdd-On Controls - DPF >85CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsAdd-On Controls - DOC ~30CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Harbor Vessels Cleaner Marine Fuels - EmulsifiedDiesel FuelARB estimates that emulsified diesel fuel used in on-road engines canreduce NOx by 15 percent and PM by 50 percent. Additional testing isrequired to determine whether similar reductions are possible in marineengines.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Harbor Vessels Cleaner Marine Fuels - Biodiesel >50 Generally results in a NOx increase. Biodiesel is best used incombination with NOx control strategies.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Harbor Vessels Cleaner Marine Fuels - Compressedor liquefied natural gas or diesel/CNGdual fuelCan result in significant reductions in NOx and PM. The results vary withspecific application and the ratio of diesel to CNG used. Additionaltesting is required to determine whether similar reductions are possible inmarine engines.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Ocean GoingVesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for MainEngines - Marine distillate fuels75 6,500-18,000 Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PMreduced.SO2 CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Ocean GoingVesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for MainEngines - Lower sulfur content35 6,500-18,000 Control efficiencies assume use of lower sulfur content fuel oil of 5000ppm. Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PMreduced.SO2 CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Ocean GoingVesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for AuxiliaryEngines - Lower sulfur content35 6,500-18,000 Control efficiencies assume use of lower sulfur content fuel oil of 5000ppm. Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PMreduced.SO2 CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsRecreational MarineReduce Fuel Sulfur Content forSmaller Commercial and RecreationalVessels10 Emission reductions based on assumption that current sulfur level of3,000 parts per million (ppm) is reduced to 500 and to 15 ppm.SO2 NJDEP, 2005Commercial Marine Vessels-Ocean GoingVesselsShore Based Electrical Power - ColdIroning90 6,500-18,000 ARB assumes 90% control and participation of 20% of fleet in 2010 and80% of fleet in 2020. Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton ofNOx + diesel PM reduced.NOx CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels-Harbor Vessels Shore Based Electrical Power - ColdIroning12-27 No cost effectiveness values provided; likely to be cost-effective for shipsthat frequently visit ports equipped with shore power. Control efficienciesbased on participation of 40% of tugboat fleet in 2010 and 80-100% oftugboat fleet in 2025.NOx CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels Shore Based Electrical Power - ColdIroning83-97 69,000 (average)16,000 (averageweighted across allships in study)Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10and SO2 reduction combined. Cost effectiveness would improve in thecase of new terminals or new vessels, due to the lack of operational,safety, and engineering challenges associated with retrofitting shorepower into existingport facilities.NOx, SO2,VOC, COEnviron, 2004NJDEP, 2005NOTES: Unless otherwise noted, control efficiencies represent control values per engine or equipment; overall cost effectiveness would need to account for the fraction of the fleet to which controls were applied.AcronymsEGR - Exhaust Gas RecirculationSCR - Selective Catalytic ReductionDOC - Diesel Oxidation CatalystsDPF - Diesel Particulate FiltersCCV - Closed Crankcase VentilationAPU - Auxiliary Power UnitsGSE - Ground Support EquipmentCNG - Compressed Natural GasLPG - Liquefied Petroleum GasIMO - International Marine OrganizationULSD - Ultra-Low Sulfur DieselPage 2 of 2Nonroad SO2 MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency (%)CostEffectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences forMore InformationNonroad DieselEnginesEarly Use of Ultra-Low SulfurDieselProportionate SO2 reductions would result due to lower S content of fuel PM EPA, 2006cNonroad DieselEnginesEarly Use of Ultra-Low SulfurDiesel + RetrofitSome retrofits that rely on ULSD (e.g., DPFs) that have been verified by EPAand/or CARB require a S content of no more than 15-50ppm.PM EPA, 2006cCommercial MarineVessels-OceanGoing VesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for MainEngines - Marine distillate fuels75 6,500-18,000PM CARB, 2006Commercial MarineVessels-OceanGoing VesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for MainEngines - Lower sulfur content80 6,500-18,000 Control efficiencies assume use of lower sulfur content fuel oil of 5000 ppm.Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.PM CARB, 2006Commercial MarineVessels-OceanGoing VesselsCleaner Marine Fuels for AuxiliaryEngines - Lower sulfur content80 6,500-18,000 Control efficiencies assume use of lower sulfur content fuel oil of 5000 ppm.Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.PM CARB, 2006Commercial MarineVesselsRecreational MarineReduce Fuel Sulfur Content forSmaller Commercial andRecreational vVessels82-99.5 Emission reductions based on assumption that current sulfur level of 3,000 partsper million (ppm) is reduced to 500 and to 15 ppm.PM NJDEP, 2005AcronymsEGR - Exhaust Gas RecirculationSCR - Selective Catalytic ReductionDOC - Diesel Oxidation CatalystsDPF - Diesel Particulate FiltersCCV - Closed Crankcase VentilationAPU - Auxiliary Power UnitsGSE - Ground Support EquipmentCNG - Compressed Natural GasLPG - Liquefied Petroleum GasIMO - International Marine OrganizationULSD - Ultra-Low Sulfur DieselPage 1 of 1Nonroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency(%)CostEffectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences for MoreInformationNonroad Diesel Construction Engine/Equipment Replacement(Scrappage)2,000-25,000 Only emission reductions reported, no control efficiencies. Emissionreductions and Cost effectiveness values by equipment application,horsepower and technology type are reported in Appendices to LADCOreport.PM ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Nonroad Diesel Construction Nonroad NOx Retrofit - LeanNOx Catalyst40 3,000-54,000 Cost effectiveness values by equipment application, horsepower andtechnology type reported in Appendices to LADCO report. Earlier technologytype engines are generally more cost-effective.ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Nonroad Diesel Construction Nonroad NOx Retrofit -EGR+DPF50 7,000-108,000 Cost effectiveness values by equipment application, horsepower andtechnology type reported in Appendices to LADCO report. Earlier technologytype engines are generally more cost-effective.ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Nonroad Diesel Construction Nonroad NOx Retrofit - SCR 70-99 2,000-40,000 Cost effectiveness values by equipment application, horsepower andtechnology type reported in Appendices to LADCO report. Earlier technologytype engines are generally more cost-effective.ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Nonroad Diesel Engines Nonroad Engine Upgrade - Lowend30 1,600 Low end represents most cost-effective retrofits (first 50% of retrofitpotential). Cost effectiveness based on low-end of range for DOC applied to250 hp bulldozers. Cost effectiveness based on the same methodology asused in the PM cost effectiveness paper.PM, VOC EPA, 2006a EPA, 2006bNonroad Diesel Engines Nonroad Engine Upgrade - Highend30 7,200 High end represents least cost-effective retrofits (second 50% of retrofitpotential). Cost effectiveness based on average of range for DOC applied to250 hp bulldozers. Cost effectiveness based on the same methodology asused in the PM cost effectiveness paper.PM, VOC EPA, 2006a EPA, 2006bNonroad Diesel "Carl Moyer/TERP"-TypeVoluntary Program - NonroadDiesel Retrofit1,800-7,300OTC, 2006Nonroad Gasoline Industrial ARB Forklift and Other IndustrialEquipment Rule - Tighter NOxand VOC Limits Plus AcceleratedReplacementCARB, 2006Nonroad Diesel Construction Emulsified Diesel Fuel 18 15,000-160,000 Cost effectiveness values by equipment application, horsepowerandtechnology type are reported in Appendices to LADCO report. Smallerhorsepower and earlier technology type engines are generally more costeffective.ENVIRON, 2006EPA, 2005Page 1 of 3Nonroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency(%)CostEffectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences for MoreInformationNonroad Diesel Construction Nonroad Idling Reduction -Automatic Shut-off DevicesControl efficiencies will be variable. For example, if 20% reduction in idlingis achievable, 225 tpy NOx and 18 tpy PM2.5 reduction would result in NJ.Reduction in fuel and engine maintenance costs, increased equipment life,and decreased noise complaints. Cost of technology would be recoupedwithin the life of the equipment, probably sooner in many cases, providing anet cost savings for equipment owner.NJDEP, 2005Locomotives Idling Reduction - SmartStart andDiesel Driven Heating System40-60 $809 Idle reduction technologies can reduce idling up to 90 percent. Controlefficiencies provided correspond to a 90 percent reduction in idling, which isexpected to reduce fuel consumption by 40 to 60 percent. Cost per ton is anupper bound value, since savings due to reduced maintenance costs notaccounted for.PM NJDEP, 2005Union Pacific, 2006Vancouver, 2005, EPA 2004Switch Locomotive Upgrade Engines in SwitcherLocomotives - Diesel-electrichybrid locomotives80 6,500-18,000 Hybrid switch locomotives have significantly reduced diesel PM and NOxemissions, idling time, and fuel use compared to conventional switchers.Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.PM CARB, 2006Switch Locomotive Upgrade Engines in SwitcherLocomotives - Install multiple offroad diesel engines80 6,500-18,000 Remanufactured switchers are powered with two or three (700 hp) Tier 3 nonroad diesel engines call gen-sets instead of conventional diesel locomotiveengines. Gen-set locomotive manufacturers report that these locomotivescan reduce fuel consumption by 20 to 35 percent. Cost effectivenessexpressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.PM CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels Add-On Controls - SCR 65-90 May reduce diesel PM emissions. PM CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsOcean Going VesselsCleaner Marine Fuels -Emulsified Diesel Fuel30 6,500-18,000 Slight increase in fuel consumption and PM emissions. Cost effectivenessexpressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsHarbor VesselsCleaner Marine Fuels -Emulsified Diesel FuelARB estimates that emulsified diesel fuel used in on-road engines canreduce NOx by 15 percent and PM by 50 percent. Additional testing isrequired to determine whether similar reductions are possible in marineengines.PM CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsOcean Going VesselsVessel Speed ReductionProgram - Extending SpeedReduction Zones Offshore6,500-18,000 Slower speeds reduce main engine fuel consumption and result in significantNOx reductions. There is the potential for increases in diesel PM emissionsfor some vessels operating at slow speeds. Cost effectiveness expressed asdollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsOcean Going VesselsShore Based Electrical Power -Cold Ironing90 6,500-18,000ARB assumes 90% control and participation of 20% of fleet in 2010 and 80%of fleet in 2020. Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx +diesel PM reduced.PM CARB, 2006Commercial Marine Vessels -Ocean-Going VesselsShore Based Electrical Power -Cold Ironing99 69,000 (average)16,000 (averageweighted acrossall ships in study)Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10 andSO2 reduction combined. Cost effectiveness would improve in the case ofnew terminals or new vessels, due to the lack of operational, safety, andengineering challenges associated with retrofitting shore power into existingport facilities.PM NJDEP, 2005Environ, 2004Commercial Marine VesselsHarbor VesselsShore Based Electrical Power -Cold Ironing12-27 No cost effectiveness values provided; likely to be cost-effective for shipsthat frequently visit ports equipped with shore power. Control efficiencyrepresents overall control effectiveness based on participation of 40% oftugboat fleet in 2010 and 80-100% of tugboat fleet in 2025.CARB, 2006Commercial Marine VesselsOcean Going VesselsBuild or Retrofit New Ships thatFar Exceed IMO Standards90 6,500-18,000 Cost effectiveness expressed as dollar per ton of NOx + diesel PM reduced. PM CARB, 2006Aircraft Ground SupportEquipmentAlternative Fuels for Airport GSE-Replace Diesel GSE withCNG/LPG65 1,000 - 3,000 Cost-effectiveness is expressed in dollar per ton VOC/CO/NOx combined VOC MRPO, 2005NESCAUM, 2003Page 2 of 3Nonroad NOx Control MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emissions Reduction Measure ControlEfficiency(%)CostEffectiveness,$/tonNotes/Caveats OtherPollutantsControlledReferences for MoreInformationAircraft Ground SupportEquipmentAlternative Fuels for Airport GSE-Convert Gas GSE to CNG/LPG25 Overall costsavings fromreduced fuel useVOC MRPO, 2005NESCAUM, 2003Aircraft Ground SupportEquipmentAlternative Fuels for Airport GSE-Replace Diesel GSE with Electric100 Cost savings -$5,800Cost savings or net costs dependent on type of GSE. Savings for belt loader,costs incurred for baggage tractor and aircraft tug.MRPO, 2005NESCAUM, 2003Aircraft Ground SupportEquipmentAlternative Fuels for Airport GSE-Replace Gas GSE with Electric100 Cost savings -$1,900Cost savings or net costs dependent on type of GSE. Savings for belt loaderand aircraft tug, costs incurred for baggage tractor.MRPO, 2005NESCAUM, 2003Aircraft Ground SupportEquipmentGate Electrification to ReduceGSE/APU Use - Retrofit AirportGates with Power andPreconditioned AirNo emission reduction or Cost effectiveness values provided. Gateelectrification requires an up-front capital investment but, once installed, thesystem produces fuel and labor savings that typically result in a relativelyshort payback time of less than two years.NESCAUM, 2003Aircraft Ground SupportEquipmentNonroad Idling Reduction Control efficiencies will be variable. For example, applying the current 3-minute idling law to the approx. 