# PECHAN

3622 Lyckan Parkway

Suite 2005

Durham, NC 27707

919-493-3144 telephone

919-493-3182 facsimile

5528-B Hempstead Way

Springfield, VA 22151

703-813-6700 telephone

703-813-6729 facsimile 

# DEVELOPMENT OF 2005

BASE YEAR GROWTH AND

CONTROL FACTORS FOR

LAKE MICHIGAN AIR

DIRECTORS CONSORTIUM

(LADCO)

F INAL 

# R EPORT

Prepared for:

Mr. Michael Koerber

Executive Director

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

9501 West Devon Avenue, Suite 701

Rosemont, IL 60018

Prepared by:

Andrew D. Bollman

James H. Wilson

E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.

3622 Lyckan Parkway, Suite 2005

Durham, NC 27707

September 2007

Pechan Report No. 07.09.001/9458.000

# [ This page intentionally left blank]

# PECHAN September 2007



# iii Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO – Final Report 

# CONTENTS

Page

TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ............... iv

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................... v

SECTION I. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 1

SECTION II. EMISSION ACTIVITY GROWTH DATA ....................................................... 3

A. OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................... ... 3

B. AREA SOURCE/MAR CATEGORIES............................................................................. 3

C. NON-EGU POINT SOURCES......................................................................................... 14

D. NONROAD MODEL SOURCES .................................................................................... 23

SECTION III. UPDATED EMISSION CONTROL DATA.................................................... 27

A. NON-EGU POINT SOURCE CONTROLS..................................................................... 27

1. NO

x 

# SIP Call................................................................................................................. 27

2. MACT Standards .......................................................................................................... 27

3. Consent Decrees............................................................................................................ 2 7

4. On-the-Books (OTB) Control Additions ...................................................................... 35

5. Best Available Retrof it Technology (BART)............................................................... 35

B. AREA SOURCE/MAR CONTROLS............................................................................... 40

1. Area Sources ................................................................................................................ . 40

2. MAR Sources (Locomotives and Marine Vessels)....................................................... 44

SECTION IV. PREPARATION OF GROWTH AND CONTROL FILES ............................. 49

A. GROWTH FACTORS...................................................................................................... 49

B. CONTROL FACTORS..................................................................................................... 51

1. Point Source Control Factors........................................................................................ 51

2. Area Source and MAR Control Factors........................................................................ 52

SECTION V. REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 55

# PECHAN September 2007



# iv Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO – Final Report 

# TABLES

Table II-1. Priority Emission Activ ity Area Source/MAR Categories........................................... 4

Table II-2. Growth Indicators for Pr iority Area Source/MAR Categories ..................................... 7

Table II-3. Priority Emission Ac tivity Point Source Categories................................................... 15

Table II-4. Growth Indicators for Pr iority Point Source Categories............................................. 19

Table II-5. Priority Emission Activity NONROAD Model Source Categories............................ 24

Table II-6. Growth Indicators for Priori ty NONROAD Model Source Categories...................... 25

Table III-1. RICE Engines in Illinois Affected by NO

x 

# SIP Call ................................................ 28

Table III-2. Post-2005 MACT St andards and Expected VOC, NO

x 

# , and PM Reductions.......... 29

Table III-3. LADCO State Non- EGU Point Sources Affected by Consent Decree Requirements

and Other On-the-Books Controls ................................................................................................ 32

Table III-4. Ohio RACT Rule Summary Cleveland/Akron 8-H our Ozone Nonattainment Area 35

Table III-5. BART Eligible Non-EGU Sources........................................................................... 36

Table III-6. Residential Wood Co mbustion NSPS Emission Reductions ................................... 43

Table III-7. Locomotive Emissions Reported in EPA Draft RIA................................................ 45

Table III-8. Percentage Reduc tions Associated with Federal Locomotive Standards................. 46

Table III-9. Percentage Re ductions Associated with Federal CMV Standards........................... 47

Table III-10. Commercial Marine Vessel Rule Penetration Values ............................................ 48

Table IV-1. RPO Data Exchange Protoc ol Format for Growth/Control Data.............................. 50

Table IV-2. Fields Populated in Growth Factor File .................................................................... 51

Table IV-3. Fields Populated in Po int Source Control Factor File............................................... 53

Table IV-4. Fields Populated in Area Source/MAR Control Factor File ..................................... 54

# PECHAN September 2007



# v Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO – Final Report 

# ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook

AIM architectural and industrial maintenance

BART best available retrofit technology

CE control efficiency

CMV commercial marine vessel

DEQ Department of Environmental Quality

DOE Department of Energy

EGAS Economic Growth Analysis System

EGU electric generating unit

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FCCUs fluid catalytic cracking units

FCU fluid coking units

FGR flue gas recirculation

HAP hazardous air pollutant

IC internal combustion

LADCO Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

LAER lowest achievable emission rate

LNB low NO

x 

# burner

MACT maximum achievab le control technology

MAR marine, aircraft, and railroad

MSAT mobile source air toxics

NAAQS national ambient air quality standards

NH3 ammonia

NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model

NO

x 

# oxides of nitrogen

NSPS new source performance standard

OTB on-the-books

OWB outdoor wood boiler

Pechan E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.

PFC portable fuel container

PM particulate matter

PM-2.5 particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers

RACT reasonably availa ble control technology

RE rule effectiveness

REMI Regional Economic Models, Inc.

RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis

RICE reciprocating inte rnal combustion engines

ROG reactive organic gases

RP rule penetration

RPO Regional Planning Organization

SCC source classification code

# PECHAN September 2007



# vi Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO – Final Report 

# SIC standard industrial classification

SIP State Implementation Plan

tpy tons per year

SO 2 

# sulfur dioxide

VOC volatile organic compound

# PECHAN Septenber 2007



# 1 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# SECTION I. BACKGROUND

E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. (Pechan) is supporting the Lake Michigan Air Directors

Consortium’s (LADCO) efforts to forecast anthro pogenic emissions for the purpose of assessing

progress for air quality goals, including goals re lated to regional haze and attainment of the

ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Under a previous contract with

LADCO, Pechan prepared emission activity growth and emission control da ta for all non-electric

generating unit (EGU) point, area, and nonroad sour ce categories relative to a base year (2002)

inventory supplied by LADCO. In December 2004, Pechan submitted emissions activity growth

and control factor files for use by LADCO in emissions modeling. A December 14, 2004 Pechan

report documents the contents a nd derivation of these files (Pech an, 2004). Revised files were

later provided to LADCO in March 2005.

In September 2005, LADCO contracted with Pech an to conduct the following two tasks to

develop updated growth and cont rol factors needed to support future year control strategy

analyses for regional haze, particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (PM-2.5), and

ozone:

Task 1: Update control factors to reflect current information pertaining to:

(a) Petroleum refinery cases and settlements;

(b) Maximum achievable control techno logy (MACT) standard control efficiency

assumptions;

(c) Residential wood combustion unit lifetime; and

(d) Regional Planning Organization (RPO) inventories.

Task 2: Develop non-EGAS default-base d emission activity growth factors for:

(a) Priority point source categories; and

(b) Priority area source categories.

A December 2005 report describes Pechan efforts to perform these tasks, which resulted in

updated emissions activity growth and control factor files (Pechan, 2005). The updates reflect

the use of more recent and/or more detailed info rmation than that used in the earlier study. As

with the earlier study, this effort involved the pr eparation of emission activity growth and control

information relative to a 2002 base year invent ory for future years of interest. Control

information was developed for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, and 2018 (e.g., 2018 is the first

milestone for regional haze reasonable progress de monstrations). Because the incremental level

of effort required to develop emission activ ity growth factors for each year over the 2003-2018

period was nominal, Pechan prepared non-E GU point and area and nonroad source growth

factors for each year ov er this entire period.

For the current study, LADCO requested that Pechan develop growth and c ontrol factor files to

support emission projections from a recently compiled 2005 base year inventory for the

following LADCO states: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

LADCO requested that Pechan provide files representing changes in emission activity and

emission control between the base year and 200 9, 2012, and 2018. As with the previous studies,

Pechan provided updated point/area source and ma rine, aircraft, and railroad (MAR) category

# PECHAN Septenber 2007



# 2 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# growth factors for each year over the 2006-2018 pe riod. Control factor development focused on

the modeling years of interest, or in the case of point source controls, the specific anticipated

implementation date within the forecast period.

This report is organized into this Background section and:

• Section II, which describes the developm ent of the emission activity growth data;

• Section III, which discusses how the update d emission control data were compiled;

• Section IV, which describes the preparation of the updated growth and control factor

files; and

• Section V, which presents the referen ces consulted in preparing this report.

# PECHAN Septenber 2007



# 3 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# SECTION II. EMISSION ACTIVITY GROWTH DATA

A. OVERVIEW

As with the two previous studies, Pechan relied on the data incorporated into Version 5.0 of the

Economic Growth Analysis System (EGAS) as the default growth factor data source. 1 

# The

EGAS 5.0 projections data are typically derived from two main resource s: (1) version 5.5 of

Regional Economic Models Incorporated (REMI )’s state-level economic models; and (2) the

Department of Energy (DOE)’s Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2004 . While socioeconomic

growth indicators from the REMI models prov ide state-level growth rates, the DOE energy

forecasts provide regional or national growth rate s (e.g., the same growth rate is applied to each

LADCO state because each of these states is includ ed in the DOE’s East North Central division).

Instead of relying on REMI’s population forecasts, Pechan de veloped growth factors from

county-level population projections avai lable from each LADCO region state.

LADCO requested that Pechan review the grow th indicators applied to particular source

classification codes (SCCs) in the 2005 base ye ar inventory. For these “priority” source

categories, Pechan evaluated alternative growth methodologies and data sources before selecting

a forecasting approach. The balance of this sect ion describes the emission activity growth data

developed in this study. Section IV discusses how these data were compiled into the file format

required by LADCO.



# B. AREA SOURCE/MAR CATEGORIES

LADCO provided Pechan with a list of priority point/area source and MAR categories for which

emission activity projection improvements were to be evaluated. For these source categories,

Pechan reviewed U.S. Environmental Prot ection Agency (EPA) SCC documentation and

emission estimation guidance to identify the emi ssions activity (throughput) data associated with

each SCC. Pechan then investig ated the availability of LADCO state-specific projections for

these data.

Table II-1 presents the descrip tions and emissions activity for each priority area source/MAR

category. The last column in this table identif ies each category’s grow th indicator assignment

under the previous Pechan forecast effort (Pech an, 2005). Table II-2 displays the assigned

growth indicator for each priority area/MAR s ource category and any altern ative indicators that

were considered. This table also presents the pe rcentage growth rates for the assigned indicators

over two forecast periods: 2005-2009 and 2005-2018.

In addition to population data from the L ADCO states and REMI employment data, the

following information sources supp lied data used in estimating emission activity growth for the

priority area source/MAR categories:

