# Emissions Inventory for Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document : 2017

- 2025 Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Final Ruleii 

### EPA

- 4 54 / R

- 1 2

- 0 05 August 201 2

Emissions Inventory for Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document : 2017

- 2025 Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Final Rule

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Assessment Division

Contact:

Alexis Zubrowiii 

### (This page intentionally left blank)iv 

## TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS

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

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... vi

LIST OF FIGURES

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... vi

LIST OF APPENDICES

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... vii

1 Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 1

2 2005 Emission inventories and their preparation

................................ ................................ ............... 2

2.1 Custom configuration for emissions modeling fo r LDGHG

................................ ............................ 3

2.2 2005 Emissions Inventories and Processing

................................ ................................ ................... 5

2.3 2005 Onroad Mobile sources

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 5

2.4 Nonroad mobile sources (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3)

................................ ............................... 7

2.4.1 Locomotives and commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3, seca_c3)

................................ ........... 7

2.5 2005 point sources (ptipm and pt nonipm sectors)

................................ ................................ ........... 7

2.5.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm)

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8

2.6 2005 nonpoint sources (afdust, ag, avefire, nonpt)

................................ ................................ .......... 8

2.6.1 Portable fuel containers

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 8

2.6.2 Onroad refueling

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 9

2.7 Other sources (biogenics, othpt, othar, and othon)

................................ ................................ .......... 9

3 VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes

................................ ................................ ....... 10

4 2030 Reference Case

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 12

4.1 Stationary source projections: EGU sector (ptipm)

................................ ................................ ...... 18

4.2 Stationary source projections: non

- EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, afdust)

............................ 18

4.2.1 Ethanol plan ts (ptnonipm)

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 20

4.2.2 Biodiesel plants ptnonipm)

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 20

4.2.3 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)

................................ ................................ ... 21

4.2.4 Cellulosic fuel production (nonpt)

................................ ................................ ............................ 21

4.2.5 Ethanol transport and distribution (nonpt)

................................ ................................ ................ 22

4.2.6 Refinery adjustments (ptnonipm)

................................ ................................ ............................. 22

4.2.7 Ethanol transport gasoline and blends (ptnonipm, nonpt)

................................ .......................... 23

4.2.8 Upstream agricultural adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm)

................................ .............. 23

4.2.9 Livestock emissions gr owth (ag, afdust)

................................ ................................ ................... 23

4.2.10 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt)

................................ ................................ ....... 24

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

................................ ....................... 25

4.2.12 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm)

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 26

4.2.13 Stationary source control programs, consent decrees & set tlements, and plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt)

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 26

4.2.14 Oil and gas projections in TX, OK, and non

- California WRAP states (nonpt)

....................... 31

4.3 Mobile source projections

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 31

4. 3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)

................................ ........... 32

4.4 Nonroad mobile source projections (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3 )

................................ ............. 33

4.4.1 Emissions generated with the NONROAD model (nonroad)

................................ .................... 33

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

................................ .... 34

4.4.3 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3)

................................ ................................ ........... 36

4.5 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sourc es (othar, othon, and othpt)

................................ .................. 37

5 2030 Control Case

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 37

5.1 2030 Control Case Point and Nonpoint sources

................................ ................................ ............ 37

5.2 2030 Control Case Mobile sources

................................ ................................ ............................... 40

6 References

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 42v ACRONYMS

AEO Annual Energy Outlook

BEIS Biogenic Emission Inventory System btp Bulk plant terminal

- to

- pump C3 Category 3 (commercial marine vessels)

CAP Criteria Air Pollutant

CARB California Air Resources Board CMAQ Community Multiscale Air Quality

CSAPR Cross

- State Air Pollution (formerly Transport) Rule

E0 0% Ethanol gasoline

E10 10% Ethanol gasoline

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

EGU Electric Generating Utilit y FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant

LDGHG Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas

HONO HNO2, nitrous acid

IPM Integrated Planning Model

LDGHG Light Duty Greenhouse Gas

MOBILE6 Mobile Source Emission Factor Model, version 6

MOVES Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator

MY Model Year

NEEDS National Electric Energy Database System

NEI National Emission Inventory

NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model OAQPS EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

ORL One Record per Line (a SMOKE input format)

MP Multipollutant

NO Nitric oxide

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

NOX Nitrogen oxides

PFC Portable Fuel Container

PE C Elemental carbon component of PM2.5

PMFINE Leftover “Other”, or “crustal” component of PM2. 5

PNO3 Particulate nitrate component of PM2.5

PSO4 Particulate sulfate component of PM2.5

PO C Organic carbon component of PM2.5

r bt Refinery

- to

- bulk terminal

RFS2 R evised annual renewable fuel standard

SMOKE Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions

SCC Source Category Code

TAF Terminal Area Forecast

TSD Technical Support Document

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WRAP Western Regional Air Partnershipvi 

## LIST OF TABLES

Table 1

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

................................ .................. 1

Table 2

- 1. Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the LDGHG Platform

................................ ................... 2

Table 2

- 2. Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for LDGHG platform

......................... 4

Table 2

- 3. Description of differences in ancillary data between the LDGHG 2005 case and the 2005 v4.2 platform

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 5

Table 2

- 4. HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in LDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform

................................ . 6

Table 2

- 5. 2005 ethanol plant emissions (tons)

................................ ................................ ............................. 8

Table 3

- 1. Summary of VOC speciation profile approaches by sector across cases

................................ ..... 11

Table 4

- 1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the LDGHG 2030 Reference case

emissions inventories from the 2005 base case

................................ ................................ ..................... 15

Table 4

- 2. LDGHG FRM reference case stationary non

- EGU source

- related projection methods

............... 19

Table 4

- 3. 2030 corn ethanol plant emissions [tons]

................................ ................................ ................... 20

Table 4

- 4. 2030 biodiesel plant emissions [tons]

................................ ................................ ......................... 20

Table 4

- 5. PFC emissions for 2030 [tons]

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 21

Table 4

- 6. 2030 cellulosic plant emissions [tons]

................................ ................................ ........................ 22

Table 4

- 7. 2030 VOC losses (Emissio ns) due to ethanol transport and distribution [tons]

........................... 22

Table 4

- 8. Impact of refinery adjustments on 2030 emissions [tons]

................................ ........................... 23

Table 4

- 9. Upstream agricultural emission increases due to RFS2 fuels in 2030 [tons]

............................... 23

Table 4

- 10. Growth factors from year 2005 to 2030 for animal operations

................................ .................. 23

Table 4

- 11. Projection factors for growing year 2005 residential wood combustion sources

....................... 25

Table 4

- 12. Factors used to project 2005 base

- case aircraft emissions to year 2030

................................ .... 26

Table 4

- 13. Summary of Non

- EGU Emission R eductions Applied to the 2005 Inventory due to Unit and

Plant Closures

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 27

Table 4

- 14. Future

- year ISIS

- based cement industry annual reductions (tons/yr) for the non

- EGU (ptnonipm) sector

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 2 9

Table 4

- 15. State

- level non

- MACT Boiler Reductions from ICR Data Gather ing

................................ ....... 29

Table 4

- 16. National Impact of RICE Controls on 2030 Non

- EGU Projections

................................ ........... 30

Table 4

- 17. Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 2030 Non

- EGU Projections

................................ ................ 30

Table 4

- 18. Oil and Gas NO X and SO 2 Emissions for 2005 and 2030 including additional reductions due to

the RICE NESHAP

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 31

Table 4

- 19 . Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and class 1 and class 2

commercial marine vessel emissions to 2030

................................ ................................ ....................... 35

Table 4

- 20. Additional class 1 railroad and C1/C2 CMV emissions from RFS2 fuel volume changes

......... 36

Table 4

- 21. NO X , SO 2 , PM 2.5 and VOC factors to project class 3 CMV emissions for 2030

........................ 37

Table 5

- 1. Adjustments to IPM Emissions to Account for Reduced Refinery Demand

................................ 38

Table 5

- 2. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on ptipm (Electric Power Plants from Electric and Electric Plug

- in Vehicles, and Reductions in Production of Electricity for Refinery Use ) .................................38



## LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4

- 1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005 and 2030

................................ ..... 33vii 

## LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A : Modified LDGHG Equations to adapt pre

- speciated diesel emissions from MOVES to air

quality modeling species needed for CMAQ

.
APPENDIX B : Summary of LDGHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non

- EGU Control Programs, Closures and

Projections

APPENDIX C : Fuel Distribution SCCs in Nonpt and Ptnonipm1 

## 1 Introduction

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

Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NH TSA) joint rulemaking effort under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) to establish fuel efficiency and greenhou se gas emissions standards for passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and

medium

- duty passenger vehicles, beginning with the 201 7 model year (MY) . This rulemaking effort is

hereafter referred to in this technical support document (TSD) as the Light Duty Vehic le Greenhouse Gas (L DGHG) rule and consists of t hree emissions cases. Table 1

- 1 provides of list of the emissions cases

created for this modeling effort.

Table 1

- 1

. List of cases run in support of the LDGHG air quality modeling

Case Name Internal EPA

Abbreviation Description

2005 B ase case 2005c t_ldghg2 2005 case created using average year fires data and an

average year temporal allocation approach for Electrical Generating Units ( EGUs ) , use d to comput e relative response factors with 2030 scenarios

. 2030 Reference case 2030c t_ldghg_ref 2030 “reference ” (baseline) scenario representing the

best estimate for the future year without implementation

of the new light duty GHG emissions standards.

2030 Control case 2030c t_ldghg_ctl2 20 30 “control” case scenario representing implementation of national GHG emissions standards

, phased in from 201 7 to 20 25

, for passenger cars, light

duty tr ucks, and medium

- duty passenger vehicles,

The data used in the 2005 emissions cases are often the same as those d escribed in the Transport Rule Final

CAP

- BAFM 2005

- based, Version 4 .2 P latform TSD ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005 )

, but some different emissions data are used for this rulemaking

. Specifically, t he LDGHG modeling used data intended only for the rule de velopment and not for general use . All of the documentation provided here describes what was done differently and specifically for the LDGHG effort in contrast to wh at is used in the

v4 .2 platform.

In LDGHG

, we used a 2005 base case approach for the year 2005 emissions scenario

. T his approach is very similar to that used in the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Final Rule (formerly known as the

“ Transport Rule”)

. A base case approach uses average year fires and EGU temporal profiles from three years of EGU data. We use a base case approach because we want to reduce year

- specific variability in

some components of the inventory

. F or example

, large fires vary in location and day of the year each year, and EGU shutdowns and high use on high energy demand days also vary by year. By using a base case approach, these two aspects of the inventory are maintained in future year modeling and therefore do not introduce potentially spurious year

- specific artifacts in air quality modeling estimates. For LDGHG , the same biogenic emissions data as the v4 .2 platform was used for the 2005 case

, and also for both future

- year

cases

. T he only significant data change s between the 2005 and the 2030 future

- year LDGHG cases are the emission inventories and spec iation approaches.

For this effort , we have created and provided county

- level emission summaries for criteria pollutants and select hazardous air pollutants ( e.g. benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3

- butadiene, ethanol, naphthalene) by emiss ions modeling sector for the case s listed above

. S ummaries were developed by month2 using average day emissions and separately with annual totals. The se data have been provided to the EPA

docket for this rule. .

In the remainder of this document, we pro vide a description of the approaches taken for the emissions in support of air quality modeling for LDGHG . In Section 2 , we describe the ancillary data and 2005 inventory

differences from the v4 .2 platform. In Section 3 , we describe the speciation differences amon g each of the

cases run for LDGHG . In Section 0 , we describe the 20 30 Reference case as compared to the 2005 base

c ase, and in Section 5 , we describe the 2030 Control Case in comparison to the 2030 Reference case.



## 2 2005 Emission i nventories and their preparation

As mentioned pre viously, t he 2005 e missions modeling approach for LDGHG used much of the same data and approaches as the 2005 v4 .2 platform. In this section, we identify the differences between the data used

for LDGHG and that used for the 2005 v4 .2 platform. Section 2.1 provide s ancillary data differences that impact multiple sectors and Sections 2.2 through 2.3 provides differences for the point, area, and mobile

sectors.

Table 2

- 1 below lists the platform sectors used for the LDGHG modeling platform. It also indicates which platform sectors include HAP emissions and the associated sectors from the National E mission Inventory (NEI) . Subsequent sections refer to these platform sectors for identifying the emissions differences between

the v4 .2 platform and the LDGHG platform.

Table 2

- 1

. Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the LDGHG Platform

Platform Sector 2005 NEI

S ector Description Contains HAP

emissions?

IPM sector: ptipm Point NEI EGU units at facilities mapped to the IPM model using the National Electric Energy Dat abase System (NEEDS) database. Yes

Non

- IPM sector: ptnonipm Point + All NEI point source units not matched to the ptipm sector

, including aircraft

. Yes

Average

- fire sector: avefire N / A Average

- year wildfire and prescr ibed fire emissions , county and

annual resolution. Yes

Agricultural sector:

ag Nonpoint NH 3 emissions from NEI nonpoint livestock and fertilizer application. No

Area fugitive dust

sector: afdust Nonpoint PM 10 and PM 2.5 emissions from fugitive dust sources in the NEI nonpoint inventory. No

Remaining nonpoint

sector: nonpt Nonpoint + All nonpoint sources not otherwise included in other emissions modeling sectors. Yes

Nonroad sector:
nonroad Mobile:

Nonroad Monthly nonroad emissions from the National Mobile Inventory

Model (NMIM) using NONROAD2005 version nr05c

- BondBase, which is equivalent to NONROAD2008a, since it incorporated

Bond rule revisions to some of the base

- case inputs and the Bond

rule controls did not take effect until later. NMIM was used for all

states except California. Monthly emissions for California created from annual emissions submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for the 2005v2 NEI. Yes

Aircraft, locomotive, marine: alm_no_c3 Mobile:

Nonroad Primarily 2002 NEI non

- rail maintena nce locomotives, and

category 1 and category 2 commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions sources, county and annual resolution. Aircraft

emissions are no longer in this sector and are now included in the

Non

- EGU sector (as point sources) ; also, category 3 CMV

emissions are no longer in this sector and are now contained in the
seca_c3 sector. Yes3

Platform Sector 2005 NEI

S ector Description Contains HAP

emissions?

C3 commercial

marine: seca_c3 Mobile:

nonroad Annual point source

- formatted, year 2005 category 3 (C3) CMV

emissions, developed for the rule called “Control of Emi ssions from New Marine Compression

- Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder”, usually described as the Emissions Control Area (ECA) study (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm). Utilized final projections from 2002, developed for the C3 ECA Proposal to the International Maritime Organization (EPA

- 420

- F

10

- 041, August 2010). Yes

Onroad , except gasoline PM :

on _noadj Mobile:

onroad + Three, monthly, county

- level components:

1) California onroad, created using annual emissions for all pollutants, submitted by CARB for the 2005v2 NEI. NH 3 (not submitted by CARB) from MOVES2010a

. 2) Onroad gasoline and diesel vehicle emissions from

MOVES2010a not subject to temperature adjustments: exhaust CO, NOX, VOC, NH3, benzene, formaldehyde, aceta ldehyde, 1,3

- butadiene, acrolein, naphthalene, brake and tire wear PM, and evaporative VOC, benzene, and naphthalene. Yes

Onroad starting

exhaust PM:
on_moves_startpm Mobile:

onroad + Monthly, county

- level MOVES2010a

- based onroad gasoline

emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to exhaust mode only for PM species and naphthalene. California emissions

not included. This sector is limited to cold start mode emissions that contain different temperature adjustment curves from running exhaust (s ee on_moves_runpm sector). No

Onroad running

exhaust PM

on_moves_runpm Mobile:

onroad + Monthly, county

- level draft MOVES2010a

- based onroad gasoline

emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to exhaust mode only for PM species and naphthalene. California emissions not included. This sector is limited to running mode emissions that contain different temperature adjustment curves from cold start exhaust (see on_moves_startpm sector). No

Biogenic: biog N/A Hour

- specific, grid cell

- specific emi ssions generated from the BEIS3.14 model, including emissions in Canada and Mexico. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform. No

Other point sources

not from the NEI: othpt N/A Point sources from Canada’s 2006 inventory and Mexico’s Phase III 1999 inventory, annual resolution. Also includes annual U.S. offshore oil 2005v2 NEI point source emissions. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform. No

Other nonpoint and

nonroad not from

the NEI: othar N/A Annual year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999 Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) nonpoint and nonroad mobile inventories. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform. No

Other onroad

sources not from the

NEI: othon N/A Year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 1999 Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) onroad mobile inventories, annual resolution. Unchanged from the 2005v4 platform. No

+ Some data included in modeling sector has been revised beyond what is included in the 2005 NEI v 1 or v 2.

As with the 2005 v4 .2 platform, the primary emi ssions modeling tool used to create the air quality model

ready emissions was the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) modeling system ( http://www.smoke

- model.org/index.cfm ). We used SMOKE vers ion 2.7 to create emissions files for a 36

- km national grid, and 12

- km Eastern and 12

- km Western grids for the 2005 base case (also known as the

“2005ct

_ ldghg 2 _05b” case).



