## ERG No. 0227.00.001.001



# EMISSIONS FROM OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION FACILITIES

FINAL REPORT

TCEQ Contract 582-7-84003

Work Order No. 1

Prepared for:

Mr. Bertie Fernando, P.E.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Air Quality Division

Mail Code 206

P.O. Box 13087

Austin, Texas 78711-3087

Prepared by:

Eastern Research Group, Inc.

1600 Perimeter Park Drive

Suite 200

Morrisville, North Carolina 27560

August 31, 2007

# i TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................... iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... vi

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose and Objectives........................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Report Organization............................................................................................. 1-2

2. CHARACTERIZATION OF OIL AND GAS SOURCES INVENTORIED.................. 2-1

2.1 Definition of Oil and Gas Sources and SCCs ...................................................... 2-1

2.2 Emission and Activity Data Issues ...................................................................... 2-2

2.2.1 Onshore Exploration Sources .................................................................. 2-2

2.2.2 Onshore Production Sources.................................................................. 2-12

2.2.3 Offshore Production Sources ................................................................. 2-16

3. SUMMARY OF 2005 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS......................................................... 3-1

3.1 Oil and Gas Emissions Summary ........................................................................ 3-1

3.2 Source Category Contributions by Pollutant ..................................................... 3-30

3.2.1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions................................................................. 3-30

3.2.2 Nitrogen Oxide Emissions ..................................................................... 3-30

3.2.3 Volatile Organic Compound Emissions................................................. 3-31

3.2.4 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions ...................................................................... 3-31

3.2.5 Particulate Matter Emissions ................................................................. 3-31

3.3 Comparison of Emissions by County ................................................................ 3-32

3.3.1 Onshore Exploration .............................................................................. 3-32

3.3.2 Onshore Production ............................................................................... 3-45

3.3.3 Offshore Production Sources ................................................................. 3-46

3.4 Comparison of Emissions by Attainment Status ............................................... 3-47

# ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)

Section Page

4. EMISSION PROJECTIONS ........................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Projections Methodology..................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Summary of Oil and Gas Area Sources Projected Emissions.............................. 4-5

5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 5-1

Appendix A – Documentation of Exploration Sources Emissions

Appendix B – Documentation of Production Sources Emissions

Appendix C – Documentation of Offshore Sources Emissions

# iii LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2-1a Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas Oil and Ga s Emission

Inventory in the Onshore Exploration Grouping ............................................................. 2-3

2-1b Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas Oil and Gas Emission

Inventory in the Onshore Production Grouping............................................................... 2-3

2-1c Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas Oil and Ga s Emission

Inventory in the Offshore Production Grouping.............................................................. 2-4

2-2a Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources in the Onshore Exploration

Grouping .......................................................................................................................... 2-4

2-2b Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources in the Onshore Production

Grouping .......................................................................................................................... 2-5

2-2c Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources in the Offshore Production

Grouping .......................................................................................................................... 2-8

3-1 Summary of Annual Statewide Criteria Pollutant Emissions.......................................... 3-2

3-2 Summary of Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Statewide Criteria Pollutant E missions ......... 3-4

3-3 Summary of Oil and Gas Category Emission Contribution Rankings by Pollutant........ 3-6

3-4a County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emi ssions

for Exploration Sources ................................................................................................... 3-8

3-4b County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emis sions

for Production Sources................................................................................................... 3-17

3-4c County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emi ssions

for Offshore Platforms ................................................................................................... 3-26

3-5 Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included

in the Inventory.............................................................................................................. 3-33

3-6 Summary of Oil and Gas Area Source Emissions by Attainment Status ...................... 3-48

4-1a Texas Counties in the Onshore-Gulf Coast EIA Region ................................................. 4-2

4-1b Texas Counties in the Onshore-Southwest EIA Region.................................................. 4-3

4-1c Texas Counties in the Onshore-Shallow EIA Region...................................................... 4-3

4-1d Area-Blocks in the Offshore-Deep EIA Region .............................................................. 4-4

4-2a Projected EIA Production ................................................................................................ 4-5

4-2b Projected EIA Production (MMBtu)................................................................................ 4-5

4-2c Final Projection Factors by EIA Region.......................................................................... 4-5

# iv LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table Page

4-3a CO Projected Emissions by Location and Type .............................................................. 4-6

4-3b NO

x 

# Projected Emissions by Location and Type............................................................. 4-6

4-3c PM 10 

# PRI Projected Emissions by Location and Type .................................................... 4-6

4-3d PM 2.5 

# PRI Projected Emissions by Location ................................................................... 4-7

4-3e SO 2 

# Projected Emissions by Location and Type ............................................................. 4-7

4-3f VOC Projected Emissions by Location and Type ........................................................... 4-7

# v LIST OF ACRONYMS

Acronym Definition

API American Petroleum Institute

CAPP Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

CBM Coal Bed Methane

CERR Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule

CO Carbon Monoxide

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

EIA Energy Information Administration

ERG Eastern Research Group

GPA Gas Processors Association

HARC Houston Advanced Research Center

hp Horsepower

H 2 

# S Hydrogen Sulfide

MMBBL Million Barrels

MMBTU Million British Thermal Units

MMS Minerals Management Service

MMscf Million Standard Cubic Feet

Mscf Thousand Standard Cubic Feet

MW Molecular Weight

NEI National Emissions Inventory

NH 3 

# Ammonia

NIF NEI Input Format

NO

x 

# Nitrogen Oxides

OFW Offshore Federal Waters

OSW Offshore State Waters

OE Onshore Exploration

OP Onshore Production

OSD Ozone Season Daily

PM Particulate Matter

PM 10 

# PM with particle diameter less than 10 micrometers

PM 2.5 

# PM with particle diameter less than 2.5 micrometers

SCC Source Classification Code

scf Standard Cubic Feet

SIP State Implementation Plan

SO 2 

# Sulfur Dioxide

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

TexAER Texas Air Emissions Repository

THC Total Hydrocarbons

TRC Texas Railroad Commission

TXCO Texas Exploration Company

US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

WRAP Western Regional Air Partnership

WYDEQ Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

# vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this study was to compile a comprehensive emissions inventory for

onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration and production facilities in Texas for the base year 2005. The inventory was compiled for criteria pollutant emissions as permissible wit h available

emission factors. Attempts were also made to include lead and ammonia (NH 3 

# ) emissions as

appropriate; however, this was not done due to a lack of credible emission factors for the se pollutants. The emissions inventory will be used for general inventory compilation and tra cking

purposes, trends analysis, and potential control strategy development purposes. Rela ted to this,

the inventory will also potentially serve as improved input data to photochemical ai r quality

dispersion modeling, emissions sensitivity analyses, State Implementation P lan (SIP), and rule

development activities.

This project addressed the development of an emissions inventory for oil and gas industry

sources in Texas that have not been well characterized previously. The oil and gas ex ploration

and production industry is a large and complex one with many different potential sources of air

pollution. The larger sources such as refineries, bulk plants, and large transmis sion/distribution

stations are generally well identified and typically treated as major point sources for inventory

purposes. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) already has good qua lity

inventories on these sources. The industry, however, contains many smaller and much more

diffuse sources that occur in the course of exploring for oil and gas and bringing t hese products

to the marketplace. Many of these sources may be identified as non-point or area s ources, and

they have emissions below major source thresholds limits. These area sources are large in

number and are geographically dispersed. Historically many of these area oil and gas sources

have not been adequately inventoried. These “missing” source emissions, their ident ification and

locations can be significant.

The goals of this study were to identify the extent of the area oil and gas so urce categories, including defining new categories not previously identified, a nd to develop

preliminary baseline emissions estimates for as many of the identifie d categories as possible

using readily available data from studies completed in the last few years . The emissions

estimates were developed using top-down, area source methods (i.e., the inventory was not

intended to be on a source-by-source, bottom-up basis). This approach was taken to be

consistent with the resources and time limitations that are available for the project. The oil and

gas industry in Texas is very large and diverse. Compiling an inventory on a point source bas is

for a state the size of Texas would be very resource intensive and costly. By apply ing these

broader area source methods, preliminary emission estimates could be obtained t hat start to give

some reference points for the level of emissions attributable to these previousl y uncharacterized

sources. It also helps provide input on where effort should be placed in the future to refine and

improve the data.

The oil and gas source categories that were the focus of initial investigations i ncluded the

following. Sources were organized into three groups – onshore exploration, onshore production,

and offshore production.

Exploration sources:

# vii • Drilling Rigs

• Gas Well Completions

• Oil Well Completions

• Gas Well Pneumatic Devices

• Oil Well Pneumatic Devices

Production sources:

• Wellheads

• Compressor Engines

• Dehydrators

• Heater Treaters

• Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks

• Loading of Oil and Condensate for Transportation

• Pump and Piping Component Fugitive Losses

• Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Engines

Offshore platforms:

• Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Platforms Operating in Texas State

Waters (0-10 miles from shore)

• Oil and Gas Platforms Operating in Federal Waters (>10-25 miles from shore )

These are the source types included in the emissions inventory. In some cases, these s ource categories have multiple emission sources associated with them. For example , for Drilling Rigs,

emission estimates were assembled for drilling rig power engines and for mud degassing

operations.

Emission estimates were constructed for each source at the county level. Bot h annual

and ozone season daily emission estimates were calculated. Much of the activity data used to

develop the emission estimates came from records maintained by the Texas R ailroad

Commission (TRC). The 2005 base year emission estimates were also projecte d to future years.

Projection years included 2010, 2015, and 2020. A procedure involving the use of U.S

Department of Energy (DOE), Energy Information Administration (EIA) oi l and gas production

growth estimates for the Texas region was used to perform the projections

.

For emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO

x 

# ), onshore drilling rig engine and compressor

engine sources were found to contribute the greatest amounts to statewide area sour ce oil and gas

emissions. These two categories were responsible for roughly 95% of statewide e missions from

oil and gas area sources. The largest sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC ), comprising

62.4% of the state area sources oil and gas total, were found to be onshore production glycol

dehydrators (26.9%), onshore condensate storage tanks (22.9%), and onshore gas production

wellheads (12.6%). Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

# ) emissions were dominated by onshore drilling rig

engines (97.4%). Similarly for carbon monoxide (CO), the largest oil and gas area sources were onshore production compressor engines (70.5%), onshore drilling rig engines (21.8%), offs hore

platform compressor engines (3.6%), and onshore production gas well completions (1.7%).

Emissions of particulate matter (PM) from oil and gas area sources, PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# , were found

to be dominated by onshore production drilling rig engines (53.8% for PM 10 

# and 53.3% for

# viii

PM 2.5 

# ) and onshore compressor engines (42.5% for PM 10 

# and 43% for PM 2.5 

# ). The final 2005

emission estimates were put into National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Inpu t Format (NIF) to

facilitate reporting to EPA under Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR ) requirements.

# 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of this study is to compile a comprehensive emissions inventory for onshore

oil and gas exploration and production facilities in Texas and for offshore production pla tforms

(within 25 miles of the Texas coast) for the base year 2005. The list of onshore oil and gas sources addressed in the study, as defined in the Work Order, is as follows.

Exploration sources including:

• Drilling Rigs

- diesel engines

- degassing of drilling muds

• Gas Well Completions

- flaring

- venting

• Oil Well Completions

- flaring

- venting

• Gas Well Pneumatic Devices

• Oil Well Pneumatic Devices

Production sources including:

• Wellheads

• Compressor Engines

• Dehydrators

• Heater Treaters

• Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks

• Loading of Oil and Condensate for Transportation

• Pump and Piping Component Fugitive Losses

• Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Pump Engines

Offshore oil and gas production platforms were inventoried in both state waters off th e coast,

which spans from shore out to a distance of 10 miles, and in federal waters out to a distanc e of

25 miles (basically the band between 10 and 25 miles). Emissions from oil and gas explora tion

sources were also addressed for the state waters area. The inventory was compiled for criteria

pollutant emissions.

This study primarily pertains to the development of an emissions inventory for oil and

gas industry sources in Texas that have not been well characterized previously. T he oil and gas

exploration and production industry is large and complex in Texas with many different potential

sources of air pollution. The larger sources in the state such as refineries, bulk pl ants, and large

transmission/distribution stations are generally well identified and typi cally treated as major

point sources for inventory purposes. The TCEQ already has good quality inventorie s on these

sources. The industry though contains many smaller and much more diffuse sources that o ccur in the course of exploring for oil and gas and bringing these products to the marketpl ace. Many

# 1-2

of these sources fit the definition of being non-point or area sources, i.e., they have emis sions

below major sources thresholds, they are large in number, and are geographically di spersed.

Historically, many of these area oil and gas sources have not been adequately identified and

inventoried. Identifying, locating, and quantifying these “missing” source emissions is a

significant task.

The goals of this study are to identify the extent of these area oil and gas so urce categories, including defining new categories not previously inventoried, and to de velop

preliminary baseline emissions estimates for 2005 for as many of the identif ied categories as

possible using currently available data (i.e., time and resources for extens ive surveys and/or new

source testing are not available). Studies within the last three years by TCEQ, the Houston

Advanced Research Center (HARC), and the Western Regional Partnership (WRAP ) have

produced data and methods that can be applied for the purposes of this inventory (HARC, 2005;

HARC, 2006a; HARC, 2006b; WRAP, 2005). The emissions estimates were developed using

top-down, area source methods (i.e., the inventory was not estimated on a source-by-source,

bottom-up basis). Compiling an inventory on a point source basis would be very resource

intensive and take more time than was available for this study. By applying broader area source methods, preliminary emission estimates can be obtained that start to give s ome reference points

for the level of emissions attributable to these previously uncharacterized sour ces. It also helps

provide input on where effort should be placed in the future to refine and improve the data. The

study results will be used for general inventory compilation and tracking purpos es, trends

analysis, and potential control strategy development purposes. The results can al so serve as improved input data to photochemical air quality dispersion modeling, emissions sensit ivity

analyses, SIP planning, and possible rule development activities.

For planning purposes, the 2005 base year estimates were projected to future year s 2010,

2015, and 2020. Also, the final base year inventory estimates were provided in National

Emissions Inventory (NEI) Input Format (NIF) for the purposes of submittal to E PA in order to

comply with Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) requirements, and to faci litate

entry of the data into the state’s TexAER (Tex as A ir E missions R epository) database.

1.2 Report Organization

Section 2.0 of this report more thoroughly identifies the oil and gas source categori es addressed in the emissions inventory and describes how each emission source is being treated in

terms of the inventory development. The emissions aspects of each category are described,

along with an identification of the pollutants being inventoried for each. Each emission sour ce is

assigned a Source Classification Code (SCC) for tracking purposes and a table of all SCCs is

presented. Section 2.0 provides explanations of any assumptions or manipulations that had to be

made to source categories to facilitate the development of area source emi ssion estimates.

The summary results of the 2005 emissions inventory development process are presente d

in Section 3.0. Summary emissions tables are provided on a statewide and county level basis for

both annual and ozone season daily (OSD) emissions. The emissions estimates are de scribed in

terms of known uncertainties and weaknesses, and suggestions for possible improvements are provided. Discussion and analysis is also provided to compare and contrast how sources rank

# 1-3

relative to each other for each pollutant. Emissions are also presented to show geo graphic

concentrations by county.

Section 4.0 presents information and data on the projection of the 2005 base year

estimates to three future years (2010, 2015, and 2020). The data and methods used to construct

projection techniques are described and statewide and county level emission est imate are

provided for all three projection years. Section 5.0 contains reference citati ons for the report.

The full documentation and detailed county level 2005 emissions estimates data for ea ch

inventoried source category are provided in Appendices A, B, and C. The appendices addres s the onshore exploration, onshore production, and offshore production source groupings,

respectively. Each appendix discussion provides full and transparent documentation on how

each category’s estimates were derived, the procedures and assumptions use d, and the input

emission factor and activity data applied to determine all emission estim ates.

# 2-1

2.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF OIL AND GAS SOURCES INVENTORIED

2.1 Definition of Oil and Gas Sources and SCCs

The majority of the list of onshore oil and gas exploration and production source

categories addressed in this project was taken from a Western Regional A ir Partnership (WRAP)

study on area source oil and gas emissions (WRAP, 2005). In the WRAP study, volatile or ganic

compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NO

x 

# ), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

# )

emission estimates were generated for several non-point oil and gas sources i n 14 states of the

WRAP region (note: not all applicable pollutants were estimated for every s ource). Many of

these same sources are prevalent in Texas. Other oil and gas emissions source s were specified

by TCEQ and in oil and gas industry data produced by the Minerals Management Ser vice

(MMS) for offshore oil and gas platforms in Texas state waters and federa l waters (MMS, 2004;

TCEQ, 2007b). The TCEQ provided information on the names and location coordinates for over

200 oil and gas platforms located within 25 miles of the Texas coastline. The MMS inform ation

characterizes emissions from 16 platform emission unit types (e.g., boiler, e ngines, turbines,

amine units, glycol dehydrators, fugitives) at the equipment level for base y ear 2005. Currently,

base year 2005 estimates are being finalized; however, MMS has provided authoriz ation for

TCEQ to use these draft data for the purposes of this project, provided the data are mar ked as

draft and are not released, cited, quoted, or otherwise used outside of TCEQ until such tim e as MMS publishes the data as final.

In this project, the oil and gas source categories have been divided into three maj or groups: onshore exploration sources, onshore production sources, and offshore production

platforms. For exploration and production, depending on the definition of the operations used,

there is clearly some potential for overlap occurring between some emission s ources, i.e., a

source such as completion venting could be considered exploration or production. For the

purposes of this project, exploration, production, and offshore sources are identified as fol lows.

Exploration sources include:

• Drilling Rigs

• Gas Well Completions

• Oil Well Completions

• Gas Well Pneumatic Devices

• Oil Well Pneumatic Devices

Production sources include:

• Wellheads

• Compressor Engines

• Dehydrators

• Heater Treaters

• Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks

• Loading of Oil and Condensate for Transportation

• Pump and Piping Component Fugitive Losses

• Coal Bed Methane Pump Engines

# 2-2

Offshore stationary sources include:

• Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Platforms Operating in Texas State

Waters (sources 0-10 miles from shore)

• Oil and Gas Production Platforms Operating in Federal Waters (sources >1 0-25

miles from shore)

Emission totals in Section 3.0 are presented according to these groupings.

Table 2-1 (a, b, and c) provides a summary of the source categories evaluated in the

emissions inventory (according to their grouping), the specific operations or proc esses that

generate air emissions, and an identification of the pollutants associated wi th each source.

Table 2-2 (organized as a, b, and c for the three groupings) further delineates thes e source category types into specific emission processes, and presents SCCs for each i ndividual emissions

process. For onshore exploration and production sources, most of the SCC assignments orig inate

as new codes proposed by TCEQ (TCEQ, 2007a) or codes proposed by ERG as a result of

assessing all of the emission processes included in the inventory. The offshore SC C assignments

are a combination of ones on the official EPA list and ones proposed by ERG.

2.2 Emission and Activity Data Issues

This discussion further describes and clarifies the oil and gas emission sour ces included

in the inventory. Factors affecting emissions are discussed and the rationale s for using certain

assumptions (related to source operation) for the purposes of the inventory are expla ined.

General information is provided on how source emissions will be estimated. The detail ed

procedural description of the estimation processes and the accompanying input data and

calculations are presented in Appendices A, B, and C. The inventory was compiled for c riteria

pollutant emissions as permissible with available emission factors. Attempt s were also made to

include lead and NH 3 

# emissions as appropriate; however, this was not done due to a lack of

credible emission factors.

2.2.1 Onshore Exploration Sources

Drilling Rigs/Engines

This category pertains to the engines used to generate power to run drilling r igs in the

exploration field. These engines are assumed to be burning diesel fuel. Emission fa ctors for

diesel-fired engines operating drilling rigs were taken from AP-42 (US E PA, 1996). Drilling rig

engines were assumed to operate with a maximum horsepower (hp) greater tha n 600 hp

(Engeser, 2004). For SO 2 

# emissions, the weight percent of sulfur used in the diesel fuel (low

sulfur fuel) is assumed to be 3400 ppmv or 0.34% by weight for every county in Texas (EPA

, 2004b). It is possible that some counties in Texas may be using fuels with a lower or hi gher

sulfur content.

# 2-3

Table 2-1a. Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas Oi l and Gas

Emission Inventory in the Onshore Exploration Grouping

Onshore Exploration

Source Type Specific Emission Sources Potential Pollutants a



# Diesel engines to run electricity generators SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , VOC,

PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# , CO Drilling Rigs

Drill mud degassing (open pits or storage tanks) VOC

Emissions from flaring from the gas well

completion phase CO, NO X 

# , VOC

Gas Well Completion Emissions from venting from the gas well

completion phase VOC

Emissions from flaring from the oil well

completion phase CO, NO X 

# , VOC, SO 2 

# Oil Well Completion Emissions from venting from the oil well

completion phase VOC

Gas Well Pneumatic

Devices Fugitive emissions from pneumatic devices used

during gas well exploration and production VOC

Oil Well Pneumatic

Devices Fugitive emissions from pneumatic devices used

during oil well exploration and production VOC

a 

# PM = Particulate Matter



# Table 2-1b. Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas O il and Gas

Emission Inventory in the Onshore Production Grouping

Onshore Production

Source Type Specific Emission Sources Potential

Pollutants a



# Oil and Gas Well Wellheads Emissions from wellhead assemblies

and rod pumps VOC

Compressor Engines Combustion emissions from compressor

engines associated with oil and gas production SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , VOC,

PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# , CO

Dehydrators/Separators Emissions from glycol dehydrator reboilers VOC

Heater Treaters Emissions from natural gas-fired

heater treaters NO

x 

# , CO

Oil and Condensate Storage

Tanks Working, breathing, and flashing losses from oil

and condensate storage tanks VOC

Loading of Oil and Condensate Fugitive emissions from truck and/or railcar

loading VOC

Pump and Piping Component

Fugitive Losses Fugitive emissions from pumps

and piping components VOC

Coal Bed Methane Pump

Engines Natural gas engine emissions

used to de-water coal beds SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , VOC,

PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# , CO

a 

# PM = Particulate Matter

# 2-4

Table 2-1c. Identification of Source Categories Addressed in the Texas O il and Gas

Emission Inventory in the Offshore Production Grouping

Offshore Production

Source Type Specific Emission Sources Potential Pollutants a



# Offshore Platforms –

State Waters Stack and fugitive process emissions for oil

and natural gas platforms operating in the

Texas state waters (0-10 miles from shore) SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , VOC,

PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# , CO

Offshore Platforms –

Federal Waters Stack and fugitive process emissions for oil

and natural gas platforms operating in the

federal waters (>10-25 miles from shore) SO 2 

# , NO

x 

# , VOC,

PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# , CO

a 

# PM = Particulate Matter



# Table 2-2a. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Onshore Exploration Grouping

Onshore Exploration Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# Drilling Rigs

- Diesel Engines 2310001200 ERG proposed SCC; Drilling Rig Engines

using diesel fuel

- Mud Degassing 2310001100 ERG proposed SCC; Mud Degassing Activities

Gas Well Completion – Flaring 2310021701 ERG proposed SCC; Flaring during Gas Well

Completions

Gas Well Completion – Venting 2310021702 ERG proposed SCC; Venting during Gas Well

Completions

Oil Well Completion – Flaring 2310011701 ERG proposed SCC; Flaring during Oil Well

Completions

Oil Well Completion – Venting 2310011702 ERG proposed SCC; Venting during Oil Well

Completions

Gas Well Pneumatic Pumps 2310021401 ERG proposed SCC; Gas Well Pneumatic

Pumps

Oil Well Pneumatic Pumps 2310011401 ERG proposed SCC; Oil Well Pneumatic

Pumps

a 

# Unless otherwise noted, SCCs were obtained from EPA’s official SCC lis t (US EPA, 2004a).

# 2-5 Table 2-2b. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Onshore Production Grouping

Onshore Production Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed

SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# Oil Well – Wellhead 2310011450 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Wellhead Activities