1 

# Information on these EGAS 5.0 data sources is provided in the report documenting the earliest study Pechan

performed for LADCO (Pechan, 2004).PECHANSeptember 20074Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-1. Priority Emission Activity Area Source/MAR CategoriesPOLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISNH3 2805047100 Agriculture Production- LivestockSwine production - deeppit house operations(unspecified animalConfinement Annual average number of swine REMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805039200 Agriculture Production- LivestockSwine production -operations with lagoons(unspecified animalManure handling andstorageAnnual average number of swine REMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805047300 Agriculture Production- LivestockSwine production - deeppit house operations(unspecified animalLand application ofmanureAnnual average number of swine REMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805001100 Agriculture Production- LivestockBeef cattle - finishingoperations on feedlots(drylots)Confinement Annual average number of beefcattleREMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805039100 Agriculture Production- LivestockSwine production -operations with lagoons(unspecified animalConfinement Annual average number of swine REMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805003100 Agriculture Production- LivestockBeef cattle - finishingoperations onpasture/rangeConfinement Annual average number of beefcattleREMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805001300 Agriculture Production- LivestockBeef cattle - finishingoperations on feedlots(drylots)Land application ofmanureAnnual average number of beefcattleREMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2630020000 Wastewater Treatment Public Owned Total Processed Volume of wastewater processed REMI Water and Sanitation sector outputNH3 2805007100 Agriculture Production- LivestockPoultry production - layerswith dry manuremanagement systemConfinement Annual average number of poultry Regression with Food/Kindred Productssector value added as explanatory variableNH3 2805021300 Agriculture Production- LivestockDairy cattle - scrape dairy Land application ofmanureAnnual average number of dairycattleRegression with Farm sector employment asexplanatory variableNH3 2805030000 Agriculture Production- LivestockPoultry Waste Emissions Not ElsewhereClassified (see also 28-05-007 -008-009)Annual average number of poultry REMI Farm sector value addedNH3 2805021200 Agriculture Production- LivestockDairy cattle - scrape dairy Manure handling andstorageAnnual average number of dairycattleRegression with Farm sector employment asexplanatory variableNH3 2104008070 Residential Wood Outdoor Boiler Amount of wood burnedNOX 2285002006 Railroad Equipment Diesel Line Haul Locomotives:Class I OperationsAmount of diesel consumed byClass I line-haul locomotivesAEO Freight rail distillate (nat'l) adjusted forrelative state growth in REMI Total outputNOX 2280002023 Marine VesselsCommercialDiesel Push Boats Amount of diesel consumed bycommercial push boatsAEO Shipping distillate (nat'l) adjusted forrelative state growth in REMI WaterTransportation sector outputNOX 2102006001 Industrial Natural Gas All Boiler Types Volume of natural gas burned byindustrial area source boilersAEO Industrial natural gasPECHANSeptember 20075Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-1 (continued)POLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISNOX 2275020000 Aircraft Commercial Aircraft Total:All Types Number of commercial aircraftlanding-takeoff cyclesFederal Aviation Administration (FAA)itinerant air carrier Landing and Take-Off(LTO) forecasts by stateNOX 2285002010 Railroad Equipment Diesel Yard Locomotives Amount of diesel consumed byyard locomotivesAEO Freight rail distillate (nat'l) adjustedfor relative state growth in REMI TotaloutputNOX 2104006000 Residential Natural Gas Total: All CombustorTypesVolume of residential naturalgas consumedAEO Residential natural gasNOX 2285002009 Railroad Equipment Diesel Line HaulLocomotives:Commuter LinesAmount of diesel consumed bycommuter locomotivesAEO Commuter rail diesel (nat'l)adjusted for relative growth in populationNOX 2280003200 Marine Vessels Commercial Residual Underway emissions Amount of residual oilconsumed by CMV duringunderway operationsAEO Shipping residual oil (nat'l) adjustedfor relative state growth in REMI WaterTransportation sector outputNOX 2102006000 Industrial Natural Gas Total: Boilers and ICEnginesVolume of natural gas burnedby industrial area source boilersand IC enginesAEO Industrial natural gasNOX 2104008070 Residential Wood Outdoor Boiler Amount of wood burnedROG 2461850000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:CommercialPesticide Application:AgriculturalAll Processes (Not listed for this SCC)Region V employment projections for"Pesticide Handlers, Sprayers"ROG 2461020000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:CommercialAsphalt Application: AllProcessesTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Region Vemployment projections for"Paving, Surfacing, & TampingOperators"ROG 2401200000 Surface Coating Other Special PurposeCoatingsTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used PopulationROG 2401001000 Surface Coating Architectural Coatings Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Regression with Population (inc. countylevel) as explanatory variable + projectedsolvent content changeROG 2460100000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll Personal Care Products Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Population (county-level for LADCOstates)ROG 2501011010 Petroleum and PetroleumProduct StoragePortable Gas Cans Residential Volume ofgasoline stored REMI, Gas and Oil ExpendituresROG 2501060100 Petroleum and PetroleumProduct StorageGasoline Service Stations Stage 2: Total Volume of gasoline pumped bystationsRegression with Gas and OilExpenditures as explanatory variableROG 2460800000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll FIFRA Related Products Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Regressionwith Population (county-levelfor LADCO states) as explanatoryvariableROG 2501060050 Petroleum and PetroleumProduct StorageGasoline Service Stations Stage 1: Total Volume of gasoline pumpedinto stationsREMI, Gas and Oil ExpendituresROG 2460400000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll Automotive AftermarketProductsTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Population (county-level for LADCOstates)ROG 2425000000 Graphic Arts All Processes Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Printing and Publishing sectoroutputROG 2401005000 Surface Coating Auto Refinishing: SIC 7532 Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Automobile Parking, Repair,Services sector outputROG 2460500000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll Coatings and RelatedProductsTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Population (county-level for LADCOstates)PECHANSeptember 20076Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-1 (continued)POLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISROG 2460200000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll Household Products Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Population (county-level for LADCOstates)ROG 2415020000 Degreasing Fabricated Metal Products(SIC 34): All ProcessesTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Fabricated Metals sectoremploymentROG 2415025000 Degreasing Industrial Machinery andEquipment (SIC 35): AllProcessesTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Machinery and ComputerEquipment sector employmentROG 2460600000 Miscellaneous Non-industrial:Consumer and CommercialAll Adhesives and Sealants Total: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used Population (county-level for LADCOstates)ROG 2420000370 Dry Cleaning All Processes Special Naphthas Amount of special naphthasusedSCC is not in current growth file; similarSCC (2420010370) is in file w/ REMILaundry sector outputROG 2630010000 Wastewater Treatment Industrial Total Processed Volume of wastewaterprocessedProjected LADCO NEEDS industrial flowdesign forecastROG 2501060101 Petroleum and PetroleumProduct StorageGasoline Service Stations Stage 2:DisplacementLoss/UncontrolledVolume of gasoline pumped viauncontrolledRegression with Gas and OilExpenditures as explanatory variableROG 2415360000 Degreasing AutoRepair Services (SIC75): Cold CleaningTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Automobile Parking, Repair,Services sector outputROG 2401002000 Surface Coating Architectural Coatings -Solvent-basedTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Housing expendituresROG 2401003000 Surface Coating Architectural Coatings -Water-basedTotal: All SolventTypesAmount of solvent used REMI, Housing expendituresROG 2104008070 Residential Wood Outdoor Boiler Amount of wood burnedSO2 2601020000 On-site Incineration Commercial/Institutional TotalAmount of material burned REMI, Commercial sector employmentSO2 2102004000 Industrial DistillateOil Total: Boilers and ICEnginesAmount of distillate oil burnedby area source industrialboilers/IC enginesAEO Industrial distillateSO2 2103004000 Commercial/Institutional Distillate Oil Total: Boilers and ICEnginesAmount of distillate oil burnedby area source commercialboilers/IC enginesNo growth based on historical energydataSO2 2275020000 Aircraft Commercial Aircraft Total: All Types SeeNOX entry FAA itinerant air carrier LTO forecasts bystateSO2 2102005000 Industrial Residual Oil Total: All BoilerTypesAmount of residual oil burnedby area source industrial boilersAEO Industrial residualSO2 2102002000 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalTotal: All BoilerTypesAmount of bit/sub coal burnedby area source industrial boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 2285002006 Railroad Equipment Diesel Line HaulLocomotives: Class IOperationsSee NOX entry AEO Freight rail distillate (nat'l) adjustedfor relative state growth in Total outputSO2 2104008070 Residential Wood Outdoor Boiler Amount of wood burnedPECHANSeptember 20077Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-2. Growth Indicators forPriority Area Source/MAR CategoriesTotal % ChangePollutantSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentNH3 2805047100 -1.7 6.2 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805039200 -2.3 4.4 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805047300 -1.6 6.4 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805001100 5.2 16.7 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805039100 -1.6 6.4 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805003100 3.2 3.5 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805001300 5.2 16.7 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2630020000 2.8 9.5 Municipal design flow forecasts from Drinking Water Infrastructure NeedsSurveyNH3 2805007100 -4.5 8.3 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805021300 -10.2 -39.0 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805030000 -5.3 6.8 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2805021200 -10.2 -39.0 Interpolated SCC/state-level animal count projections from EPA NH3inventory of Animal Husbandry OperationsForecast data are state-levelNH3 2104008070 78.0 84.3 Extrapolation of national 1999-2004 trend in OWB sales (exponentialgrowth) thru 2006; linear growth thru 2008; 2009+ based on ruralpopulation growth rateNOX 2285002006 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historicand forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -1.4% per year; AEOforecast = 1.4% per yearNote that post-2001 trend hasbeen upward and thathistorical data shows severalups and downsNOX 2280002023 4.3 9.9 AEO national Domestic Shippingsector distillate projections adjusted forLADCO region growth in REMI Water Transportation sector outputrelative to nation1998-2004 fuel consumption data forbarge traffic on regional rivers indicatessimilar annual growth rate (1.0%)Forecast data are state-levelNOX 2102006001 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year;AEO forecast = 1.4% per yearNOX 2275020000 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends (FederalAviation Administration commercialaircraft landing and take-offs data)FAA 1990-2005 = -0.01% per year; FAAforecast = 1.7% per yearNOX 2285002010 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trend (historic trendbased on 1996-2002 regional Switch and Terminal Services employment)1996-2004 = -1.6% per yearemployment decrease; AEO forecast =1.4% per yearNOX 2104006000 1.7 2.8 AEO residential natural gas consumption forecast DOE 1990-2004 = 0.5% annual; AEOforecast = 0.2%PECHANSeptember 20078Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-2 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentNOX 2285002009 7.4 26.1 Annual growth rate (1.8%) from2005-2009 diesel fuel consumption projectionsreported in Marta 2007 budgetNOX 2280003200 0.4 1.3 1995-2005 Great Lakes region ton-miles trend (0.1% annual growth) AEO forecasts national DomesticShipping residual oil consumption+1.1% per yearUsed historicalgrowth rate sinceregion-specificNOX 2102006000 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year;AEO forecast = 1.4% per yearNOX 2104008070 78.0 84.3 Extrapolation of national 1999-2004 trend in OWB sales (exponential growth) thru2006; linear growth thru 2008; 2009+ based on rural population growth rateROG 2461850000 4.8 16.1 Regional employment projections for "Pesticide Handlers, Sprayers" combined withprojected solvent content change from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-AgriculturalChemical Market for Solvents" (-0.4% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2461020000 -1.9 -6.0 No employment growth assumption due to contradictory historic and forecast trends in"Paving, Surfacing, & Tamping Operators" employment, combined with projectedsolvent content change from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Asphalt ProductionMarket for Solvents" (-0.5% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2401200000 -6.5 -16.1 Population forecast combined withprojected change in paint solvent content fromFreedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Paints/CoatingsMarket for Solvents" (-1.9% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2401001000 -9.9 -9.3 Regression with Population forecast as explanatory variable combined with Freedoniaprojected change in proportion of total Architectural coatings that are solvent-based (-2.0% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2460100000 -3.9 -11.6 Population forecast combined with projected solvent content change from Freedonia's"Solvents to 2010-Cosmetics & Toiletries Market for Solvents" (-1.5% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2501011010 0.2 0.3 Regression equation with Gas and Oil Expenditures as explanatory variable Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2501060100 0.2 0.3 Regression equation with Gas and Oil Expenditures as explanatory variable Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2460800000 -10.5 -15.6 Regression equation with Population as explanatory variable Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2501060050 0.2 0.3 Regression equation with Gas and Oil Expenditures as explanatory variable Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2460400000 0.1 3.3 Population forecast combined withprojected change in solvent use/vehicle fromFreedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Transportation Markets for Solvents" (-0.4% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2425000000 0.0 0.0 No employment growth assumption due to contradictory historic and forecast trendsfor "Printing Machine Operators" employment, and no projected change in solventcontent of ink from Freedonia's "Solventsto 2010-Printing Ink Market for Solvents"ROG 2401005000 -12.9 -38.9 Employment projections for "Automotive Body andRelated Repairers" combined w/change in proportion of automotive coatingsthat are solvent-based from Freedonia's"Automotive Coatings, Adhesives & Sealants-Automotive Coatings Demand byFormulation and Substrate" (-4.3% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2460500000 -6.5 -16.1 Population forecast combined withprojected change in paint solvent content fromFreedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Paints/CoatingsMarket for Solvents" (-1.9% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelPECHANSeptember 20079Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-2 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentROG 2460200000 0.6 6.8 Population forecast combined with projected change in cleaning product solventcontent from Freedonia's "Solvents to2010-Cleaning Product Market for Solvents" (-0.1% per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2415020000 -15.0 -35.9 Fabricated Metals sector employment forecast combined with projected change insolvent use from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Metal Processing Market forSolvents" (-3.7% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2415025000 0.2 -11.4 Machinery and Computer Equipment sector employment forecast combined withprojected change in solvent use from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Metal ProcessingMarket for Solvents" (-3.7% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2460600000 -10.0 -24.4 Population forecast combinedwith projected change in solvent content fromFreedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Adhesives andSealants Market for Solvents" (-2.7%per year)Forecast data arecounty-levelROG 2420000370 -1.6 -0.4 Regional employment projections for "Laundry andDry Cleaning Workers" (+0.7% peryear) combined with projected solvent content from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-DryCleaning and Other Markets for Solvents" (-0.7%)ROG 2630010000 4.1 13.8 Growth rate from regional industrial wastewater flow design forecast from DrinkingWater Infrastructure Needs SurveyROG 2501060101 0.2 0.3 Regression equation with Gas and Oil Expenditures as explanatory variable Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2415360000 2.4 10.3 Regional employment projections for "Automotive Service Technicians andMechanics" combined with forecast change in solvent use from "Solvents to 2010-Transportation Markets for Solvents" (-0.4% per year)ROG 2401002000 -9.9 -9.3 Regression with Population forecast as explanatory variable combined with Freedoniaprojected change in proportion of total Architectural coatings that are solvent-based (-2.0% per year)Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2401003000 3.6 12.3 Regression equation with Population as explanatory variable Forecast data arestate-levelROG 2104008070 78.0 84.3 Extrapolation of national 1999-2004 trend in OWB sales (exponential growth) thru2006; linear growth thru 2008; 2009+ based on rural population growth rateSO2 2601020000 7.2 15.0 Commercial sector employment forecast Forecast data arestate-levelSO2 2102004000 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = +0.5% per year;AEO forecast = -0.3% per yearSO2 2103004000 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -2.0% per year;AEO forecast = 0.8% per yearSO2 2275020000 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year;AEO forecast = +1.7% per yearSO2 2102005000 -49.4 -49.6 AEO forecast for industrial sectorresidual oil consumption DOE 1990-2004 = -6.6% per year;AEO forecast = -5.1% per yearSO2 2102002000 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearPECHANSeptember 200710Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-2 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentSO2 2285002006 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -1.4% per year;AEO forecast = +1.4% per yearNote that post2001 trend isupward & historicaldata has severalups/downsSO2 2104008070 78.0 84.3 Extrapolation of national 1999-2004 trend in OWB sales (exponential growth) thru2006; linear growth thru 2008; 2009+ based on rural population growth rate

# PECHAN September 2007



# 11 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# • Animal Husbandry: projected number of animals from EPA’s ammonia emission

forecasts for animal husbandry operations (EPA, 2004);

• Marine Vessels Commercial, Diesel–Pus h Boats: historic al (1998-2004) fuel

consumption for barge traffic on rive rs in LADCO region (ENVIRON, 2007a);

• Multiple Fuel Combustion categories: DOE East North Central region energy

forecasts from AEO 2007 and 1990-2004 LADCO region energy consumption data

(DOE, 2007a and 2007b);

• Commercial Aircraft: state-level i tinerant aircraft operations (FAA, 2007);

• Diesel Line Haul Locomotives–Co mmuter Lines: Metra diesel fuel

expenditure/price projections (Metra, 2007);

• Pesticide Application–Agric ultural: LADCO region project ed number of “pesticide

handlers, sprayers, and applic ators, vegetation” (BLS, 2007);

• Commercial Asphalt Application–All Pro cesses: LADCO region projected number

of “paving, surfacing, and ta mping operators” (BLS, 2007);

• Graphic Arts –All Processes: LADC O region projected number of “printing

machine operators” (BLS, 2007);

• Surface Coating–Auto Refinishing: SIC 7532: LADCO region projected number of

“Automotive Body and Related Repairers” (BLS, 2007);

• Dry Cleaning, All Processes–Special Naphtha s: LADCO region pr ojected number of

“Laundry and Dry Cleaning Workers” (BLS, 2007);

• Wastewater Treatment-Industr ial: LADCO region projec ted wastewater treatment

industrial design flow (EPA, 2007a); and

• Degreasing–Auto Repair Services (S IC 75): Cold Cleaning: LADCO region

projected number of “Automotive Servi ce Technicians and Mechanics” (BLS, 2007).

Many of the above are solvent use categories fo r which Pechan also incorporated projected

solvent content changes as forecast by The Freedonia Group, Inc. (Freedonia, 2006).

In cases where energy consumption is the emissions activity, a common growth factor

development approach was to compare ava ilable regional histori cal (1990-2004) energy

consumption data to AEO 2007 forecast data to determine if the forecast growth rates appear

suspect relative to historical trends. Pechan conducted similar historical/forecast activity trend

comparisons for the non-fuel combustion priority cat egories whenever historical trend data were

readily available (e.g., occupationa l employment data). In sel ecting from alternative data

# PECHAN September 2007



# 12 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# sources/trend data, the ge neral decision-making hierarchy was as follows, listed in order of

preference:

1. If the forecast and historical trends were in the same direc tion, Pechan relied on forecast

data (an exception was made, however, in ca ses where forecast data were only available

on a national-level, but historical data were available for the LADCO region).

2. If the forecast and historical trends were in different dire ctions (e.g., forecast trend is for

an increase in activity, but historical trend was a decrease), Pechan applied a no growth

assumption.

Outdoor Wood Boilers

Residential Wood Combusti on from Outdoor Wood Boilers (SCC 2104008070) was not

originally identified as a source category for gr owth indicator review be cause this category was

only recently added to LADCO’ s emissions inventory. Outdoor Wood Boilers (OWBs) have

become much more prevalent in the last several years as homeown ers seek ways to avoid recent

large increases in natural gas and home heating oil prices. This s ource category does not exist in

EPA’s official SCC list, and there is no current EPA emission inventory preparation guidance for

this sector. Pechan assumed that this category’ s emissions are based on the estimated number of

wood boilers, the average amount of wood burned in each boiler, and emission factors that are

related to the amount of wood burned.

Investigations indicate little hist orical and forecast OWB data exist to assist in identifying future

trends in LADCO region OWB use: state-specif ic sales from nine manufacturers obtained by

EPA from nine manufacturers, and national sa les data obtained by the New York Attorney

General’s Office via subpoena of 21 manufact urers. These sales data are for 1999-2004.

Because of the much greater manufacturer covera ge for the national data, and because the state

estimates indicate that the majority of recent OW Bs sales have occurred in the LADCO states,

Pechan focused the historical trend analysis on the national data. Th ese data indicate an

extremely high average growth rate of 41 percent per year over the 1999-2004 period.

