### EPA - 420/R- 11 - 008 July 2011

Heavy- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas (HDGHG) Emissions Inventory for Air Quality

Modeling Technical Support Document

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality

Assessment Division
**Contact:** Rich Masonii 

## TA **BLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **................... iii**  **LIST OF TABLES ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ...........**  **iv LIST OF APPENDICES**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **. iv**  **1 Introduction**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **.............. 1**  **2 2005 Emission inventories and their preparation**  **................................ ................................**  **................. 2**  2.1 Custom configuration for emissions modeling for HDGHG
................................ ............................. 4 2.2 Point, Nonpoint, Nonroad, and non
- U.S. sources ................................ ................................ .............. 6 2.3 2005 Onroad Mobile sources
................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 6 **3 VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes**  **................................ ................................**  **........... 7**  **4 2030 Reference Case**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ...............................**  **10** 4.1 St ationary

source projections: EGU sector (ptipm)
................................ ................................ ......... 17 4.2 Stationary

source projections: non
- EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag, afdust)
............................. 17 4.2.1 Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust)
................................ ................................ ...................... 18 4.2.2 Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt)
................................ ................................ ............. 19 4.2.3 Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm)
................................ ............................. 19 4.2.4 Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)
................................ ................................ ..... 20 4.2.5 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm)
................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 21 4.2. 6 Stationary

source control programs, consent decrees & settlements, and plant closures (ptnonipm, nonpt)
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 22 4.2.7 Oil and gas projections in TX, OK, and non
- California WRAP states (nonpt)
........................... 26 4.3 Mobile source projections
................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 27 4.3.1 Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)
................................ ............ 27 4.3.2 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3)
................................ ..... 30 4.3.3 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (seca_c3)
................................ ................................ .............. 32 4.4 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, and othpt)
................................ .................... 33 **5 2030 Control Case**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **.. 33**  5.1 2030 Control Case Point and Nonpoint sources
................................ ................................ ............... 33 5.2 2030 Control Case Mobile sources
................................ ................................ ................................ ... 34 **6 References**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **............... 35** iii 

## AC **RONYMS AEO**  Annual Energy Outlook **BEIS** Biogenic Emission Inventory S ys tem **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 (formerl y Transport) Rule **E0** 0% Ethanol gasoline **E10** 10% Ethanol gasoline **EISA** Energy

Independence and Security Act of 2007 **EGU** Electric Generating Utility **FAA** Federal Aviation Administration **FI PS**  Federal Information Processing Standard **HAP** Hazardous Air Pollutant **HDGHG** Heavy Duty Greenhouse Gas **HONO** HNO2, nitrous acid **IPM** Integrated Planning Model **LDGHG** Li ght Duty Greenhouse Gas **MOBILE6** Mobile Source Emission Factor Model, version 6 **MOVES** Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator **MY** Model Year **NEEDS** National Electric Energy Database S ys tem **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** Revised 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 Partnershipiv 

## LIST OF T

**AB LES**  Table 1
- 1. List of cases run in support of the HDGHG air quality modeling
................................ ................... 1 Table 2
- 1. Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the HDGHG Platform
................................ ..................... 2 Table 2
- 2. Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for HDGHG platform
.......................... 5 Table 2
- 3. Description of differences in ancillary data between the HDGHG 2005 case and the 2005 v4.2 platform
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 6 Table 2
- 4. HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in HDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform
................................ .. 7 Table 3
- 1. Summary

of VOC speciation profile approaches b y s ector across cases ................................ ........ 9 Table 4
- 1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the 2030 Reference case emissions inventories from the 2005 bas e case ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 14 Table 4
- 2. Growth factors from year 2005 to 2030 for Animal Operations
................................ .................... 18 Table 4
- 3. Projection Factors for growing ye ar 2005 Residential Wood Combustion Sources
...................... 19 Table 4
- 4. Factors used to project 2005 base
- case aircraft emissions to year 2030 ................................ ........ 21 Table 4
- 5. Summary

of Non
- EGU Emission Reductions Applied to the 2005 Inventory due to Unit and Plant Closures
................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 23 Table 4
- 6. Future - ye ar ISI S - based cement industry annual reductions (tons/y r) for the non
- EGU (ptnonipm) sector ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 24 Table 4
- 7. State - level non
- MACT Boiler Reductions from I CR Data Gathering
................................ ........... 25 Table 4
- 8. National Impact of RICE Controls on 2030 Non
- EGU Projections
................................ .............. 25 Table 4
- 9. Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 2014 Non
- EGU Projections
................................ .................... 26 Table 4
- 10. Oil and Gas NO X and SO 2 Emissions for 2005 and 2030 including additional reductions due to the RI CE NESHAP ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 26 Table 4
- 11. Components of 2030 HDGHG Nonroad Sector
................................ ................................ .......... 30 Table 4
- 12 . Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions to 2030
................................ ................................ ........................ 31 Table 4
- 13. NO X , SO 2 , and PM 2.5 Factors to Project Class 3 Commercial Marine Vessel emissions to 2030

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 33 Table 5
- 1. Upstream HDGHG Control Case adjustments
................................ ................................ ............... 34 Table 5
- 2. Onroad mobile reductions from HDGHG controls
................................ ................................ ........ 34 

## LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4
- 1. MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005 and 2030
................................ ...... 29 

## LIST OF A **PPENDICES APPENDIX A**  : Modified HDGHG Equations to adapt pre - speciated diesel emissions from MOVES to air

quality modeling species needed for CMAQ
. **APPENDIX B:** Inventory Data F iles Used for Each H DGHG Modeling Case

– SMOKE Input Inventory

Datasets **APPENDIX C**  **:** Ancillary Data Files Used for H DGHG 2005 Case Compare d to 2005 v4 .2 Platform Data Files **APPENDIX D**  **:** Summary of HD GHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non
- EGU Control Programs, Closures and Projections1 

## 1 **Introduction** This document provides the details of emissions data processing 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 (EI SA) to establish fuel efficiency

and greenhous e gas emissions standards for c ommercial m edium
- and h eavy- d uty o n - h ighway v ehicles and w ork trucks beginning with the 2014 model year (MY) . This rulemaking effort is hereafter referred to in this technical support document (TSD) as the Heavy Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas (H DGHG) rule and consists of three emissions cases. T able 1 - 1 provides of list of the emissions cases created for this modeling effort.

**T able**  **1 -**  **1 .**  Li st of cases run in support of the H DGHG air quality modeling **Case Name Internal EPA** 

**Abbreviation Description**  2005 B ase case 2005c s_hdghg 2005 case created using average ye ar fires data and an average ye ar temporal allocation approach for Electrical Generating Units ( EGUs ) , use d to comput e relative response factors with 2030 scenarios
. 2030 Reference case 2030cs_hdghg_ref 2030 “reference ” (baseline) scenario representing the best estimate for the future year without implementation of national heavy duty vehicle emissions standards. 2030 Control case 2030c s_ h dghg_ctl 20 30 “control” case scenario representing

implementation of national emissions standards , phased in between 2014 and 2018, for (c ommercial medium and) heavy- duty vehi cles
. 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, the H DGHG modeling used data intended onl y for the rule development and not for general use . All of the documentation provided here describes what was done differentl y and specifically for the H DGHG effort in contrast to wh at is used in the v4 .2 platform. In H DGHG , we used a 2005 base case approach for the year 2005 emissions scenario
. This approach is very similar to that in the recently promulgated Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Final Rule (formerly known as the “ Transport Rule”)
. A base case approach uses average ye ar fires and EGU temporal profiles from three ye ars of EGU data. We use a base case approach because we want to reduce ye ar- specific variability

in some components of the inventory
. F or example , large fires vary in location and day

of the ye ar each year, and EGU shutdowns and high use on high energy demand day s 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 HD GHG , the same biogenic emissions data as the v4 .2 platform was used for the 2005 case , and also for both future
ye ar cases . The only significant data change s between the 2005 and the 2030 future
- ye ar HDGHG cases are the emission inventories and speciation approaches. For this effort , we have created and provided county- level emission summaries for criteria pollutants and select hazardous air pollutant s ( e.g. benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, 1,3
- butadiene, ethanol, naphthalene) b y emissions modeling sector for the case s listed above
. S ummaries are included by month using average day

emissions and separatel y with annual totals. The se data have been provided to the EPA2 docket for this rule. In addition, the data will be posted on the Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors (CHIEF) website in earl y August 2011 under the “ H DGHG 2005 and 2030 emissions data” link at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#2005
. In the remainder of this document, we provide a description of the approaches taken for the emissions in support of air quality modeling for H DGHG . 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 HDGHG . In Section 4 , we describe th e 20 30 Reference case as compared to the 2005 base case, and in Section 5 , we describe the 2030 Control Case in comparison to the 2030 Reference case. 

## 2 **2005 Emissio**  **n i nv** **entories and their preparation**  As mentioned previously, the 2005 emissions modeling approach for HDGHG 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 H DGHG 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 H DGHG modeling platform. It also indicates which platform sectors include HAP emissions and the associated sectors from the National Emission Inventory (NEI) . Subsequent sections refer to these platform sectors for identifying the emissions differences between the v4 .2 platform and the H DGHG platform.