### 2.1 Custom configuration for emissions modeling for LDGHG

Unlike the 2005 v4 .2 platform, the configuration for LDGHG modeling included additional hazardous air pollutants ( HAP s) and used slightly revised ancillary speciation data. Both of these differences are described

in this section.4 Table 2

- 2 lists the additional HAP pollutants processed for the LDGHG platform

, which were not included in

the 2005 v4 .2 platform. However, since using the full multipollutant HAP version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality ( CMAQ ) model would have taken longer than the time available for our pro ject, we used a “lite” version of the multipollutant CMAQ (Version 4.7) that required emissions only for the species

listed in the footnote of Table 2

- 2

.
Table 2

- 2

. Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for LDGHG platform

Inventory Pollutant Model Species Model species description

CL2 CL2 Atomic gas

- phase chlorine

HCl HCL Hydrogen Chloride (hydrochloric acid) gas

CO CO Carbon monoxide

NO X NO Nitrogen oxide

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide

HONO Nitrous acid

SO 2 SO2 Sulfur dioxide

SULF Sulfuric acid vapor

NH 3 NH3 Ammonia

VOC ACROLEIN * Acrolein from the HAP inventory

ALD2 Acetaldehyde from VOC speciation
ALD_PRIMARY * Acetaldehyde from the HAP inventory

ALDX Propionaldehyde and higher aldehydes

BENZENE Benzene (not part of CB05)

BUTADIENE13 * 1,3

- butadiene from the HAP inventory

ETH Ethene

ETHA Ethane

ETOH Ethanol

FORM Formaldehyde
FORM_PRIMARY * Formaldehyde from the HAP inventory

IOLE Internal olefin carbon bond (R

- C=C

- R)

ISOP Isoprene

MEOH Methanol

OLE Terminal olefin carbon bond (R

- C=C)

PAR Paraffin carbon bond

TOL Toluene and other monoalkyl aromatics

XYL Xylene and other polyalkyl aromatics

Various additional VOC species from the biogenics model which do not map to the above model species SESQ Sesquiterpenes

TERP Terpenes

PM 10 PMC Coarse PM > 2.5 microns and 10 microns

PM 2.5 PEC Particulate elemental carbon 2.5 microns

PNO3 Particulate nitrate 2.5 microns

POC Particulate organic carbon (carbon only) 2.5 microns

PSO4 Particulate Sulfate 2.5 microns

PMFINE Other particulate matter 2.5 microns

Sea

- salt species (non

– anthropogenic emissions) PCL Particulate chloride

PNA Particulate sodium

- ACROLEIN, ALD2_PRIMARY, BUTADIENE13, and FORM_PRIMARY are the extra “CMAQ

- lite” HAPs that are not in the v4.2 platform.5 In addition to the model species differences , the LDGHG platform had a few additional custom aspects in the

2005 cases

. Table 2

- 3 lists the datasets used by the LDGHG platform that are different from the v4 .2 platform.

Another consideration is the speciation across the LDGHG future

- year cases as compared to 2005. Se ction 3 provides a detailed account of these differences. Otherwise, the future

- year ancillary data were largely the same as those in 2005, with no substantial differences. All ancillary data files can be found at the 2005

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

Table 2

- 3

. Description of differences in ancillary data between the LDGHG 200 5 case and the 2005 v4 .2 platform

Ancillary Data Type Difference between 2005 v4 .2 platform and LDGHG platform Speciation cross

references and Speciation profiles The LDGHG data files are configured to support the multi

- pollutant (MP) version of CMAQ, whereas the 2005 v 4 .2 platform data file is configured to support only the non

- MP version. Therefore, the LDGHG data files include profiles for additional VOC HAP species. Inventory tables The LDGHG data file is configure d to support the MP “lite” version of CMAQ,

whereas the 2005 v4 .2 platform data file is confi gured to support only the non

MP version.



### 2.2 2005 Emissions Inventories and Processing

The LDGHG emissions for 2005 for many sectors except for U.S. onroad mobile sectors (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, and on_moves_startpm) are similar to those provided in the 2005 Version 4.2

- based Transport Rule Final TSD. Only minor adjustments were made to the point source sectors (ptnonipm, point), nonpoint source se ctors (nonpt, afdust, ag, avefire), and nonroad sectors (alm_no_c3, nonroad, seca_c3)

. The Canada and Mexico sector (othar, othon, othpt) inventories are unchanged from the 2005v4.2 emissions modeling platform except for updated gridding surrogates used i n the area based emissions

. Th e 2005v4.2

TSD provides detailed documentation on the 2005v4.2 inventories and can be found at: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/20 05v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_28jun2011.pdf

.



### 2.3 2005 Onroad Mobile sources

Onroad m obile sources include three sectors for US onroad emissions (on_noadj, on_moves_startpm, on_moves_runpm) . As discussed in the previous section, the t hree US nonroad sectors (nonroad

, alm_no_c3 , and seca_c3 ) and the Canada/Mexico onroad emissions (othon) are unchanged from the 2005v4.2 platform

.

For onroad mobile, the MOVES

- based emissions in the on_noadj sector and the on_mov es_startpm and

on_moves_runpm sectors (completely MOVES

- based) emissions inventory data are from the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator ( MOVES2010, specifically, version MOVES2010a ) model

. In addition, for the MOVES PM sectors, t he temperature adjustment calculations applied to PM 2.5 sp ecies were the same as in the v4.2 platform. T he NH 3 onroad emissions in California (on_noadj sector) use MOVES2010 (a)

- based

emissions. All other pollutants in California were supplied by CARB for the 2005 NEI v2. The LDGHG

onroad emissions keep additional HAPs as described in Section 2.1

.

For LDGHG , MOVES2010a was used in conjunction with an internal default database s ( MOVESDB20100913_45_ corr
, MOVESDB20100913_ldt , and
MOVESDB20100913_MHDHHD2b3_corr ) which contained performance updates from MOVESDB20100826, the database originally released with MOVES2010a and used in the 2005v4.2 platform. T he MOVES2010 a default database used to model LDGH G also include d improved heavy duty6 PM exhaust estimates (particularly for future year estimates) and was further customized to allow separate calculation of heavy duty emissions of different weight categories as described in the “Final Rulemaking to

Esta blish Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Engines and Vehicles Regulatory Impact Analysis” ( http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/documents/420r11901.pdf ).

In addition, we used NO and NO 2 directly from MOVES2010 a for LDGHG , rather than the default NO/NO 2 speciation from NO X used in 2005v4.2 processing

. Table 2

- 4 shows the default NO, NO 2 , and HONO fractions used in 2005v4.2 versus the equations for LDGHG , where NO_MOVES and NO2_MOVES are the

MOVES2010

- provided NO and NO 2 emissions. The HONO , compu ted from total MOVES NOX (sum of NO and NO2 from MOVES) is subtracted out of MOVES NO2 to conserve mass. The speciation of MOVES HONO, NO and NO2 is based on the molecular weight of NO 2 (46); that is, these NO X components were speciated assuming they wer e inventoried as NO2

- equivalent. A ll pr ior speciation of MOVES NO X

w as also based on NO2 molecular weight equivalency.

Table 2

- 4

. HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in LDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform

CMAQ Specie LDGHG 2005v4.2

NO NO_MOVES NOX * 0.9

NO2 0.992 * NO2_MOVES

– 0.008 * NO_MOVES NOX * 0.092

HONO 0.008 * (NO2_MOVES + NO_MOVES) NOX * 0.008

With one notable exception discussed here , f or onroad gasoline exhaust PM emissions, the allocation of

MOVES PM2.5 emissions to SMOKE

- ready format PM species is the same as the 2005v4.2 platform and is

documented in Appendix D of the 2005v4.1 TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/tox ics/2005v4.1_appendices.pdf

. The exception to these equations is that

for LDGHG processing, NH 4 (ammonium) is removed from the computation of POC (PM 2.5 - based organic carbon) in equation 9, which in turn, affects the PMFINE (“other”, or “crustal” PM 2.5 ) computation in equation 10. I n short, MOVES2010 a for LDGHG included improved PM exhaust estimates

, and for diesel exhaust, the larger sulfate (PSO4) component was creating more NH 4 in equation 7 than available
“PM25OM” from MOVES2010 a
, where MOVES

- provide d species are related as follows:

PM25_TOTAL = PM25EC + PM25OM + PSO4

CMAQ requires the se five CMAQ species to sum to total PM2.5 , i.e. :

PM2.5 = POC +PEC+PNO3+PSO4+PMFINE

Appendix A in this document contains the revised text and equations, specifically, equation 7b for diesel

exhaust. A recent study ( SRI , 2009) also showed that, despite being sampled for NH 4 and other ionic species in the particle phase, no particle phase NH 4 was found in downstream filter tests. OTAQ experts agreed that

NH 4 for diesel exhaust must therefore removed, but we did not have time to reprocess gasoline exhaust PM (on_moves_runpm and on_moves_startpm sector ) emissions wi th NH 4 removed so the gasoline exhaust PM

emissions do include some ammonium

. However, PSO4 for gasoline exhaust is considerably smaller than diesel exhaust so the impact is likely negligible for air quality modeling. It is important to note that total

PM2.5 was conse rved for both gasoline and diesel exhaust (e.g., PM2_5_TOTAL from MOVES and PM2.5 for CMAQ are identical). Note that PM emissions from these diesel sources are not subject to temperature adjustments like the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors.7 

### 2.4 No nroad mobile sources (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3)

The nonroad sector s include a wide

- range of mobile emission sources ranging from locomotives , marine vessels, construction and farming equipment to hand

- held lawn tools. Emissions for this sector are the s ame as those in the 2005v4.2 emissions modeling platform. The 2005v4.2 TSD can be found at: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_28jun2011.



### 2.4.1 Locomotives and commercial m arine vessels (alm_no_c3, seca_c3)

The year 2005 emissions for locomotive and commercial marine vessel sources used for this rule are the same as they were for the Final Rulemaking: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency

Standards for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Engines and Vehicles signed on August 9, 2011 and available at http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations.htm#1

- 2 , and are also the same as those used for the Final

Cross

- State Air Pollu tion (CSAPR) Rule documented in: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_28jun2011.pdf. The procedures for calculating emissions from locomotives and C1/C2 commercial marine wer e developed for the Locomotive Marine Rule (2008) and are detailed in the RIA “ Final Rule: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Compression

- Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per Cylinder ”, published May 6, 200 8 and republished June 30, 2008, and can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/locomotives.htm#2008final

. The procedures used for calculating C3 commercial

marine emissions are those develo ped in the recent C3 “ Final Rule: Control of Emissions from New Marine Compression

- Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder ”, published April 30, 2010 and can be

found at: http:/

/www.epa.gov/oms/oceanvessels.htm#car

- ems

.



### 2.5 2005 point sources (ptipm and ptnonipm sectors)

Point sources are sources of emissions for which geographic coordinates (e.g., latitude/longitude) are specified, as in the case of an individual facility. A facili ty may have multiple emission points that may be characterized as units such as boilers, reactors, spray booths, kilns, etc. A unit may have multiple processes (e.g., a boiler that sometimes burns residual oil and sometimes burns natural gas). Note that this section describes only NEI point sources within the contiguous United States. The offshore oil platform (othpt sector) and category 3 CMV emissions (seca_c3 sector) are also point source formatted inventories but are unchanged for the LDGHG modeling from the modeling of other recent rules. Discussion of the seca_c3 and othpt sector emissions can be found in the Final CSAPR TSD referenced in Section 2.3.2.

After removing offshore oil platforms (othpt sector), two platform sectors were created from th e remaining 2005v2 NEI point sources to provide inputs into SMOKE: the EGU sector

– also called the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) sector (i.e., ptipm) and the non

- EGU sector

– also called the non

- IPM sector (i.e., ptnonipm). This split facilitates the u se of different SMOKE temporal processing and future

- year projection techniques for each of these sectors, along with the replacement of ptipm emissions with outputs from IPM in emissions cases for future years. The inventory pollutants processed through SMOKE for both ptipm and ptnonipm sectors were: CO, NO X , VOC, SO 2 , NH 3 , PM 10 , and PM 2.5 and the following HAPs: HCl (pollutant code = 7647010 ), and Cl2 (code = 7782505 ). We did not utilize BAFM from these sectors as we chose to speciate VOC without any use (i.e., integration) of VOC HAP pollutants from the inventory. Integration is discussed in detail in Section 3.

The ptnonipm emissions were provided to SMOKE as annual emissions. The ptipm emissions for the base case were input to SMOKE as daily emiss ions. The ptipm emissions are unchanged from those in the

2005v4.2

– the basis for the Final CSAPR and Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas (HDGHG) FRM

- emission modeling platform. However, for the ptnonipm sector for all LDGHG FRM scenarios, including year 2005

emi ssions, additional known ethanol plants were included that were not in 2005v4.2. We also removed all8 onroad refueling emissions as these were replaced with MOVES

- based onroad refueling emissions (discussed in Section 2.5.2).



### 2.5.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm)

We r eplaced all ethanol plants that OTAQ had supplied from the RFS2 rule

– see Section 2.1.2 in the CSAPR

Final TSD

- with those recently compiled for the 2005 case for the LDGHG FRM . These plants all produce corn ethanol and reflect a volume of approximately 4 .1 billion gallons. All ethanol plants were assigned coordinates based on analysis using searches of company web sites and Google Earth verification for many sites. Emissions were calculated based on plant design capacity and emission factors based on pr oduction process and energy source (e.g. dry mill natural gas, wet mill coal, etc.). Finally, because benzene, acetaldehyde and formaldehyde (BAF) emissions were directly computed for these sources, we treated these ethanol plants as VOC integrate sources , unlike the rest of the ptnonipm sector. A summary of the ethanol plant emissions used in the 2005 scenario is provided in Table 2

- 5

.

Table 2

- 5

. 2005 ethanol p lant e missions (tons)

Pollutant Emissions

1,3

- Butadiene 0.0003

Acrolein 10.5
Formaldehyde 13.3

Benzene 5.7
Acetaldehyde 314.4

CO 7,023

NO X 8,204

PM 10 10,107

PM 2.5 3,691

SO 2 9,001

VOC 10,754



### 2.6 2005 nonpoint sources (afdust, ag, avefire, nonpt)

The year 2005 area

- source fugitive dust (afdust), agricultural animal and fertilizer NH 3 (ag), and average (typical)

- year fires (avefire) emissions are the same as those used in the CSAPR Final (2005v4.2) emission modeling platform. Nonpoint sources that were not subdivided into the afdust, ag, or avefire sectors were assigned to the “nonpt” sector, and most of these sources are also unchanged for LDGHG FRM modeling. The 2005 nonpoint sources that change in this study are limited to portable fuel containers (PFCs) and onroad refueling.



### 2.6.1 Portable fuel containers

Year 2005 PFC emissions are unchanged from the CSAPR Final inventory except for the addition of ethanol. Ethanol emissions were not provided for 20 05, but were supplied for future year scenarios. Therefor e, we scaled year 2017 pre

- RFS2 ethanol emissions by the ratio of 2005 to 2017 pre

- RFS2 VOC emissions to compute year 2005 ethanol emissions as follows:

Ethanol_2005 = Ethanol_2017 (pre

- RFS2) * [VOC_2005 / VOC_2017 (pre

- RFS2) ]9 

### 2.6.2 Onroad refueling

Refueling emissions were modeled using a modified draft version of EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator ( draft MOVES2010b ) at the county level for all twelve months. The refueling inventory includes

e missions from spillage loss and displacement vapor loss.

In an effort to reduce MOVES runtime, the “representing counties” approach was used instead of running every single county in the lower 48 states. We selected representing counties by grouping co unties based on Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADD), fuel parameters, usage of California emission standards, I/M programs, altitude , and temperature.

Temperature bins with increments of ten degrees F ahrenheit were created for the minimu m and maximum temperatures for each month using the temperatures from the 2005 calendar year values in the CountyYearMonthHour table of the NMIM County Database (NCD) NCD20100602 NMIM database. All counties in each group had min and max temperatures for a ll twelve months in the same temperature bins.

Once counties were grouped, the representing county was chosen as the one with the highest VMT, resulting in total of 238 counties. The same set of county groups and representing counties was used for all ye ars and

scenarios.

MOVES was run in inventory mode for only the representing counties using the county

- specific on

- road data, such as vehicle miles travelled, fleet age distribution, speed distribution, and meteorology, available

from the NCD. The cust omized fuel inputs, discussed in Section 2.2.2.1, were used for each of the representing counties.

The resulting refueling emission inventories for 238 representing counties in U.S. short tons were converted to emission factors by dividing the inventory b y the corresponding activity in each representing county. Then, the calculated emission factors from the representing counties were applied to the represented counties and multiplied by the county

- specific activity to generate the inventories for all coun ties.



### 2.7 Other sources (biogenics, othpt, othar, and othon)

All emissions from Canada, Mexico, and Offshore Drilling platforms (othpt, othar, and othon), and all non

anthropogenic inventories (biogenics and ocean chlorine) are unchanged from the 2005v4.2 (use d for the Final CSAPR and HDGHG FRM) emissions modeling platform. The one difference between LDGHG and these previous modeling is the use of updated gridding surrogates for othar and othon. The same emissions

are used for all LDGHG FRM scenarios and years

.

The biogenic emissions were computed based on 2005 meteorology data using the BEIS3.14 model within SMOKE. The 2002 platform used the BEIS3.13 model; otherwise, all underlying land use data and parameters are unchanged for the 2005 platform.

The BEIS3 .14 model creates gridded, hourly, model

- species emissions from vegetation and soils. It estimates CO, VOC, and NO X emissions for the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. The BEIS3.14 model is described further

in: http://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2008/slides/pouliot_tale_two_cmas08.ppt

The inputs to BEIS include:

Temperature data at 2 meters which were obtained from the meteorological input files to the air quality model,10

Land

- use data from the Biogenic Emissions Landuse Database, version 3 (BELD3). BELD3 data provides data on the 230 vegetation classes at 1

- km resolution over most of North America, which is

the same land

- use data were used for the 2002 platform.