2000 non-road GSEs in NJ will result in fuelsavings and reduced engine wear and is a low cost strategy.NJDEP, 2005AcronymsEGR - Exhaust Gas RecirculationSCR - Selective Catalytic ReductionDOC - Diesel Oxidation CatalystsDPF - Diesel Particulate FiltersCCV - Closed Crankcase VentilationAPU - Auxiliary Power UnitsGSE - Ground Support EquipmentCNG - Compressed Natural GasLPG - Liquefied Petroleum GasIMO - International Marine OrganizationULSD - Ultra-Low Sulfur DieselNOTES: Unless otherwise noted, control efficiencies represent control values per engine or equipment; overall cost effectiveness would need to account for the fraction of the fleet to whichcontrols were applied.Page 3 of 3Nonroad Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceCARB 2005 California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board (CARB). "ARB/Railroad Statewide Agreement ParticulateEmissions Reduction Program atCalifornia Rail Yards," June 2005. http://www.arb.ca.gov/railyard/083005mouexecuted.pdfCARB 2006 California Air Resources Board, "Proposed Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Good Movement in California, March 21,2006http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/gmerp/gmerp.htmENVIRON 2004 “Cold Ironing Cost Effectiveness Study”, ENVIRON International Corporation, prepared for Port of Long Beach, California, March 30, 2004.http://www.polb.com/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=2157ENVIRON 2006 ENVIRON International Corporation, "Evaluation of Candidate Mobile Source Control Measures", Final Report, preparedfor Lake Michigan Air DirectorsConsortium, 2250 E. Devon Ave., #250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, February 28, 2006.http://www.ladco.org/reports/rpo/Regional%20Air%20Quality/LADCO%20Control%20Report_Final.pdfEPA 2004 Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long-Duration Switch Yard Locomotive Idling Emission Reductions in State Implementation Plans. EPA420-B-04-002.January 2004. http://www.epa.gov/oms/smartway/idle-guid.htmEPA 2005 Draft list of potential RACT and RACM from PM rule preamble (see EPA websites on verified retrofit technologies)http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retroverifiedlist.htmEPA 2006a E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "PM NAAQS Modeling, Technical Memorandum", Draft Report, prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ResearchTriangle Park, NC, July 2006.EPA 2006b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, "Diesel Retrofit Technology, An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of ReducingParticulate Matter Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines Through Retrofits", EPA420-S-06-002, March 2006.http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420s06002.pdfEPA 2006c EPA staff communication via e-mail from R. Kapichak, OTAQ/EPA, to J. Ketcham-Colwill, OPAR/OAR/EPA on September 9, 2006MRPO 2005 Midwest RPO, Interim White Paper - Midwest RPO Candidate Control Measures, Source Category: Airport Related Activities, December 20, 2005.http://www.ladco.org/reports/rpo/Regional%20Air%20Quality/White%20Papers%20March%202006/Airports_Operations_Ver1.pdfNESCAUM 2003 Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM). Controlling Airport-Related Air Pollution. June 2003.http://www.nescaum.org/documents/aviation_final_report.pdf/view?searchterm=AirportNJDEP 2005 NJDEP Diesel Initiatives Workgroup, "A Collaborative Report Presenting Air Quality Strategies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey," October31, 2005. http://www.nj.gov/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_di_workgroup_report.pdfPage 1 of 2Nonroad Control Measures ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceOTC 2006 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) “Candidate Control Measures.” http://www.otcair.org/projects_details.asp?FID=93&fview=stationarySCAQMD 2006 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Summit, June 5 & 6, 2006. http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/07aqmp/aqsummit/aqsummit.htmlSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006 The State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, "Controlling Fine Particulate MatterUnder the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options, " March 2006 http://www.4cleanair.org/PM25Menu-Final.pdfUnion Pacific 2006 “Union Pacific and the Environment” fact sheet. www.up.comVancouver 2005 “Vancouver, Wa. Switchyard Locomotive Idle Reduction Project, Final Report to EPA”, Southwest Clean Air Agency, Vancouver, Wa., October 18, 2005.http://www.epa.gov/SmartwayLogistics/documents/vancouver-locomotive.pdfPage 2 of 2Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCENVIRON,2006NOx NonroaddieselNonroadMobileSourcesCaliforniaDiesel FuelAromatichydrocarboncontent of 10%2270xxxxxx6ENVIRON,20068,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006California Fuels measurewill also reduce sulfurlevels and decrease PM,but Federal DieselRegulations will provideequivalent PM reductionsSCAQMD,2006NOx NonroadDieselNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad DieselRetrofitSCR 2270xxxxxx98SCAQMD,2006Reduction on newinstallations. NOxreduction technologiesmay result in larger PMemissions and reducedfuel efficiency.OTC, 2006 NOx NonroadDieselConstructionLocomotivesCommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSources"CarlMoyer/TERP"-Type VoluntaryProgramNonroad DieselRetrofit2270002xxx2285002xxx2280002xxx$1,800-$7,300 OTC, 2006ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEmulsifiedDiesel FuelEmulsifiedDiesel FuelTier 0 2270002xxx18EPA, 2005 15,000-50,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report. Smallerhorsepower engines aregenerally more costeffective.