**Table 2**  **- 1**  **.** Sectors Used in Emissions Modeling for the H DGHG Platform **Platform Sector**  **2005 NEI**

**S ector**  **Description Contains HAP**  **em issions?**  **IPM sector: ptipm**  Point NEI EGU units at facilities mapped to the IPM model using the National Electric Energy Database 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 prescribed fire emissions , county and annual resolution. Yes **Agricultural sector: ag**  Nonpoint NH3 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 **Rem aining nonpoint**  **sector: nonpt**  Nonpoint+ All nonpoint sources not otherwise included in other emissions mo deling 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, locom**  **otive, m arine:**  **alm_no_c3** Mobile:

Nonroad Primarily 2002 NEI non
- rail maintenance 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**  **em issions?**  **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 Emissions 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. NH3 (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, acetaldehyde, 1,3 -butadiene, acrolein, naphthalene, brake and tire we ar PM, and evaporative VOC, benzene, and naphthalene. 3) Onroad emissions for Hg from NMIM using MOBILE6.2, other than for California. 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 mo de 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 (see on_moves_runpm sector). No

**Onroad running exhaust PM**  **on_ moves_run** 

**pm** Mobile: onroad+ Monthly, county
- level draft MOVES2010a -based onroad gasoline

emissions subject to temperature adjustments. Limited to exhaust mo de 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 emissions gen erated 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 2005 v4 platform. No

+ Some data included in modeling sector has been revised beyond what is included in the 2005 NEI v 1 or v2. As with the 2005 v4 .2 platform, the primary emissions modeling tool used to create the air quality model
ready emissions was the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) modeling s ys tem (http://www.smoke
- model.org/index.cfm). We used SMOKE version 2.6 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 “2005cs_hdghg_05b” case).4 

### 2.1 **Custom configuration for emissions modeling for H**  **DGHG** Unlike the 2005 v4 .2 platform, the configuration for H DGHG modeling included additional hazardous air pollutant s ( HAP s) and used slightly revised ancillary speciation data. Both of these differences are described in this section. Table 2 - 2 lists the additional HAP pollutants processed for the H DGHG platform , which were not included in the 2005 v4 .2 platform. How ever, 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 project, 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 .5

**Table 2**  **- 2**  **.** Model species produced by SMOKE for CB05 with SOA for HDGHG 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. In addition to the model species differences , the H DGHG platform had a few additional custom aspects in the 2005 cases
. Table 2 - 3 lists the datasets used by the H DGHG platform that are different from the v4 .2 platform. In addition, Appendix C provides a more detailed comparison of the ancillary datasets for the 2005 v4 .2 platform versus the H DGHG platform.6 Another consideration is the speciation across the H DGHG future
- ye ar cases as compared to 2005. Section 3 provides a detailed account of these differences. Otherwise, the future
- ye ar 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 H DGHG 200 5 case and the 2005 v4 .2 platform **Ancillary Data Type Difference between**  **2005 v4 .2**  **platform and H** **DGHG platform**  Speciation cross
references and Speciation profiles The H DGHG data files are configured to support the multi
- pollutant (MP) version of CMAQ, whereas the 2005 v4 .2 platform data file is configured to support only

the n on - MP version. Therefore, the H DGHG data files include profiles for additional VOC HAP species. Inventory tables The HDGHG 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 **Point**

**, Nonpoint, Nonroad, and non -**  **U.S. s ources**  With the exception of the extra VOC HAPs retained in HDGHG processing, the 2005 HDGHG emissions for all sectors except for U.S. onroad mobile sectors (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, and o n_moves_startpm) are identical to those provided in the 2005 Version 4.2
- based Transport Rule Final TSD. All point source sectors (ptnonipm, point), nonpoint source sectors (nonpt, afdust, ag, avefire), nonroad sectors (alm_no_c3, nonroad, seca_c3) and Canada and Mexico sector (othar, othon, othpt) inventories are the same in the 2005 HDGHG platform as the 2005v4.2 emissions modeling platform. Th e 2005v4.2 TSD can be found at: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory /2005v4_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 three 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_mo v es_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors (completel y MOVES - based) emissions inventory data are from the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator ( MOVES2010, specificall y, version MOVES2010a) model
. The NH3 onroad emissions in California (on_noadj sector) use MOVES2 010 (a)
- based emissions in HDGHG compared to the NMIM (MOBILE6)
- based emissions in the 2005v4.2 platform. The HDGHG onroad emissions keep additional HAPs as described in Section 2.1 . In addition for these MOVES sectors, the temperature adjustment calculations applied to PM 2.5 species were the same as in the v4 .2 platform
. For HDGHG, MOVES2010a was used in conjunction with an internal default database MOVESDB201009 13, which contained performance updates from the MOVESDB20100826, the database originall y released with MOVES2010a and used in the 2005v4.2 platform. Specificall y, the MOVES2010 a emissions updates for HDGHG include improved PM exhaust estimates (particularl y for future ye ar estimates). In addition, we used NO and NO 2 directly from MOVES2010 a for HDGHG, 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 HDGHG, where NO_MOVES and NO2_MOVES are the MOVES2010
- provided NO and NO 2 emissions. The HONO , compute d from total7 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 were inventoried as NO2
- equivalent; all prior speciation of MOVES NO X w as also based on NO2 molecular weight equivalency
.

**Table 2**  **- 4**  **.** HONO, NO, and NO2 computations in HDGHG versus 2005v4.2 platform **CMAQ Specie HDGHG**  **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 HDGHG 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 ) c omputation in equation 10. In short, MOVES2010 a for HDGHG 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
- provided species are related as follows: PM25_TOTAL= PM25EC + **PM25OM** + PSO4 CMAQ requires the five CMAQ species to also sum to total PM2.5: 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 gaso line exhaust PM emissions do include some ammonium
. However, PSO4 for gasoline exhaust is considerabl y smaller than diesel exhaust so the impact is likely negligible for air quality modeling. Itis important to note that total PM2.5 was conserved 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. 

## 3 **VOC speciation changes that represent fuel changes**  A significant detail that is different in each of the HDGHG 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 C MAQ. In this section , we summarize the various speciation profile information used in configuring the v arious cases
. The VOC speciation approach used for the base
- year case HD GHG 2005 has some notable differences from the 2005 v4.2 platform for many emi ssions modes (e.g., evaporative, exhaust) and processes (e.g., diesel, gasoline, refueling) . Two significant updates in the 2005 HDGHG are : 1) headspace vapor speciation utilizes a combination of the E10 headspace vapor profile (8763) and E0 headspace vap or profile (8762) as8 opposed to using solel y 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 for Table 3 - 1 more details. The VOC speciation approach used for each of the future
- ye ar cases is customized to account for the impact of fuel changes . These changes affect the on_noadj sector, the nonro ad sector, and parts of the nonpt and ptnonipm sectors. The speciation changes from fuels in the nonpt sector are for portable fuel containers (PFCs) and fuel distribution operations associated with the bulk
- plant
- to - pump (btp) distribution. The speciation changes from fuels in the ptnonipm sector include btp distribution operations inventoried as point sources. Refinery

to bulk terminal (rbt) fuel distribution speciation does not change across the modeling cases because this is considered upstream from the introduction of ethanol into the fuel. Mapping of fuel distribution SCCs to btp and rbt emissions categories can be found in Appendix A of the revised annual Renewable Fuel Standard ( RFS2 ) Emissions Inventory for Air Quality

Modeling Technical Support Document (EPA Report No. 420
- R - 10 - 005, January 2010, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420r10005.pdf ). Table 3 - 1 summarizes the different profiles utilized for the fuel
- related sources in each of the sectors for 2005 and the future ye ar cases. A comparison of the 2005v4.2 platform with the HDGHG 2005 case is also included.