The emissions from Canada, Mexico, and Offshore Drilling platforms are included as part of five sectors: othpt, othar, and othon.

The “oth” refers to the fact that these emissions are “other” than those in the 2005 NEI, and the third and

fourth character s provide the SMOKE source types: “pt” for point, “ar” for “area and nonroad mobile”, and

“on” for onroad mobile.

For Canada, year 2006 inventories are used for the 2005 platform, although corresponding future

- year emissions were not available. For Me xico we continued to use emissions for 1999 (Eastern Research Group Inc., 2006) developed as part of a partnership between Mexico's Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales

- SEMARNAT) and Nation al Institute of Ecology (Instituto Nacional de Ecología

- INE), the U.S. EPA, the Western Governors' Association (WGA), and the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). This inventory includes

emissions from all states in Mexico.

The offshore emissions include point source offshore oil and gas drilling platforms. We used updated emissions from the 2005v2 NEI point source inventory. The offshore sources were provided by the Mineral Management Services (MMS).



## 3 VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes

A significant detail that is different in each of the LDGHG modeling cases than in the 2005v4.2 emissions modeling is the VOC speciation profiles used to split total VOC emissions into the VOC model species needed for CMAQ. In this section

, we summarize the various speciation profile information used in configuring the v arious cases

.

The VOC speciation approach used for the 2005 base

- year case has some notable differences from the 2005 v4.2 platform for many emissions modes (e. g., evaporative, exhaust) and processes (e.g., diesel, gasoline, refueling) . Two significant updates in the 2005 LDGHG are : 1) headspace vapor speciation utilizes a combination of the E10 headspace vapor profile (8763) and E0 headspace vapor profile (8762 ) as opposed to using solely E0 for 2005 1 , and 2) a new Heavy Duty Diesel vehicle exhaust mode profile (8774) for pre

- 2007 model year (MY) vehicles that replaces an older 2004

- vintage medium

- duty diesel profile (4674). See Table

3

- 1 for more details.

The VOC speciation approach used for each of the future

- year cases is customized to account for the impact of fuel changes . These changes affect the on_noadj sector, the nonroad sector, and parts of the nonpt and ptnonipm sectors. The speciation changes from fuels in the nonpt sector are for portable fuel containers (PFCs) , onroad refueling, and fuel distribution operations associated with the b ulk

- plant

- to

- pump (btp)

di stribution. The speciation changes from fuels in the ptnonipm sector include btp distribution operations inventoried as point sources. Refinery to bulk terminal (rbt) fuel distribution and bulk plant storage (bps) speciation does not change across the mod eling cases because this is considered upstream from the

introduction of ethanol into the fuel. Mapping of fuel distribution SCCs to btp , bps, and rbt emissions categories can be found in Appendix C

.

1 This was an oversight in the 2005v4.2 platform corrected for this modeling effort.11 To differentiate when a source was integrating BAFM versus EBAFM (ethanol in addition to BAFM), the speciation profiles which do not include ethanol are referred to as an “E

- profile”, for example E10 headspace gasoline evaporative speciation profile 8763 w here ethanol is speciated from VOC, versus 8763E where ethanol is obtained directly from the inventory. For fuel distribution operations associated with the bulk

plant

- to

- pump (btp) distribution, ethanol is speciated from VOC

– thus a “BAFM” profile

- becau se the fuel distribution operations in the nonpoint inventories are NEI

- based and therefore do not include ethanol specifically because the NEI does not provide ethanol as a pollutant. For PFC and refueling, ethanol was present in the inventories and ther efore EBAFM profiles were used to integrate ethanol in the speciation.

Table 3

- 1 summarizes the different profiles utilized for the fuel

- related sources in each of the sectors for 2005 and the future year cases. A comparison of the 2005v4.2 platform with the LDGHG 2005 case is also

included. This table does not indicate when “E

- profiles” were used.

Table 3

- 1

. Summary of VOC speciation profile approaches by sector across cases

Inventory Type and

Mode VOC speciation approach by fuels VOC

Profile

Codes 2005

V4.2 2005

LDGHG 2030

Reference

& Control

Mobile

Exhaust

Diesel medium

- duty diesel exhaust, 2004

- vintage 4674 o nroad

nonroad

pre

- 2007 Heavy Duty profile 8774 o nroad

nonroad

pre

- 2007 Medium Duty 8775 onroad except Class 6,7 & 8 start

weighted year 2030 heavy

- duty start (parking area) emissions with HD controls 877CH onroad

class 8 start only weighted year 2030 medium

- duty start (parking area) emissions with HD controls 877CM onroad class

6 & 7 start only

Mobile

Exhaust

Gasoline Tier 1 E0 and E10 combinations 8750

8751 o nroad

nonroad o nroad

nonroad

Tier 1 E10

8751 nonroad

Tier 2 E10 8757 onroad

Mobile Evaporative

Diesel diesel evap headspace profile, Circle K

Diesel single

- sample 4547 onroad

nonroad onroad

nonroad o nroad

nonroad

Mobile Evaporative

Gasoline E0 and E10 combinations 8753

8754 o nroad

nonroad o nroad

nonroad

E10

8754 o nroad

nonroad

Mobile Refueling, PFCs, gas distribution E0 headspace 8762 All listed

E0 headspace and E10 headspace

combinations 8762

8763 All listed

E0 headspace or E1 5 2 8 869

8 871 All listed

2 PFC and BTP are post addition of ethanol and hence use E15 profile (8871) and BTP and RPT are before the addition of ethanal and hence use E0 profile (8869).12 

## 4 20 30 Reference Case

The 2030 reference case represents emissions in the futur e. The reference and control cases assume fuel and emission changes from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) and RFS2 for upstream sources. For highway vehicles, we assume all gasoline use is E10. The 2030 reference case uses many of the same growth and control assumptions as those for the Final Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). There

are some differences betwee n the shared projection inputs from the 2012 and 2014 base case projections in

CSAPR and the 2030 reference case for LDGHG:

1) The 2030 reference case includes the HDGHG controls. That is, we use the onroad HDGHG control case emission inventory as the refer ence case emissions for the LDGHG rule.

2) Some additional controls that were promulgated after 2014, (e.g., post

- 2014 consent decrees and fuel sulfur rules in a couple of states) are included.

3) Growth factors for several sources are year

- specific; so while th e methodology is the same as CSAPR, the future year emissions estimates differ (e.g., oil and gas in a couple states, residential wood combustion).

4) Onroad refueling uses year and scenario

- specific (i.e., reference versus control ) MOVES emissions,

rather th an NEI emissions.

5) There is a new dataset of ethanol plants that replaces a limited set of NEI ethanol plants in 2005v4.2

- based CSAPR 2012 and 2014 projections.

6) Minor errors identified after CSAPR modeling was complete were fixed (e.g, we include agricultural dust projections for the couple of states that provided point source farms).

There are other new inputs unique to the LDGHG reference case that were not part of the CSAPR projections. Examples of these are RFS2 upstream inputs such as biodie sel and cellulosic ethanol plants , and adjustments to refinery emissions and fuel transport and distribution emissions to account for impacts of

EISA

. These new inputs and projections for the reference case are discussed later in this section. The

remain der of Section 4 is very similar to Section 4 in the CSAPR emissions modeling TSD, available from ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eits d_28jun2011.pdf , but with the updates just

discussed.

The future base

- case projection methodologies vary by sector. The 2030 reference case represent s predicted emissions in the absence of any further controls beyond those Federal and State measures alre ady promulgated before emissions processing on the Transport Rule began in December, 2010. For EGU emissions (ptipm sector), the emissions reflect state rules and federal consent decrees through De cember 1, 2010. For mobile sources (on_noadj, on_moves_ru npm, and on_moves_startpm sectors), all national measures for which data were available at the time of modeling have been included. The future base

- case scenarios do reflect projected economic changes and fuel usage for EGU and mobile sectors. For nonEGU point (ptnonipm sector) and nonpoint stationary sources (nonpt, ag, and afdust sectors), local control programs that might have been necessary for areas to attain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS annual standard, 2006 PM NAAQS (24

- hour) standard, and the 1997 ozone N AAQS are generally not included in the future base

case projections for most states. One exception are some NOx and VOC reductions associated with the New York, Virginia, and Connecticut State Implementation Plans (SIP), which were added as part of the

co mments received from the CSAPR and a larger effort to start including more local control information on stationary non

- EGU sources; this is described further in Section 4.2 . T he following bullets summarize the projection methods used for sources in the va rious sectors , while additional details and data sources are given

in Table 4

- 1

.13

IPM sector (ptipm): Unit

- specific e stimates from IPM, version 4.10 , including CSAPR and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS)

. Non

- IPM sector (ptnonipm): Projection factors and percent reductions r eflect CSAPR ( Transport

Rule ) comments and emission reductions due to control programs, plant closures, consent decrees

and settlements , and 1997 and 2001 ozone State Implementation Plans in NY, CT, and VA. We also

used pro jection approaches for point

- source livestock , and aircraft and gasoline stage II emissions that are consistent with projections used for the sectors that contain the bulk of these emissions.

Terminal area forecast (TAF) data aggregated to the national le vel were used for aircraft to account for projected changes in landing/takeoff activity. Year

- specific speciation was applied to some portions of this sector and was discussed in Section 3

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

Agricultur al sector (ag): Projection factors for livestock estimates based on expected changes in animal population from 2005 Department of Agriculture data ; no growth or control for NH 3 emissions from fertilizer application.

Area fugitive dust sector (afdust): Pr ojection factors for dust categories related to livestock estimates based on expected changes in animal population; no growth or control for other categories in this

sector.
Remaining Nonpoint sector (nonpt): Projection factors that implement Transport Rule Proposal

comments and reflect emission reductions due to control programs. Residential wood combustion projections based on growth in lower

- emitting stoves and a reduction in higher emitting stoves. PFC projection factors reflec ting impact of the final Mobile Source Air Toxics ( MSAT 2) rule. Gasoline stage II projection factors based on National Mobile Inventory Model ( NMIM )

- estimated VOC refueling estimates for future years. Oil and gas projection estimates are provided for the non

California Western Regional Air Partnership ( WRAP ) states as well as Oklahoma and Texas. Year

specific speciation was applied to some portions of this sector and wa s discussed in Section 3

. Nonroad mobile sector (nonroad): Other than for California, this sector uses data from a run of

NMIM that utilized the NR05d

- Bond

- final version of NONROAD (which is equivalent to

NONROAD2008a ) , using future

- year equipment population estimates and control programs to the

year 2030 and using national level inputs

. F inal controls from the final locomotive

- marine and small spark ignition OTAQ rules are included . California

- specific data provided by the state of California, except NH 3 used 20 30 NMIM. Year

- specific speciation was applied to some portions of this secto r and is discussed in Section 4.3.5.

L ocomotive, and non

- Class 3 commercial marine sector (alm_no_c3): Projection factors for Class 1

and Class 2 commercial marine and locomotives which reflect Transport Rule comments and activity growth and final locomotive

- marine controls.

Class 3 commercial marine vessel sector (seca_c3): Base

- year 2005 emissions grown and controlled

to 2030 , incorporating Transport Rule comments and controls based on Emissions Control Area (ECA) and International Marine Organiz ation (IMO) global NO X and SO 2 controls.

Onroad mobile sector with no adjustment for daily temperature (on_noadj): MOVES2010a run (state

- month ) for 20 30 with results disaggregated to the county level in proportion to NMIM 20 30

emissions estimates

. The re ference case does not include LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include

H DGHG impacts. Temperature impacts at the monthly average resolution. California

- specific data provided by the state of California , except NH 3 which was obtained from MOVES2010a

. Othe r than California, this sector includes all non

- refueling onroad mobile emissions (exhaust, evaporative, brake wear and tire wear modes) except exhaust mode gasoline PM and naphthalene emissions that are provided in the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors.14

Onroad PM gasoline running mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Running mode MOVES2010a year 2030 future

- year state

- month estimates for PM and naphthalene, apportioned to the county level using NMIM 2030 state

- county ratios matched to vehicle and road types. The reference case does

not include 2017

- LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include H DGHG impacts. Use future

- year temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 72°F emissions to ambient temperatures (for elemental and organic carbon) based on grid cell hourly temperature ( note that lower temperatures result in increased emissions).

Onroad PM gasoline start mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Cold start MOVES2010a future

- year 2012 and 2014 state

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

NMIM 20 30 state

- county ratios of local urban and rural roads by vehicle type. The reference case

does not include 2017 LDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include H DGHG impacts. Use future

- year temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 72 ° F emissions (for elemental and organic carbon) to ambient temperatures based on grid cell hourly temperature s (lower temperatures result in increased emissions).

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

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

Other p oint (othpt): No growth or control.

Biogenic: 2005 emissions used for all future

- year scenarios.15 Table 4

- 1 summarizes the control strategies and growth assumptions by source type that were used to create

the 2030 base

- case emissions from the 2005v4.2 base

- case inventories. All Mexico, Canada, and offshore oil emissions are unchanged in all future cases from t hose in the 2005 base case. Note that mercury (Hg) is listed in the pollutants column; however, we did not include Hg in our v4.2

- based LDGHG modeling.

Lists of the control, closures, projection packets (datasets) used to create the LDGHG 2030 future ref erence

c ase scenario inventories from the 2005 LDGHG base case are provided in Appendix B

.

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

source sector for which a distinct set of data were u sed or developed for the purpose of projections for the

LDGHG Rule. This organization allows consolidation of the discussion of the emissions categories that are contained in multiple sectors, because the data and approaches used across the sectors are co nsistent and do not need to be repeated. Sector names associated with the emissions categories are provided in parentheses.16

Table 4

- 1

. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the LDGHG 20 30 Reference case emissions inventories from the 2005 base case

Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions ( g rouped by a ffected p ollutants or s tandard and a pproach u sed to

a pply to the i nventory) Pollutants

a ffected Approach/

R eference

Non

- EGU Point (pt nonipm sector) p rojection a pproaches MACT rules, national, VOC: national applied by SCC, MACT Boat Manufacturing Wood Building Products Surface Coating Generic MACT II: Spandex Production, Ethylene manufacture Large Appliances Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON): Alkyd Resins, Chelating Agents, Explosives, Phthalate Plasticizers, Polyester Resins, Polymerized Vinylidene Chloride

Reinforced Plastics Asphalt Processing & Roofing

Iron & Steel Foundries Metal: Can, Coil

Metal Furniture

Miscellaneous Metal Parts & Products Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Paper and Other Web

Plastic Parts Plywood and Composite Wood Products

Carbon Black Production Cyanide Chemical Manufacturing Friction Products Manufacturing Leather Finishing Op erations Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing Organic Liquids Distribution (Non

- Gasoline) Refractory Products Manufacturing

Sites Remediation VOC EPA, 2007 a

Consent decrees on c ompanies (based on information from the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

– OECA) apportioned to plants owned/operated by the

c ompanies VOC, CO, NOx, PM, SO 2 1

DOJ Settlements: plant SCC controls for: Alcoa, TX Premcor (formerly Motiva), DE All 2

Refinery Consent Decrees: plant/SCC controls NOx, PM, SO 2 3

Hazardous Waste Combustion PM 4 Municipal Waste Combustor Reductions

– plant level PM 5 Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator Regulations NO X , PM, SO 2 EPA, 2005 Large Municipal Waste Combustors

– growth applied to specific plants All (including Hg) 5 MACT rules, plant

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

- level, PM & SO 2 : Lime Manufacturing PM, SO 2 7 MACT rules, plant

- level, PM: Taconite Ore PM 8

Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to year 2030 (some farms in the point inventory) NH 3 , PM 9

NESHAP: Portland Cement ( 09/09/10)

– plant level based on Industrial Sector Integrated Solutions (ISIS) policy emissions in 2013. The ISIS results are from the

ISIS

- Cement model runs for the NESHAP and NSPS analysis of July 28, 2010 and

include closures

. Hg, NO X , SO2,
PM, HCl 10; EPA,

2010

New York o zone SIP c ontrols VOC, NO X , HAP VOC 11

Additional p lant and u nit closures provided by state, regional, and the EPA agencies and additional consent decrees. Includes updates from CSAPR comments. All 12

Emission r eductions resulting from controls put on specific boiler units (not due to MACT) after 2005, identified through analysis of the control data gathered from the NO X , SO 2 , HCl Section

4.2.13.217

Information Collection Request ( ICR ) from the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional

Boiler NESHAP. Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP NO X , CO, PM

, SO 2 13

Ethanol plants that account for increased ethanol production due to RFS2 mandate All 1 4

State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil

– effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New

York SO 2 15

Nonpoint ( nonpt sector) p rojection a pproaches

Municipal Waste Landfills: projection factor of 0.25 applied All EPA, 2007 a Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to year 2030 NH 3 , PM 9

New York, Connecticut, and Virginia ozone SIP controls VOC 11, 16

RICE NESHAP NO X , CO, VOC,

PM , SO 2 13

State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil

– effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New

York SO 2 15

Residential Wood Combustion Growth and Change

- outs from year 2005 to year 2030 All 17

Gasoline and diesel fuel Stage II refueling via MOVES2010 LDGHG month

- specific

inventories for 2030 with assumed RFS2 and LDGHG fuels VOC , Benzene,

Ethanol 18

Portable Fuel Container Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule 2 ( MSAT2 ) inventory growth and control from year 2005 to year 2030 VOC 19

Use Phase II WRAP 2018 Oil and Gas for year 2030 VOC, SO 2 , NO X , CO Section

4.2.14 Use 2008 Oklahoma and Texas Oil and Gas, and apply year 2021 projections for TX (last year available used as surrogate for 2030), and RICE NESHAP controls to

Oklahoma emissions. VOC, SO 2 , NO X , CO, PM Section

4.2.14

APPROACHES /REFERENCES

- Non

- EGU Stationary Sources : 1. Appendix B in the MATS Proposal TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf

2. For Alcoa consent decree, used http:// cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/cases/index.cfm; for Moti va : used information sent by

State of Delaware

3. Used data provided by the EPA , OAQPS , Sector Policies and Programs Division (SPPD).

4. Obtained from Anne Pope , the US EPA

- H azardous W aste I ncinerators criteria and hazardous air pollutant controls

carried over from 2002 Platform, v3

. 1.

