V

- 1 Appendix V

2007 Attainment Emissions Inventory

1.0 Attainment Emissions Inventory Introduction

The 2007 PM 2.5 r edesignation attainment e mission Inventory is a compilation of annual

emissions from fine particulate matter ( PM 2.5 ) , oxides of nitrogen ( NO

x ), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ). The sources are divided into four sectors and each making up one component of the inventory: point sources, area (nonpoint) sources, onroad sources, nonroad sources.

The 2007 attainment emissions inventory was prepared with t he support of the Mid

- Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) and its contractors

, AMEC Environment and
Infrastructure and SRA International, Inc. A copy of the Technical Support Document 1
prepared by AMEC and SRA for MARAMA is included as Attachment 1 to this appendix

.

2.0 Fugitive Dust

As discussed in New Jersey’s 2002 Periodic Emission Inventory, Attachment 2, dated May 2006, New Jersey believe s that the fugitive dust

- related PM 2.5 emissions calculated using USEPA inventory guidance is not representative of ambient air quality, as demonstrated by a review of monitoring data and EPA guidance on PM 2.5 fugitive dust transport fractions. The USEPA has developed a methodology to reduce the fugitive dust emissions by applying “transport fa ctors” at the county level

. 2 MARAMA applied the USEPA “transport factor s ” when developing the 2007 area source emission inventory

. Additional details regarding the transport

factors can be found in EPA’s guidance and in the Technical Support Document fo r the Development of the 2025 Emission Inventory for PM Counties in the MANE

- VU Region, Version

3.3

, prepared by AMEC and SRA for MARAMA, and dated January 23, 2012

. A copy of the

TSD is included as A ttachment 1 to Appendix VI

.

A table of area source SCC s affected by the PM transport fraction s is included as Exhibit 2.1 on page 9 of the MARAMA 2025 Inventory TSD. The area source categories affected by the PM transport fraction s include paved roads, unpaved roads, construction, mining and quarrying, and

a gricultural tilling. A table of the NonEGU Point sources affected by the PM transport fraction is included as Exhibit 3.1 on page 46 of the MARAMA TSD. The NonEGU Point sources affected by the PM transport fraction include dust from paved and unpaved roa dways, dust from stock/storage piles, landfill activity, quarry activity, and raw material handling.

The USEPA transport factors that were applied to New Jersey’s 2007 PM 2.5 Area and Point

source inventories are listed in Table 1 , below:

1 AMEC and SRA for MARAM A. Technical Support Document for the Development of the 2007 Emission Inventory

for PM Nonattainment Counties in the MANE

- VU Region Version 3.3. AMEC Environment and Infrastructure and SRA International, Inc for Mid

- Atlantic Regional Air Management Asso ciation (MARAMA), January 23, 2012.

2 U.S. Environmental Protections Agency. Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse

- Fugitive Dust Fractions . February 2007. (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/dustfractions).V

- 2 Table 1

PM Trans port Fractions for N ew Jersey PM Nonattainment Counties

County FIPS County PM Transport

Fraction

34003 BERGEN 0.2657

34005 BURLINGTON 0.3008

34007 CAMDEN 0.1375

34013 ESSEX 0.3461

34015 GLOUCESTER 0.4361

34017 HUDSON 0.5286

34021 MERCER 0.3472

340 23 MIDDLESEX 0.3273

34025 MONMOUTH 0.5468

34027 MORRIS 0.2297

34031 PASSAIC 0.1971

34035 SOMERSET 0.3635

34039 UNION 0.3117

3 .0 Point Sources

For the purposes of this 2007 emissions inventory, a point source is defined as a stationary facility th at emits or has the potential to emit at or above any of the following thresholds:



## • 10 tons per year of VOC



## • 25 tons per year of NO

x



## • 100 tons per year of carbon monoxide, PM 2.5 , PM 10 , SO 2, ammonia

The remaining stationary sources are included in the area so urces emissions inventory.

3.1 NO

x , SO 2 , and PM 2.5 Emissions From Emission Statements

The 2007 point source inventories for NO

x , SO 2 , and PM 2.5 were developed using data reported by facilities to the NJDEP through the Emission Statement Program. Facili ties are required to prepare an annual accounting of air emissions for each pollutant source at the facility and to report those emissions by submitting an Emission Statement to the NJDEP in accordance with

N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 21. A total of 594 facilities, inc luding power plants with units that report to the Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD), were identified in New Jersey as meeting one of the required criteria in 2007.

Emission Statement data are submitted through NJDEP's data entry software, known as

Remot e Air Data Input Users System (RADIUS). Table 2 provides a brief description of the

Emission Statement information collected.V

- 3 Table 2 : Emission Statement Information

Screen Name Description of Emission Statement Data Facility Profile (General) Plant level data (Facility Information) Facility Profile (Planning) Estimates of plant activities for planning purposes

Non

- Source Fugitive Emissions Fugitive emissions Insignificant Source Emission s List of sources not requiring permits
Equipment Inventory List of permitted sources Control Device Inventory List of control devices
Emission Point Inventory List of emission points (stacks) for the permitted

sources
Emission Unit/Batch Process

Inve ntory List of emission units and batch processes containing the permitted sources Subject Item Group Inventory List of sources grouped for various permitting

purposes
Emission Statement Process and emission data for all sources, including control effici ency and source details

The certified RADIUS file containing the emission statement data was imported into the New Jersey Emission Mana gement System (NJEMS) database. After the data was quality assured (see Section 8.1), the data was submitted to the US EPA’s NEI database in National Inventory Format (NIF). For the 2007 inventory, this NIF file (NEI_48.xml) was provided to MARAMA’s contractor, who ran queries to extract the emissions data. This file is available electronically.