1 This was an oversight in the 2005v4.2 platform corrected for this modeling effort.9

**Table 3**  **- 1**  **.** Summary

of VOC speciation profile approaches b y s ector across cases **Inventory Type and**  **Mode VOC speciation approach by fuels**  **VOC Profile**  **Codes 2005** 

**V4.2 2005** 

**HDGH G**  **2030**

**Reference 2030** 

**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 onroad

except Class 6,7 & 8 start weighted year 2030 heavy
- duty start (parking area) emissions **without** HD controls 877RH onroad class 8 start only 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 **without** HD controls 877RM onroad class 6 & 7 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 E0 **or** E10 by county 8750 8751 o nroad nonroad o nroad

nonroad **Mobile Evaporative**  **Diesel** diesel evap headspace profile,

Circle K Diesel single
- sample 4547 onroad onroad o nroad onroad E0 **and** E10 combinations 8753 8754 nonroad nonroad E0 **or** E10 by county 8753 8754 nonroad nonroad **Mobile Evaporative**  **Gasoline** E0 **and** E10 combinations 8753 8754 o nroad

nonroad o nroad

nonroad E0 **or** E10 by county 8753 8754 o nroad nonroad 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** E10 by county 8762 8763 All listed All listed Appendix C lists ancillary input data file names used for HDGHG emissions modeling that are updated from the v4 .2 platform. All ancillary data files not unique to HDGHG emissions modeling are available on the 2005 v4.2 - based platform website previousl y referenced.10 

## 4 **20 30 Reference**  **Case** The 20 30 Reference case is intended to represent the emissions associated with use of the most likely volume of ethanol in the absence of the greenhouse gas emissions standards for c ommercial m edium
- and h eavy- d uty o n - h ighway v ehicles and w ork trucks beginning with the 2014 model year (MY). The reference case assumes no improvements in fuel consumption or greenhouse gas emissions in MY 2014 through 2018. The reference and control cases do not include fuel and emissions changes from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) , or revised annual Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2); however the Light Duty Greenhouse Gas (LDGHG) impacts are included in both cases. The 2030 Reference case uses many of the same growth and control assumptions as those for the Final Cross - State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), because other than onroad mobile sources, both HDGHG and CSAPR use the same 2005v4.2
- based emissions inventories. There are some differences between the 2012 and 2014 base case projections in CSAPR and the 2030 reference case for HDGHG: 1) The year 2030 includes some additional controls that were promulgated after 2014 (e.g., fuel sulfur rules in a couple of states). 2) Growth factors for several sources are year - specific; so while the methodology is the same as CSAPR, the future year emissions estimates differ (e.g., oil and gas in a couple states, onroad refueling, residential wood combustion). 3) Minor errors identified after CSAPR modeling was complete were fi xed (e.g, we include agricultural dust projections for the couple of states that provided point source farms). The remainder 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_eitsd_28jun2011.pdf , but with the updates described above
. The future base
- case projection methodologies vary b y sector. The 2030 reference case represent s predicted emissions in the absence of any further controls beyond those Federal and State measures already 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_runpm, and on_moves_startpm sectors), all national measures for which data were available at the time of modeling have been inclu ded. 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 hav e been necessary for areas to attain the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS annual standard, 2006 PM NAAQS (24
- hour) standard, and the 1997 ozone NAAQS are generall y 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 comments received from the CSAPR and a larger effort to start including more local control information on stationary non - EGU sour ces; this is described further in Section 4.2 . The following bullets summarize the projection methods used for sources in the various sectors , while additional details and data sources are given in11 Table 4 - 1 .  IPM sector (ptipm): Unit
- specific e stimates from IPM, version 4.10.  Non - IP M 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 projection approaches for point
- source livestock , and aircraft and gasoline st age 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 level were used for aircraft to account for projected changes in landing/take off 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.  Agricultural 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): Projection factors for dust categories related to livestock estimates based o n 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 program s. Residential wood combustion projections based on growth in lower
- emitting stoves and a reduction in higher emitting stoves. PFC projection factors reflecting 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. Yearspecific 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
- ye ar equipment population estimates and control programs to the ye ar 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 sector 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
- ye ar 2005 emissi ons grown and controlled to 2030 , incorporating Transport Rule comments and controls based on Emissions Control Area (ECA) and International Marine Organization (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 reference case does not include HDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include LDGHG impacts. Temperature impacts at the monthly average resolution. California
specific data provided b y the state of California , except NH 3 which was obtained from MOVES2010a . VOC speciation uses different future
- ye ar values to take into account both the increase in ethanol use , and the existence of Tier 2 vehicles that use a different speciation profile. Other than California, this sector includes all non
- refueling onroad mobile emissions (exhaust,12

evaporative, brake wear and tire wear modes) except exhaust mode gasolin e PM and naphthalene emissions that are provided in the on_moves_startpm and on_moves_runpm sectors.  Onroad PM gasoline running mode sector (on_moves_startpm): Running mode MOVES2010a year 2030 future
- ye ar state - month estimates for PM and naphthalene, app ortioned to the county level using NMIM 2030 state - county ratios matched to vehicle and road types. The reference case does not include HDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does include LDGHG impacts. Use future
- year temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 7 2°F emissions to ambient temperatures (for elemental and organic carbon) based on grid cell hourl y 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 b y vehicle typ e. The reference case does not include HDGHG or RFS2 impacts, but does in clude LDGHG impacts. Use future
- ye ar temperature adjustment file for adjusting the 72 ° F emissions (for elemental and organic carbon) to ambient temperatures based on grid cell hourl y 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 nonroad/nonpoint (othar): No growth or control.  Other p oint (othpt): No growth or control.  Biogenic: 2005 emissions used for all future
- ye ar scenarios.13 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 2005 v4.2 base
- case inventories. All Mexico, Canada, and offshore oil emissions are unchanged in all future cases from those 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 HDGHG modeling. Lists of the control, closures, projection packets (datasets) used to create the HDGHG 2030 future reference c ase scenario inventories from the 2005 HDGHG base case are provided in Appendix D. The remainder of this section is organized eith er by source sector or by

specific emissions category within a source sector for which a distinct set of data were used or developed for the purpose of projections for the HDGHG Rule. This organization allows consolidation of the discussion of the emissio ns categories that are contained in multiple sectors, because the data and approaches used across the sectors are consistent and do not need to be repeated. Sector names associated with the emissions categories are provided in parentheses.14

**Table 4**  **- 1**  **.** Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the 20 30 Reference case emissions inventories from the 2005 base case **Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions (**  **g rouped by**  **a ffected**  **p ollutants o**  **r 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 Rein forced 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 Pro duction Cyanide Chemical Manufacturing Friction Products Manufacturing Leather Finishing Operations Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing Organic Liquids Distribution (Non
- Gasoline) Refractory Products Manufacturing Sites Remediation VOC EPA, 2007 a

Consent decrees on c om

panies (based on information from the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

– OECA) apportioned to plants owned/operated by the c om panies 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 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 13; EPA, 2010 Livestock Emissions Growth from year 2002 to year 20 30 (some farms in the point inventory) NH3, PM 9 Gasoline Stage II growth and control from year 2005 to year 20 30 based on MOVES 2030 reference and 2005 state
- level ratios VOC 11 New York o zone SIP c ontrols VOC, NO X , HAP VOC 14 Additional p lant and unit closures provided by state, regional, and the EPA agencies and additional consent decrees. Includes updates from C SAPR comments. All 1915

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 Information Collection Request ( ICR) from the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boiler NESHAP. NO X , SO 2 , HCl Section 4.2.6 Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP NO X , CO, PM , SO 2 15 Replaced 2005 with 2008 emissions for Corn Products International, Cook C ounty, Illinois, due to the shutdown of 3 boilers and addition of a new boiler (subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Requirements) . Agency Identifier: 031012ABI (ILEPA) All 1 6 State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil

–effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New York SO 2 17 **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 20 30 NH3, PM 9 Residential Wood Combustion Grow th and Change
- outs from year 2005 to year 20 30 All 10 Gasoline Stage II growth and control from year 2005 to year 20 30 based on MOVES 2030 reference and 2005 state
- level ratios VOC 11 Portable Fuel Container Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule 2 ( MSAT2 ) inventory grow th and control from year 2005 to year 2030 VOC 12 RICE NESHAP NO X , CO, VOC, PM , SO 2 15 Use Phase II WRAP 2018 Oil and Gas VOC, SO 2 , NO X , CO Section 4 .2.7 Use 2008 Oklahoma and Texas Oil and Gas, and apply year 2021 projections for TX (last year available), and RICE NESHAP controls to Oklahoma emissions. VOC, SO 2 , NO X , CO, PM Section 4 .2.7 New York, Connecticut, and Virginia ozone SIP controls VOC 14, 18 State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil

–effective only in Maine, New Jersey, and New York SO 2 17 **APPROACHES /REFERENCES**  **- Stationary Sources**  **:** 1. Appendix B in the Proposed Toxics Rule 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 Motiva : 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 Incinerators criteria and hazardous air pollutant controls carried over from 2002 Platform, v3
. 1. 5. Used data provide d by the EPA, OAQPS SPPD expert
. 6. Percent reductions and plants to receive reductions based on recommendations by rule lead engineer, and are consistent 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 (US DA) and the Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute. See Section 3.2.1. 10. Grow th and Decline in woodstove types based on industry trade group data, See S ection
. 11. VOC emission ratios of year 20 16 (linear interpolation between 2015 and 2020)
- spec ific from year 2005 from the National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM ) results for onroad refueling including activity grow th from VMT, Stage II control programs at gasoline stations, and phase in of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls. 12. VOC and benzene emissions for year 20 16 (linear interpolation between 2015 and 2020) from year 2002 from MSAT216

rule (EPA, 2007b ) 13. 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 14. New York NO X and VOC reducti ons obtained from Appendix J in NY Department of Environmental Conservation Im plementation Plan for Ozone (February 2008): http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/air_pdf/NYMASIP7final.pdf
. See Section 3.2.6. 15. Appendix F in the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf 16. The 2008 data used came from Illinois’ submittal of 2008 emissions to the NEI. 17. Based on available, enforceable state sulfur rules as of November, 2010: http://www.ilta.org/Legislat iveandRegulatory/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_ne w_la.html , http://green.bl ogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/20/new
- york
- mandates
- cleaner
- heating
- oil/ 18. VOC reductions in Connecticut and Virginia obtained from CSAPR comments. 19. Appendix D of Cross
- State Air Pollution Rule: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_appendices_28jun2011.pdf