5. Used data provided by the EPA, OAQPS SPPD expert.

6. Percent reductions and plants to receive reductions based on recommendations by rule lead engineer, and are consisten t with the reference: EPA, 2007a

7. Percent reductions recommended are determined from the existing plant estimated baselines and estimated reductions as shown in the Federal Register Notice for the rule. SO 2 percent reduction are computed by 6

, 147/30,783 = 20 % and

PM 10 and PM 2.5 reductions are computed by 3

, 786/13

, 588 = 28%

8. Same approach as used in the 2006 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) , which estimate d reductions of “ PM emissions by 10,538 tpy, a reduction of about 62%. ” Used same list of plants as were identified based on tonnage and SCC from

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

9. Except for dairy cows and turkeys (no growth), based o n animal population growth estimates from the US Department of Agriculture ( USDA ) and the Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute. See Section 4.2.10.

10. Data files for the cement sector provided by Elineth Torres, the EPA

- SPPD, from the analysis done for the Cement

NES H AP: The ISIS documentation and analysis for the cement NESHAP/NSPS is in the docket of that rulemaking

docket # EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2002

- 005. The Cement NESHAP is in the Federal Register: September 9, 2010 (Volume 75,

Number 174

, Page 5496 9

- 55066

11. New York NO X and VOC reductions obtained from Appendix J in NY Departme nt of Environmental Conservation Implementation Plan for Ozone (February 2008): http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/air_pdf/NYMASIP7final.pdf

. 12. Appendix D of Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_appendices_28jun2011.pdf

13. Appendix F in the Proposed (Mercury and Air) Toxics Rule TSD:18

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf

14. The 2008 data used came from Illinois’ submittal of 2008 emissions to the NEI.

15. Based on available, enforceable state sulfur rules as of November, 2010: http://www.ilta.org/LegislativeandRegulatory/MVNRLM/NEUSASulfur%20Rules_09.2010.pdf

, http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_124th/billpdfs/SP062701.pdf

, http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel/governor_paterson_signs_new_la.html

, http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/20/new

- york

- mandates

- cleaner

- heating

- oil/

16. VOC reductions in Connecticut and Virginia obtained from CSAPR comments.

17. Growth and Decline in woodstove types based on industry trade group data, See Section 4.2.11.

18. MOVES (2 010a) results for onroad refueling including activity growth from VMT, Stage II control programs at gasoline stations, and phase in of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls. http ://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm

19. VOC, benzene , and ethanol emissions for 2030 based on MSAT2 rule and ethanol fuel assumptions (EPA, 2007b )

Onroad mobile and n onroad m obile c ontrols (list includes all key mobile control strategies but is not exhaustive)

National Onroad Rules:

Tier 2 Rule : Signature date February, 2000 2007 Onroad Heavy

- Duty Rule : February, 2009 Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2) : February, 2007

Renewable Fuel Standard : March, 2010 Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule: May, 2010 Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for 2008

- 2011 Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Rule: August 2011 all 1

Local Onroad Programs:

National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV): March, 1998 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV Program : January,1995 VOC 2

National Nonroad Controls:

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

– Tier 4 : June, 2004 Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large

- Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines (Marine and Land Based): “Pentathalon Rule” : November, 2002

Cl ean Bus USA Program: October, 2007 Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Compression

- Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder: October, 2008 Locomotive and marine rule (May 6, 2008) Marine SI rule (October 4, 1996) Nonroad large SI and recreational engine rule (November 8, 2002) Nonroad SI rule (October 8, 2008) Phase 1 nonroad SI rule (July 3, 1995) Tier 1 nonroad diesel rule (June 17, 2004) all 3,4,5

Aircraft (emissions are in the nonEGU point inventory) : Itinerant (ITN) operations at airports to year 2030 all 6

Locomotives: Energy Information Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

– Tier 4 : June 2004

Locomotive Em iss ions Final Rulemaking, December 17, 1997 Locomotive rule: April 16, 2008 Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine: May 2008 all EPA, 2009; 3; 4; 5

Commercial Marine: Category 3 marine diesel engines Clean Air Act and International Maritime Organization standards (April, 30, 2010)

– also includes CSAPR comments.
EIA fuel consumption projections for diesel

- fueled vessels

Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

– Tier 4 Emissions Standards for Commercial Marine Diesel Engines, December 29, 1999

Locomotive and m arine rule (May 6, 2008) Tier 1 Marine Diesel Engines, February 28, 2003 all 7, 3; EPA,

200919

APPROACHES/REFERENCES

– Mobile Sources

1. http://epa.gov/otaq/hwy.htm

2. Only for states submitting these inputs: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/lev

- nlev.htm

3. http://www.epa.gov/nonroad

- diesel/2004fr.htm

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

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

6. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System, January 2010: http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp

7. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm



### 4.1 Stationary source projections: EGU sector (ptipm)

The future

- year data for the ptipm sector used in the air quality modeling were created using version 4.10 (v4.10) of the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) ( http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/pr ogsregs/epa

ipm/index.html ). The IPM is a multiregional, dynamic, deterministic linear programming model of the U.S.

electric power sector. V ersion 4.1 0 reflects state rules and consent decrees through December 1, 2010 and incorporates information on exi sting controls collected through the Information Collection Request ( ICR ),

and information from comments received on the IPM

- related Notice of Data Availability (NODA) published on September 1, 2010. The 2030 IPM emissions reflect the CSAPR as finalized in July 2011 and the final Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule. They do not reflect the Boiler MACT regulatory assumptions because the rule was stayed at the time the modeling was performed. IPM v4.10 F inal included the addition of over 20 GW of existing Activated Carbon Injection ( ACI ) reported to the EPA via the ICR

. Units with SO 2 or NO X advanced controls (e.g., scrubber, SCR) that were not required to run for compliance with Title IV,

New Source Revi ew (NSR), state settlements, or state

- specific rules were modeled by IPM to either operate

those controls or not based on economic efficiency parameters.

IPM 4.10 include s adjustments to assumptions regarding the performance of acid gas control techno logies, new costs imposed on fuel

- switching (e.g., bituminous to sub

- bituminous), correction of lignite availability to some plants, incorporation of additional planned retirements, a more inclusive implementation of the scrubber upgrade option, and the av ailability of a scrubber retrofit to waste

- coal fired fluidized bed combustion units without an existing scrubber. Further details on the future

- year EGU emissions inventory

used for this rule can be found in the incremental documentation of the IPM v.4.1 0 platform , available a t http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa

- ipm/BaseCasev410.html

. A complete list of state regulations, NSR settlements, and state settlements includ ed in the IPM modeling is given in Appendices 3

- 2, 3

- 3, and 3

- 4 beginning on p. 68 of http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa

ipm/CSAPR/docs/DocSuppv410 _FTransport.pdf

.

Directly emitted PM emissions (i.e., PM 2.5 and PM 10 ) from the EGU sector are computed via a post processing routine which applies emission factors to the IPM

- estimated fuel throughput based on fuel, configuration and controls to compute the filterable and condensable components of PM. This methodology

is documented in the IPM CSAPR TSD.



### 4.2 Stationary source projections: non

- EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, afdust)

To project U.S. stat ionary sources other than the ptipm sector, we applied growth factors and/or controls to certain categories within the ptnonipm, nonpt, ag and afdust platform sectors. This subsection provides details on the data and projection methods used for these sectors. In estimating future

- year emissions, we

assumed that emissions growth d oes not track with economic growth for many stationary non

- IPM sources.20 This “no

- growth” assumption is based on an examination of historical emissions and economic data

. More

details on the rationale for this approach can be found in Appendix D of the Re gulatory Impact Assessment

f or the PM NAAQS rule (EPA, 2006 ).

The starting point was the emission projections done for the 2005v4 .2 platform for the CSAPR , which incorporated responses to public comments on the modeling inventories . The 2012 and 2014 pro jection factors developed for the CSAPR (see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#final ) were updated to reflect year 20 30 projections.

Year

- specific projection factors for year 20 30 were used for creating the 20 30 reference case unless noted otherwise. Growth factors (and control factors) are provided in the following sections where feasible. However, some sectors used growth or control factors that varied geographically and t heir contents could not be provided in the following sections (e.g., gasoline distribution varies by state and pollutant and has

hundreds of records).

Table 4

- 2 lists the stationary non

- EGU inputs and projection factors that were applied to account for year 2030 RFS2 mandate impacts on emissions to the reference and control cases. These inputs are discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.1 through Section 4.2.9. All o ther stationary non

- EGU projections, controls and plant closure information not related to the RFS2 impacts are discussed in Section 4.2.10 through Section

4.2.14

.

Table 4

- 2

. LDGHG FRM reference case stationary non

- EGU source

- related p rojection methods Input Type Sector(s) Description Corn ethanol plants SMOKE ORL file that

replaces 2005 base case

ORL file p tnonipm Based on RFS2 analysis and production

volumes. Point source format.

Biodiesel plants SMOKE ORL file p tnonipm Accounts for facilities with current production capacities, to support RFS2 biodiesel production. Point source format.

Cellulosic fuel production SMOKE ORL file n onpt Accounts for cellulosic ethanol and cellulosic diesel to suppo rt RFS2 cellulosic production. County

- level (nonpoint) format. Ethanol transport

and distribution SMOKE ORL file n onpt Accounts for ethanol vapor losses and spillage at any point in the transport and distribution chain. County

- level (nonpoint)

format.

Portable Fuel Containers (PFCs) SMOKE ORL n onpt NONROAD

- model based emissions from PFCs, including vapor displacement, tank permeation, and diurnal evaporation. County

level (nonpoint) format. Onroad refueling SMOKE ORL file nonpt MOVES

- based gasoline and diesel fuel spillage and displacement vapor losses. County

- level (nonpoint) format, monthly

resolution. Refinery adjustments Projection factors p tnonipm Not in base cases, accounts for changes in various refinery processes due to incorporation of RF S2 fuels.21 Ethanol transport gasoline & ethanol

blends Projection factors nonpt, ptnonipm Not in base cases, accounts for RFS impacts

on emissions from bulk plant storage, refinery to bulk terminal, and bulk terminal to pump. Upstream agricultural adjustments Projection factors afdust, ag,
nonpt, ptnonipm Not in base cases, accounts for changes in ag

burning/dust, fertilizer application/production, livestock dust/waste and pesticide application/production.



### 4.2.1 Ethanol plants (ptnonipm)

As discussed in Section 2.4.1, for 2005 we replaced all corn ethanol plants that OTAQ had supplied from the

RFS2 rule

– see Section 2.1.2 in the CSAPR Final TSD

- with an updated list. Additional ethanol plants cited for development in support of increased ethanol product ion for RFS2 are the cause for the increased number

of facilities and emissions. Table 4

- 3 provides the summaries for the corn ethanol plants in the 2030 cases.

Table 4

- 3

. 2030 c orn ethanol p lant e missions [tons]

Pollutant 2030
1,3

- Butadiene 0.0003

Acrolein 10.5 Formaldehyde 13.3

Benzene 5.7 Acetaldehyde 314.4

CO 7,023

NO X 7,396

PM 10 10,107

PM 2.5 3,691

SO 2 9,001

VOC 10,754



### 4.2.2 Biodiesel plants pt nonipm)

OTAQ developed an inventory of biodiesel plants for 2030 that were sited at existing plant locations in support of producing biodiesel fuels for the RFS2 mandate. The RFS2 calls for 1. 67 billion gallons per year ( Bgal) of biodiesel fuel production by year 2030. Only plants with current production capacities were assumed to be operating in 2030. Total plant capacity at these existing facilities is limited to just over 1 Bgal. There was no attempt to site future y ear plants to account for the need to match biodiesel production needed for RFS2. Therefore, OTAQ applied scalar adjustments to each individual biodiesel plant to match

the 2030 production level of 1.67 Bgal

. . Once facility

- level production capacities were scaled, emission factors were applied based on soybean oil feedstock. Inventories were modeled as point sources with Google Earth and web searching validating facility coordinates and correcting state

- count y FIPS. Table 4

- 4 provides

the 2030 biodiesel plant emissions estimates.

Table 4

- 4

. 2030 biodiesel p lant e missions [t ons]

Pollutant 2030

Acrolein 3.56E

- 04
Formaldehyde 2.56E

- 03

Benzene 5.42E

- 0522 Acetaldehyde 4.14E

- 04

CO 836

NO X 1,349

PM 10 114

PM 2.5 114

SO 2 10

VOC 73



### 4.2.3 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)

We obtained future

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

and modeled for the EPA ’s MSAT 2 rule (EPA, 2007b ). The 10 PFC SCCs are summarized below ( note that

the full SCC descriptions for these SCCs include “Stor age and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage” as the beginning of the description).

2501011011 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Permeation

2501011012 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Evaporation

2501011013 Residential Portable F uel Containers: Spillage During Transport

2501011014 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement

2501011015 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Spillage

2501012011 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Permeation

2501012012 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Evaporation

2501012013 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Spillage During Transport

2501012014 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement

250101 2015 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Spillage

Additional information on the PFC inventories is available in Section 2.2.3 of the documentation for the 2002 Platform ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2002 ).

The future

- year emissions reflect projected increases in fuel consumption, state programs to reduce PFC emissions, standards promulgated in the MSAT 2 rule, and impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) on gasoline volatility. OTAQ provided year 2030 PFC emissions that include estimated Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) and oxygenate impacts on VOC emissions, and more importantly, large increases in ethanol emissions from RFS2. These emission estimates also include refueling from the NONROAD model for gas can vapor displacement, changes in tank permeation and diurnal emissions from evaporation. Because these

PFC inventories contain ethanol and benzene , we developed a VOC E

- profile that integrated ethanol and

benzene , see Section 3 for more details. Emissions for 2030 are provided in Table 4

- 5

.

Table 4

- 5

. PFC e missions for 2030 [tons]

Pollutant 2030

VOC 146,593

Benzene 1,622

Ethanol 31,632



### 4.2.4 Cellulosic fuel production (nonpt)

OTAQ developed county

- level inventories for cellulosic diesel and cellulosic ethanol production for 2030 to satisfy RFS2 requirements . The methodology for building cellulosic plant emissions inventories is fairly similar conceptually to that for building the biodiesel plant inventories. First, we assume that cellulosic23 diesel and cellulosic ethanol are produced in the same counties where current production capacity exists, based on RFS2 FRM inventories. The total county production capacity was over 16 Bg al; therefore, OTAQ applied a scalar adjustment to each count y’ s production capacity to match the 2030 production estimate of 11.44 Bgal (6.5 Bgal diesel and 4.92Bgal ethanol): 0.715 for 2030. Once county

- level cellulosic production capacities were scale d, emission factors were applied. Table 4

- 6 provides the year 2030 cellulosic plant

emissions estimates. These emission factors were obtained from the RFS2 rule for criteria pollutants;

emission factors for toxics were derived from 2005 NEI data.

Table 4

- 6

. 2030 c ellulosic plant e missions [tons]

Pollutant 2030

Acrolein 61
Formaldehyde 168

Benzene 79
Acetaldehyde 2,286

CO 124,336

Ethanol 5,530

NH 3 1.6

NO X 185,745

PM 10 21,862

PM 2.5 10,986

SO 2 14,475

VOC 15,489

We had no refined information on potential VOC speciation differences between cellulosic diesel and cellulosic ethanol sources. Therefore, we summed up cellulosic diesel and cellulosic ethanol sources and used the same SCC (30125010: Industrial Chemical Manufacturing, Ethanol by Fermentation production) for VOC speciation as was used for corn ethanol plants. However, these cellulosic inventories cont ain ethanol; therefore we developed a VOC E

- profile that integrated ethanol, see Section 3 for more details.



### 4.2.5 Ethanol transport and distribution (nonpt)

OTAQ developed county

- level inventories for ethanol transport and distribution for 2030 to account for

l osses for the processes such as truck, rail and waterways loading/unloading and intermodal transfers such as highway

- to

- rail, highways

- to

- waterways, and all other possible combinations of transfers. Emission rates were applied based on June 2008 AP

- 42 fac tors and ethanol versus gasoline vapor mass equations. These emissions are entirely evaporative and therefore limited to VOC and are summarized in Table 4

- 7 . The

lea ding descriptions are “Industrial Processes; Food and Agriculture; Ethanol Production” for each SCC.

Table 4

- 7

. 2030 V OC losses (Emissions) due to e thanol t ransport and d istribution [tons]

SCC Description 2030

30205031 Denatured Ethanol Storage Working Loss 34,642

30205052 Ethanol Loadout to Truck 23,794

30205053 Ethanol Loadout to Railcar 11,991



### 4.2.6 Refinery adjustments (ptnonipm)

Refinery emissions were adjusted for changes in fuels due to the RFS2 mandate. These adjustments were provided by OTAQ and impact processes such as process heaters, catalytic cracking units, blowdown24 systems, wastewater treatment, condensers, cooling towe rs, flares and fugitive emissions. The impact of the

RFS2

- based reductions is shown in Table 4

- 8

.