3.2 Emission Offset s (Emission Reduction Credits)

Section IV.C.3 (Emission Reduction Credits from Shutdowns and Curtailments) of Appendix S

to 40 C.F.R. pt. 51, states that emissions reductions achieved by shutting down an existing source or curtailing production or operatin g hours may be credited for offsets if such reductions are surplus, permanent, quantifiable, and federally enforceable and the shutdown or curtailment occurred after the last day of the base year for the SIP planning process. Appendix S allows the

use of pre

- base year shutdown and curtailment credits of PM 2.5 , and its precursors (SO 2 and

NO

x ), emissions for offsets, provided the projected emissions inventory used to develop the attainment demonstration explicitly includes emissions for offsets from such pr eviously

shutdown or curtailed emission units.

Although this SIP is not an attainment demonstration, potential offset emissions were added to the emission inventory to be conservative to account for potential emission reduction credits (ERCs) that may be used by stationary sources pursuant to N.J.AC. 7:27

- 18, “Emission Offset

Rules.” To incorporate these potential emissions into the inventory, New Jersey allocated the statewide pre

- base year (2007) banked offsets available from 2001

- 2006 to the county lev el, proportioned by population, for PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2 . The emissions were assigned to SCC 23

- 99

- 000

- 000 (miscellaneous industrial processes: not elsewhere classified) with an identifier of “OFFSET99999”. The emissions were entered as point sources at the county centroid with an assumed stack height of 10 feet.V

- 4 3

. 3 Rule Effectiveness

Per the USEPA's guidance, 3 4 a rule effectiveness factor was applied to all applicable sources

for the NO

x , SO 2 , and PM 2.5 inven tories. The purpose of the rule effectiveness factor is to account for noncompliance with existing rules, pollution control equipment failures and control equipment downtime. The USEPA guidance requires states to apply a default rule

effectiveness factor of eighty percent unless other, state

- specific data exist to justify the use of a different value. New Jersey has chosen to apply state

- specific rule effectiveness factors to point sources in the 2007 inventory if the overall control efficiency is not re ported in the Emission Statement Program . All remaining sources had the eighty percent rule effectiveness applied in accordance with USEPA guidance.

3

. 3 .1 Emissions Calculation/Reporting Methodology

Facilities had the option to calculate and report pollutant source emissions based on several calculation methods. If a facility calculated their emissions based on continuous emissions monitoring, predictive emissions monitoring, source test or material balance, using engineering knowledge of the process, the NJDEP concluded that these facilities had accounted for factors for which a rule effectiveness factor is otherwise applied. Therefore, in these cases, the eighty percent rule effectiveness factor was not applied.

3

. 3 .2 Overall Efficiency of Control Equipment

As part of their Emission Statement Program , facilities are required to report overall efficiency, which is the combined control efficiency of all devices t hat control a given source. The overall efficiency accounts for the:

1) Amount of time a control device is operating while a process or source is in use, 2) Control efficiency, and 3) Capture efficiency of any and all control devices present for a pro cess or source.

The NJDEP determined that facilities reporting an overall efficiency for a source have already accounted for factors which a rule effectiveness factor is otherwise applied. Therefore, in these cases, the eighty percent rule effectiveness factor was not applied. However, for the few

instances where a rule does not require a control device on a facility , and therefore, the facility would not have reported an overall efficiency for a source, then the eighty percent rule

effectiveness factor was applied to these sources. An example of the latter is the New Jersey’s recent revision to the Sulfur in Fuel Rule, where the reduction of SO 2 is due the reduction of
sulfur in the fuel, not a control device.

3

. 4 Point Source Emission Inventory

Table 3 summarizes the 2007 point source emission inventory by county for PM 2.5 , NO

x and

SO 2

. Attachments 2

, 3

, 4 a and 4b contain the detailed point source emission inventor ies

. These attachments are only available electronically.

3 USEPA, “Guidelines for Estimating and Applying Rule Effectiveness for Ozone/CO State Implementation Plan Base Year Inventories”, November 1992. Hereafter cited as Rule Effectiveness Guidance.

4 USEPA, “Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient A ir Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations”, June 2003.V

- 5 Table 3

2007 Point Source Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 188 851 46

Essex 230 2,361 299

Hudson 2,142 3,873 4,467

Mercer 1,079 2,233 14,432

M iddlesex 458 2,065 367

Monmouth 33 195 43

Morris 32 196 55

Passaic 6 95 20

Somerset 72 260 35

Union 697 3,699 596

Total 4,937 15,827 20,359 New Jersey Portion of Southern NJ

- Phila. NAA
Burlington 174 516 157

Camden 155 756 76

Gloucester 471 3

, 181 1

, 801

Total 799 4,453 2,035

* These totals include adjusted emissions from fugitive dust categories.

4 .0 Area Sources

The area source component of the 2007 emission inventory includes emissions from numerous

facilities or activities that individual ly release small amounts of a given pollutant, but collectively they can release significant amounts of a pollutant. This includes small stationary sources that fall below required emission reporting thresholds by the Emission Statement Program. Area

sou rces are small and numerous and have emissions which are not readily associated with a single point or a small set of points. Some of the stationary sources in this sector are sometimes referred to as minor point sources.

4 .1 PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2 Emission Calculation Procedure s

The PM 2 .5 , NO

x , and SO 2 emissions from area source categories were calculated, for the most part, by multiplying a USEPA published emission factor by a known indicator of a ctivity for each source category, such as employment, population and fuel usage. The emissions were

calculated on an annual basis

. A calculation methodology sheet was created to document the data used to estimate the emissions from each area source categ ory. In general, the calculation methodology sheets document the calculation methodology selected, the process used to estimate the emissions, all assumptions required to calculate the emissions, and all sources of data. A complete set of calculation met hodology sheets is included in Attachment 5

.

The following sections describe how the area source emission inventory was developed.V

- 6 4

. 1.1 Annual Emissions

Most USEPA emission factors are in pounds of pollutant emitted per unit of activity. The

genera l calculation methodology to estimate tons of pollutant emitted per year can be expressed

as:

Emissions Annual = EF x AL/CF (1)

where:

Emissions Annual = Annual pollutant emissions in tons per year

EF = Annual emission factor

AL = Annual activity level

CF = Factor to convert pounds to tons

4. 1.2 County Level Emissions

Depending on the activity data obtained for a particular category, emissions are either

calculated on a statewide basis and alloc ated to the county level based on a secondary activity indicator, or are calculated on a county basis and totaled for statewide emissions. For example, architectural coatings emissions are calculated at the county level using county population and dry cle aning emissions are calculated at the county level using county employment. Residential natural gas combustion is calculated at the state level using statewide fuel use estimates published by the United States Department of Energy and is allocated to the county level based on census data regarding the number of houses using natural gas as a primary heat source.