**Onroad mobile and n onroad**  **m obile**  **c ontrols**  **(list includes al l 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 all 1 **Local Onroad Program s:**  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 Clean Bus USA Program: October, 2007 Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Com pression
- Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder: October, 2008 all 3,4,5
**Aircraft:** Itinerant (ITN) operations at airports to year 2030 all 6 **Locom otives:**  Energy Information Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

– Tier 4 : June 2004 Locomotive Emiss ions Final Rulemaking, December 17, 1997 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 C SAPR comments. EIA fuel consumption projections for diesel
- fueled vessels OTAQ ECA C3 Base 203 0 inventory for residual
- fueled vessels Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule

– Tier 4 Emissions Standards for Commercial Marine Diesel Engines, December 29, 1999 Tier 1 Marine Diesel Engines, February 28, 2003 all 7, 3; EPA, 2009

**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/17

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/progsregs/epa
ipm/index.html ). The IPM is a multiregional, dy namic, 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 existing controls collected through the Information Collection Request ( ICR), and information from comments received on the IPM
- related Notice of Data Availa bility (NODA) published on September 1, 2010. IPM v4.10 Final included the addition of over 20 GW of existing Activated Carbon Injection (ACI) reported to the EPA via the I CR . Units with SO 2 or NO X advanced controls (e.g., scrubber, SCR) that were not re quired to run for compliance with Title IV, New Source Review (NSR), state settlements, or state
- specific rules were modeled by IPM to either operate those controls or not based on economic efficiency parameters. Updates to IPM 4.10 (with respect to the v ersion released in the IP M NODA version) include adjustments to assumptions regarding the performance of acid gas control technologies, 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 availability of a scrubber retrofit to waste
- coal fired fluidized bed combustion units without an existing scrubber. Further details on the future
- ye ar EGU emissions inventory used for this rule can be found in the incremental documentation of the IP M v.4.1 0 platform , available at http://www.epa.gov/airm arkets/progsregs/epa
- ipm/BaseCasev410.html
. Note that this year 2030 IPM run includes the version 4.10 NODA CSAPR Proposal (not Final) emissions and does not include the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) Rule impacts (proposal or final) , which was proposed on March 16 , 2011. In addition, the Boiler MACT was not represented because the rule was not final at the time the HDGHG modeling was performed. Directl y emitted PM emissions (i.e., PM 2.5 and PM 10 ) from the EGU sector are computed via a pos t 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. stationary 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 does not track with economic growth for many stationary

non - IPM sources. This “no
- growth” as sumption 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 Regulatory 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 projection18 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 their contents could not be provided in the foll owing sections (e.g., gasoline distribution varies by state and pollutant and has hundreds of records). 

### 4.2.1 **Livestock emissions growth (ag, afdust)** Growth in ammonia (NH 3 ) and dust (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) emissions from livestock in the ag and afdust and ptnonipm sec tors was based on projections of growth in animal population. Table 4 - 2 provides the growth factors from the 2005 base
- case emissions to 20 30 for animal categories applied to the ag , afdust , and ptnonipm sectors for livestock
- related SCCs. For example, year 20 30 beef emissions are 3 . 85 % larger than the 2005 base
- case emissions. 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 turkey s , we assumed that there would be no growth in emissions. This assumption was based on an anal ys is of historical trends in the number of such animals compared to production rates. Although productions rates have increas ed, the number of animals has declined. Thus, we do not believe that production forecasts provide representative estimates of the future number of cows and turkey s; therefore, we did not use these forecasts for estimating future
- ye ar emissions from these animals. In particular, the dairy cow population is projected to decrease in the future as it has for the past few decades; however, milk production will be increasing over the same period. Note that the ammonia emissions from dairies are not directl y re lated to animal population but also nitrogen excretion. With the cow numbers going down and the production 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

f or livestock emissions used 2002 emissions values therefore, our projection method projected from 2002 rather 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 animal categories in Table 4 - 2 .

**Table 4**  **- 2**  **.** Growth factors from year 2005 to 2030 for Animal Operations

**Animal Category Projection** 

**Factor** Dairy Cow 1.0000 Beef 1.0385 Pork 1.1666 Broilers 1.6426 Turkeys 1.0000 Laye rs 1.4491 Poultry Average 1.4991 Overall Average 1.174519 

### 4.2.2 **Residential wood combustion growth (nonpt)**  We projected residential wood combustion emissions based on the expected increase in the number of low
emitting wood stoves and the corresponding decrease in other typ es 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 program (http: //www.epa.gov/ burnwise ). Details of this approach can be found in Section 2.3.3 of the PM NAAQS Regulatory Impact Anal ys is (EPA, 2006). The spe cific assumptions we made were:

 Fireplaces, source category code ( SCC ) =2104008001: increase 1%/year  Old woodsto ves, SCC=2104008002, 2104008010, or 2104008051: decrease 2%/year  New woodstoves, SCC=2104008003, 2104008004, 2104008030, 2104008050, 2104008052 or 2104008053: increase 2%/year For the general woodstoves and fireplaces category (SCC 2104008000) we 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 approach results in an overall decrease of 1.056% per ye ar for this source category
. Table 4 - 3 p resents the projection factors used to project the 2005 base case (2002 emissions) for residential wood combustion. **Table 4**  **- 3**  **.** Projection Factors for growing ye ar 2005 Residential Wood Combustion Sources **SCC SCC Description**  **Projection Factor**  2104008000 Total: Woodstoves and Fireplaces 0. 7043 2104008001 Fireplaces: General 1. 28 2104008070 Outdoor Wood Burning Equipment 2104008002 Fireplaces: Insert; non
- EPA certified 0. 44 2104008010 Woodstoves: General 2104008051 Non - catal ytic Woodstoves: Non
- EPA certified 2104008003 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; non
- catal ytic 1. 56 2104008004 Fireplaces: Insert; EPA certified; catal ytic 2104008030 Cataly

tic Woodstoves: General 2104008050 Non - catal ytic Woodstoves: EPA certified 2104008052 Non - catal ytic Woodstoves: Low Emitting 2104008053 Non - catal ytic Woodstoves: Pellet Fired 

### 4.2.3 **Gasoline Stage II growth and control (nonpt, ptnonipm)**  Emissions from Stage II gasoline operations in the 2005 base case are contained in both nonpt and ptnonipm sectors. The onl y 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 following SIC and SCC codes are associated with gasoline Stage II emissions in the ptnonipm sector:

 SI C 5541 (Automotive Dealers & Service Stations, Gasoline Service Stations , Gasoline service stations)  SCC 40600401 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks
- Stage II;Vapor Loss w/o Controls)20

 SCC 40600402 (Petroleum and Solvent Evaporation;Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Products;Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks
- Stage II; Liquid Spill L oss 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 We used a consistent approach across nonpt and ptnonipm to project these gasoline stage II emissi ons. The approach involved computing state - level VOC - specific projection factors from the state - level MOVES2010a - based results for onroad refueling, using ratios of future–ye ar 20 30 refueling emissions to 2005 base
- case emissions. The approach accounts for three elements of refueling growth and control: (1) activity growth (due to VMT growth as input into MOVES2010a) , (2) emissions reductions from Stage II control programs at gasoline stations, and (3) emissions red uctions resulting from the phase
- in over time of newer vehicles with onboard Stage II vehicle controls. We assumed that all areas with Stage II controls in 2005 continue to have Stage II controls in 20 30 . We computed VOC, benzene and naphthalene projecti on factors at a county
- specific, annual resolution as shown below ; note that naphthalene, while provided by MOVES2010a , is not used in the HDGHG Rule : PF_VOC [state , future year] = V OC_RFL [ state , future year] /VOC_RFL [ state , 2005] , PF_BENZENE [ state , future year] = B ENZENE_RFL [ state , future year] / BENZENE _RFL [ state , 2005] , and PF_NAPHTHALENE [ state , future year] = PF_VOC [state , future year] where VOC_RFL is the VOC refueling emissions for onroad sources from MOVES2010a , and BENZENE_RFL is the BENZENE refue ling emissions for onroad sources from MOVES2010a We applied these projection factors to both nonpt and ptnonipm sector gasoline stage II sources. Chemical speciation uses certain VOC HAPs for some sources, specificall y, benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, and methanol (BAFM). The VOC HAPs are used for sources that have consistent VOC and VOC HAPs using various criteria as described in the Section**Error! Reference source not found. Error!**  **Reference source not found.** in the CSAPR TSD ( ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory /2005v4_2/transportrulefinal_eitsd_28jun2011.pdf ) , and these sources are called “integrated” sources. The nonpoint gasoline stage II emissions are an integrated source, and so the VOC HAPs are also projected based on ratios of future
- ye ar and base
- ye ar VOC. The only two VOC HAPs emitted from refueling are benzene and naphthalene, and both of these w ere projected consistently with VOC. However, naphthalene was not used in the chemical speciation (it is not B,A,F or M pollutant) and was therefore not used for this effort. Therefore, only b enzene was use d as part of the speciation for the nonpt sector gasoline stage II sources. The entire ptnonipm inventory is considered “no - integrate” because VOC and VOC HAP emission estimates were not found to be of the same (consistent) data source. Therefore ptnonip m gasoline stage II sources did not use the projected benzene as part of the speciation, but rather used VOC speciation to estimate benzene. 