Table 4

- 8

. Impact of r efinery adjustments on 2030 e missions [tons]

Pollutant Reductions 2030

CO 13,602

NO X 34,850

PM 10 7,550

PM 2.5 4,365

SO 2 24,014

VOC 6,428



### 4.2.7 Ethanol transport gasoline and blends (ptnonipm, nonpt)

Emissions changes in the transport of changing fuels from the RFS2 mandate impact several processes including bulk plant storage (BPS), refinery to bulk terminal (RBT) and bulk terminal to pump (BTP). These impacts, provided by OTAQ, result in approximate ly 46,000 tons of VOC reductions in 2030 for these

processes. See Appendix E for cross

- walk between SCC and each type of petroleum transport and storage.



### 4.2.8 Upstream agricultural adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm)

Changes in domestic biofuel volumes, resulting from the RFS2 fuels mandate, impact upstream agricultural

related source categories in several emissions modeling sectors. These source categories include fertilizer application, pesticide application and livestock waste (NH 3 only), agricultura l tilling, unloading and livestock dust (PM only) and fertilizer production mixing and blending, pesticide production and agricultural burning (all pollutants). As seen in Table 4

- 9 , the cumulative impact of these source

- specific changes is a net increase in emissions for upstream agricultural sources.

Table 4

- 9

. Upstream agricultural emission increases due to RFS2 fuels in 2030 [tons]

Pollutant Increases 2030

CO 416

NH 3 61,793

NO X 500

PM 10 59,004

PM 2.5 8,972

SO 2 95

VOC 23



### 4.2.9 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust)

Growth in ammonia (NH 3 ) and dust (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) emissions from livestock in the ag

, afdust and ptnonipm sectors was based on projections of growth in animal population. Error! Reference source not

ound. provides the growth factors from the 2005 bas e

- case emissions to year 2030 scenarios for animal categories applied to the ag

, afdust , and ptnonipm secto rs for livestock

- related SCCs.

Table 4

- 10

. Growth f

actors from year 2005 to 2030 for animal o peration s

Animal Category 2030 Dairy Cow 1.0000

Beef 1.038525 Pork 1.1666

Broilers 1.6426 Turkeys 1.0000 Layers 1.4491 Poultry Average 1.4991 Overall Average 1.1745

Except for dairy cows and turkey production, the animal projection factors are derived from national

- level animal population projections from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute (FAPRI). For dairy cows and turkeys

, we assumed that there would be no growth in emissions. This assum ption was based on an analysis of historical trends in the number of such animals compared to production rates. Although productions rates have increased, the number of animals has declined. Thus, we do not believe that production forecasts provide repre sentative estimates of the future number of cows and turkeys; therefore, we did not use these forecasts for estimating

future

- year emissions from these animals. In particular, the dairy cow population is projected to decrease in

the future as it has for t he past few decades; however, milk production will be increasing over the same period. Note that the ammonia emissions from dairies are not directly related to animal population but also nitrogen excretion. With the cow numbers going down and the product ion going up we suspect the excretion value will be changing, but we assumed no change because we did not have a quantitative estimate.

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

fr om 2002 r ather than from 2005.

Appendix E in the 2002v3 platform documentation provides the animal population data and regression curves used to derive the growth factors: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/reports/Emissions%20TSD%20Vol2_Appendices_01

- 15

- 08.pdf . Appendix F in the same document provides the cross references of livestock sources in the ag, afdust and ptnonipm

sectors to the relevant animal categories

.



### 4.2.10 Resident ial wood combustion growth (nonpt)

We projected residential wood combustion (RWC) emissions based on the expected increase in the number

of low

- emitting wood stoves and the corresponding decrease in other types of wood stoves. As newer,

cleaner woodstoves replace older, higher

- polluting wood stoves, there will be an overall reduction of the emissions from these sources. The approach cited here was developed as part of a modeling exercise to estimate the expected benefits of the woodstoves change

- out progr am ( http://www.epa.gov/ burnwise ). Details of this approach can be found in Section 2.3.3 of the PM NAAQS Regulatory Impact Analysis (EPA, 2006).

The spe cific assumptions we made were:

 Fireplaces, source category code ( SCC ) =2104008001: increase 1%/y ea r

 Old woodstoves, SCC=2104008002, 2104008010, or 2104008051: decrease 2%/y ea r

 New woodstoves, SCC=2104008003, 2104008004, 2104008030, 2104008050, 2104008052 or 2104008053: increase 2%/y ea r

For the general woodstoves and fireplaces category (SCC 2104008000) w e computed a weighted average distribution based on 19.4% fireplaces, 71.6% old woodstoves, 9.1% new woodstoves using 2002v3

Platform missions for PM 2.5 . These fractions are based on the fraction of emissions from these processes in

the states that did not have the “general woodstoves and fireplaces” SCC in the 2002 v3 NEI. This approach26 results in an overall decrease of 1.056% per year for this source category. Table 4

- 11 p resents the projection factors used to project the 2005 base case (2002 emissions) for RWC.

Table 4

- 11

. Projection f

actors for growing year 2005 r esidential wood c ombustion s ources

SCC SCC Description 2030

2104008000 Total: Woodstoves and Fireplaces 0. 70

2104008001 Fireplaces: General 1. 28 2104008070 Outdoor Wood Burning Equipment

2104008002 Fireplaces: Insert; non

- EPA certified

0. 44 2104008010 Woodstoves: General

2104008051 Non

- catalytic Woodstoves: Non

- EPA certified

2104008003 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; non

- catalytic

1. 56 2104008004 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; catalytic

2104008030 Catalytic Woodstoves: General

2104008050 Non

- catalytic Woodstoves: EPA certified

2104008052 Non

- catalytic Woodstoves: Low Emitting

2104008053 Non

- catalytic Woodstoves: Pellet Fired



### 4.2.11 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm)

Emissions from Stage II gasoline operations in the 2005 v4.2 platform are contained in both nonpt and ptnonipm sectors. The only SCC in the nonpt inventory used for gasoline Stage II emissions is 2501060100 (Storage and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage; Gasoline Service Stations; Stage II: Total). The fo llowing SIC and SCC codes are associated with gasoline Stage II emissions in the ptnonipm

sector:

 SIC 5541 (Automotive Dealers & Service Stations, Gasoline Service Stations, Gasoline service stations)

 SCC 40600401 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transp ortation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls)

 SCC 40600402 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Liquid Spill Loss w/o Controls)

 SCC 40600403 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls)

 SCC 40600499 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Not Classified

In the LDGHG modeling, these SCCs were removed from the nonpt and ptnonipm inventories and replaced with a separate refueling inventory in the nonpt sector. This refueling invento ry was generated from draft MOVES2010b, provided monthly emissions for both gasoline and diesel refueling, and was year and scenario specific. The speciation of the refueling emissions integrated ethanol as well as BAFM (EBAFM)

and w as speciated using E

- p rofiles, s ee S ection 3 for more details

.

For the 2030 reference case, the MOVES refueling results account for projected fuel properties, VMT growth over time, the phase

- in of onboard vapor control, and the phase

- in of previously finalized fuel consumption regulations.27 

### 4.2.12 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm)

These 2005 point

- source emissions are projected to future years by applying activity growth using data on itinerant (ITN ) operations at airports. The ITN operations are defined as aircraft take

- offs whereby the aircraft leaves the airport vicinity and lands at another airport, or aircraft landings whereby the aircraft has arrived from outside the airport vicinity. We used projected ITN information available from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System: http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp (publication date January 2010 ). This information is available for approximately 3

, 300 individual airports, for all years up to 20 30 . We aggregated and applied this information at the national level by summing the airport

- specific (U.S. airports only) ITN operations to national totals by year and by aircraft operation, for each of the four available operation types : commercial, general, air taxi and military. We computed growth factors for each operation type by dividing future

- year ITN by 2005

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

The methods that the FAA used for developing the ITN data in the TAF are documented in: http://www.f

aa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/2009

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

Table 4

- 12 provides the national growth factors for aircraft; all factors are applied to year 2005 emissions. For example, year 20 30 commercial aircraft emissions are 50.59 % higher than year 2005 emissions

.

Table 4

- 12

. Factors used to project 2005 base

- case aircraft emissions to year 2030

SCC SCC Description Projection Factor

2275001000 Military aircraft 1.0275

2275020000 Commercial aircraft 1.5059

2275050000 General aviation 0.9916

2275060000 Air taxi 1.0259

27501015 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP

- 5 1.0275

27502001 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Commercial;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas 1.5059

27502011 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Commercial;Jet Engine: Jet A 1.5059

27505001 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Civil;Piston Engine: Aviation Gas 0.9916

27505011 Internal Combustion Engines;Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Civil;Jet Engine: Jet A 0.9916

27601014 Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP

- 4 1.0275

27601015 Internal Combustion Engines;Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO

Exhaust;Military;Jet Engine: JP

- 5 1.0275

We did not apply growth factors to any point sources with SC C 27602011 (Internal Combustion Engines; Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A) because the facility names associated with these point sources appeared to represent industrial facilities rather than airports. This SCC is only in one county, Santa Barbara, California (State/County FIPS 06083).



### 4.2.13 Stationary s ource control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt)

We applied emissions reduction factors to the 200 5 emissions for particular sources in the ptnonipm and nonpt sectors to reflect the impact of stationary

- source control programs including consent decrees,28 settlements, and plant closures. Some of the controls described in this section were obtained from comments

on the CSAPR proposal. He re we describe the contents of the controls and closures for the 2030 reference case. Detailed summaries of the impacts of the control programs are provided in Appendix D of the CSAPR

TSD: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_appendices_28jun2011.pdf

.

Controls from the NO X SIP call were assumed to have been implemented by 2005 and captured in the 2005 base case (2005v2 poin t inventory). This assumption was confirmed by review of the 2005 NEI that showed reductions from Large Boiler/Turbines and Large Internal Combustion Engines in the Northeast states covered by the NOx SIP call. The future

- year base controls consist of th e following:

We did not include MACT rules where compliance dates were prior to 2005, because we assumed these were already reflected in the 2005 inventory. The EPA OAQPS Sector Policies and Programs Division (SPPD) provided all controls information related to the MACT rules, and this information is as consistent as possible with the preamble emissions reduction percentages for these rules.

Various emissions reductions from the CSAPR comments, including but not limited to: fuel switching at units, shu tdowns, future

- year emission limits, ozone SIP VOC controls for some sources in Virginia and Connecticut, and state and local control programs.

Evolutionary information gathering of plant closures (i.e., emissions were zeroed out for future years)

were als o included where information indicated that the plant was actually closed after the 2005 base year and prior to CSAPR and LDGHG modeling that began in the fall of 2010

. We also applied unit and plant closures received from the CSAPR comments. However, plants projected to close in the future (post

- 2010 ) were not removed in the future years because these projections can be inaccurate due to economic improvements

. We also applied cement kiln (unit) and cement plant closures

discussed later in Section 4.2. 6.1 . More detailed information on the overall state

- level impacts of all control programs and projection datasets, including units and plants closed in the 2012 and 2014

base

- case ptnonipm inventories are provided in Appendix D of the CSAPR TSD: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_appendices_28jun2011.pdf . The magnitude of all unit and plant closures on the non

- EGU point ( ptnonipm) sector 2005 base

- case emissions is shown in Table 4

- 13 below.

Table 4

- 13

. Summary of Non

- EGU Emission Reduct ions Applied to the 2005 Inventory due to Unit and

Plant Closures

CO NH 3 NO X PM 10 PM 2.5 SO 2 VOC

Reductions 125,162 636 109,237 21,143 12,600 190,734 26,750

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

Consent Decrees on the non

- EGU ( ptnonipm ) sector emissions. We also included estimated impacts of HAP standards per Section 112, 129 of the Clean Air Act on the non

- EGU ( ptnonipm ) and nonpoint ( nonpt ) sector emissions, based on expected CAP co

- benefits to sources in these sectors.

Numerous controls have compliance dates beyond 2008; these include refinery and the Office of Compliance and Enforcement (OECA) consent decrees, Department of Justice (DOJ) s ettlements, as

well as most national VOC MACT controls. Additional OECA consent decree information is provided in Appendix B of the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD: http: //www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf

. The detailed data

used are available at the website listed in Section 1.29

Refinery consent decrees controls at the facility and SCC level (collected through internal

coordination on r efineries by the EPA).

Fuel sulfur fuel limits were enforceable for Maine , New Jersey and New York. These fuel limits

were incremental and not applicable until after 2012.

Criteria air pollutant (cap) reductions a cobenefit to RICE NESHAP controls , includ ing SO 2 RICE

cobenefit controls

. We applied New York State Implementation Plan available controls for the 1997 8

- hour Ozone

standard for non

- EGU point and nonpoint NO X and VOC sources based on NY State Department of Environmental Conservation February 2008 guidance. These reductions are found in Appendix J in : http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/air_pdf/NYMASIP7final.pdf

. See Section 3.2.6 in the CSAPR TSD: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_28jun2011.pdf

.

Most of the control programs were applied as replacement controls, which means tha t any existing percent reductions (“baseline control efficiency”) reported in the NEI were removed prior to the addition of the percent reductions due to these control programs. Exceptions to replacement controls are “additional”
controls, which ensure th at the controlled emissions match desired reductions regardless of the baseline control efficiencies in the NEI. We used the “additional controls” approach for many permit limits, settlements and consent decrees where specific plant and multiple

- plant

- lev el reductions/targets were desired and at municipal waste landfills where VOC was reduced 75% via a MACT control using projection factors

of 0.25.

4.2.13.1 R eductions from the Portland Cement NESHAP

As indicated in30 Table 4

- 1 , the Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) model (EPA, 2010) was used to project the cement industry component of the ptnonipm emissions modeling sector to 20 13. There were no future year

estimat es for year 2030, so 2013 estimates were used for the 2030 Reference case . This approach provided reductions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants, including mercury. The ISIS cement emissions were developed in support for the Portland Cement NESHAPs and the NSPS for the Portland cement manufacturing industry.

The ISIS model produced a Portland Cement NESHAP policy case of multi

- pollutant emissions for individual cement kilns (emission inventory units) that were relevant for years 2013 through 2017. These

ISIS

- based emissions included information on new cement kilns, facility and unit

- level closures, and updated policy case emissions at existing cement kilns. The units that opened or closed before 2010 were included in

the projections as were t he ISI S

- based policy case predictions of emissions reductions and activity growth.

The ISIS model results for the future show a continuation of the recent trend in the cement sector of the replacement of lower capacity, inefficient wet and long dry kilns with b igger and more efficient preheater and precalciner kilns. Multiple regulatory requirements such as the NESHAP and NSPS currently apply to the cement industry to reduce CAP and HAP emissions. Additionally, state and local regulatory requirements might app ly to individual cement facilities depending on their locations relative to ozone and

PM 2.5 nonattainment areas. The ISIS model provides the emission reduction strategy that balances: 1) optimal (least cost) industry operation, 2) cost

- effective controls to meet the demand for cement, and 3) emission reduction requirements over the time period of interest. Table 4

- 14 shows the magnitude of the

ISIS

- based cement indust ry reductions in the future

- year emissions that represent 201 3 (and 2030 for

LDGHG ) , and the impact that these reductions have on total stationary non

- EGU point source (ptnonipm)

emissions.

Table 4

- 14

. Future

- year ISIS

- based cement industry annual reductions (tons/yr)

for the non

- EGU (ptnonipm) sector

Pollutant Cement Industry

emissions in 2005 Decrease in cement

industry emissions

in 20 30 vs 2005 % decrease in

ptnonipm from

cement reduction

NO X 193,000 56,740 2.4%

PM 2.5 14,400 7,840 1.8%

SO 2 128,400 106,000 5.0%

VOC 6,900 5,570 0.4%

HCl 2,900 2,220 4.5%

4.2.13.2 Boiler reductions not associated with the MACT rule

The Boiler MACT ICR collected data on existing controls. We used an early version of a data base developed for that rulemaking entitled “ survey_database_2008_results 2 .mdb ” ( EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2002

- 0058

- 0788) which is posted under the Technical Information for the Boiler MACT major source rule ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/boiler/boilerpg.html ). We extracted all controls that were installed after 2005, determined a percent reduction, and verified with source owners that these controls were actively in use . In many situations we learned that the controls were on site but were not in use . A summary of the plant

- unit specific reductions that were verified to be actively in use are summarized in Table 4

- 15

.

Table 4

- 15

. State

- level non

- MACT Boiler Reductions from ICR Data Gathering31

State Pollutant Pre

- controlled

Emissions (tons) Controlled

Emissions (tons) Reductions

(tons) Percent

Reduction

%
Michigan NO X 907 544 363 40

North Carolina SO 2 652 65 587 90
Virginia SO 2 3379 338 3041 90
Washington SO 2 639 383 256 40

North Carolina HC l 31 3 28 90

4.2.13.3 RICE NESHAP

There are three rulemakings for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE). These rules reduce HAPs from existing and new RICE sources. In order to meet the standards, existing sources with certain types of engines will need to install controls. In addition to reducing HAPs, these controls also reduce CAPs, specifically, CO, NO X , VOC, PM,

and SO 2 . In 2014 and beyond, compliance dates have passed for all three rules; thus all three rules are

included in the 2030 LDGHG emissions projection.