Manufacturers indicate that although OWBs have been available for sale since the 1980s, the

very large OWB sales growth rates are new phe nomenon. The growth rates appear to mainly

result from homeowner reactions to recent large increases in residential heating prices (e.g.,

between 1999 and 2004, residential natural gas and di stillate oil prices ro se 61 and 87 percent,

respectively). Because DOE data indicate th at natural gas accounts for the majority of

residential energy consumption in the LADCO Stat es, and increases in residential natural gas

prices continued through 2006 (the average annual price for resi dential natural gas increased 28

percent between 2004 and 2006), Pechan forecas t the national number of OWBs through 2006

via extrapolation of the 1999-2004 national OWB tre nd. In particular, Pechan fit an exponential

equation to the 1994-2004 data, and used the equation to estimate 2005 and 2006 OWB counts.

Next, Pechan reviewed AEO 2007 projections of residential natura l gas prices for the East North

Central region (which includes 5 of the 6 LADC O region States) to identify whether recent

increases are expected to continue. The AEO 2007 projects the average 2 007 price for residential

# PECHAN September 2007



# 13 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# natural gas in the East North Central region to be 4 percent lower th an in 2006, and forecasts

continued price decreases through th e 2008-2018 period (see table below).

Year Residential Natural Gas

Price ($/million Btu) % Change

from 2006

2006 12.08

2007 10.92 -4.1

2008 10.80 -5.1

2009 10.28 -9.7

2010 10.02 -11.9

2011 9.61 -15.5

2012 9.48 -16.9

2013 9.28 -18.4

2014 9.32 -18.1

2015 9.27 -18.6

2016 9.37 -17.7

2017 9.60 -15.7

2018 9.56 -20.8



# Given the projected modest price decreases thru 2 008, and the fact that distillate oil prices are

forecast to increase 6.1 percent between 2006 a nd 2008, and because one expects a time lag in

responding to energy price changes, Pechan assumes that OWB sales will continue to increase at

a significant rate through 2008. Pechan specifi cally fit a linear trend line to the 1999-2004

OWB, and projected OWBs in 2007 and 2008 by extending the trend through 2008, and applying

each year’s growth rate to the estimated count of OWBs in 2006.

By 2009, Pechan projects that the larger projected declines in natural gas prices, and forecasted

decreases in other heating fuel prices, will si gnificantly restrain OW B growth. In addition,

because of neighborhood smoke nuisance concerns, and the need for ready access to inexpensive

wood, it is expected that the market for OWBs will be generally constrained to heavily-wooded

rural areas. Therefore, Pechan forecasts post-200 8 year OWB growth to more closely trend with

population growth in these areas. To approxi mate this growth, Pechan compiled 1990 and 2000

total and rural area population data for the LADCO region. These da ta indicate that rural area

population grew at approximately 60 percent of the rate of total popula tion over this period.

Pechan estimated rural area population growth for the LADCO region by multiplying this

adjustment factor by the forecasted growth rate for total population in the LADCO region. The

following table displays the projected count of OWBs in the LADCO region for 2005, 2009,

2002, and 2018.

Year Estimated # of OWBs

2005 81,082

2009 144,356

2012 145,911

2018 149,421

# PECHAN September 2007



# 14 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# It is important to note that it is particularly ch allenging to forecast OWB activity given the

extremely high OWB sales growth rates that have occurred in recent years. LADCO will want to

closely monitor activity and emission trends for this category given its relative importance in the

emissions inventory, recent hist orical growth rates, and a dditional unique characteristics.

Finally, Pechan reviewed the complete list of area/MAR source categories in the LADCO base

year inventory to identify the priority category growth indicators that could be applied to nonpriority area/MAR categories. This step yielde d priority category growth indicator assignments

for an additional 26 area/MAR categories.



# C. NON-EGU POINT SOURCES

Table II-3 displays the priority point source categori es, including the description and emissions

activity associated with each cate gory. The last column in this table identifies each category’s

growth indicator assignment under th e previous growth and control factor contract. Table II-4

presents the assigned growth indicator for each pr iority point source category and identifies any

alternative growth indicators that were considered . Pechan first considered the use of historical

throughput data from LADCO stat e point source inventories to identify recent trends that

provided sufficient support for extrapolation. As mentioned above, for energy consumption

sectors, Pechan compared regional histor ical (1990-2004) energy consumption data to AEO 2007

forecast data to determine if the fo recast growth rates appear suspec t relative to historical trends.

In selecting from alternative growth indicat or data sources, the ge neral decision-making

hierarchy was as follows, listed in order of preference:

(1) If throughput data were availa ble for states representing a majority of emissions for a

given category, and these data indicated a c onsistent trend, the hist orical throughput trend

was extended thru 2009, and held constant th ereafter (two reasons for not extending the

trend throughput the entire forecast period ar e that throughput data are only available for

a three or a six-year period, and in some cas es the historical throughput decrease was so

large that it would eventua lly result in no activity);

(2) If the forecast and historical trends were in the same direction, Pechan relied on the

forecast data (an exception was made, however, if the forecast data were only available

on a national-level, but the historical data were available for the LADCO region); and

If the forecast and historical tr ends were in different directions (e.g., forecast trend is for an

increase in activity, but historic al trend was a decrease), Pechan applied a no growth assumption.PECHANSeptember 200715Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-3. Priority Emission Activity Point Source CategoriesPOLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISNH3 10200601 Industrial Natural Gas > 100 Million Btu/hr Volume of natural gas burned inindustrial pt source boilers of >100MMBtuNo growth based on historical (1990-2001)energy dataNH3 30102599 ChemicalManufacturingCellulosic Fiber Production Other Not Classified Amount of cellulosic fiber produced Avg of REMI employment & output GFs forPlastics, Materials, & Synthetics sectorNH3 10200602 Industrial Natural Gas 10-100 Million Btu/hr Volume of natural gas burned inindustrial pt source boilers of 10-100MMBtuNo growth based on historical energy dataNH3 30199999 ChemicalManufacturingOther Not Classified Specify in Comments Field Amount of (unknown) chemicalproducts producedAvg of REMI employment & output GFs forChemicals sectorNH3 10200204 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalSpreader Stoker Amount of bituminous coal burned inspreader stoker industrial pt sourceboilersAEO Industrial steam coalNOX 20200202 Industrial Natural Gas Reciprocating Volume of natural gas burned inindustrial pt source reciprocatingenginesNo growth based on historical energy dataNOX 30500606 Mineral Products Cement Manufacturing (DryProcess)Kilns Amount of cement produced via dryprocessLADCO region historical cement productiongrowth rateNOX 30600201 PetroleumIndustryCatalytic Cracking Units Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit Amount of fresh feed processed viafluid catalytic cracking units (FCCU)AEO Refined Petroleum Products Supplied(national)NOX 30600104 PetroleumIndustryProcess Heaters Gas-fired Volume of gas burned in petroleumindustry pt source process heatersAEO Refining sector natural gas (national)NOX 10200202 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalPulverized Coal: Dry Bottom Amountof bituminous coal burned indry bottom industrial pt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalNOX 10200601 Industrial Natural Gas > 100 Million Btu/hr Volume of natural gas burned inindustrial pt source boilers of >100MMBtuNo growth based on historical energy dataNOX 30300304 Primary MetalProductionBy-product CokeManufacturingQuenching Amount of coal charged tomanufacture cokeREMI output for Blast Furnaces and BasicSteel products sectorNOX 10200217 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalAtmospheric Fluidized BedCombustion: Bubbling Bed(BituminousAmount of bituminous coal burned inbubbling bed industrial pt sourceboilersAEO Industrial steam coalNOX 10200707 Industrial Process Gas Coke Oven Gas Volume of process gas burned in cokeovensAEO Metallurgical coal consumptionprojections (national)NOX 10200602 Industrial Natural Gas 10-100 Million Btu/hr Volume of natural gas burned inindustrial pt source boilers of 10-100MMBtuNo growth based on historical energy dataPECHANSeptember 200716Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-3 (continued)POLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISNOX 20200254 Industrial Natural Gas 4-cycle Lean Burn Volume of natural gas burnedin industrial sector 4-cyclelean burn IC enginesNo growth based on historical energy dataNOX 20100102 Electric Generation Distillate Oil (Diesel) Reciprocating Amount of distillate oil burnedin reciprocating engines forelectricityAEO Electric Generation distillate oilNOX 20200201 Industrial Natural Gas Turbine Volume of natural gas burnedin industrial sector turbinesNo growth based on historical energy dataNOX 39000689 In-process Fuel Use Natural GasGeneral Volume of industrial processpt source natural gas burnedNo growth based on historical energy dataNOX 10200201 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalPulverized Coal: WetBottomAmount of bituminous coalburned in wet bottom industrialpt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalNOX 10200701 Industrial Process Gas Petroleum Refinery Gas Volume of petroleum refinery(still) gas burnedNo growth based on historical energy dataROG 30100399 Chemical ManufacturingAmmonia Production Other Not Classified Amountof ammonia produced REMI output for Agricultural Chemicals sectorROG 30201916 Food and Agriculture Vegetable Oil ProcessingOil Extraction Amount of extractor feed cakeproducedREMI output for Grain Mill Products and Fatsand Oils sectorROG 40500511 Printing/Publishing General Gravure: 2754 Amount of solvent in ink usedby pt sourcesREMI output for Commercial Printing andBusiness Forms sectorROG 30199999 Chemical Manufacturing OtherNot Classified Specify in CommentsFieldAmount of (unknown)chemical products producedAvg of REMI employment & output GFs forChemicals sectorROG 30125099 Chemical Manufacturing Methanol/AlcoholProductionOther Not Classified Amount of methanol/alcoholproducedREMI output for Industrial Chemicals sectorROG 40201301 Surface CoatingOperationsPaper Coating Coating Operation Amount of solvent in coatingused by pt sourcesNo growth based on historical LADCOemissions trendROG 40200101 Surface CoatingOperationsSurface Coating Application- GeneralPaint: Solvent-base Amount of coating mix appliedby pt sourcesNo growth based on historical LADCOemissions trendROG 30102599 Chemical Manufacturing Cellulosic Fiber Production Other Not Classified Amount of cellulosic fiberproducedAvg of REMI employment & output GFs forPlastics, Materials, & Synthetics sectorROG 30500201 Mineral Products Asphalt Concrete Rotary Dryer:Conventional Plant (see3-05-002-50 to -53 forAmount of hot mix asphaltproduced by pt sourcesAvg of REMI employment & output GFs forMisc. Petroleum and Coal Products sectorROG 30201906 Food and Agriculture Vegetable Oil Processing Corn Oil: General Amount of extractor feed cakeproducedREMI output for Grain Mill Products and Fatsand Oils sectorROG 30201919 Food and Agriculture Vegetable Oil ProcessingFugitive Leaks Amount of extractor feed cakeproducedREMI output for Grain Mill Products and Fatsand Oils sectorROG 40200110 Surface CoatingOperationsSurface Coating Application- GeneralPaint: Solvent-base Amount of solvent-basedcoatings applied by pt sourcesHistorical LADCO throughput data trendROG 40201899 Surface CoatingOperationsMetal Coil Coating Other Not Classified Amount of solvent in coatingused by pt sourcesREMI output for Nonferrous Rolling andDrawing sectorROG 40388801 Petroleum ProductStorage at RefineriesFugitive Emissions Specify in CommentsFieldPetroleum product storagecapacity at refineriesAEO Refined Petroleum Products Supplied(national)ROG 40200701 Surface CoatingOperationsSurface Coating Application- GeneralAdhesive Application Amountof adhesive coatingsapplied by pt sourcesREMI output for Total Manufacturing sectorPECHANSeptember 200717Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-3 (continued)POLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISSO2 30600201 Petroleum Industry Catalytic Cracking Units Fluid Catalytic CrackingUnitAmount of fresh feedprocessed via FCCUAEO Refined Petroleum Products Supplied(national)SO2 10200202 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalPulverized Coal: DryBottomAmount of bituminous coalburned in dry bottom industrialpt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 30600805 Petroleum Industry Fugitive Emissions Miscellaneous:Sampling/Non-AsphaltBlowing/Purging/etc.Barrels of refinery feedprocessedAEO Refined Petroleum Products Supplied(national)SO2 30199999 Chemical Manufacturing OtherNot Classified Specify in CommentsFieldAmount of (unknown)chemical products producedAvg of REMI employment & output GFs forChemicals sectorSO2 10200217 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalAtmospheric FluidizedBed Combustion:Bubbling Bed (BituminousAmount of bituminous coalburned in bubbling bedindustrial pt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 10200201 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalPulverized Coal: WetBottomAmount of bituminous coalburned in wet bottom industrialpt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 10200225 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalTraveling Grate(Overfeed) Stoker(Subbituminous Coal)Amount of subbituminous coalburned in overfeed stokerindustrial pt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 30500606 Mineral Products Cement Manufacturing (DryProcess)Kilns Amount of cement producedvia dry processLADCO region historical cement productiongrowthSO2 30600401 Petroleum Industry Blowdown Systems Blowdown System withVapor Recovery Systemwith FlaringBarrels of refinery feedprocessedAEO Refined Petroleum Products Supplied(national)SO2 10200204 Industrial Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalSpreader Stoker Amount of bituminous coalburned in spreader stokerindustrial pt source boilersAEO Industrial steam coalSO2 10300217 Commercial/Institutional Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalAtmospheric FluidizedBed Combustion:Bubbling Bed (Bitumin.)Amount of bituminous coalburned in bubbling bedcommercial pt source boilersAEO Commercial coalSO2 39000701 In-process Fuel Use Process Gas Coke Oven or BlastFurnaceVolume of coke oven or blastfurnace gas burnedAEO Metallurgical coal consumptionprojections (national)SO2 30103201 Chemical Manufacturing ElementalSulfur Production Mod. Claus: 2 Stage w/oControl (92-95%Removal)Amount of 100% sulfurproducedREMI output for Industrial Chemicals sectorSO2 10300225 Commercial/Institutional Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalTraveling Grate(Overfeed) Stoker(Subbituminous Coal)Amount of subbituminous coalburned in overfeed stokercommercial pt source boilersAEO Commercial coalSO2 10300209 Commercial/Institutional Bituminous/SubbituminousCoalSpreader Stoker(Bituminous Coal)Amount of bituminous coalburned in spreader stokercommercial pt source boilersAEO Commercial coalSO2 10200401 Industrial Residual Oil Grade 6 Oil Amount of residual oil (No. 6)burned in industrial pt sourceboilersNo growth based on historical energy dataPECHANSeptember 200718Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-3 (continued)POLLUTANTSCCDESC2DESC3DESC4EMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASISEMISSION TREND ANALYSIS CATEGORIES NOT LISTEDABOVE WITH CONSISTENT THROUGHPUT TRENDSVOC 40202201 Petroleum and SolventEvaporationSurface Coating OperationsPlastic Parts: CoatingOperationAmount of solvent used incoating appliedHistorical LADCO throughput data trendNOX 39000699 In Process Fuel Use Natural Gas General Amount of nat gas used inindustrial processesNo growth based on historical energy dataPECHANSeptember 200719Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-4. Growth Indicators forPriority Point Source CategoriesTotal % ChangePollutantSCCEmissionsPriorityCategory2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentNH3 10200601 NOx -11.5 -11.5 Historic throughput trend from 3 states (-3.0% peryear) extended thru 2009; post-2009 held constant.DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearNH3 30102599 4.9 18.2 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors forPlastics, Materials, & Synthetics sectorForecast data are state-levelNH3 10200602 NOx -12.2 -12.2 Historic throughput trend from 4 states (-3.2% peryear) extended thru 2009; post-2009 held constant.DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearNH3 30199999 8.9 25.6 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors forChemicals sectorForecast data are state-levelNH3 10200204 NOx 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrialcoal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year; AEOforecast = <-0.1% per yearDid not use throughput sinceavailable states represent<50% of regional emissionsNOX 20200202 NOx 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecasttrendsDOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearDid not use throughput sinceavailable state represent<50% of regional emissionsNOX 30500606 8.2 29.4 LADCO region historical cement production growthrate (+2.0% per year)NOX 30600201 SO2 0.4 0.4 AEO refinery distillation projections for PetroleumAdministration District (PAD) II, which includes allLADCO states plus additional surrounding statesSimilar 1990-2005 data also includesstates not in LADCO region and showsvery small growth rateDid not use throughput sinceavailable states represent<50% of regional emissionsNOX 30600104 5.9 20.6 1991-2002 MidwestCensus region Refining sectornatural gas consumption growth rate (+1.5% peryear)AEO National Refining sector natural gasconsumption forecast is +2.7% per yearUsed historical growth ratebecause it is regional and ofsimilar direction to AEOnational forecastNOX 10200202 NOx 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrialcoal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year; AEOforecast = <-0.1% per yearDid not use throughput sinceavailable states represent<50% of regional emissionsNOX 10200601 NOx -11.5 -11.5 Historic throughput trend from 3 states (-3.0% peryear) extended thru 2009; post-2009 held constant.DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearNOX 30300304 -6.2 -19.8 AEO forecast for metallurgicalcoal consumption DOE 1990-2004 = -3.0% per year; AEOforecast = -1.7% per yearNOX 10200217 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrialcoal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year; AEOforecast = <-0.1% per yearNOX 10200707 -6.2 -19.8 AEO forecast for metallurgicalcoal consumption DOE 1990-2004 = -3.0% per year; AEOforecast = -1.7% per yearNOX 10200602 NOx -12.2 -12.2 Historic throughput trend from 4 states (-3.2% peryear) extended thru 2009; post-2009 held constant.DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearNOX 20200254 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecasttrendsDOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year; AEOforecast = +1.4% per yearPECHANSeptember 200720Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-4 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCCEmissionsPriorityCategory2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentNOX 20100102 1.7 5.5 DOE 1990-2004 historic trend (+0.4%) AEO forecast = +5.0% per year thru2009, but near equivalent decreasefrom 2009 to 2018Used historic trendbecause of largedifference between 2009and 2018 forecast, &historic growth rate is inbetween the 2 forecastvaluesNOX 20200201 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year;AEO forecast = +1.4% per yearNOX 39000689 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -0.01% per year;AEO forecast = +1.4% per yearNOX 10200201 SO2 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearNo throughput dataavailableNOX 10200701 -1.3 -4.1 DOE 1990-2004 historic trend (-0.3% per year) AEO forecast = 2009 (-1.0% peryear) and 2018 (-0.1% per year)Used historic trendbecause is regionspecific (forecast isnational), and historicchange is in between the2009 & 2018 AEO growthratesROG 30100399 -19.7 -28.6 Freedonia's "Chemical Catalysts to 2009-Ammonia CatalystDemand" - national projections adjusted for relative state growth inREMI output for Agricultural Chemicals sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 30201916 2.2 11.9 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors for Grain MillProducts and Fats and Oils sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 40500511 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic trend versus forecast trendin regional employment for "Printing Machine Operators"Freedonia's "Solvents to2010-Printing Ink Marketfor Solvents" indicates noprojected change insolvent content of inkROG 30199999 8.9 25.6 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors for ChemicalssectorForecast data are statelevelROG 30125099 1.1 5.3 Freedonia's "Chemical Catalysts to 2009-Alcohols Catalyst Demandby Application" - national projections adjusted for relative stategrowth in REMI output for Industrial Chemicals sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 40201301 0 0 No growth based on consistent historic LADCO emissions trend 2005 emissions dataconfirm previous nogrowth approachROG 40200101 VOC -6.4 -21.4 Regional employmentprojections for "Coating, Painting, andSpraying Machine Operators, and Tenders" adjusted for solventcontent of paints and coatings from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Paints and Coatings Market for Solvents" (-1.9% per year)Forecast data are statelevel; adopted approachbelieved better thanavailable historicthroughput dataPECHANSeptember 200721Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-4 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCCEmissionsPriorityCategory2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentROG 30102599 4.9 18.2 Avg of REMI employment& output growth factors for Plastics,Materials, & Synthetics sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 30500201 8.3 21.5 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors for Misc.Petroleum and Coal Products sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 30201906 2.2 11.9 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors for Grain MillProducts and Fats and Oils sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 30201919 2.2 11.9 Avg of REMI employment & output growth factors for Grain MillProducts and Fats and Oils sectorForecast data are statelevelROG 40200110 VOC -6.4 -21.4 Regional employmentprojections for "Coating, Painting, andSpraying Machine Operators, and Tenders" adjusted for solventcontent of paints and coatings from Freedonia's "Solvents to 2010-Paints and Coatings Market for Solvents" (-1.9% per year)Forecast data are statelevel; adopted approachbelieved better thanavailable historicthroughput dataROG 40201899 6.9 26.0 Freedonia's "Protective Coatings to 2009-Demand for CoilCoatings" - national projections adjusted for relative state growth inREMI output for Nonferrous Rolling and Drawing sector, adjustedfor projected solvent content information for paints and coatingsfrom "Solvents to 2010-Paints/Coatings Market for Solvents" (-1.9%per year)Forecast data are statelevel; coil coating hasseen significant growthhistorically, and suchgrowth is projected tocontinue in the futureROG 40388801 0.4 0.4 AEO refinery distillationprojections for Petroleum AdministrationDistrict (PAD) II, which includesall LADCO states plus additionalsurrounding states1990-2005 data also includes statesnot in LADCO region and showssimilar very small growth rateROG 40200701 -1.6 -1.0 Freedonia's "Solventsto 2010-Adhesives & Sealants Market forSolvents" national projections, adjusted for relative state growth inREMI output in Total Manufacturing sectorSO2 30600201 SO2 0.4 0.4 AEO refinery distillationprojections for Petroleum AdministrationDistrict (PAD) II, which includesall LADCO states plus additionalsurrounding states1990-2005 data also includes statesnot in LADCO region and showssimilar very small growth rateDid not use throughputsince available staterepresent <50% ofregional emissionsSO2 10200202 NOx 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearNo throughput dataavailableSO2 30600805 SO2 0.4 0.4 AEO refinery distillationprojections for Petroleum AdministrationDistrict (PAD) II, which includesall LADCO states plus additionalsurrounding states1990-2005 data also includes statesnot in LADCO region and showssimilar very small growth rateNo throughput dataavailableSO2 30199999 8.9 25.6 Avg of REMI employment & output GFs for Chemicals sector Forecast data are statelevelSO2 10200217 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearSO2 10200201 SO2 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearNo throughput dataavailableSO2 10200225 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearSO2 30500606 8.2 29.4 LADCO region historicalcement production growth rate (+2.0% peryear)PECHANSeptember 200722Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-4 (continued)Total % ChangePollutantSCCEmissionsPriorityCategory2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredCommentSO2 30600401 0.4 0.4 AEO refinery distillationprojections for Petroleum AdministrationDistrict (PAD) II, which includesall LADCO states plus additionalsurrounding states1990-2005 data also includes statesnot in LADCO region and showssimilar very small growth rateSO2 10200204 NOx 2.9 -0.6 AEO forecast for other industrial coal combustion DOE 1990-2004 = -1.5% per year;AEO forecast = <-0.1% per yearDid not use throughputsince available statesrepresent <50% ofregional emissionsSO2 10300217 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -1.2% per year;AEO forecast = +0.0% per yearSO2 39000701 -6.2 -19.8 AEO forecast for metallurgicalcoal consumption DOE 1990-2004 = -3.0% per year;AEO forecast = -1.7% per yearSO2 301032012.5 8.2 1996-2005 recovered elemental sulfur production growth rate(+0.6% per year) for IL + MI + MN + OHSO2 10300225 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -1.2% per year;AEO forecast = +0.0% per yearSO2 10300209 0.0 0.0 No growth due to contradictory historic and forecast trends DOE 1990-2004 = -1.2% per year;AEO forecast = +0.0% per yearSO2 10200401 SO2 -49.4 -49.6 AEO forecast for industrial residual oil consumption (-5.1% peryear)DOE 1990-2004 = -6.6% per year Used AEO forecast dueto similarity with AEOhistorical trend andthroughput trend (-6.1%)NON-PRIORITY CATEGORIES INCLUDED IN EMISSION TREND ANALYSIS WITH CONSISTENT THROUGHPUT TRENDS:VOC 40202201 VOC -33.5 -33.5 Historic throughput trend from 3 states (-9.7%) extended thru 2009;post-2009 held constant.NOX 39000699 NOx -15.8 -15.8 Historic throughput trend from 3 states (-4.2%) extended thru 2009;post-2009 held constant.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 23 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table II-4 also presents the 2005-2009 and 2005-2018 growth rates for the final assigned point