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEmulsifiedDiesel FuelEmulsifiedDiesel FuelTier 1 2270002xxx18EPA, 2005 21,000-68,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report. Smallerhorsepower engines aregenerally more costeffective.PrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferencePage 1 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEmulsifiedDiesel FuelEmulsifiedDiesel FuelTier 2 2270002xxx18EPA, 2005 31,000-100,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report. Smallerhorsepower engines aregenerally more costeffective.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEmulsifiedDiesel FuelEmulsifiedDiesel FuelTier 3 2270002xxx18EPA, 2005 50,000-160,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report. Smallerhorsepower engines aregenerally more costeffective.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEngine/EquipmentReplacement(Scrappage)Replace Tier 0with Tier 2enginesTier 0 2270002xxx EPA, 2005 2,000-8,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006Only emission reductionsreported, no controlefficiencies. Emissionreductions and C-Evalues by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEngine/EquipmentReplacement(Scrappage)Replace Tier 1with Tier 3enginesTier 1 2270002xxx EPA, 2005 4,000-11,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006Only emission reductionsreported, no controlefficiencies. Emissionreductions and C-Evalues by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report.Page 2 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesEngine/EquipmentReplacement(Scrappage)Replace Tier 2with Tier 3enginesTier 2 2270002xxx EPA, 2005 9,000-25,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006Only emission reductionsreported, no controlefficiencies. Emissionreductions and C-Evalues by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology type arereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitLean NOxCatalystTier 0 2270002xxx40EPA, 2005 3,000-16,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitLean NOxCatalystTier 1 2270002xxx40EPA, 2005 4,000-22,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitLean NOxCatalystTier 2 2270002xxx40EPA, 2005 6,000-33,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitLean NOxCatalystTier 3 2270002xxx40EPA, 2005 12,000-54,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitEGR+DPF Tier 0 2270002xxx50EPA, 2005 7,000-32,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.Page 3 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitEGR+DPF Tier 1 2270002xxx50EPA, 2005 9,000-45,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitEGR+DPF Tier 2 2270002xxx50EPA, 2005 13,000-66,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitEGR+DPF Tier 3 2270002xxx50EPA, 2005 26,000-108,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitSCR Tier 0 2270002xxx70-99EPA, 2005 2,000-12,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitSCR Tier 1 2270002xxx70-99EPA, 2005 3,000-17,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitSCR Tier 2 2270002xxx70-99EPA, 2005 4,000-25,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.ENVIRON,2006NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad NOxRetrofitSCR Tier 3 2270002xxx70-99EPA, 2005 9,000-40,000 2007 ENVIRON,2006C-E values by equipmentapplication, horsepowerand technology typereported in Appendices toLADCO report.Page 4 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceNJDEP,2005NOx NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad IdlingRequirementsAutomatic Shutoff Devices2270002xxxControl efficiencies willbe variable. Forexample, if 20%reduction in idling isachievable, 225 tpy NOxand 18 tpy PM2.5reduction would result inNJ.Reduction in fuel andengine maintenancecosts, increasedequipment life, anddecreased noisecomplaints. Cost oftechnology would berecouped within the life ofthe equipment, probablysooner in many cases,providing a net costsavings for equipmentowner.OTC, 2006 PM NonroadDieselConstructionNonroadMobileSourcesClean AirConstructionInitiativeNonroad DieselRetrofit2270002xxx $ per ton varies OTC, 2006EPA, 2006a PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - LowendDPF 1988-20072270xxxxxx90 9018,100 2007 EPA, 2006b Low end represents mostcost-effective retrofits(first 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onlow-end of range for DOCapplied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)Page 5 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceEPA, 2006a PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - HighendDPF 1988-20072270xxxxxx90 9033,900 2007 EPA, 2006b High end represents leastcost-effective retrofits(second 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onaverage of range forDOC applied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)EPA, 2006a PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - LowendDOC 1988-20072270xxxxxx20 5018,100 2007 EPA, 2006b Low end represents mostcost-effective retrofits(first 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onlow-end of range for DOCapplied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)EPA, 2006a PM/NOx NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - LowendRebuild 1988-20072270xxxxxx20 30 6018,100 2007 EPA, 2006b Low end represents mostcost-effective retrofits(first 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onlow-end of range for DOCapplied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)Page 6 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceEPA, 2006a PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - HighendDOC 1988-20072270xxxxxx20 5033,900 2007 EPA, 2006b High end represents leastcost-effective retrofits(second 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onaverage of range forDOC applied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)EPA, 2006a PM/NOx NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesNonroadRetrofit - HighendRebuild 1988-20072270xxxxxx20 30 6033,900 2007 EPA, 2006b High end represents leastcost-effective retrofits(second 50% of retrofitpotential). Costeffectiveness based onaverage of range forDOC applied to 250 hpbulldozers. PM costeffectiveness valuesapply for all retrofitmeasures combined(DOC, DPF, and rebuild)EPA, 2006c PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesEarly Use ofUltra-LowSulfur DieselEarly Use ofUltra-Low SulfurDiesel2270xxxxxxSome direct PMreductions would resultdue to lower S content offuelEPA, 2006c PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesEarly Use ofUltra-LowSulfur Diesel +RetrofitEarly Use ofUltra-Low SulfurDiesel + Retrofit2270xxxxxxSome retrofits that relyon ULSD (e.g., DPFs)that have been verifiedby EPA and/or CARBrequire a S content of nomore than 15-50ppm.EPA, 2005 PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesClean BurningFuelsProhibit Saleand Use ofDiesel thatExceeds High SContent2270xxxxxxPage 7 