-----Forwarded by Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/28/2010 11:10PM -----

To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

From: "Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov>

Date: 07/28/2010 04:38PM

cc: "Kymn, Christine J." <Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov>, "Higgins, Cortney"

<Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>, "Johnson, Nancy" <Nancy.Johnson@hq.doe.gov>,

RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Fred Talcott/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Larry

Sorrels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Amy Lamson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Peter

Nagelhout/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Michael Horowitz/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, "Kymn, Christine 

J."

<Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov>

Subject: RE: FW: Emission Factors and Percent Reduction by Catalysts

Thanks for the quick reply.

My mistake - I was reading the HAP figure for that one. And, I've gone back

to the source for the HAP and VOC reductions - and I can verify the 76% and

71% reductions are consistent with the cited data - which I hadn't yet looked

at.

And the CO data is 94%, and that matches too.

So the only missing piece is the Emissions Factors data - which is quite

important. Look forward to that being provided.

FYI - For HAPs, INGAA suggests an EF of 2.43 E-04 (from AP-42) as more

appropriate for 4SRB, whereas the proposal used 4.78 E-04 (HP<50) or 6.88 E04, and the new draft final uses 6.58 E-04. EPA's EF factor alone makes the

cost/ton about a factor of two lower.

-----Original Message-----

From: King.Melanie@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:King.Melanie@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 4:21 PM

To: Bromberg, Kevin L.

Cc: Kymn, Christine J.; Higgins, Cortney; Johnson, Nancy;

Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov; Talcott.Fred@epamail.epa.gov;

Sorrels.Larry@epamail.epa.gov; Lamson.Amy@epamail.epa.gov;

Nagelhout.Peter@epamail.epa.gov; horowitz.michael@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: Re: FW: Emission Factors and Percent Reduction by Catalysts

Kevin,

Where are you seeing that the CO % reduction for 4SLB should be 71%? If you

look at the table for 4SLB which is Table 2, see the far right column, the %

reductions for CO are all greater than 90%. The % reductions for

formaldehyde, which is what we use for HAP and VOC, is provided in each table

(see CH2O). Table 4 for 4SRB engines does show the NOx % reductions, see the

far right column. None of the other subcategories has NOx reductions.

The emission factors come from our Emissions Database that was put together

several years ago, plus we supplemented that information with new data where

we could. We're working on a memo that documents the information.

Melanie King

Energy Strategies Group

Sector Policies and Programs Division

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

Agency

Mail Code D243-01

RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-2469

Fax: (919) 541-5450

king.melanie@epa.gov

|------------>

| From: |

|------------>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|"Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov>

|

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|------------>

| To: |

|------------>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

|
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|------------>

| Cc: |

|------------>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|"Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>, "Kymn, Christine J."

<Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov>, "Johnson, Nancy" |

|<Nancy.Johnson@hq.doe.gov>

|

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|------------>

| Date: |

|------------>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|07/28/2010 04:06 PM

|

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|------------>

| Subject: |

|------------>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

|FW: Emission Factors and Percent Reduction by Catalysts

|

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------|

Hi – Melanie – I’m forwarding this because I think Cortney is jammed.

Not sure if we will get to this tomorrow in preamble questions, because it’s

really about the RIA. But these are pretty basic, and your contractor could

probably readily answer these.

Kevin

_____________________________________________

From: Bromberg, Kevin L.

Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:25 AM

To: 'Higgins, Cortney'; Kymn, Christine J.

Cc: Lee, Amanda I.

Subject: Emission Factors and Percent Reduction by Catalysts

<<EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0059-0665[1].pdf>>

Cortney, Christine – I think we should forward this to EPA this AM. See

below:

This document is cited on page 2 of in the July 26 Cost/Ton memo, as the

source of the control efficiencies represented in Table 2. The July 26 memo

reports CO emission reductions of 94% and 49% for 4 SLB and 4 SRB

respectively, and the figures in this document appear to indicate 71% and 49%

respectively by my inspection. Although, EPA has properly identified the 49%

reduction, it appears that the 4SLB figure used by EPA is incorrect: it should

be 71% instead of 94% reduction.

More importantly, this document does not provide the percent emission

reductions for HAPs, VOCs, or NOx – where is this document? Perhaps, EPA

meant to cite a different document in footnote 3 of the July 27th document?

Most importantly, the July 26 memo does not identify the source of the

original emission factors of uncontrolled emissions listed in Table 2,

before adoption of the percent reductions. What is the source of the

original emission factors?
Without this information, I can’t verify EPA’s emission reductions in two ways

– can’t verify the control efficiencies or the original emission factors –

which can very much modify the cost reasonableness of the GACT analyses.

I thought I should send this in advance of tomorrow’s questions to give you a

heads-up. If you could answer today, that would be even better.

Thanks

Kevin

Thanks

Kevin(See attached file: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0059-0665[1].pdf)