### 4.2.4 **Portable fuel container growth and control (nonpt)** We obtained future
- ye ar VOC emissions from Portable Fuel Containers (PFCs) from inventories developed and modeled for the EPA ’s MSAT 2 rule (EPA, 2007 b ). The 10 PFC SCCs are summarized below (note that the full SCC descriptions for these SCCs include “Storage and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product Storage” as the beginning of the description).21  2501011011 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Permeation  2501011012 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Evaporation  2501011013 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Spillage During Transport  2501011014 Residenti al 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  2501012015 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 . Future - year emission s for PFCs were available for 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2030. Benzene was used in VOC speciation for the air quality model through the modification of VOC speciation profiles calculations (no other BAFM HAPs are emitted from PFCs). 

### 4.2.5 **Ai rcraft growth (ptnonipm)**  These 2005 point
- source emissions are projected to future years by appl ying 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) Sy stem: 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 ye ars up to 20 30 . We aggregated and applied this infor mation at the national level b y 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 ty pe b y dividing future
- year ITN b y 2005 - ye ar 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.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/2009
- 2025/media/2009%20Forecast%20Doc.pdf Table 4 - 4 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**  **- 4**  **.** Factors used to project 2005 base
- case aircraft emissions to ye ar 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 1.505922

**SCC SCC Description**  **Projection Factor** 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 SCC 27602011 (Internal Combustion Engines; Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A) because the facility names as sociated 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). None of our aircraft emission projections account for any control pro grams. We considered the NO X standard adopted b y the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) in February 2004, which is expected to reduce NO X by approximately

2% in 2015 and 3% in 2020. Ho wever, this rule , signed July 2011 (see http://www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm), was not adopted as an EPA (or U.S.) rule prior to HDGHG modeling ; therefore, the effects of this rule were not included in the future
- ye ar emissions projections. 

### 4.2.6 **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 sector s to reflect the impact of stationary
- source control programs including consent decrees, settlements, and plant closures. Some of the controls described in this section were obtained from comments on the CSAPR proposal. Here 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 point inventory). This assumption w as confirmed b y review of the 2005 NE I that showed reductions from Large Boiler/Turbines and Large Internal Combustion Engines in the Northeast states covered b y the NOx SIP call. The future
- ye ar base controls consist of the 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, shutdowns, future
- ye ar 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 ye ars) were also included where information indicate d that the plant was actually closed after the 2005 base ye ar and prior to CSAPR and HDGHG 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 the23

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 emissio ns is shown in Table 4 - 5 below. **Table 4**  **- 5**  **.** Summary

of Non
- EGU Emission Reductions 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) settlements, as well as most national VOC MACT controls. Additional OECA consent d ecree 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.  Refinery

consent decrees controls at the facility and SCC level (collected through internal coordination on refineries by the EPA).  Fuel sulfur fuel limits were enforceable for Maine , New Jer sey and New York. These fuel limits were incremental and not applicable until after 2012.  Criteria air pollutant (cap) reductions a cobenefit to RI CE NESHAP controls , including SO 2 RI CE 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 that 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 that the controlled emissions match desired reductions regardless of the baseline control efficiencies in the NEI. We use d the “additional controls” approach for many permit limits, settlements and consent decrees where specific plant and multiple
- plant
- level reductions/targets were desired and at municipal waste landfills where VOC was reduced 75% via a MACT control using projection factors of 0.25.24 **4.2.6.1 R**  **eductions from the Portland Cement NESHA P**  As indicated in Table 4
- 1 , the Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (I SI S) model (EPA, 2010) was used to project the cement industry component of the ptnonipm emissions modeling sec tor to 20 13. There were no future ye ar estimates 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 I SI S model produced a Portland Cement NESHAP policy case of multi
- pollutant emissions for individual cement kilns (emission inventory units) th at were relevant for ye ars 2013 through 2017. These IS IS - 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 w ere included in the projections as were the I SI S - based policy case predictions of emissions reductions and activity growth. The I SI S 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 bigger 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, st ate and local regulatory requirements might apply to individual cement facilities depending on their locations relative to ozone and PM 2.5 nonattainment areas. The I SI S 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 - 6 shows the magnitude of the IS IS - based cement industry reductions in the future
- year emissions that represent 201 3 (and 2030 for HDGHG) , and the impact that these reductions have on total stationary non - EGU point source (ptnonipm) emissions. **Table 4**  **- 6**  **.** Future - ye ar ISI S - based cement industry annual reductions (tons/y r) 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% **4.2.6.2 Boiler**  **reductions not associated with the MA** **CT rule** The Boiler MACT I CR 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 activel y 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
- 7.25

**Table 4**  **- 7**  **.** State - level non
- MACT Boiler Reductions from I CR Data Gathering
**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 **4.2.6.3 RICE**  **NESHA P**  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 RI CE 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, specificall y, 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 HDGHG emissions projection. The rules can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ric epg.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 Pollutants 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 rul es is that they focus on different types of engines, different facility typ es (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 RI CE sources , based on the requirements of the rule for existing sources onl y because the inventory includes only

existing sources and the current projection approach does not estimate emissions from new sources. A complete discussion on the methodology to estimate RI CE controls is provided in Appendix F in the Proposed MATS Rule TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_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 - 8 .

**Table 4**  **- 8**  **.** 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 **4.2.6.4 Fuel**  **sulfur rules**  Fuel sulfur rules that were signed (enforceable) at the time of the HDGHG emissions processing are limited to Maine , New Jersey and New York. Several other states have fuel sulfur rules that were in development26 but not finalized prior to CSAPR and HDGHG R ule emissions processing: http://www.ilta.org/LegislativeandRegulatory /MVNRLM/NEUSASulfur%20Rules_09.2010.pdf
. The fuel sulfur content for all home heatin g oil SCCs in 2005 is assumed to by 3000 part per million (ppm). Effective July

1, 2012, New York requires all heating oil sold in New York to contain no more than 15ppm of sulfur, thus reducing SO 2 emissions by 99.5% for post - 2012 (2030) projections. Th ese New York sulfur content reductions are further discussed here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel/governor_paterson_signs_new_la.html
. The New Jersey

ye ar 2017 standard of 15ppm (assuming 500ppm baseline for Kersone) sulfur content yi elds 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 s ulfur content reductions on SO2 is shown in Table 4 - 9 .

**Table 4**  **- 9**  **.** Impact of Fuel Sulfur Controls on 2014 Non
- EGU Projections

**State SO**  **2 Reductions**  Maine 18,470 New Jersey 998 New York 54,431 **Total 73,898**  

### 4.2.7 **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, ye ar 20 21, estimates 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 ye ar, ye ar 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 b y ye ar 2014, were applied to the ye ar 2008 Oklahoma oil and gas inventory b ut 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 and VOC emissions reductions from the RI CE NESHAP, which we assumed has some applicability to this industry

(see Appen dix F in the Proposed Toxics Rule TSD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/toxics/proposed_toxics_rule_appendices.pdf )
. Table 4 - 10 shows the 2005 and 2030 NOX and SO2 emissions including RI CE reductions for Oklahoma
. **Table 4**  **- 10**  **.** Oil and Gas NO X and SO 2 Emissions for 2005 and 2030 including additional reductions due to the RI CE NESHAP **NOX PM2.5**  **SO2 VOC**  **2005 2030**  **2005 2030**  **2005 2030**  **2005 2030** 27

Alaska 836 453 62 1 68 12 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** The 2030 HDGHG Reference case inventories are identical to 2030 HDGHG Control case inventories except for the MOVES2010a - based (onroad) emissions (and some gasoline distribution emissions in the ptnonipm and nonpt sectors). The 2030 Control case inventori es are discussed in Section 5. Mobile source monthly

inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile emissions were created for 20 30 using a combination of 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 ye ars include regulations affecting locomotives, various nonroad engines including diesel engines and various marine engine ty pes, 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 4.3.1.1 . Locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) projections are discussed in subsection 4.3.2 , and Class 3 (C3) CMV projected emissions are discussed in subsec tion 4.3.3 . 