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceEPA, 2005 PM NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesStandards for"GrossEmitting"EquipmentEstablishOpacity or otherEmissionStandards forDieselEquipment orVessels2270xxxxxx2280002xxxEPA, 2006c SO2 NonroadDieselEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesEarly Use ofUltra-LowSulfur DieselEarly Use ofUltra-Low SulfurDiesel2270xxxxxxProportionate SO2reductions would resultdue to lower S content offuelCARB, 2006 PM NonroaddieselindustrialNonroadMobileSourcesARB CargoHandlingEquipmentRuleApplication ofBest AvailableControlTechnologyLevel 3 2270003xxx2270002xxx85CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Level 1, 2 and 3represent threebenchmarks that controlsystems can be verifiedto.CARB, 2006 PM NonroaddieselindustrialNonroadMobileSourcesARB CargoHandlingEquipmentRuleApplication ofBest AvailableControlTechnologyLevel 2 2270003xxx2270002xxx50CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Level 1, 2 and 3represent threebenchmarks that controlsystems can be verifiedto.CARB, 2006 PM NonroaddieselindustrialNonroadMobileSourcesARB CargoHandlingEquipmentRuleApplication ofBest AvailableControlTechnologyLevel 1 2270003xxx2270002xxx25CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Level 1, 2 and 3represent threebenchmarks that controlsystems can be verifiedto.STAPPA/ALAPCO,2006PM NonroaddieselindustrialNonroadMobileSourcesOperationalChanges atPortsReduce Use ofMobile DieselpoweredMaterialHandlingEquipment InFavor ofElectricpowered2270003xxx2270002xxxCARB,2005This program is avoluntary agreement withthe BNSF RailwayCompany and the UnionPacific RailroadCompany to reduce PMemissions in Californiarail yards.EPA, 2005 PM NonroadEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesEarlyRetirement/ScrappagePrograms toReduceEmissions andAccelerateRetirement ofBoats andLawn andGardenEquipment2260xxxxxx2265xxxxxx2270xxxxxxPage 8 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceEPA, 2005 PM NonroadEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesLow EmissionSpecificationsLimit emissionsfor constructionprojects,industrialfacilities, shipyards, airports2260xxxxxx2265xxxxxx2270xxxxxxEPA, 2005 PM NonroadEnginesNonroadMobileSourcesClean BurningFuelsExpand Use ofClean BurningFuels2260xxxxxx2265xxxxxx2270xxxxxxSCAQMD,2006PM NonroadGasolineNonroadMobileSourcesEquipmentReplacementLawn MowerBuy BackProgram2260004xxx2265004xxxProgram encouragestrading of gasolinepowered mowers byproviding funds to offsetthe purchase cost ofelectric mowers.CARB, 2006 NOx NonroadgasolineindustrialNonroadMobileSourcesARB Forkliftand OtherIndustrialEquipmentRuleTighter NOxand VOC LimitsPlusAcceleratedReplacement2260003xxx2265003xxxNJDEP,2005PM/VOC RecreationalMarineNonroadMobileSourcesVariableRegistrationFees for BoatEnginesBoat EngineRegistration228202xxxxThis control measurewould require owners toregister boat engines.The boat engineregistration fee schedulewould be designed sothat lower fees would beassessed for the newestengines.MRPO,2005NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesAlternativeFuels forAirport GSEReplace DieselGSE withCNG/LPG2270008xxx65 30NESCAUM,20031,000 - 3,000 NESCAUM,2003Cost-effectiveness isexpressed in dollar perton VOC/CO/NOxcombinedMRPO,2005NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesAlternativeFuels forAirport GSEConvert GasGSE toCNG/LPG2260008xxx2265008xxx25 50-70NESCAUM,2003Overall costsavings fromreduced fuel useNESCAUM,2003MRPO,2005NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesAlternativeFuels forAirport GSEReplace DieselGSE withElectric2270008xxx100NESCAUM,2003Cost savings -$5,800NESCAUM,2003Cost savings or net costsdependent on type ofGSE. Savings for beltloader, costs incurred forbaggage tractor andaircraft tug.Page 9 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceMRPO,2005NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesAlternativeFuels forAirport GSEReplace GasGSE withElectric2260008xxx2265008xxx100NESCAUM,2003Cost savings -$1,900NESCAUM,2003Cost savings or net costsdependent on type ofGSE. Savings for beltloader and aircraft tug,costs incurred forbaggage tractor.NESCAUM,2003NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesGateElectrificationto ReduceGSE/APU UseRetrofit airportgates withpower andpreconditionedair2260008xxx2265008xxx2270008xxx2275070000No emission reduction orC-E values provided.Gate electrificationrequires an up-frontcapital investment but,once installed, thesystem produces fuel andlabor savings thattypically result in arelatively short paybacktime of less than twoyears.NJDEP,2005NOx AircraftGroundSupportEquipmentNonroadMobileSourcesNonroad IdlingRequirementsRestrict Idling to3 minutes2270008xxxControl efficiencies willbe variable. Forexample, applying thecurrent 3-minute idlinglaw to the approx. 2000non-road GSEs in NJ willresult in fuel savings andreduced engine wear andis a low cost strategy.CARB, 2006 PM/NOx SwitchLocomotiveNonroadMobileSourcesUpgradeEngines inSwitcherLocomotivesDiesel-electrichybridlocomotives228500201080 80CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Hybrid switchlocomotives havesignificantly reduceddiesel PM and NOxemissions, idling time,and fuel use compared toconventional switchers.Page 10 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceCARB, 2006 PM/NOx SwitchLocomotiveNonroadMobileSourcesUpgradeEngines inSwitcherLocomotivesLocomotivescomprised ofmultiple offroad dieselengines228500201080 80CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Remanufacturedswitchers are poweredwith two or three (700 hp)Tier 3 non-road dieselengines call gen-setsinstead of conventionaldiesel locomotiveengines. Gen-setlocomotivemanufacturers report thatthese locomotives canreduce fuel consumptionby 20 to 35 percent.NJDEP,2005NOx/PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesIdlingReductionSmartStart andDiesel DrivenHeating System2285002xxx40-6040-60UnionPacific,2006$809 2005 Vancouver,2005Idle reductiontechnologies can reduceidling up to 90 percent,depending on whichtechnology is employedin which application.Control efficienciesprovided correspond to a90 percent reduction inidling, which is expectedto reduce fuelconsumption by 40 to 60percent. PM and NOxcost per ton is an upperbound value, sincesavings due to reducedmaintenance costs notaccounted for.CARB, 2006 PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesLocomotiveRetrofitDOC 2285002xxx20-50CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Has not been tested orused in rail yardapplications in the U.S.CARB, 2006 PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesLocomotiveRetrofitDPF 2285002xxx>85CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Has not been tested orused in rail yardapplications in the