Technical Support Document (TSD) 

for the Transport Rule 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

State Budgets, Unit Allocations, and Unit Emissions Rates 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air and Radiation 

July 2010 

1 
State Budgets, Unit Allocations, and Unit Emissions Rates 

This Technical Support Document (TSD) provides information that supports 

EPA’s determination of state emissions budgets, unit-level allocations, direct control rate 

limits, and new unit set-asides for the Transport Rule proposal. Section IV.E in the 

Transport Rule preamble discusses state emissions budgets. Section V.D in the preamble 

discusses unit-level allocations, including the approach to allocate to new units from new 

unit set-asides in each state. Section V.D also discusses direct control rate limits. 

This TSD provides additional information in support of the state budgets, unitlevel allocations, direct control rate limits, and new unit set-asides. The TSD is 

organized as follows: 

1. Overview 

2. State Budgets 

3. Unit-Level Allocations 

4. Direct Control Rate Limits 

5. New Unit Set-Asides 

1. Overview 

State budgets, unit-level allocations, and direct control rate limits are key 

interrelated components of the proposed Transport Rule. As discussed in preamble 

sections III.A and IV.D, each state’s budget comprises the emissions that EPA estimates 

remain after the state has made the reductions required to eliminate its significant 

contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance of the relevant National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in other states in an average year.1

 As such, 

the budget relates directly to the statutory authority upon which the Transport Rule is 

 

1

 As discussed in preamble section III.A, in the case of certain states for which EPA has only quantified a 

minimum amount of emissions reductions needed to make measurable progress towards eliminating 

their significant contribution and interference with maintenance with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the emissions budget is the emissions that will remain after removal of those emissions. 

 2
built. Under either the proposed State Budgets/Limited Trading remedy or the State 

Budgets/Intrastate Trading alternative remedy, each state’s budget is allocated to sources 

within that state and determines how much each source can emit without trading 

allowances (allocations are discussed in preamble section V.D). Similarly, under the 

Direct Control alternative remedy, rate limits specify the maximum emissions rate at 

which an electric generating unit (EGU) may operate without averaging rates with other 

EGUs under the same ownership within the state (rate limits are discussed in preamble 

section V.D). 

Besides their importance to the Transport Rule, state budgets, unit-level 

allocations, and direct control rate limits share a common development process. Each is 

derived from a combination of recent emissions and heat input data and electric power 

sector projections from the Integrated Planning Model (IPM) affecting an inventory of 

fossil-fuel-fired EGUs of more than 25 MW capacity. Specifically, each state’s budget 

was constructed from a combination of data and IPM projections for the EGUs in that 

state, and each EGU’s contribution to the budget formed the basis of its allocation and 

direct control rate limit calculations. 

As discussed in preamble section V.D, EPA proposes to allocate emissions 

allowances to new units from small new unit set-asides in each state. To create new unit 

set-asides, EPA would distribute to existing EGUs a quantity of allowances less than the 

entire state emissions budgets and would hold back, for the new unit set-aside for a state, 

3 percent of the state budget. 

This TSD details the how the state budgets were formed, how allocations were 

derived, and how direct control rate limits were set. The TSD also describes how EPA 

determined the size of the new unit set-asides. Following these descriptions, an appendix 

showing each affected EGU’s allocation under the allocation methodology in the 

proposed FIPs, as well as each EGU's allowable emissions rate under the direct control 

alternative, comprises most of the document. 

2. State Budgets 

Inventory of Units 

The inventory of units on which state budgets are based is the union of units 

reporting emissions data to EPA (via various emissions trading programs) and units 

included in IPM modeling (identified in NEEDS v302_EISA database). Generally, since 

IPM is a representation of all units which are capable of supplying electricity to the US 

 3
electric grid and only units subject to EPA trading programs report emissions data, the 

units reporting data are a subset of the IPM/NEEDS inventory. However, both 

inventories must be considered due to potential inconsistencies. For example, it is 

possible that a new unit is captured in reported data but not yet included in IPM 

modeling. Additionally, the breakdown of a plant into multiple generating units might be 

done differently in each data set, for example, where there is not a 1:1 relationship 

between boiler and generator. Similarly, a combined cycle gas turbine and heat recovery 

steam generator may be treated as either a single unit or two separate units. 

Figure 1 provides a stylistic representation of the unit inventory, aggregating the 

population into three sets (A, B, and C) by data source. The stylistic data sets in this 

figure are referred to throughout the remainder of this document. 