Gas Well – Wellhead 2310021450 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Wellhead Activities

Compressor Engines

- 2-cycle, lean 2310021100 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 2-cycle, lean

- 2-cycle, lean, less than 50hp 2310021101 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 2-cycle,

lean, less than 50hp

- 2-cycle, lean, 50-499hp 2310021102 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 2-cycle,

lean, 50-499hp

- 2-cycle, lean, 500+hp 2310021103 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 2-cycle,

lean, 500+hp

- 4-cycle, lean 2310021200 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, lean

- 4-cycle, lean, less than 50hp 2310021201 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle,

lean, less than 50hp

- 4-cycle, lean, 50-499hp 2310021202 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle,

lean, 50-499hp

- 4-cycle, lean, 500+hp 2310021203 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle,

lean, 500+hp

- 4-cycle, rich 2310021300 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich

- 4-cycle, rich, less than 50hp 2310021301 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich,

less than 50hp

- 4-cycle, rich, 50-499hp 2310021302 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich,

50-499hp

- 4-cycle, rich 500+hp 2310021303 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich

500+hp

- 4-cycle, rich w/NSCR 2310021321 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich

w/NSCR

- 4-cycle, rich, less than 50hp

w/NSCR 2310021331 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich,

less than 50hp w/NSCR

# 2-6 Table 2-2b. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Onshore Production Grouping (Continued)

Onshore Production Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed

SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# - 4-cycle, rich, 50-499hp

w/NSCR 2310021341 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich,

50-499hp w/NSCR

- 4-cycle, rich, 500+hp w/NSCR 2310021351 TCEQ TexAER SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Compressor Engines: 4-cycle, rich,

500+hp w/NSCR

Gas Well – Dehydrator 2310021400 TCEQ Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Dehydrator

Oil Well – Heater Treater 2310011100 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Heater Treater

Oil Well – Oil Storage Tanks 2310011020 TCEQ Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production

– Crude Oil Tank

Gas Well – Condensate Storage

Tanks 2310011010 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Condensate Tank

Tank Truck/Railcar Loading – Oil 2310011201 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Tank Truck/Railcar Loading: Condensate

Tank Truck/Railcar Loading –

Condensate 2310011202 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Tank Truck/Railcar Loading: Oil

Oil Well – Fugitive Emissions

- Connection 2310011501 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Connectors

- Flange 2310011502 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Flanges

- Open End 2310011503 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Open Ended Lines

- Pump 2310011504 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Pumps

- Valve 2310011505 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Valves

- Other 2310011506 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Oil Production –

Fugitives: Other

Gas Well – Fugitive Emissions

- Connection 2310021501 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Connectors

- Flange 2310021502 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Flanges

- Open End 2310021503 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Open Ended Lines

- Pump 2310021504 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Pumps

- Valve 2310021505 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Valves

# 2-7 Table 2-2b. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Onshore Production Grouping (Continued)

Onshore Production Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed

SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# - Other 2310021506 ERG Proposed SCC; Onshore Natural Gas

Production – Fugitives: Other

Coal Bed Methane Pump Engines 2310021800 ERG proposed SCC; Coal Bed Methane Pump

Engines

a 

# Unless otherwise noted, SCCs were obtained from EPA’s official SCC lis t (US EPA, 2004a).

# 2-8 Table 2-2c. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Offshore Production Grouping

Offshore Production Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed

SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# Offshore Platforms (State & Federal Waters)

- Boiler/Heater/Treater, <10

MMBTU/hr 10200603 External Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas

(<10 MMBTU/hr)

- Diesel Engine 20200102 Internal Industrial Combustion Reciprocating

Engine: Diesel Oil

- Natural Gas Turbine 20200201 Internal Industrial Combustion: Turbine:

Natural Gas

- Natural Gas Engine, 2-cycle

lean 20200252 Internal Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas (2-

cycle-lean)

- Natural Gas Engine, 4-cycle

Rich 20200253 Internal Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas (4-

cycle-rich)

- Natural Gas Engine, 4-cycle

Clean 20200254 Internal Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas (4-

cycle-lean)

- Natural Gas Engine, 2-cycle

Clean 20200255 Internal Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas (2-

cycle-clean)

- Natural Gas Engine, 4-cycle

Clean 20200256 Internal Industrial Combustion: Natural Gas (4-

cycle-clean)

- Cold Vents 31000123 Oil and Gas Production – Vents

- Losses from Flashing 31000132 Oil and Gas Production - Flashing Losses

- Pneumatic Pumps 31000224 Oil and Gas Production – Pneumatic Devices

- Glycol Dehydrators using

Triethylene Glycol 31000301 Oil and Gas Production - Glycol Dehydrators

using TEG

- Pressure Relief Valves 31000307 Oil and Gas Production - Relief Valves

- Fugitive Emissions: Other 31088811 Oil and Gas Production - Fugitive Emissi ons

- Storage Tank: Condensate 40400321 Oil and Gas Production – Storage Tank

Condensate

- Storage Tank: Crude Oil 40400322 Oil and Gas Production – Storage Tank: Crude

Oil

- Natural Gas Engines: 4-Cycle,

Rich 2310002001 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Compressor Engines: 4-cycle rich

- Storage Tanks - Condensate 2310002010 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production -

Storage Tanks: Condensate

- Storage Tanks - Crude Oil 2310002020 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production -

Storage Tanks: Crude Oil

- Natural Gas Turbines 2310002051 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Turbines: Natural Gas

- Boilers/Heaters 2310002100 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Boilers/Heaters: Natural Gas

- Diesel Engines 2310002105 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Diesel Engines

- Drilling Rig Engines 2310002200 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Drilling Rig Engines

- Loading: Barge - Oil 2310002201 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Loading Operations via Barge: crude oil

# 2-9 Table 2-2c. Assignment of SCCs to Texas Oil and Gas Sources

in the Offshore Production Grouping (Cont.)

Offshore Production Source

Types and Emission Processes Proposed

SCC SCC Description (abbreviated) a



# - Mud Degassing 2310002210 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Mud degassing activities

- Flare - pilot light 2310002301 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Flares: continuous pilot light

- Flare - flaring 2310002305 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Flares: Flaring Operations

- Glycol Dehydrators 2310002400 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Glycol Dehydrators: triethylene glycol

- Pneumatic Pumps-Gas and Oil

Wells 2310002401 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Pneumatic Pumps: Gas and Oil Wells

- Pressure/Level Controllers 2310002411 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production

– Pressure/Level Controllers

- Cold Vents 2310002421 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Cold Vents

- Fugitives - Connectors: gas

streams 2310002501 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Connectors: gas streams

- Fugitives - Flanges: gas streams 2310002502 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Flanges: gas streams

- Fugitives - Valves: gas 2310002505 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Valves: gas

- Fugitives - Other: gas 2310002506 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Other: gas

- Fugitives - Connectors: oil

streams 2310002511 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Connectors: oil streams

- Fugitives - Flanges: oil 2310002512 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Flanges: oil

- Fugitives - Valves: oil 2310002515 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Valves: oil

- Fugitives - Other: oil 2310002516 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Other: oil

- Fugitives - Connectors:

oil/water streams 2310002521 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production –

Fugitives, Connectors: oil/water streams

- Fugitives - Flanges: oil/water 2310002522 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Product ion –

Fugitives, Flanges: oil/water

- Fugitives - Valves: oil/water 2310002525 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Produc tion –

Fugitives, Valves: oil/water

- Fugitives - Other: oil/water 2310002526 ERG Proposed SCC; Offshore Production

– Fugitives, Other: oil/water

a 

# Unless otherwise noted, SCCs were obtained from EPA’s official SCC lis t (US EPA, 2004a).

# 2-10

All exploratory oil and gas drilling in Texas requires a permit. On the Texas Ra ilroad

Commission (TRC) website, a listing of year 2005 approved drilling permits was available, with

the assumption being made that this would be typical for actual drilling activiti es that occurred in

2005. It is possible that drilling permits approved in 2005, did not have actual drilling

commence until 2006. Conversely, actual drilling may have taken place in 2005 under permit

approvals made in 2004. An additional parameter retrieved for each approved permit is well

depth.

For most of the drilling permit data, the “spud date”, or the date in which drilling

commenced, and the completed drilling date are included. Thus, actual number of drilli ng days

can be calculated for each permit. Unfortunately, the effort required for obta ining this

information for over 11,000 permits was time and resource prohibitive. As an alternati ve, representative drilling profiles were developed for each county and wellbore type (vertical,

horizontal, directional, etc.) by obtaining the number of days drilled (from spud date a nd

completed drilling date) for the permit with the maximum well depth. A total of 430 count ywellbore drilling profiles were developed and applied to over 11,000 permits. As expecte d,

wellbore profiles that were “horizontal” took longer to drill significant depths w hen compared to

“vertical” wellbores. Approximately 85% of identified drilling permits indicated the use of

wellbore drilling. Using industry guidance, average horsepower ratings c an be assigned for

lightweight, intermediate, or heavyweight drilling operations (Engeser, 200 4). These

classifications are based on well depth. For example, lightweight rigs are generally used for well

depths between 1,500 to 2,000 meters (4,900 – 6,500 feet). The average horsepower for

lightweight rigs is 650 hp. Similar factors are available for intermediate a nd heavy weight rigs.

Drilling operations are assumed to be 24-hours a day during the drilling period. Thus, tota l

engine power output in terms of horsepower-hours (hp-hr) can be calculated for each pe rmitted

drilling operation, which in turn allows for the estimation of emissions.

Drilling Rigs/Mud Degassing

Various drilling fluids or muds are used during the drilling process to cool and lubricat e the drill bit. These muds are returned to the surface contaminated with organic mate rials from

the well. Upon reaching the surface, offgasing occurs and VOC are emitted int o the air. No

VOC emission factor was found in AP-42 or elsewhere for mud degassing operations occurr ing

during drilling activities. However, a VOC emission factor can be derived us ing information

from an MMS study for offshore platforms (MMS, 2004). The VOC emission factor for m ud

degassing was derived from a total hydrocarbon (THC) emission factor used by t he MMS in

their studies of platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. For drilling fluids using water -based muds, the

THC emission factor is 881.81 lbs/day. To convert to a VOC emission factor, it was ass umed

that 8.61% of THCs are VOCs by weight (GPA, 2004), and this value was applied to develop a

VOC emission factor:

EF VOC 

# = (881.81 lb THC/day) * (VOC wt%)

EF VOC 

# = (881.81) * (8.61/100) = 75.93 lb VOC/day

For mud degassing activities, the number of drilling days per operation (obtained from T RC

data) will be applied to the VOC emission factor to determine emissions.

# 2-11

Oil and Gas Well Completions

After drilling and casing a well, it must be “completed.” Completion is the proce ss in

which the well is enabled to produce oil or gas. Once the desired well depth is reache d, the

formation must be tested and evaluated to determine whether the well will be compl eted for

production, or plugged and abandoned. To complete the well production, casing is installed and

cemented and the drilling rig is dismantled and moved to the next site. A service rig is brought

in to perforate the production casing and run production tubing. If no further pre-production

servicing is needed, the christmas tree is installed and the production cycle be gins. This category

addresses emissions associated with the completion process at oil and gas w ells.

Emission factors for gas and oil well completions are specified as flari ng and venting

activities. It was assumed that both activities occur during the well complet ion phase. Flaring

emission factors for CO and NO

x 

# were taken from AP-42 for Industrial Flares (US EPA, 1991).

It is assumed that flares are smokeless, and thus no PM emissions are expecte d. There are no

AP-42 flaring emission factors for SO 2 

# or VOC. The displacement equation will be used to

calculate those emissions (see Completions discussion in Appendix A sections A.3 and A .4).

Similarly, VOC emissions from venting activities were calculated usi ng the displacement

equation.

Well completion statistics were obtained from a resource known as The Drill ing

Observer, which summarizes well completion data that has been collected and archive d by TRC

(The Drilling Observer, 2007). Included in these statistics are the 24-hour potent ial test results

of natural gas, condensate, and casinghead gas flow for each completed oil and gas w ell. Using

this information, the daily volume of gas vented and/or flared can be calculated on a pe r well

basis. The TRC regulations allow up to 10 days of venting after a well is complete d, and then

flaring must be used (TRC, 2007b). For this study, it is assumed conservatively that vent ing

occurs for 10 days and flaring occurs on one day.

Oil and Gas Well Pneumatic Devices

Pneumatic devices powered by pressurized natural gas are widely used in the na tural gas

industry as liquid level controllers, pressure regulators, and valve controllers. As part of normal

operation, pneumatic devices release or bleed natural gas to the atmosphere and, as s uch, are a

source of VOC emissions. The extent of the emissions depends largely on the design o f the

device in use (US EPA, 2003).

No available VOC emission factors for gas-actuated pneumatic pumps used during

drilling and production activities could be located. However, the WRAP study assumed an average fuel usage rate of 5 scf/hr of natural gas used to run a pneumatic pump (W RAP, 2005).

For oil wells, the average VOC weight percent is 33.20% of the casinghead gas; fo r gas wells,

the average VOC weight percent of the dry gas is 8.61% and for condensate gas it is 5.39%

(GPA, 2004).

Actual operating oil and gas well counts by county were retrieved from the T RC (TRC,

2005a; TRC 2005b), yielding total pumps on a county basis.

# 2-12

2.2.2 Onshore Production Sources

Oil and Gas Wellheads

The wellhead is the part of an oil or gas well that terminates at the surfac e whether on

land or offshore, where oil or gas products can be withdrawn. The primary function of the

wellhead is to hold the casings and the production tubing of the well. On top of the wellhead sits

the tubing hanger, from which the production tubing is run. The well christmas tree res ts on top

of the tubing hanger, as well as surface flow-control facilities in preparat ion for the production

phase of the well. The wellhead is a source of VOC emissions from various fugitive outl ets.

The AP-42 emission factor used to calculate VOC emissions from oil wellheads is based

on the number of oil wellheads in place. The TRC collects and maintains oil wellhead count s by

county in Texas (TRC, 2005a). The AP-42 emission factor for VOC emissions from gas

wellheads is based on gas production. Gas production data by county in Texas is also availa ble

from the TRC (TRC, 2005c).

Compressor Engines

This category concerns gas field compressor engines used to boost the wellhead pre ssure of natural gas so that it can be injected into gathering lines and moved into subsequent

processing stages of the gas industry. Reciprocating engines, fueled wi th raw natural gas, are

normally used to drive gas field compressors. The results of 2005 and 2006 studies of natura l

gas compressor engines by the HARC were applied for this project to gen erate emission factors

for engines at oil and gas production facilities (HARC, 2005; HARC, 2006a). Emission fa ctors

were calculated using the following equation provided in the HARC report:

EF ijk 

# = F 1i 

# * F 2j 

# * C i 

# * H j 

# * EF jk 

# * 1/2000

Where:

EF ijk



# = Emission factor for county i, for engine type j, and pollutant k (tons/MSCF)

F 1i 

# = Fraction of wells requiring compression in county i

F 2j 

# = Fraction of compression load represented by engines of type j

C i 

# = Compression requirements for county i (hp-hr/MSCF)

H

j 

# = Brake specific fuel consumption for engine type j (MMBtu/hp-hr)

EF

jk 

# = Emission factor for engine type j, and pollutant k (lb/MMBtu)

1/2000 = Conversion from lbs of emissions to tons of emissions

Although county-specific data are not available for all these variables, the HARC study

developed compression requirements and compression loads for three distinct distric ts in eastern

Texas, including one attainment area and two nonattainment areas (Houston and Dall as). For

this project, these data were applied to the other Texas counties, according to at tainment status,

to generate county-specific emission factors for compressor engines.

The HARC study assumed the fraction of wells requiring compression is equal to the

fraction of wells greater than one year old (HARC, 2005). The fraction of wells gre ater than one

# 2-13

year old was relatively constant in the three districts examined by the HAR C study. For this

inventory project, it was assumed that this fraction remains constant across the entire state for the

purpose of estimating emissions from compressor engines.

While the initial report (HARC, 2005) focused on engines less than 500 hp, the follow-up

report (HARC, 2006a) included engines with greater than 500 hp and also provided a more

detailed breakdown of engines less than 500 hp. The distribution of engine types presented in

the 2006 follow-up report was used for this inventory study to estimate the fractions of various

engine types in attainment and nonattainment areas of Texas. The compression requi rements in

the three districts included in the previous HARC study were relatively consis tent. An average

of these factors was applied to the entire state in both attainment and nonattainment areas.

The HARC study selected representative engine models for each category of engine and

used the average fuel consumption for each of those engines to represent the fuel cons umption

for each of those engine types as a whole. For this oil and gas inventory study, the fuel

consumption data for those same representative engines was used to estimate f uel consumption

from each engine type.

Pollutant- and engine-specific emission factors were taken from AP-42 to est imate

pollutant emissions from each engine type based on the county-by-county breakdown of engine

use described above. Gas production data, the basis for the emissions estimation equati on, were obtained from county-specific production data collected by the TRC.

Dehydrators

Glycol dehydrators are used by the natural gas industry to remove water fr om raw natural

gas to improve its quality for sale, and to help prevent corrosion in downstream pipelines . As the

dehydrator system removes moisture from the gas, some methane and VOC is al so absorbed and

then lost to the atmosphere in the glycol reboiler process. For this project, uncontr olled VOC

emissions from dehydrators were estimated using a gas production-based emis sion factor

provided by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WYDEQ) for use in the

WRAP study (WRAP, 2005). The emission factor was applied to Texas county gas produ ction

figures obtained from the TRC.

Heater Treaters

Heater treaters are devices used at oil wells to separate oil-water em ulsions that are

present. These devices are found in both horizontal and vertical designs with a firebox on the

bottom. The units are usually fueled by natural gas or demulsified crude oil. Emiss ions from the

fuel combustion process are being estimated in this project.

Uncontrolled NO X 

# and CO emissions from heater treaters were estimated using the

emission factors provided by the WYDEQ for use in the WRAP oil and gas sources inventor y report (WRAP, 2005). The emission factors are based on the quantity of oil produced, and oil

production data by county was obtained from the TRC (TRC, 2005c).

# 2-14

Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks

At oil and gas wells, oil and condensate are collected in storage tanks prior to bei ng transferred for processing. The storage tanks are sources of VOC emissi ons from working,

breathing, and flashing losses. Uncontrolled VOC emissions from oil and condensate st orage tanks were calculated using emission factors presented for comparison in the stud y “VOC

Emissions from Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks” prepared by the HARC in October 2006

(HARC, 2006b). The emission factors used came from factors developed and published by the

WYDEQ. While the HARC study made emission measurements at 33 tank batterie s in three

geographic areas of Texas and calculated average values, the confidence inte rvals of the results

were very large and the averages themselves were considerably higher th an established emission

factors from both Wyoming and Colorado (see WRAP, 2005). Because of this high degree of

data uncertainty with the HARC study measurements, the WYDEQ emission fac tors were

selected as the best choice to estimate VOC emissions for oil and condensate st orage tanks. The

emission factors are applied to county-specific oil and condensate production figur es obtained

from the TRC (TRC, 2005c).

Oil and Condensate Loading

Oil and condensate stored in storage tanks is transferred to trucks and railcars for

shipment for further processing. Fugitive VOC emissions are released fro m these loading

processes. Emissions from the loading of oil and condensate were estimated using a n AP-42

equation (US EPA, 1995a) and county-specific temperature data for Texas. The AP-42 e quation

to calculate loadout emission factors is:

L L 

# = 12.46 * S * P * M / T

Where:

L L 

# = Loading loss (lb/1,000 gal of liquid loaded)

S = Saturation factor (based on type of loading operation)

P = True vapor pressure of liquid loaded (psia)

M = Molecular weight of tank vapors (lb/lb-mole)

T = Temperature of bulk liquid loaded ( o 

# R)

To determine the saturation factor, the type of loading operation employed throughout t he

state of Texas is assumed to be submerged loading with a dedicated vapor balance ( S = 1.00 in

the equation above). The true vapor pressure of oil and condensate was determined by using

average temperature data for each county in Texas and temperature-dependent va por pressures of

crude oil from AP-42. Temperature data from 87 weather stations throughout Texas w ere obtained and isotherms were developed to estimate average annual temperatures for each county

in Texas. These temperatures determined both the true vapor pressure using AP-42 dat a and the

average temperature of the bulk liquid (T). The molecular weight of tank vapors was assumed

constant and equal to AP-42 data for crude oil (50 lb/lb-mole) and gasoline (RVP 7) (68 lb/lbmole) at 60 ° F for oil and condensate, respectively. The gasoline value was used for condensat e since no specific number for condensate was available.

# 2-15

The AP-42 equation to calculate temperature-dependent emission factors for loadout

losses generates an emission factor based on the amount of liquid loaded (US EPA, 1995a). Th e calculated emission factors were applied to the amount of oil and condensate produced in each

county, which was obtained from data provided by the TRC (TRC, 2005c).

Pump and Piping Component Fugitive Losses

At producing well sites, there are numerous pumps and piping configurations used to

move oil and gas products and get them into the processing and distribution systems. These

pieces of equipment contain numerous components such flanges, valves, and seals that ar e potential sources of fugitive VOC emissions. Emissions from these sources wer e estimated for

the purposes of this inventory. Fugitive (uncontrolled) emissions from pump and piping

components were estimated using emission factors developed by the American Pet roleum

Institute (API) in their publication number 4615 (API, 1995). These API emission fact ors are available for connections, flanges, open ends, pumps, valves, and other (including instruments,

loading arms, pressure relief valves, stuffing boxes, compressor seals, dump lever arms, and

vents) in units of lb/component-day for both gas and oil service. The API factors were

developed for THC emissions. Therefore, the THC factors were multiplied by the average weight fraction of VOCs in onshore light crude and onshore gas production (0.292 and 0.035,

respectively) to obtain the VOC emission factors used in the inventory.

The API emission factors for fugitive VOC emissions from pump and piping components

are on a “per component” basis. In order to apply these “per component” factors on a county

basis, average equipment counts for oil and gas facilities were obtained. The most com plete and

descriptive information found on component counts came from a study conducted by the

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP, 1999). These data provide the numbers of

valves, connectors, pressure relief valves and open-ended lines in both gas and liquid servic e at a

typical battery. According to the results of the 33 batteries surveyed for HA RC’s study of “VOC

Emissions from Oil and Condensate Storage Tanks” (HARC, 2006b) and HARC’s “Natura l Gas

Compressor Engine Survey for Gas Production and Processing Facilities” ( HARC, 2005), the

average number of wellheads served per battery is 2.8. These factors were use d in conjunction

with county wellhead data to estimate fugitive emissions from pump and piping components

.

Coal Bed Methane Sources

Emissions from coalbed methane (CBM) pumps were on the initial source category list

considered for this inventory. CBM is natural gas that can be extracted from coa l seams, and is

high in methane content. Emissions occur from pumping the water from the well (or d ewatering

the coal seam) using small pumps. CBM production is a major natural gas source in som e western states, such as Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico. In 2001, the first CBM f ield in

Texas was discovered in the Sacatosa (Olmos) Field in Maverick County, TX. From 2001 to

2004, attempts were made by The Texas Exploration Company (TXCO) to have CBM b e a viable, economic option for natural gas production (TXCO, 2004). Nearly 50 wells were d rilled

during that time. However, TXCO sold their CBM operations to Encana in 2005, and it is

believed that CBM production was halted for 2005. Thus, no emission estimates were develop ed

for CBM pumps for the Maverick County site for 2005.

# 2-16

2.2.3 Offshore Production Sources

This category addresses emissions from oil and gas platforms in state and fe deral waters

off the coast of Texas. State waters are defined to be the area lying 0 – 10 m iles from shore,

while federal waters are the area >10 – 25 miles from shore. For the state wat ers area, exploration and production sources are addressed, while in federal waters only produc tion source

emissions are inventoried. Emission estimates for these sources were dete rmined in several

ways. Emission estimates for the federal waters sources were obtained di rectly from the 2005

draft emission inventory for oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico produced by M MS

(MMS, 2007). As of August 2007, the MMS inventory data and report are considered draft, and

while MMS is allowing the emission estimate data to be used for the purposes of thi s TCEQ

project, no data are to be published, cited, quoted, or released outside of TCEQ until such tim e that MMS publishes the 2005 results as final.