### 4.3.1 **Onroad mobile (on_noadj, on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm)** The onroad emissions were primaril y based on the 2010 version of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator ( MOVES2010a)

– the same version that was used for 2005 HDGHG . The same MOVES
- based PM 2.5 temperature adjustment factors were applied as were used in 2005 for running mode emissions; however, cold start emissions used year
- specific temperature ad justment factors. The use of the same temperature adjustments nationwide for gasoline PM is not a limitation, since the temperature adjustments in MOVES for gasoline PM do not depend on county
- specific inputs.28 California 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 ye ar 2005 emissions, future
- year Calif ornia NH 3 emissions are from MOVES runs for California , disaggregated to the county level using NM IM . We estimated HAP emissions by appl ying HAP - to - CAP ratios computed from Calif ornia 2005 NEI submittal p rovided by EPA in 12/2007. This was done because the C ARB submittal from March 2007 did not include estimates for HAP s. We retained onl y those HAP s that were also estimated by NMIM for nonroad mobile sources; all other HAP s were dropped
. Onroad mobile sector 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 AEO20 11 . We used MOVES2010 a to create emissions b y 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. While the EPA intends to replace this approach with a county - specific implementation of MOVES for use in future regulatory actions, this approach was the best approach available at the time of this modeling. Onroad PM gasoline 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
- m onth level, and the 2030 NMIM results 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 , fo r ye ar 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 in future years, and for year 2030 processing, we updated the temperature adju stment curves for these cold start emissions. Note that running exhaust temperature adjustment factors are the same for all ye ars. Also, it is worth noting that the running mode gasoline exhaust emissions are considerabl y larger than cold start mode gaso line exhaust emissions before application of the temperature adjustments
.29

**Figure 4**  **- 1**  **.** MOVES exhaust temperature adjustment functions for 2005 and 2030

**4.3.1.1 Nonroad**  **mobile (nonroad)**  This sector includes monthly exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions from nonroad engines (not including commercial marine, aircraft, and locomotives) derived from NMIM for all states except California. Like the onroad emissions, NMIM provides nonroad emissions for VOC by three emission modes: exhaust, evaporative and refueling. Unlike the onroad sector, nonroad refueling emissions for nonroad sources are not included in the nonpoint (nonpt) sector and so are retained in this sector. With the exception of California, U.S. emissions for the nonroad sector (defined as the equipment types covered b y NMIM) were created using a consistent NMIM - based approach as was used for 2005, but projected for 2030 . The 2030 NMIM runs utilized the NR05d
- Bond
- final version of NONROAD (which is equivalent to NONROAD2008a). The future
- year emissions account for increases in activity (based on NONROAD model default growth estimates of future
- ye ar equipment population) and changes in fuels and engines that reflect implementation of national regulations and local control programs that impact each year differentl y due to engine turnover
. We have not included voluntary programs such as programs encouraging either no refueling or evening refueling on Ozone Action Day s and diesel retrofit programs. The national regulations incorporated in the modeling 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/nonroad/420f08004.htm)  OTAQ’s Small Engine Spark Ignition (“Bond”) Rule , November 2008 : (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip
- ld.htm) 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**A d** **j u** **s t** **m e** **n t** **F a** **c t** **o r** 

**Temperature (F)**  Run Exhaust Both Years Start Exhaust 2005 Start Exhaust 203030 All states except C alifornia : OTAQ provided several runs of NMIM emissions for the LDGHG (control case) Rule that were blended together to create the 2030 HDGHG nonroad sector emissions. We used these same nonroad emissions for both the reference and control cases in HDGHG. 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 200 2v3 platform for the SCCs listed in Table 4 - 11 . OTAQ also provided diesel recreational marine (pleasure craft) emissions in November 2009.

**Table 4**  **- 11**  **.** Compon ents 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_nponzseg11dies.txt 22820200x Diesel recreational
marine LdGhgN2030e10.txt 2260x 2 - stroke gasoline engines 2265x 4 - stroke gasoline engines 228200x, 228201x Gasoline recreational

marine All NMIM data are based on AEO2007 fuels and NMIM county database NCD20080727. We converted emissions from monthly totals to monthly average - day values based the on number of day s in each month. CO 2 and all of California emissions were removed prior to creating SMOKE one record per line ( ORL) files. California nonroad: California monthly

nonroad emissions are ye ar 2030 and are based on March 2007 California Air Resources Board (CARB) data (Martin Johnson: mjohnson@arb.ca.gov). NH3 emissions are from NMIM runs for California (same data as were used in 203 0 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 emissions were computed by multiplying SCC 2505 000120 emissions by 0.61, to adjust to remove double counting with Portable Fuel Container inventory for Calif ornia. We estimated HAP emissions by appl ying HAP - to - CAP ratios computed from the Calif ornia data provided for the 2005 NEI v2, collected by EPA on 12/2007. This was done because the C ARB submittal from March 2007 did not include estimates for HAP s. We retained only those HAP s that are also estimated b y NMIM for nonroad mobile sources; all other HAP s were dropped
. 

### 4.3.2 **Locomotives and**  **Class 1 & 2 com**  **mercial marine vessels (alm_no_c3)** Future ye ar locomotive and Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions were calculated using projection factors that were computed based on national , annual summaries of locomotive emissions in 2002 and ye ar 2030 . These national summaries were used to create national by
- pollutant, by
- SCC projection factors; these factors include final loco motive
- marine controls and are provided in Table 4
- 12.31

**Table 4**  **- 12**  . Factors applied to year 2005 emissions to project locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2 Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions to 2030 **SCC SCC Description**  **Poll utant**  **Projection Factor**  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 1.074 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 emissions to lower future
- ye ar 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.32 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
- ye ar 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
- 12. Similar to locomotives, VOC HAPs were projected based on the VOC factor. Delaware provided updated future
- ye ar NO X , SO 2 , and PM emission estimates for C1/C2 CMV as part of the Transport Rule comments. These updated emissions were applied to the 20 30 inventory and override the C1/C2 projection factors in Table 4
- 12. 

### 4.3.3 **Cla ss 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 - IM O ) 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 ye ar 2030 for the HDGHG future reference case , which include s ECA - IMO controls. An overview of the ECA
- IMO project and future
- ye ar 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/oceanvesse ls.htm These projection factors vary depending on geographic region and pollutant; 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
- 13. Note that th ese factors are relative to 2002. Factors relative to 2005 can be computed from the 2002
- 2005 factors. The 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
- Washington border, and East Coast and Gulf Coast regions are divided east
- west b y roughl y the upper Florida Key s 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.33

**Table 4**  **- 13**  **.** NO X , SO 2 , and PM 2.5 Factors to Project Class 3 Commercial Marine Vessel emissions to 20 30

**Region NOX**  **SO2 PM2.5**  **VOC** Alaska East 1.702 0.095 0.312 2.487 Alaska West 2.052 0.456 0.571 2.396 East Coast 1.072 0.123 0.470 3.464 Gulf Coast 0.688 0.079 0.303 2.217 Hawaii East 1.416 0.147 0.506 3.839 Hawaii West 2.783 0.733 0.871 3.842 North Pacific 0.874 0.098 0.348 2.528 South Pacific 1.232 0.166 0.589 4.225 Great Lakes 1.090 0.057 0.214 1.621 Outside ECA 2.427 0.623 0.745 3.417 

### 4.4 **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
- ye ar emissions that were consistent with the bas e year emissions. 

## 5 **20 30 Control**  **Case** The 2030 HDGHG Control case is intended to represent the emissions associated with use of the most likely volume of ethanol after application of the greenhouse gas emissions standards for c ommercial m edium
- and h eavy- d uty o n - h ighway v ehicles and w ork trucks beginning with the 2014 model year (MY). The control case assumes improvements in fuel consumption or greenhouse gas emissions in MY 2014 through 2018. Similar to the reference case, the control case does not include fuel and emissions changes from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) , or the revised annual Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2); however the Li ght Duty Greenhouse Gas (LDGHG) impacts are included in both this control case and the referenc e case discussed in section 4. The 2030 Control case inventories differ from the reference case in onl y two components: 1) Gasoline distribution impacts in the non
- EGU point (ptnonipm) and nonpoint sectors, and 2) MOVES2010a - based onroad mobile impacts to medium and heavy duty vehicles. 

### 5.1 **20 30 Control Case**  **Point and Nonpoint**  **sources** The point sources for the 20 30 HDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 20 30 Reference Case for the following point source emissions modeling sectors: US EGU point source (ptipm), sources from Mexico, Canada, and the Gulf of Mexico (othpt). The nonpoint sources for the 2030 HDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following nonpoint source emissions modeling sectors: area fugitive du st (afdust), agricultural ammonia (ag), average
- ye ar fires (avefire) and sources from Mexico and Canada (othar). The HDGHG year 2030 control case changes to the point and nonpoint emissions are limited to Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) year2010
- based upstream adjustments: refinery supply estimates and estimated reductions in consumption that impact crude production and transport/distribution emissions from the HDGHG control strategy for medium and heavy duty vehicles. The onl y sectors impacted b y these control case adjustments are the ptnonipm (point) and nonpt (nonpoint) sectors. VOC speciation changes from the reference to the control case are discussed in Section 3.34 Upstream adjustments to oil refining, crude production, and transport were supplied by O TAQ on 12/16/2010 in the Excel ® workbook “ HDGHG_AQADJ_121610.xlsx ”. These adjustments reduce all pollutant emissions from the 2030 reference case and are summarized below in Table 5 - 1 . **Table 5**  **- 1**  **.** Upstream HDGHG Control Case adjustments **Category Sectors Impacted**  **% Reduction**  **Cumulative Emissions Reductions**

**NO X**  **PM 2.5**  **SO 2**  **VOC** Production nonpt and ptnonipm 0.13% 1,667 308 1,821 1,794 Refinery nonpt and ptnonipm 1.27% Transport nonpt and ptnonipm 0.13% 