source growth indicators. In addition, Pechan re viewed the complete list of point SCCs in the

LADCO base year inventor y to identify the priority category growth indicators that could be

applied to non-priority point s ource categories. This step yi elded priority category growth

indicator assignments for an addi tional 539 point s ource categories.



# D. NONROAD MODEL SOURCES

At LADCO’s request, Pechan analyzed potential improvements to the default growth indicators

for the 25 NONROAD model priority source cate gories displayed in Table II-5. With the

exception of the all-terrain vehicle, offroad motorcycle, and snowmobile categories, 1989-1996

national equipment population trends form the basi s for the NONROAD growth rates. For these

other three categories, NONROA D relies on national equipment population forecasts prepared

by a relevant trade association (see Table II-5 for details).

Table II-6 reports this stu dy’s growth indicator assignmen ts for priority NONROAD model

source categories. Given the acknowledged sh ortcomings of the NONROAD growth rates (use

of 1989-1996 national equipment populations to proj ect future equipment populations in each

region of the country), the growth factor improve ments generally reflect th e use of regional/statelevel forecast data that are e xpected to correlate with use of the equipment (i.e., regional

occupational employment project ions, state-level economic sector employment forecasts, or

state-level landing/take-off projec tions). Table II-6 also disp lays any alternative growth

indicators that were considered. For th e three categories for which NONROAD relies on

forecasts rather than historical 1989-1996 trends , Pechan compiled available recent historical

equipment population estimates. This informati on was used to revise the current national

forecast approach to reflect more recent info rmation, and whenever possible, recent LADCO

region-specific equipment population trends.

Although the NONROAD model growth rates are fuel -specific, Pechan was unable to develop

fuel-specific forecast data. Therefore, Pechan updated a priority category’s growth rates only

when the 1989-1996 national equipment populations i ndicated that the cate gory’s fuel-specific

growth rate had traditionally be en similar to the overall sect or’s equipment population growth

rate. Table II-6 identifies instances where the past fuel-specific growth rate substantially differed

from the overall sector’s growth rate. In these cases, Pechan retained the NONROAD model

fuel-specific forecast approach. Section IV.A. describes how Pechan incorporated the updated