Figure 1. Stylistic Representation of Unit Inventory 

A B C

Units Reporting 

Emissions Data to EPA 

IPM Projections 

(NEEDS Database)

The inventory of units on which budgets are based is limited to only fossil-fired 

units with greater than 25 MW electric generating capacity. For Set B and C, generating 

capacity and fuel type is defined in the NEEDS database. Units in Set A are assumed to 

be fossil-fired EGUs greater than 25 MW if they reported data to one of the following 

programs: CAIR NOX, CAIR SO2, ARP, and/or CAIROS in MA, CT, or AR. 

Where possible, EPA determined a crosswalk between those units in the 

intersection of the two data sources. This set is stylistically represented as Set B in 

Figure 1. This crosswalk is used to compare total state emissions from historic data to 

model projections. In cases where one unit with reported emissions matched to multiple 

units in the IPM/NEEDS inventory, emissions were divided equally. 

 4
Determining Reported Emissions 

For those units which report emissions data to EPA (Sets A and B), the reported 

annual data (SO2, NOX, and heat input) is assumed to be the most recent non-null first 

quarter, second quarter, third quarter, and fourth quarter emissions and heat input, 

between quarter 1 2007 and quarter 3 2009. The reported ozone season NOX emissions 

and heat input are assumed to be the most recent ozone season data reported to EPA 

between 2007 and 2009. 

Determining Projected Emissions 

For those units present in the NEEDS v302 EISA database and thus included in 

IPM modeling, (Sets B and C), projected data are assumed to be the annual (SO2, NOX, 

heat input) and ozone season (NOX, heat input) data projected by the IPM run that is 

designated “TR_Base_Case,” as apportioned to the unit level in the 2012 parsed file. The 

IPM runs and parsed files can be found in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491). 

Adjusting Emissions 

Both reported emissions and projected emissions require adjustment to reflect the 

fact that some sources installed advanced SO2 and NOX control equipment to comply 

with CAIR but might not operate that equipment if they are not covered by the Transport 

Rule (because once the Transport Rule is finalized, the CAIR requirements will cease to 

exist). For both NOX and SO2, reported data is adjusted to account for retrofit controls 

that are expected to be built by 2012 but were not in place during the time period for 

which the data was reported. Conversely, projected data is adjusted to account for 

“dispatchable” controls that may not have operated fully in the base case projections.2

 

Also, both reported and projected emissions for annual NOX are adjusted to account for 

the year-round operation of post-combustion controls which may only have operated 

during the ozone season. Notably, all of these adjustments represent potential decreases, 

not increases, to the unadjusted reported or projected emissions; that is, only downward 

adjustments are made to a unit’s emissions total. The adjustments made are shown in 

summary in Tables 1 and 2 below and described in the following section. 

 

2

 Dispatchable controls are described in detail in the Transport Rule model documentation, “Updates to 

EPA Base Case v3.02 EISA Using the Integrated Planning Model.” 

 5
For many of the adjustments in Tables 1 and 2 below, the calculations use a 

“controlled model projection” of EGU emissions to prevent removal rates from being 

applied to units that are already controlling. For example, if a dispatchable scrubber with 

a 95% removal percentage were operating with a reduced removal percentage of 60%, 

simply applying 95% removal would yield an erroneous removal percentage of 98%. 

Instead, adjusting based on the greater of that result and a controlled model projection 

yields the correct 95% removal corresponding to full operation of the scrubber. The 

controlled model projections used for this purpose are 2014 parsed results from three 

IPM runs: TR_SO2_1600 for SO2; TR_NOX_500 for annual NOX; and 

TR_NOX_OS_500 for ozone-season NOX.

3

Apart from the controlled model projections described above, assumptions about 

controls follow those of EPA modeling using IPM4. Existing scrubbers have removal 

rates specified in NEEDS. 2012 retrofit scrubbers, for which a NEEDS rate is not 

available, are assumed to achieve 95% removal. Post-combustion NOX controls are 

assumed to achieve the removal rates specified in the IPM documentation, including 90% 

for SCR on coal-fired units, 35% for SNCR on conventional coal, and 50% for SNCR on 

fluidized bed coal units. As in IPM, NOX controls were assumed not to control beyond a 

floor of 0.06 lbs/mmBTU. 

