Appendix B 

Emissions Inventory Methodology 
B - i 

Emission Estimation Methodology for Cargo 

Handling Equipment Operating at Ports and 

Intermodal Rail Yards in California 
B - ii 

Table of Contents 

Contents Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................B-1 

I. INTRODUCTION 

A. Background.............................................................................................B-3 

II. EMISSIONS CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 

A. Methodology ...........................................................................................B-5 

B. Emission Inventory Inputs.......................................................................B-6

1. Population ....................................................................................B-6 

2. Average Horsepower ...................................................................B-7 

3. Activity..........................................................................................B-9 

4. Engine Load Factor......................................................................B-9 

5. Emission Factors........................................................................B-10 

6. Emission Factor Deterioration....................................................B-10 

7. Fuel Correction Factors..............................................................B-13 

8. Add-on Controls and Other Emission Reduction Strategies.......B-13 

C. Emission Projections.............................................................................B-14 

1. Growth Factors...........................................................................B-14 

2. Equipment Attrition or Scrappage ..............................................B-14 

3. New Engine Standards ..............................................................B-15 

III. EMISSION ESTIMATES..................................................................................B-16 

A. Statewide Emission Estimates..............................................................B-16 

B. District-specific Emission Estimates .....................................................B-16 

C. Cargo Handling Equipment-specific Emission Estimates......................B-17 

D. Benefits of Voluntary Programs and Future Emission Projections........B-17 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Emission Inventory Inputs (Population Allocations, Engine Profiles, 

Engine Loads, Useful Life, Deterioration Factors, Growth Factors, Fuel 

Correction Factors) 

Appendix B: 2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) By Facility Type, By Equipment 

Type, By Model Year, and By Horsepower Category 

Appendix C: Statewide Cargo Handling Equipment Survey 
B - iii 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Contents Page

List of Figures and Tables 

Table ES-1: Estimated Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions.........B-1 

Table ES-2: Estimated District Allocations of Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling 

Equipment Emissions .............................................................................B-2 

Table I-1: Categories of Cargo Handling Equipment Included in the 

 Emissions Inventory................................................................................B-3 

Table II-1: Estimated Statewide Cargo Handling Equipment 

 Populations.............................................................................................B-7 

Table II-2: 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Profiles at Ports..................................B-8 

Table II-3: 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Profiles at 

 Intermodal Rail Yards .............................................................................B-9 

Table II-4: Engine Load Factors.............................................................................B-10 

Table II-5: Estimated Percentages of Existing Cargo Handling 

 Equipment with Onroad, Offroad, or Retrofitted Engines......................B-12 

Table II-6: Cargo Handling Equipment Useful Life Inputs ......................................B-13 

Table III-1: Estimated Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment 

 Emissions (tons per day) ......................................................................B-16 

Table III-2: Estimated 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions 

By District (tons per day)...................................................................... B-17 

Table III-3 Cargo Handling Equipment Engines Projected Year 2010 and 

 2020 Emission Estimates......................................................................B-19 

Figure II-1: Attrition Curve, 12 Year Useful Life.......................................................B-15 

Figure III-1: Baseline vs. Voluntary Programs 

 Diesel PM Emissions (tons per year)....................................................B-18 

 

 
B - 1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The California Air Resources Board (ARB) staff developed a statewide emission 

estimation methodology for cargo handling equipment at ports and intermodal rail yards. 

This effort was undertaken to support the development of a statewide emission control 

strategy addressing emissions from cargo handling equipment at ports and intermodal 

rail yards. The methodology reflects updated population and activity data for cargo 

handling equipment statewide by equipment type based on a survey conducted by ARB 

in early 2004 and recent emission inventories prepared for the ports of Los Angeles and 

Long Beach. Emissions estimates were developed for nine equipment types associated 

with California’s ports and intermodal rail yards including aerial lifts, cranes, excavators, 

forklifts, container handling equipment, other general industrial equipment, 

sweeper/scrubbers, tractor/loader/backhoes, and yard trucks. A total of 16 ports and 

14 intermodal rail yards are included in this estimation. 

The ARB staff estimates that in 2004, cargo handling equipment diesel-fueled engines 

operating at ports and intermodal rail yards in California emitted approximately 

0.65 tons per day of diesel PM. In addition, those engines are estimated to have 

emitted approximately 19 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). As shown in 

Table ES-1, yard trucks, container handling equipment (top picks, sides picks, etc.), and 

cranes are responsible for the majority of the emissions representing approximately 

90 percent of the emissions for all pollutants. 

Table ES-1: Estimated Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions 

 

2004 Pollutant 

Emissions, 

Equipment Types Tons Per Day 

Numbers of 

Equipment 

NOx Diesel PM

Cranes 321 1.93 0.07 

Excavators 28 0.24 0.01 

Forklifts 464 0.54 0.03 

Container Handling 

Equipment 487 3.25 0.11 

Other, General Industrial 

Equipment 40 0.08 <0.01 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 28 0.04 <0.01 

Tractor/Loader/ Backhoe 93 0.18 0.01 

Yard Trucks 2,277 12.78 0.42 

Totals 3,738 19.04 0.65 

Emissions were also allocated to the districts based on the location of a port or 

intermodal rail yard. Only 8 of the 35 air pollution control (APCD) or air quality 

management districts (AQMD) (districts) in California had emissions associated with 

ports or intermodal rail yards. A summary of the emission estimates for the 8 districts 

with the highest estimates of emissions is provided in Table ES-2. As is shown, the 
B - 2 

districts with the ports or intermodal rail yards responsible for the largest contributions of 

emissions are in the South Coast AQMD and the Bay Area AQMD. Those two districts 

account for approximately 90 percent of the statewide numbers of cargo handling 

equipment and 85 percent of the emissions of all pollutants from cargo handling 

equipment. 