State waters estimates were derived by a combination of approaches. The TC EQ

industrial point source group supplied emission estimate data for five production platfor ms in

state waters. Other information on the number and locations of additional platforms i n state

waters was developed from TRC data and data provided by the TCEQ Project Repres entative.

The five platforms provided by TCEQ represent a portion of the total facilities operating

in Texas state waters. Based on production information, characteristics, and fue l consumption

(as outlined in Appendix C.2), it is estimated that there are 17 oil platforms and 18 natura l gas

platforms operating in Texas state waters. To calculate emissions for al l platforms operating in

Texas state waters, a model platform with typical equipment types and counts was developed.

Operating parameters for the model platform equipment types were developed usi ng data from

the 2005 MMS dataset (i.e., platforms included in the MMS 2005 inventory of platforms in

federal waters). Information on typical hours of operation, fuel input rate, fuel usa ge rate, and

fuel type were used to develop combustion source profiles. Other information, such as dril ling

days, barge loading of oil, and total oil and condensate produced were obtained from the TRC

website and used to model evaporative losses. Once the model platform was developed, it w as applied to the estimated number of platforms to generate total state waters activity. The total

activity data was then apportioned to the appropriate offshore county via oil and gas product ion

for 2005.

# 3-1 3.0 SUMMARY OF 2005 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS

This section of the project report presents summarized results of the Texas are a source oil

and gas emission inventory development effort. Emission inventory estimates are pr esented on

both statewide and county-specific bases according to the previously identified gr oupings of

onshore exploration sources, onshore production sources, and offshore production sources

(Section 3.1). In addition to presenting the inventory results, discussion is provided on the

strengths and weaknesses of the inventory, inventory uncertainties, and possible impr ovements

that can be made to the emission estimates. Section 3.2 describes how the various indi vidual

source categories compare and rank relative to each other for each of the estim ated pollutants.

Section 3.3 provides input on the level of emissions per county and what counties represent the

largest share of statewide emissions. In Section 3.4, emissions are examine d in terms of county

attainment/nonattainment designations. The distribution of emissions by designat ion is

presented.

3.1 Oil and Gas Emissions Summary

For the 2005 base year, emission estimates were prepared on both an annual and ozone

season daily (OSD) basis. The specific details on how each category’s e missions were

calculated can be found in Appendix A (for onshore exploration sources), Appendix B (for

onshore production sources), and Appendix C (for offshore production sources). Any required

derivations of activity or emission factor data are explained, and all data use d for the derivations

are shown. All applied equations are presented and discussed, and every variable, const ant, and

conversion factor used is defined and documented. Each source appendix section presents

emission estimates (in tabular form) on an SCC basis for every applicable count y in the state.

All of these individual emissions data are summed to provide the tables in Section 3.0.

Electronic Excel ® 

# spreadsheet files are provided along with this hard copy report that mimic all

of the information in the documentation appendices.

Table 3-1 presents a summary of annual statewide criteria pollutant emissi ons from

individual area source oil and gas categories. Table 3-2 presents the same statewi de information,

but for emissions on an OSD basis as opposed to annual. The emissions data in Tables 3-1 and

3-2 are organized by the exploration, production, and offshore (divided into state and federa l

waters) groupings. As shown in Table 3-1, the largest amount of CO emissions (70.6%) com es from onshore production sources (primarily from natural gas compressor engine s). Emissions of

NO

x 

# are dominated by onshore exploration (54.2%) and onshore production sources (41.6%).

Drilling rig engines are the most significant NO

x 

# exploration category, while compressor engines

are the major production-related NO

x 

# source.

For VOC emissions, onshore production sources make up 85.1% of the total VOC and

onshore exploration sources at 14.3%. The chief production sources contributing to VOC are

glycol dehydrators (26.9%), condensate storage tanks (22.9%), and gas wellheads (12.6%). T he

onshore exploration grouping, namely drilling rig engines, constitute 98.4% of SO 2 

# emissions.

Drilling rig engines (onshore exploration) and compressor engines (onshore produc tion) together

are responsible for roughly 96.4% of PM (PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# ) emissions. The source category

contributions are summarized by pollutant in Table 3-3.

# 3-2

Table 3-1. Summary of Annual Statewide Criteria Pollutant Emissions

Annual Emissions (tons/yr)

Oil and Gas Emission Sources CO NO X 

# PM 10 

# PM 2.5 

# SO 2 

# VOC

Onshore Exploration

Drilling Rig Engines 27,442 119,647 1,998 1,954 13,697 3,183

Mud Degassing -- -- -- -- -- 10,674

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas Wells -- -- -- -- -- 73,474

Pneumatic Pumps-Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 19,764

Well Completions: Gas Wells 2,180 401 -- -- -- 19,764

Well Completions: Oil Wells 74 14 -- -- 138 13,145

Onshore Exploration Total 29,695 120,061 1,998 1,954 13,835 120,240

Onshore Production

Fugitives - All Components -- -- -- -- -- 42,652

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 225,860

Heater Treater 195 977 -- -- -- --

Loading: Truck/Railcar - Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 6,188

Loading: Truck/Railcar - Oil -- -- -- -- -- 26,691

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 88,754 91,021 1,578 1,578 44 5,058

Storage Tanks - Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 192,744

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 76,552

Wellheads - Gas Production -- -- -- -- -- 105,881

Wellheads - Oil Production -- -- -- -- -- 34,315

Onshore Production Total 88,949 91,998 1,578 1,578 44 715,941

Offshore-State Waters (0-10 miles from TX coast)

Boilers/Heaters 14 16 0.3 0.3 0.1 1

Cold Vents -- -- -- -- -- 986

Diesel Engines 217 1,006 71 71 78 75

Drilling Rig Engines 123 537 9 9 61 14

Flares 614 114 <0.1 <0.1 1 10

Fugitives - All Components -- -- -- -- -- 520

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 189

Loading: Barge – Oil -- -- -- -- -- 1

Mud Degassing -- -- -- -- -- 70

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 861 847 11 11 0.4 25

Natural Gas Turbines 851 3,321 20 20 36 22

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas and Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 29

Pressure/Level Controllers -- -- -- -- -- 1

Storage Tanks - Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 1,982

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 99

Offshore-State Waters Total 2,680 5,841 110 110 177 4,025

# 3-3

Table 3-1. Summary of Annual Statewide Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Cont inued)

Annual Emissions (tons/yr)

Oil and Gas Emission Sources CO NO X 

# PM 10 

# PM 2.5 

# SO 2 

# VOC

Offshore-Federal Waters (within 10-25 miles of TX coast)

Boilers/Heaters 5 6 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.3

Cold Vents -- -- -- -- -- 155

Diesel Engines 32 141 8 8 6 9

Fugitives - All components -- -- -- -- -- 667

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 43

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 4,585 3,225 16 16 1 87

Natural Gas Turbines 22 86 1 1 0.2 1

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas and Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 63

Pressure/Level Controllers -- -- -- -- -- 25

Storage Tanks - Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 1

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 37

Storage Tanks - Flashing Losses -- -- -- -- -- 0.1

Offshore-Federal Waters Total 4,644 3,457 25 25 7 1,088

Grand Total - All Sources 125,968 221,357 3,711 3,667 14,064 841,295

# 3-4

Table 3-2. Summary of Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Statewide Criteria Pollutant E missions

Ozone Season Daily (tons/day)

Oil and Gas Emission Sources CO NO X 

# PM 10 

# PM 2.5 

# SO 2 

# VOC

Onshore Exploration

Drilling Rig Engines 74.82 326.21 5.45 5.33 37.34 8.68

Mud Degassing -- -- -- -- -- 29.10

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas Wells -- -- -- -- -- 200.21

Pneumatic Pumps-Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 182.12

Well Completions: Gas Wells 5.94 1.09 -- -- -- 53.88

Well Completions: Oil Wells 0.20 0.04 -- -- 0.38 35.81

Onshore Exploration Total 80.96 327.33 5.45 5.33 37.72 327.88

Onshore Production

Fugitives - All Components -- -- -- -- -- 116.22

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 615.51

Heater Treater 0.53 2.66 -- -- -- --

Loading: Truck/Railcar - Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 16.86

Loading: Truck/Railcar – Oil -- -- -- -- -- 72.71

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 241.88 248.06 4.30 4.30 0.12 13.78

Storage Tanks – Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 525.27

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 208.54

Wellheads - Gas Production -- -- -- -- -- 288.55

Wellheads - Oil Production -- -- -- -- -- 93.50

Onshore Production Total 242.41 250.72 4.30 4.30 0.12 1,950.95

Offshore-State Waters (0-10 miles from TX coast)

Boilers/Heaters 0.04 0.04 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cold Vents -- -- -- -- -- 2.68

Diesel Engines 0.59 2.74 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.20

Drilling Rig Engines 0.34 1.46 0.02 0.02 0.17 0.04

Flares 1.67 0.31 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.03

Fugitives - All Components -- -- -- -- -- 1.42

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 0.52

Loading: Barge – Oil -- -- -- -- -- <0.01

Mud Degassing -- -- -- -- -- 0.19

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 2.35 2.30 0.03 0.03 <0.01 0.07

Natural Gas Turbines 2.32 9.04 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.06

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas and Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 0.08

Pressure/Level Controllers -- -- -- -- -- <0.01

Storage Tanks – Condensate -- -- -- -- -- 5.40

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 0.27

Offshore-State Waters Total 7.30 15.90 0.30 0.30 0.48 10.95

# 3-5 Table 3-2. Summary of Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Statewide Criteria

Pollutant Emissions (Continued)

Ozone Season Daily (tons/day)

Oil and Gas Emission Sources CO NO X 

# PM 10 

# PM 2.5 

# SO 2 

# VOC

Offshore-Federal Waters (within 10-25 miles of TX coast)

Boilers/Heaters 0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cold Vents -- -- -- -- -- 0.42

Diesel Engines 0.09 0.38 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Fugitives - All components -- -- -- -- -- 1.82

Glycol Dehydrators -- -- -- -- -- 0.12

Natural Gas Compressor Engines: All

types 12.49 8.78 0.04 0.04 <0.01 0.24

Natural Gas Turbines 0.06 0.23 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Pneumatic Pumps-Gas and Oil Wells -- -- -- -- -- 0.17

Pressure/Level Controllers -- -- -- -- -- 0.07

Storage Tanks – Condensate -- -- -- -- -- <0.01

Storage Tanks - Crude Oil -- -- -- -- -- 0.10

Storage Tanks - Flashing Losses -- -- -- -- -- <0.01

Offshore-Federal Waters Total 12.65 9.41 0.07 0.07 0.02 2.96

Grand Total - All Sources 343.31 603.37 10.11 9.99 38.34 2,292.55

# 3

- 6Table 3-3. Summary of Oil and Gas Category Emission Contribution Rankings by PollutantCO EmissionsContributionsNOxEmissionsContributionsVOC EmissionsContributionsPM10EmissionsContributionsPM2.5EmissionsContributionsSO2EmissionsContributionsCompressor Engines(OP) – 70.5%Drilling Rig Engines(OE) – 54.1%Glycol Dehydrators (OP)– 26.9%Drilling Rig Engines(OE) - 53.8%Drilling Rig Engines(OE) - 53.3%Drilling Rig Engines(OE) – 97.4%Drilling Rig Engines(OE) – 21.8%Compressor Engines(OP) – 41.2%Condensate StorageTanks (OP) – 22.9%Compressor Engines(OP) – 42.5%Compressor Engines(OP) – 43%Oil Well Completions(OE) – 1.0%Gas Well Completions(OE) – 1.7%Natural Gas Turbines(OSW) – 1.5%Gas Wellheads (OP) –12.6%Diesel Engines(OSW) – 1.9%Diesel Engines(OSW) – 1.9%All others - <1% eachAll others - <1% eachCompressor Engines(OFW) – 1.5%Crude Oil Storage Tanks(OP) – 9.1%All others - <1% each All others - <1% eachAll others - <1% eachGas & Oil WellPneumatic Devices (OE)– 8.7%Pump & Piping Fugitives(OP) – 5.1%Oil Wellheads (OP) –4.1%Oil Loading (OP) – 3.2%Gas Well Completions(OE) – 2.4%Oil Well Completions(OE) – 1.6%Mud Degassing (OE) –1.3%All others - <1% eachOE = Onshore ExplorationOP = Onshore ProductionOSW = Offshore State WatersOFW = Offshore Federal Waters

# 3-7

Tables 3-4a, 3-4b, and 3-4c provide a view of criteria pollutant emissions at the

individual county level. Table 3-4a lists annual and OSD emissions estimates coll ectively for all

onshore exploration sources. The county level estimates for each specific explora tion category

are detailed in Appendix A. Similarly, Tables 3-4b and 3-4c present county level es timates for

onshore production and offshore production categories, respectively. Appendix B provides

county-specific estimates and documentation for all onshore production categori es. Emissions

from offshore production sources in state and federal waters are addressed by c ounty and lease

block in Appendix C.

One of the greatest uncertainties regarding the emissions inventory has to b e the potential

existence of emission controls at onshore sources. Attempts to gather input on the li kelihood and

extent of controls did not yield much information. Since many of these operations woul d be

covered by the TCEQ permit-by-rule program, calls were made to these co ntacts to try and

determine if there was any state data on the extent of controls. Essential ly no useful information

in regards to controls could be identified. Within the resource constraints of this projec t, it was

not feasible to conduct an investigation into this specific issue. As described in t he previous

Task 2 Technical Memorandum, essentially all of the onshore exploration and production sour ce estimates reflect uncontrolled emissions. This is particularly important for two of the categories

found to be prominent VOC emitters – glycol dehydrators and condensate storage tanks. I f a

significant number of these units do have VOC controls, the estimated inventory result s for VOC

would be impacted. In addition to the permit-by-rule for oil and gas sources, a specif ic TCEQ

rule (Rule §115.112) is in effect for VOC storage. That rule applies to oil and condensate

storage on a per tank/tank battery basis based on total throughput. Since this category was addressed as an area source for this inventory, determining the rule applicabil ity for all of the

tanks/tank batteries in Texas was beyond the resources and feasibility of t his project. Additional

investigation would be needed to estimate tank/tank battery throughputs such that possibl e rule

applicability and control impacts could be assessed.

As with any inventory development process, assumptions and concessions have to be

made because of lack of data and time and resource limitations. The estimation proce dures used

in this inventory were detailed in the previous Task 2 Technical Memorandum and approved by

TCEQ. These procedures represent sound and valid estimation techniques; however, if fut ure improvements could be made, the overall quality of the resulting emission estima tes could be

improved. Some of these possible improvements are listed below.

Drilling Rig Engines: develop data on actual fuel usage and/or rig horsepower s izes. If

these data are too cumbersome to obtain, then get the actual number of drilling days.

These data should eventually be available from the TRC. However, it should be noted

that the drilling profile days profiles approach used in the inventory represents a much

more accurate level of drilling than just using an arbitrary number (e.g., like 15 da ys per

10,000 feet).

# 3

- 8Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Exploration SourcesCOANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayAnderson/48001 45.3 0.123 196.6 0.535 3.3 0.009 3.20.009 22.5 0.061 257.1 0.700Andrews/48003 72.2 0.197 307.3 0.837 5.1 0.014 5.00.014 38.5 0.105 3324.6 9.054Angelina/48005 24.0 0.065 97.0 0.264 1.6 0.004 1.60.004 11.1 0.030 27.9 0.076Aransas/48007 5.1 0.014 19.8 0.054 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 2.8 0.008 72.0 0.196Archer/48009 35.8 0.097 156.0 0.425 2.6 0.007 2.5 0.007 17.9 0.049 1395.0 3.799Armstrong/48011Atascosa/48013 23.7 0.065 102.3 0.279 1.7 0.005 1.70.005 11.7 0.032 536.3 1.462Austin/48015 24.3 0.066 93.8 0.256 1.6 0.004 1.5 0.004 11.2 0.031 137.5 0.375Bailey/48017Bandera/48019 0.4 0.001Bastrop/48021 144.3 0.393Baylor/48023 3.7 0.010 16.0 0.044 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 1.8 0.005 65.0 0.177Bee/48025 196.6 0.535 814.4 2.218 13.6 0.037 13.3 0.036 93.0 0.253 287.1 0.782Bell/48027Bexar/48029 1238.1 3.375Blanco/48031Borden/48033 35.0 0.095 151.9 0.414 2.5 0.007 2.5 0.007 17.7 0.048 329.3 0.897Bosque/48035 3.2 0.009 13.9 0.038 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.6 0.004 2.1 0.006Bowie/48037 2.3 0.006 10.0 0.027 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 1.2 0.003 10.3 0.028Brazoria/48039 161.1 0.439 666.3 1.817 11.1 0.030 10.9 0.030 76.5 0.209 335.8 0.916Brazos/48041 41.9 0.114 170.2 0.463 2.8 0.008 2.8 0.008 21.7 0.059 467.9 1.274Brewster/48043Briscoe/48045Brooks/48047 188.7 0.514 727.4 1.981 12.1 0.033 11.8 0.032 83.6 0.228 420.0 1.144Brown/48049 4.6 0.012 19.8 0.054 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 2.3 0.006 355.5 0.968Burleson/48051 29.7 0.081 121.8 0.332 2.0 0.006 2.00.005 17.3 0.047 798.3 2.174Burnet/48053Caldwell/48055 27.2 0.074 118.8 0.324 2.0 0.005 1.90.005 13.6 0.037 1400.1 3.816Calhoun/48057 59.8 0.163 244.0 0.665 4.1 0.011 4.00.011 27.9 0.076 103.1 0.281Callahan/48059 2.5 0.007 10.6 0.029 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 1.3 0.004 389.3 1.060

# 3

- 9Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayCameron/48061 1.1 0.003Camp/48063 41.7 0.113Carson/48065 1.1 0.003 4.0 0.011 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.5 0.001 705.9 1.922Cass/48067 5.5 0.015 21.6 0.059 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.0012.5 0.007 72.5 0.198Castro/48069Chambers/48071 45.2 0.123 161.4 0.440 2.7 0.007 2.60.007 20.5 0.056 395.5 1.079Cherokee/48073 88.8 0.242 356.3 0.970 5.9 0.016 5.80.016 40.7 0.111 163.7 0.446Childress/48075 3.1 0.008Clay/48077 11.8 0.032 51.3 0.140 0.9 0.002 0.8 0.002 6.0 0.016 543.1 1.479Cochran/48079 12.6 0.034 54.4 0.148 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 6.4 0.017 892.1 2.429Coke/48081 12.8 0.035 55.0 0.150 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 6.7 0.018 167.8 0.457Coleman/48083 1.2 0.003 5.0 0.013 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.6 0.002 333.5 0.908Collin/48085Collingsworth/48087 42.5 0.116Colorado/48089 163.2 0.444 674.5 1.837 11.2 0.031 11.0 0.030 77.0 0.210 204.9 0.558Comal/48091Comanche/48093 0.5 0.001 2.3 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001 42.6 0.116Concho/48095 29.3 0.080 118.7 0.323 2.0 0.005 1.9 0.005 13.7 0.037 156.9 0.427Cooke/48097 175.1 0.477 759.9 2.070 12.7 0.035 12.40.034 87.4 0.238 1053.2 2.868Coryell/48099Cottle/48101 37.0 0.101 154.3 0.420 2.6 0.007 2.5 0.007 17.6 0.048 52.0 0.142Crane/48103 51.2 0.139 204.4 0.557 3.4 0.009 3.3 0.009 25.0 0.068 1903.3 5.183Crockett/48105 745.2 2.029 2987.0 8.135 49.7 0.13548.6 0.132 343.9 0.936 2623.8 7.145Crosby/48107 171.0 0.466Culberson/48109 4.7 0.013 20.4 0.055 0.3 0.001 0.30.001 2.3 0.006 40.9 0.111Dallam/48111Dallas/48113Dawson/48115 18.9 0.051 81.6 0.222 1.4 0.004 1.3 0.004 9.7 0.026 547.7 1.492Deaf Smith/48117

# 3

- 10Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayDelta/48119Denton/48121 731.4 1.992 2829.9 7.707 47.0 0.128 46.0 0.125 322.5 0.878 1348.5 3.672De Witt/48123 199.1 0.542 791.5 2.155 13.2 0.036 12.9 0.035 90.3 0.246 289.2 0.787Dickens/48125 12.0 0.033 51.7 0.141 0.9 0.002 0.8 0.002 6.1 0.017 112.3 0.306Dimmit/48127 53.1 0.145 213.1 0.580 3.5 0.010 3.5 0.009 25.2 0.069 407.0 1.108Donley/48129 0.4 0.001Duval/48131 173.7 0.473 658.9 1.794 10.9 0.030 10.70.029 75.4 0.205 728.4 1.984Eastland/48133 37.1 0.101 160.5 0.437 2.7 0.007 2.60.007 18.5 0.051 399.8 1.089Ector/48135 202.3 0.551 877.7 2.390 14.7 0.040 14.30.039 102.3 0.279 2875.7 7.831Edwards/48137 30.5 0.083 124.6 0.339 2.1 0.006 2.00.006 14.2 0.039 106.9 0.291Ellis/48139 2.5 0.007 9.6 0.026 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.0001.1 0.003 3.9 0.011El Paso/48141Erath/48143 8.5 0.023 32.4 0.088 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 3.8 0.010 52.8 0.144Falls/48145 2.7 0.007 11.7 0.032 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.3 0.004 14.2 0.039Fannin/48147Fayette/48149 41.6 0.113 177.6 0.484 3.0 0.008 2.90.008 21.7 0.059 429.5 1.170Fisher/48151 3.5 0.010 14.9 0.041 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 2.0 0.005 206.3 0.562Floyd/48153 3.2 0.009 13.7 0.037 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.6 0.004 2.6 0.007Foard/48155 3.6 0.010 14.4 0.039 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.6 0.004 42.1 0.115Fort Bend/48157 107.4 0.293 417.7 1.139 6.9 0.019 6.8 0.019 47.9 0.131 334.9 0.913Franklin/48159 27.9 0.076 118.8 0.323 2.0 0.005 1.90.005 14.3 0.039 138.7 0.378Freestone/48161 616.0 1.677 2464.5 6.712 41.0 0.11240.1 0.109 281.0 0.765 910.7 2.480Frio/48163 6.3 0.017 27.3 0.074 0.5 0.001 0.4 0.0013.1 0.009 245.7 0.669Gaines/48165 405.9 1.105 1752.2 4.772 29.2 0.080 28.6 0.078 202.4 0.551 1887.8 5.141Galveston/48167 19.5 0.053 78.6 0.214 1.3 0.004 1.30.003 9.6 0.026 137.4 0.375Garza/48169 40.7 0.111 177.3 0.483 3.0 0.008 2.9 0.008 20.3 0.055 933.6 2.543Gillespie/48171Glasscock/48173 26.0 0.071 109.3 0.298 1.8 0.005 1.8 0.005 14.0 0.038 645.7 1.759Goliad/48175 444.1 1.209 1667.8 4.542 27.7 0.075 27.0 0.074 189.9 0.517 895.4 2.438