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

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Eng ines; Final Rule (69 FR 33473) published 06/15/04

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Poll utants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; Final Rule (FR 9648 ) published 03/03/10

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; Final Rule (75 FR 51570) published 08/20/2010

The difference among these three rules is that they focus on different types of engines, different facility types (major for HAPs, versus area for HAPs) and different engine sizes based on horsepower (HP)

. In addition, they have different compliance dates

. We project CAPs from the 2005 NEI RICE sources , based on the requirements of the rule for existing sources only because the inventory includes only existing sources and the current projection approach does not estimate emissions from new sources.

A com plete discussion on the methodology to estimate RICE controls is provided in Appendix F in the Proposed MATS Rule TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/prop osed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf . Impacts of the RICE controls on stationary non

- EGU emissions (nonpt and ptnonipm sectors), excluding WRAP, Texas, and Oklahoma oil and gas emissions (see Section 4.2.7) are provided in Table 4

- 16

.

Table 4

- 16

. National Impact of RICE Controls on 2030 Non

- EGU Projections

CO NO X PM 10 PM 2.5 SO 2 VOC

Reductions 116,434 111,749 1,595 1,368 21,957 14,669

4.2.13.4 Fuel sulfur rules

Fuel sulfur rules that were signed (enforceable) at the time of the LDGHG emissions processing are limited

to Maine , New Jersey and New York. Several other states have fuel sulfur rules that were in development but not finalized prior to CSAPR and LDGHG Rule emissions processing:

ht tp://www.ilta.org/LegislativeandRegulatory/MVNRLM/NEUSASulfur%20Rules_09.2010.pdf

.32 The fuel sulfur content for all home heating oil SCCs in 2005 is assumed to by 3000 part per million (ppm). Effective July 1, 2012, New York requires all heating oil sol d in New York to contain no more than 15ppm of sulfur, thus reducing SO 2 emissions by 99.5% for post

- 2012 (2030) projections. These New York sulfur

content reductions are further discussed here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel/governor_paterson_signs_new_la.html

.

The New Jersey year 2017 standard of 15ppm (assuming 500ppm baseline for Kersone) sulfur content yields

a 96.25% SO 2 emissions reduction for kersone (fuel #1). The New Jersey sulfur content reductions are

discussed here: http://njtoday.net/2010/09/01/nj

- adopts

- rule

- limiting

- sulfur

- content

- in

- fuel

- oil/

.

The Maine fuel sulfur rule effective January 1, 2014 reduces sulfur to 15ppm, resulting in a 99.5 % reduction from 3000 ppm. These Maine sulfur content reductions are discussed here: http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_124th/billpdfs/SP062701.pdf

.

The impact of these fuel sulfur content reductions on SO2 is shown in Table 4

- 17

.

Table 4

- 17

. Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 20 30 Non

- EGU Projections

State SO 2 Reductions

Maine 18,470 New Jersey 998

New York 54,431

Total 73,898



### 4.2.14 Oil and gas projections in TX, OK, and non

- California WRAP states (nonpt)

For the 2005v4.2 platform, we incorporated updated 2005 oil and gas emissions from Texas and Oklahoma. For Texas oil and gas production, we used the last available future year, year 20 21, e stimates from the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and used them as described in: http:// www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/am/contracts/reports/ei/5820783985FY0901

- 20090715

- ergi

- Drilling_Rig_EI.pdf

.

We also received 2008 data for Oklahoma that we used as the best available data to represent 20 30

. We

utilize d the latest available future year, year 2018, Phase II WRAP oil and gas emissions data for the non

California Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) states to represent year 2030. RICE NESHAP reductions, which are effective by year 2014, were applied to the y ear 2008 Oklahoma oil and gas inventory but not applied to the 2021 TCEQ oil and gas estimates or 2018 WRAP Phase II oil and gas inventory.

For Oklahoma, we applied CO, NO X , SO 2 a nd VOC emissions reductions from the RICE N ESHAP, which

we assumed has some applicability to this industry (see Appendix F in the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf )

. Table 4

- 18 shows the

2005 and 2030 NOX and SO2 emissions including RICE reductions for Oklahoma

.

Table 4

- 18

. Oil and Gas NO X and SO 2 Emissions for 2005 an d 2030 including additional reductions due to

the RICE NESHAP

NOX PM2.5 SO2 VOC

2005 2030 2005 2030 2005 2030 2005 2030

Alaska 836 453 62 1 68 1233

Arizona 13 15 37 49

Colorado 32,188 33,517 350 11 35,500 43,639

Montana 10,617 13,880 640 6 9,187 14,110

Nevada 71 63 1 0 105 163

New Mexico 61,674 74,648 369 12 215,636 267,846

North Dakota 6,040 20,869 688 4 8,988 17,968

Oklahoma 39,668 42,402 1,918 2,231 1,014 2 155,908 163,598 Oregon 61 44 19 14

South Dakota 566 557 43 0 370 562

Texas 42,854 26,061 2,945 435 5,977 33 4,337 1,504

Utah 6,896 6,297 149 1 43,403 81,890 Wyoming 36,172 34,142 541 3 166,939 304,748

Total 237,656 252,948 4,862 2,666 9,834 73 640,498 896,104



### 4.3 Mobile source projections

Mobile source monthly inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile emissions were created for 20 30 using a

the NMIM and MOVES2010a models. Future

- year emissions reflect onroad mobile control programs including the Light

- Duty Vehicle Tier 2 Rule, the Onroad Heavy

- Duty Rule, and the Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT2) final rule. Nonroad mobile emissions reductions for these years inclu de regulations affecting locomotives, various nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine engine types, fuel sulfur content, and evaporative emissions

.

Onroad mobile sources are comprised of several components and are discussed in the next subsection ( 4.3.1 ).

Nonroad mobile emission projections are discussed in subsection 4.4 . Locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) projections are discussed in subsection 4.4.2 , and Class 3 (C3) CMV p rojected emissions are discussed in subsection 4.4.3

.



### 4.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)

The onroad emissions for states other than California were generated with the 2010 version of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator ( MOVES2010a )

– the same version that was used for the 2005 baseline inventory and the 2030 control case

. For all three cases, the model was run with custom default inputs that accounted for the Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas standards and allowed for the separate calculation of heavy duty emissions of different weight categories as described in the “Final Rulemaking to Establish Greenhouse

Gas Emissio ns Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Engines and Vehicles Regulatory Impact Analysis” ( http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/documents/420r11901.pdf ).

Californ ia onroad (on_noadj)

California onroad inventory: California year 20 3 0 c omplete CAP/HAP onroad inventories are monthly onroad emissions and are based on March 2007 California Air Resources Board (CARB) data (Martin

Johnson: mjohnson@arb.ca.gov ). Like year 2005 emissions, future

- year California NH 3 emissions are from

MOVES runs for California , disaggregated to the county level using NMIM

. We estimated HAP emissions by applying HAP

- to

- CAP ratios computed from Calif ornia 2005 NEI submittal p rovi ded by EPA in 12/2007.

T his was done because the C ARB submittal from March 2007 did not include estimates for HAP s. We

r etained only those HAP s that were also estimated by NMIM for nonroad mobile sources; all other HAP s

were dropped

.34 Onroad mobile secto r with no adjustment for daily temperature (on_noadj)

As discussed in Section 2, the MOVES2010a model was used for all vehicles, road types, and pollutants. Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) w as projected using growth rates from the Department of Energy’s

AEO 20 11 . We used MOVES2010 a to create emissions by state, SCC, pollutant, emissions mode and month. We then allocated these emissions to counties using ratios based on 20 30 NMIM county

- level data by state, SCC, pollutant, and emissions mode.

Onroad PM ga soline running and cold start mode sectors (on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm)

MOVES

- based cold start and running mode emissions consist of gasoline exhaust speciated PM and naphthalene. These pre

- temperature

- adjusted emission s at 72°F are projected to year 2030 from year 2005 inventories using the 20 30

- specific runs of MOVES2010a . VMT were projected using growth rates from the

AEO2009. As w ith the on_noadj sector, the 2030 MOVES2010a data were created at the state

- month level,

and the 2030 NMIM result s were used to disaggregate the state level results to the county level.

MOVES

- based temperature adjustment factors were applied to gridded, hourly emissions using gridded, hourly meteorology. As seen in Figure 4

- 1 , for year 2030 , we used the same temperature adjustment factors

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

decrease i n future years, and for year 2030 processing, we updated the temperature adjustment curves for these cold start emissions. Note that running exhaust temperature adjustment factors are the same for all years. Also, it is worth noting that the running mode gasoline exhaust emissions are considerably larger than

cold start mode gasoline exhaust emissions before application of the temperature adjustments

.

Figure 4

- 1

. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 20 05 and 2030



### 4.4 Nonroad mobile source projections (nonroad, alm_no_c3, seca_c3)

The components of the nonroad mobile sectors are discussed in Section 2.3. Nonroad mobile emissions

reductions for the LDGHG reference case include s year

- specific regulations affecting locomotives, various nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine engine types, fuel sulfur content, and evaporative emissions. This section discusses the changes due to the NONROAD/NMIM system (nonroad sector) and additional C1/C2 CMV and locomotive emissions from volume increases resulting from incorporation of larger amounts of renewable fuels in the 2030 reference case.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

- 20

- 15

- 10

- 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Adjustment Factor

Temperature (F) Run Exhaust Both Years

Start Exhaust 2005

Start Exhaust 203035 

### 4.4.1 Emissions generated with the NONROAD model (nonroad)

OTAQ provided several runs of NMIM emissions that were blended together to create the 2030 nonroad

sector emissions. We used these same nonroad emissions for both the reference and control cases. Table 4

- 11

shows how the various NMIM runs were combined to create the non

- California nonroad mobile inventories. The first component “2002v3

- based 2030 Base Case” is from the 2030 Base case in our 2002v3 platform for

the SCCs listed in Table 4

- 11. OTAQ also provided diesel recreational marine (pleasure craft) emis sions in

November 2009.

Table 4

- 11. Components of 2030 HDGHG Nonroad Sector

NMIM file SCCs Description of Nonroad

SCCs

2002v3

- based 2030 Base Case 2267x LPG equipment

2268x CNG equipment

2270x Diesel engines

2285002015,

2285006015 Railway maintenance

LdGhgN2030e0_nponzseg11die

s.txt 22820200x Diesel recreational

- marine

LdGhgN2030e10.txt 2260x 2

- stroke gasoline engines

2265x 4

- stroke gasoline engines

228200x, 228201x Gasoline recreational

marine

We have not included volu ntary nonroad programs in our projections such as programs encouraging either no refueling or evening refueling on Ozone Action Days and diesel retrofit programs. The national nonroad regulations are those promulgated prior to December 200 9

, and beginning about 1990. Recent rules include:

“Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

- Tier 4”: (http://www.epa.gov/nonroaddiesel/2004fr.htm ), published June 29, 2004, and,

Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large Spark

- Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines (Marine

and Land

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

OTAQ’s Locomotive Marine Rule, March 2008: ( http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonr oad/420f08004.htm )

OTAQ’s Small Engine Spark Ignition (“Bond”) Rule, November 2008: ( http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip

- ld.htm )

All future year nonroad emissions used NMIM data that are based on AEO2009 fuels and the same NMIM county database NCD20101201Tier3. We converted e missions from monthly totals to monthly average

- day

values based the on number of days in each month. Only criteria and select HAPs (benzene, acetaldehyde, butadiene, acrolein, and formald ehyde) were retained when creating SMOKE one record per line ( ORL )

files.36 California monthly nonroad emissions are year 2030 and are based on March 2007 California Air Resources Board (CARB) data (Martin Johnson: mjohnson@arb.ca.gov). NH3 emissions are fro m NMIM runs for California (same data as were used in 2030 from the 2002 v3 platform). We allocated refueling emissions to the gasoline equipment types based on evaporative mode VOC emissions from the 2002 v3 platform 2030 NMIM data, and the refueling emis sions were computed by multiplying SCC 2505000120 emissions by 0.61, to adjust to remove double counting with Portable Fuel Container inventory for California. We estimated HAP emissions by applying HAP

- to

- CAP ratios computed from the California data provi ded for the 2005 NEI v2, collected by EPA on 12/2007. This was done because the CARB submittal from March 2007 did not include estimates for HAPs. We retained only those HAPs that are also estimated by NMIM for nonroad mobile sources; all other HAPs were d ropped.



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

Aircraft emissions reside in the nonEGU point inventory (ptnonipm), and the projection factors used to create year 2030 estimates, are discussed in Section 4.2. The remaining 2005 N EI emissions for locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) use year

- specific projection estimates.

Base f uture year locomotive and C1/C2 CMV emissions were calculated using projection factors that were computed based on national

, annual summaries of emissions in 200 5 and 2030

. Some additional emissions were then factored in due to changes in fuels. These national summaries were used to create national by

pollutant, by

- SCC pr ojection factors; these factors include final loco motive

- marine controls and are provided

in Table 4

- 19

. Modest additive Class I railroad and C1/C2 CMV emissions that account for RFS2 volume

incre ases in the LDGHG future year reference scenarios were then added into the reference case due to the volume differences in corn, cellulosic and imported ethanol and cellulosic diesel fuels. These additional

emissions are summarized in37 Table 4

- 20

.

Table 4

- 19 . Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and c lass 1 and c lass 2

commercial m arine vessel e missions to 2030

SCC SCC Description Poll utant 2030

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions CO 0.956

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions NH 3 1.285

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions NO X 0.372

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM 10 0.350

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM 2.5 0.356

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions SO 2 0.045

2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions VOC 0.402

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations CO 1.640

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations NH 3 1.627

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations NO X 0.357

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM 10 0.260

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM 2.5 0.263

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations SO 2 0.006

2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations VOC 0.293

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations CO 0.403

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations NH 3 1.627

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations NO X 0.350

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM 10 0.272

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM 2.5 0.275

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations SO 2 0.001

2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations VOC 0.387

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) CO 1.188

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) NH 3 1.627

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) NO X 0.241

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM 10 0.148

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM 2.5 0.149

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) SO 2 0.005

2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) VOC 0.136

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines CO 1.172

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines NH 3 1.627

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines NO X 0.237

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM 10 0.146

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM 2.5 0.146

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines SO 2 0.005

2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines VOC 0.134

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives CO 1.649

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives NH 3 1.627

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives NO X 0.851

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM 10 0.690

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM 2.5 0.704

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives SO 2 0.007

2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives VOC 1.07438

Table 4

- 20

. Additional class 1 r ailroad and C1/C2 CMV e missions from RFS2 f uel v olume c hanges

Pollutant 2030 C lass 1

Rail (tons) 20 30 C1/C2

CMV (tons)

1,3

- Butadiene 0.56 0.01

Acrolein 0.54 0.05
Formaldehyde 7.50 2.23

Benzene 0.45 0.30
Acetaldehyde 3.26 1.11

CO 1,906 272

NH 3 5.99 0.95

NO X 4,298 642

PM 10 86 21

PM 2.5 83 20

SO 2 4.51 5.99

VOC 173 15

The future

- year locomotive emissions account for increased fuel consumption based on Energy Information Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail, and emissions reductions resulting from

emissions standards from the Final Locomotive

- Marine rule (EPA, 2009). This rule lowered diesel sulfur

content and tightened emission standards for existing and new locomotives and marine diesel emissi ons to
lower future

- year PM, SO 2 , and NO X , and is documented at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.htm

. Voluntary retrofits under the National Clean Diesel Campaign ( http://www. epa.gov/otaq/diesel/index.htm ) are not included in our projections.

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

- butadiene, acetaldehyde, acro lein, benzene, and formaldehyde.

Class 1 and 2 CMV gasoline emissions (SCC = 2280004000) were not changed for future

- year processing. C1/C2 diesel emissions (SCC = 2280002100 and 2280002200) were p rojected based on the Final

L ocomotive Marine rule national

- level factors provided in Table 4

- 19 . Similar to locomotives, VOC HAPs were projected based on the VOC factor.

Delaware provided updated future

- year NO X , SO 2 , and PM emission estimates for C1/C2 CMV as part of the Transport Rule com ments. These updated emissions were applied to the 2030 inventory and override the C1/C2 projection factors in Table 4

- 19

.



### 4.4.3 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3 )

The seca_c3 sector emissions data were provided by OTAQ in an ASCII raster format used since the SO 2 Emissions Control Area

- International Marine Organization ( ECA

- IMO ) project began in 2005. The (S)ECA Category 3 ( C3 ) commercial marine vessel 2002 base

- case emissions were projected to year 2005 for the 2005 base case and to 2030, which includes ECA

- IMO controls. An overview of the ECA

- IMO project and

future

- year goals for reduction of NO X , SO 2 , and PM C3 emissions can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420f09015.htm

The resulting coordinated strategy, including emission standards under the Clean Air Act for new marine diesel engines with per

- cylinder displacement at or above 30 liters , and the establishment of Emission

Control Areas is at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/oceanvessels.htm39 These projection factors vary depending on geographic region and poll utant; where VOC HAPs are assigned the same growth rates as VOC. The projection factors used to create the 2030 seca_c3 sector emissions are provided in Table 4

- 21

. Note that these factors are relative to 2002. Factors relative to 2005 can be computed from the 2002

- 2005 factors.