Table ES-2: Estimated District Allocations of Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling 

Equipment Emissions 

District NOx Diesel PM 

Bay Area 3.34 0.11 

Mojave 0.08 <0.01 

North Coast 0.06 <0.01 

San Diego 0.75 0.03 

San Joaquin 0.55 0.01 

South Coast 13.38 0.45 

Ventura 0.66 0.02 

Yolo-Solano 0.08 <0.01 

Note 1: The following districts had no cargo handling equipment emissions allocated to them: Amador, Antelope 

Valley, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Feather River, Glenn, Great Basin Unified, Imperial, Kern, Lake, Lassen, 

Mariposa, Mendocino, Modoc, Monterey Bay, Unified, Northern Sierra, Northern Sonoma, Placer, Sacramento, San 

Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehama, and Tuolumne.

Note 2: The total emissions may vary slightly from the values shown in Table ES-1 due to rounding. 
B - 3 

 I. INTRODUCTION 

A. Background 

In this chapter, ARB staff provides background on the cargo handling equipment 

emissions inventory, our purpose and goals in preparing an emissions inventory update, 

and a general overview of the methodology developed to estimate the emissions from 

cargo handling equipment. 

Cargo handling equipment is used for commercial purposes to move consumer goods 

through California’s ports and intermodal facilities. There are a number of types of 

cargo handling equipment including container handling equipment such as top picks 

and rubber tire gantry cranes and bulk handling equipment which includes tractors, 

sweepers, fork lifts, and excavators. 

A list of the different types of cargo handling equipment and a brief description of the 

work done by that equipment type is found in Table I-1. This equipment is generally 

operated at a port or intermodal facility, although it can be used at other facilities such 

as distribution centers.1

 

Table I-1: Categories of Cargo Handling Equipment Included in the 

 Emissions Inventory 

Equipment Type Description 

Cranes 

Cranes include rubber tire gantry cranes and other mobile cranes used to 

move containers from vessels to dockside, used to stack and unstack 

containers, and used to move containers to and from yard trucks 

Excavators Used to pick up heavy bulk materials and other dry bulk materials 

Forklifts Used to move cargo, truck chassis, or other equipment short distances for 

placement on or removal from stacks 

Container Handling 

Equipment 

Includes side picks, top picks, reach stackers. Used to stack containers, 

move containers from one area of the terminal to another, or move 

containers on and off yard trucks 

Other, General 

Industrial Equipment

Includes a variety of equipment types including aerial lifts, euclids, rail-car 

movers, and heavy duty off-highway trucks 

Sweeper/Scrubbers Used to clean up after bulk goods movement 

Tractor/Loader/ 

Backhoe 

Used to load and unload bulk materials 

Yard Truck 

Used to move containers to and from ships/trains, move containers within or 

off the terminal, and move containers to and from RTG cranes for 

placement on or removal from stacks 

Cargo handling equipment can be a significant source of diesel particulate matter (PM) 

emissions in communities near ports and intermodal rail facilities. To reduce diesel 

 

1

 Cargo handling equipment used at other types of facilities associated with the movement of goods in 

California, such as distribution centers, are not included in this emissions inventory. 
B - 4 

particulate matter (PM) emissions in communities near ports and intermodal rail yards, 

ARB staff are undertaking a rule-making effort to require reductions in emissions from 

cargo handling equipment. To support that rule-making and to assist in understanding 

the impacts from any proposed rule, it is necessary to develop a detailed emissions 

inventory for the specific types of equipment used in these facilities. 

Our goals in undertaking this emissions inventory update were to: 

• Update the inventory to reflect the most current cargo handling equipment fleets; 

• Develop a consistent methodology that could be used statewide to estimate 

emissions from cargo handling equipment at ports and intermodal rail yards; 

• Establish a structure that would allow allocation of the statewide emissions to 

individual ports and/or intermodal rail facilities; and 

• Accurately reflect adopted regulations and other regulatory programs in the baseline 

inventory and in any future year forecasts. 
B - 5 

II. EMISSION CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 

In this section, we provide a discussion of the methodology used to develop the cargo 

handling equipment emission estimation methodology.

Briefly, the approach used to develop the cargo handling equipment emissions 

inventory estimates entailed determining the average annual emissions per engine for 

each equipment type and then multiplying that value by the total number of engines in 

that grouping. The majority of the inputs that went into developing the average annual 

emissions came from individual engine profiles developed using the information from a 

Cargo Handling Equipment Survey conducted by the ARB in 2004 and cargo handling 

equipment population information provided by the ports of Los Angeles and Long 

Beach. These inputs were then processed using a template based on the ARB’s 

OFFROAD model (ARB, 2000) to estimate annual emissions per engine for each 

equipment type. This data was then expanded to include the estimated statewide 

population of cargo handling equipment fitting a specific age and horsepower range. To 

estimate port-specific emissions, the populations of cargo handling equipment were 

allocated based on the ARB Survey and the port-specific data. Emission estimates 

were developed for the eight types of equipment described in Table I-1. Estimates for 

oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) were made. 