# 3

- 11Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayGonzales/48177 6.4 0.018 28.1 0.077 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 3.2 0.009 82.6 0.225Gray/48179 8.5 0.023 32.1 0.087 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.0013.7 0.010 1318.8 3.592Grayson/48181 88.8 0.242 382.6 1.042 6.4 0.017 6.20.017 45.8 0.125 533.2 1.452Gregg/48183 126.7 0.350 446.7 1.233 7.4 0.020 7.2 0.020 50.7 0.140 1706.4 4.709Grimes/48185 86.9 0.237 270.9 0.738 4.4 0.012 4.3 0.012 30.5 0.083 290.0 0.790Guadalupe/48187 11.8 0.032 51.5 0.140 0.9 0.002 0.80.002 5.9 0.016 905.0 2.467Hale/48189 7.7 0.021 32.8 0.089 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.0014.1 0.011 106.0 0.289Hall/48191Hamilton/48193 0.7 0.002 3.0 0.008 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001 2.5 0.007Hansford/48195 41.9 0.114 170.4 0.464 2.8 0.008 2.80.008 19.4 0.053 168.0 0.458Hardeman/48197 59.6 0.162 259.5 0.707 4.3 0.012 4.20.012 29.9 0.081 149.4 0.407Hardin/48199 59.7 0.162 238.3 0.648 4.0 0.011 3.9 0.011 28.5 0.077 549.0 1.492Harris/48201 61.8 0.169 261.7 0.714 4.4 0.012 4.3 0.012 30.0 0.082 235.2 0.641Harrison/48203 626.3 1.728 2538.1 7.004 42.2 0.11741.3 0.114 293.6 0.810 1365.2 3.767Hartley/48205 10.2 0.028 42.0 0.114 0.7 0.002 0.7 0.002 4.8 0.013 32.0 0.087Haskell/48207 0.7 0.002 3.0 0.008 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001 122.0 0.332Hays/48209Hemphill/48211 3534.0 9.624 15159.2 41.283 252.9 0.689 247.4 0.674 1739.0 4.736 2596.0 7.070Henderson/48213 30.6 0.083 115.5 0.315 1.9 0.005 1.9 0.005 13.2 0.036 151.8 0.413Hidalgo/48215 411.0 1.119 1531.2 4.170 25.4 0.069 24.8 0.068 174.0 0.474 845.8 2.304Hill/48217 67.7 0.184 293.4 0.799 4.9 0.013 4.8 0.013 33.6 0.091 42.2 0.115Hockley/48219 86.5 0.236 371.2 1.011 6.2 0.017 6.10.016 45.2 0.123 2127.1 5.793Hood/48221 48.0 0.131 171.9 0.468 2.8 0.008 2.8 0.008 19.5 0.053 131.9 0.359Hopkins/48223 1.8 0.005 7.7 0.021 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.9 0.002 31.4 0.085Houston/48225 68.9 0.188 255.0 0.694 4.2 0.012 4.10.011 29.0 0.079 219.2 0.597Howard/48227 21.9 0.060 92.8 0.253 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 11.9 0.032 1643.2 4.475Hudspeth/48229Hunt/48231Hutchinson/48233 24.1 0.066 99.4 0.271 1.7 0.005 1.6 0.004 11.3 0.031 1443.4 3.931

# 3

- 12Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayIrion/48235 218.9 0.596 939.1 2.557 15.7 0.043 15.30.042 108.5 0.296 886.0 2.413Jack/48237 102.4 0.279 425.0 1.157 7.1 0.019 6.9 0.019 49.3 0.134 1021.3 2.781Jackson/48239 63.1 0.172 216.8 0.591 3.6 0.010 3.50.010 25.3 0.069 340.9 0.928Jasper/48241 5.3 0.014 16.0 0.043 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 3.3 0.009 187.3 0.510Jeff Davis/48243Jefferson/48245 90.2 0.245 333.2 0.905 5.5 0.015 5.4 0.015 38.8 0.105 327.7 0.891Jim Hogg/48247 211.8 0.577 874.6 2.382 14.6 0.040 14.2 0.039 100.0 0.272 262.3 0.714Jim Wells/48249 19.5 0.053 78.2 0.213 1.3 0.004 1.30.003 9.0 0.024 99.4 0.271Johnson/48251 309.2 0.840 979.3 2.661 16.1 0.044 15.7 0.043 110.3 0.300 931.1 2.530Jones/48253 12.2 0.033 51.8 0.141 0.9 0.002 0.8 0.002 6.4 0.018 374.1 1.019Karnes/48255 33.3 0.091 134.0 0.365 2.2 0.006 2.2 0.006 15.9 0.043 150.9 0.411Kaufman/48257 8.4 0.023Kendall/48259Kenedy/48261 159.4 0.434 621.3 1.692 10.3 0.028 10.1 0.027 70.8 0.193 239.7 0.653Kent/48263 2.7 0.007 11.8 0.032 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.0011.4 0.004 230.3 0.627Kerr/48265 0.4 0.001Kimble/48267 2.4 0.006 9.1 0.025 0.2 0.000 0.1 0.000 1.0 0.003 6.9 0.019King/48269 15.8 0.043 68.2 0.186 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 7.9 0.021 216.4 0.589Kinney/48271Kleberg/48273 58.4 0.159 223.4 0.608 3.7 0.010 3.60.010 25.4 0.069 123.7 0.337Knox/48275 0.9 0.002 3.8 0.010 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.4 0.001 90.1 0.245Lamar/48277Lamb/48279 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 25.8 0.070Lampasas/48281 0.4 0.001 1.7 0.005 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.2 0.001 0.4 0.001La Salle/48283 563.4 1.534 2420.9 6.593 40.4 0.11039.5 0.108 277.4 0.756 525.7 1.432Lavaca/48285 170.2 0.464 644.0 1.754 10.7 0.029 10.4 0.028 73.2 0.199 340.3 0.927Lee/48287 56.0 0.153 221.2 0.602 3.7 0.010 3.6 0.010 34.5 0.094 1281.5 3.490Leon/48289 527.8 1.437 2188.1 5.959 36.5 0.099 35.70.097 250.0 0.681 578.4 1.575Liberty/48291 180.7 0.493 673.5 1.837 11.2 0.030 10.9 0.030 77.2 0.210 659.8 1.799

# 3

- 13Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayLimestone/48293 273.9 0.746 1095.0 2.982 18.2 0.05017.8 0.049 124.8 0.340 424.2 1.155Lipscomb/48295 200.6 0.546 745.3 2.030 12.4 0.034 12.1 0.033 88.1 0.240 905.0 2.465Live Oak/48297 492.2 1.340 2107.6 5.740 35.2 0.09634.4 0.094 241.3 0.657 481.0 1.310Llano/48299Loving/48301 292.7 0.797 1114.0 3.034 18.5 0.050 18.1 0.049 126.8 0.345 768.4 2.093Lubbock/48303 7.9 0.021 34.3 0.093 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 3.9 0.011 195.0 0.531Lynn/48305 6.3 0.017 27.3 0.074 0.5 0.001 0.4 0.0013.2 0.009 47.6 0.130McCulloch/48307 8.0 0.022 34.7 0.094 0.6 0.002 0.60.002 4.0 0.011 42.6 0.116McLennan/48309 27.1 0.074McMullen/48311 333.6 0.909 1283.0 3.494 21.3 0.05820.8 0.057 146.6 0.399 846.1 2.304Madison/48313 30.5 0.083 130.6 0.356 2.2 0.006 2.10.006 15.9 0.043 183.4 0.499Marion/48315 23.6 0.064 95.2 0.259 1.6 0.004 1.5 0.004 11.3 0.031 162.5 0.443Martin/48317 120.0 0.327 520.3 1.417 8.7 0.024 8.50.023 60.9 0.166 937.7 2.554Mason/48319Matagorda/48321 151.9 0.414 559.9 1.525 9.3 0.025 9.1 0.025 64.9 0.177 472.1 1.286Maverick/48323 147.8 0.403 642.4 1.749 10.7 0.029 10.5 0.029 74.3 0.202 422.0 1.149Medina/48325 1.2 0.003 5.1 0.014 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.6 0.002 679.9 1.853Menard/48327 2.5 0.007 10.9 0.030 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 1.2 0.003 51.5 0.140Midland/48329 266.3 0.725 1151.9 3.137 19.2 0.052 18.8 0.051 134.8 0.367 2385.0 6.495Milam/48331 4.2 0.011 18.1 0.049 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 2.1 0.006 467.0 1.272Mills/48333 12.1 0.033 52.7 0.144 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 6.0 0.016 7.0 0.019Mitchell/48335 24.1 0.066 104.8 0.285 1.8 0.005 1.70.005 12.1 0.033 985.0 2.682Montague/48337 107.8 0.294 465.5 1.268 7.8 0.021 7.6 0.021 55.0 0.150 1176.4 3.204Montgomery/48339 37.6 0.103 160.2 0.437 2.7 0.007 2.6 0.007 18.3 0.050 103.0 0.281Moore/48341 17.7 0.048 71.6 0.195 1.2 0.003 1.2 0.003 8.3 0.023 462.2 1.259Morris/48343 0.4 0.001Motley/48345 8.4 0.023Nacogdoches/48347 257.8 0.702 920.3 2.506 15.2 0.041 14.9 0.041 104.3 0.284 635.3 1.730Navarro/48349 13.8 0.038 58.2 0.159 1.0 0.003 0.9 0.003 6.8 0.018 370.0 1.008

# 3

- 14Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayNewton/48351 40.5 0.110 170.4 0.464 2.8 0.008 2.8 0.008 21.8 0.059 288.5 0.786Nolan/48353 15.3 0.042 66.3 0.181 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 7.8 0.021 231.1 0.629Nueces/48355 194.6 0.531 795.7 2.169 13.2 0.036 13.0 0.035 91.4 0.249 400.1 1.091Ochiltree/48357 56.6 0.154 213.7 0.582 3.5 0.010 3.5 0.009 25.0 0.068 465.4 1.268Oldham/48359 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.5 0.023Orange/48361 32.8 0.089 143.1 0.389 2.4 0.006 2.3 0.006 16.4 0.045 79.3 0.215Palo Pinto/48363 21.8 0.059 75.8 0.206 1.3 0.003 1.2 0.003 9.3 0.025 422.5 1.151Panola/48365 704.9 1.920 2710.8 7.382 45.0 0.123 44.0 0.120 311.8 0.849 1898.0 5.169Parker/48367 175.8 0.478 712.6 1.936 11.9 0.032 11.6 0.032 82.4 0.224 409.3 1.112Parmer/48369Pecos/48371 204.8 0.558 813.3 2.215 13.5 0.037 13.20.036 93.3 0.254 1688.2 4.597Polk/48373 36.6 0.100 147.9 0.403 2.5 0.007 2.4 0.007 16.9 0.046 104.2 0.284Potter/48375 37.8 0.103 155.9 0.425 2.6 0.007 2.5 0.007 17.8 0.049 336.6 0.917Presidio/48377Rains/48379 1.3 0.003Randall/48381Reagan/48383 493.0 1.343 2140.0 5.828 35.7 0.097 34.9 0.095 248.2 0.676 2215.2 6.033Real/48385 0.4 0.001 1.6 0.004 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.2 0.001 1.7 0.005Red River/48387 24.0 0.065Reeves/48389 77.4 0.211 330.0 0.899 5.5 0.015 5.4 0.015 38.1 0.104 410.3 1.117Refugio/48391 68.3 0.186 260.3 0.709 4.3 0.012 4.20.012 34.1 0.093 931.4 2.536Roberts/48393 168.5 0.459 651.2 1.773 10.8 0.029 10.6 0.029 77.7 0.212 715.9 1.950Robertson/48395 583.5 1.589 2352.5 6.407 39.1 0.10738.3 0.104 268.4 0.731 743.7 2.025Rockwall/48397Runnels/48399 36.4 0.099 156.4 0.426 2.6 0.007 2.60.007 18.9 0.051 326.7 0.890Rusk/48401 440.7 1.216 1682.5 4.643 27.9 0.077 27.30.075 191.4 0.528 1631.0 4.501Sabine/48403 2.8 0.008 12.1 0.033 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.4 0.004 4.7 0.013San Augustine/48405 4.2 0.011San Jacinto/48407 29.0 0.079 118.1 0.322 2.0 0.0051.9 0.005 13.5 0.037 43.3 0.118

# 3

- 15Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daySan Patricio/48409 183.0 0.499 767.7 2.093 12.8 0.035 12.5 0.034 87.7 0.239 235.2 0.641San Saba/48411Schleicher/48413 56.0 0.153 177.6 0.484 2.9 0.008 2.9 0.008 20.5 0.056 382.3 1.041Scurry/48415 102.8 0.280 435.9 1.187 7.3 0.020 7.10.019 55.3 0.151 1660.5 4.522Shackelford/48417 11.8 0.032 50.7 0.138 0.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 5.9 0.016 881.1 2.399Shelby/48419 95.6 0.260 364.2 0.992 6.0 0.016 5.9 0.016 43.0 0.117 344.1 0.937Sherman/48421 7.3 0.020 29.2 0.079 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 3.3 0.009 102.2 0.278Smith/48423 1258.9 3.474 5165.4 14.253 86.0 0.237 84.1 0.232 590.6 1.630 1444.1 3.985Somervell/48425 2.9 0.008 11.9 0.032 0.2 0.001 0.20.001 1.4 0.004 3.2 0.009Starr/48427 149.9 0.408 472.9 1.288 7.8 0.021 7.6 0.021 53.7 0.146 662.5 1.804Stephens/48429 28.9 0.079 121.1 0.330 2.0 0.005 2.00.005 14.3 0.039 695.9 1.895Sterling/48431 50.8 0.138 216.3 0.589 3.6 0.010 3.50.010 25.8 0.070 772.8 2.105Stonewall/48433 5.0 0.014 21.8 0.059 0.4 0.001 0.40.001 2.5 0.007 279.7 0.762Sutton/48435 76.7 0.209 266.6 0.726 4.4 0.012 4.3 0.012 30.2 0.082 586.8 1.598Swisher/48437Tarrant/48439 329.7 0.896 1110.4 3.017 18.3 0.050 17.9 0.049 125.5 0.341 901.7 2.450Taylor/48441 1.6 0.004 6.3 0.017 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 1.0 0.003 233.9 0.637Terrell/48443 127.9 0.348 504.3 1.373 8.4 0.023 8.20.022 58.1 0.158 279.1 0.760Terry/48445 30.6 0.083 133.3 0.363 2.2 0.006 2.2 0.006 15.4 0.042 444.3 1.210Throckmorton/48447 5.3 0.015 22.8 0.062 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 2.8 0.008 476.3 1.297Titus/48449 1.3 0.004 5.7 0.016 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.7 0.002 87.5 0.238Tom Green/48451 67.8 0.185 293.8 0.800 4.9 0.013 4.8 0.013 33.8 0.092 346.8 0.944Travis/48453 13.3 0.036Trinity/48455 0.2 0.001 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 10.6 0.029Tyler/48457 305.2 0.831 1265.4 3.446 21.1 0.057 20.6 0.056 144.6 0.394 311.6 0.849Upshur/48459 241.1 0.665 1005.1 2.773 16.7 0.046 16.4 0.045 115.0 0.317 321.3 0.887Upton/48461 602.7 1.641 2465.6 6.715 41.0 0.112 40.1 0.109 287.4 0.783 2147.7 5.849Uvalde/48463 0.2 0.000Val Verde/48465 66.5 0.181 272.4 0.742 4.5 0.012 4.4 0.012 31.1 0.085 94.8 0.258

# 3

- 16Table 3-4a. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions forExploration Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayVan Zandt/48467 3.8 0.010 16.7 0.045 0.3 0.001 0.30.001 1.9 0.005 253.4 0.690Victoria/48469 30.7 0.084 110.2 0.300 1.8 0.005 1.80.005 12.8 0.035 201.1 0.548Walker/48471 9.9 0.027 41.2 0.112 0.7 0.002 0.7 0.002 4.9 0.013 33.7 0.092Waller/48473 33.4 0.091 140.1 0.382 2.3 0.006 2.3 0.006 16.9 0.046 214.4 0.585Ward/48475 218.1 0.594 942.0 2.565 15.7 0.043 15.40.042 110.2 0.300 1560.7 4.250Washington/48477 58.3 0.159 208.8 0.569 3.5 0.009 3.4 0.009 23.8 0.065 197.0 0.536Webb/48479 718.3 1.956 2738.4 7.458 45.4 0.124 44.40.121 311.5 0.848 1634.9 4.452Wharton/48481 224.6 0.612 877.0 2.388 14.6 0.040 14.2 0.039 100.5 0.274 529.8 1.443Wheeler/48483 2246.7 6.118 9524.6 25.938 158.8 0.433 155.3 0.423 1090.4 2.970 1861.1 5.068Wichita/48485 14.4 0.039 62.7 0.171 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 7.2 0.020 2600.5 7.082Wilbarger/48487 39.5 0.107 171.9 0.468 2.9 0.008 2.8 0.008 19.7 0.054 419.9 1.144Willacy/48489 51.9 0.141 194.7 0.530 3.2 0.009 3.20.009 22.4 0.061 159.3 0.434Williamson/48491 21.4 0.058Wilson/48493 7.4 0.020 32.1 0.088 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 3.7 0.010 289.9 0.790Winkler/48495 183.1 0.499 779.6 2.123 13.0 0.035 12.7 0.035 92.5 0.252 1309.7 3.567Wise/48497 609.3 1.656 2407.0 6.541 40.0 0.109 39.10.106 278.7 0.757 1838.5 4.996Wood/48499 8.7 0.024 37.6 0.102 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.0024.4 0.012 296.2 0.807Yoakum/48501 116.2 0.316 497.5 1.355 8.3 0.023 8.10.022 59.9 0.163 1889.3 5.145Young/48503 10.6 0.029 45.3 0.123 0.8 0.002 0.7 0.002 5.3 0.014 1209.5 3.294Zapata/48505 1115.6 3.038 4175.0 11.370 69.2 0.18867.7 0.184 474.5 1.292 2134.7 5.813Zavala/48507 44.4 0.121 193.4 0.527 3.2 0.009 3.2 0.009 22.3 0.061 123.5 0.336Total 29,695 80.96 120,061 327.33 1,998 5.45 1,9545.33 13,835 37.72 120,240 327.68In order to reflect significant figures, estimates should be interpreted as follows: 0.0 = <0.1; 0.00 = <0.01; and 0.000 = <0.001.

# 3

- 17Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production SourcesCOANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayAnderson/48001 179.8 0.490 185.8 0.506 3.1 0.008 3.1 0.008 0.1 0.000 1483.7 4.041Andrews/48003 562.0 1.531 623.2 1.697 9.4 0.026 9.40.026 0.3 0.001 12150.6 33.090Angelina/48005 21.2 0.058 21.8 0.059 0.4 0.001 0.40.001 0.0 0.000 100.8 0.274Aransas/48007 94.2 0.257 96.9 0.264 1.6 0.004 1.6 0.004 0.0 0.000 933.5 2.544Archer/48009 8.9 0.024 11.2 0.031 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 1744.9 4.752Armstrong/48011Atascosa/48013 94.5 0.258 98.2 0.268 1.6 0.004 1.60.004 0.0 0.000 1154.8 3.148Austin/48015 205.3 0.560 211.0 0.576 3.5 0.010 3.50.010 0.1 0.000 1552.0 4.233Bailey/48017Bandera/48019 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.9 0.002Bastrop/48021 5.8 0.016 6.1 0.017 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 255.2 0.696Baylor/48023 0.1 0.000 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 96.5 0.263Bee/48025 616.1 1.678 632.1 1.721 10.5 0.029 10.5 0.029 0.3 0.001 3240.7 8.825Bell/48027Bexar/48029 0.1 0.000 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 1314.5 3.583Blanco/48031Borden/48033 42.5 0.116 52.3 0.142 0.7 0.002 0.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 1724.0 4.695Bosque/48035Bowie/48037 4.9 0.013 5.2 0.014 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 83.7 0.228Brazoria/48039 221.4 0.604 266.9 0.728 9.5 0.026 9.5 0.026 0.3 0.001 6955.2 18.969Brazos/48041 184.8 0.503 193.3 0.526 3.1 0.009 3.10.009 0.1 0.000 1905.8 5.190Brewster/48043Briscoe/48045Brooks/48047 1258.6 3.428 1291.9 3.518 21.4 0.058 21.4 0.058 0.6 0.002 9651.3 26.283Brown/48049 24.9 0.068 25.7 0.070 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 505.5 1.377Burleson/48051 226.4 0.617 236.4 0.644 3.8 0.010 3.8 0.010 0.1 0.000 2410.0 6.563Burnet/48053Caldwell/48055 7.8 0.021 9.8 0.027 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 1727.2 4.708Calhoun/48057 189.8 0.517 195.5 0.532 3.2 0.009 3.20.009 0.1 0.000 1484.5 4.043Callahan/48059 15.8 0.043 16.6 0.045 0.3 0.001 0.30.001 0.0 0.000 516.1 1.406

# 3

- 18Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayCameron/48061 3.0 0.008 3.0 0.008 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 13.8 0.038Camp/48063 14.2 0.039 15.0 0.041 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 163.4 0.445Carson/48065 312.1 0.850 320.3 0.872 5.3 0.014 5.30.014 0.1 0.000 1946.8 5.302Cass/48067 56.2 0.153 58.2 0.158 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 0.0 0.000 488.2 1.329Castro/48069Chambers/48071 101.5 0.277 122.7 0.335 4.3 0.012 4.3 0.012 0.1 0.000 3413.3 9.309Cherokee/48073 229.4 0.625 235.6 0.642 3.9 0.011 3.9 0.011 0.1 0.000 1488.3 4.053Childress/48075 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 12.8 0.035Clay/48077 13.7 0.037 15.5 0.042 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 859.8 2.341Cochran/48079 44.2 0.120 52.9 0.144 0.7 0.002 0.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 2164.7 5.895Coke/48081 54.2 0.148 56.4 0.154 0.9 0.003 0.9 0.003 0.0 0.000 468.4 1.276Coleman/48083 30.6 0.083 31.9 0.087 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 557.7 1.519Collin/48085Collingsworth/48087 20.9 0.057 21.4 0.058 0.4 0.0010.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 124.6 0.339Colorado/48089 347.6 0.947 356.8 0.972 5.9 0.016 5.9 0.016 0.2 0.000 2407.5 6.556Comal/48091Comanche/48093 11.4 0.031 11.7 0.032 0.2 0.001 0.20.001 0.0 0.000 97.0 0.264Concho/48095 23.8 0.065 25.2 0.069 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 345.6 0.941Cooke/48097 21.5 0.059 25.2 0.069 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 1630.2 4.440Coryell/48099Cottle/48101 78.5 0.214 80.6 0.219 1.3 0.004 1.3 0.004 0.0 0.000 537.4 1.464Crane/48103 956.9 2.606 999.9 2.723 16.2 0.044 16.20.044 0.4 0.001 8484.7 23.107Crockett/48105 1847.8 5.032 1901.4 5.178 31.5 0.08631.5 0.086 0.9 0.002 10799.4 29.410Crosby/48107 1.2 0.003 2.3 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 337.8 0.920Culberson/48109 24.7 0.067 25.6 0.070 0.4 0.001 0.40.001 0.0 0.000 186.3 0.507Dallam/48111Dallas/48113Dawson/48115 39.9 0.109 49.9 0.136 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 0.0 0.000 1992.5 5.426Deaf Smith/48117Delta/48119