4. 1.3 Strategies to Eliminate Double Counting

Emissions for some source categories are estimated in both the area source portion of the inventory and in the point source inventory. Reporting the emissions in each category results in double counting of the emissions. Therefore, the area source portion of the inventory must be adjusted for the emissions already accounted for in the point source inv entory. There are three ways to eliminate this double counting. One approach is to delete a known point source from the database used to calculate the area source inventory. For example, if a particular industrial

incinerator submits an emission stateme nt then it is included in the point source inventory and is not included in the area source inventory. A second approach involves adjusting the source category activity level by subtracting the activity reported in the point source inventory. For example , industrial fuel combustion emissions are estimated in both the point source and the area source inventories. Since the industrial fuel use activity level reported by facilities is accounted for in the point source inventory, this fuel can be subtracted from the area source statewide industrial fuel use activity level in the area source inventory. The resulting area source activity level is then utilized in the calculation to estimate the emissions for this category

for area sources.

4. 1.4 Emission Co ntrols

New Jersey has developed a number of air pollution control (APC) measures to reduce area

source emissions. Table 4 lists the New Jersey r ules that apply to the 2007 area source PM 2.5 attainment inventory:V

- 7 Table 4

Area Source Rules that Apply t o the 2007 PM 2. 5 Attainment Inventory

Rule Applicable SCC Codes

N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 2: Control and Prohibition of Open Burning 2610000100, 2610000400, 2610030000,
2610040400, 2801500170, 2810015000,
2801500100, 2801500300, 2801500600

N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 9: Sulfur i n Fuels 2102004000, 2102005000, 2102011000,
2103004000, 2103005000, 2103011000,

2104011000

N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 10: Sulfur in Solid Fuels 2102001000,2102002000, 2103001000,
2103002000, 2104001000, 2104004000

N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 11: Incinerators 2601010000, 2601030000 , 2601000000,

2601030000

Control e fficiency (CE) factors for the control measures have been estimated and applied to the emission inventory. The USEPA requires that rule effectiveness (RE) and rule penetration (RP) factors be applied to adjust the emiss ion inventory whenever control measures have been applied to an inventory. 5 The purpose of the rule effectiveness factor is to account for the underestimation of emissions due to noncompliance with the existing control measures, control device equipment d owntime or operating problems, process upsets, and the inability of most emission estimate calculation procedures to incorporate these problems. 6 Rule penetration is a measure of the extent to which a rule applies to a given source category.

Whenever a control measure is applicable to a specific area source category, the three factors

of CE, RE, and RP are incorporated into emission estimation equation (1) as follows:

Emissions Annual = {EF x AL x [ 1

- (CE x RE x RP)]}/CF ( 2 )

CE, RE and RP are normally expressed as percentages but used as fractions in the above equations. For the area emission inventory, the USEPA default rule effectiveness value of eighty percent and rule penetration value of 100 percent was used the majority of the time. In the instance where CE is included in the emission factor, the CE is expressed as a “0” in equation number 2.

4.1.5 Wildfire Emissions

Wildfires are exceptional events, are not spread out over the entire year, and are unpredictable from year to year. For this reason, the USEPA has changed the way wildfires are reported in their US National Emissions Inventory (NEI). They are now required to be reported as events. For this SIP inventory, New Jersey used an average of emissions from 2000

- 2007 to estim ate

2007 emissions from wildfires (SCC 2810001000). A large wildfire occurred in Burlington

C ounty in 2007. The 8

- year average of wildfire emissions from 2000

- 2007 presents a more representative estimate of wildfire emissions for the 2007 attainment inve ntory. An averaged estimate is appropriate for the attainment inventory so that evaluations of the impact of

5 Guidelines for Estimating and Applying Rule Effectiveness for Ozone/CO State Implementation Plan Base Year Inventories, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, USEPA, November 1992, page 21.

6 Ibid. page 3.V

- 8 permanent and enforceable control measures in future inventory projections will not be biased. This approach was recommended by USEPA. 7

4. 2 Area Source Emission Inventory

Table 5 summarizes the 2007 area source emission inventory by county for PM 2.5 , NO

x and

SO 2

. Attachment 6 contain s the detailed area source emission inventor ies

. Th is attachment is only available electronically

.

Table 5 2007 Area Source Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 597 2,515 731

Essex 531 2,094 739

Hudson 415 1,522 418

Mercer 293 1,12 5 331

Middlesex 902 2,187 574

Monmouth 846 1,654 459

Morris 742 1,564 683

Passaic 331 1,138 333

Somerset 478 939 248

Union 364 1,383 467

Total 5,499 16,122 4,983 New Jersey Portion of Southern NJ

- Phila. NAA
Burlington 1,702 1,397 443

Camden 423 1,358 412

Gloucester 732 728 274

Total 2,857 3,483 1,129

* These totals include adjusted emissions from fugitive dust categories.

5.0 Onroad Sources

New Jersey’s 2007 attainment emissions inventory for o nroad sources is discussed in Appendix

V II

.

6.0 N onroad Sources

N onroad Mobile Sources include internal combustion engines used to propel marine vessels, airplanes, and locomotives, or to operate equipment such as forklifts, lawn and garden equipment, portable generators, etc. For activities othe r than marine vessels, airplanes, and locomotives, the inventory was developed using the most current version of USEPA’s NONROAD model as embedded in the National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM). Since the

NONROAD model does not include emissions from marin e vessels, airplanes, and locomotives, these emissions were estimated using the latest USEPA guidance or by groups such as the Eastern Regional Technical Advisory Committee (ERTAC) and Starcrest

.