 

Below, we provide a more detailed discussion of the methodology used to estimate the 

cargo handling equipment emission inventory, including the assumptions and data 

inputs used. 

A. Methodology 

The basic equation used for estimating emissions from cargo handling equipment is: 

E y,t = Σ Pop t, v, x ∗ HP ∗ %Load t ∗ EF v, x ∗ Hrs t

 where 

E = pollutant specific emissions (tons per year of NOx and diesel PM) 

 Pop = cargo handling equipment type-specific population 

 HP = engine average rated brake horsepower in a given horsepower range 

 % Load = average engine load 

 EF = emission factor 

 Hrs = average annual use in hours 

 y = inventory year 

 t = equipment type (cranes, yard trucks, etc)

 v = engine age (based on model year) 

 x = horsepower range of the engine 

Each of these elements, and how they were incorporated into the cargo handling 

equipment emission estimates, are discussed below. The base year for the cargo 

handling equipment emissions inventory is 2004. 
B - 6 

B. Emission Inventory Inputs 

1. Population 

The cargo handling equipment populations were developed using information from the 

ARB 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Survey, the 2001 Port of Los Angeles emissions 

inventory, and the 2002 Port of Long Beach emissions inventory. These sources of 

information are described below. In addition, the steps taken to develop port-specific 

and intermodal facility-specific estimates of the numbers of cargo handling equipment 

for 2004 are described. 

ARB’s Cargo Handling Equipment Survey (December 2004) 

The ARB conducted a survey of cargo handling equipment owner/operators to collect 

information about the different types of cargo handling equipment (ARB’s Statewide 

Cargo Handling Equipment Survey, or ARB Survey). Owners/operators of cargo 

handling equipment were sent a copy of the ARB’s survey in 2004. The survey 

requested, for the year 2004, information about the numbers of different types of cargo 

handling equipment at port terminals, annual use, information about the general 

equipment operating conditions, and engine information (make and model of the engine, 

horsepower, annual hours of use, any control equipment associated with it, etc.). The 

ARB Survey also requested information on projected estimated growth in equipment 

and hours of operation in 2010 and 2020. 

The survey was sent to more than 120 owner/operators statewide and the ARB 

received 69 responses representing approximately 2,000 pieces of equipment. A copy 

of the ARB Survey is provided in Appendix C. Because the Ports of Los Angeles and 

Long Beach had recently conducted a similar survey, the terminal operators at those 

two ports were only requested to respond to the survey questions on anticipated growth 

and the types of installed controls. 

Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach Cargo Handling Equipment Data 

To develop port-wide emissions inventories, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 

(the Ports) authorized Starcrest Consulting Group to collect information about the cargo 

handling equipment that operate on their respective properties. The Port of Los 

Angeles collected information for 2001 and the Port of Long Beach collected data for 

2002. The information collected by Starcrest was provided to the ARB and included 

information about the equipment type, owner/operator contact information, enginespecific information (make, model, load factor, etc.), and annual activity. 

Estimating 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Populations 

To make the cargo handling equipment emission estimates compatible with the ARB’s 

OFFROAD model, the different equipment types at ports and intermodal rail yards 

collected through the ARB Survey and the Ports of Los Angeles (POLA) and Long 
B - 7 

Beach (POLB) were allocated to the eight equipment categories described previously in 

Table I-1. Because the cargo handling equipment populations for the ports of Los 

Angeles and Long Beach were associated with 2001 and 2002, respectively, these 

populations were grown to 2004 estimates using a 3% annual growth factor for both the 

equipment populations and the equipment activity. This growth factor is based on the 

projected growth data collected as a part of the ARB Survey. The populations of cargo 

handling equipment, by type, were assigned to a port or intermodal facility based on 

ARB Survey data.2 

In addition, adjustments to the cargo handling equipment populations at several ports 

were made due to partial, or no, reporting of the cargo handling equipment at a number 

of ports. Using information gathered by contacting the ports directly or from published 

information regarding cargo throughputs, the ARB staff developed estimates of the 

populations for cargo handling equipment for each port where information was not 

complete. 

Based on this approach, we estimate that there are approximately 3,700 pieces of cargo 

handling equipment statewide. 

Table II-1: Estimated Statewide Cargo Handling Equipment Populations3

Equipment Type Estimated 2004 Population 

Cranes 321 

Excavators 28 

Forklifts 464 

Container Handling Equipment 487 

Other, General Industrial Equipment 40 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 28 

Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 93 

Yard Truck 2,277 

Total 3,738 

2. Average Horsepower 

Using the ARB’s 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Survey and the cargo handling 

equipment emissions inventory data for the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 

average horsepower for various engine horsepower ranges were estimated by 

equipment type. Below, the horsepower range of the equipment, the average 

horsepower, and the average annual hours of operation for each equipment type at 

ports (Table II-2) and at intermodal rail yards (Table II-3) are presented below. 

 

 

2

 There were no additional adjustments to cargo handling equipment populations associated with 

intermodal rail yards because 100 percent of the intermodal facilities reported their equipment 

populations. 