# 3

- 19Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayDenton/48121 1615.0 4.398 1616.7 4.403 38.7 0.105 38.7 0.105 1.1 0.003 12189.4 33.196De Witt/48123 502.6 1.369 516.2 1.406 8.6 0.023 8.60.023 0.2 0.001 4992.6 13.596Dickens/48125 2.9 0.008 6.0 0.016 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 545.0 1.484Dimmit/48127 59.0 0.161 62.4 0.170 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 0.0 0.000 913.6 2.488Donley/48129 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.4 0.004Duval/48131 1038.8 2.829 1066.7 2.905 17.7 0.048 17.7 0.048 0.5 0.001 6019.8 16.394Eastland/48133 76.3 0.208 78.8 0.215 1.3 0.004 1.30.004 0.0 0.000 836.8 2.279Ector/48135 709.4 1.932 764.8 2.083 11.9 0.032 11.90.032 0.3 0.001 10891.8 29.662Edwards/48137 287.1 0.782 294.0 0.801 4.9 0.013 4.90.013 0.1 0.000 1122.9 3.058Ellis/48139 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 3.0 0.008El Paso/48141Erath/48143 32.1 0.087 32.9 0.089 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 156.6 0.427Falls/48145 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 12.5 0.034Fannin/48147Fayette/48149 367.9 1.002 380.3 1.036 6.3 0.017 6.30.017 0.2 0.000 3528.9 9.610Fisher/48151 12.8 0.035 14.2 0.039 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 404.7 1.102Floyd/48153 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.4 0.004Foard/48155 14.4 0.039 14.9 0.041 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 122.0 0.332Fort Bend/48157 228.6 0.623 276.0 0.753 9.7 0.027 9.7 0.027 0.3 0.001 8222.1 22.424Franklin/48159 53.9 0.147 56.1 0.153 0.9 0.002 0.90.002 0.0 0.000 664.9 1.811Freestone/48161 4309.4 11.736 4414.3 12.021 73.5 0.200 73.5 0.200 2.0 0.006 16757.9 45.637Frio/48163 18.4 0.050 20.0 0.054 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 485.7 1.323Gaines/48165 544.1 1.482 614.9 1.675 9.0 0.025 9.00.025 0.2 0.001 11929.3 32.487Galveston/48167 70.3 0.192 85.8 0.234 3.0 0.008 3.00.008 0.1 0.000 4305.4 11.742Garza/48169 16.1 0.044 24.6 0.067 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 2173.4 5.919Gillespie/48171Glasscock/48173 212.6 0.579 225.0 0.613 3.6 0.010 3.6 0.010 0.1 0.000 2459.3 6.697Goliad/48175 1203.0 3.276 1234.0 3.361 20.5 0.056 20.5 0.056 0.6 0.002 7080.2 19.282Gonzales/48177 19.1 0.052 20.1 0.055 0.3 0.001 0.30.001 0.0 0.000 269.1 0.733Gray/48179 217.1 0.591 224.9 0.612 3.7 0.010 3.7 0.010 0.1 0.000 2529.8 6.889

# 3

- 20Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayGrayson/48181 100.9 0.275 106.3 0.289 1.7 0.005 1.70.005 0.0 0.000 1172.9 3.194Gregg/48183 1079.8 2.979 1111.8 3.068 18.4 0.051 18.4 0.051 0.5 0.001 7108.9 19.616Grimes/48185 304.6 0.830 312.3 0.851 5.2 0.014 5.20.014 0.1 0.000 1483.2 4.039Guadalupe/48187 1.5 0.004 4.6 0.012 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1381.0 3.764Hale/48189 19.7 0.054 25.8 0.070 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 950.0 2.587Hall/48191Hamilton/48193 2.6 0.007 2.7 0.007 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 14.7 0.040Hansford/48195 403.1 1.098 413.2 1.125 6.9 0.019 6.9 0.019 0.2 0.001 1741.8 4.743Hardeman/48197 10.7 0.029 14.6 0.040 0.2 0.000 0.20.000 0.0 0.000 672.8 1.832Hardin/48199 77.0 0.209 85.0 0.231 2.3 0.006 2.3 0.006 0.1 0.000 3492.2 9.490Harris/48201 160.6 0.438 194.0 0.529 6.9 0.019 6.90.019 0.2 0.001 4855.7 13.243Harrison/48203 1228.4 3.390 1260.2 3.477 20.9 0.05820.9 0.058 0.6 0.002 7537.5 20.799Hartley/48205 37.5 0.102 38.8 0.106 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 0.0 0.000 214.3 0.584Haskell/48207 0.9 0.002 1.6 0.004 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 231.5 0.631Hays/48209Hemphill/48211 1720.9 4.686 1765.0 4.807 29.3 0.08029.3 0.080 0.8 0.002 11346.1 30.899Henderson/48213 636.9 1.734 653.5 1.780 10.9 0.03010.9 0.030 0.3 0.001 2765.7 7.532Hidalgo/48215 3336.6 9.086 3422.9 9.322 56.9 0.15556.9 0.155 1.6 0.004 25063.7 68.256Hill/48217 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.7 0.002Hockley/48219 164.9 0.449 208.7 0.568 2.6 0.007 2.60.007 0.1 0.000 8252.6 22.474Hood/48221 86.6 0.236 88.8 0.242 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 0.0 0.000 482.3 1.314Hopkins/48223 20.4 0.056 21.7 0.059 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 223.4 0.608Houston/48225 182.4 0.497 188.3 0.513 3.1 0.008 3.10.008 0.1 0.000 1107.2 3.015Howard/48227 104.0 0.283 118.5 0.323 1.7 0.005 1.70.005 0.0 0.000 3760.2 10.240Hudspeth/48229Hunt/48231Hutchinson/48233 241.0 0.656 248.5 0.677 4.1 0.0114.1 0.011 0.1 0.000 2606.2 7.097Irion/48235 150.3 0.409 156.8 0.427 2.5 0.007 2.5 0.007 0.1 0.000 1749.5 4.765Jack/48237 246.1 0.670 253.4 0.690 4.2 0.011 4.2 0.011 0.1 0.000 2398.3 6.531Jackson/48239 460.1 1.253 473.3 1.289 7.8 0.021 7.80.021 0.2 0.001 3368.7 9.174

# 3

- 21Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayJasper/48241 137.8 0.375 142.0 0.387 2.3 0.006 2.30.006 0.1 0.000 1833.8 4.994Jeff Davis/48243Jefferson/48245 328.0 0.891 353.3 0.960 9.9 0.027 9.9 0.027 0.3 0.001 11891.4 32.314Jim Hogg/48247 436.1 1.188 447.3 1.218 7.4 0.020 7.4 0.020 0.2 0.001 2799.7 7.625Jim Wells/48249 149.7 0.408 153.7 0.419 2.5 0.007 2.5 0.007 0.1 0.000 872.3 2.376Johnson/48251 688.5 1.871 688.6 1.871 16.5 0.045 16.5 0.045 0.5 0.001 3738.0 10.158Jones/48253 10.3 0.028 12.2 0.033 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 613.7 1.671Karnes/48255 145.4 0.396 149.6 0.407 2.5 0.007 2.50.007 0.1 0.000 1021.7 2.782Kaufman/48257 0.1 0.000 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 25.9 0.070Kendall/48259Kenedy/48261 778.5 2.120 797.9 2.173 13.3 0.036 13.3 0.036 0.4 0.001 3584.1 9.761Kent/48263 136.5 0.372 149.7 0.408 2.3 0.006 2.3 0.006 0.1 0.000 2171.6 5.914Kerr/48265 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.8 0.002Kimble/48267 5.0 0.014 5.2 0.014 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 21.1 0.057King/48269 34.9 0.095 39.9 0.109 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 0.0 0.000 983.9 2.680Kinney/48271Kleberg/48273 448.0 1.220 459.7 1.252 7.6 0.021 7.60.021 0.2 0.001 3475.4 9.465Knox/48275 0.1 0.000 0.6 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 161.8 0.441Lamar/48277Lamb/48279 3.6 0.010 5.3 0.015 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 286.9 0.781Lampasas/48281La Salle/48283 225.2 0.613 231.2 0.630 3.8 0.010 3.8 0.010 0.1 0.000 1782.0 4.853Lavaca/48285 1106.0 3.012 1133.9 3.088 18.9 0.051 18.9 0.051 0.5 0.001 5761.3 15.690Lee/48287 216.3 0.589 224.9 0.612 3.7 0.010 3.7 0.010 0.1 0.000 1931.5 5.260Leon/48289 672.5 1.831 690.8 1.881 11.5 0.031 11.50.031 0.3 0.001 3129.3 8.522Liberty/48291 353.1 0.963 424.9 1.159 15.1 0.041 15.1 0.041 0.5 0.001 15220.0 41.509Limestone/48293 1129.1 3.075 1156.7 3.150 19.2 0.052 19.2 0.052 0.5 0.001 4550.6 12.393Lipscomb/48295 793.0 2.159 813.6 2.216 13.5 0.037 13.5 0.037 0.4 0.001 4691.9 12.778Live Oak/48297 386.7 1.053 397.3 1.082 6.6 0.018 6.6 0.018 0.2 0.000 2446.0 6.661Llano/48299

# 3

- 22Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayLoving/48301 1045.8 2.848 1073.2 2.923 17.8 0.049 17.8 0.049 0.5 0.001 4630.8 12.611Lubbock/48303 2.4 0.007 5.6 0.015 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 659.2 1.795Lynn/48305 0.9 0.002 1.3 0.003 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 98.9 0.269McCulloch/48307 0.5 0.001 0.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 65.2 0.177McLennan/48309 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 28.50.078McMullen/48311 929.0 2.530 954.0 2.598 15.8 0.043 15.8 0.043 0.4 0.001 4906.3 13.361Madison/48313 121.7 0.331 125.7 0.342 2.1 0.006 2.10.006 0.1 0.000 843.2 2.296Marion/48315 82.6 0.225 85.0 0.231 1.4 0.004 1.4 0.004 0.0 0.000 689.8 1.878Martin/48317 174.6 0.475 189.1 0.515 2.9 0.008 2.90.008 0.1 0.000 2919.1 7.950Mason/48319Matagorda/48321 471.7 1.285 485.5 1.322 8.0 0.022 8.0 0.022 0.2 0.001 5113.3 13.925Maverick/48323 75.0 0.204 79.2 0.216 1.3 0.003 1.30.003 0.0 0.000 1122.8 3.058Medina/48325 0.2 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 725.7 1.978Menard/48327 1.8 0.005 2.1 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 93.8 0.255Midland/48329 887.7 2.417 930.2 2.533 15.0 0.041 15.0 0.041 0.4 0.001 9843.2 26.806Milam/48331 6.6 0.018 7.7 0.021 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 654.7 1.783Mills/48333 0.2 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 1.2 0.003Mitchell/48335 9.3 0.025 15.8 0.043 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 1948.1 5.305Montague/48337 39.2 0.107 43.1 0.117 0.7 0.002 0.70.002 0.0 0.000 1583.2 4.311Montgomery/48339 57.5 0.157 69.7 0.190 2.4 0.007 2.4 0.007 0.1 0.000 1619.6 4.417Moore/48341 677.6 1.845 694.6 1.892 11.5 0.031 11.50.031 0.3 0.001 2985.3 8.130Morris/48343 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.1 0.003Motley/48345 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 21.9 0.060Nacogdoches/48347 1025.6 2.793 1051.0 2.862 17.5 0.048 17.5 0.048 0.5 0.001 5198.6 14.157Navarro/48349 8.8 0.024 9.6 0.026 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 508.3 1.384Newton/48351 54.7 0.149 57.3 0.156 0.9 0.003 0.9 0.003 0.0 0.000 759.1 2.067Nolan/48353 32.5 0.089 35.9 0.098 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 719.7 1.960Nueces/48355 990.2 2.699 1016.9 2.772 16.9 0.046 16.9 0.046 0.5 0.001 7879.1 21.477Ochiltree/48357 442.5 1.205 455.0 1.239 7.5 0.021 7.5 0.021 0.2 0.001 2605.6 7.096Oldham/48359 3.5 0.010 3.7 0.010 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 40.3 0.110

# 3

- 23Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayOrange/48361 108.9 0.296 117.3 0.319 3.3 0.009 3.30.009 0.1 0.000 3884.3 10.555Palo Pinto/48363 226.3 0.616 232.4 0.633 3.9 0.0113.9 0.011 0.1 0.000 1508.1 4.107Panola/48365 4282.2 11.662 4390.3 11.956 73.0 0.19973.0 0.199 2.0 0.005 24328.0 66.253Parker/48367 231.3 0.629 231.5 0.629 5.5 0.015 5.50.015 0.2 0.000 1660.5 4.512Parmer/48369Pecos/48371 2951.9 8.039 3045.7 8.294 50.2 0.137 50.2 0.137 1.4 0.004 16122.6 43.907Polk/48373 348.1 0.948 358.7 0.977 5.9 0.016 5.9 0.016 0.2 0.000 3973.1 10.820Potter/48375 257.8 0.702 264.3 0.720 4.4 0.012 4.40.012 0.1 0.000 1265.6 3.447Presidio/48377Rains/48379 90.5 0.246 92.7 0.252 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 0.0 0.000 326.9 0.890Randall/48381Reagan/48383 445.4 1.213 466.4 1.270 7.5 0.021 7.50.021 0.2 0.001 5000.9 13.619Real/48385 7.7 0.021 7.9 0.021 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 32.5 0.088Red River/48387 0.1 0.000 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 74.5 0.203Reeves/48389 425.5 1.159 437.4 1.191 7.2 0.020 7.20.020 0.2 0.001 2266.1 6.171Refugio/48391 768.9 2.094 797.4 2.171 13.1 0.036 13.1 0.036 0.4 0.001 4720.4 12.855Roberts/48393 565.1 1.539 580.5 1.581 9.6 0.026 9.60.026 0.3 0.001 3836.4 10.448Robertson/48395 1831.9 4.989 1878.5 5.116 31.2 0.085 31.2 0.085 0.9 0.002 7193.5 19.590Rockwall/48397Runnels/48399 25.3 0.069 26.9 0.073 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 442.8 1.206Rusk/48401 1465.6 4.044 1506.5 4.157 25.0 0.069 25.0 0.069 0.7 0.002 8654.4 23.881Sabine/48403 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.3 0.020San Augustine/48405 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.1 0.022San Jacinto/48407 93.2 0.254 95.9 0.262 1.6 0.004 1.6 0.004 0.0 0.000 1250.9 3.412San Patricio/48409 497.1 1.355 512.0 1.396 8.5 0.023 8.5 0.023 0.2 0.001 6503.4 17.727San Saba/48411Schleicher/48413 199.1 0.542 204.8 0.558 3.4 0.0093.4 0.009 0.1 0.000 1358.1 3.698Scurry/48415 421.1 1.147 463.7 1.263 7.0 0.019 7.00.019 0.2 0.001 7415.7 20.195Shackelford/48417 52.5 0.143 55.2 0.150 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 1349.2 3.674Shelby/48419 617.1 1.681 632.6 1.723 10.5 0.029 10.5 0.029 0.3 0.001 3207.4 8.735

# 3

- 24Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daySherman/48421 350.1 0.953 358.8 0.977 6.0 0.016 6.00.016 0.2 0.000 1402.7 3.820Smith/48423 824.0 2.274 847.2 2.338 14.0 0.039 14.00.039 0.4 0.001 5538.5 15.283Somervell/48425 1.9 0.005 2.0 0.005 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.3 0.020Starr/48427 2053.2 5.591 2107.6 5.740 35.0 0.095 35.0 0.095 1.0 0.003 16049.7 43.708Stephens/48429 200.7 0.546 210.1 0.572 3.4 0.009 3.4 0.009 0.1 0.000 2206.1 6.008Sterling/48431 264.9 0.721 273.8 0.746 4.5 0.012 4.5 0.012 0.1 0.000 2348.2 6.395Stonewall/48433 8.3 0.023 10.6 0.029 0.1 0.000 0.10.000 0.0 0.000 615.7 1.677Sutton/48435 1320.9 3.597 1353.1 3.685 22.5 0.061 22.5 0.061 0.6 0.002 5554.1 15.126Swisher/48437Tarrant/48439 1283.6 3.488 1283.8 3.489 30.7 0.08430.7 0.084 0.9 0.002 6887.4 18.716Taylor/48441 3.9 0.011 5.1 0.014 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 390.3 1.063Terrell/48443 1060.9 2.889 1087.2 2.961 18.1 0.04918.1 0.049 0.5 0.001 5101.1 13.892Terry/48445 24.0 0.065 32.9 0.090 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 1719.6 4.683Throckmorton/48447 25.7 0.070 28.0 0.076 0.4 0.0010.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 817.9 2.227Titus/48449 0.3 0.001 1.3 0.004 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 238.6 0.650Tom Green/48451 41.9 0.114 43.9 0.120 0.7 0.002 0.70.002 0.0 0.000 621.8 1.693Travis/48453 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 14.2 0.039Trinity/48455 3.4 0.009 3.7 0.010 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 63.2 0.172Tyler/48457 298.8 0.814 311.0 0.847 5.1 0.014 5.1 0.014 0.1 0.000 11513.9 31.356Upshur/48459 834.2 2.302 855.7 2.361 14.2 0.039 14.2 0.039 0.4 0.001 5617.3 15.500Upton/48461 1232.3 3.356 1284.3 3.498 20.9 0.057 20.9 0.057 0.6 0.002 15899.5 43.299Uvalde/48463 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001Val Verde/48465 291.7 0.794 298.8 0.814 5.0 0.014 5.0 0.014 0.1 0.000 1081.4 2.945Van Zandt/48467 117.5 0.320 122.2 0.333 2.0 0.005 2.0 0.005 0.1 0.000 995.6 2.711Victoria/48469 345.0 0.939 355.0 0.967 5.9 0.016 5.9 0.016 0.2 0.000 2322.9 6.326Walker/48471 17.8 0.049 18.3 0.050 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 87.5 0.238Waller/48473 27.1 0.074 34.4 0.094 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 0.0 0.000 1036.7 2.827Ward/48475 787.0 2.143 815.6 2.221 13.4 0.036 13.40.036 0.4 0.001 5951.2 16.207Washington/48477 418.5 1.140 429.9 1.171 7.1 0.0197.1 0.019 0.2 0.001 2515.7 6.851Webb/48479 3826.4 10.420 3921.9 10.681 65.2 0.178 65.2 0.178 1.8 0.005 20396.4 55.546

# 3

- 25Table 3-4b. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Production Sources (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayWharton/48481 903.9 2.462 929.8 2.532 15.4 0.042 15.4 0.042 0.4 0.001 7502.1 20.431Wheeler/48483 1016.8 2.769 1044.3 2.844 17.3 0.04717.3 0.047 0.5 0.001 9032.0 24.597Wichita/48485 5.0 0.014 9.4 0.026 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 3310.2 9.015Wilbarger/48487 0.7 0.002 2.2 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 612.5 1.668Willacy/48489 453.2 1.234 466.5 1.271 7.7 0.021 7.70.021 0.2 0.001 5056.5 13.771Williamson/48491 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 24.9 0.068Wilson/48493 0.6 0.002 1.2 0.003 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 377.8 1.030Winkler/48495 627.9 1.710 650.4 1.771 10.7 0.029 10.7 0.029 0.3 0.001 4688.6 12.768Wise/48497 2774.8 7.540 2844.0 7.728 47.3 0.129 47.3 0.129 1.3 0.004 13743.7 37.347Wood/48499 216.8 0.590 230.7 0.628 3.7 0.010 3.7 0.010 0.1 0.000 2511.6 6.840Yoakum/48501 442.0 1.204 503.4 1.371 7.3 0.020 7.30.020 0.2 0.001 10557.4 28.751Young/48503 55.2 0.150 59.1 0.161 0.9 0.003 0.9 0.003 0.0 0.000 1843.8 5.021Zapata/48505 4938.6 13.449 5058.8 13.777 84.2 0.22984.2 0.229 2.3 0.006 19494.0 53.088Zavala/48507 22.2 0.061 24.5 0.067 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 428.6 1.167Total 88,949 242.41 91,998 250.72 1,578 4.30 1,5784.30 44 0.12 715,941 1,950.95In order to reflect significant figures, estimates should be interpreted as follows: 0.0 = <0.1; 0.00 = <0.01; and 0.000 = <0.001.

# 3

- 26Table 3-4c. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Offshore PlatformsCOANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayAransas/48007 70.1 0.191 195.3 0.532 3.5 0.010 3.50.009 13.1 0.036 116.3 0.317Brazoria/48039 239.0 0.652 495.8 1.352 9.5 0.026 9.5 0.026 10.8 0.030 292.3 0.797Calhoun/48057 456.8 1.244 947.7 2.581 18.1 0.049 18.1 0.049 20.7 0.056 367.9 1.002Cameron/48061Chambers/48071 54.4 0.148 112.8 0.308 2.2 0.006 2.20.006 2.5 0.007 46.9 0.128Galveston/48167 223.2 0.609 531.1 1.448 9.8 0.027 9.8 0.027 23.6 0.064 814.7 2.222Jefferson/48245 750.0 2.038 1646.6 4.474 31.1 0.08431.0 0.084 52.0 0.141 627.8 1.706Kenedy/48261 231.9 0.631 481.1 1.310 9.2 0.025 9.20.025 10.5 0.029 908.1 2.473Kleberg/48273 131.3 0.358 272.4 0.742 5.2 0.014 5.20.014 5.9 0.016 285.3 0.777Matagorda/48321 385.3 1.049 802.2 2.185 15.3 0.04215.3 0.042 18.0 0.049 357.3 0.973Nueces/48355 137.7 0.375 355.8 0.970 6.5 0.018 6.40.018 20.2 0.055 208.2 0.568San Patricio/48409Willacy/48489Brazos, Block 376 13.3 0.036 8.8 0.024 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 6.5 0.018Brazos, Block 397 127.1 0.346 82.2 0.224 0.3 0.0010.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 16.1 0.044Brazos, Block 415 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000Brazos, Block 451 245.2 0.668 158.9 0.433 0.7 0.0020.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 19.6 0.053Brazos, Block 453 139.6 0.380 91.6 0.249 0.4 0.0010.4 0.001 2.0 0.005 16.0 0.044Brazos, Block 491 21.9 0.060 14.2 0.039 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 11.6 0.032Brazos, Block 542 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 5.7 0.015Galveston, Block 190 17.6 0.048 16.6 0.045 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.3 0.014Galveston, Block 209 116.3 0.317 271.8 0.740 4.7 0.013 4.7 0.013 0.1 0.000 53.2 0.145Galveston, Block 223 10.3 0.028 15.6 0.043 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 2.3 0.006Galveston, Block 225 2.9 0.008Galveston, Block 239 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.0 0.019Galveston, Block 255 29.1 0.079 19.3 0.053 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.1 0.003Galveston, Block 273 95.0 0.259 68.6 0.187 0.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 13.8 0.037Galveston, Block 301 10.0 0.027 7.3 0.020 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 16.5 0.045Galveston, Block 303 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.6 0.021Galveston, Block 333 2.5 0.007 10.7 0.029 0.7 0.0020.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 23.2 0.063

# 3

- 27Table 3-4c. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Offshore Platforms (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayGalveston, Block 343 84.6 0.231 56.9 0.155 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 40.2 0.109Galveston, Block 395 10.3 0.028 6.9 0.019 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 11.8 0.032High Island, Block 021 0.1 0.000High Island, Block 022 36.5 0.099 23.6 0.064 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 5.5 0.015High Island, Block 034 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001High Island, Block 037 0.2 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 22.6 0.061High Island, Block 039 59.4 0.162 38.4 0.105 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.8 0.002High Island, Block 045 122.9 0.335 79.5 0.217 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.3 0.014High Island, Block 046 3.2 0.009 2.2 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 2.4 0.006High Island, Block 052 15.3 0.042 9.9 0.027 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 26.6 0.072High Island, Block 072 5.7 0.015High Island, Block 084 7.8 0.021 11.9 0.032 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 12.6 0.034High Island, Block 085 148.8 0.405 96.3 0.262 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 9.8 0.027High Island, Block 110 56.6 0.154 37.7 0.103 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 6.9 0.019High Island, Block 116 67.5 0.184 44.0 0.120 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 17.7 0.048High Island, Block 136 123.2 0.335 82.0 0.223 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.8 0.016High Island, Block 140 39.9 0.109 26.2 0.071 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 14.9 0.041High Island, Block 154 12.4 0.034 13.6 0.037 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 46.4 0.126High Island, Block 176 274.5 0.748 179.0 0.487 0.90.002 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 70.0 0.191High Island, Block 177 96.2 0.262 79.3 0.216 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 5.4 0.015High Island, Block 179 172.3 0.469 115.8 0.315 0.50.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 41.3 0.112High Island, Block 194 7.0 0.019Matagorda Island,Block 487 65.0 0.177 42.1 0.115 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.0000.0 0.000 15.3 0.042Matagorda Island,Block 555112.6 0.307 75.0 0.204 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 82.2 0.224Matagorda Island,Block 566 2.8 0.008 4.3 0.012 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 9.9 0.027Matagorda Island,Block 587 153.6 0.418 99.5 0.271 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 1.3 0.004