equipment population growth rates into the NONROAD modelPECHANSeptember 200724Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-5. Priority Emission Activity NONROAD Model Source CategoriesSCCDESCRIPTION SUMMARYEMISSIONS ACTIVITYCURRENT GROWTH BASIS2260001030 2-Stroke ATV Population of 2-stroke gasoline ATVs NONROAD (Motorcycle Industry Councilnational 2-stroke gasoline ATV projections)2265001030 4-Stroke ATV Population of 4-stroke gasoline ATVs NONROAD (Motorcycle Industry Councilnational 4-stroke gasoline ATV projections)2260001010 2-Stroke Offroad Motorcycles Population of 2-stroke gasoline offroad motorcycles NONROAD (Motorcycle Industry Council national off-highway motorcycle populationprojections)2265001010 4-Stroke Offroad Motorcycles Population of 4-stroke gasoline offroad motorcycles NONROAD (Motorcycle Industry Council national off-highway motorcycle populationprojections)2267006000 LPG Light Commercial Population of light commercial LPG-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 LPG light commercial equipment population growth rate)2270004000 Diesel Lawn & GardenEquipmentPopulation of lawn & garden diesel-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel lawn& garden equipment population growth rate)2270008000 Diesel Airport ServiceEquipmentPopulation of airportservice diesel-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel airportservice equipment population growth rate)2267008000 LPG Airport Service Equipment Population of airport service LPG-fueled equipment NONROAD (national 1989-1996 total airport service equipment population growth rate)2268008000 CNG Airport Service Equipment Population of airport service CNG-fueled equipment NONROAD (national 1989-1996 total airport service equipment population growth rate)2260001020 2-Stroke Snowmobiles Population of 2-stroke gasoline snowmobiles NONROAD national growth (see below) with state adjustment based on real disposableincome forecasts2265001020 4-Stroke Snowmobiles Population of 4-stroke gasoline snowmobiles NONROAD (International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association national snowmobilepopulation projections)2260007000 2-Stroke Logging Equipment Population of logging 2-stroke gasoline equipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 gasoline logging equipment population growth rate)2265007000 4-Stroke Logging Equipment Population of logging 4-stroke gasoline equipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 gasoline logging equipment population growth rate)2270006000 Diesel Light Commercial Population of light commercial diesel-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel light commercial equipment population growth rate)2268006000 CNG Light Commercial Population of light commercial CNG-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 CNG light commercial equipment population growth rate)2267007000 LPG Logging Equipment Population oflogging LPG-fueled equipment NONROAD(national 1989-1996 logging equipment population growth rate)2268007000 CNG Logging Equipment Populationof logging CNG-fueled equipment NONROAD (national 1989-1996 logging equipment population growth rate)2285002000 Diesel Railway Maintenance Population of railway maintenance diesel-fueledequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel railwaymaintenance equipment population growthrate)2260006000 2-Stroke Light Commercial Populationof light commercial 2-stroke gasolineequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 gasoline light commercial equipment population growth rate)2265006000 4-Stroke Light Commercial Populationof light commercial 4-stroke gasolineequipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 gasoline light commercial equipment population growth rate)2270002000 Diesel ConstructionEquipment Population of construction diesel-fueled equipment NONROAD national growth with stateadjustment based on Construction employmentforecasts2270003000 Diesel Industrial Equipment Population of industrial diesel-fueled equipmentNONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel industrial equipment population growth rate)2267003000 LPG Industrial Equipment Populationof industrial LPG-fueled equipment NONROAD (national 1989-1996 LPG industrial equipment population growth rate)2270001000 Diesel Recreational Vehicles Population of diesel recreational vehicles NONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel recreational equipment population growth rate)2282020000 Diesel Recreational MarinePopulation of diesel recreational marine vessels NONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel recreational equipment population growth rate)PECHANSeptember 200725Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-6. Growth Indicators for Priority NONROAD Model Source CategoriesTotal % ChangeSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredComment2260001030 10.8 39.7 50% higher growth rate than overall LADCO region"Recreational Vehicle Service Technicians" employmentprojections, which is 1.7%/yr, based on premise thatATV market is less mature than market for otherrecreation vehiclesAvailable ATV/OHV registration data for MI+MN+WI indicateavg. annual growth of 14.6% between 2000 and 2005;however, 2006 data for each state is only +1 or +1.1%;NONROAD shows 2005-2006 = +10.5%. National ATVsales (not population) of +3.8% per year for 2000-2005;2005-2006 sales = -4.2%Did not use long-term historical trendas ATV market appears to be maturingbased on most recent data (this ispredicted by NONROAD model, but notuntil post-2010; NONROAD shows2010-2018 = +2.7%/yr)2265001030 10.8 39.7 50% higher growth rate than overall LADCO region"Recreational Vehicle Service Technicians" employmentprojections, which is 1.7%/yr, based on premise thatATV market is less mature than market for otherrecreation vehiclesAvailable ATV/OHV registration data for MI+MN+WI indicateavg. annual growth of 14.6% between 2000 and 2005;however, 2006 data for each state is only +1 or +1.1%;NONROAD shows 2005-2006 = +10.5%. National ATVsales (not population) of +3.8% per year for 2000-2005;2005-2006 sales = -4.2%Did not use long-term historical trendas ATV market appears to be maturingbased on most recent data (this ispredicted by NONROAD model, but notuntil post-2010; NONROAD shows2010-2018 = +2.7%/yr)2260001010 5.1 17.7 LADCO region employment projections for "MotorcycleMechanics"Unable to compile regional registration trends; national offroad motorcycle sales for 2000-2006 = +2.3%, but 2001-2006 = -1.6%Employment projections are LADCOregion-specific and fall in-betweenrecent national sales trends2265001010 5.1 17.7 LADCO region employment projections for "MotorcycleMechanics"Unable to compile regional registration trends; national offroad motorcycle sales for 2000-2006 = +2.3%, but 2001-2006 = -1.6%Employment projections are LADCOregion-specific and fall in-betweenrecent national sales trends2267006000 19.8 57.5 NONROAD (national 1989-1996 LPG light commercialequipment population growth rate)REMI Commercial sector employment forecast for LADCOregion (2005-2009=+1.8%yr; 2005-2018 = +1.1%/yr)Did not use alternative becausehistorical period indicates substantiallydifferent growth rate for LPG thanoverall sector2270004000 5.8 20.1 LADCO region employment projections for "Landscapingand Groundskeeping Workers"2270008000 -0.7 18.0 State-level FAA itinerant air carrier + air taxi landing andtake-off (LTO) forecast (updated as of December 2006)2267008000 -0.7 18.0 State-level FAA itinerant air carrier + air taxi landing andtake-off (LTO) forecast (updated as of December 2006)2268008000 -0.7 18.0 State-level FAA itinerant air carrier + air taxi landing andtake-off (LTO) forecast (updated as of December 2006)2260001020 3.5 11.9 50% lower growth rate than overall LADCO region"Recreational Vehicle Service Technicians" employmentprojections, which is 1.7%/yr, based on premise thatsnowmobile market is more mature than market for otherrecreation vehiclesAnnual growth in snowmobile registrations for statesrepresenting 92% of 2006 LADCO region registrations:2000-2006 = +0.0%No growth assumption not adoptedbecause lack of snowfall often cited asmajor contributing factor for recentstagnation in snowmobile registrations2265001020 3.5 11.9 50% lower growth rate than overall LADCO region"Recreational Vehicle Service Technicians" employmentprojections, which is 1.7%/yr, based on premise thatsnowmobile market is more mature than market for otherrecreation vehiclesAnnual growth in snowmobile registrations for statesrepresenting 92% of 2006 LADCO region registrations:2000-2006 = +0.0%No growth assumption not adoptedbecause lack of snowfall often cited asmajor contributing factor for recentstagnation in snowmobile registrationsPECHANSeptember 200726Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable II-6 (continued)Total % ChangeSCC2005-20092005-2018Growth Indicator BasisAlternatives ConsideredComment2260007000 2.2 7.32265007000 2.2 7.3 LADCO region employment projections for "LoggingEquipment Operators"2270006000 7.2 15.0 REMI Commercial sector employment forecast forLADCO region2268006000 7.2 15.0 REMI Commercial sector employment forecast forLADCO region2267007000 2.2 7.3 LADCO region employment projections for "LoggingEquipment Operators"2268007000 2.2 7.3 LADCO region employment projections for "LoggingEquipment Operators"2285002000 12.2 36.7 NONROAD (national 1989-1996 diesel railwaymaintenance equipment population growth rate)LADCO region employment projections for "Rail-Track Laying &Maintenance Equipment Operators" (-1.6%/yr)Did not use alternative becausehistorical period indicatessubstantially different growth rate fordiesel than overall sector2260006000 7.2 15.0 REMI Commercial sector employment forecast forLADCO region2265006000 7.2 15.0 REMI Commercial sector employment forecast forLADCO region2270002000 4.7 16.2 LADCO region employment projections for "OperatingEngineers and Other Construction EquipmentOperators"2270003000 0.1 0.2 LADCO region employment projections for "IndustrialMachinery Mechanics"2267003000 0.1 0.2 LADCO region employment projections for "IndustrialMachinery Mechanics"2270001000 10.4 31.5 NONROAD (national1989-1996 diesel recreationalequipment population growth rate)LADCO region employment projections for "Recreational VehicleService Technicians" (+1.7%/yr)Did not use alternative becausehistorical period indicatessubstantially different growth rate fordiesel than overall sector2282020000 10.4 31.5 NONROAD (national1989-1996 diesel recreationalequipment population growth rate)Two options: 1996-2005 LADCO region recreational boatregistration growth rate (0.8%/yr) and LADCO region employmentprojections (+1.5%/yr) for "Motorboat Mechanics"Did not use alternatives becausehistorical period indicatessubstantially different growth rate fordiesel than overall sector.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 27 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# SECTION III. UPDATED EMISSION CONTROL DATA

A. NON-EGU POINT SOURCE CONTROLS

1. NO

x 

# SIP Call

All states in the LADCO region affected by the NO

x 

# (oxides of nitrogen) SIP (State

Implementation Plan) Call requirements (OH, IN, IL, MI) indicated that their sources were

complying in 2005. The only exception to this is for reciprocating internal combustion engines

(RICE) in Illinois. The State of I llinois recommended that an 82 percent NO

x 

# control efficiency

be applied to large RICE engines that are affected by the SIP Call. The RICE engine

requirement in Illinois has a January 1, 2008 complia nce date. Table III-1 lists these engines and

the associated NO

x 

# control efficiencies applied in the emi ssion projections. This requirement is

expected to affect NO

x 

# emissions in all projection years.

2. MACT Standards

Table III-2 summarizes the control factors us ed to estimate the post-2005 effects of MACT

emission standards on volatile organic compounds (VOC), NO

x 

# , and PM emissions in the

projection years. The inform ation in this table was developed from EPA guidance on

estimating the criteria pollutant emission benefits of MACT standards (Page, 2007). Any post2005 MACT standards that have no expected cr iteria pollutant emission reductions according

to the draft EPA guidance were not included in Ta ble III-2. Table III-2 was circulated to the

states for review, and Wisconsin provided it s own estimates of the expected VOC and PM

emission reductions from these MACT standards in its state. The State of Michigan concurred

with the emission reduction estimates made by Wisconsin. Those VOC and PM emission

reduction percentages are shown in the two right- most columns of Table III-2. So, the control

factor file reflects the EPA estimated values for IL, IN, MN, and OH, and the Wisconsinprovided estimates for MI and WI.

3. Consent Decrees

Previous Pechan-developed control efficienci es by source (Pechan, 2005) and pollutant were

merged with the LADCO state 2005 point source file and control factor s assigned accordingly.

The 2005 point source control efficienci es (CEs) for sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

# ) and NO

x 

# for fluid

catalytic cracking units (FCCUs) and heaters and boilers were checked to see whether there is

any compliance by 2005. Pechan also added all MA CTEC revisions/additions from their earlier

report to the control factor file (MACTEC incor porated cases and settleme nts control factors for

refineries that were not evaluated for the 812 st udy) and made any changes/additions that were

provided by the state air pollution control agencies. Table III-3 lists all of the LADCO state

Non-EGU Point Sources affected by consent decr ees. These sources all have post-2005 control

factors applied in the analysis. There are tw o refineries in the st udy area who had either

complied with their consent decrees or curtailed applicable operations by 2005, so no future year

control factors were applied in this analysis. These two refineries are Premcor Refining in IL

and the Flint Hills Refinery in MN.PECHANSeptember200728Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable III-1. RICE Engines in Illinois Affected by NOxSIP CallId Number Device Process Device Description Pollutant%Reduction Comments027807AAC 0003 01 ENGINES 09-ENG AND 10-ENG NOX 59 50/50 for 2 engines =.5+.5(.18) = 59% reduction041804AAC 0009 01 ENGINE 1213 NOX 82041804AAC 0010 01 ENGINE 1214 NOX 82041804AAC 0011 01 ENGINE 1215 NOX 82041804AAC 0012 01 ENGINE 1216 NOX 82041804AAC 0013 01 ENGINE 1217 NOX 82073816AAA 0001 01 WORTHINGTON MLV-10 COMPRESSOR & GAS FIRED ENGINE #12 NOX 82073816AAA 0004 01 CLARK TCV-10 COMPRESSOR& GAS FIRED ENGINE ENGINE #9 NOX 82073816AAA 0012 01 WORTHINGTON MLV-10 COMPRESSOR AND GAS FIRED ENGINE NO. 13 NOX 82073816AAA 0013 01 WORTHINGTON MLV-10 COMPRESSOR AND GAS FIRED ENGINE NO. 14 NOX 82073816AAA 0014 01 WORTHINGTON MLV-10 COMPRESSOR AND GAS FIRED ENGINE NO. 15 NOX 82073816AAA 0015 01 WORTHINGTON MLV-14 ENGINE #10 NOX 82085809AAA 0010 01 3 CLARKCOMPRESSORS NOX 82093802AAF 0003 01 ENGINE E-1008 NOX 82113817AAA 0002 01 ENGINE EC21 NOX 82113817AAA 0003 01 ENGINE IC11 NOX 82113821AAA 0002 01 ENTERPRISE RECIP COMP EC-21 4000 MPEF 3.3.2-1 NOX 82113821AAA 0005 01 COOPER COMPRESSOR CC22 EF 3.3.2-1 4000 HP NOX 82149820AAB 0002 01 2 RECIPROCATING ENGINES (1013 - 1014) NOX 59 50/50 for 2 engines =.5+.5(.18) = 59% reduction149820AAB 0003 01 3 RECIPROCATING ENGINES (1015 - 1017) NOX 82167801AAA 0001 01 ENGINES1116 AND 1117 NOX 82167801AAA 0003 01 1-COOPER RECIPROCATING ENGINE, 4000HP, 1115 NOX 82167801AAA 0008 01 ENGINES1118 AND 1119 NOX 59 50/50 for 2 engines =.5+.5(.18) = 59% reductionPECHANSeptember200729Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable III-2. Post-2005 MACT Standards and Expected VOC, NOx, and PM ReductionsMACT Standard – Source CategoryCode of FederalRegulationsSubpartComplianceDate (existingsources)VOC(% Reduction)NOx(% Reduction)Total PM(% Reduction)Affected SCCsMACTCodeWisconsin andMichigan ValuesVOC PMAsphalt Processing and Asphalt RoofingManufactureLLLLL5/1/20068530505001, 30500101,30500102, 30505010,30601101041810 0Auto and Light Duty TrucksIIII4/26/20074040201601 to 40201632;4020169907020 0Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching andBattery StacksCCCCC4/14/2006030300304; 30300303030310 0Fabric Printing, Coating & DyeingOOOO5/29/20066040201101 to 40201199;40201201; 40201210071310 0Integrated Iron and SteelFFFFF5/20/2006(5)2030301501 to 3030159603050 10Iron and Steel FoundriesEEEEE4/22/20075304003XX, 304007XX03085 0Lime ManufacturingAAAAA1/5/200723305016XX04080 10Metal CanKKKK11/13/20067040201702; 40201703 to4020179907070 0Metal FurnitureRRRR5/23/20060402020XX10 0Misc. Coating ManufacturingHHHHH12/11/200664402026XX164210 0Misc. Metal Parts and ProductsMMMM1/2/20070402025XX10 0Misc. Organic Chemical Production andProcesses (MON)FFFF11/10/200666645200XX; 30113001 to30113007; 684300XX;30101005 to 30101099;68445001; 68445010;68445013; 68445020;68445022; 68445101;68445201; 30110002 to30110099; 64820001;64820010; 64821001;64821010; 64822001;64822010; 64823001;64823010; 64823001;64823010; 64880001;64882001; 64882002;64882599; 30105001;30105101 to 30105130;30801001; 31604001;31604002; 31600403;68510001; 68510010;68510011; 68580001;68582001; 68582002;68582599; 30101837;64610301 to 64610350;64610001 to 64610050;64610101 to 64610150;164110 0PECHANSeptember2007Table III-2 (continued)30Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportMACT Standard – Source CategoryCode of FederalRegulationsSubpartComplianceDate (existingsources)VOC(% Reduction)NOx(% Reduction)Total PM(% Reduction)Affected SCCsMACTCodeWisconsin andMichigan ValuesVOC PM64610201 to 64610250;64615001 to 64615030;64620001 to 64620038;64630001 to 64630083;64631001 to 64631083;64632001 to 64632083;64680001; 64682001;64682002; 64682501;64682502; 64682599;64130001 to 64130025;64130101 to 64130125;64130201 to 64130225;64131010 to 64131030;64132001 to 64132030;64133001 to 64133030;64180001; 64182001;64182002; 64182599;64615001; 64620001;65135001Organic Liquids DistributionEEEE2/3/20077040300102, 40300104,40300106, 40300107,40301010-40301021060210 0Plastic PartsPPPP4/19/20070402022XX10 0Plywood and Composite WoodProductsDDDD10/1/200754307007XX; 30700921 to30700971; 30701001 to30701057; 30700602 to307006611624Refractory Products ManufacturingSSSSS4/17/2006810040610 0Reinforced Plastic CompositesProductionWWWW4/21/2006390133710 0Site RemediationGGGGG10/8/2006500504001XX; 50400201,50400202; 504002XX;504100XX; 504101XX;504102XX; 504103XX;504102XX; 504103XX;04104XX; 504105XX;504106XX; 504107XX;50480001; 50482001;50482002; 50482599;50480004080510 0PECHANSeptember 2007Table III-2 (continued)31Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportMACT Standard – Source CategoryCode of FederalRegulationsSubpartComplianceDate (existingsources)VOC(% Reduction)NOx(% Reduction)Total PM(% Reduction)Affected SCCsMACTCodeWisconsin andMichigan ValuesVOC PMStationary Combustion TurbinesYYYY3/5/2007131720100101, 20100201,20200101, 20200103,20200201, 20200203,20200901, 20300102,20300202, 2030020301050 0Taconite Iron Ore ProcessingRRRRR10/30/2006006232302371 to 3230239904110 10Wood Building ProductsQQQQ5/28/200663040202101 to 40202199070310 0**Based on organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emission reductionsPECHANSeptember200732Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable III-3. LADCO State Non-EGU Point Sources Affected by Consent Decree Requirementsand Other On-the-Books ControlsIdentification CodesFCCU RequirementsHeater/Boiler RequirementsState County Facility* CompanyLocationStateSO2NOxSO2NOx18 089 00003 BP AmocoWhitingINFCU 500: Install wet gasscrubber; FCU 600: UseSO2adsorbing catalystadditive and/orhydrotreatment.FCU 600: InstallSCR; FCU 500: LowNOxcombustionpromoter and NOxadsorbing catalystadditiveElimination of oil burningand restricting H2S inrefinery fuel gasUse qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions by9632 tons per year (tpy).39 095 0448010246 BP AmocoToledoOHSO2catalyst additiveInstall SNCR systemElimination of oil burningand restricting H2S inrefinery fuel gasUse qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions by9632 tpy.17 197 197090AAI CITGO GlobalRefineryLemontILNew wet gas scrubberLow NOxcombustionpromoter (20 ppmvdlimit)Comply with NSPSSubparts A and J for fuelgas combustion devices.Eliminate fuel oil burning.Use qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions fromlisted units by at least 50% ofthe revised baseline17 119 119090AAA Conoco PhilipsGlobal RefineryRoxanna (WoodRiver)ILInstall new wet gasscrubber (25 ppmvd orlower)FCCU 1: Scrubberbased NOxemissionreduction technologyto achieve 20 ppmvdSubject to NSPS SubpartsAand J for fuel gascombustion devicesUse qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions fromcombustion units by 4951 tpy17 119 119090AAA Conoco PhilipsGlobal RefineryHartford (WoodRiver)ILInstall new wet gasscrubber (25 ppmvd orlower)FCCU 2: EnhancedSNCRSubject to NSPS SubpartsAand J for fuel gascombustion devicesUse qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions fromcombustion units by 4951 tpy17 197 197800AAA Exxon-MobilRefineryJolietILInstall new wet gasscrubber (25 ppmvd orlower)Install and operate anSCR systemAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability for heatersand boilers and reduce oreliminate fuel oil firingUse qualifying controls toreduce NOxemissions fromcombustion units17 033 033808AAB MarathonAshland RefineryRobinsonILExisting wet gasscrubberCatalyst additiveAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability for heatersand boilers and reduce oreliminate fuel oil firingReduce overall NOxemissions from the controlledheaters and boilers at MAPrefineries by 4,000 tpy.Control methods can include:SCR or SNCR; ULNB;technologies to reach 0.040lbs per MMBtu or lower;alternate SO2single burnertechnology to achieve 0.055lbs per MMBtu or lower; unitshutdowns.PECHANSeptember2007Table III-3 (continued)33Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportIdentification CodesFCCU RequirementsHeater/Boiler RequirementsState County Facility* CompanyLocationStateSO2NOxSO2NOx26 163 A9831 MarathonAshland RefineryDetroit MI SO2catalyst additive Catalyst additiveAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability for heaters andboilers and reduce oreliminate fuel oil firingReduce overall NOxemissions from thecontrolled heaters andboilers at MAP refineries by4,000 tpy. Control methodscan include: SCR or SNCR;ULNB; technologies toreach 0.040 lbs per MMBtuor lower; alternate SO2single burner technology toachieve 0.055 lbs perMMBtu or lower; unitshutdowns.27 163 2716300003 MarathonAshland RefinerySt Paul Park MN New wet gas scrubberon unit 1; catalystadditive on other unitCatalyst additiveAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability for heaters andboilers and reduce oreliminate fuel oil firingReduce overall NOxemissions from thecontrolled heaters andboilers at MAP refineries by4,000 tpy. Control methodscan include: SCR or SNCR;ULNB; technologies toreach 0.040 lbs per MMBtuor lower; alternate SO2single burner technology toachieve 0.055 lbs perMMBtu or lower; unitshutdowns.39 151 1576000301 MarathonAshland RefineryCanton OH SO2catalyst additive Catalyst additiveAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability for heaters andboilers and reduce oreliminate fuel oil firingReduce overall NOxemissions from thecontrolled heaters andboilers at MAP refineries by4,000 tpy. Control methodscan include: SCR or SNCR;ULNB; technologies toreach 0.040 lbs per MMBtuor lower; alternate SO2single burner technology toachieve 0.055 lbs perMMBtu or lower; unitshutdowns.39 095 0448010246 SunocoPetroleumRefineryToledo OH Install new wet gasscrubber to meet 25ppmvd SO2Install SCR systemsor alternatetechnology to meet 20ppmvdAccept NSPS Subpart Japplicability and reduce oreliminate fuel oil burningPECHANSeptember2007Table III-3 (continued)34Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportIdentification CodesState County Facility* CompanyLocationStateNotes17 115 115015AAEADM Decatur IL Settlement agreement17 143 143065AJEADM Peoria IL Settlement agreement17 001 001815AAFADM Quincy IL Settlement agreement18 173 00002Alcoa Warrick Units 1,2,3 IN Settlement agreement*Facility identification codes are thoseused in the 2002 point source files.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 35 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) provided information about the