3

 The population values only include diesel-fueled engines. While there are gasoline and alternate fuelpowered cargo handling equipment, this inventory only focuses on diesel-fueled equipment. 
B - 8 

Table II-2: 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Profiles at Ports 

 

Equipment Type HP Range Average 

HP 

Average Annual Use 

(hrs – 2004) 

< 50 43 

51 - 120 112 

121 - 175 150 

176 - 250 210 

251 - 500 412 

501 - 750 657 

Cranes 

751 - 1000 966 

1371 

176 - 250 245 Excavators 251 - 500 387 2222 

< 50 45 

51 - 120 103 

121 - 175 154 

176 - 250 208 

Forklifts 

251 - 500 278 

1098 

51 - 120 111 

121 - 175 164 

176 - 250 236 

251 - 500 310 

Container Handling Equipment 

751 - 1000 930 

2388 

<50 50 

51 – 120 99 

121 – 175 157 

176 – 250 225 

Other General Equipment 

251 - 500 387 

693 

< 50 48 

51 - 120 106 

121 - 175 148 Sweeper/Scrubber 

176 - 250 180 

872 

<50 40 

51 – 120 88 

121 – 175 148 

176 – 250 203 

251 – 500 356 

Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 

501 – 750 750 

755 

51 – 120 85 

121 – 175 172 

176 – 250 212 

251 – 500 434 

Yard Trucks 

501 - 750 635 

2536 
B - 9 

Table II-3: 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Profiles at Intermodal Rail Yards 

 

Equipment Type HP Range Average 

HP 

Average Annual Use 

(hrs – 2004) 

176 – 250 236 Cranes 251 – 500 309 1632 

51 – 120 93 

Forklifts 121 – 175 153 

176 – 250 200 

803 

121 – 175 160 

Container Handling Equipment 176 – 250 208 

251 – 500 299 

2388 

126 – 175 150 

Other General Equipment 176 – 250 250 

251 - 500 344 

1632 

Sweeper/Scrubber 176 – 250 200 872 

Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 51 – 120 70 755 

126 – 175 150 Yard Truck 176 – 250 203 1289 

Note: If there is not a specific horsepower range listed for a specific type of equipment, then there were 

no engines in that size range used by that type of equipment. 

3. Activity 

The ARB Survey and the information provided by the ports of Los Angeles and Long 

Beach provided engine-specific annual use values (hours of operation). It was 

assumed that all of an engine’s hours of operation occurred within the borders of 

California. The equipment type-specific annual average use, in hours, can be found in 

Tables II-2 and II-3 above. The annual use values were used to estimate cumulative 

engine use. Cumulative engine use is estimated by multiplying the annual use by the 

age of the engine. The estimate of cumulative engine use is the basis for estimating the 

impacts of engine deterioration on emissions from individual engines. A discussion of 

how emission factor deterioration rates were developed is provided in subsection 6 

“Emission Factor Deterioration.” 

4. Engine Load Factor 

The engine load under normal operating conditions is another key activity input. 

Information about the operating load factors for cargo handling equipment was taken 

from the engine load factors specified in the ARB’s OFFROAD model for the specific 

type of cargo handling equipment or similar equipment. Table II-4 below provides the 

engine load factors, by equipment type, used to estimate emissions. 
B - 10 

Table II-4: Engine Load Factors 

Equipment Type Engine Load Factor 

Cranes 43% 

Excavators 57% 

Forklifts 30% 

Container Handling Equipment 59% 

Other, General Industrial Equipment 51% 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 68% 

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 55% 

Yard Trucks 65% 

Staff considered using an alternative load factor for yard tractors to better represent the 

engine load yard trucks operate under in their day-to-day activities. However, after 

additional investigation, ARB staff decided not to revise the engine load factor at this 

time. This decision is based on a lack of adequate test data to support the use of a 

revised yard truck engine load factor. There is a study underway by the ARB and the 

Port of Los Angeles to investigate cargo handling equipment load factors. As the 

results of those studies become available, the cargo handling equipment emission 

inventory will be revised. 

5. Emission Factors 

In 2004, the cargo handling equipment populations at California’s ports and intermodal 

rail yards were comprised of a mix of cargo handling equipment units with different 

engines types (off-road and on-road) and units employing voluntary emission control 

strategies (controlled). In an effort to take this equipment mix into account, the ARB 

staff developed a composite emission factor based on the relative percentage off-road, 

on-road, and retrofitted engines. The emission factors for off-road engines are taken 

from the ARB’s OFFROAD model. Emission factors for on-road engines were taken 

from the ARB’s on-road engine certification standards. The emission factors for 

retrofitted equipment were developed using OFFROAD emission factors with the control 

device-specific control efficiencies applied. 

6. Emission Factor Deterioration 

As an engine ages, the pollutant-specific emission factors slowly increase. This 

phenomenon is described as “deterioration” and is primarily due to the wear on the 

various parts of an engine with use. Deterioration occurs at different rates for each 

pollutant. When developing emission estimates, it is essential that deterioration be 

taken into account and factored in the emissions estimation methodology. The 

deterioration rates used in the OFFROAD model are expressed as the percent increase 

in emissions over the percent of an engine’s useful life consumed (see Appendix A). 

The methodology used for cargo handling equipment relies on the deterioration 

functions developed for the ARB’s OFFROAD model. However, modifications were 

made to better reflect the operation of cargo handling equipment. 
B - 11 

The deteriorated emission factors were developed using the same methodology found 

in the ARB’s OFFROAD model. 