# 3

- 28Table 3-4c. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Offshore Platforms (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayMatagorda Island,Block 5880.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.5 0.023Matagorda Island,Block 603 0.6 0.002 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001Matagorda Island,Block 604 219.7 0.598 144.6 0.394 0.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 16.3 0.045Matagorda Island,Block 605 69.0 0.188 44.7 0.122 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.0010.0 0.000 7.2 0.020Matagorda Island,Block 618 31.1 0.085 29.4 0.080 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 11.6 0.032Matagorda Island,Block 622173.7 0.473 192.0 0.523 1.3 0.004 1.3 0.004 4.4 0.012 80.6 0.220Matagorda Island,Block 623 187.7 0.511 127.0 0.346 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 0.0 0.000 23.7 0.065Matagorda Island,Block 631 145.3 0.396 94.1 0.256 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 12.8 0.035Matagorda Island,Block 632 180.7 0.492 117.6 0.320 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.1 0.000 2.3 0.006Matagorda Island,Block 633 32.4 0.088 39.9 0.109 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 45.4 0.124Matagorda Island,Block 635 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.1 0.019Matagorda Island,Block 63874.8 0.204 48.4 0.132 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.00013.6 0.037Matagorda Island,Block 657 1.4 0.004 6.4 0.017 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 1.0 0.003Matagorda Island,Block 685 1.2 0.003 1.9 0.005 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.2 0.022Matagorda Island,Block 686 150.9 0.411 98.9 0.269 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 14.3 0.039Matagorda Island,Block 696 63.7 0.174 41.3 0.112 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.0000.0 0.000 4.6 0.013Matagorda Island,Block 69972.7 0.198 47.2 0.129 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.00023.7 0.065

# 3

- 29Table 3-4c. County-Level Annual and Ozone Season Daily (OSD) Criteria Pollutant Emissions for Offshore Platforms (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayMustang Island, Block 726 0.4 0.001 0.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.6 0.004Mustang Island, Block 754 3.2 0.009 4.9 0.013 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 13.1 0.036Mustang Island, Block 858 1.9 0.005 2.9 0.008 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.0 0.003Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 010162.3 0.442 105.3 0.287 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 23.0 0.063Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 012 0.4 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.5 0.020Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 013 272.9 0.743 185.3 0.505 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 0.0 0.000 10.0 0.027Sabine Pass-Texas,Block 018 69.0 0.188 44.7 0.122 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.0010.0 0.000 3.7 0.010West Cameron, Block 021 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000West Cameron, Block 022 0.6 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.2 0.020West Cameron, Block 043 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.7 0.005West Cameron, Block 044 49.3 0.134 57.0 0.155 2.2 0.006 2.2 0.006 0.0 0.000 2.8 0.008West Cameron, Block 045 5.0 0.014 3.3 0.009 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 17.7 0.048West Cameron, Block 048 151.6 0.413 99.5 0.271 0.40.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 29.0 0.079West Cameron, Block 053 20.3 0.055 19.1 0.052 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 6.1 0.017West Cameron, Block 116 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.4 0.004West Cameron, Block 130 7.8 0.021 8.8 0.024 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 4.7 0.013West Cameron, Block 153 0.1 0.000Total 7,323 19.94 9,298 25.32 135 0.37 135 0.37 1850.50 5,113 13.93In order to reflect significant figures, estimates should be interpreted as follows: 0.0 = <0.1; 0.00 = <0.01; and 0.000 = <0.001.

# 3-30

Mud Degasssing: similar to drilling rig engines, it would be preferred to obtai n the actual

number of drilling days. Another piece of information that could help produce more

accurate estimates would be the mud types used at all sites. The inventory was

constructed assuming water-based muds, but some operators may use synthetic or oilbased muds. As indicated in the literature (MMS, 2007), the emission factors for

synthetic – or oil-based muds are different.

Well completions: More site-specific information on actual or typical number of venting

and flaring days during well completions is needed. Based on the requirements in the

applicable TRC regulations, the inventory was developed assuming a conservative value

of 10 days of venting.

Offshore-state waters: Obtaining better information on the actual number of pl atforms in

state waters would improve this part of the inventory. Platform activity by are a-block

information was available, but the inventory had to be developed using an assumption for

number of platforms per lease. As per a TCEQ Houston-Galveston area inventory, it w as assumed that for oil, one oil platform per oil lease was used and for gas, one gas pla tform

per six gas leases was used (TCEQ, 2000).

Dehydrators and Condensate Storage: The emission factors used for these c ategories

came from the WRAP oil and gas study, and reflect factors developed in a differe nt state.

While the factors appear to be totally valid and acceptable, the inventory could be

improved if emissions and controls information for these sources in Texas could be

developed to better validate the factors used.

3.2 Source Category Contributions by Pollutant

3.2.1 Carbon Monoxide Emissions

Total statewide emissions of CO for onshore exploration and production and offshore

production sources are estimated to be 125,968 tons per year. The top contributor to this amount

is natural gas compressor engines used for onshore production (88,754 tons). Compressor

engines were responsible then for 70.5% of total CO emissions in the oil and gas area source inventory. The next largest source after compressors was drilling rig en gines used in

exploration, constituting 21.8% of the CO emissions. The next four largest CO contributors are offshore platforms-federal waters compressor engines (3.6%), gas well completions (1.7%),

offshore platforms-state waters compressor engines (0.68%), and offshore pl atforms-state waters

natural gas turbines (0.68%). These six categories generate nearly 99% of the CO statewide

estimate from oil and gas area sources.

3.2.2 Nitrogen Oxide Emissions

Similar to CO emissions, oil and gas area source NO

x 

# emissions are also dominated by

onshore exploration drilling rig engines and onshore production compressor engines. Tota l

estimated NO

x 

# emissions for all oil and gas area sources included in this inventory are 221,357

tons per year. Onshore exploration drilling rig engines make up 54.1% of this amount, whi le

# 3-31

onshore production compressor engines are responsible for 41.1%. The two categories combined

generate over 95% of all estimated NO

x 

# emissions. The most significant of the remaining

sources include offshore platforms-state waters natural gas turbines (1.5%), offshore platformsfederal waters compressor engines (1.5%), offshore platforms-state wat ers diesel engines

(0.45%), onshore production heater treaters (0.44%), and offshore platforms-state wate rs compressor engines (0.38%). These seven categories constitute 99.4% of the NO

x 

# emissions

estimated for oil and gas area sources statewide (including offshore source s).

3.2.3 Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

Practically every source in the inventory emits VOC, some less than 1 ton a year , while

others are estimated to release several hundred thousand tons per year. Total s tatewide VOC

from the sources included in the inventory have been estimated at 841,295 tons per year. Fi ve categories dominate this emissions total (80.2% of all VOC) – onshore production glycol

dehydrators (26.9%), onshore production condensate storage tanks (22.9%), onshore production

gas wellheads (12.6%), onshore production crude oil storage tanks (9.1%), and pneumatic

devices associated with onshore production gas and oil wells (8.7%). Of the remai ning VOC

emissions sources, six are responsible for 17.5% of VOC emissions, making these 11 c ategories

the source of nearly 98% of all oil and gas area sources VOC emissions. The six c ategories

comprising the 17.5% of emissions consists of onshore production pump and piping fugitives

(5.1%), onshore production oil wellheads (4.1%), onshore production oil loading (3.2%),

onshore exploration gas well completions (2.4%), exploration oil well completions (1.6% ), and

onshore exploration mud degassing (1.3%).

3.2.4 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions

Estimated emissions of SO 2 

# are clearly dominated by one source category – onshore

exploration drilling rig engines. This category is estimated to release 97.4 % of the total SO 2 

# emissions from oil and gas area sources. The next largest source of SO 2 

# is onshore exploration

oil well completions at 138 tons per year or 0.98% of total emissions. Diesel engines and

drilling rig engines on offshore platforms-state waters are responsible for 0.56% and 0.44%,

respectively, of total SO 2 

# emissions. The remaining categories are estimated to be very minor

SO 2 

# emitters.

3.2.5 Particulate Matter Emissions

Contributions to PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# emissions track very consistently. Two categories

dominate (over 96% of emissions) both PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# emissions – onshore exploration drilling

rig engines and onshore production natural gas compressor engines. The contribut ions to

emissions are summarized as follows.

PM 10



# Drilling Rig Engines – 53.8% of emissions

Compressor Engines – 42.5% of emissions

# 3-32

PM 2.5



# Drilling Rig Engines – 53.3% of emissions

Compressor Engines – 43.0% of emissions

The only other PM emissions category that is estimated to contribute at least 1% to total PM 10 

# or

PM 2.5 

# emissions is diesel engines at offshore state waters platforms. Thi s source category is

responsible for approximately 1.9% of PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# emissions. All remaining PM 10 

# and PM 2.5 

# categories are less than 1% contributors.

3.3 Comparison of Emissions by County

Table 3-5 contains a listing of pollutant emissions by county for all sources included i n this inventory, i.e., the values represent the sum of all onshore exploration, onshore production,

and offshore production platform emissions for each county. Both annual and OSD emission

estimates are provided. For the offshore federal waters data, emissions a re listed by lease block

since these are not assigned to counties. Discussions regarding the contributi on of emissions by

county for each source grouping are provided below.

3.3.1 Onshore Exploration

Annual and OSD emissions for all pollutants are presented at the county level for ons hore

exploration sources collectively in Table 3-4a. For counties emitting all poll utants (i.e., have

both combustion sources and evaporative sources), a total of 14 counties make up roughly 50%

of all emissions. These counties (in approximate descending order) are:

 Hemphill,

 Wheeler,

 Smith,

 Zapata,

 Crockett,

 Denton,

 Webb,

 Panola,

 Harrison,

 Freestone,

 Upton,

 Wise,

 LaSalle, and

 Robertson.

The lowest level of these counties represents about 2.0% of the emissions of any give n pollutant

such as CO, NO

x 

# , PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# or SO 2 

# . The majority of the remaining Texas counties contribute

less than 1% to total onshore exploration emissions, and many have emissions constituti ng less

than 0.1% of the statewide total.

# 3

- 33Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the InventoryCOANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayAnderson/48001 225.2 0.613 382.4 1.041 6.3 0.017 6.3 0.017 22.6 0.062 1740.9 4.741Andrews/48003 634.2 1.727 930.5 2.534 14.5 0.039 14.4 0.039 38.8 0.106 15475.2 42.144Angelina/48005 45.2 0.123 118.8 0.324 2.0 0.005 1.90.005 11.1 0.030 128.7 0.350Aransas/48007 169.4 0.462 312.0 0.850 5.4 0.015 5.40.015 15.9 0.043 1121.8 3.058Archer/48009 44.7 0.122 167.2 0.455 2.7 0.007 2.7 0.007 17.9 0.049 3139.9 8.551Armstrong/48011Atascosa/48013 118.1 0.322 200.5 0.547 3.3 0.009 3.3 0.009 11.7 0.032 1691.0 4.610Austin/48015 229.6 0.626 304.8 0.831 5.1 0.014 5.00.014 11.3 0.031 1689.5 4.608Bailey/48017Bandera/48019 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.4 0.004Bastrop/48021 5.8 0.016 6.1 0.017 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 399.4 1.089Baylor/48023 3.7 0.010 16.3 0.044 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 1.8 0.005 161.4 0.440Bee/48025 812.7 2.213 1446.5 3.939 24.1 0.066 23.80.065 93.3 0.254 3527.8 9.607Bell/48027Bexar/48029 0.1 0.000 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 2552.7 6.958Blanco/48031Borden/48033 77.5 0.211 204.2 0.556 3.2 0.009 3.2 0.009 17.8 0.048 2053.4 5.592Bosque/48035 3.2 0.009 13.9 0.038 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.6 0.004 2.1 0.006Bowie/48037 7.2 0.020 15.2 0.042 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.2 0.003 94.1 0.256Brazoria/48039 621.6 1.695 1429.0 3.897 30.0 0.08229.8 0.081 87.7 0.239 7583.3 20.682Brazos/48041 226.7 0.617 363.5 0.990 6.0 0.016 5.90.016 21.8 0.059 2373.7 6.464Brewster/48043Briscoe/48045Brooks/48047 1447.3 3.941 2019.3 5.499 33.5 0.091 33.3 0.091 84.2 0.229 10071.3 27.427Brown/48049 29.5 0.080 45.5 0.124 0.8 0.002 0.7 0.002 2.3 0.006 861.0 2.345Burleson/48051 256.1 0.697 358.2 0.975 5.9 0.016 5.8 0.016 17.4 0.047 3208.3 8.737Burnet/48053Caldwell/48055 35.0 0.095 128.6 0.350 2.1 0.006 2.10.006 13.6 0.037 3127.3 8.525Calhoun/48057 706.5 1.924 1387.2 3.778 25.4 0.069 25.3 0.069 48.6 0.132 1955.5 5.325Callahan/48059 18.3 0.050 27.2 0.074 0.4 0.001 0.40.001 1.3 0.004 905.4 2.466

# 3

- 34Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayCameron/48061 3.0 0.008 3.0 0.008 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 14.9 0.041Camp/48063 14.2 0.039 15.0 0.041 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 205.0 0.558Carson/48065 313.1 0.853 324.2 0.883 5.4 0.015 5.40.015 0.7 0.002 2652.7 7.224Cass/48067 61.7 0.168 79.7 0.217 1.3 0.004 1.3 0.004 2.5 0.007 560.7 1.527Castro/48069Chambers/48071 201.1 0.548 396.9 1.083 9.2 0.025 9.1 0.025 23.2 0.063 3855.8 10.516Cherokee/48073 318.3 0.867 591.9 1.612 9.8 0.027 9.7 0.026 40.8 0.111 1652.0 4.499Childress/48075 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 15.9 0.043Clay/48077 25.5 0.070 66.8 0.182 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 6.0 0.016 1402.8 3.820Cochran/48079 56.8 0.155 107.3 0.292 1.6 0.004 1.60.004 6.4 0.018 3056.8 8.325Coke/48081 67.0 0.182 111.4 0.303 1.8 0.005 1.8 0.005 6.7 0.018 636.2 1.733Coleman/48083 31.9 0.087 36.9 0.100 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 891.2 2.427Collin/48085Collingsworth/48087 20.9 0.057 21.4 0.058 0.4 0.0010.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 167.1 0.455Colorado/48089 510.8 1.391 1031.4 2.809 17.2 0.04716.9 0.046 77.2 0.210 2612.3 7.114Comal/48091Comanche/48093 11.9 0.033 14.0 0.038 0.2 0.001 0.20.001 0.3 0.001 139.6 0.380Concho/48095 53.0 0.144 143.9 0.392 2.4 0.006 2.3 0.006 13.7 0.037 502.5 1.368Cooke/48097 196.6 0.535 785.2 2.138 13.0 0.036 12.80.035 87.4 0.238 2683.4 7.308Coryell/48099Cottle/48101 115.4 0.314 234.9 0.640 3.9 0.011 3.90.010 17.7 0.048 589.5 1.605Crane/48103 1008.1 2.745 1204.3 3.280 19.6 0.053 19.6 0.053 25.4 0.069 10388.0 28.290Crockett/48105 2593.0 7.061 4888.4 13.313 81.1 0.221 80.1 0.218 344.7 0.939 13423.2 36.555Crosby/48107 1.2 0.003 2.3 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 508.8 1.386Culberson/48109 29.4 0.080 45.9 0.125 0.8 0.002 0.80.002 2.3 0.006 227.2 0.619Dallam/48111Dallas/48113Dawson/48115 58.8 0.160 131.6 0.358 2.0 0.005 2.0 0.005 9.7 0.026 2540.2 6.918Deaf Smith/48117Delta/48119

# 3

- 35Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayDenton/48121 2346.5 6.390 4446.7 12.110 85.7 0.23384.6 0.230 323.6 0.881 13537.9 36.868De Witt/48123 701.7 1.911 1307.7 3.561 21.7 0.059 21.4 0.058 90.5 0.246 5281.7 14.384Dickens/48125 14.9 0.041 57.8 0.157 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 6.1 0.017 657.2 1.790Dimmit/48127 112.1 0.305 275.5 0.750 4.5 0.012 4.50.012 25.3 0.069 1320.6 3.596Donley/48129 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.7 0.005Duval/48131 1212.5 3.302 1725.6 4.699 28.6 0.078 28.4 0.077 75.9 0.207 6748.1 18.377Eastland/48133 113.4 0.309 239.3 0.652 4.0 0.011 3.9 0.011 18.6 0.051 1236.6 3.368Ector/48135 911.7 2.483 1642.4 4.473 26.6 0.072 26.3 0.072 102.7 0.280 13767.6 37.493Edwards/48137 317.6 0.865 418.6 1.140 7.0 0.019 6.90.019 14.4 0.039 1229.8 3.349Ellis/48139 3.0 0.008 10.1 0.027 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 1.1 0.003 6.9 0.019El Paso/48141Erath/48143 40.5 0.110 65.3 0.178 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 3.8 0.010 209.4 0.570Falls/48145 2.7 0.007 11.7 0.032 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.3 0.004 26.7 0.073Fannin/48147Fayette/48149 409.5 1.115 557.8 1.519 9.2 0.025 9.20.025 21.9 0.060 3958.4 10.780Fisher/48151 16.3 0.044 29.1 0.079 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 2.0 0.005 611.0 1.664Floyd/48153 3.2 0.009 13.7 0.037 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.6 0.004 4.0 0.011Foard/48155 17.9 0.049 29.4 0.080 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 1.7 0.005 164.1 0.447Fort Bend/48157 336.0 0.916 693.7 1.892 16.7 0.04616.5 0.045 48.3 0.132 8556.9 23.337Franklin/48159 81.8 0.223 174.8 0.476 2.9 0.008 2.90.008 14.3 0.039 803.6 2.188Freestone/48161 4925.4 13.413 6878.8 18.733 114.5 0.312 113.6 0.309 283.0 0.771 17668.5 48.117Frio/48163 24.7 0.067 47.2 0.129 0.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 3.1 0.009 731.4 1.992Gaines/48165 950.0 2.587 2367.0 6.446 38.3 0.104 37.6 0.102 202.7 0.552 13817.1 37.628Galveston/48167 313.0 0.854 695.6 1.897 14.1 0.03914.1 0.038 33.3 0.091 5257.5 14.339Garza/48169 56.8 0.155 202.0 0.550 3.2 0.009 3.1 0.009 20.3 0.055 3107.0 8.461Gillespie/48171Glasscock/48173 238.6 0.650 334.3 0.910 5.4 0.015 5.4 0.015 14.1 0.038 3105.0 8.456Goliad/48175 1647.1 4.485 2901.9 7.903 48.2 0.131 47.5 0.129 190.5 0.519 7975.6 21.720Gonzales/48177 25.6 0.070 48.2 0.131 0.8 0.002 0.80.002 3.2 0.009 351.7 0.958Gray/48179 225.6 0.614 257.0 0.700 4.2 0.012 4.2 0.011 3.8 0.010 3848.6 10.481

# 3

- 36Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayGrayson/48181 189.7 0.517 488.9 1.331 8.1 0.022 8.00.022 45.8 0.125 1706.0 4.646Gregg/48183 1206.5 3.329 1558.5 4.300 25.8 0.071 25.6 0.071 51.2 0.141 8815.3 24.325Grimes/48185 391.5 1.066 583.2 1.588 9.6 0.026 9.50.026 30.6 0.083 1773.2 4.829Guadalupe/48187 13.3 0.036 56.1 0.153 0.9 0.002 0.90.002 5.9 0.016 2285.9 6.231Hale/48189 27.4 0.075 58.6 0.159 0.9 0.002 0.8 0.002 4.1 0.011 1056.0 2.876Hall/48191Hamilton/48193 3.3 0.009 5.7 0.016 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.3 0.001 17.2 0.047Hansford/48195 445.0 1.212 583.6 1.589 9.7 0.026 9.6 0.026 19.6 0.053 1909.8 5.201Hardeman/48197 70.3 0.191 274.0 0.746 4.5 0.012 4.40.012 29.9 0.081 822.2 2.239Hardin/48199 136.7 0.372 323.3 0.879 6.3 0.017 6.20.017 28.6 0.078 4041.1 10.981Harris/48201 222.5 0.607 455.7 1.243 11.2 0.031 11.1 0.030 30.2 0.082 5090.9 13.884Harrison/48203 1854.8 5.118 3798.3 10.481 63.2 0.174 62.2 0.172 294.2 0.812 8902.6 24.566Hartley/48205 47.6 0.130 80.8 0.220 1.3 0.004 1.3 0.004 4.8 0.013 246.3 0.671Haskell/48207 1.6 0.004 4.6 0.012 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.3 0.001 353.6 0.963Hays/48209Hemphill/48211 5254.9 14.311 16924.1 46.090 282.3 0.769 276.7 0.754 1739.8 4.738 13942.1 37.969Henderson/48213 667.5 1.818 769.1 2.094 12.8 0.03512.7 0.035 13.5 0.037 2917.5 7.945Hidalgo/48215 3747.6 10.206 4954.2 13.492 82.2 0.224 81.7 0.222 175.6 0.478 25909.5 70.560Hill/48217 67.8 0.185 293.4 0.799 4.9 0.013 4.8 0.013 33.6 0.091 42.8 0.117Hockley/48219 251.4 0.685 579.9 1.579 8.8 0.024 8.70.024 45.3 0.123 10379.7 28.267Hood/48221 134.6 0.367 260.7 0.710 4.3 0.012 4.3 0.012 19.5 0.053 614.3 1.673Hopkins/48223 22.2 0.060 29.4 0.080 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.9 0.002 254.8 0.694Houston/48225 251.2 0.684 443.3 1.207 7.3 0.020 7.20.020 29.1 0.079 1326.4 3.612Howard/48227 125.9 0.343 211.3 0.575 3.3 0.009 3.20.009 11.9 0.032 5403.4 14.715Hudspeth/48229Hunt/48231Hutchinson/48233 265.1 0.722 347.9 0.947 5.8 0.0165.7 0.016 11.5 0.031 4049.5 11.028Irion/48235 369.2 1.005 1095.9 2.985 18.2 0.050 17.9 0.049 108.6 0.296 2635.5 7.177Jack/48237 348.5 0.949 678.3 1.847 11.3 0.031 11.10.030 49.4 0.135 3419.6 9.313Jackson/48239 523.1 1.425 690.2 1.880 11.4 0.031 11.3 0.031 25.5 0.069 3709.6 10.102