T he geographic regions are described in the ECA Proposal technical support document: http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420r09007

- chap2.pdf . These regions extend up to 200 nautical miles offshore, though less at international boundaries. North and South Pacific regions are divided by the Oregon

- Washi ngton border, and East Coast and Gulf Coast regions are divided east

- west by roughly the upper Florida Keys just southwest of Miami.

The factors to compute HAP emission are based on emissions ratios discussed in the 2005v4 documentation ( ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4/2005_emissions_tsd_07jul2010.pdf ). As with the 2005 base case,

this sector uses CAP

- HAP VOC integration.

Table 4

- 21

. NO X , SO 2 , PM 2.5 and VOC f actors to p roject c lass 3 CMV emissions for 2030

Region NO X SO 2 PM 2.5 VOC

Alaska East 1.702 0.095 0.312 2.487

Alaska West (AW) 2.052 0.456 0.571 2.396

East Coast 1.072 0.123 0.47 3.464

Gulf Coast 0.688 0.079 0.303 2.217

Hawaii East (HE) 1.416 0.147 0.506 3.839

Hawaii West (HW) 2.783 0.733 0.871 3.842

North Pacific (NP) 0.874 0.098 0.348 2.528

South Pacific (SP) 1.232 0.166 0.589 4.225

Great Lakes (GL) 1.09 0.057 0.214 1.621

Outside ECA 2.427 0.623 0.745 3.417



### 4.5 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, and othpt)

Emissions for Canada, Mexico, and offshore sources were not projected to future years, and are therefore the same as those used in the 2005 base case. Therefore, the Mexico emissions are based on year 1999, offshore oil is based on year 2005, and Canada is based on year 2006. For both Mexico and Canada, their responsible agencies did not provide future

- year emissions that were consistent with the base year emissions.



## 5 20 30 Control Case

The LDGHG control case represents the future with implementation of new LDGHG standards. Similar to the 2030 base case discussed in Section 4, the control case also includes MSAT2 and HDGHG. This section will address only those componen ts that are different between the reference and control

scenarios. VOC speciation is identical in the control and the reference cases a s discussed in Section 3.



### 5.1 20 30 Control Case Point and Nonpoint sources
The point sources for the 20 30 LDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 20 30 Reference

Case for the sources from Mexico, Canada, and the Gulf of Mexico (othpt). The nonpoint sources for the40 2030 LDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following nonpoin t source emissions modeling sectors: area fugitive dust (afdust), agricultural ammonia (ag), average

year fires (avefire) and sources from Mexico and Canada (othar).

The LDGHG year 2030 control case includes changes to t he EGU emissions (ptipm). IPM vers ion 4.10 was run to simulate additional electricity demand from electric vehicles as detailed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis for this rule . Additional pollutant

- specific adjustment factors were applied to the ptipm results to

reflect the reduction in EG U emissions due to a decrease in petroleum refinery production. These adjustments are provided in Table 5

- 1. Table 5

- 2 provides total air quality inventory impacts on electrical power plants from electric and electric plug

- in vehicles as well as reductio ns in production of electricity for refinery use.

Table 5

- 1

. Adjustments to IPM Emissions to Account for Reduced Refinery Demand

Pollutant Adjustment

Factor

CO 0.99912

NOx 0.99892

PM 10 0.99660

PM 2. 5 0.99871

SO 2 0.99884

VOC 0.99513

Table 5

- 2. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on ptipm ( Electric Power Plants from Electric and Electric

Plug

- in Vehicles, and Reductions in Production of Electricity for Refinery Use )

.

Pollutant Tons Percent of Total Ptipm Inventory

PM 2.5 -- 136 0.06

PM 10 - 923 0.31

NO X 459 0.02

VOC

- 7 0.01

CO 7618 0.72

SO X 3131 0.15

NH 3 541 1.10 Acetaldehyde 0 0.49

Acrolein 0 0

Benzene

- 12 0.24
1,3

- Butadiene 0 0 Formaldehyde 112 1.25

The control case also includes inventory adjustments to the following upstream processes : domestic crude production and transport losses during transport to refineries, petroleum production and refining emissions, production of energy for refinery use, combustion emissions from transpo rt of refinery products, and gasoline transport, storage and distribution losses

. 3

3 These upstream adjustments were supplied by OTAQ in the Excel ® workbook “upstream scalars LD GH G_ram_RC.xlsx ” with additional adjustments on 6/13/2012 in the workbook “Upstream_Scalars_Rerun_v6.xlsx”.41 To adjust inventories for domestic crude production and transport, we assumed 50% of the change in gasoline and diesel supply would come from domestic refineries, and (b) 10% of the change in crude being used by domestic refineries would be domestic crude. Using the assumption that 1.0 gallon less of gasoline equates to approximately 1.0 gallon less crude throughput, the reduction in crude extraction and transport

from thi s rule would equal about 5% of the change in gasoline volume. Since the reduction in fuel consumption is estimated at 31.6 billion gallons for this rule, the reduction in crude production is about 1.58 billion gallons for this rule. To generate the emissi on inventory adjustment factors for air quality modeling these reductions were applied to the projected crude supply of 230 billion gallons to US refineries in 2030, per AEO 2011. i Thus, the adjustment is 0.68%. In addition, petroleum refinery emissions were reduced by 21% to account for lower gasoline production resulting from the rule.

Decreased petroleum refinery output also resulted in reduced emissions from energy feedstock production.

Table 5

- 3 presents adjustment factors for emissions associated with residual oil production, natural gas production and coal, due to decreased petroleum refinery production. Methods used to develop these adjustments are described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis.

Table 5

- 3. Upstream Refinery Emission Impacts in Tons and Inventory Scalars

Residual Oil

Production Natural Gas

Production Coal

Production

Pollutant Impact Scalar Impact Scalar Impact Scalar

VOC

- 51 0.9992

- 474 0.9883

- 270 0.9026

CO

- 93 0.9990

- 676 0.9758

- 97 0.9817

NO

x - 351 0.9943

- 2010 0.9583

- 551 0.9136

PM 10 - 36 0.9997

- 51 0.9199

- 6366 0.7195

PM 2.5 - 17 0.9990

- 39 0.9353

- 1584 0.7874

SO

x - 179 0.9913

- 1168 0.9753

- 325 0.8947

Decreased gasoline production also results in lower emissions of VOC and benzene produced by storage and transfer activities associated with distribution of gasoline. Emissions from these storage and transfer

activities were partitioned into a refinery to bulk terminal component (RBT), a bulk plant storage (BPS) component, and a bulk terminal to gasoline dispensing pump (BTP) component (see Appendix C for SCCs)

. One set of scalars was applied to RBT/BPS emissions and another to BTP emissions. These scala rs are provided in Table 5

- 4 . The scalars for BTP emissions reflect the change in total gasoline plus ethanol volume in gasoline and gasoline/ethanol blends. However, it does not account for changes in gasoline/ethanol blends used. Impacts were assumed to be spread evenly across the U. S. Methods used to develop these scalars are described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis.

Table 5

- 4

. Scalars Applied to Base Inventory (2005 Platform with RFS2 Impacts) to Obtain Reference and

Control Case Gasoline Stora ge, Transport and Distribution Emissions

Process Reference Case (Impacts of

Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule) Control Case (Impacts of

Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty

Greenhouse Gas Rule Plus this Rule)

Refinery to Bulk Terminal/ Bulk Plant Storage 0.9972 0.7944

Bulk Terminal to Pump 0.9976 0.823442 Finally, in addition to non

- combustion emissions associated with storage, transport and distribution, there are combustion emissions associated with transport of gasoline by pipeline, commercial marine v essel, rail, and

tanker truck. Estimates of emission impacts by transport model were developed using methods detai led in the Regulatory Impact A nalysis for this rule and applied to total emissions from transport sources to develop scaling factors. Emissi on inventory and inventory scalars for pipelines (pumps and other equipment) are given in Table 5

- 5 . Impacts for mobile sources are discussed in the next section.

Table 5

- 5

. Gasoline Transport Pipeline Emission Impacts in Tons and Inventory Scalars

Pollutant Impact Scalar

VOC

- 287 0.9959

CO

- 1447 0.9864

NO

x - 6137 0.9192

PM 10 - 241 0.9895

PM 2.5 - 130 0.9932

SO

x - 1292 0.9890

Total air quality inventory impacts for the ptnonipm and nonpt sources described above are provided in

Table 5

- 6

.

Table 5

- 6

. Total Air Quality Inventory Impacts on Ptnonipm and Nonpt Inventory

Pollutant Tons Percent of Total Ptnonipm and Nonpt Inventory

PM 2.5 - 3,578 0.26

PM 10 - 8,412 0.45

NO X - 15,538 0.40

VOC

- 149,193 1. 76

CO

- 13,004 0.13

SO 2 - 14,714 0.5 5

NH 3 0 0 Acetaldehyde

- 5 0.01

Acrolein 0 0

Benzene

- 1499 1.4 2
1,3

- Butadiene

- 2 0.04 Formaldehyde

- 687 0.19



### 5.2 20 30 Control Case Mobile sources

The onroad mobile and nonroad mobile sources for the 2030 LDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following emissions modeling sectors: US nonroad mobile (nonroad), C3 commercial marine (seca_c3), Canada and Mexico onroad mobile emissions (othon) and

Canada and Mexico nonroad e missions (also in the othar sector with Canada and Mexico stationary sources).43 The LDGHG year 2030 control case changes to the mobile sectors are limited to US locomotives and non

- C3 commercial marine (alm_no_c3)

, the MOVES2010a

- based onroad non

- Califor nia (except NH 3 ) inventories ( on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm and on_noadj sectors ) , and the California onroad mobile emissions

.

The 2030 control case for onroad (MOVES and California based) includes a rebound effect ( increased VMT due to improved fuel e fficiency ) , and a decrease in SO 2 and SO 4 emissions due to decrease fuel usage. An

a djustment factor accounting for rebound impact was calculated by running MOVES2010a at the national level with output by model year. Model

- year specific rebound

- related VMT changes were applied, and emissions were summed across model years and divided by the original emissions to develop pollutant

specific adjustment factor for the the exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear modes . Similarly, the SO2 and SO4

reductions were calculated by applying appropriate reductions to national emissions by model year and using these reductions to compute SCC

- specific reduction ratios. These adjustment factors were applied to the 2030 reference onroad inventories (on_moves_runpm, on_moves_ startpm, and on_noadj including CA)

. These updated inventories were then processed through SMOKE in the same manner as the reference and

base cases.

The control case also includes Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) year2010

- based upstream adjustments: refinery supply estimates and estimated reduct ions in consumption that impact the transport/ distribution fuel via rail, marine vessels (c1 and c2), and heavy and medium duty trucks. 4 These adjustments impact the alm_no_c3 and onroad sectors from the 2030 reference case.

4 These upstream adjustments to alm_no_c3 due to decreased petroleum refinery production were supplied by OTAQ on 6/13/2012 in the workbook “Upstream_ Scalars_Rerun_v 7 .xlsx”. The adjustment to onroad including rebound, SO2/SO4 reductions, and refinery upstream impacts on medium and heavy duty truck were provide by OTAQ on 6/8/2012 in “LDGHGctl2030_adj_080612.csv”44 

## 6 References

EPA, 2005. Clean Air Interstate Rule Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, March 005.

Available at http://www.epa.gov/cair/pdfs/finaltech01.pdf

. EPA, 2006. Regulatory Impact Analyses, 2006 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle

Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, October, 2006. Docket # EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2001

- 0017, # EPAHQ

- OAR

- 2006

- 0834. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html

. EPA, 2007 a

. Guidance for Estimating VOC and NOx Emission Changes from MACT Rules, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA

- 457/B

- 07

- 001, May 2007. Avai lable at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/documents/guidance/200705_epa457_b

- 07

- 001_emission_changes_mact_rules.p df

.
EPA. 2007 b

. National Scale Modeling for the Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA 454/R

- 07

- 002, February 2007. Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/454r07002.pdf

EPA, 2009. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters Per Cylinder. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420

- R

- 08

- 001a, May 2009. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420r08001a.pdf

EPA, 2010. Technical Support Document: The Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) Model and the Analysis for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Sectors Policies and Program Division and Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, August 201 0.

SRI, 2009. Southwest Research Insititute, Final Report prepared for Coordinating Research Council, Inc.: ACES Phase I: Phase 1 of the Advanced Collaborative Emissions Study, June 2009. Available at: http://www.crcao.org/reports/recentstudies2009/ACES%20Phase%201/ACES%20Phase1%20Final% 20Report%2015JUN2009.pdf45 

## APPENDIX A

Modified LDGHG Equations to adapt pre

- speciated diesel em issions from MOVES to air quality modeling species needed fo r CMAQ

As shown in equation (1) below, MOVES provides total PM 2.5 , PEC and PSO4. A remainder term, R , makes up the difference between the two species and the total PM 2.5

.

MOVES total PM 2.5 = PEC + PSO 4 + R ( 1 )

The R term includes POM, which consists of POC and the hydrogen and oxygen atoms attached to the carbon as part of the organic matter, PNO3, soil oxides and metals (also known as “crustal” and called METAL here), ammonium, and water, and thus can be also writte n as:

R = POM + PNO3 + METAL + NH4 + H 2 0 (2 )

To correctly calculate the five PM 2.5 species needed for CMAQ, we first needed to break out the POC, PNO3, and PMFINE from R . Different calculations are used for light

- duty diesel vehicles and heav y

- duty diesel vehicles, since the speciation profiles for these are different. The speciation profiles used for these

calculations are:

For both light duty diesel vehicles and heavy duty diesel vehicles, the SPECIATE 4.0 PM2.5 speciation profiles “ 3914” (HHDV) and “92042” (LDDV) will be used to help calculate the other species. At the time, OTAQ did not provide a justification for choosing this profile, but the fractions of metals and PNO3 are small and so presumably the choice does not matter too much a s long as the smallest of those fractions is representative.

We computed the primary nitrate based on speciation profile 92011 from the SPECIATE4.1 database (Hsu et al., 2006) using equation (3) shown below.

PNO3 = PEC × F NO3 / F

EC (3)

where,

F EC = Fraction of elemental carbon in speciation profile:

- LDDV: 57.4805% (based on profile 92042) 5

- HDDV: 77.1241% (based on profile 3914)

F NO3 = Fraction of nitrate in speciation profile

- LDDV: 0.1141% (based on profile 3914, intentionally inconsistent)

- HDDV: 0.1141% (based on profile 3914)

To identify which sources should get the LDDV and which should get the HDDV approach, see Table 1,

below.

Since CMAQ’s PMFINE species is the sum of soil oxides, metals, ammonium, and water, we needed to

calculate all of its components. First, the metals and ammonium are computed using equations (4) and (5). Equation (5) is based on stoichiometric calculations.

5 All profile fractions provided in emai l from Catherine Yanca on 11/6/2009, 1:49pm in attachment “ Equations for diesel MOVES speciation use in CMAQ 110609.doc ”46 METAL = PEC × F metal / F

EC (4)

NH4 = ( PNO3/

MW NO3 +2 × PSO4/

MW SO4 ) × MW

NH4 (5)

where,

F metal = Fraction of metals in speciation profile (0.002663 6 )

MW SO4 = Molecular weight of sulfate ( 96.0576 )

MW NO3 = Molecular weight of nitrate ( 62.0049 )

MW NH4 = Molecular weight of ammonium ( 18.0383 )

The final component of PMFINE is the non

- carbon mass of organic carbon. To calculate the non

- carbon mass, we first needed to compute o rganic carbon from the remainder term, R

.

A key assumption is that POM is a factor of 1.2 greater than the mass of primary organic carbon, which is also used in the CMAQ postprocess ing software at EPA.

POM = 1.2 × POC ( 6 )

Using this assumption and assuming that the H 2 0 is negligible, the equation needed for the calculation of POC is shown in equation s 7 a and 7b for gasoline exhaust and diesel exhaust, respectively

. As discuss ed in

Section 2 .3 , for LDGHG , the NH4 component was removed for diesel exhaust only

.

Gasoline Exhaust: POC = 5/6 × ( R

– METAL

– NH4

– PNO3) (7 a )

Diesel Exhaust: POC = 5/6 × ( R

– METAL

– PNO3) (7b)

See Appendix B of the 2005v4 TSD for more complete dis cussion on PM speciation for gasoline exhaust

processes: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4/2005_emissions_tsd_appendices_11may2010.pdf

.

From equation (6), the non

- carbon portion of the organic carbon matter is 20%, of the POC. By definition,

PMFINE is the sum of the non

- carbon portion of the mass, METAL and NH4. Thus, we computed PMFINE_72 using equation s (8 a and 8b ) shown below for gasoline and diese l exhaust

.

Gasoline Exhaust: PMFINE_72 = METAL + NH4 + 0.2 × POC_72 (8 a )

Diesel Exhaust: PMFINE_72 = METAL + 0.2 × POC_72 (8b)

Equations 7a and 8a (with NH 4 ) will be obsolete in all subsequent MOVES post

- processing; we did not have time to reprocess the gasoline exhaust emissions for LDGHG ; however, the computed NH4 component in gasoline exhaust was much smaller than for diesel exhaust so this impact should b e negligible.

For mobile sources, we assumed that PMC is 8.6% of the PM 2.5 mass. Equation (9) shows how we

calculated it.

PMC = 0.086 × (PMFINE + PEC + POC + PSO4 + PNO3 ) (9)

Table A

- 1

. List of SCC groups for application of LDDV or HDDV appr oach

Approach SCC list

LDDV 2230001000 through 2230060334

HDDV 2230071110 through 2230075330

6 Value provided by Catherine Yanca and Joe Somers to OAQPS in email provided 11/5/200947 

## APPENDIX B

Summary of LDGHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non

- EGU Control Programs, Closures and Projections48 Lists of control, closure, projection packet datasets used to create LDGHG year 2030 Reference case inventories from the 2005 LDGHG ba se case are provided in Tables B

- 1 and B

- 2

.