Deteriorated Emission Factor 

 EF = ZH + DR * Hrs 

And 

 

Deterioration Rate 

DR = (ZH * DF) / UL 

Where: EF = emission factor, in grams per horsepower-hour (g/hp-hr) 

ZH = zero-hour emission rate, or when the equipment is new (g/hp-hr) 

Hrs = cumulative hours, or total number of hours accumulated on the 

 equipment (equipment age x average annual activity, from survey data)

DR = deterioration rate, or the increase in ZH emissions as the equipment is 

used (g/hp-hr) 

DF = deterioration factor (% increase per % useful life consumed) 

UL= useful life of engine (in hours) (cargo handling equipment survey maximum 

 useful life * average annual activity) 

Two of the components, zero hour emission factors (ZH) and useful life values (UL), 

were revised based on the data gathered by the ARB’s cargo handling equipment 

survey and the cargo handling equipment emissions inventory done by the ports of Los 

Angeles and Long Beach. A discussion of these two adjustments is provided below. 

Zero Hour Emission Rates

As discussed above, revised zero hour emission factors were developed using a 

weighted average based on the product of the numbers of off-road, on-road, and 

retrofitted engines in the statewide cargo handling equipment population and the 

emission factors associated with those engines. The numbers of off-road, on-road, and 

controlled engines were based on engine model information collected from the ARB’s 

survey and the emission inventories at the ports. Table II-5 below provides a summary 

of the percentage breakdown for the different engine configurations (on-road, off-road or 

controlled) estimated for each model year. 
B - 12 

Table II-5: Estimated Percentages of Existing Cargo Handling Equipment with 

Onroad, Offroad, or Controlled Engines 

Yard Trucks Cranes Forklift Other, General 

Model Yr Equip 

Onroad 

Offroad 

w/controls 

Offroad 

w/controls 

Offroad 

w/controls Offroad w/controls 

1980 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1981 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1982 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1983 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1984 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1985 27.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1986 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1987 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1988 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1989 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1990 13.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1991 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1992 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1993 7.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1994 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1995 24.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1996 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

1997 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

1998 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

1999 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

2000 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

2001 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

2002 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

2003 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

2004 24.9% 65.0% 13.1% 8.0% 42.9% 

Useful Life

The average useful life for each type of cargo handling equipment was based on 

operators responses to the ARB Cargo Handling Equipment Survey. Table II-6 

provides the average useful life by equipment type based upon where the equipment is 

used, at a port or at a rail yard. Table II-6 also includes the average annual usage (from 

Tables II-2 and II-3) and the engine load factor (from Table II-4). 
B - 13 

Table II-6: Cargo Handling Equipment Useful Life Inputs

Average 

Annual 

Usage 

(hrs/yr) 

Average 

Annual 

Usage 

(hrs/yr) 

Engine Load 

Factors 

Average 

Useful Life 

(yrs) 

Average 

Useful Life 

Equipment Type (yrs) 

Port Rail Port/Rail Port Rail 

Cranes 1371 1632 0.43 24 18 

Excavators 2222 NA 0.57 16 NA 

Forklifts 1098 803 0.30 16 20 

Container Handling 

Equipment 2388 2388 0.59 16 18 

Other, General 

Industrial Equipment 693 1632 0.51 16 16 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 872 872 0.68 16 16 

Tractors/ Loaders/ 

Backhoes 755 755 0.55 16 16 

Yard Trucks 2536 1289 0.65 12 8 

The percent useful life (%UL) was estimated by dividing the engine age by the useful 

life for a specific equipment type. The final deteriorated emission factors are developed 

using the following equation: 

 EF = ZH + DR * Hrs 

 = ZH + ZH * DF * Hrs 

 UL 

 = ZH + ZH(DF) * Hrs

 UL 

 7. Fuel Correction Factors 

California implemented diesel fuel regulations in 1993, which lowered the limits of 

aromatic compounds and the sulfur content of fuel marketed in California. The fuel 

correction factors used in the development of a statewide cargo handling equipment 

emission inventory are contained in the ARB’s OFFROAD model. The fuel correction 

factors are dimensionless multipliers applied to the basic exhaust emission rates. 

These fuel correction factors account for the differences in the properties of CARB 

diesel fuels compared to those of commercially dispensed fuels. Specifics about the 

fuel correction factors are found in Appendix A. 

8. Add-on Controls and Other Emission Reduction Strategies 

A number of the state’s deep-water ports have encouraged voluntary implementation of 

cargo handling equipment emission reduction strategies using state funding, such as 

the Carl Moyer Program, or through port funding mechanisms. Many operators have 

taken advantage of these programs by implementing various control options including 
B - 14 

installation of diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs), using emulsified fuels alone or in 

conjunction with a DOC, or installation of diesel particulate filters. 

As a result of these voluntary programs, approximately 1,400 cargo handling equipment 

vehicles, primarily yard trucks, have been retrofitted with DOCs or replaced with new, 

cleaner engines in the last three years. As stated previously, the impacts from these 

voluntary strategies are included in the inventory methodology by adjusting the zerohour emission rates. 

C. Emission Projections 

Emission projections for the years 2010 and 2020 were developed. These projections 

reflect expected growth rates in equipment populations and activity; the turnover or 

attrition of the fleet; and the change in emission factors over time as the new engine 

standards are implemented. Below, ARB staff describes the assumptions used to 

generate the emission projections for future years.

1. Growth Factors 

The growth factors used to estimate cargo handling equipment emissions in future 

years was based on an analysis done by ARB staff using growth estimates provided by 

terminal owner/operators as a part of the ARB’s 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment 

Survey. The terminal owner/operators provide estimates of the numbers of pieces of 

equipment, by equipment type, they anticipated having in 2010 and 2020. In addition, 

the terminal owner/operators were asked to provide estimates of the percent of growth 

in activity of their equipment in 2010 and 2020. 