# 3

- 37Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayJasper/48241 143.0 0.390 158.0 0.430 2.6 0.007 2.60.007 3.4 0.009 2021.1 5.504Jeff Davis/48243Jefferson/48245 1168.1 3.174 2333.1 6.340 46.4 0.126 46.2 0.126 91.1 0.248 12846.9 34.910Jim Hogg/48247 647.9 1.765 1321.9 3.600 22.0 0.06021.7 0.059 100.2 0.273 3062.0 8.339Jim Wells/48249 169.2 0.461 231.9 0.632 3.9 0.010 3.8 0.010 9.1 0.025 971.7 2.646Johnson/48251 997.6 2.711 1667.9 4.532 32.6 0.089 32.2 0.088 110.7 0.301 4669.2 12.688Jones/48253 22.5 0.061 64.0 0.174 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 6.4 0.018 987.8 2.690Karnes/48255 178.7 0.487 283.6 0.772 4.7 0.013 4.70.013 15.9 0.043 1172.6 3.193Kaufman/48257 0.1 0.000 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 34.3 0.093Kendall/48259Kenedy/48261 1169.9 3.186 1900.3 5.175 32.8 0.089 32.6 0.089 81.6 0.222 4731.9 12.886Kent/48263 139.3 0.379 161.5 0.440 2.5 0.007 2.5 0.007 1.4 0.004 2401.9 6.541Kerr/48265 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.2 0.003Kimble/48267 7.4 0.020 14.3 0.039 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.0 0.003 28.0 0.076King/48269 50.7 0.138 108.1 0.294 1.7 0.005 1.7 0.005 7.9 0.021 1200.3 3.269Kinney/48271Kleberg/48273 637.7 1.737 955.5 2.602 16.5 0.045 16.5 0.045 31.6 0.086 3884.3 10.578Knox/48275 1.0 0.003 4.4 0.012 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.4 0.001 251.9 0.686Lamar/48277Lamb/48279 3.6 0.010 5.3 0.015 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.0 0.000 312.7 0.852Lampasas/48281 0.4 0.001 1.7 0.005 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.2 0.001 0.4 0.001La Salle/48283 788.5 2.147 2652.1 7.223 44.2 0.12043.3 0.118 277.5 0.756 2307.6 6.284Lavaca/48285 1276.2 3.476 1778.0 4.842 29.5 0.080 29.3 0.080 73.8 0.201 6101.6 16.617Lee/48287 272.3 0.742 446.0 1.215 7.3 0.020 7.3 0.020 34.6 0.094 3213.0 8.750Leon/48289 1200.3 3.269 2879.0 7.840 47.9 0.130 47.1 0.128 250.3 0.682 3707.6 10.097Liberty/48291 533.8 1.456 1098.5 2.996 26.2 0.072 26.0 0.071 77.7 0.212 15879.8 43.309Limestone/48293 1402.9 3.821 2251.7 6.132 37.5 0.102 37.1 0.101 125.4 0.341 4974.8 13.548Lipscomb/48295 993.5 2.706 1558.9 4.246 25.9 0.07025.6 0.070 88.5 0.241 5596.9 15.242Live Oak/48297 878.9 2.394 2504.9 6.822 41.7 0.11441.0 0.112 241.5 0.658 2927.0 7.971Llano/48299

# 3

- 38Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayLoving/48301 1338.5 3.645 2187.1 5.956 36.3 0.099 35.9 0.098 127.3 0.347 5399.2 14.704Lubbock/48303 10.3 0.028 39.9 0.109 0.6 0.002 0.6 0.002 3.9 0.011 854.2 2.326Lynn/48305 7.2 0.020 28.6 0.078 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.0013.2 0.009 146.6 0.399McCulloch/48307 8.4 0.023 35.4 0.096 0.6 0.002 0.60.002 4.0 0.011 107.8 0.293McLennan/48309 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 55.60.151McMullen/48311 1262.6 3.438 2237.0 6.092 37.1 0.10136.7 0.100 147.0 0.400 5752.5 15.666Madison/48313 152.2 0.414 256.4 0.698 4.3 0.012 4.20.011 16.0 0.044 1026.6 2.796Marion/48315 106.2 0.289 180.1 0.491 3.0 0.008 3.00.008 11.3 0.031 852.3 2.321Martin/48317 294.6 0.802 709.4 1.932 11.6 0.032 11.4 0.031 61.0 0.166 3856.8 10.503Mason/48319Matagorda/48321 1009.0 2.748 1847.6 5.032 32.6 0.089 32.4 0.088 83.1 0.226 5942.7 16.184Maverick/48323 222.8 0.607 721.6 1.965 12.0 0.033 11.8 0.032 74.3 0.202 1544.8 4.207Medina/48325 1.4 0.004 5.5 0.015 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.6 0.002 1405.6 3.831Menard/48327 4.3 0.012 13.0 0.035 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.2 0.003 145.3 0.396Midland/48329 1153.9 3.143 2082.1 5.670 34.3 0.09333.8 0.092 135.2 0.368 12228.3 33.301Milam/48331 10.7 0.029 25.8 0.070 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 2.1 0.006 1121.7 3.055Mills/48333 12.3 0.034 53.0 0.144 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 6.0 0.016 8.2 0.022Mitchell/48335 33.3 0.091 120.6 0.328 1.9 0.005 1.80.005 12.1 0.033 2933.1 7.988Montague/48337 147.0 0.400 508.6 1.385 8.4 0.023 8.3 0.022 55.0 0.150 2759.5 7.515Montgomery/48339 95.1 0.259 229.9 0.627 5.1 0.014 5.1 0.014 18.4 0.050 1722.6 4.698Moore/48341 695.2 1.893 766.2 2.087 12.7 0.035 12.70.035 8.6 0.023 3447.4 9.388Morris/48343 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.6 0.004Motley/48345 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 30.4 0.083Nacogdoches/48347 1283.4 3.495 1971.3 5.368 32.7 0.089 32.4 0.088 104.8 0.285 5834.0 15.888Navarro/48349 22.7 0.062 67.8 0.185 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 6.8 0.018 878.4 2.392Newton/48351 95.2 0.259 227.7 0.620 3.8 0.010 3.7 0.010 21.8 0.059 1047.7 2.853Nolan/48353 47.9 0.130 102.2 0.278 1.7 0.004 1.6 0.004 7.8 0.021 950.8 2.589Nueces/48355 1322.6 3.605 2168.4 5.911 36.6 0.100 36.3 0.099 112.0 0.305 8487.5 23.136Ochiltree/48357 499.0 1.359 668.7 1.821 11.1 0.03011.0 0.030 25.2 0.069 3071.1 8.363Oldham/48359 3.6 0.010 3.8 0.010 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 48.8 0.133

# 3

- 39Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayOrange/48361 141.7 0.385 260.4 0.708 5.7 0.015 5.60.015 16.5 0.045 3963.6 10.771Palo Pinto/48363 248.1 0.676 308.2 0.839 5.1 0.0145.1 0.014 9.4 0.026 1930.6 5.258Panola/48365 4987.1 13.581 7101.1 19.338 118.0 0.321 117.0 0.319 313.8 0.855 26226.0 71.421Parker/48367 407.1 1.106 944.1 2.565 17.4 0.047 17.1 0.047 82.5 0.224 2069.8 5.625Parmer/48369Pecos/48371 3156.7 8.597 3859.0 10.509 63.8 0.174 63.5 0.173 94.7 0.258 17810.7 48.504Polk/48373 384.7 1.048 506.6 1.380 8.4 0.023 8.3 0.023 17.0 0.046 4077.3 11.104Potter/48375 295.6 0.805 420.3 1.145 7.0 0.019 6.90.019 17.9 0.049 1602.1 4.363Presidio/48377Rains/48379 90.5 0.246 92.7 0.252 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 0.0 0.000 328.2 0.894Randall/48381Reagan/48383 938.3 2.555 2606.4 7.098 43.3 0.118 42.5 0.116 248.4 0.677 7216.0 19.652Real/48385 8.0 0.022 9.5 0.026 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.0000.2 0.001 34.2 0.093Red River/48387 0.1 0.000 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 98.5 0.268Reeves/48389 502.9 1.369 767.4 2.090 12.8 0.035 12.6 0.034 38.3 0.104 2676.4 7.289Refugio/48391 837.2 2.280 1057.7 2.880 17.4 0.047 17.3 0.047 34.5 0.094 5651.8 15.391Roberts/48393 733.6 1.998 1231.6 3.354 20.4 0.056 20.2 0.055 78.0 0.212 4552.3 12.397Robertson/48395 2415.4 6.578 4231.1 11.522 70.4 0.192 69.5 0.189 269.3 0.733 7937.2 21.616Rockwall/48397Runnels/48399 61.7 0.168 183.3 0.499 3.0 0.008 3.00.008 18.9 0.051 769.5 2.096Rusk/48401 1906.2 5.260 3188.9 8.799 52.9 0.146 52.3 0.144 192.1 0.530 10285.4 28.381Sabine/48403 3.3 0.009 12.6 0.034 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 1.4 0.004 11.9 0.033San Augustine/48405 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 12.3 0.034San Jacinto/48407 122.2 0.333 214.0 0.584 3.6 0.0103.5 0.010 13.5 0.037 1294.2 3.530San Patricio/48409 680.1 1.854 1279.7 3.488 21.3 0.058 21.0 0.057 88.0 0.240 6738.6 18.368San Saba/48411Schleicher/48413 255.2 0.695 382.5 1.042 6.3 0.0176.2 0.017 20.6 0.056 1740.3 4.739Scurry/48415 523.8 1.427 899.6 2.450 14.3 0.039 14.1 0.039 55.5 0.151 9076.2 24.717Shackelford/48417 64.3 0.175 105.9 0.289 1.7 0.0051.7 0.005 5.9 0.016 2230.3 6.074

# 3

- 40Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayShelby/48419 712.7 1.941 996.8 2.714 16.6 0.045 16.4 0.045 43.3 0.118 3551.4 9.672Sherman/48421 357.4 0.973 388.0 1.057 6.5 0.018 6.40.018 3.5 0.010 1504.9 4.098Smith/48423 2082.9 5.748 6012.6 16.591 100.0 0.27698.2 0.271 591.0 1.631 6982.6 19.268Somervell/48425 4.8 0.013 13.9 0.038 0.2 0.001 0.20.001 1.4 0.004 10.5 0.029Starr/48427 2203.1 6.000 2580.6 7.028 42.7 0.116 42.6 0.116 54.7 0.149 16712.2 45.513Stephens/48429 229.5 0.625 331.2 0.902 5.4 0.015 5.4 0.015 14.4 0.039 2902.0 7.903Sterling/48431 315.7 0.860 490.1 1.335 8.1 0.022 8.0 0.022 25.9 0.071 3121.1 8.500Stonewall/48433 13.3 0.036 32.4 0.088 0.5 0.001 0.50.001 2.5 0.007 895.5 2.439Sutton/48435 1397.6 3.806 1619.6 4.411 26.9 0.073 26.8 0.073 30.8 0.084 6140.9 16.724Swisher/48437Tarrant/48439 1613.3 4.384 2394.1 6.506 49.0 0.13348.6 0.132 126.4 0.343 7789.1 21.166Taylor/48441 5.5 0.015 11.4 0.031 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 1.0 0.003 624.2 1.700Terrell/48443 1188.8 3.238 1591.4 4.334 26.5 0.07226.3 0.072 58.6 0.160 5380.2 14.652Terry/48445 54.7 0.149 166.2 0.453 2.6 0.007 2.6 0.007 15.4 0.042 2163.9 5.893Throckmorton/48447 31.0 0.085 50.8 0.138 0.8 0.0020.8 0.002 2.8 0.008 1294.2 3.525Titus/48449 1.6 0.004 7.0 0.019 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.0000.7 0.002 326.0 0.888Tom Green/48451 109.7 0.299 337.7 0.920 5.6 0.015 5.5 0.015 33.9 0.092 968.5 2.638Travis/48453 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 27.5 0.075Trinity/48455 3.6 0.010 4.5 0.012 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 73.8 0.201Tyler/48457 604.0 1.645 1576.4 4.293 26.2 0.071 25.7 0.070 144.8 0.394 11825.5 32.205Upshur/48459 1075.2 2.967 1860.8 5.135 31.0 0.085 30.6 0.084 115.4 0.319 5938.6 16.387Upton/48461 1835.0 4.997 3749.9 10.212 62.0 0.169 61.1 0.166 288.0 0.784 18047.2 49.148Uvalde/48463 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.5 0.001Val Verde/48465 358.2 0.976 571.2 1.555 9.5 0.026 9.4 0.026 31.2 0.085 1176.2 3.203Van Zandt/48467 121.3 0.330 138.9 0.378 2.3 0.006 2.3 0.006 2.0 0.005 1249.0 3.401Victoria/48469 375.7 1.023 465.2 1.267 7.7 0.021 7.7 0.021 12.9 0.035 2524.0 6.874Walker/48471 27.8 0.076 59.5 0.162 1.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 4.9 0.013 121.2 0.330Waller/48473 60.5 0.165 174.4 0.476 3.5 0.009 3.4 0.009 16.9 0.046 1251.1 3.412Ward/48475 1005.2 2.737 1757.6 4.786 29.1 0.079 28.8 0.078 110.5 0.301 7511.9 20.457Washington/48477 476.9 1.299 638.8 1.740 10.6 0.02910.5 0.029 24.0 0.065 2712.7 7.388

# 3

- 41Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayWebb/48479 4544.7 12.377 6660.3 18.138 110.7 0.301109.7 0.299 313.3 0.853 22031.3 59.998Wharton/48481 1128.5 3.073 1806.8 4.920 30.0 0.08229.6 0.081 100.9 0.275 8031.9 21.874Wheeler/48483 3263.5 8.888 10568.9 28.782 176.2 0.480 172.7 0.470 1090.9 2.971 10893.1 29.665Wichita/48485 19.4 0.053 72.0 0.196 1.1 0.003 1.1 0.003 7.2 0.020 5910.8 16.097Wilbarger/48487 40.2 0.109 174.1 0.474 2.9 0.008 2.8 0.008 19.7 0.054 1032.4 2.812Willacy/48489 505.1 1.376 661.2 1.801 10.9 0.030 10.9 0.030 22.6 0.061 5215.9 14.204Williamson/48491 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 46.3 0.126Wilson/48493 8.0 0.022 33.3 0.091 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 3.7 0.010 667.7 1.820Winkler/48495 811.0 2.209 1430.0 3.894 23.7 0.064 23.4 0.064 92.8 0.253 5998.3 16.335Wise/48497 3384.1 9.196 5251.0 14.269 87.3 0.237 86.4 0.235 280.0 0.761 15582.2 42.343Wood/48499 225.5 0.614 268.3 0.731 4.3 0.012 4.3 0.012 4.5 0.012 2807.8 7.647Yoakum/48501 558.2 1.520 1000.9 2.726 15.6 0.043 15.4 0.042 60.1 0.164 12446.7 33.896Young/48503 65.9 0.179 104.4 0.284 1.7 0.005 1.7 0.005 5.3 0.014 3053.3 8.315Zapata/48505 6054.2 16.488 9233.8 25.147 153.4 0.418 151.9 0.414 476.8 1.298 21628.7 58.902Zavala/48507 66.7 0.182 217.9 0.593 3.6 0.010 3.5 0.010 22.3 0.061 552.2 1.504Brazos, Block 376 13.3 0.036 8.8 0.024 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 6.5 0.018Brazos, Block 397 127.1 0.346 82.2 0.224 0.3 0.0010.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 16.1 0.044Brazos, Block 415 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000Brazos, Block 451 245.2 0.668 158.9 0.433 0.7 0.0020.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 19.6 0.053Brazos, Block 453 139.6 0.380 91.6 0.249 0.4 0.0010.4 0.001 2.0 0.005 16.0 0.044Brazos, Block 491 21.9 0.060 14.2 0.039 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 11.6 0.032Brazos, Block 542 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 5.7 0.015Galveston, Block 190 17.6 0.048 16.6 0.045 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.3 0.014Galveston, Block 209 116.3 0.317 271.8 0.740 4.7 0.013 4.7 0.013 0.1 0.000 53.2 0.145Galveston, Block 223 10.3 0.028 15.6 0.043 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 2.3 0.006Galveston, Block 225 2.9 0.008Galveston, Block 239 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.0 0.019Galveston, Block 255 29.1 0.079 19.3 0.053 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.1 0.003Galveston, Block 273 95.0 0.259 68.6 0.187 0.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 13.8 0.037Galveston, Block 301 10.0 0.027 7.3 0.020 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 16.5 0.045

# 3

- 42Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayGalveston, Block 303 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.6 0.021Galveston, Block 333 2.5 0.007 10.7 0.029 0.7 0.0020.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 23.2 0.063Galveston, Block 343 84.6 0.231 56.9 0.155 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 40.2 0.109Galveston, Block 395 10.3 0.028 6.9 0.019 0.0 0.0000.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 11.8 0.032High Island, Block 021 0.1 0.000High Island, Block 022 36.5 0.099 23.6 0.064 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 5.5 0.015High Island, Block 034 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001High Island, Block 037 0.2 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 22.6 0.061High Island, Block 039 59.4 0.162 38.4 0.105 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.8 0.002High Island, Block 045 122.9 0.335 79.5 0.217 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.3 0.014High Island, Block 046 3.2 0.009 2.2 0.006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 2.4 0.006High Island, Block 052 15.3 0.042 9.9 0.027 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 26.6 0.072High Island, Block 072 5.7 0.015High Island, Block 084 7.8 0.021 11.9 0.032 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 12.6 0.034High Island, Block 085 148.8 0.405 96.3 0.262 0.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 9.8 0.027High Island, Block 110 56.6 0.154 37.7 0.103 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 6.9 0.019High Island, Block 116 67.5 0.184 44.0 0.120 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 17.7 0.048High Island, Block 136 123.2 0.335 82.0 0.223 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 5.8 0.016High Island, Block 140 39.9 0.109 26.2 0.071 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 14.9 0.041High Island, Block 154 12.4 0.034 13.6 0.037 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 46.4 0.126High Island, Block 176 274.5 0.748 179.0 0.487 0.90.002 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 70.0 0.191High Island, Block 177 96.2 0.262 79.3 0.216 0.9 0.002 0.9 0.002 0.0 0.000 5.4 0.015High Island, Block 179 172.3 0.469 115.8 0.315 0.50.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 41.3 0.112High Island, Block 194 7.0 0.019Matagorda Island, Block 487 65.0 0.177 42.1 0.115 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 15.3 0.042Matagorda Island, Block 555 112.6 0.307 75.0 0.2040.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 82.2 0.224Matagorda Island, Block 566 2.8 0.008 4.3 0.012 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 9.9 0.027Matagorda Island, Block 587 153.6 0.418 99.5 0.2710.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 1.3 0.004Matagorda Island, Block 588 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.5 0.023Matagorda Island, Block 603 0.6 0.002 0.4 0.001 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.3 0.001

# 3

- 43Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayMatagorda Island, Block 604 219.7 0.598 144.6 0.3940.8 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 16.3 0.045Matagorda Island, Block 605 69.0 0.188 44.7 0.122 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 7.2 0.020Matagorda Island, Block 618 31.1 0.085 29.4 0.080 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 11.6 0.032Matagorda Island, Block 622 173.7 0.473 192.0 0.5231.3 0.004 1.3 0.004 4.4 0.012 80.6 0.220Matagorda Island, Block 623 187.7 0.511 127.0 0.3461.0 0.003 1.0 0.003 0.0 0.000 23.7 0.065Matagorda Island, Block 631 145.3 0.396 94.1 0.2560.4 0.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 12.8 0.035Matagorda Island, Block 632 180.7 0.492 117.6 0.3200.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.1 0.000 2.3 0.006Matagorda Island, Block 633 32.4 0.088 39.9 0.109 0.1 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 45.4 0.124Matagorda Island, Block 635 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.1 0.019Matagorda Island, Block 638 74.8 0.204 48.4 0.132 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 13.6 0.037Matagorda Island, Block 657 1.4 0.004 6.4 0.017 0.50.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 1.0 0.003Matagorda Island, Block 685 1.2 0.003 1.9 0.005 0.00.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 8.2 0.022Matagorda Island, Block 686 150.9 0.411 98.9 0.2690.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 14.3 0.039Matagorda Island, Block 696 63.7 0.174 41.3 0.112 0.2 0.000 0.2 0.000 0.0 0.000 4.6 0.013Matagorda Island, Block 699 72.7 0.198 47.2 0.129 0.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 23.7 0.065Mustang Island, Block 726 0.4 0.001 0.7 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.6 0.004Mustang Island, Block 754 3.2 0.009 4.9 0.013 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 13.1 0.036Mustang Island, Block 858 1.9 0.005 2.9 0.008 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.0 0.003Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 006 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 010 162.3 0.442 105.3 0.287 0.5 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 23.0 0.063Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 012 0.4 0.001 0.5 0.001 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.5 0.020Sabine Pass-Louisiana,Block 013 272.9 0.743 185.3 0.505 1.5 0.004 1.5 0.004 0.0 0.000 10.0 0.027Sabine Pass-Texas, Block 018 69.0 0.188 44.7 0.1220.2 0.001 0.2 0.001 0.0 0.000 3.7 0.010West Cameron, Block 021 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.1 0.000West Cameron, Block 022 0.6 0.002 0.8 0.002 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 7.2 0.020West Cameron, Block 043 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.7 0.005West Cameron, Block 044 49.3 0.134 57.0 0.155 2.2 0.006 2.2 0.006 0.0 0.000 2.8 0.008

# 3

- 44Table 3-5. Combined County-Level Emission Estimates for All Sources Included in the Inventory (Cont.)COANNCO-OSDNOX-ANNNOX-OSDPM10-ANNPM10-OSDPM2.5-ANNPM2.5-OSDSO2-ANNSO2-OSDVOC-ANNVOC-OSDTexas County/FIPStons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/daytons/yrtons/dayWest Cameron, Block 045 5.0 0.014 3.3 0.009 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 17.7 0.048West Cameron, Block 048 151.6 0.413 99.5 0.271 0.40.001 0.4 0.001 0.0 0.000 29.0 0.079West Cameron, Block 053 20.3 0.055 19.1 0.052 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 6.1 0.017West Cameron, Block 116 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 0.0 0.000 1.4 0.004West Cameron, Block 130 7.8 0.021 8.8 0.024 0.3 0.001 0.3 0.001 0.0 0.000 4.7 0.013West Cameron, Block 153 0.1 0.000Total 125,968 343.31 221,357 603.37 3,711 10.11 3,667 9.99 14,064 38.34 841,295 2292.56In order to reflect significant figures, estimates should be interpreted as follows: 0.0 = <0.1; 0.00 = <0.01; and 0.000 = <0.001.

# 3-45

When considering only VOC emissions, the county distribution for onshore exploration is

somewhat different as illustrated below. These 14 counties constitute 26.6% of total s tatewide

VOC from oil and gas onshore exploration area sources.

 Andrews (2.76%)

 Ector (2.39%)

 Crockett (2.18%)

 Wichita (2.16%)

 Hemphill (2.16%)

 Midland (1.98%)

 Upton (1.79%)

 Zapata (1.78%)

 Crane (1.58%)

 Panola (1.58%)

 Yoakum (1.57%)

 Gaines (1.57%)

 Wheeler (1.55%)

 Wise (1.53%)

For all other counties for VOC, emission contributions are less than 1.5%.

3.3.2 Onshore Production

Annual and OSD emissions for all pollutants are presented at the county level for ons hore

production sources collectively in Table 3-4b. Considering only VOC emissions, 18 countie s are responsible for nearly 40% of statewide emissions from oil and gas area source s. The ranking of

these counties for VOC for onshore production is as follows.

 Hidalgo (3.5%)

 Panola (3.4%)

 Webb (2.85%)

 Zapata (2.72%)

 Freestone (2.34%)

 Pecos (2.25%)

 Starr (2.24%)

 Upton (2.22%)

 Liberty (2.13%)

 Wise (1.92%)

 Denton (1.7%)

 Andrews (1.7%)

 Gaines (1.67%)

 Jefferson (1.66%)

 Tyler (1.61%)

 Hemphill (1.58%)

 Ector (1.52%)

 Crockett (1.51%)

# 3-46

All other counties contribute less than 1.5% and the majority are below 1%.