Adjustments for scrubbers also account for the tendency to operate scrubbed units 

more than they operated as unscrubbed units. The rate determined with the criteria above 

was applied to the greater of reported heat input and heat input from the controlled model 

projection. For example, consider a hypothetical unit installing a scrubber in 2011 with a 

removal rate of 95%. As a relatively well-controlled unit in the controlled model 

projection, assume this unit operated 50% more in the controlled model projection than in 

the most recent reported data. Adjustment to this unit’s SO2 emissions would account not 

only for the 95% reduction but also for the 50% increase in utilization, accurately 

reflecting the combination of these two changes. 

Adjustments to reported data of units with controls installed in 2009 were treated 

on a case-by-case basis. Quarterly emissions rates were assessed to determine when the 

control might have been installed. If a clear drop commensurate with the new control 

 

3

 These model runs were originally used for analysis of significant contribution and are described in the 

TSD, “Analysis to Quantify Significant Contribution.” 4

 Specifically, the discussion in this paragraph draws from Tables 5.5 and 5.2 from “Documentation for 

EPA Base Case 2006 (v3.0) Using the Integrated Planning Model,” available at 

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/progsregs/epa-ipm/index.html. 

 6
could be determined, the rate implied by the post-installation data was used. If the data 

did not clearly indicate when the control was installed, the control was treated as though 

it were a 2010 or 2011 control as specified in Table 1 below. 

Table 1. Adjustments to Reported Emissions to Account for Controls 

Control 

Type 

Online Year of 

Control 

Pollutant Procedure for Adjustment 

Use the greater of the emissions that result from 

applying: 

SCR or

SNCR 

2010–2011 in 

NEEDS 

Annual NOX

or Ozoneseason NOX Removal rate from 

IPM documentation* 

0.06 lbs/mmBTU 

SCR or

SNCR 

2009 in 

NEEDS 

Annual NOX

or Ozoneseason NOX

Reflect post-installation data if available. 

Otherwise, treat like 2010–2011 controls above. 

Use the greater of the emissions that result from 

applying:

SCR or

SNCR 

2012 retrofit in 

TR_Base_Case 

Annual NOX

or Ozoneseason NOX Removal rate from 

IPM documentation* 

Emissions rate in controlled 

model projection 

SCR or

SNCR 

Before 2009 in 

NEEDS 

Annual NOX Reflect emissions rate in reported ozone-season 

data. 

1) Use the greater of the emissions rates that result 

from applying: 

FGD removal rate in 

NEEDS 

Emissions rate in controlled 

model projection 

2) Apply the emissions rate to the greater of these 

heat inputs:

FGD 2010–2011 in 

NEEDS 

SO2

Reported heat input Heat input in controlled 

model projection 

FGD 2009 in 

NEEDS 

SO2 Reflect post-installation data if available. 

Otherwise, treat like 2010–2011 controls above. 

1) Use the greater of the emissions rates that result 

from applying: 

95% removal rate Emissions rate in controlled 

model projection 

2) Apply the emissions rate to the greater of these 

heat inputs:

FGD 2012 retrofit in 

TR_Base_Case 

SO2

Reported heat input Heat input in controlled 

model projection 

 7
*As described above, removal rates are 90% for SCR and 35% (conventional) or 50% (FBC) for 

SNCR. 

Table 2. Adjustments to Projected Base Case Emissions to Account for 

Controls 

Control Type Online Year of 

Control 

Pollutant Procedure for Adjustment 

Use the greater of the emissions 

that result from applying: 

Dispatchable 

SCR 

Any year in 

NEEDS 

Annual NOX or

Ozone-season NOX

Removal rate 

from IPM 

documentation* 

Emissions rate 

in controlled 

model projection

SNCR or nondispatchable SCR Any year in 

NEEDS or

2012 retrofit in 

TR_Base_Case 

Annual NOX Reflect emissions rate in 

TR_Base_Case 2012 ozone-season 

projection. 

1) Use the greater of the emissions 

rates that result from applying: 

FGD removal 

rate in NEEDS 

Emissions rate 

in controlled 

model projection

2) Apply the emissions rate to the 

greater of these heat inputs:

Dispatchable 

FGD 

Any year in 

NEEDS 

SO2

Reported heat 

input 

Heat input in 

controlled model 

projection 

*As described above, IPM removal rates are 90% for SCR and 35% (conventional) or 50% (FBC) 

for SNCR. 

Prior to making the above adjustments for controls, a few units were adjusted on a 

case-by-case basis to correct for inaccurate or unrepresentative data. Brayton Point unit 3 

is expected to have a dry scrubber rather than a wet scrubber by 2012. For Rodemacher 

unit 2, 2007 quarter 4 heat input is used instead of incomplete 2008 quarter 4 heat input. 