ARB staff used these estimates to develop statewide growth estimates for both 

equipment populations and equipment activity using weighted averages of the 

estimated growth over two time intervals, 2004 – 2010 and 2010 – 2020. The estimated 

growth rates in cargo handling equipment populations and activity varied by equipment 

type. The growth rates, by equipment type, used to develop future year cargo handling 

equipment emission estimates are presented in Appendix A. 

 

2. Equipment Attrition or Scrappage

Scrappage is a function that describes the relationship between equipment age and the 

proportion of equipment that has been removed from service. This function is 

expressed in terms of a fraction of the average lifetime of the equipment. The average 

lifetime varies by the type of cargo handling equipment. For this cargo handling 

equipment emission estimation methodology, the scrappage function in the ARB’s 

OFFROAD model was used. However, the application of the scrappage function was 

tailored to align with our understanding of the useful life information gathered in the ARB 

Survey. It was assumed that, at the average useful life determined from the ARB 

Survey, 20 percent of the engines for a given model year would remain. 
B - 15 

For example, the average useful life reported in the ARB Survey for port yard trucks is 

12 years. This means that on average, a yard truck is kept 12 years, however there are 

some yard trucks that are removed from service more quickly and others that remain 

beyond 12 years. In the scrappage curve developed for the current cargo handling 

emission estimation methodology, approximately 50 percent of the original population 

remains at 80 percent of the average useful life, in this case approximately 10 years. 

Approximately 20 percent of the original population remains at 12 years. The entire 

population of engines were accounted for in the inventory, however in the model, the 

engines were distributed over 12 model years. An example of the port yard truck 

attrition curve is presented in Figure II-1.4 Similar attrition curves were developed for 

container handling equipment, general cargo handling equipment and cranes. 

Figure II-1: Attrition Curve, 12-year Useful Life 

 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Age (years)

% of population remaining

 

Additional discussion of the role the scrappage function plays in the development of 

off-road equipment and a tabular representation of the ARB scrappage rate function is 

presented in the ARB’s OFFROAD model. 

3. New Engine Standards 

Emission factors for future years were based on the OFFROAD model which 

incorporates the impacts of new engine standards (Tier 3 and 4) for each year and 

horsepower range. The emission factors reflect any phase-in of emission standards 

allowed by the regulations establishing the new engine standards. 

 

4

 The model developed for cargo handling equipment did not deteriorate emissions past the average 

useful life. Rather it assumed any engine past the average useful life would have the same emissions as 

an engine at the average useful life. 
B - 16 

III. EMISSION ESTIMATES 

A. Statewide Emission Estimates 

The emission inventory for cargo handling equipment includes total emissions for the 

entire state, subtotals for each of the air basins and subtotals for each county, or a 

portion of a county, in each air basin. The data in Table III-1 summarizes the statewide 

inventory of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and diesel particulate matter (PM) for 2004 by 

equipment type. 

Table III-1: Estimated Statewide 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions 

(tons per day) 

 

2004 Pollutant 

Emissions, 

Equipment Types Numbers of Tons Per Day 

Equipment 

NOx Diesel 

PM

Cranes 321 1.93 0.07 

Excavators 28 0.24 0.01 

Forklifts 464 0.54 0.03 

Container Handling 

Equipment 487 3.25 0.11 

Other, General 

Industrial Equipment 40 0.08 <0.01 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 28 0.04 <0.01 

Tractor/Loader/ 

Backhoe 93 0.18 0.01 

Yard Trucks 2,277 12.78 0.42 

Total 3,738 19.04 0.65 

As can be determined from the information presented in Table III-1, yard trucks, 

container handling equipment (top picks, sides picks, etc.), and cranes are the 

responsible for approximately 90 percent of the emissions for all pollutants. 

B. District-specific Emission Estimates 

Estimates of emissions from cargo handling equipment were made on a port-by-port 

and intermodal facility-specific basis using the numbers of specific equipment types 

located at each facility. These emissions were then allocated to the appropriate air 

pollution control and air quality management districts based on the location of the ports 

and intermodal facilities. A summary of district-specific emissions for NOx and PM is 

provided in Table III-2. 
B - 17 

Table III- 2: Estimated 2004 Cargo Handling Equipment Emissions 

By District (tons per day)5

District NOx Diesel PM

Bay Area 3.34 0.11 

Mojave 0.08 <0.01 

North Coast 0.06 <0.01 

San Diego 0.75 0.03 

San Joaquin 0.55 0.01 

South Coast 13.38 0.45 

Ventura 0.66 0.02 

Yolo-Solano 0.08 <0.01 

These emission estimates vary slightly from the statewide emission estimates as a 

result of rounding issues associated with the software package used to develop the 

emission estimates. 

C. Cargo Handling Equipment-specific Emission Estimates 

Appendix B contains emission estimates by equipment type for 2004. The estimates 

are presented by equipment type, by model year, and by horsepower category.

D. Benefits of Voluntary Programs and Future Emission Projections 

The emission reductions attributable to the voluntary emission reduction strategies 

(retrofits) implemented at California’s ports have been incorporated in the baseline 

emission estimates. The ARB estimates that the installation of aftertreatment control 

technologies will result in an estimated 13 percent reduction in diesel PM emissions 

from 2004 through 2020. The ARB staff is unable to project any future emission 

reductions associated with voluntary emission reduction strategies because information 

about the continued implementation of these programs is uncertain. 