expected emissions reductions associated with settlements affecting Michigan sources. The

information from Michigan DEQ was provided fo r Severstal (iron and steel), US Steel, and

Marathon refinery. For Seve rstal, the key information provided indicated that NO

x 

# emissions

after the summer 2007 would be reduced at the blast furnace B and C stoves via a low NO

x 

# burner (LNB) installation. A 50 percent NO

x 

# control factor was applied with 2007

implementation year based on information in th e Ozone Transport Rulemaking analysis about

the expected emission reduction of LNB applied to a blast furnace. For US Steel, the Michigan

DEQ-provided information indicated that PM controls would be in stalled during 2005 or 2006

on the basic oxygen furnace and blast furnace B, so it was assumed that these were base year

controls and no future year control factor was ap plied. For the Marathon refinery in Michigan,

the Michigan DEQ estimated that catalyst additives applied to the FCCU would reduce NO

x 

# emissions by 25-50 percent and SO 2 

# emissions by 60-80 percent. The midpoint of each range

was used to estimate post-2005 control factors for th is refinery. All other expected controls at

Marathon are to reduce PM emissions and were assumed to have occurred by 2005, so no future

year PM control factors were applied.

4. On-the-Books (OTB) Control Additions

Table III-3 lists on-the-books controls that were applied to individual f acilities/sources in the

future year control factor file. This inform ation was developed from the OTB updated control

factor file provided by LADCO from the 2002 ba se year projections. The compliance date

information in this file was used to eliminat e controls that had compliance dates of 2005 or

earlier. Ohio EPA provided informati on about the expected effects of NO

x 

# Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RAC T) rules in achieving post- 2005 emission reductions in the

Cleveland-Akron, Ohio 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. Table III-4 summarizes the source

categories, associated emission control equipmen t to meet the requirements, and the estimated

NO

x 

# control percentages.

Table III-4. Ohio RACT Rule Summary Cleveland/Akron 8-Hour Ozone

Nonattainment Area

Source Category Unit Size

(MMBtu/hour) NO

x 

# Control Estimated NO

x 

# Control

Efficiency

RICE Engines All Low Emission Combustion 80%

ICI Boilers 20-49 Burner Tune-up 10%

ICI Boilers 50-99 LNB+FGR 61%

ICI Boilers 100-249 LNB+FGR 61%

ICI Boilers >250 LNB+FGR 61%

Combustion Turbine All Dry LNB 70%

SOURCE: Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution Control.



# 5. Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART)

Table III-5 lists the BART-eligible sources fo r the states in the LADCO study region. In

instances where criteria air pollu tant control percentages (for SO 2 

# and NO

x 

# ) are listed in this

table, those control percentages were applied in estimating 2018 emissions.PECHANSeptember200736Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable III-5. BART Eligible Non-EGU SourcesEst. Emission ReductionState State ID Source Name CountyCountyID Source ID BART Emission Unit ID Description Stack ID SO2NOxILLINOIS 17 Conoco Phillips Madison 11D 119090AAAILLINOIS 17 Exxon Mobil Will 197 197800AAAILLINOIS 17 CITGO Will 197 197090AAIILLINOIS 17 National Steel –Granite CityMadison 119 119813AAIINDIANA 18 AGC DIVISIONALCOA POWERGENERATINGWarrick 173 2 Boiler #2 Dry Bottom, pulverizedcoal-fired boiler241-242 95 90Boiler #3 Dry Bottom pulverizedcoal-fired boiler242 95 90Boiler #4 Dry Bottom, pulverizedcoal-fired boiler243 95 90INDIANA 18 Alcoa Inc. – Warrick Warrick 173 7 105m.1, 10 POTLINE #3. ROOMS105 AND 106 gtc105M 95 40107M, 108M POTLINE #4. ROOMS107 AND 108 GTC107M 95 40109M,110M POTLINE #5, ROOMS109 AND 110, A-398109M 95 40111M,112M, POTLINE #6 95 40130m.1,104 potline #2, Rooms 103and 104, A-398103m.1 95 40134.63 HDC FURNACECOMLEXES1EH 0 40134.71 OFFLINES #2 134.71 0 40INDIANA 18 ESSROC CEMENTCORP. (Speed)Clark 19 8 EU20 Kiln #1 95 70EU21 Kiln #2 95 70INDIANA 18 GE PLASTICS MT.VERNON INC.Posey 129 2 08-706 CO AND ORGANICSULFIDE STREAMFROM PHOSGENEFED08-70670795 009-001 B&W NATURAL GASAND OIL FIREDBOILER09-001 0 7009-001 Riley Boiler 12-001 95 7012-001 Hot Oil Heater 0 009-002 LASKER BOILER 09-002 95 7509-002 ERIE BOILER 09-002 95 75PECHANSeptember2007Table III-5 (continued)37Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportEst. Emission ReductionState State ID Source Name CountyCountyIDSource ID BART Emission Unit ID Description Stack ID SO2NOxINDIANA 18 ISG-BURNSHARBOR (FormerlyBeth. Steel)Porter 127 1 460-01 #7 Boiler 4 95 7546002 #8 Boiler 5 95 75460-03 #9 Boiler 6 95 75460-04 #10 Boiler 7 95 75460-05 Boiler #11 8 95 75460-06 #12 Boiler 9 95 75512-06 #1 COKE BATTERYPUSHING11 0 0512-08 #1 Coke BatteryUnderfire13 95 75512-14 #2 COKE BATTERYPUSHING12 0 0512-16 #2 COKE BATTERYUNDERFIRE STACK14 95 75520 BLAST FURNACEFUGITIVES0 0520-04 SINTER WINDBOXSTACK25 95 75520-18 BLAST FURNACE DCASTHOUSEEMISSIONS33 0 0520-18 C BLAST FURNACESTOVES31 0 0520-19 BLAST FURNACE DSTOVES34 0 0520-19 BLAST FURNACE CCASTHOUSE33 0 0534 STEELMAKINGFUGITIVES0 0534-01 STEELMAKING HMDSTATION #157 0 0534-02 STEELMAKING HMD#259 0 0534-10 STEELMAKINGVESSELS #1 & #262 0 0534-11 STEELMAKINGVESSELS64 0 0534-23 STEELMAKING FMBOILER65 0 0PECHANSeptember 2007Table III-5 (continued)38Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportEst. Emission ReductionState State ID Source Name CountyCountyID Source ID BART Emission Unit ID Description Stack ID SO2NOx595-24 CASTER #1 80 0 0670-05 HOT STRIP FURNACE#190 95 75670-07 HOT STRIP #3FURNACE92 95 75670-07 HOT STRIP 91 95 75673-14 160" OKATE MILLFURNACE #1112 0 75673-15 160" PLATE MILLFURNACE #2113 0 75673-16.17 160" PLATE MILLFURNACES 4&5110 0 0673-18.19 160" PLATE MILLFURNACES 6&7111 0 0673-20 160" PLATE MILLFURNACE #8114 0 0674.26,27 110" PLATE MILLFURNACES #1122 0 0MICHIGAN 26 Lafarge Midwest Inc. Alpena 7 B1477 Kilns #1-#5MICHIGAN 26 Stone Container Corp. Ontonagon 131 A5754 Riley BoilerPaper Machine #2MICHIGAN 26 Tilden Mining Co Marquette103 B4885 Pelletizing Line #1, includeskiln, furnace, cooler, dryerBoiler #2Primary crusherMICHIGAN 26 Empire Iron Mining Marquette 103B1827 Pelletizing Lines #1 - #3 furnaceBoilers #1 - #3Primary crusherMICHIGAN 26 St. Mary’s Cement(CEMEX)Charlevoix 29 B1559 Kiln and pre-calcinerMICHIGAN 26 New Page Paper(Escanaba)Delta 41 A0884 Boiler #8Boiler #9Recovery furnaceLime kilnMINNESOTA 27 Ipsat Inland St. Louis 137 2713700062MINNESOTA 27 EVTAC-Fairlane St. Louis 137 2713700113MINNESOTA 27 National Steel(Keewatin)St. Louis 137 2713700063MINNESOTA 27 Hibbing Taconite St. Louis 137 2713700061MINNESOTA 27 USS Minntac St. Louis 137 2713700005MINNESOTA 27 Northshore Mining Lake 75 2707500003PECHANSeptember 2007Table III-5 (continued)39Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportEst. Emission ReductionState State ID Source Name CountyCountyID Source ID BART Emission Unit ID Description Stack ID SO2NOxN. DAKOTA 38 Great River Energy –Coal CreekMcLean 55 17N. DAKOTA 38 Basin Electric Power –Leland OldsMercer 57 1N. DAKOTA 38 Great River Energy –StantonMercer 57 4N. DAKOTA 38 Minnkota Power – MRYoungOliver 65 1OHIO 39 Mead Paper Division Ross 67 671010028WISCONSIN 55 Georgia-PacificConsumer Products(Formerly Fort James)Brown 9 405032870 Boiler B26 stoker (coal, tire andother fuels), 350mmBtu/hrS10 85 50Boiler B27 cyclone, 615 mmBtu/hr S10 85 88

# PECHAN September 2007



# 40 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# B. AREA SOURCE/MAR CONTROLS

1. Area Sources

Pechan worked with the LADCO states to dete rmine how to estimate the effect of federal/

state/local rules on area source category emissions. The sub-sections below describe the results

of this effort.

a. VOC Solvent Categories

For VOC emissions from consumer products and architectural and maintenance coatings, it was

decided to estimate post-2005 VOC emission reducti on credits using EPA guidance to states for

estimating the benefits of three Federal ru les being promulgated during calendar year 2007

(Harnett, 2007). These rules will establish or amend VOC content limits for (1) aerosol coatings

(new rule), (2) architectural and industrial mainte nance (AIM) coatings (amendments), and

(3) household and institutional consumer products (amendments).

EPA estimated that the aerosol coatings rule will achieve the equivalent of a 19 percent reduction

in mass VOC emissions from the 1990 baseline. The year 1990 represents the baseline, since

there has been no previous Federal rulemaking for aerosol coatings. The creditable reduction

that may be claimed is 0.114 pounds per capita. In the LADCO state 2005 emission inventory,

this VOC emission reduction is applied to SCC 2460500000, which are Coatings and related

products. A 12 percent VOC emission reduction is applied to SCC 2460500000 in each forecast

analysis year (i.e., 2009, 2012, and 2018) to estimate the benefit of the federal aerosol coatings

rule. This percentage is lower than the equi valent value estimated by EPA because the aerosol

coatings rule is a subset of the Coatings and related products categ ory represented by SCC

2460500000.

For AIM coatings, EPA estimates that the amende d Federal AIM rule will achieve a reduction of

31 percent from the post-1998 Federa l rule baseline of 3.6 pounds per capita. This is a creditable

reduction of 1.1 pounds per capita. AIM coatin g emission reductions are applied to the

following SCCs in the base year LADCO i nventory for each analysis year: 2401001000;

2401002000; 2401003000; 2401008000; 2401008999. 2



# For consumer products, EPA has calculated that the amended Federal rule will achieve a VOC

reduction of approximately 29 percent beyond that achieved by the 1998 Federal rule. This is a

creditable reduction of 0.9 pounds per capita. Emission reductions from the Federal rule are

applied to all Consumer Product source cate gories (SCCs 2460*) in each analysis year.

b. Portable Fuel Containers

For portable fuel containers ( PFCs), while there are state-by-st ate differences in likely rule

adoption dates, all state’s control factors are ba sed on the EPA mobile source air toxics (MSAT)

rule requirements. EPA adopted emission standa rds for portable fuel containers (such as gas

2 

# Note that subsequent to delivery of the area source/MAR control file, Wisconsin stated that this last SCC should

not be included for their state.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 41 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# cans) under the consumer products authority of th e Clean Air Act. Starting with containers

manufactured in 2009, the standard limits eva poration and permeation emissions from these

containers to 0.3 grams of hydrocarbons per gallon per day. EPA also adopted test procedures

and a certification and compliance program in order to ensure that containers meet the emission

standard over a range of in-use conditions.