Seminole (Florida) units 1 and 2 are assumed to have had SCR installed prior to 2009. 

These adjustments are summarized below in Table 3, and the resulting allocations and 

direct control rate limits are shown in the Appendix of this document. 

 8
Table 3. Unit-specific Adjustments 

NEEDS 

ID 

ORIS 

Code 

Plant Name Unit 

ID 

Adjustment to Data Affected 

Pollutant 

1619_B_3 1619 Brayton 

Point 

3 Scrubber achieves 90% 

rather than 95% removal 

SO2

6190_B_2 6190 Rodemacher 2 Use 2007 Q4 for calculation 

of annual heat input data 

SO2

136_B_1 136 Seminole 1 Has pre-2009 SCR Annual NOX

136_B_2 136 Seminole 2 Has pre-2009 SCR Annual NOX

Reported annual and ozone season NOX emissions are adjusted to account for unusually 

low utilization in 2009. For units reporting emissions (Sets A and B), the annual 

emissions assumed in the budget calculation are calculated by applying the 2008 heat 

input to the annual average emissions rate determined from the most recent quarter 1, 

quarter 2, quarter 3, and quarter 4 (and potentially adjusted for controls, as described 

above). 2009 heat input is used for units which did not report 2008 heat input data. 

Ozone season emissions are assumed to be 2008 ozone season heat input multiplied by 

the most recent ozone season average emissions rate. 

Because 2009 was an unusually low year, rebasing emissions on 2008 heat input 

in this way typically results in larger annual NOX emissions. 

2012 SO2 Budgets 

2012 SO2 budgets are the lower of the recent actual emissions or projected base 

case emissions, at the state level. The unit-level data used in developing 2012 SO2 state 

budgets is based on the inventory of units described in section 2 “Inventory of Units” and 

adjusted as summarized in Tables 1-3.. 

Each state’s 2012 SO2 budget is the sum of 

(1) adjusted emissions from units with only reported data (Set A), plus 

(2) adjusted emissions from units with only projected data (Set C), plus 

(3) from units with both reported and projected data (Set B), the lesser of: 

a. total emissions based on adjusted reported data, or 

 9
b. total emissions based on adjusted projected data. 

2014 and Beyond SO2 Budgets 

For group 2 states5 (Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, 

Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina) the 2014 

and beyond budgets are equal to the 2012 budgets. 2014 and beyond SO2 budgets for 

group 1 states (Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, New 

York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, 

Wisconsin) are based on 2014 IPM projected emissions from fossil units greater than 25 

MW capacity. 

Group 1 state budgets are based on reductions projected to be cost-effective at 

$2000 per ton of SO2 in the significant contribution analysis. The TSD titled “Analysis 

to Quantify Significant Contribution” contains details about this analysis. More 

information on the IPM run (TR_SO2_2000) is available in the docket for this 

rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491). Each group 1 state’s budget, 

with the exception of Tennessee, is equal to the projected state emissions from covered 

units (fossil-fired, greater than 25 MW capacity) in this IPM run. 

For Tennessee, the 2012 SO2 budget calculation methodology resulted in a 

slightly smaller budget than would have been as calculated under the 2014 and beyond 

methodology for group 1 states. As a result, the budget for the state of Tennessee does 

not change in 2014. 

Annual NOX Budgets 

2012 and beyond annual NOX budgets are the lower of the recent actual emissions 

or projected base case emissions at the state level. The unit-level data used in developing 

2012 annual NOX state budgets is based on the inventory of units described in section 2 

“Inventory of Units” and adjusted as summarized in Tables 1-3. 

Each state’s 2012 NOX budget is the sum of 

(1) adjusted emissions from units with only reported data (Set A), plus 

(2) adjusted emissions from units with only projected data (Set C), plus 

 

5

 As discussed in the preamble, the proposed Transport Rule divides the states required to make SO2

reductions into two groups reflecting the differing stringency of SO2 reductions required to address 

significant contribution and interference with maintenance for each state. 

 10
(3) from units with both reported and projected data (Set B), the lesser of: 

a. total emissions based on adjusted reported data, or 

b. total emissions based on adjusted projected data. 

Ozone-season NOX Budgets 

2012 and beyond ozone season NOX budgets are the lower of the recent actual 

emissions or projected base case emissions at the state level. The unit-level data used in 

developing 2012 ozone season NOX state budgets is based on the inventory of units 

described in section 2 “Inventory of Units” and adjusted as summarized in Tables 1-3. 