Estimates of emission reductions attributable to these voluntary programs are based on 

information provided by the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland in addition 

to information collected as a part of the ARB’s Cargo Handling Equipment Survey. 

Graphic depiction of the impact of the voluntary emission reduction programs are 

presented in Figure III-1. 

 

5

 The following districts have no cargo handling emissions associated with them: Amador, Antelope 

Valley, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Feather River, Glenn, Great Basin Unified, Imperial, Kern, 

Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, Mendocino, Modoc, Monterey Bay, Unified, Northern Sierra, Northern Sonoma, 

Placer, Sacramento, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehama, and Tuolumne. 
B - 18 

Figure III-1: Baseline vs. Voluntary Programs – Diesel PM Emissions 

(tons per year) 

 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

20042007201020152020

Year

TPY

PM Baseline

PM No Voluntary

Because the majority of the voluntary efforts involved the installation of diesel oxidation 

catalysts, the ARB staff estimates there are minimal reductions in NOx attributable to 

the voluntary installation of exhaust aftertreatment control devices on cargo handling 

equipment. While a small percentage of cargo handling equipment engines are using 

emulsified fuels, which result in some NOx reductions (up to 20 percent), the ARB staff 

is unable to quantify the benefits at this time. 

Table III-3 below presents the cargo handling equipment emission estimates for the 

years 2010 and 2020 assuming the growth factors presented in Appendix A. 
B - 19 

Table III-3: Cargo Handling Equipment Engines Projected Year 2010 and 2020 

Emission Estimates 

2010 Emission, 

Tons per Day 

2020 Emission, 

Tons per Day Equipment Types Numbers of 

Equipment NOx Diesel PM 

Numbers of 

Equipment NOx Diesel PM 

Cranes 470 1.83 0.06 602 1.33 0.03 

Excavators 29 0.18 0.01 32 0.05 <0.01 

Forklifts 530 0.39 0.02 607 0.17 0.01 

Container Handling 

Equipment 738 3.43 0.12 1111 1.70 0.05 

Other General 

Industrial 

Equipment 

60 0.08 <0.01 93 0.04 <0.01 

Sweepers/ 

Scrubbers 43 0.04 <0.01 64 0.02 <0.01 

Tractors/ Loaders/ 

Backhoes 132 0.17 0.01 200 0.08 <0.01 

Yard Trucks 2810 10.20 0.31 3790 3.02 0.09 

Total 4811 16.34 0.53 6500 6.41 0.18 

 
B - 20 

REFERENCES 

(ARB, 2000) Air Resources Board. Staff Report: Public Meeting to Consider Approval 

of California’s Emissions Inventory for Off-Road Large Compression-Ignited Engines 

(≥ 25HP) Using the New OFFROAD Emissions Model; January 2000. 
BA - 1 

Emission Inventory Inputs 

(Population Allocations, Useful Life, Deterioration Factors, Growth Factors, 

Fuel Correction Factors) 

The basic equation used for estimating emissions from cargo handling equipment is: 

E y = Σ Pop t, v, x ∗ HP ∗ %Load t ∗ EF v, x ∗ Hrs t

 where 

E = pollutant emissions (NOx, and PM) 

 Pop = cargo handling equipment type-specific population 

HP = engine average rated brake horsepower in a given 

 horsepower range 

 % Load = average engine load 

 EF = emission factor 

 Hrs = average annual use 

 y = inventory year 

 t = equipment type (cranes, yard trucks, etc)

 v = engine age (based on model year) 

 x = horsepower range of the engine 

This equation will serve as the basis on which cargo handling emission estimation 

methodology-specific information will be presented in this Appendix. 

1. Equipment Populations

Cargo Handling Equipment Population Allocation Percentages – by facility

The equipment population percentages for California’s intermodal rail yards were 

estimated from the facility-specific populations. The equipment percentages for each 

facility are presented below in Table BA-1a and BA-1b. For the purposes of developing 

emission estimates for cargo handling equipment in future years, ARB staff assumed 

that these population distributions remain the same from year-to-year. 
BA - 2 

Table BA-1a: Equipment Population Allocations, By District, for Ports 

District % Statewide 

BAAQMD 19 

San Diego 4.3 

San Joaquin Valley Unified 2.4 

South Coast 70 

Ventura 3.8 

Yolo-Solano 0.5 

Table BA-1b: Equipment Population Allocations, By District, for 

 Intermodal Rail Yards 

District % Statewide 

BAAQMD 9.1 

Mojave Desert 6.4 

San Joaquin Valley Unified 8.7 

South Coast 75.8 

2. Engine Useful Life 

The following equipment-specific average useful life information was developed using 

information from the ARB’s cargo handling equipment survey and the cargo handling 

equipment emission inventories developed for the ports of Los Angeles and Long 

Beach. 
BA - 3 

Table BA-2: Equipment Useful Life 

Activity 

(hrs/yr) 

Activity 

(hrs/yr) 

Total Useful 

Life (yrs) 

Total Useful 

Equipment Type Life (yrs) 

Port Rail Port Rail 

Cranes 1371.1 1632.3 24 18 

Excavators 2222.2 1162.0 16 NA 

Forklifts 1098.1 802.8 16 20 

Container Handling 

Equipment 2387.7 2388.0 16 18 

Other, General 

Industrial 

Equipment 

692.7 1631.6 16 16 

Sweeper/Scrubbers 871.5 872.0 16 16 

Tractors/ Loaders/ 

Backhoes 755.1 755.0 16 16 

Yard Trucks 2536.0 1289.4 12 8 

3. Deterioration Factor Tables 

The cargo handling emission inventory methodology relied on the OFFROAD 

deterioration factors (percent increase in emissions per percent useful life). These 

factors are presented in Table BA-3 below. 