7 Email correspondence with Alison Eyth, USEPA Emission Inventory and Analysis Group, April 13,

2012.V

- 9 6.1 N ONROAD Model Equipment

The USEPA’s NONROAD model estim ates emissions from equipment such as recreational
marine vessels, recreational land

- based vehicles, farm and construction machinery, lawn and garden equipment, aircraft ground support equipment (GSE) and rail maintenance equipment. This equipment is powe red by diesel, gasoline, compressed natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas engines.

The National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) runs the n onroad model by inputting monthly national county data (NCD) such as county specific fuel parameters and temperatures . This

enables NMIM to develop n onroad model emission estimates for any specific year, month or season. Most of the work associated with executing NMIM involved updating the NMIM county

database with s tate

- specific information. This was accomplished by AMEC (formally MACTEC),

M ARAMA ’s con tractor . For this analysis, AMEC used the NMIM2008 software (version NMIM20090504), the National County Database (version NCD20090531), and NONROAD2008a (July 2009 version) as a starting point. NCD20090531 contains the 2007

year

- specific meteorology data set that USEPA used to calculate 2007 emissions in addition to fuel revisions for years 2006

- 2011. Additional changes were made to the NCD20090531 based on review of data by the s tates as discussed below. The purpose of this review was to create a new NCD specific to the 2007 base year model run. AMEC performed these changes and

conducted all the NMIM runs. The following subsections describe these changes applied to the 2007 model runs conducted for New Jersey.

6.1.1 State Review of NMIM Fuel Characteristics

New Jersey commented on fuel characteristics data and changes were made to the underlying MySQL database to incorporate those changes into the USEPA’s NONROAD model. These included changes to Reid Vapor Pressure, sulfu r and oxygenate fractions. Where changes were made, the Contractor created new gasoline type IDs. The twenty gasoline fuel record types added to the “gasoline” table in the MySQL NCD database for New Jersey is shown in

Table 6 below:

Table 6 New Jersey A dded Gasoline Fuel Record Types

GASOLINE

IDENTIFICATION AVERAGE

REID VAPOR

PRESSURE AVERAGE

SULFUR% AVERAGE

MAXIMUM

SULFUR% AVERAGE

ETHANOL%

1905 10.45 0.003884 0.0065 9.77

1906 12.99333 0.003347 0.005767 9.952564

1926 10.61 0.004023 0.0059 9.73

1927 13.42 0.00372 0.0071 9.920882

1962 10.66 0.004295 0.0065 9.9

1963 13.42 0.003161 0.0051 9.967692

2018 10.61 0.004023 0.0059 9.73

2019 13.42 0.00372 0.0071 9.920882

2046 6.880187 0.003338 0.006157 9.81232

2254 12.99333 0.003347 0.005767 9.952564

2255 10.42143 0.003427 0.005257 9.998571

2256 6.941806 0.003077 0.005609 9.802004

2282 13.42 0.00372 0.0071 9.920882

2283 10.61 0.0033 0.004975 10.0275V

- 10 GASOLINE

IDENTIFICATION AVERAGE

REID VAPOR

PRESSURE AVERAGE

SULFUR% AVERAGE

MAXIMUM

SULFUR% AVERAGE

ETHANOL%

2341 13.42 0.003161 0.0051 9.967692

2342 10.66 0.003406 0.004967 9.966667

2343 6.95121 0.002959 0.0055 9.772723

2407 13.42 0.00372 0.0071 9.920882

2408 10.61 0.003363 0.00514 10.062

2409 6.880728 0.003421 0.0062 9.814258

Other NONROAD model parameters included in the 2007 NMIM NONROAD model run for New Jersey were a diesel sulfur percen tage of 0.1139, a marine diesel sulfur percentage of 0.1332

and an ethanol market share of 100 %.

6.1.2 Update of NMIM Allocation Files for Population and Housing

Several NONROAD categories use housing unit or population data to allocate the emissions to the county level fro m State calculations. MARAMA s tates identified some discrepancies in the housing and population data contained in the NONROAD model and requested that the Contractor update the allocation files for those categories. As a consequence, the Contractor

obtai ned 1 and 2 unit housing information and updated 2007 population estimates. Data were

obtained from the sources listed in Exhibit 6.1.2

.

Exhibit 6.1.2 Data Sources for Population and Housing Data

Source Type Data Source

2007 Population Data Source http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO

- EST2008

- 01.html

Total Housing Data Source http://www.census.gov/popest/housing/HU

- EST2007

- CO.html

1 yr

– 1 and 2 Unit Housing

Data 2007 American Community Survey 1

- Year Estimates

3 yr

– 1 and 2 Unit Housing

Data B25024. UNITS IN STRUCTURE

- Universe: HOUSING UNIT S

Data Set: 2005

- 2007 American Community Survey 3

- Year Estimates, Survey: American Community Survey

Three sources for the housing unit data were required to evaluate all counties within the MARAMA region. Census data are frequently withheld when the dat a reporting can lead to disclosure of confidential business information or due to incomplete survey response. For the 1 and 2 unit housing data, the predominant source was the 1 year

- 1 and 2 unit housing data. If

that was unavailable due to either confi dentiality issues or lack of survey response, then the 3 year data was used by determining an average value for the three year period. Finally if no data were available for the 3 year 1 and 2 unit housing information, total housing unit data were

utilized . The revised housing unit data affected the allocation of residential lawn and garden equipment. Revised allocation files for all MARAMA States (except NY) were developed and utilized in the NMIM modeling for this category.