Each state’s 2012 ozone season NOX budget is the sum of 

(1) adjusted emissions from units with only reported data (Set A), plus 

(2) adjusted emissions from units with only projected data (Set C), plus 

(3) from units with both reported and projected data (Set B), the lesser of: 

a. total emissions based on adjusted reported data, or 

b. total emissions based on adjusted projected data. 

3. Unit-level Allocations 

The allocation methodology distributes the state budgets to individual units. The 

proposed unit-level allocations are calculated analogous with the way each state budget is 

calculated – each unit receives a proportional share of its state budget based on that unit’s 

share of state emissions assumed in developing the budget. The following sections 

describe in more detail the proposed allocation methodology for each pollutant: SO2

(2012-2013, 2014 and beyond), annual NOX, and ozone season NOX. 

SO2 Allocations for 2012–2013 

The basis for 2012-2013 SO2 allocations is the unit-level emissions assumption 

(tons) used in determining the state budget. Consistent with state budget calculation, the 

allocations to units with only reported data (Set A) are based on that reported data. 

Similarly, allocations to units with only projected data (Set C) are based on that projected 

data. For those units with both reported and projected data (Set B), allocations are based 

on the data source used in the state budget (the source resulting in the lowest total budget 

from Set B units at the state level). 

 11
Units are allocated 97% of the assumed unit-level emissions of each state’s 

budget. The remaining 3% of allowances are withheld for a new-unit set-aside. See 

section 5 for discussion of the new unit set-asides. Proposed allocations are rounded to 

the nearest ton. 

SO2 Allocations for 2014 and Beyond 

For group 2 states (Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, 

Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina), 2014 and 

beyond allocations are equal to 2012-2013 allocations. For group 1 states (Georgia, 

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin), unit-level allocations are 

a proportional share of the state’s budget based on projected SO2 emissions from fossilfired greater than 25 MW capacity units in the TR_SB_Limited_Trading IPM run, as 

apportioned to the unit level in the 2014 parsed file. Units in group 1 states without an 

IPM projection do not receive SO2 allocations in 2014 and beyond. 

The proposed unit-level allocations are 97% of each unit’s proportional share of 

emissions. The remaining 3% of allowances are withheld for a new unit set-aside. See 

section 5 for discussion of the new unit set-aside. Proposed allocations are rounded to the 

nearest ton. 

Annual NOX Allocations for 2012 and Beyond 

The basis for 2012 and beyond annual NOX allocations is the unit-level emissions 

assumption (tons) used in determining the state budget. Consistent with state budget 

calculation, the allocations to units with only reported data (Set A) are based on that 

reported data. Similarly, allocations to units with only projected data (Set C) are based 

on that projected data. For those units with both reported and projected data (Set B), 

allocations are based on the data source used in the state budget (the source resulting in 

the lowest total budget from Set B units at the state level). 

The proposed unit-level allocations are 97% of the unit-level emissions assumed 

in developing each state’s budget. The remaining 3% of allowances are withheld for a 

new unit set-aside. See section 5 for discussion of the new unit set-aside. Proposed 

allocations are rounded to the nearest ton. 

 12
Ozone-season NOX Allocations for 2012 and Beyond 

The basis for 2012 and beyond ozone season NOX allocations is the unit-level 

emissions assumption (tons) used in determining the state budget. Consistent with state 

budget calculation, the allocations to units with only reported data (Set A) are based on 

that reported data. Similarly, allocations to units with only projected data (Set C) are 

based on that projected data. For those units with both reported and projected data (Set 

B), allocations are based on the data source used in the state budget (the source resulting 

in the lowest total budget from Set B units at the state level). 

The proposed unit-level allocations are 97% of the unit-level emissions assumed 

in developing each state’s budget. The remaining 3% of allowances are withheld for a 

new unit set-aside. See section 5 for discussion of the new unit set-aside. Proposed 

allocations are rounded to the nearest ton. 