### 5.2 **20 30 Control Case**  **Mobile sources** The onroad mobile and nonroad mobile sources for the 2030 HDGHG Control Case include the same emissions as the 2030 Reference Case for the following emissions modeling sectors: US nonroad mobile (nonroad), US locomotives and non
- C3 commercial marine (alm_n o_c3), C3 commercial marine (seca_c3), Canada and Mexico onroad mobile emissions (othon) and Canada and Mexico nonroad emissions (also in the othar sector with Canada and Mexico stationary sources). California onroad mobile emissions were also not changed in the control case except for NH 3 , where MOVES control case emissions replaced MOVES reference case NH 3 estimates. The HDGHG year 2030 control case changes to the mobile sectors are limited to the MOVES2010a - based onroad non
- California (except NH 3 ) inventories and impact the following onroad mobile emissions modeling sectors: on_moves_runpm, on_moves_startpm and on_noadj. Similar to the 2005 HDGHG and 2030 HDGHG reference cases, w e allocated the state
- SCC MOVES data to county- SCC using ratios developed from the same 2030 NMIM county- SCC data as used in the 2030 HDGHG reference case . Other than the different MOVES2010a emissions data, we used the same processing steps as described for the 2005 base and 20 30 reference cases. VOC speciation changes from the reference to the control case are discussed in Section 3. Control case onroad mobile reductions are provided in Table 5 - 2 . Small increases in PM 2.5 are the re sult of slight increases in auxiliary power unit emissions. **Table 5**  **- 2**  **.** Onroad mobile reductions from HDGHG controls **NO X**  **PM 2.5**  **SO 2**  **VOC Reductions**  215,639 - 237 304 22,953 **% Reduction from Reference case**  11.9% - 0.2% 1.3% 2.4%35 

## 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 Anal ys es, 2006 N ational 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. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/docum ents/guidance/200705_epa457_b
- 07 - 001_emission_changes_mact_rules.pdf
. EPA. 2007 b
. National Scale Modeling for the Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions Analy sis and Monitoring Division, Research Trian gle 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 Anal ys is: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from L ocomotive Engines and Marine Compression Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters Per C yl inder. 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 (I SI S) Model and the Analy sis 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 2010. 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/recentstudie s2009/ACES%20Phase%201/ACES%20Phase1%20Final% 20Report%2015JUN2009.pdf36 

## APPENDIX A **Modified HDGHG Equations to adapt pre**  **- speciated diesel emissions 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 METALhere), ammonium, and water, and thus can be also written 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 heavy- 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 presumabl y 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) 2

- 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.

2 All profile fractions provided in email from Catherine Yanca on 11/6/2009, 1:49pm in attachment “ Equations for diesel MOVES speciation use in CMAQ 110609.doc ”37 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 3 ) 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, respectivel y . As discuss ed in Section 2 .3 , for HDGHG, the NH4 component was removed for diesel exhaust only
. Gasoline Exhaust: POC = 5/6 × ( R

– METAL

– NH4

– PNO3) (7a ) 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 (8a ) Diesel Exhaust: PMFINE_72 = METAL + 0.2 × POC_72 (8b) Equations 7a and 8a (with NH4 ) will be obsolete in all subsequent MOVES post
- processing; we did not have time to reprocess the gasoline exhaust emissions for HDGHG; however, the computed NH4 component in gasoline exhaust was much smaller than for diesel exhaust so this impact should be 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**  **.** Li st of SCC groups for application of LDDV or HDDV approach

**Approach SCC list**  LDDV 2230001000 through 2230060334 HDDV 2230071110 through 2230075330

3 Value provided by Catherine Yanca and Joe Somers to OAQPS in email provided 11/5/200938 

## APPENDIX **B Inventory Data F**  **iles Used for Each H** **DGHG Modeling Case** 
**– SMOKE Input**  **Inventory Datasets**  In any of the following dataset names where the placeholder <mon> has been provided, this is intended to mean 12 separate files with the <mon> placeholder replaced with either jan, feb, mar, apr, may , jun, jul, aug, sep, oct, nov, or dec, each associated with a particular month of the year.39 **Table B**  **- 1**  **.** Li st of inventory data associated with H DGHG modeling cases. **Cas e**  **Sector SMOKE Input Files**  2005 Base (2005cs_hdghg_05b) ptipm Annual: ptinv_ptipm_2005cs_cap_27dec2010_txt_29dec2010_v1_orl.txt Annual: ptinv_ptipm_2005cs_hap_27dec2010_txt_27dec2010_v0_orl.txt Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2005cs_05b_<month>_ida.txt Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2005cs_05b_<month>_ida.txt ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2005v2_2005cs_orl_06jan2011_v4_orl.txt

ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2005v2_2005cs_orl_04jan2011_v2_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_caphap_ethanol_plant_additions_2005_30jun2010_v3_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_2005cap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_2005hap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt afdust arinv_afdust_2002ad_xportfrac_26sep2007_v0_orl.txt ag arinv_ag_cap2002nei_06nov2006_v0_orl.txt alm_no_c3 arinv_lm_no_c3_hap2002v4_20feb2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_lm_no_c3_cap2002v3_22dec2010_v1_orl.txt nonpt arinv_nonpt_pf4_cap_nopfc_04jan2011_v5_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_pf4_hap_nopfc_nobafmpesticidesplus_04jan2011_v3_orl.txt arinv_pfc_2002_caphap_27dec2007_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_WRAP_OilGas_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_cap_2005_TCEQ_Oklahoma_OilGas_28may2010_v0_orl.txt nonroad arinv_nonroad_caps_2005v2_<month>_revised_08sep2008_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_revised_<month>_23jun2010_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonroad_haps_2005v2_<month>_revised_05sep2008_v0_orl.txt on_noadj mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_with_NO_NO2_HONO_2005cs_hdghg_<month>_24FEB2011_24feb2011_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2005v2_revised_<month>_16feb2011_v1_orl.txt on_moves_runpm mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2005cs_hdghg_<month>_03FEB2011_03feb2011_v0_orl.txt on_moves_startpm mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2005cs_hdghg_<month>_03FEB2011_03feb2011_v0_orl.txt seca_c3 ptinv_eca_imo_CANADA_SCC_fix_vochaps_2005_09DEC2010_09dec2010_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_CANADA_SCC_fix_caps_2005_09DEC2010_09dec2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_imo_fixFIPS_US_wDE_andSCC_fix_caps_2005_09DEC2010_09dec2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_imo_fixFIPS_US_andSCC_fix_vochaps_2005_09DEC2010_09dec2010_v0_orl.txt All Cases avefire arinv_avefire_2002ce_21dec2007_v0_ida.txt arinv_avefire_2002_hap_18nov2008_v0_orl.txt othar arinv_nonroad_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt

arinv_nonroad_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt arinv_nonpt_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt arinv_nonpt_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt arinv_canada_offroad_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_canada_marine_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_canada_oarea_cap_2006_02mar2009_v3_orl.txt40 **Cas e**  **Sector SMOKE Input Files**  arinv_canada_aircraft_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_canada_rail_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_canada_ag_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_canada_afdust_xportfrac_cap_2006_03feb2009_v0_orl.txt othon mbinv_canada_onroad_cap_2006_04feb2009_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_mexico_border1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt mbinv_onroad_mexico_interior1999_21dec2006_v0_ida.txt othpt ptinv_canada_point_2006_orl_09mar2009_v2_orl.txt

ptinv_canada_point_cb5_2006_orl_10mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_canada_point_uog_2006_orl_02mar2009_v0_orl.txt ptinv_mexico_border99_03mar2008_v1_ida.txt ptinv_mexico_interior99_05feb2007_v0_ida.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_offshore_oil_cap2005v2_20nov2008_20nov2008_v0_orl.txt 2030 Reference and Control Ptipm Annual: ptinv_PTI NV_EPA410_BC_15b_summer_2030_02FEB2011_ORL_04feb2011_v0_orl.txt Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_noncem_2030cs_hdghg_ref_05b_<month> _ida.txt Daily: ptday_ptipm_caphap_cem_2030cs_hdghg_ref_05b_<month>_ida.txt afdust arinv_afdust_2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt ag arinv_ag_cap2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt alm_no_c3 arinv_lm_no_c3_hap2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt

arinv_lm_no_c3_cap2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt Nonroad arinv_nonroad_capshaps_LDGHG_2030_CONTROL_<month>_15DEC09_15dec2009_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonroad_calif_caphap_2030v31_<month>_17apr2008_v0_orl.txt seca_c3 ptinv_eca_imo_CANADA_SCC_fix_vochaps_2030_08FEB2011_08feb2011_v0_orl.txt