NJ provided revised human po pulation data for 2002, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. This human population data is the same as those used by the Metropolitan Planning Organizations in their

travel demand models to calculate onroad sector emissions. Because of the way NONROAD

handles missi ng data, if data for 2007 are not found, the most current data (in this case 2005) are used to assist in determining a 2007 value.V

- 11 6.1.3 Recreational Marine Vessel Population Revision

Total New Jersey default populations for each of the three major re creational marine vessel categories contained in the NONROAD model (outboard, inboard/sterndrive and personal watercraft) were updated. The National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) provided updated populations for the outboard and personal watercra ft vessel engine categories. Because the population files used by the NONROAD model (and thus NMIM) were configured with population values for various horsepower categories, the contractor determined the fraction of the total for each marine vessel type in each horsepower category from the NONROAD default population files. These fractions were then used to allocate the total state population obtained from NMMA to the various horsepower categories. The only exception to this was the

addition of data for sa ilboats. The sailboat populations were split among the outboard and

inboard/sterndrive watercraft vessels.

6.1

. 4 Airport Ground Support Equipment Removal

New Jersey provided revised equipment population values for Airport Ground Support Equipment. As discussed in Section 7 of this TSD, emissions from airport ground support equipment is also included in USEPA’s aircraft inventory prepared using the Federal Aviation Administration’s Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS). Correspondence wit h USEPA indicated that USEPA considers the emissions calculated by EDMS to be better than those calculated by NONROAD. For this reason, all emissions calculated by NMIM/NONROAD for airport ground support equipment were removed from the inventory to avoid double counting.

6.1.5 NMIM Run Specifications

The run specifications for each NMIM run were developed on a state

- by

- state basis. The settings for each specification panel within the NMIM model are detailed below.

• Description: A short descriptive term for th e run was entered for each state specific run.

• Geography: The “county” option was selected for each state specific run. All counties

within a state were selected for the run.

• Time: On the time panel, the year 2007 was selected in the drop down box and add ed to the year selections area. The Use Yearly Weather Data check box was also selected. Every month in the Months check box area was selected.

• Vehicles/Equipment: Only the nonroad vehicle/equipment area was selected. All fuels and all vehicle types wer e selected for each state run. Aircraft ground support equipment was included in the run specifications but those records were removed during post

processing steps.

• Fleet: No selections or information was entered in this panel.

• Pollutants: All criteria pol lutants (with HC reported as VOC) were selected except for

CO 2 . Exhaust PM 10 and PM 2.5 were also selected.

• Advanced features: Only the server and database were selected in this panel.V

- 12 • Output: Under the Geographic Representation panel the County selection was made. In the General Output area, a new database was selected on the server for the output.

All added external files for use in each state run were placed in the external files directory of the

NCD. Entries for all external files included were added to the countynrfiles table of the NCD.

6.1. 6 N ONROAD Model Equipment Emission Inventory

Table 7 summarizes the 2007 n onroad model source emission inventory by county for PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2

. Attachment 7 contain s the detailed n onroad source emission in ventor ies

. Th is

attachment is only available electronically.

Table 7

2007 N ONROAD Model Equipment

E mission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 338 4,065 186

Essex 173 2,264 118

Hudson 154 1,932 118

Mercer 156 1,728 104

Middlesex 295 3,629 188

Monmouth 254 2,802 161

Morris 209 2,353 107

Passaic 127 1,613 75

Somerset 155 1,620 79

Union 136 1,733 74

Total 1997 23,738 1208

New Jers ey Portion of Southern NJ

- Phila. NAA
Burlington 172 1849 96

Camden 123 1413 71

Gloucester 103 1057 55

Total 397 4320 221

6.2 Commercial Marine Vessels (CMV)

For the purpose of emission calculations, CMV engines are divided into three categori es based on displacement (swept volume) per cylinder. Category 1 and Category 2 marine diesel engines typically range in size from about 500 to 8,000 kW (700 to 11,000 hp). These engines are used to provide propulsion power on many kinds of vessels inclu ding tugboats, pushboats, supply vessels, fishing vessels, and other commercial vessels in and around ports. They are

also used as stand

- alone generators for auxiliary electrical power on vessels. Category 3 marine diesel engines typically range in size from 2,500 to 70,000 kW (3,000 to 100,000 hp). These are very large marine diesel engines used for propulsion power on ocean

- going vessels such as container ships, oil tankers, bulk carriers and cruise ships.

The majority of marine vessels are powered by diesel engines that are either fueled with distillate or residual fuel oil blends. For the purpose of emission inventories, USEPA has assumed that Category 3 vessels primarily use residual blends while Category 1 and 2 vessels typically use distillate fuel s.V

- 13 CMV emission inventories for Category 1,2 and 3 vessels w ere available from USEPA 2008

N ational E mission I nventory (NEI) 8

. This NEI database included residual and diesel fueled CMV emissions for both the port and underway operation modes of Cruise ( C), Maneuver (M), Reduced Speed Zone (Z) and Hotelling (H) that can be configured into CMV Category 1,2 and 3

vessels emission inventories. This database was matched to GIS ArcInfo shape files for use in plotting emissions.

New Jersey indicated that the y had developed CMV emission inventories that they preferred over those provided by USEPA for certain counties. However, these emissions were only available in NIF area source file format (county/SCC summary level) and not spatially allocated.

Thus for co nsistency, NJDEP mapped the shape files to determine exactly what constituted the port and underway areas in both South and North New Jersey. New Jersey visually determined that the USEPA shape files for the port mainly constituted the docking facilities themselves while those for the underway region constituted almost all the waterborne area outside or adjacent to the docking facilities. On this basis and following guidance included in a September 28, 2011 email from Laurel Driver of the USEPA, New Jerse y classified all residual fueled (Category 3) vessels not otherwise docked as conducting either a C or Z mode of underway operation and all residual fueled (Category 3) docked vessels as conducting an H mode of port operation. For all diesel fueled (Cate gory 2) vessels, New Jersey classified them as mainly conducting either a C mode of underway operation, and in a few instances where EPA made this determination, as conducting a M mode of port operation. Exhibit 6.2 provides a summary

of these determinati ons as well as the S ource C ategory C ode (SCC) designation of each CMV operation included in the 2007 emission inventory :