4. Direct Control Rate Limits 

EPA is taking comment on a direct control rate limit alternative remedy. The 

unit-level rates which sources must comply with under this approach are determined 

analogously to unit-level allocations – each unit’s proposed allocation is divided by the 

reported or projected heat input associated with that tonnage. The heat input assumed in 

this approach is determined identically to emissions. For units in Set A, reported annual 

heat input is calculated from the most recent first, second, third, and fourth quarters for 

SO2, and 2008 heat input for annual and ozone season NOX. For units in Set C, the heat 

input is projected by IPM in TR_Base_Case, as apportioned to the unit-level in the 2012 

parsed file (or, in the case of group 1 states in 2014 and beyond, projected by IPM in 

TR_SB_Limited_Trading, as apportioned to the unit level in the 2014 parsed file). The 

source of the heat input for units in Set B (both projected and reported data available) is 

identical to the source of the emissions data for that unit. Note that this data source could 

be different based on pollutant, at the same unit. 

5. New Unit Set-Asides 

The new unit set-aside for SO2, annual NOX, and ozone season NOX for each state 

is determined based on the percentage of the total emissions represented by the net new 

emissions calculated by IPM in TR_SB_Limited_Trading, as parsed to the unit level in 

the 2020 run year. This method for calculating the new unit set aside ensures new units 

have sufficient allocations, while balancing the allocation needs of existing EGUs. The 

 13
total emissions for each pollutant are the sum of emissions from all covered units (fossilfired, greater than 25 MW capacity) in the 2020 run year of TR_SB_Limited_Trading. 

The net new emissions for each pollutant is equal to the projected 2020 emissions from 

newly built units in IPM, less the sum of allocations to units projected to retire for more 

than 3 years by 2020 (after 6 years, allocations to retired units are returned to the new 

unit set-aside). The percentages of the total emissions represented by the projected net 

new emissions calculated by IPM in 2020 are: 

SO2: 0.60% 

Annual NOX: 3.06%

Ozone season NOX: 2.74% 

To allow for reasonable flexibility, EPA proposes new unit set-asides that are 3 

percent of the state emissions budgets. The size of the new unit set-aside is 3 percent for 

the SO2 group 1, SO2 group 2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season trading programs, as 

appropriate, for each state. See Tables 4 and 5. 

For each control period, any allowances remaining in a state’s new unit set-aside 

(after allocations are made to new units that requested allowances) are distributed to the 

existing units in that state in proportion to the existing unit’s original allocations. This 

ensures that total allocations to units in the state equal the state budget. 

Table 4. SO2 and Annual NOX State New Unit Set-Aside Budgets for 

Electric Generating Units (tons) 

State 

SO2, 2012-

2013

SO2, 2014 

and Later

NOX, 2012 

and Later 

Alabama 4,856 4,856 2,075 

Connecticut 92 92 83 

Delaware 234 234 186 

District of Columbia 10 10 5 

Florida 4,852 4,852 3,600 

Georgia 6,998 2,572 2,214 

Illinois 6,269 4,546 1,681 

Indiana 12,011 6,042 3,471 

Iowa 2,822 2,583 1,382 

Kansas 1,718 1,718 1,540 

Kentucky 6,586 3,415 2,224 

Louisiana 2,714 2,714 1,318 

Maryland 1,190 1,190 511 

 14
Massachusetts 237 237 179 

Michigan 7,540 4,670 1,948 

Minnesota 1,413 1,413 1,240 

Missouri 6,111 4,763 1,730 

Nebraska 2,148 2,148 1,297 

New Jersey 339 339 355 

New York 1,996 1,261 700 

North Carolina 3,345 2,456 1,554 

Ohio 13,949 5,349 2,919 

Pennsylvania 11,658 4,251 3,417 

South Carolina 3,494 3,494 1,016 

Tennessee 3,000 3,000 851 

Virginia 2,178 1,224 887 

West Virginia 6,163 3,570 1,560 

Wisconsin 2,893 2,000 1,345 

Total 116,816 75,000 41,288 

Table 5. Ozone Season NOX State New Unit Set-Aside Budgets for 

Electric Generating Units (tons) 

State 

NOX Ozone 

Season, 

2012 and Later

Alabama 892

Arkansas 500

Connecticut 39

Delaware 74

District of Columbia 3

Florida 1,708

Georgia 964

Illinois 707

Indiana 1,500

Kansas 643

Kentucky 927

Louisiana 637

Maryland 217

Michigan 848

Mississippi 496

 15
 16

New Jersey 158

New York 333

North Carolina 706

Ohio 1,220

Oklahoma 1,113

Pennsylvania 1,448

South Carolina 457

Tennessee 347

Texas 2,267

Virginia 378

West Virginia 667

Total 19,249

Appendix: Table of Unit-level Allocations and Rate Limits 

See “TSD Allocation Table” available in the docket.