ptinv_eca_imo_CANADA_SCC_fix_caps_2030_08FEB2011_08feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_imo_fixFIPS_US_wDE_andSCC_fix_caps_2030_08FEB2011_08feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_eca_imo_fixFIPS_US_andSCC_fix_vochaps_2030_08FEB2011_08feb2011_v0_orl.txt 2030 Reference Only (2030cs_hdghg_ref_05b) ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2030cs_10feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_caphap_ethanol_plant_additions_2005_30jun2010_v3_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_2005cap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_2005hap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_cornproducts17031_hap_cap_2008t_27aug2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_capHG_cementI SI S_2016cr_16AUG2010_16aug2010_v0_orl.txt nonpt arinv_nonpt_2030cs_pf4_cap_nopfc_11feb2011_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_2030cs_pf4_hap_nopfc_nobafmpesticidesplus_11feb2011_v0_orl.txt arinv_pfc_caphap2030_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_cap_2018PhaseII _WRAP_OilGas_24aug2009_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_2030cs_from_cap_2008_TCEQ_Oklahoma_OilGas_11feb2011_v0_orl.txt on_noadj mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_with_NO_NO2_HONO_2030cs_hdghg_ref_<month>_23FEB2011_23feb2011_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2030v31_<month>_14feb2011_v1_orl.txt on_moves_runpm mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2030cs_hdghg_ref_<month>_04FEB2011_04feb2011_v0_orl.txt41 **Cas e**  **Sector SMOKE Input Files**  on_moves_startpm mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2030cs_hdghg_ref_<month>_04FEB2011_04feb2011_v0_orl.txt 2030 Control Only (2030cs_hdghg_ctl_05b) Ptnonipm ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_cap2030cs_hdghg_ctl_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_hap2030cs_hdghg_ctl_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_caphap_ethanol_plant_additions_2005_30jun2010_v3_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_xportfrac_2005cap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_2005hap_v1_from_2005ai_ND_ADM_plant_30jun2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_cornproducts17031_hap_cap_2008t_27aug2010_v0_orl.txt ptinv_ptnonipm_capHG_cementI SI S_2016cr_16AUG2010_16aug2010_v0_orl.txt Nonpt arinv_nonpt_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_pf4_cap_nopfc_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt

arinv_nonpt_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_pf4_hap_nopfc_nobafmpesticidesplus_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt arinv_pfc_caphap2030_02apr2008_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_cap_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_from_2018PhaseII_WRAP_OilGas_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt arinv_nonpt_2030cs_hdghg_from_2030cs_TCEQ_Oklahoma_OilGas_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt on_noadj mbinv_on_noadj_MOVES_with_NO_NO2_HONO_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_<month>_25FEB2011_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt

mbinv_onroad_calif_caphap_2030v31_<month>_14feb2011_v1_orl.txt on_moves_runpm mbinv_on_moves_runpm_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_<month>_25FEB2011_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt on_moves_startpm mbinv_on_moves_startpm_2030cs_hdghg_ctl_<month>_25FEB2011_25feb2011_v0_orl.txt42 

## APPENDIX **C Ancillary Data Files Used for**  **H DGHG**  **2005 Case Compared to 2005 v4 .2**  **Platform Data Files** To match the Datasets and Versions listed in this table to actual data files, combine the Dataset name and the version number in the following pattern: <Dataset Name>_<Date>_<Version number>.txt, where <Date> is the last date of change for that version and will have a unique value for the combination of Dataset Name and Version number.43 **Table C**  **- 1**  **.** Detailed list of ancillary data differences between the H DGHG 2005 and the 2005 v4 .2 platform **Description Environme** 

**nt Variable 2005 v4**  **.2 platform**  **2005 H**  **DGHG platform** 

**Sectors Dataset**  **Vs n**  **Dataset Vs**  **n Comment and Impact**  **Impact ?**  Inventory table INVTABLE All sectors invtable_hapcapintegate_cb0

5soa_nomp_nohg 3 invtable_hapcap_cb05soa 10 H DGHG used a toxics “lite” approach for processing the emissions and 2005 v4 .2 platform used an approach without most toxics. Impacts only the species included in the air quality mo deling. H DGHG also includes speciated NO, NO2 and HONO from MOVES2010a onroad mo bile sources. Yes
Inventory table INVTABLE avefire, ptnonipm, ptipm invtable_hapcapnohapuse_c

b05soa_nomp_nohg 1 invtable_hapcap_cb05_no_b afm 3 Approach for implementing "no HAP use" approach for these sectors was different in H DGHG, but the result was the same. No Com bination Profiles GSPRO_C

OMBO onroad,

nonroad, ptnonipm, nonpt gspro_combo_2005 2 gspro_combo_2005 6 Different fuel mixes for refueling, PFCs, and gasoline distribution in ptnoipm and nonpt in HDGHG

– see Section 3 in HDGHG TSD. Yes VOC to TOG pollutant conversions GSCNV All sectors gscnv_cmaq_cb05_tx_pf 4 3 gscnv_cb05_soa 1 Contains all 3 2005v4.2 GSCNV datasets appended into a single dataset. Updated for HDGHG profiles. Yes VOC to TOG pollutant conversions GSCNV All sectors gscnv_cmaq_cb05_hspace_t

oxic 0 n/a Headspace profiles for NONHAP TOG No VOC to TOG pollutant conversions GSCNV All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_hspace_B

AF 1 n/a Headspace profiles for benzene No Speciation profiles
- static GSPRO All sectors gspro_static_cmaq 9 gspro_static_cmaq 12 Added NO, NO2, and HONO for MOVES2010a species. Yes Speciation profiles for TOG GSPRO All sectors gspro_tog_cb05_soa_pf4_pr

etier2 1 gspro_tog_cb05_soa 1 Excluded ald2_primary and form_primary from v4 platform since not needed No Speciation profiles Other VOC HAP GSPRO All sectors n/a gspro_other_hapvoc_no_ben z -benz 0 For H DGHG, this dataset has the HAP VOC species that get passed through from inventory to the multipollutant inputs created for H DGHG. Yes Speciation profiles for non GSPRO All sectors gspro_nonhaptog_cb05_tx_p

f4_pretier2 1 gspro_nonhaptog_cb05 1 Updated HDGHG profiles and also appends the next three listed GSPRO datasets from v4.2 in this Yes44 **Description Environme**  **nt Variable 2005 v4**  **.2 platform**  **2005 H**  **DGHG platform** 

**Sectors Dataset**  **Vs n**  **Dataset Vs**  **n Comment and Impact**  **Impact ?**  HAP TOG table Speciation profile 8762/8763 for toxics GSPRO All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_hspace_t

oxic 0 n/a toxics from NONHAPTOG for headspace profiles 8762 and 8763 No Speciation profile 8762/8763 for nontoxics GSPRO All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_hspace_n

ontoxic 0 n/a toxics from TOG for headspace profiles 8762 and 8763 No Speciation profile 8762/8763 for TOG to BAF GSPRO All sectors gspro_cmaq_cb05_hspace_B

AF 1 n/a benzene from TOG for headspace profiles 8762 and 8763 No Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, not year - specific GSREF All sectors gsref_nonhapvoc_general_ld

ghg_cr_update 6 gsref_nonhapvoc_general_h dghg 1 Reassigned nonroad diesel exhaust and pleasure craft from code 4674 to 8774. Yes Speciation xref for NONHAPVOC, year - specific GSREF All sectors gsref_nonhapvoc_2005_ldgh

g_cr_update 6 gsref_nonhapvoc_2005_hdg hg 1 Replaced 8762 (E0) headspace refueling/distribution with COMBO E0/E10 profile, add pre
- 2007 HD trucks profile (8774) Yes Speciation xref for VOC, not year - specific GSREF All sectors gsref_voc_general_ldghg 6 gsref_voc_general_hdghg 2 Reassigned nonroad diesel exhaust and pleasure craft from code 4674 to 8774. Yes Speciation xref for VOC, year
specific GSREF All sectors gsref_voc_2005_ldghg 5 gsref_voc_2005_hdghg 3 Replaced 8762 (E0) headspace refueling/distribution with COMBO E0/E10 profile, add pre
- 2007 HD trucks profile (8774) Yes Speciation xref
- static GSREF All sectors gsref_static_cap_pf4 0 gsref_static_cap_pf4 1 Allows MOVES2010a NO, NO2, and HONO to pass through as
- is. Yes SCC Descriptions SCCDESC All sectors sccdesc_pf31 10 sccdesc_pf31 11 New SCC found for Hg processing ptnonipm No45 

## Appendix D **Summary of HDGHG Rule 2030 Reference Case Non**  **- EGU Control Programs, Closures and Projections**  Lists of control, closure, projection packet datasets used to create HDGHG year 2030 Reference case inventories from the 2005 HDGHG base case are provided in Tables D
- 1 and D - 2 . **Table D -**  **1 .**  **Datasets used to Create**  **HDGHG 20**  **30 Inventories**  **for Non**  **- EGU Point So**  **urces Nam**  **e 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 2016cr 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.46

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. 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_hdghg_ref Projecti on PROJECTION_2005cs_2030cs_hdghg_ref_o

nroad_refueling_04FEB2011 0 Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling. **Table D -**  **2 .**  **Datasets used to Create**  **HDGHG 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_hdghg_ref Projection PROJECTION_2005cs_2030cs_hdghg_ref _onroad_refueling_04FEB2011 0 Projection factors for gasoline stage 2 refueling.