The VOC emission reduction benefits were estimat ed assuming that the new rule affects PFC

sales starting during 2009, and th at each PFC that meets the MSAT standard has 75 percent

lower emissions than the PFC being replaced.

To account for the fact that grow th in the portable fuel contai ner population and turnover from

old to new containers will be affected by the MSAT rule, 3 

# Pechan calculated projection year

emissions using the following equation:

(Eq. 1)

where:

Q N 

# = emissions in projection year

Q

o 

# = emissions in base year

R i 

# = annual retirement rate

F

e 

# = emission factor ratio for existing sources (1.0)

G N 

# = projection year growth factor (projection year activity/base year activity)

F

n 

# = emission factor ratio for new s ources relative to existing sources

t = number of years between ba se year (2002) and projection year

The first term in the equation represents ne w source growth and cont rols, the second term

accounts for retirement and controls for exis ting sources, and the third term accounts for

replacement source controls. Because retirement was not estimated using a constant annual rate

(5 percent were assumed to be retired in the fi rst year, with 10 percent retired in each additional

forecast year), Pechan replaced the (1-R i 

# ) t 

# terms in this equation w ith the appropriate proportion

of containers retired between the base year a nd the appropriate forecast year. Pechan then

computed an overall emission reduction for each future year of interest by comparing the

forecast year controlled emissions calculated from this equation to the forecast year uncontrolled

emissions. For example, an overall VOC emissi on reduction of 26.4 percent was computed for

Illinois. Pechan then back-calculated the appr opriate rule pe netration (RP) value for each

forecast year based on the overall emissions reduction, the 75 percent CE value, and an rule

effectiveness (RE) of 100 percen t (e.g., the calculated RP for Illinois for 2012 is 35.2 percent).

3 

# Note that to simplify the analysis P echan assumed that all post-2005 new container growth would be affected by

the MSAT rule (due to low growth rates, this assumpti on does not have a significant impact on the overall emission

reduction estimates of this rule). 

# ( ) 

# [ ] () () ⎭ ⎬ ⎫

⎩ ⎨ ⎧ ⎥ ⎦ ⎤ ⎢ ⎣ ⎡ ⎥ ⎦ ⎤ ⎢ ⎣ ⎡

− − +

− +

− = n e n 

# F t

i R F t

i R F N G

o Q N Q 1 1 1 1

# PECHAN September 2007



# 42 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# c. Residential Wood Heating (Woods toves and Fireplace Inserts)

Pechan developed control fact ors by pollutant and year to account for the effect of the

replacement of retired wood stoves/inserts that emit at pre-residential wood heater new source

performance standard (NSPS) levels,. These c ontrol factors were developed using an annual

2 percent retirement rate for wood stoves/fire places along with pre- and post-NSPS wood stove

and fireplace emission factors. SCCs for "cont rolled" wood stoves and fireplace inserts have no

control factors applied. Pechan developed updated residential wood combustion control factors

for the LADCO states using the same algorithms applied previously (Pechan, 2004). Table III-6

displays the emission reduction, control efficiency, and rule pe netration percentages modeled.

d. Stage II Vehicle Refueling

Pechan developed updated (2005 base year) Stag e II vehicle refueling control factors via

MOBILE runs for the LADCO states. Onroad refue ling control factors were calculated based on

the percentage difference between the projection year (2009, 2012, and 2018) MOBILE6

refueling emission factors and the 2005 MO BILE6 refueling emission factors.

MOBILE6 emission factors were calculated at Janua ry and July temperature and fuel conditions.

July emission factors were used as the surr ogate for the five-month ozone season (May through

September) and the January emission factors were used as the surrogates for the remaining seven

months. Temperatures modele d were the January and July average daily monthly maximum and

minimum temperatures for each state (i.e., Illi nois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and

Wisconsin) based on 30-year average temperatur e data, as used in EPA’s second Section 812

Prospective analysis. MOBILE6 input files were created for each unique combination of:

January and July Reid vapor pressure, reformul ated gasoline, oxygenated fuel, gasoline sulfur,

and Stage II control programs for each of the st ates mentioned above. Fuel data and Stage II

control program information for each state a nd corresponding projection year were based on

EPA’s National Mobile Inventory Model (N MIM) County Database (version NDC20060201).

Data extracted from NMIM’s County Database fo r these input parameters were based on January

and July values.

Stage II control programs for IL, IN, and WI bega n in 1998 with a phase-in year of one year and

with a percent efficiency value of 86.0 per cent for LDGVs and LDGTs in the program.

Similarly, the HDGVs in the program have 86.0 pe rcent efficiency. For Ohio, these control

programs began in 1993 with a two-year phase -in and 77.0 percent efficiency for both the

LDGVs + LDGTs and HDGVs in the program.

Modeling these temperature, fuel, and Stage II control inputs (where applicable), Pechan

calculated MOBILE6 emission factors for calendar years 2005, 2009, 2012, and 2018.

The resulting MOBILE6 emission factors were fi rst weighted according to the default MOBILE6

VMT mix to determine the weighted average refu eling emission factor fo r all gasoline vehicle

types. The resulting January and July emission factors were weighted together according to the

number of days in the seven-month season (212 days) and the five-month ozone season (153).PECHANSeptember200743Development of 2005 Base YearGrowth and Control Factorsfor LADCO - Final ReportTable III-6. Residential Wood Combustion NSPS Emission Reductions(percentage values)2009 2012 2018SCC SCC Description PollutantReductionControlEfficiencyRulePenetration ReductionControlEfficiencyRulePenetration ReductionControlEfficiencyRulePenetration2104008001 Total Fireplaces CO 2.9 55.0 5.3 4.9 55.0 8.9 8.5 55.0 15.52104008010 Total Woodstoves CO 3.1 55.0 5.6 5.2 55.0 9.5 9.0 55.0 16.42104008000 Total Fireplaces & Woodstoves CO 3.0 55.0 5.5 5.1 55.0 9.3 8.9 55.0 16.22104008001 Total Fireplaces NOX 1.9 28.6 6.6 3.3 28.6 11.5 5.6 28.6 19.62104008010 Total Woodstoves NOX 2.0 28.6 7.0 3.4 28.6 11.9 5.8 28.6 20.32104008000 Total Fireplaces & Woodstoves NOX 2.0 28.6 7.0 3.3 28.6 11.5 5.8 28.6 20.32104008001 Total Fireplaces PM10-PRI 2.3 35.9 6.4 4.0 35.9 11.1 6.9 35.9 19.22104008010 Total Woodstoves PM10-PRI 2.5 35.9 7.0 4.2 35.9 11.7 7.2 35.9 20.12104008000 Total Fireplaces & Woodstoves PM10-PRI 2.4 35.9 6.7 4.1 35.9 11.4 7.1 35.9 19.82104008001 Total Fireplaces PM25-PRI 2.3 35.9 6.4 4.0 35.9 11.1 6.9 35.9 19.22104008010 Total Woodstoves PM25-PRI 2.5 35.9 7.0 4.2 35.9 11.7 7.2 35.9 20.12104008000 Total Fireplaces & Woodstoves PM25-PRI 2.4 35.9 6.7 4.1 35.9 11.4 7.1 35.9 19.82104008001 Total Fireplaces VOC 5.9 77.4 7.6 9.8 77.4 12.7 17.1 77.4 22.12104008010 Total Woodstoves VOC 5.6 77.4 7.2 9.4 77.4 12.1 16.4 77.4 21.22104008000 Total Fireplaces & Woodstoves VOC 5.4 77.4 7.0 9.2 77.4 11.9 16.0 77.4 20.7Note: Rule effectiveness (RE) of 100 percent for each SCC/year.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 44 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# After this was done for all of the modeled years and state or sub-state ar eas, the overall control

efficiency for refueling, due to fleet turnover, was calculated ba sed on the percentage difference

between the 2005 and corresponding pr ojection year emission factors. These control efficiencies

were then assigned to individual counties, base d on the mapping of fuel and Stage II control

parameters to those modeled in the MOBILE6 files.

2. MAR Sources (Locomotives and Marine Vessels)

EPA issued a proposed rule this spring affecting future criteria pollutant emissions from railroad

locomotives and commercial marine vessels (C MVs) (EPA, 2007b). These are the two off-road

source categories that are addres sed in this report. Base year emissions (2005) information for

these two source categories was develope d by ENVIRON under contract to LADCO

(ENVIRON, 2007a and b).

Control factors for criteria air pollutants were developed using Chapter 3 (Emissions Inventory)

of EPA’s “Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from

Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters per

Cylinder” (EPA, 2007b). This chap ter presents EPA’s analysis of the emissions impact of the

proposed rule for three source ca tegories affected: commerci al marine diesel engines,

recreational marine diesel engine s, and locomotives. The proposed control requirements include

NOx and PM emission standards for Category 1 and Category 2 commercial marine diesel

engines (both above and below 37 kilowatts). New NOx and PM emission standards would also

apply to all recrea tional diesel engines and locomotives. There are no new standards for HC or

CO; however, the PM standards are also expected to decrease HC emissions.

For locomotives, the EPA Regulatory Impact Anal ysis (RIA) chapter was used to develop 2009,

2012 and 2018 estimates of baseline and post-co ntrol emissions by po llutant by locomotive

usage. This information is summarized in Ta ble III-7. The RIA examin ed the effect of the

proposed rule on emissions for (1) large line haul , (2) large switch, (3) small railroads, and (4)

passenger commuter trains. Each of these four usage types was assigned to the base year 2005

emission inventory SCCs. The SCC assignments are shown at the bottom of Table III-7.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 45 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table III-7. Locomotive Emissions Reported in EPA Draft RIA

Large Line Haul Large Switch Small Railroads Passenger Commuter

Year Baseline Controlled Baseline Controlled Baseline Controlled Baseline Controlled

Volatile Organic Compounds

2006 43,874 5,501 2,891 1,609

2009 43,486 42,008 5,696 5,552 3,032 3,032 1,546 1546

2012 42,891 35,890 5,898 5,364 3,179 3,179 1,476 1301

2018 41,684 23,607 6,325 5,066 3,497 3,497 1,332 771

PM-2.5

2006 27,082 2,202 907 992

2009 24,216 23,661 2,120 2,070 870 870 861 861

2012 23,800 20,672 2,188 2,006 912 912 819 738

2018 22,542 14,516 2,309 1,896 991 991 719 466

PM-10

2006 27,919 2,270 935 1,023

2009 24,965 24,393 2,185 2,134 897 897 888 888

2012 24,536 21,311 2,256 2,068 940 940 845 761

2018 23,240 14,965 2,380 1,954 1,022 1,022 741 480

Oxides of Nitrogen

2006 779,842 86,861 37,690 38,466

2009 755,490 751,364 88,573 87,999 39,528 39,528 32,338 32,338

2012 730,031 692,606 88,909 86,614 41,456 41,456 27,212 25,933

2018 708,525 608,010 90,875 84,612 44,299 44,299 22,559 19,496

SCC(s) 2285002006 2285002010 2285002007 2285002008; 2285002009



# Because the federal locomotive emission standa rds modeled under previous LADCO contracts

will continue to achieve emission reductions, it was necessary for Pechan to adjust the

information in the new RIA to estimate the total post-base year reductions from the effects of

both the existing and proposed locomotive standa rds. Pechan computed a revised set of

projected emissions for modeling years 2009, 2012, and 2018 that reflect application of EPA’s

assumed locomotive growth rate (1.6 percent per year) to the base year (2006) emissions from

their analysis. This step was used to estim ate the emissions for each modeling year excluding

the effects of both sets of emission standards. Next, Pechan computed the percentage reduction

in emissions between the revised emissions in each modeling year and th e controlled emissions

reported in EPA’s draft RIA. Table III-8 show s how the revised baseli ne and percent reduction

for each modeling year. For example, for la rge line haul railroads, the baseline 2009

uncontrolled VOC emissions are estimated to be 46,014 tons nationally. Cont rolled emissions of

42,008 tons represent an 8.7 per cent VOC reduction from this uncontrolled emission estimate

(46,014 – 42,008 = 4,010; 4,010/46,014 * 100 = 8.7).

# PECHAN September 2007



# 46 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table III-8. Percentage Reductions Associated with Federal Locomotive

Standards

Large Line Haul Large Switch Small Railroads Passenger Commuter

Year Revised

Baseline %

Reduction Revised

Baseline %

Reduction Revised

Baseline %

Reduction Revised

Baseline %

Reduction

Volatile Organic Compounds

2006

2009 46,014 8.7% 5,769 3.8% 3,032 0.0% 1,687 8.4%

2012 48,258 25.6% 6,051 11.3% 3,180 0.0% 1,770 26.5%

2018 53,080 55.5% 6,655 23.9% 3,498 0.0% 1,947 60.4%

PM-2.5

2006

2009 28,403 16.7% 2,309 10.4% 951 8.5% 1,040 17.2%

2012 29,788 30.6% 2,422 17.2% 998 8.6% 1,091 32.4%

2018 32,765 55.7% 2,664 28.8% 1,097 9.7% 1,200 61.2%

PM-10

2006

2009 29,281 16.7% 2,381 10.4% 981 8.5% 1,073 17.2%

2012 30,709 30.6% 2,497 17.2% 1,028 8.6% 1,125 32.4%

2018 33,777 55.7% 2,746 28.9% 1,131 9.7% 1,238 61.2%

Oxides of Nitrogen

2006

2009 817,877 8.1% 91,097 3.4% 39,528 0.0% 40,342 19.8%

2012 857,766 19.3% 95,540 9.3% 41,456 0.0% 42,310 38.7%

2018 943,477 35.6% 105,087 19.5% 45,599 2.8% 46,537 58.1%

SCC(s) 2285002006 2285002010 2285002007 2285002008; 2285002009

Note: emissions reported in short tons.



# Analogous control factor calculations to those de scribed above for locomotives were used to

compute total CMV emission reduction values representing the effects of both existing and

proposed emission standards. Table III-9 presents the EPA baseline emissions, Pechan’s revised

baseline emissions (computed using EPA’s 0.9 percent annual growth assumption), EPA’s

controlled emissions, and the percentage reducti on estimates applied in this analysis. For

example, the CMV standards are expected to reduce VOC emissions by 33.9 percent in 2018.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 47 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table III-9. Percentage Reductions A ssociated with Federal CMV Standards

Emissions (short tons)

Year Baseline Revised

Baseline Controlled %

Reduction

Volatile Organic Compounds

2005 17,295

2009 16,870 17,926 16,863 5.9%

2012 16,495 18,414 16,344 11.2%

2018 16,034 19,431 12,851 33.9%

PM-2.5

2005 30,042

2009 27,327 31,138 27,324 12.2%

2012 26,657 31,987 26,582 16.9%

2018 22,553 33,753 19,308 42.8%

PM-10

2005 30,972

2009 28,172 32,102 28,169 12.3%

2012 27,481 32,977 27,403 16.9%

2018 23,251 34,798 19,905 42.8%

Oxides of Nitrogen

2005 825,229

2009 781,105 855,341 781,105 8.7%

2012 743,915 878,643 742,453 15.5%

2018 686,966 927,171 591,991 36.2%

Sulfur Dioxide

2005 82,543

2009 46,838 85,555 46,839 45.3%

2012 42,515 87,886 42,515 51.6%

2018 6,054 92,740 5,630 93.9%

Carbon Monoxide

2005 153,499

2009 149,966 159,100 149,966 5.7%

2012 146,227 163,434 146,227 10.5%

2018 140,443 172,461 140,443 18.6%



# For commercial marine diesel engines, the RIA examines expected rule emission benefits for

four different engine types/sizes . The total CMV emission benefits in each year were used and

applied equally to most of the affected SCCs in the 2005 inventory. However, Pechan applied

rule penetration (RP) values to two CMV S CCs based on an ENVIRON table indicating RP

values of less than 100 percent for these SCCs (see Table III-10).