Table B

- 1

. Datasets used to Create LDGHG 20 30 Inventories for Non

- EGU Point Sources

Name Type Dataset Version Description CLOSURES LotusNotes, ABCG, plus Timin

2016cr Plant

Closure CLOSURES_LotusNotes_Linda_Timin_2016

cr_23AUG2010 1 Plant and unit closures identified through EPA

review.

CLOSURES TR1 comments and consent decrees

2014cs Plant

Closure CLOSURES_TR1_2014cs_01FEB2011 0 Plant and unit closures through 2014 identified as a result of Transport Rule comments.

CLOSURES cement ISIS 2013 policy Plant

Closure CLOSURES_cementISIS_2016cr_17AUG201

0 1 Cement plant and unit closures identified via the ISIS 2013 policy case.

closures: 2005 to 2012ck Plant

Closure CLOSURES_2005ck_to_2012ck_CoST_form

at 0 Plant and unit closures identified 2008 or before.

CONTROL ADDITIONAL OECA 2005cr to

2016cr Control CONTROLS_additional_NEIpf4_OECA_200 5cr_2016cr_29JUL2010 1 Controls that implement OECA consent decrees.

CONTROL REPLACE DOJ 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NEIpf4_DOJ_200 5cr_2016cr_02AUG2010.txt 0 Controls resulting from the 2002v3 DOJ Texas

settlement.

CONTROL REPLACE HWI 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NEIpf4_HWI_200 5cr_2016cr_02AUG2010.txt 1 Hazardous Waste Incinerator controls for CAPs and Haps carried over from 2002v31.

CONTROL REPLACE IndustrialBoiler

nonMACT 2005cr to 2 016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_IndBoilers_nonM ACT_by2008_20AUG2010 0 Industrial boiler controls not related to application

of the MACT but derived from the Boiler MACT

ICR database dated 4/30/10.

CONTROL REPLACE LMWC 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NEIpf4_LMWC_
2005cr_2016cr_02AUG2010.txt 0 Controls for large municipal combustors carried

over from 2002v31.

CONTROL REPLACE MACT 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NEIpf4_MACT_2 005cr_2016cr_02AUG2010.txt 0 MACT controls carried over from 2002v3 and updated as appropriate.

CONTROL REPLACE NY SIP 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NYSIP_O3_SCC_
2016cr_26AUG2010 0 Controls that reflect enforceable controls for NOx

and VOC from the New York ozone SIP.

CONTROL REPLACE Refineries 2005cr to

2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NEIpf4_refineries _2005cr_2016cr_02AUG2010.txt 0 Controls for refineries specified by EPA expert refinery staff.

CONTROL RICE 2016cr_05b Control CONTROLS_replacement_RICE_2016cr_21

SEP2010 1 Controls for 2014 and 2016 that represent three separate RICE NESHAPs

CONTROL RICE SO2 2014cs_05b Control CONTROLS_replacement_RICE_SO2_2014c
s_05JAN2011 1 SO2 reductions from the Ultra

- low Sulfur Diesel requirement for CI engines
CONTROL SULF rules: ME, NY, NJ 2018 and beyond Control CONTROLS_SULF_rules_2018_and_beyond
_03FEB2011 1 SO2 reductions due to state sulfur content rules for

fuel oil.

CONTROL St Gobain and LaFarge 2017 Control CONTROLS_rep_Lafarge_StGobain_2017cs _25JAN2011.txt 0 Controls for NOx, SO2, PM., and HCl resulting from Saint Gobain and Lafarge consent decrees

CONTROL TR1 Final CONTROL packet: 2021 Control CONTROLS_TR1_2021_09FEB2011 1 Controls for TCEQ oil and gas and non

- ISIS

related cement controls.

CONTROL TR1 Final consent decr ees 2019 Control CONTROLS_additional_TR1final_consent_d ecrees_2005cs_to_2019cs 1 Controls related to consent decrees identified during the Transport Rule comment period.49

CONTROL cement ISIS 2013 policy Control CONTROLS_replacement_cementISIS_2016
cr_17AUG2010 0 Controls for cement plants based on 2013 ISIS policy case

PROJECTION 2005 to 2030 ag emissions Projecti

on PROJECTION_2005cs_2030_ag_09FEB2011 0 Projection factors for agriculture based on animal population stats.

PROJECTION LMWC 2005cr to 2016cr Projecti

on PROJECTION_2005cr_2016cr_LMWC_29J

UL2010 0 Projection factors for Solid and Liquid Municipal

Waste Combustors.

PROJECTION TR1 comments 2005cs to 20XXcs

- ptnonipm Projecti

on PROJECTION_2005cs_20XX_TR1_ptnonip

m_01FEB2011 0 Projection factors derived from Transport Rule

comments.
PROJECTION aircraft 2005cs to 2030 JAN2010

FAATAF Projecti

on PROJECTION_2005cs_2030_aircraft_JAN20

10_based_FAATAF_10FEB2011 0 Projection factors for aircraft derived from the FAA Terminal Area Forecast System.

PROJECTION cement ISIS 2013 policy Projecti

on PROJECTION_cementISIS_2016cr_17AUG2

010 0 Projection factors that implement the 2013 ISIS policy case for cement. PROJECTION refueling 2005cs to 2030cs_ LDGHG _ref Projecti

on PROJECTION_2005cs_2030cs_ LDGHG _ref

_onroad_refueling_04FEB2011 0 Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling.

Table B

- 2

. Datasets used to Create LDGHG 20 30 Inventories for Nonpoint Sources

Control Program Name Type Dataset Version Description

CONTROL REPLACE NY

SIP 2005cr to 2016cr Control CONTROLS_replacement_NYSIP_O3_SC
C_2016cr_26AUG2010 0 Controls that reflect enforceable controls for NOx and VOC from the

New York ozone SIP.

CONTROL RICE 2016cr_05b Control CONTROLS_replacement_RICE_2016cr_

21SEP2010 1 Controls for 2014 and 2016 that represent three separate RICE

NESHAPs

CONTROL RICE SO2 2014cs_05b Control CONTROLS_replacement_RICE_SO2_20 14cs_05JAN2011 0 SO2 reductions from the Ultra

- low Sulfur Diesel requirement for CI engines

CONTROL SULF rules: ME, NY, NJ 2018 and beyond Control CONTROLS_SULF_rules_2018_and_beyo nd_03FEB2011 0 SO2 reductions due to state sulfur content rules for fuel oil.

CONTROL TR1 Final CONTROL packet: 2021 Control CONTROLS_TR1_2021_09FEB2011 0 Controls for TCEQ oil and gas and non

- ISIS related cement controls.

PROJECTION 2005 to 2030
ag sector Projection PROJECTION_2005cs_2030_ag_09FEB20

11 0 Projection factors for agriculture based on animal population stats.

PROJECTION RWC and

landfills 2005 to 2030 Projection PROJECTION_2005cs_2030cs_RWC_land fills_08FEB2011 0 Projection factors for residential wood combustion and landfills. PROJECTION refueling

2005cs to
2030cs_ LDGHG _ref Projection PROJECTION_2005cs_2030cs_ LDGHG _r ef_onroad_refueling_04FEB2011 0 Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling.50 

## Appendix C

Fuel distribution SCCs in nonpt and ptnonipm

Cross

- walk between SCC and portable fuel containers (PFC), bulk plant storage (BPS), refinery to bulk terminal (RBT) and bulk terminal to pump (BTP).

scc SCC description Cod

e

40600100 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;undefined BTP

40400100 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;undefined RBT

40400173 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

2501060052 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Gasoline Service Stations;Stage 1: Splash Filling BTP

2501060100 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Gasoline Service Stations;Stage 2: Total BTP

250105012 0 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Bulk Terminals: All Evaporative Losses;Gasoline RBT

2501011011 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Residential Portable Gas Cans;Permeation PFC

2505040120 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;Pipeline;Gasoline RBT

2501060201 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Gasoline Service Stations;Underground Tank: Breathing and Empty ing BTP

2501011012 Storage and Transport ;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Residential Portable Gas Cans;Evaporation (includes Diurnal losses) PFC

2501055120 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Bulk Plants: All Evaporative Losses;Gasoline BPS

2501060053 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Gasoline Service Stations;Stage 1: Balanced Submerged Filling BTP

2501060051 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Gasoline Service Stations;Stage 1: Submerged Filling BTP

2501 011013 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Residential Portable Gas Cans;Spillage During Transport PFC

2505020120 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;Marine Vessel;Gasoline RBT

2501011014 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Residential Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump

- Vapor Displacement PFC

40600401 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls BTP

2501011015 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Residential Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump

- Spillage PFC

2505000120 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;All Transport Types;Gasoline RBT

2501012011 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Permeation PFC

2505030120 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;Truck;Gasoline BTP

40600131 Petr oleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Submerged Loa ding (Normal Service) BTP

40400250 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Loading Racks BPS

2501012012 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Evaporation (includes Diurnal loss es) PFC51

40600141 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank C ars and Trucks;Gasoline: Submerged Loading (Balanced Service) BTP

2660000000 Waste Disposal, Treatment, and Recovery;Leaking Underground Storage Tanks;Leaking Underground Storage Tanks;Total: All Storag e Types BTP

2501012013 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Spillage During Transport PFC

40600136 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Splash Lo ading (Norma l Service) BTP

40600403 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks

- Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls BTP

40400111 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40301151 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Floating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline: Stand ing Loss

- Inter nal RBT

40400150 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Miscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Loading Racks RBT

40400153 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Vapor Control Unit Losses RBT

40600238 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Barges Loading

- Uncleaned Tanks RBT

40400179 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Internal Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal) RBT

40400116 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.)

- Float Rf Tnk RBT

40400199 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;See Comment ** RBT

40400151 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Valves, Flanges, and Pumps RBT

40600307 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;G asoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Underground Tank Breathing and Emptying BTP

40400160 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40301001 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: B reathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40400148 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss

- Ext. Float Roof (Pri/Sec Seal) RBT

40301102 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;P etroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Floating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank

Size) RBT

40301103 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Floating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40688801 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments F ield BTP

2501012014 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump

- Vapor Displacement PFC

40600306 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Balanced Submerged Filling BTP

40600240 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Barge Loading

- Average Tank Condition RBT

40600501 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Pipeline Petroleum Transport

- General

- All Products;Pipeline Leaks RBT

40600236 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Ship Loading

- Uncleaned Tanks RBT

40400178 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss

- Int. Float Roof (Pri/Sec Seal) RBT

40400170 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40600299 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Not Classified ** RBT

40400108 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liqui ds Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Working Loss (Diameter Independent)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40600298 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Not Classified ** RBT

40300201 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Deleted

- Do Not Use (See 4

- 03

- 011 and 4

- 07);Gasoline ** RBT52

40400152 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Vapor Collection Losses RBT

40600163 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Produc ts;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Return with Vapor (Transit Losses) BTP

40400110 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40688802 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments F ield BTP

2501012015 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;Commercial Portable Gas Cans;Refilling at the Pump

- Spillage PFC

40600301 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Splash Filling BTP

40400162 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400118 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space RBT

40600232 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Ocean Barges Lo ading RBT

40600197 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Not Classified ** BTP

40400113 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40600302 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Sub merged Filling w/o Controls BTP

40400251 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Valves, Flanges, and Pumps BPS

40400161 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Termin als;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400130 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400101 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40600101 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petrol eum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Splash Loading ** BTP

40301101 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Floating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13 : Standing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank

Size) RBT

40301007 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: W orking Loss (Tank Diameter

Independent) RBT

40400140 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- Ext. Float Roof Tank w/ Second'y Seal RBT

40400149 Petroleu m and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Specify Liquid: External Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal) RBT

40400210 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.)

- Float Rf Tnk BPS

40400279 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: Internal Floating Roof (P rimary/Secondary Seal) BPS

40400171 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40400107 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Working Loss (Diam. Independent)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400262 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Int. Flo ating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40400141 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40301105 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Floating Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 10 : Standing Loss (250000 Bbl. Tank

Size) RBT

40400112 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40400203 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BPS

40400114 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40600199 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Not Classified ** B TP53

40400117 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13/10/7: Withdrawal Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.)

- Float Rf Tnk RBT

2501995000 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage;All Storage Types: Working Loss;Total: All Products BTP

40600239 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Tanker Ship

- Ballasted Tank Condition RBT

40400205 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporati on;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Working Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BPS

40400230 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40400132 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40600502 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Pipeline Petroleum Transport

- General

- All Products;Pipeline Venting RBT

40600237 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline : Ocean Barges Loading

- Uncleaned Tanks RBT

40400172 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40600126 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Submerged Loading ** BTP

40400103 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400201 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BTP

40301003 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 7: Br eathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40400202 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BTP

40400261 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40400404 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 10: Working Loss BTP

40600147 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Submerged Loading (Clean Tanks) BTP

40600234 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Ship Loading

- Ballasted Tank RBT

40400260 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40600399 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Not Classified ** BTP

40301202 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Variable Vapor Spac e;Gasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss RBT

40301002 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Stor age at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40400204 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Working Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BPS

40400240 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liqu id: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40400402 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 13: Working Loss BTP

40400249 Petroleum and Solvent Evapo ration;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: External Floating Roof (Primary/Secondary Seal) RBT

40400401 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss BTP

40600231 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Ship Loading

- Cleaned and Vapor Free Tanks RBT

40400115 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Pe troleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss (250000 Bbl Cap.)

- Floating Roof Tank RBT

40400102 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (67000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400232 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BPS

40400142 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT54

40400233 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40400131 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400109 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Working Loss (Diameter Independent)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400406 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 7: Working Loss BTP

40400253 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Miscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Vapor Control Unit Losses BPS

40300302 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Deleted

- Do Not Use (See 4

- 03

- 011 and 4

- 07);Gasoline ** RBT

40400207 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.)

- Floating Roof Tank BTP

40600162 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Loaded with Fuel (Transit Losses) BTP

40600707 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling

- Stage I;Underground Tank Breathing

and Emptying BTP

40400208 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss (67000 Bbl Cap.)

- Floating Roof Tank BPS

40400403 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss BTP

40600503 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Pipeline Petroleum Transport

- Ge neral

- All Products;Pump Station RBT

40400271 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal BTP

40600305 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Gasoline Retail Operations

- Stage I;Unloading ** BTP

40400248 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10/13/7: Withdrawal Loss

- Ext. Float Roof (Pri/Sec Seal) BPS

40400206 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Working Loss (67000 Bbl. Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank BTP

40400104 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400105 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40400278 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10/13/7: Withdrawal Loss

- Int. Float Roof (Pri/Sec Seal) BTP

40688805 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments Field BTP

40400106 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl Capacity)

- Fixed Roof Tank RBT

40600144 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Gasoline: Splash Lo ading (Balanced Service) BTP

40600198 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Tank Cars and Trucks;Not Classified ** BTP

40600233 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Barge Loading

- Cleaned and Va por Free Tanks BTP

40600241 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Tanker Ship

- Ballasting BTP

40400143 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal RBT

40400405 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Petroleum Products

- Underground Tanks;Gasoline RVP 7: Breathing Los s BTP

40688803 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Fugitive Emissions;Specify in Comments F ield RBT

40400270 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Specify Liquid: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal BPS

40400263 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40400231 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal BTP

40600702 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (C orporate) Fleet Refueling

- Stage I;Submerged Filling w/o Controls BTP55

40400119 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space RBT

40400133 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- External Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400163 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- Internal Floating Roof w/ Primary Seal RBT

40400252 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Miscellaneous Losses/Leaks: Vapor Collection Losses BPS

40400272 Petroleu m and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal BPS

40400241 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Standing Loss

- Ext. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal BPS

40400213 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space BTP

4040 0211 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 13: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space BTP

40301004 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 13: Breathing Loss (250000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40600706 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling

- Stage I;Balanced Submerged Filling BTP

40600701 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling

- Stage I;Splash Filling BTP

40301006 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Fixed Roof Tanks (Varying Sizes);Gasoline RVP 7: Br eathing Loss (250000 Bbl. Tank Size) RBT

40400212 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 10: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space BTP

40301203 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Product Storage at Refineries;Variable Vapor Space;Gasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss RBT

40600602 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Consumer (Corporate) Fleet Refueling

- Stage II;Liquid Spill Loss w/o Controls BTP

40600504 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Pipeline Petroleum Transport

- General

- All Products;Pump Station Leaks RBT

2505020121 Storage and Transport;Petroleum and Petroleum Product Transport;Marine Vessel;Gasoline

- Barge RBT

40400120 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Terminals;Gasoline RVP 7: Filling Loss (10500 Bbl Cap.)

- Variable Vapor Space RBT

40400273 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Petroleum Liquids Storage (non

- Refinery);Bulk Plants;Gasoline RVP 7: Standing Loss

- Int. Floating Roof w/ Secondary Seal BPS

40600235 Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Marine Vessels;Gasoline: Ocean Barges Lo ading

- Ballasted Tank BTP

i U. S. Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2011 with Projections to 2035. Report No. DOE/EIA

- 0383. April 2011. http://205.254.135.7/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2011).pdfUnited States

Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Assessment Division Research Triangle Park, NC Publication No. EPA

- 454 / R

- 12

- 005 August, 2012