Exhibit 6.2 CMV SCC, Description, Mode and Vessel Category

SCC Description Emission Mode Vessel Category

2280002100 Diesel Port M Ca tegory 1 & 2

2280002200 Diesel Underway C Category 1 & 2

2280003100 Residual Port H or M Category 3

2280003200 Residual Port C or Z Category 3

A description of how CMV emissions were determined for specific New Jersey counties follows

below. This de scription is presented in two parts analogous with the different methodologies applied for those Northern New Jersey counties associated with the New York North New Jersey (NYNNJ) Harbor system and for those Southern New Jersey counties associated with

the New Jersey Delaware River Basin. Only one county, Passaic County, was not associated with either the harbor system or the river basin. Therefore, New Jersey relied upon the USEPA

2008 NEI to determine cmv emissions for this county.

6.2.1 New Jersey Portion of the NYNNJ Harbor System

The most significant New Jersey CMV operations occur in the NJ portion of the NYNNJ Harbor system. This encompasses the North Jersey counties of Bergen, Hudson, Essex, Union,

Middlesex and Monmouth. CMV emissions for this harbor system were mainly developed from

the information included in the C MV Em issions Inventory Report prepared by Starcrest

8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Documentation for the Commercial Marine Vessel Component of the

National Emission s Inventory Methodology, Eastern Research Group report # 0245.02.302.001, USEPA Contract

number EP

- D

- 07

- 097. March 30, 2010.V

- 14 Consulting Croup, LLC. 9 This inventory was prepared as a part of the New York Harbor Deepening Project. This report relied on actual operational data, to the extent such information was available, and then used local activity parameters to extend emission estimates to those portions not directly inventoried. Actual operational data was obtained from extensive

interviews with vessel operators, crew, pilots, and the United States Coast Guard’s vessel traffic system that tracks oceangoing commercial marine vessels from points of origin and destination.

From th ese emission estimates were prepared based on estimated horsepower dem and. The original inventory was conducted for the year 2000 and did not consider USEPA Tier 1 or MARPOL control measures for CMV. Therefore, NJDEP needed to grow the emissions to 2007 and then apply USEPA Tier 1/MARPOL control factors to the grown emiss ions.

New York New Jersey Port Authority (NYNJPA) Trade Statistics were used to grow the Northern NJ Starcrest emissions from 2000 to 2007. These trade statistics provide the total bulk and general cargo tonnage and the number of motor vehicles and twe nty foot equivalent containers (TEUs) delivered to or from Northern Jersey ports from 2000 to 2007. New Jersey divided the amount of cargo, TEUs and cars delivered in 2007 over those delivered in 2000 to obtain growth factors to be applied to each type of category 3 vessel emissions associated with their delivery to and from the port. This is a direct correspondence because the Starcrest report includes separate emissions for each major type of category 3 vessel that operates in the port. For example, the growth in containers delivered to and from the port in 2000 to 2007 relates directly to the growth in containerships and hence the growth in their emissions during this period. Similarly, the growth in bulk and general cargo and cars respectively relates to the growth in category 3 bulk carriers, RoRo vessels and car carriers emissions. In concern for category 3 tankers, the growth rate was based on the increase in petroleum products delivered to New Jersey from 2000 and 2007 as determined by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), United States Department of Energy.

The Starcrest report also specifically relates emissions from harborcraft such as assist tug boats to the specific type of OGV that they assist in their harbor maneuvering and docking so that the same OGV growth factors may be applied to them. In concern for towboats which represent the other major contributor of harborcraft emissions that operates in the New York and North New Jersey harbor, New Jersey assumed that their growth would relate to the increase in bulk and general cargo from 2000 to 2007. This is because towboats pull or push barges that transport bulk and general cargo.

6.2.2 New Jersey Portion of the Delaware River Basin

In concern for the Southern New Jersey counties associated with CMV operations in the Delaware River Basin, New Jersey relied on the above referenced USEPA NEI and the state of Pennsylvania. New Jersey used the USEPA NEI to develop all of its category 3 CMV underway and port emissions and the category 1 and 2 CMV port emissions for Mercer, Burlington, Camden and Gloucester counties. New Jersey used the Pennsylvania category 1 and 2 underway inventory to develop its own inventory for category 1 and 2 harborcraft underway

emissions for these sam e counties. New Jersey assumed that CMV emissions generated in the New Jersey counties on the eastern bank of the Delaware River Basin except for individual port operations are equivalent to those generated in corresponding Pennsylvania counties located on the western bank. A similar allocation process had been agreed to by New Jersey and Pennsylvania as part of the 1990 emission inventory submittal. New Jersey did not use the

9 Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC, 2003, “The New York, Northern New Jersey, Long Island

Nonattainment Area Commercial Marine Vesse l Emissions Inventory”V

- 15 Pennsylvania inventory for category 3 CMV emissions because Pennsylvania had also relied on

the USEPA 2008 NEI to determine emissions for this category in the Delaware River Basin.

New Jersey obtained 2008 data from Pennsylvania and the USEPA NEI data was for 2008 . No changes were made to the 2008 data for 2007 (i.e., the 2007 e missions were assumed to be equal to 2008). Also, New Jersey has no significant lightering operations.

6.2.3 Commercial Marine Vessel Emission Inventory

Table 8 summarizes the 2007 CMV source emission inventory by county for PM 2.5 , NO

x and

SO 2

. Atta chment 6 contain s the detailed nonroad source emission inventor ies

. Th is attachment

is only available electronically.