In looking at the remaining pollutants that mainly come from onshore production

combustion sources, a total of 13 counties constitute over 41% of all other pollutant emissi ons

(i.e., CO, NO

x 

# , PM 10 

# , PM 2.5 

# and SO 2 

# ). For any one of these pollutants, the primary county

contributors are in order (note: to illustrate the relative contribution levels, t he values for NO

x 

# are shown below, values for the other pollutants follow similar relative tracks):

 Zapata (5.50%)

 Freestone (4.80%)

 Panola (4.77%)

 Webb (4.26%)

 Hidalgo (3.72%)

 Pecos (3.31%)

 Wise (3.09%)

 Starr (2.29%)

 Crockett (2.07%)

 Robertson (2.04%)

 Hemphill (1.92%)

 Denton (1.76%)

 Rusk (1.64%)

3.3.3 Offshore Production Sources

County- and lease block-level emission estimates for offshore production platform s are provided in Table 3-4c. As described previously, offshore sources are divided into two gr oups –

state waters (coastline out to 10 miles) and federal waters (from 10 to 25 mile s from shore). For

VOC emissions, the majority of emissions were shown to occur from state water s sources. The

principal counties and their percent contribution to total offshore VOC emissions is shown

below. These nine counties comprise roughly 78% of the estimated offshore VOC emi ssions.

 Kenedy (17.8%)

 Galveston (15.9%)

 Jefferson (12.3%)

 Calhoun (7.2%)

 Matagorda (7.0%)

 Brazoria (5.7%)

 Kleberg (5.6%)

 Nueces (4.1%)

 Aransas (2.3%)

In the federal waters offshore area, only four lease blocks had VOC emissions

constituting at least 1% of total offshore emissions. These blocks include Mata gorda IslandBlock 555 (1.61%), Matagorda Island-Block 622 (1.58%), High Island-Block 176 (1.37%), and

Galveston-Block 209 (1.0%). All other counties and lease blocks were less than 1% of tota l

VOC emissions.

# 3-47

For combustion–related pollutants, the picture is similar, but with some difference s. For

pollutants like NO X 

# , CO, and SO 2 

# , Jefferson County (state waters) is shown to be the primary

source of emissions (CO-10.2%, NO X 

# -17.7%, PM 10 

# - 22.9%, and SO 2 

# -28.2%). After Jefferson,

the main contributors to combustion pollutant emissions were Calhoun, Matagorda, Galves ton,

and Brazoria. These all occur in state waters. The contribution of sources in stat e waters (in

these 5 to 7 counties) to total emissions of these pollutants is as follows.

 CO – 36.6%

 NO

x 

# – 62.8%

 PM 10 

# – 81.5%

 PM 2.5 

# – 81.4%

 SO 2 

# – 96%

In federal waters, most of the contributions for lease blocks for combustion-relat ed

pollutants are less than 1%. However, there are some exceptions for specific poll utants. For CO,

the following lease blocks have significant contributions.

 High Island-Block176 (3.75%)

 Sabine Pass-Louisiana-Block 013 (3.73%)

 Brazos-Block 451 (3.35%)

 Matagorda Island-Block 623 (2.56%)

 Matagorda Island-Block 622 (2.37%)

 High Island-Block 179 (2.35%)

Galveston-Block 209, Matagorda Island-Block 622, and Sabine Pass-Louisiana-Block 013 are

significant contributors for NO

x 

# , PM 10 

# , and PM 2.5



# .

3.4 Comparison of Emissions by Attainment Status

The inventory data results were analyzed to evaluate how much of each pollutant

emission was occurring in counties classified as attainment and nonattainment ( for any

pollutant). All counties were assigned an attainment status based on informati on from the TCEQ

web site and the U.S. EPA (US EPA, 2007) and all pollutant emissions were summed by county

based on its classification. The results of that assessment are summarize d in Table 3-6.

# 3-48

Table 3-6. Summary of Oil and Gas Area Source Emissions by Attainment Status

Pollutant Attainment Status Total Emissions (tons/yr) Percent of Total

Attainment Counties 119,116 94.6% CO

Nonattainment Counties 6,851 5.4%

Attainment Counties 208,250 94.1% NO

x 

# Nonattainment Counties 13,107 5.9%

Attainment Counties 756,676 89.9% VOC

Nonattainment Counties 84,619 10.1%

Attainment Counties 13,271 94.4% SO 2



# Nonattainment Counties 792 5.6%

Attainment Counties 3,437 92.6% PM 10



# Nonattainment Counties 274 7.4%

Attainment Counties 3,395 92.6% PM 2.5



# Nonattainment Counties 271 7.4%



# As indicated in Table 3-6, for every pollutant, attainment counties contain the bulk of the

emissions. Given the shear number of total counties in Texas and the relatively low num ber of

nonattainment counties, this result is not unexpected.

# 4-1 4.0 EMISSIONS PROJECTIONS

4.1 Projections Methodology

Statewide emission projections were developed for base years 2010, 2015, and 2020

using information from the Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Suppleme ntal Tables to

the Annual Energy Outlook (EIA, 2007). The EIA data tables (specifically Table s 103 and 104)

present annual estimated crude oil and natural gas for the years 2004-2030. The geo graphic level

of the projected data is by EIA Region.

Portions of Texas fall into three EIA Regions: Gulf Coast; Southwest; and Midconti nent.

The majority of the State is in the Gulf Coast and Southwest EIA Regions. Only a s mall portion

(area to the west of Oklahoma) is in the Midcontinent Region. Because the Midconti nent EIA

Region contains six other states, any projections data for the Midcontinent EIA R egion may not

be reflective of Texas operations. Thus, it was assumed that the Southwest EIA Reg ion is likely

more representative of the Texas portion of the Midcontinent EIA Region.

Similarly, the Gulf Coast EIA Region includes mostly east Texas countie s, but also

includes four other states. The Southwest EIA Region includes almost all of west T exas, and the

eastern half of New Mexico. The EIA data also has projections for offshore plat forms that are

“Offshore-shallow” and “Offshore-deep.” It was assumed that the “Offs hore-shallow” EIA

Region is a suitable surrogate for platforms in Texas state waters and the “Offshore-deep” EIA

Region is a suitable surrogate for platforms in federal waters. Tables 4-1 (a-d) identify the Texas

counties with the appropriate EIA Region.

Tables 4-2(a-c) present the steps for developing the projected oil and natural gas

production for 2010, 2015, and 2020. Projection factors for each year were developed and

applied to the counties in the applicable EIA Region, and summed together. Additionally, only

one projection factor was developed to account for all oil and gas operations. Thus, the oil and

natural gas production data were converted to BTU and then summed together.

For example, year 2005 oil production for the “Onshore-Gulf Coast” EIA Region was

0.54 million barrels (MMBBL) per day. Using an average heating value of 134,010 BTU/ga l for

crude oil, this equates to 1.11 billion MMBTU. The year 2005 natural gas production for the

same region was 4.65 trillion cubic feet. Using an average heating value of 1036 BTU/s cf, this

equates to 4.82 billion MMBTU. Summing the oil and natural gas production yields a total of

5.93 billion MMBTU. In 2010, the same data parameters yield 0.719 billion MMBTU for oil

and 4.64 billion MMBTU for natural gas. The total for year 2010 is 5.36 billion MMBTU.

Therefore, the projection factor from 2005 to 2010 is:

2005 to 2010 projection factor = 2010 total MMBTU/2005 total MMBTU

2005 to 2010 projection factor = 5.36 billion MMBTU/5.93 billion MMBTU

2005 to 2010 projection factor = 0.90

# 4-2 Table 4-1a. Texas Counties in the Onshore-Gulf Coast EIA Region

Anderson Franklin Lavaca Sabine

Angelina Freestone Lee San Augustine

Aransas Frio Leon San Jacinto

Atascosa Galveston Liberty San Patricio

Austin Goliad Limestone Shelby

Bastrop Gonzales Live Oak Smith

Bee Gregg Martin Starr

Bexar Grimes Matagorda Titus

Bowie Guadalupe Mclennan Travis

Brazoria Hardin Mcmullen Trinity

Brazos Harris Medina Tyler

Brooks Harrison Milam Upshur

Burleson Henderson Montgomery Uvalde

Caldwell Hidalgo Morris Van Zandt

Calhoun Hopkins Nacogdoches Victoria

Cameron Houston Navarro Walker

Camp Jackson Newton Waller

Cass Jasper Nueces Washington

Chambers Jefferson Orange Webb

Cherokee Jim Hogg Panola Wharton

Colorado Jim Wells Polk Willacy

Denton Karnes Rains Williamson

Dimmit Kaufman Red River Wilson

Duval Kenedy Refugio Wood

Falls Kleberg Robertson Zapata

Fayette La Salle Rusk Zavala

Fort Bend Lampasas

# 4-3 Table 4-1b. Texas Counties in the Onshore-Southwest EIA Region

Andrews Edwards Kimble Roberts

Archer Ellis King Runnels

Bandera Erath Knox Schleicher

Baylor Fisher Lamb Scurry

Borden Floyd Lipscomb Shackelford

Bosque Foard Loving Sherman

Brown Gaines Lubbock Somervell

Callahan Garza Lynn Stephens

Carson Glasscock Madison Sterling

Childress Gray Marion Stonewall

Clay Grayson Maverick Sutton

Cochran Hale Mcculloch Tarrant

Coke Hamilton Menard Taylor

Coleman Hansford Midland Terrell

Collingsworth Hardeman Mills Terry

Comanche Hartley Mitchell Throckmorton

Concho Haskell Montague Tom Green

Cooke Hemphill Moore Upton

Cottle Hill Motley Val Verde

Crane Hockley Nolan Ward

Crockett Hood Ochiltree Wheeler

Crosby Howard Oldham Wichita

Culberson Hutchinson Palo Pinto Wilbarger

Dawson Irion Parker Winkler

De Witt Jack Pecos Wise

Dickens Johnson Potter Yoakum

Donley Jones Reagan Young

Eastland Kent Real

Ector Kerr Reeves

Table 4-1c. Texas Counties in the Offshore-Shallow EIA Region

Aransas Jefferson

Brazoria Kenedy

Calhoun Kleberg

Chambers Matagorda

Galveston Nueces

# 4-4 Table 4-1d. Area-Blocks in the Offshore-Deep EIA Region

Brazos, Block 376 High Island, Block 052 Matagorda Island, Block 633

Brazos, Block 397 High Island, Block 072 Matagorda Island, Block 635

Brazos, Block 415 High Island, Block 084 Matagorda Island, Block 638

Brazos, Block 451 High Island, Block 085 Matagorda Island, Block 657

Brazos, Block 453 High Island, Block 110 Matagorda Island, Block 685

Brazos, Block 491 High Island, Block 116 Matagorda Island, Block 686

Brazos, Block 542 High Island, Block 136 Matagorda Island, Block 696

Galveston, Block 190 High Island, Block 140 Matagorda Island, Block 699

Galveston, Block 209 High Island, Block 154 Mustang Island, Block 726

Galveston, Block 223 High Island, Block 176 Mustang Island, Block 754

Galveston, Block 225 High Island, Block 177 Mustang Island, Block 858

Galveston, Block 239 High Island, Block 179 Sabine Pass-Louisiana, Block 006

Galveston, Block 255 High Island, Block 194 Sabine Pass-Louisiana, Block 010

Galveston, Block 273 Matagorda Island, Block 487 Sabine Pass-Louisiana, Block 012

Galveston, Block 301 Matagorda Island, Block 555 Sabine Pass-Louisiana, Block 013

Galveston, Block 303 Matagorda Island, Block 566 Sabine Pass-Texas, Block 018

Galveston, Block 333 Matagorda Island, Block 587 West Cameron, Block 021

Galveston, Block 343 Matagorda Island, Block 588 West Cameron, Block 022

Galveston, Block 395 Matagorda Island, Block 603 West Cameron, Block 043

High Island, Block 021 Matagorda Island, Block 604 West Cameron, Block 044

High Island, Block 022 Matagorda Island, Block 605 West Cameron, Block 045

High Island, Block 034 Matagorda Island, Block 618 West Cameron, Block 048

High Island, Block 037 Matagorda Island, Block 622 West Cameron, Block 053

High Island, Block 039 Matagorda Island, Block 623 West Cameron, Block 116

High Island, Block 045 Matagorda Island, Block 631 West Cameron, Block 130

High Island, Block 046 Matagorda Island, Block 632 West Cameron, Block 153

# 4-5 Table 4-2a. Projected EIA Production

Oil Production Natural Gas Production

2005 2010 2015 2020 2005 2010 2015 2020

Location (MMBBL/day) TSCF

Offshore-Deep 0.84 1.62 1.98 1.85 1.37 2.27 3.05 2.68

Offshore-Shallow 0.47 0.34 0.3 0.32 1.98 1.59 1.49 1.39

Onshore-Gulf Coast 0.54 0.35 0.27 0.27 4.65 4.48 4.11 3.94

Onshore-Southwest 0.93 0.93 0.91 0.9 1.81 2.02 1.95 1.9



# Table 4-2b. Projected EIA Production (MMBTU)

Oil Production Natural Gas Production

2005 2010 2015 2020 2005 2010 2015 2020

Location Billion MMBTU Billion MMBTU

Offshore-Deep 1.73 3.33 4.07 3.80 1.42 2.35 3.16 2.78

Offshore-Shallow 0.97 0.70 0.62 0.66 2.05 1.65 1.54 1.44

Onshore-Gulf Coast 1.11 0.72 0.55 0.55 4.82 4.64 4.26 4.08

Onshore-Southwest 1.91 1.91 1.87 1.85 1.88 2.09 2.02 1.97



# Table 4-2c. Final Projection Factors by EIA Region

Total Oil and Natural Gas

Production Projection Factors from 2005

2005 2010 2015 2020 2005 2010 2015 2020

Location Billion MMBTU Unitless

Offshore-Deep 3.14 5.68 7.23 6.58 1.00 1.81 2.30 2.09

Offshore-Shallow 3.02 2.35 2.16 2.10 1.00 0.78 0.72 0.70

Onshore-Gulf Coast 5.93 5.36 4.81 4.64 1.00 0.90 0.81 0.78

Onshore-Southwest 3.79 4.00 3.89 3.82 1.00 1.06 1.03 1.01



# 4.2 Summary of Oil and Gas Area Sources Projected Emissions

Tables 4-3(a-f) are summaries of the projected statewide emissions by l ocation (onshore,

offshore), type (exploration, production, and offshore), and pollutant. Generally, emissi ons are projected to decline from 2005 to 2020 for onshore production (~14%), onshore exploration

(~11%), and offshore-state waters (~30%). Conversely, emissions from offshore- federal waters

are projected to increase during the same time period (~109%).

# 4-6 Table 4-3a. CO Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

CO Onshore Exploration 29,695 29,021 27,209 26,462

CO Onshore Production 88,949 85,299 79,260 76,919

CO Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 4,644 8,405 10,680 9,705

CO Offshore-State Waters Offshore 2,680 2,090 1,929 1,876

Total 125,968 124,815 119,079 114,962



# Table 4-3b. NO

x 

# Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

NO

x 

# Onshore Exploration 120,061 117,570 110,333 107,326

NO

x 

# Onshore Production 91,998 88,253 82,018 79,599

NO

x 

# Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 3,457 6,257 7,951 7,225

NO

x 

# Offshore-State Waters Offshore 5,841 4,556 4,205 4,089

Total 221,357 216,636 204,507 198,239



# Table 4-3c. PM 10 

# -PRI Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

PM 10 

# - PRI Onshore Exploration 1,998 1,957 1,836 1,786

PM 10 

# - PRI Onshore Production 1,578 1,511 1,404 1,362

PM 10 

# -

PRI Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 25 45 58 52

PM 10 

# - PRI Offshore-State Waters Offshore 110 86 79 77

Total 3,711 3,599 3,377 3,278

# 4-7 Table 4-3d. PM 2.5 

# -PRI Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

PM 2.5 

# - PRI Onshore Exploration 1,954 1,914 1,796 1,747

PM 2.5 

# - PRI Onshore Production 1,578 1,511 1,404 1,362

PM 2.5 

# -

PRI Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 25 45 58 52

PM 2.5 

# - PRI Offshore-State Waters Offshore 110 86 79 77

Total 3,667 3,556 3,336 3,238



# Table 4-3e. SO 2 

# Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

SO 2 

# Onshore Exploration 13,835 13,552 12,719 12,373

SO 2 

# Onshore Production 44 42 39 38

SO 2 

# Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 7 13 17 15

SO 2 

# Offshore-State Waters Offshore 177 138 128 124

Total 14,064 13,745 12,903 12,550



# Table 4-3f. VOC Projected Emissions by Location and Type

Pollutant Location Type 2005

Emissions

(tpy) 2010

Emissions

(tpy) 2015

Emissions

(tpy) 2020

Emissions

(tpy)

VOC Onshore Exploration 120,240 120,202 113,875 111,017

VOC Onshore Production 715,941 692,079 645,543 627,048

VOC Offshore-Federal

Waters Offshore 1,088 1,970 2,503 2,274

VOC Offshore-State Waters Offshore 4,025 3,139 2,898 2,817

Total 841,295 817,389 764,818 743,156

# 5-1 5.0 REFERENCES

American Petroleum Institute (API), 1995. Emission Factors for Oil and Gas Pr oduction

Operations. API Publication No. 4615. January 1995.

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), 1999. CH4 and VOC Emissions from

the Canadian Upstream Oil and Gas Industry. July 1999. Internet address:

http://www.capp.ca/raw.asp?x=1&dt=NTV&e=PDF&dn=84181

Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2007. Supplemental Tables to the Annual Ene rgy Outlook 2007, Data Tables 103 and 104. Data released February 2007. Washington, D.C.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/supplement/index.html

Engeser, B, 2004. Fundamentals of Drilling, Part 1, pg. 37. International Continental Sci entific

Drilling Program. Sept. 2004. Accessed June 5, 2007. Internet address:

http://www.icdp-online.de/news/training/Bosumtwi/engeser/drillfund1.pdf

Gas Processors Association (GPA), 2004. The Gas Processing Industry, Its Funct ion and Role in

Energy Supplies. Tables 1 and 2. Tulsa, OK. Accessed June 7, 2007. Internet address:

http://www.gasprocessors.com/pdffiles/itsfunctionandrole04.pdf

Gas Research Institute (GRI), 1992. Venting and Flaring Emissions from Pr oduction,

Processing, and Storage in the Natural Gas Industry. Prepared by Radian Corpor ation, Austin,

Texas. 1992.

Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC), 2005. Natural Gas Compressor Engine Survey and

Engine NO X 

# Emissions at Gas Production Facilities. Prepared by Eastern Research G roup, Inc.

August 31, 2005.

Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC), 2006a. Natural Gas Compressor Engine Surv ey for Gas Production and Processing Facilities. Prepared by Eastern Resear ch Group, Inc.

October 5, 2006.

Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC), 2006b. VOC Emissions from Oil and Condensate

Storage Tanks. Prepared by URS Corporation, COMM Engineering, and Trimeric Corporation.

October 31, 2006.

# 5-2

Minerals Management Service (MMS), 2007. Year 2005 Gulfwide Emission Inventory S tudy:

Draft Report. U.S. Dept. of Interior, MMS, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orlean s, LA.

Prepared by Wilson, D.L., R.S. Billings, R.G. Oommen, and R.K. Chang, Eastern Research

Group, Inc. Report No. MMS 2007-XXX. August 2007.

Minerals Management Service (MMS), 2004. Gulfwide Emission Inventory Study for Regional

Haze and Ozone Modeling Effort. Prepared by Eastern Research Group, Inc. Report No. M MS

2004-072. October 2004. Internet address:

http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ssjf/documents/eictts/OilGas/WRAP _Oil&Gas_Final_Report.12

2805.pdf

National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), 2007. Meteorological Data for Nati onal Weather

Service Stations in Texas. Unedited Local Climatological Data Series. Data retrieved June, 2007.

Internet address: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), 2007a. New Oil and Gas SCCs. Dat a provided by Mr. Charlie Rubick, TCEQ. February 28, 2007. Email communication from

Charlie Rubick, TCEQ to Rick Baker, Eastern Research Group, Inc.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), 2007b. Texas Oil and Gas Platfor m Emissions Data for Baseyear 2005. Data provided by Mr. Bertie Fernando, TCEQ. June 21,

2007. Email communication from Bertie Fernando, TCEQ to Garry Brooks, Eastern Re search

Group, Inc.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), 2000. Rate of Progress for Houst onGalveston Area; Improvements to the 1999 Area Sources Inventory. Data provided by Mr.

Charlie Rubick, TCEQ. July 6, 2007. Email communication from Charlie Rubick, TCEQ to

Regi Oommen, Eastern Research Group, Inc.

Texas Railroad Commission (TRC), 2007b. Gas Well Gas and Casinghead Gas Shall Be U tilized

for Legal Purposes. TAC 16, Part 1, Chapter 3, Rule 3.32. Accessed from internet June 1, 2007.

Internet address:

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_ rloc=&p_tloc=

&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=16&pt=1&ch=3&rl=32

Texas Railroad Commission (TRC), 2005a. Oil Well Counts By County As Of September 2005.

September 3, 2005. Accessed June 4, 2007. Internet address:

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/divisions/og/statistics/wells/wellcount /oilwlct0905.pdf

Texas Railroad Commission (TRC), 2005b. Gas Well Counts By County As Of September 2005.

September 3, 2005. Accessed June 4, 2007. Internet address:

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/divisions/og/statistics/wells/wellcount /gaswlct0905.pdf

# 5-3

Texas Railroad Commission (TRC), 2005c. General Production Query Results for Oil,

Casinghead, Gas, and Condensate for Oil Leases and Gas Wells by Onshore County, J anuary 2005 through December 2005. Accessed July 2, 2007. Internet address:

http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/PDQ/generalReportAction.do

The Drilling Observer, 2007. The Oil and Gas Regulatory Report, A Weekly Newsle tter

(multiple). Austin, TX. Data sent to Regi Oommen, Eastern Research Group, In c. June 28, 2007.

The Texas Exploration Company (TXCO). 2004 Annual Report, Letter to Shareholders.

Accessed June 11, 2007. Internet address: http://www.txco.com/txco04ar.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2007. Welcome to the Green Book -

Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants. Prepared by the US EPA Offi ce of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2006. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissi on Factors, 5th Edition and Supplements (AP-42); Liquid Storage Tanks, Table 7.1-2. November

2006. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch07/final/c07s01.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2005. WebFIRE Emission Factors. Acce ssed

June 26, 2007. Internet address: http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/download/WebFIREFactors.csv

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2004a. Source Classification Codes. Pre pared

by the Emissions Inventory and Analysis Group (EIAG). February 2004. Internet address:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/codes/scc_feb2004.xls

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2004b. Overview of EPA’s Low Sulfur Die sel

Fuel Programs. Office of Transportation and Air Quality. Presentation made N ovember 2004.

Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/presentations/overviewulsdprgrm.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2003. Lessons Learned from Natural G as STAR Partners – Options for Reducing Methane Emissions From Pneumatic Devic es in the

Natural Gas Industry. EPA Report No. EPA430-B-03-004. US Environmental Protection

Agency. July 2003. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/gasstar/pdf/lessons/ll_pneumatics.pdf

. Site accessed August 3, 2007.

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA, 1999). Preferred and Alternate Methods f or Estimating Air Emissions from Oil and Gas Field Production and Processing O perations.

September, 1999. Internet address:

http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eiip/techreport/volume02/ii10.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 1996. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissi on

Factors, 5 th 

# Edition and Supplements (AP-42); Large Stationary Diesel and All Stationar y Diesel-fuel Engines, Table 3.4-1. October 1996. Internet address:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch03/final/c03s04.pdf

# 5-4

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 1995a. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emiss ion

Factors, 5 th 

# Edition and Supplements (AP-42); Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum

Liquids. January 1995. Internet address:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch05/final/c05s02.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 1991. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissi on

Factors, 5 th 

# Edition and Supplements (AP-42); Industrial Flares, Table 13-5. September, 1991.

Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13/final/c13s05.pdf

Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), 2005. Oil and Gas Emission Inventories for the

Western States. Prepared by ENVIRON International. December 27, 2005. Inte rnet address:

http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ssjf/documents/eictts/OilGas/WRAP _Oil&Gas_Final_Report.12

2805.pdf

# Appendix A – Documentation of Exploration Sources E missions

# Appendix B – Documentation of Production Sources Em issions

# Appendix C – Documentation of Offshore Sources Emis sions