U.S.CARB, 2006 PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesUse ofAlternativeFuelsBiodiesel 2285002xxx>50CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Biodiesel generallyresults in a NOx increase,and is best used incombination with NOxcontrol strategies.Page 11 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceEPA, 2005 PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesDiesel IdlingProgramsReduce Idlingfor Locomotives2285002xxxSTAPPA/ALAPCO,2006PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesI&M forLocomotivesConductOpacity Testingand ConductRepairs2285002xxx CARB,2005This program is avoluntary agreement withthe BNSF RailwayCompany and the UnionPacific RailroadCompany to reduce PMemissions in Californiarail yards.CARB, 2006 PM Locomotives NonroadMobileSourcesUse ofAlternativeFuelsFisher-TropschDiesel2285002xxx $6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Made from convertingsynthetic gas to a liquidhydrocarbon diesel, thissynthetic diesel fuelcontains less than 10ppm sulfur, which directlyreduces diesel PM andSOx emissions.NJDEP,2005NOx/PM CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesProvide ElectricPower to Shipsat the PortsCold Ironing 2280002xxx83-9799Environ,2004$69,000/ton =average$16,000/ton =weightedaverageEnviron,2004Cost-effectiveness wouldimprove in the case ofnew terminals or newvessels, due to the lackof operational, safety,and engineeringchallenges associatedwith retrofittingshorepower into existingport facilities.CARB, 2006 PM CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesAdd-OnControlsDPF 2280002xxx>85CARB,2006There are two kinds offilters available - passiveand active.CARB, 2006 PM CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesAdd-OnControlsDOC 2280002xxx~30CARB,2006NJDEP,2005SO2/PM CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesReduce FuelSulfur Contentin MainEngines ofOcean-goingvesselsSwitch to LowSulfur Fuel2280002xxx5 40NJDEP,2005This measure must beimplemented throughpetitioning EPA togenerate a SECAapplication associatedwith MARPOL.CARB, 2006 NOx CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesAdd-OnControlsSCR 2280002xxx65-90CARB,2006May reduce diesel PMemissions.Page 12 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceNJDEP,2005SO2/PM CommercialMarineVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesLimit SulfurContent ofAuxiliaryEngine FuelSwitch to LowSulfur Fuel2280002xxxCalifornia has predictedthat their auxiliary enginerule will yield thefollowing reductions: 2.7tons per day (TPD) of PMin 2007 and 3.7 TPD ofPM in 2010.California has predictedthat their auxiliary enginefuel sulfur limit will costthe container and bulkshipping industry toreduce sulfur content ofthe fuel from 1% to 0.5%approximately $34 millionin 2007. To furtherreduce the sulfur contentof the fuel from 0.5% to0.1% would costapproximately $38 millionin 2010.NJDEP,2005SO2/PM CommercialMarineVesselsRecreationalMarineNonroadMobileSourcesReduce FuelSulfur Contentfor SmallerCommercialandRecreationalVesselsSwitch to LowSulfur Fuel2280002xxx228202xxxx10 82-99.5NJDEP,2005Emission reductionsbased on assumptionthat current sulfur level of3,000 parts per million(ppm) is reduced to 500and to 15 ppm.CARB, 2006 NOx/PM CommercialMarineVesselsHarborVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesShore BasedElectricalPowerCold Ironing 228000202012-2712-27CARB,2006No C-E values provided;likely to be cost-effectivefor ships that frequentlyvisit ports equipped withshore power. Controlefficiencies based onparticipation of 40% oftugboat fleet in 2010 and80-100% of tugboat fleetin 2025.CARB, 2006 PM CommercialMarineVesselsHarborVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuelsBiodiesel 2280002020>50CARB,2006Generally results in aNOx increase. Biodieselis best used incombination with NOxcontrol strategies.Page 13 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceCARB, 2006 NOx CommercialMarineVesselsHarborVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuelsEmulsifiedDiesel Fuel2280002020 CARB,2006ARB estimates thatemulsified diesel fuelused in on-road enginescan reduce NOx by 15percent and PM by 50percent. Additionaltesting is required todetermine whethersimilar reductions arepossible in marineengines.CARB, 2006 PM CommercialMarineVesselsHarborVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuelsCompressed orliquefied naturalgas ordiesel/CNGdual fuel2280002020Can result in significantreductions in NOx andPM. The results varywith specific applicationand the ratio of diesel toCNG used. Additionaltesting is required todetermine whethersimilar reductions arepossible in marineengines.CARB, 2006 NOx/PM CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesShore BasedElectricalPowerCold Ironing 228000201090 90$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 ARB assumes 90%control and participationof 20% of fleet in 2010and 80% of fleet in 2020CARB, 2006 SO2/PM CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuels for MainEnginesMarine distillatefuels228000201075 75 6CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006CARB, 2006 NOx/PM CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesBuild NewShips that FarExceed IMOStandardsNew orRetrofittedEngines228000201060 90CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006CARB, 2006 SO2 CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuels for MainEnginesLower sulfurcontent228000201035 80CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Control efficienciesassume use of lowersulfur content fuel oil of5000 ppmPage 14 of 15Nonroad Detailed Control Measure ListSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0PM2.5PM SO2 NH3 NOx VOCPrimaryReferenceMajorPollutantSourceCategorySourceSectorCommentsControlMeasureApplicableSCC CodesControl Efficiency (%)CEReferenceTechnology ModelYearCostEffectivenessCostYearCostReferenceCARB, 2007 SO2 CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuels forAuxiliaryEnginesLower sulfurcontent228000201035 80CARB,2006$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Control efficienciesassume use of lowersulfur content fuel oil of5000 ppmCARB, 2006 NOx CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesCleaner MarineFuelsEmulsifiedDiesel Fuel228000201030$6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Slight increase in fuelconsumption and PMemissions.CARB, 2006 NOx CommercialMarineVesselsOcean GoingVesselsNonroadMobileSourcesVessel SpeedReductionProgramExtendingspeed reductionzones offshore2280002010 $6,500-$18,000per ton of NOx +diesel PMreduced2005 CARB, 2006 Slower speeds reducemain engine fuelconsumption and resultin significant NOxreductions. There is thepotential for increases indiesel PM emissions forsome vessels operatingat slow speeds.AcronymsEGR - Exhaust Gas RecirculationSCR - Selective Catalytic ReductionDOC - Diesel Oxidation CatalystsDPF - Diesel Particulate FiltersCCV - Closed Crankcase VentilationAPU - Auxiliary Power UnitsGSE - Ground Support EquipmentCNG - Compressed Natural GasLPG - Liquefied Petroleum GasIMO - International Marine OrganizationULSD - Ultra-Low Sulfur DieselPage 15 of 15Onroad VOC MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationSchool Bus Diesel Retrofit - Diesel OxidationCatalysts50 12000 - 49100Applies to 1990-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006School Bus Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 12400 - 50500Applies to 1995-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 6 & 7 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Diesel OxidationCatalysts50 27600 - 67900Applies to 1990-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 6 & 7 HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 28400 - 69900Applies to 1995-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 8B HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Diesel OxidationCatalysts50 11100 - 40600Applies to 1990-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006Class 8B HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Catalyzed DieselParticulate Filters90 12100 - 44100Applies to 1995-2006 modelyearsPM, CO EPA 2006b, EPA 2006d, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Active DieselParticulate Filter60 - 93 PM, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - Flow ThroughFilter50 - 89 Applies to 1991 - 2002model years; needs 15 ppmsulfur diesel or CARB dieselPM, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006; CARB 2006a,EPA 2006HDDVs Diesel Retrofit - NOX Adsorber 10 - 90 PM, NOX, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006, EPA 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Biodiesel 0 - 50 Increases NOX PM, CO EPA 2006e; STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - OxygenatedDiesel0 - 50 Oxygenated with ethanol;Nox emissions likely toincreasePM, CO, CO2 STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006HDDVs Alternative Fuel - Fuel-borneCatalyst0 - 50 PM, NOX, CO STAPPA/ALAPCO 2006Class 5 and above HDDVs andDiesel BusesReplacement 72 - 89Applies to 1990-2006 modelyearsPM, NOX EPA 2006dClass 8 HDDVs Intermodal - shift of transportationof goods from truck to railtransport1.0 0 Would result in a 0.3-0.4%increase in all pollutantsfrom locomotive and railSCCs; represents a 1% shiftfrom truck-only transport toPM, NOX, SO2,NH3EPA 2006dClass 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling withTruck Stop Electrification3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fullyrecovered by fuel savingsPM, NOX, SO2, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2004Class 8 HDDVs Eliminate Long Duration Idling withMobile Idle ReductionTechnologies3.4 0 Upfront capital costs fullyrecovered by fuel savingsPM, NOX, SO2, CO EPA 2006d, EPA 2004Page 1 of 3Onroad VOC MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationLight-Duty Gasoline Vehiclesand TrucksBest Workplaces for Commutersall measures combined0.4-1.0 Reductions based on thefollowing measures:Regional Rideshare,Vanpool Programs, Parkand-ride lots, RegionalTDM, Employer tripreduction programs; controlefficiency depends onpenetration--0.4% reductionat 10% penetration and1.0% reduction at 25%penetrationPM, NOX, SO2,NH3, COEPA 2006d, EPA 2005bLDGVs, LDGTs, HDGVs, andMCsFederal Reformulated Gasoline 27 NOX, CO Pechan 2006, EPA 1999LDGVs and LDGTs High Enhanced I/M Program 1.8 - 19.8 Reduction is based onemissions from entire fleetNOX, CO Pechan 2006LDGVs and LDGTs Repair assistance for low-incomeowners of older poorly maintainedvehiclesNOX NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs MPG/Emissions Requirements forLarge FleetsNOX, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Fee based on VMTNOX, PM, SO2, NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Alternative Fuels Tax CreditNJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Shuttles in StructuredCommunitiesNOX, PM, SO2,NH3NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Electric Vehicle Charging Stations NOX, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTs Expansion of Bike/hiking trails NOX, PM, SO2,NH3NJDEP 2005bHDDVs Driver incentive/training programto reduce idlingNOX, PM, SO2 NJDEP 2005aPage 2 of 3Onroad VOC MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Source Category Emission Reduction Measure ControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveats Other pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationLDGVs and LDGTs Incentives for hybrids and otherULEV, SULEV, ZEV vehiclesNOX, PM, SO2 CARB 2006bAll Highway Vehicles Smoking Vehicle HotlinePM, NOX CARB 2006bAcronyms:LDGV=Light-duty Gasoline VehicleLDGT=Light-duty Gasoline TruckHDGV=Heavy-duty Gasoline VehicleMC=MotorcycleLDDV=Light-duty Diesel VehicleLDDT=Light-duty Diesel TruckHDDV=Heavy-duty Diesel VehiclePage 3 of 3Onroad NH3 MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0SO2Source CategoryEmission Reduction MeasureControlEfficiencyCostEffectivenessNotes/caveatsOther pollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationClass 8 HDDVsIntermodal - shift of transportationof goods from truck to railtransport1.00Would result in a 0.3-0.4% increase in allpollutants from locomotive and rail SCCs;represents a 1% shift from truck-onlytransport to railPM, NOX, SO2,VOCEPA 2006dLDGVs and LDGTsBest Workplaces for Commutersall measures combined0.4-1.0Reductions based on the followingmeasures: Regional Rideshare, VanpoolPrograms, Park-and-ride lots, RegionalTDM, Employer trip reduction programs;control efficiency depends on penetration--0.4% reduction at 10% penetration and1.0% reduction at 25% penetrationPM, NOX, VOC,SO2, COEPA 2006d, EPA 2005BLDGVs and LDGTsFee based on VMTVOC, NOX, PM,NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTsElectric Shuttles in StructuredCommunitiesVOC, NOX, PM,SO2NJDEP 2005bLDGVs and LDGTsExpansion of Bike/hiking trailsVOC, NOX, PM,NJDEP 2005bAcronyms:LDGV=Light-duty Gasoline VehicleLDGT=Light-duty Gasoline TruckHDGV=Heavy-duty Gasoline VehicleMC=MotorcycleLDDV=Light-duty Diesel VehicleLDDT=Light-duty Diesel TruckHDDV=Heavy-duty Diesel VehiclePage 1 of 1Onroad VOC and NH3 Measure ReferencesSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Key ReferenceReferences for Onroad VOC and NH3CARB 2006aCalifornia Air Resources Board, "Currently Verified Diesel Emission Control Technologies," as of September 6, 2006http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verifiedtechnologies/cvt.htmCARB 2006b California Air Resources Board, "ARB Programs," updated May 4, 2006 http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/programs.htmENVIRON 2006 ENVIRON International Corporation, "Evaluation of Candidate Mobile Source Control Measures", Final Report, preparedfor Lake Michigan Air DirectorsConsortium, 2250 E. Devon Ave., #250, Des Plaines, IL 60018, February 28, 2006.http://www.ladco.org/reports/rpo/Regional%20Air%20Quality/LADCO%20Control%20Report_Final.pdfEPA 1999 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, "Phase II Reformulated Gasoline: The Next Major Step Toward Cleaner Air", EPA420-F-99-042, November 1999. http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/rfg/f99042.pdfEPA 2004 Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long DurationTruck Idling Emission Reductions In State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity, EPA420-B04-001, January 2004. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/truckidlingguidance.pdfEPA 2005 Draft list of potential RACT and RACM from PM rule preamble (see EPA websites on verified retrofit technologies)http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retroverifiedlist.htmEPA 2005b Guidance for Quantifying and Using Emissions Reductions from Best Workplaces for Commuter Programs in State Implementation Plans and TransportationConformity Determinations, EPA420-B-05-016, October 2005. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/policy/transp/commuter/420b05016.pdfEPA 2006 Diesel Retrofits: Quantifying and Using Their Benefits in SIPs and Conformity, EPA420-B-06-005, June 2006.http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/420b06005.pdfEPA 2006b U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, "Diesel Retrofit Technology, An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of ReducingParticulate Matter Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines Through Retrofits", EPA420-S-06-002, March 2006.http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420s06002.pdfEPA 2006d EPA Staff Communication: "Mobile Source Control Measures in PM NAAQS RIA", EPA, 2006EPA 2006e Clean Ports USA, "Emission Reduction Strategies by Application, Trucks," as of September 2006 http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/ports/stratapp.htm#highwayNJDEP 2005a NJDEP Diesel Initiatives Workgroup, "A Collaborative Report Presenting Air Quality Strategies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey," October31, 2005. http://www.nj.gov/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_di_workgroup_report.pdfNJDEP 2005b NJDEP Gasoline Cars & Trucks Workgroup, "A Collaborative Report Presenting Air Quality Strategies for Further Consideration by the State of New Jersey,"October 31, 2005. http://www.state.nj.us/dep/airworkgroups/docs/final_gct_report.pdfOTC 2006 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) “Candidate Control Measures.” http://www.otcair.org/projects_details.asp?FID=93&fview=stationaryPechan 2006 E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "AirControlNET, Version 4.1 Control Measure Documentation Report," Draft Report, prepared for U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, Pechan Report No. 06.05.003/9011.002, May 2006.San Joaquin Valley UAPCD, 2003 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (UAPCD). Final BACM Technological and Economic Feasibility Analysis, prepared by Sierra Research,March 21, 2003. http://www.soiltac.com/PDF/Final_BACM_Chapter 20 - Fugitive Dust 287Feasibility_Analysis.pdfSTAPPA/ALAPCO 2006The State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, "Controlling Fine Particulate MatterUnder the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options, " March 2006. http://www.4cleanair.org/PM25Menu-Final.pdfTCEQ 2006 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Texas Air Quality Control Measures, as of September 2006http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/sipstrategies.html#mobilePage 1 of 1Fugitive Dust MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0Stationary Source Fugitive Dust MeasuresSource categoryEmissions reduction measureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveatsOtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationAbrasive blastingWater spray50-93%(PM10)Not availableWRAP 2006Abrasive blastingEnclosure, fabric filter95% (PM10)Not availableWRAP 2006Mineral products industry widevariety of sourcesControl measures identified inWRAP fugitive dust manual,chapter 11VariableNot availableWRAP 2006Open area wind erosionControl measures identified inWRAP fugitive dust manual,chapter 8VariableNot availableWRAP 2006Storage pile wind erosionControl measures identified inWRAP fugitive dust manual,chapter 9VariableNot availableWRAP 2006Ref: Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Fugitive Dust Handbookhttp://www.wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.htmlPage 1 of 2Fugitive Dust MeasuresSee cover note for important notes and caveats on the use of these tablesDraft Version 1.0On-road fugitive dust measuresSource categoryEmissions reduction measureControlefficiency (%)Cost effectiveness($/ton reduced)CostYearNotes/caveatsOtherpollutantscontrolledReferences for more informationPaved RoadsStreet SweepingEffectivenessvaries withfrequencyPaved RoadsRequire 4 foot paved shoulders(all new paved roads)$13,800 - $554,000, (50%of existing paved roads)$7,290-$11,300 - per ton ofPM102002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Paved RoadsRequire wind- and water-bornedeposition to be removed within 24hours of discovery$2,850 per ton PM10reduced2002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Unpaved RoadsChemical Stabilization/ DustSuppressant Application25$2,753 per ton PMremoved1990$EPA 1986Unpaved RoadsImplement rules to limit visible dustemissions to 20% opacity onunpaved parking areas receiving upto 100 trips per day$5,230-$30,500 per tonPM102002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Unpaved RoadsLimit max speed on unpaved roadsto 25 mph$1,080 per ton PM102002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Unpaved RoadsPave unpaved roads and unpavedparking lots25$2,160-$5,920 per tonPM10 (2002$)2002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Unpaved RoadsRequire paving, 4 inches gravel, ordust suppressant at special eventparking$5,980-$63,200 per tonPM102002$San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003Ref: San Joaquin Valley UAPCD 2003San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (UAPCD). Final BACM Technological and Economic FeasibilityAnalysis, prepared by Sierra Research, March 21, 2003.www.soiltac.com/PDF/Final_BACM_Chapter 20 - Fugitive Dust 287Feasibility_Analysis.pdf.Ref: EPA 1986"Identification, Assessment, and Control of Fugitive Particulate Emissions," EPA/600/8-86/023. Prepared by Midwest Research Institute, August 1986.Page 2 of 2