Table 8

2007 Commercial Marine Vessel Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 10 253 43

Essex 11 329 339

Hudson 109 2714 1265

Mercer 0 0 0

Middlesex 18 467 182

Monmouth 58 820 706

Morris 0 0 0

Passaic 0 6 0

Somerset 0 0 0

Union 100 2710 1574

Total 306 73 00 4108 New Jersey Portion of Southern NJ

- P hila. NAA
Burlington 1 15 40

Camden 60 896 560

Gloucester 41 634 795

Total 102 1545 1396

6. 3 Aircraft

Aircraft emissions in the 2007 inventory are available in either a county

- by

- county or airport

- b y

airport basis for six types of aircraft operations:

• Air carrier operations represent landings and take

- offs (LTOs) of commercial aircraft with

seating capacity of more than 60 seats (SCC 22

- 75

- 020

- 000);

• Commuter/air taxi operations are one category. Co mmuter operations include LTOs by

aircraft with 60 or fewer seats that transport regional passengers on scheduled

commercial flights. Air taxi operations include LTOs by aircraft with 60 or fewer seats

conducted on non

- scheduled or for

- hire flights (SCC 2 2

- 75

- 060

- 011 (Piston) or 012

(Turbine);V

- 16 • General aviation represents all civil aviation LTOs not classified as commercial (SCC 22

-

75

- 050

- 011 (Piston) or 012 (Turbine):

• Military operations represent LTOs by military aircraft (SCC 22

- 75

- 001

- 000);

• Ground Sup port Equipment (GSE) typically includes aircraft refueling and baggage

handling vehicles and equipment, aircraft towing vehicles, and passenger buses (SCC

22

- 65

- 008

- 005 (4

- Stroke Gasoline), 22

- 67

- 008

- 005 (LPG), 22

- 68

- 008

- 005 (CNG), 22

-

70

- 008

- 005 (Diesel); and

• Auxiliary power units (APUs) provide power to start the main engines and run the

heating, cooling, and ventilation systems prior to starting the main engines. (SCC 22

- 75

-

070

- 000).

6.3.1 Emission Dispersion Modeling of New Jersey Airports

New Jers ey a ircraft emissions were calculated based on the number of landing and take

- off (LTO) cycles generated at each airport

. Nine Airports which are Jersey Newark Liberty International, Teterboro, Atlantic City, Morris Municipal, Essex County, Mercer County

, Naval
Lakehurst Base, Monmouth Executive and Millville Municipal supplied New Jersey with LTO counts for each specific aircraft type (i.e., Boeing 707, AirBus 300) that operated at their airport

in 2007. These LTO counts were applied to the Emissions a nd Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS), the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) aircraft emissions modeling tool, to determine their

emissions.

6.3.2 McGuire Air Force Base (McGuire)

McGuire Air Force Base (McGuire) supplied LTO and Touch and Go information for that facility for general conformity for the year 2005. This information was used for the year 2007 because there has not been any significant change to it. Information on time

- in

- mode, number of engines and emission factors for military aircraft was obtained from Air Emission Inventory

Guidance for Mobile Sources at Air Force Installations , January 2002 and used to determine LTOs emissions at this facility.

6.3.3 Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) Airports

For all other remaining airports, total LTO nu mbers for the aircraft categories of commercial, military, air taxi and general aviation airports as reported in the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) System for the year 2007. 10 An average aircraft emission

factor develo ped from the most common aircraft types for a given category was applied to the

total aircraft category counts

.

6.3.4 Aircraft Ground Support Equipment (GSE)

NJ provided GSE/Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) emissions for each of the seven major airports

that submitted LTO fleet mix counts. The EDMS model determined these emissions by applying default GSE/APU equipment to those aircraft types that are known to use these units. Th e se emissions had GSE emissions as a single value without an indication of the fuel type of the

10 Federal Aviation Administration, Terminal Area Forecast 2007 Database FileV

- 17 equipment. In this case, the fuel type ratios used in the USEPA NEI were used to divide GSE emissions by their SCC designated fuel type. Those ratios are included in Exhibit 6.3.4 below :

Exhibit 6.3.4

GSE Fractional Apportionment

SC C SCC Level Two Fraction

2265008005 Off

- highway Vehicle Gasoline, 4

- Stroke 0.1686

2267008005 LPG 0.0165

2268008005 CNG 0.0131

2270008005 Off

- highway Vehicle Diesel 0.8017

In concern for those smaller airports whose emissions were not determined by th e EDMS, they can be considered to not generate any GSE/APU emissions because many Air Taxi, General Aviation and Military aircraft do not use GSE/APU.

6.3.5 Aircraft Emission Inventory

Table 9 summarizes the 2007 aircraft emission inventory by county fo r PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2

. Attachment 7 contain s the detailed n onroad source emission inventor ies

. Th is attachment is only available electronically.

Table 9

2007 Total Aircraft Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Ton s per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 9 198.1 31.7

Essex 61 3236 344

Hudson 0 0 0

Mercer 1 30 5

Middlesex 0 3 1

Monmouth 1 8 2

Morris 3 75 15

Passaic 0 2 0

Somerset 0 12 3

Union 0 5 1

Total 75 3568 40 2 New Jersey Portion of Southern NJ

- P hila. NAA
Burlington 52 540 20

Camden 0 1 0

Gloucester 0 5 1

Total 52 546 21V

- 18 6.4 Railroad Diesel Locomotives

Railroad diesel locomotive engines are classified into the following categories:

• Class I lin e haul diesel locomotives are operated by large freight railroad companies and

are used to power freight train operations over long distances (SCC 22

- 85

- 002

- 006);

• Class II/III line haul diesel locomotives are operated by smaller freight railroad

companies and are used to power freight train operations over long distances (SCC 22

-

85

- 002

- 007);

• Inter

- city passenger train diesel locomotives are operated primarily by Amtrak to provide

inter

- city passenger transport (SCC 22

- 85

- 002

- 008);

• Independent commuter diese l rail systems operate locomotives provide passenger

transport within a metropolitan area (SCC 22

- 85

- 002

- 009); and

• Yard/switch diesel locomotives are used in freight yards to assemble and disassemble

trains, for short hauls of trains that are made up of o nly a few cars (SCC 22

- 85

- 002

- 010).

6.4.1 Class II/III L ine H aul , Yard, Commuter a nd Passenger Diesel L ocomotives

USEPA has developed fuel usage based emission factors for each of the above referenced locomotive engine categories. New Jersey developed its emission inventory for these categories by applying these emission factors to specific 2007 fuel usage data received from Class II/III line haul and independent commuter rail systems and yard/switch freight and commuter rail yards. An estimation of f uel consumption based on gross tons miles (tons of freight and number of cars multiplied by the miles traveled) and a fuel consumption index (gross ton miles per gallon of fuel) was prepared for those railroads that did not submit statewide fuel

data.