# PECHAN September 2007



# 48 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table III-10. Commercial Marine Vessel Rule Penetration Values

Percentage of Engines Affected by Proposed EPA Standards Source

Category

Code (SCC) Source

Definition Purpose Geographic

Area NOx PM-10 HC CO SOx

River Traffic 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 2280002023 Push Boats Barge Freight

Lake Traffic 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002021 Tugs Vessel assist

and support

functions Near port 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280003200 Mid-Great

Lakes 85% 81% 86% 86% 77%

2280003100 Deep draft Laker and

ocean-going

large vessels Near port 81% 71% 87% 83% 63%

2280002022 Ferries River or lake

ferrying Regular routes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002024 Other

Commercial

Vessels Excursion

boats

primarily Near dock 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002025 Dredges Dredging

projects Varies 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002029 Support

Vessels General work

boats Near port 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002030,

2280004030 1 

# Commercial

Fishing Market

fishing Great Lakes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2280002040,

2280004040 1 

# Military Coast Guard

and Navy Great Lakes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

# PECHAN September 2007



# 49 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# SECTION IV. PREPARATION OF GROWTH AND CONTROL

FILES

This section describes the contents of the grow th and control factor files submitted to LADCO

earlier this month. The first s ubsection discusses the preparation of the point and area source/

MAR factor file and the revised NONROAD model growth file. The fina l subsection describes

the contents of the c ontrol factor files.

Table IV-1 presents the RPO Data Exchange Pr otocol Format for reporting emission growth and

control data. Pechan utilized this format to cr eate growth and control f actor files for LADCO.

Because the growth factors ( unlike the control factors) do not differ by pollutant, Pechan

developed a separate file contai ning only the point and area source/ MAR growth factors. Pechan

revised the growth packet portion of the NONROAD model growth file ( NATION.GRW ) to

replace the default model equipment population gr owth rates with growth rates based on more

recent/more region-specific information. Two sets of control factor files we re prepared: one for

area source/MAR categories and one for point source categories. The point and area

source/MAR growth and control files were develope d in fixed field ascii format. The format of

the default NONROAD model growth file was re tained in the revised version prepared for

LADCO. The following subsections describe the contents of the gr owth and control factor files.



# A. GROWTH FACTORS

Pechan compiled the LADCO region growth factor information into the file

$LADCO_2005_GF_Final_RPO.txt . Table IV-2 displays the RPO Data Exchange Protocol

Format fields and identifies the fields that were p opulated in this file. Th e file contains separate

records for each SCC/state for each year between 2006 and 2018 (population-based growth

indicator records are reported by SCC/state/county because population projections were available

at the county-level).

Pechan revised the input file used by the NONROAD model ( NATION.GRW ) to reflect

historical equipment population changes and to estimate future equipment population changes.

In particular, Pechan incorporated LADCO st ate-specific records to the GROWTH packet

portion of this file. The fixed field format of the data in this packet is as follows:

Characters Description

1-5 FIPS code (00000 = applies to entire na tion; ss000 = applies to all of state ss)

6-10 subregion code (left blank)

11-15 year of estimate (4-digit year)

17-20 indicator code (alphanumeri c code identified within NONROAD)

26-45 value for indicator

# PECHAN September 2007



# 50 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table IV-1. RPO Data Exchange Protoc ol Format for Growth/Control Data

Field Name Field Description Field

Length

RECORD TYPE A code that identifies the type of record (G for growth, C for

control) 2

COUNTRY CODE A code that identifies the country (US = United States) 2

STATE PROVINCE TRIBAL CODE The code for the state/province/tribe 4

COUNTY FIPS The FIPS code for the county 3

SIC 4-digit SIC, or 2 digit SIC with remaining digits blank (not zero) 4

SCC EPA source classification code or a fraction of the code 10

SITE ID Unique state/local/tribal ID reported consistently over time 15

EMISSION UNIT ID Unique state/local/tribal ID reported consistently over time 6

EMISSION RELEASE POINT ID State/ local/tribal ID for point /location where emissions are

released to ambient air 6

POLLUTANT CODE Pollutant code 9

PROCESS ID Unique state/local/tribal ID reported consistently over time 6

BASE DATE Date that the control st rategy comes into effect 6

FUTURE DATE Future date that the c ontrol strategy affects 6

PRIMARY CONTROL EQUIPMENT CODE Primary control equipment code 10

BASE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY Base year % control efficiency(60% reduction = 60) 6

FUTURE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY Future year % control efficiency(60% reduction = 60) 6

FUTURE DATE GROWTH FACTOR Growth factor based on changes in throughput, economic

growth (unrelated to controls). This is an absolute growth rate

not an annual growth rate. 11

CONTROL TYPE MACT, RACT, LAER, SIPCALL, BART, etc 10

FUTURE DATE CHEMICAL SPECIATION

PROFILE Code matching speciate chemical speciation profile unless in

base year 6

ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS CAP Allowable emissions cap units must be in TONS/day 10

MARKET PENETRATION OF NEW

SPECIATION PROFILE Fraction of future year emissions using new speciation profile 6

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 3 (Field used to enter future year control efficiency value where

available) 10

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 2 (Field used to enter future year rule effectiveness value where

available) 10

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 1 (Field used to enter future year RP value where available) 10

CONTROL DESCRIPTION A text description of the control 80

PRIMARY CONTACT Email address of the primary c ontact/developer of this record 30

# PECHAN September 2007



# 51 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table IV-2. Fields Populated in Growth Factor File

Field Name Populated in Growth Factor File?

RECORD TYPE Yes

COUNTRY CODE Yes

STATE PROVINCE TRIBAL CODE Yes

COUNTY FIPS Yes (with “000” except for population data)

SIC No

SCC Yes

SITE ID No

EMISSION UNIT ID No

EMISSION RELEASE POINT ID No

POLLUTANT CODE No

PROCESS ID No

BASE DATE Yes

FUTURE DATE Yes

PRIMARY CONTROL EQUIPMENT CODE No

BASE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY No

FUTURE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY No

FUTURE DATE GROWTH FACTOR Yes

CONTROL TYPE No

FUTURE DATE CHEMICAL SPECIATION PROFILE No

ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS CAP No

MARKET PENETRATION OF NE W SPECIATION PROFILE No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 3 (future year CE) No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 2 (future year RE) No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 1 (future year RP) No

CONTROL DESCRIPTION No

PRIMARY CONTACT Yes



# B. CONTROL FACTORS

Pechan compiled control factors for the LADCO states in two sets of ascii f iles: one set for point

source controls ( LADCO 2005 Base Year Point Control File.txt ), and the other set for area

source/MAR controls ( LADCO 2005 Base Year Area Source and MAR Control File.txt ).

1. Point Source Control Factors

The LADCO 2005 Base Year Point Control File.txt file reports control information at the

Process ID-level and for the specif ic date that each control is e xpected to be implemented. Note

that the Base Date Control Efficiency field is populated with a zero for every record because

Pechan did not have any base year control information other than that reported in the base year

inventory supplied by LADCO. LADCO should rely on the control information in the base year

inventory to identify the base year level of control. For MA CT standards, the point source

control factors are incremental to base year cont rol levels. Because all other point source control

# PECHAN September 2007



# 52 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# factors represent absolute control levels, L ADCO should subtract any existing 2005 inventory

level of control from the control factor leve l of control to determ ine net reductions for nonMACT controls. Pechan found very few point source records with control information, so

LADCO should expect very little control ov erlap between the 2005 inve ntory and the control

file. Table IV-3 identifies the RPO Data Exchange Protocol fields that are populated in the point

source control file.

2. Area Source and MAR Control Factors

Pechan compiled the area source and MAR control f actor information into a single ascii file that

reports the level of control for each year of in terest (2009, 2012, and 2018). In cases where there

is no change in emission reduction after the initia l implementation year, the level of control is

repeated for each year. For controls where em ission reductions increase over time (due to

increased levels of RP), the level of control in creases for each successive modeling year. Except

for the single control for which emission reduc tions are county-specific (Stage II Vehicle

Refueling), the area source and MAR c ontrol factor file is expressed at the state-level. In cases

where it was feasible to do so, Pechan populated the 5 th 

# , 4 th 

# , and 3 rd 

# fields from the end of each

control factor file (“RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE” in the RPO Data Exchange Protocol

Format) with future year CE, RE, and RP values, respectively (the field “FUTURE DATE

CONTROL EFFICIENCY” was populated with th e overall percentage emission reduction).

Table IV-4 identifies the RPO Data Exchange Prot ocol fields that are pop ulated in this file.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 53 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table IV-3. Fields Populated in Po int Source Control Factor File

RPO Data Exchange Protocol Format Field Name Populated in Point

Source Control

Factor File

RECORD TYPE Yes

COUNTRY CODE Yes

STATE PROVINCE TRIBAL CODE Yes

COUNTY FIPS Yes

SIC Yes

SCC Yes

SITE ID Yes

EMISSION UNIT ID Yes

EMISSION RELEASE POINT ID Yes

POLLUTANT CODE Yes

PROCESS ID Yes

BASE DATE Yes

FUTURE DATE 1 

# Yes

PRIMARY CONTROL EQUIPMENT CODE No

BASE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY 2 

# Yes

FUTURE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY 3 

# Yes

FUTURE DATE GROWTH FACTOR No

CONTROL TYPE Yes

FUTURE DATE CHEMICAL SPECIATION PROFILE No

ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS CAP No

MARKET PENETRATION OF NE W SPECIATION PROFILE No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 3 (future year CE) No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 2 (future year RE) No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 1 (future year RP) No

CONTROL DESCRIPTION Yes

PRIMARY CONTACT Yes

1 

# Represents date that control is first implemented



# . 2 

# All records populated with “0" - LADCO should rely on control information reported in base year inventory.

3 

# Populated with overall percentage emission reduction.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 54 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Table IV-4. Fields Populated in Ar ea Source/MAR Control Factor File

RPO Data Exchange Protocol Format Field Name Populated in Area

Source/MAR Control

Factor File

RECORD TYPE Yes

COUNTRY CODE Yes

STATE PROVINCE TRIBAL CODE Yes

COUNTY FIPS Yes

SIC No

SCC Yes

SITE ID No

EMISSION UNIT ID No

EMISSION RELEASE POINT ID No

POLLUTANT CODE Yes

PROCESS ID No

BASE DATE Yes

FUTURE DATE Yes

PRIMARY CONTROL EQUIPMENT CODE No

BASE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY Yes

FUTURE DATE CONTROL EFFICIENCY 1 

# Yes

FUTURE DATE GROWTH FACTOR No

CONTROL TYPE No

FUTURE DATE CHEMICAL SPECIATION PROFILE No

ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS CAP No

MARKET PENETRATION OF NE W SPECIATION PROFILE No

RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 3 (future year CE) Yes 2



# RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 2 (future year RE) Yes 2



# RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE FIELD 1 (future year RP) Yes 2



# CONTROL DESCRIPTION Yes

PRIMARY CONTACT Yes

1 

# Populated with overall percentage emission reduction (product of CE, RE, and RP).

2 

# Not populated for Federal locomotive standards or Stage II Vehicle Refueling control program.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 55 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# SECTION V. REFERENCES

BLS, 2007: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “State Occupational Em ployment Projections,

Long-Term,” accessed from http://www.projectionscentr al.com/projections.asp, Office of

Employment Projections, Washi ngton, DC. Accessed May 2007.

DOE, 2007a: U.S. Department of Energy, “A nnual Energy Outlook 2007, with Projections

through 2030,” DOE/EIA-0383(2007), Energy In formation Administration, Office of

Integrated Analysis and Forecasti ng, Washington, DC. February 2007.

DOE, 2007b: U.S. Department of Energy, “State Energy Consumption, Price, and Expenditure

Estimates (SEDS),” accessed from http:/ /www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/_seds.html,

Energy Information Administration, Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting,

Washington, D.C. Accessed April 2007.

ENVIRON, 2007a: ENVIRON International Corporation, “Draft LADCO 2005 Commercial

Marine Emissions,” prepared for Lake Michig an Air Directors Cons ortium, Des Plaines,

IL, March 2, 2007.

ENVIRON, 2007b: ENVIRON International Corporation, “Draft LADCO 2005 Locomotive

Emissions,” prepared for Lake Michigan Ai r Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL,

February 2007.

EPA, 2004: U.S. Environmental Protection Ag ency, “National Emission Inventory—Ammonia

Emissions from Animal Husbandry Operati ons, Draft Report,” (no further identifying

information available). January 2004.

EPA, 2007a: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2000,”

data for LADCO states accessed from http://www.epa.gov/owm/mtb/cwns/index.htm,

Office of Wastewater Management, Washington, DC. Accessed May 2007.

EPA, 2007b: U.S. Environmental Protection Ag ency, “Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis:

Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotive Engines and Marine

Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 Lite rs per Cylinder – Chapter 3: Emission

Inventory,” Assessment and Standards Di vision, Office of Transportation and Air

Quality, EPA420-D-07-001, March 2007.

FAA, 2007: U.S. Federal Aviation Administratio n, “Terminal Area Forecast System,” data for

LADCO states accessed from http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp , Office of

Aviation Policy and Plans, Wa shington, DC. Accessed March 2007.

Freedonia, 2006: The Freedonia Group, Inc., “Solvents to 2010, U.S. Industry Study with

Forecasts to 2010 & 2015,” Study #2055, Cleveland, OH, April 2006.

# PECHAN September 2007



# 56 Development of 2005 Base Year Growth and

Control Factors for LADCO - Final Report 

# Harnett, 2007: William T. Harnett, “Guidance for Estimating VOC and NO

x 

# Emission Changes

from MACT Standards,” Memorandum to Regional Air Division Directors, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Re search Triangle Park, NC, May 11, 2007.

Metra, 2007: Metra, “2007 Metra Program and Budget,” accessed from

http://metrarail.com/Budget/2007BudgetBook.pdf , Chicago, IL, May 2007.

Page, 2007: Stephen D. Page, “Emission Re duction Credit for Three Federal Rules for

Categories of Consumer and Commercial Pr oducts under Section 183(e) of the Clean Air

Act,” Memorandum to Air Division Directors, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, NC, May 30, 2007.

Pechan, 2004: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc ., “Development of Growth and Control Factors

for Lake Michigan Air Directors Consor tium (LADCO) – Final Report,” Durham, NC,

prepared for Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL, December 15,

2004.

Pechan, 2005: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc ., “Development of Updated Growth and Control

Factors for Lake Michigan Air Direct ors Consortium (LADCO) – Draft Report,”

Durham, NC, prepared for Lake Michigan Ai r Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL,

December 29, 2005.