I n concern for passenger locomotive emissions (AMTRAK), there were no emissions. This is because AMTRAK only used electric powered locomotives on the Northeast corridor line in New Jersey. These electric engines do not generate any emissions.

6.4.2 Class I L i ne H aul Diesel L ocomotives

In concern for the Class 1 line haul locomotives, New Jersey elected to use the Class I Line

Haul ERTAC 2008 inventory that was made available to the MARAMA states. 11 The ERTAC rail inventory included both the State and the Cou nty level Class 1 line haul emissions in NIF

format. This inventory was developed from national locomotive fuel consumption data and additional confidential information provided by the two major Class 1 line

- haul railroads that operate in New Jersey (Norf olk Southern and CSX). A ll 2008 emissions were assumed to equal

2007 emissions.

11 Eastern Regional Technical Advisory Committee. ERTAC Rail Emissions Inventory Part 1: Class I Line

- Haul

Locomotives. October 2010.V

- 19 6.4.3 Railroad Diesel Hydrocarbon Emissions

Both Class I and Class II/III emissions were reported as hydrocarbons (HC). These emissions were converted to VOC emissions by multiplying the HC emissions by a factor of 1.053

. 12

6.4.4 Railroad Diesel Locomotive Emission Inventory

Table 1 0 summarizes the 2007 railroad diesel locomotive emission inventory by county for

PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2 . Attachment 7 contain s the detailed n o nroad source emission inventor ies

. Th is attachment is only available electronically.

Table 1 0

2007 Railroad Diesel Locomotive Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Port ion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 27 1095 8

Essex 11 452 5

Hudson 17 656 6

Mercer 4 130 1

Middlesex 14 539 6

Monmouth 12 512 4

Morris 7 321 3

Passaic 7 285 2

Somerset 11 409 4

Union 12 454 4

Total 120 4852 42 New Jersey Portion of Southern N J

- P hila. NAA
Burlington 0 15 0

Camden 7 314 3

Gloucester 1 51 1

Total 9 380 4

6.5. Total N onroad Emission Inventory

Table 1 1 summarizes the total n onroad source s 2007 annual emission s inventory by county for

PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2

. This inventory p rovides a summation of the NONROAD model equipment, CMV, Aircraft and Locomotive sources 2007 annual emissions. Attachment 7 contain s the

detailed n onroad source emission inventories. Th is attachment is only available electronically.

12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Emission Factors for Locomotives; EPA

- 420F09025, 2009.V

- 20 Table 1 1

Total 200 7 N onroad Source Emission Inventory by County and Pollutant

County PM 2.5 * Tons per Year NO

x Tons per Year SO 2 Tons per Year

New Jersey Portion of Northern NJ

- NY

- CT NAA

Bergen 383 5611 269

Essex 256 6281 805

Hudson 279 5302 1388

Mercer 161 1888 11 0

Middlesex 327 4637 376

Monmouth 325 4142 872

Morris 219 2749 124

Passaic 134 1906 78

Somerset 166 2040 85

Union 247 4902 1652

Total 2497 39457 5761 New Jersey Portion of Southern NJ

- Phila. NAA
Burlington 225 2420 156

Camden 190 2624 635

Glouc ester 146 1747 852

Total 561 6790 1642

7 .0 Quality Assurance

7 .1 Point Sources

This section outlines and discusses the quality assurance checks performed on the point source

emission statement data submitted to the NJDEP.

7 .1.1 Data Ent ry Checks

Pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:27

- 21 et seq., 2007 point source emissions were reported by applicable facilities to the NJDEP through the Emission Statement Program. All applicable facilities reported their 2007 emissions in electronic format , therefor e, no data entry quality assurance

was necessary

.

7 .1.2 Completeness Checks & Reasonableness Checks

All of the 594 Emission Statements submitted by applicable facilities in 2007 were checked for completeness. The checklist in Attachment 8 was used for emission statement review. NJDEP staff accessed data from both the New Jersey Environmental Management System (NJEMS) and the NJDEP Emission Statement Program Confidential Cabinet and compiled data into various reports using the Web Intelligence Software and Microsoft Access software (Access) to assist in determining responses to the questions in this checklist. NJEMS is the database that

the NJDEP uses to store all emission statement data. The Confidential Cabinet contains all the confidential process d ata, which are manually reviewed by the NJDEP staff. Web Intelligence Software is the report writer software that the NJDEP uses to access the data stored in the New Jersey Environmental Management System, while Access is the software that the NJDEP uses to configure the data from Web Intelligence Software into other useful reports for error checks. The data source used for determining the response to each specific question in the checklist is identified after each question.V

- 21 7 .2 Area Sources

The PM 2.5 , NO

x and SO 2 emissions from area source categories were calculated, for the most part, by multiplying a USEPA published emission factor by a known indicator of activity for each source category such as employment, population and fuel usage. There are several area source categories and methodologies, resulting in numerous calculations. The area source emissions calculations were checked for accuracy by adding county emission totals and comparing them with the statewide emission totals. The c alculations were randomly reviewed by NJDEP Bureau of Air Quality Planning staff to check for accuracy.

7 .3 Onroad Sources

The calculations were randomly reviewed by NJDEP Bureau of Air Quality Planning staff to check for accuracy. This is discussed further in Appendix VII

.

7 .4 Nonroad Sources

The calculations were randomly reviewed by NJDEP Bureau of Air Quality Planning staff to check for accuracy. The quality assurance review for the NMIM NONROAD Model equipment

emissions estimates d eveloped by AMEC included New Jersey running the USEPA NONROAD

Model with input parameters similar to those used in the NMIM run. The NMIM NONROAD

model run and the USEPA NONROAD model run emissions estimates were sufficiently similar

to confirm the accur acy of the NMIM run . For the CMV , aircraft and locomotive emission estimates, New Jersey conducted a visual spot check of the columns of calculations performed on each excel spreadsheet that was used for these emission estimates.