Table BA-3: Deterioration Rates for Diesel Engines 

 (% increase per % useful life consumed) 

Deterioration Factor HP 

NOx PM 

25-50 0.06 0.31 

51-120 0.14 0.44 

121-250 0.14 0.44 

>250 0.21 0.67 

4. Growth Factors 

The population and activity annual average growth factors by facility type shown below 

in Tables BA-4 and BA-5 were developed from the ARB’s 2004 Cargo Handling 

Equipment Survey and the cargo handling equipment emission inventories developed 

by the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. These estimates are population weighted 

values that went into developing the projected emissions from cargo handling 

equipment. 
BA - 4 

Table BA-4: Cargo Handling Equipment Population Annual Average Growth 

Rates 

Ports 

(percent annual average 

growth) 

Intermodal Rail Yards 

(percent annual average 

Equipment Type growth) 

2004 - 2010 2010 - 2020 2004 - 2010 2010 - 

2020 

Container Handling 

Equipment 7.1 3.9 7.8 8.7 

Cranes 5.9 2.6 5.9 2.6 

Excavators 0.8 1 NA NA 

Forklifts 2.2 1.2 2.9 3.8 

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0.3 0.3 0 0 

Yard Trucks 3.1 2.1 6.4 7.5 

Table BA-5: Cargo Handling Equipment Activity Annual Average Growth Rates 

Ports 

(percent annual average 

growth) 

Intermodal Rail Yards 

(percent annual average 

Equipment Type growth) 

2004 - 2010 2010 - 2020 2004 - 2010 2010 - 

2020 

Container Handling 

Equipment 9.1 3.9 7.1 8.6 

Cranes 7.4 4.9 4.4 2.4 

Excavators 0.8 2 NA NA 

Forklifts 2.7 2.1 2.9 3.8 

Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 0 0 0 0 

Yard Trucks 3.3 2.4 6.1 7.2 

5. Fuel Correction Factors

California implemented diesel fuel regulations in 1993, which lowered the limits of 

aromatic compounds and the sulfur content of fuel marketed in California. The fuel 

correction factors used in the development of a statewide cargo handling equipment 

emission inventory are contained in the ARB’s OFFROAD model and summarized in 

Table BA-6 below. The fuel correction factors are dimensionless multipliers applied to 

the basic exhaust emission rates. These fuel correction factors accounts for the 

differences in the properties of certified fuels compared to those of commercially 

dispensed fuels. 
BA - 5 

Table BA-6: Fuel Correction Factors 

Area Calendar Years Hp Group Model Years NOx PM 

SCAQMD and Pre-1985 All All 1.000 1.000 

Ventura 1985 – 1993 All All 1.000 0.950 

Pre-1994 All All 1.000 1.000 

<25 Pre-1995 

25 – 50 Pre-1999 

51 – 100 Pre-1998 

101 – 175 Pre-1997 

176+ Pre-1996 

0.930 0.750 

<25 1995+ 

25 – 50 1999 – 2010 

51 – 100 1998 – 2010 

101 – 175 1997 – 2010 

1994 – 2006 

176+ 1996 – 2010 

0.948 0.822 

<25 Pre-1995 

25 – 50 Pre-1999 

51 – 100 Pre-1998 

101 – 175 Pre-1997 

176+ Pre-1996 

0.930 0.720 

<25 1995+ 

25 – 50 1999 – 2010 

51 – 100 1998 – 2010 

101 – 175 1997 – 2010 

176+ 1996 – 2010 

0.948 0.800 

All 

2007+ 

All 2011+ 0.948 0.852 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 1 

 NOX PM 

Port/Rail Equipment model yr Hp Total Pop tpd tpd

P Crane 2004 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2003 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2002 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2001 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2000 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1999 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1998 50 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 1997 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1996 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1995 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1994 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1993 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1992 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1991 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1989 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1988 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1987 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1986 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1985 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1983 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1982 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1981 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1980 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2004 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2003 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 2002 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2001 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2000 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1999 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1998 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Crane 1997 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1996 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1995 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1994 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1993 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1992 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1991 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1989 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1988 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1987 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1986 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1985 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1983 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1982 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 1981 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1980 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Crane 2004 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 2003 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 2002 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 2001 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 2000 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1999 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1998 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Crane 1997 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 1996 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1995 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1994 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1993 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1992 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1991 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 1989 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1988 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 2 

P Crane 1987 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1986 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Crane 1985 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1983 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1982 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Crane 1981 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Crane 1980 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Crane 2004 250 3 0.0056 0.0001 

P Crane 2003 250 5 0.0092 0.0002 

P Crane 2002 250 3 0.0075 0.0002 

P Crane 2001 250 3 0.0076 0.0002 

P Crane 2000 250 1 0.0014 0.0000 

P Crane 1999 250 1 0.0014 0.0000 

P Crane 1998 250 8 0.0184 0.0004 

P Crane 1997 250 3 0.0064 0.0001 

P Crane 1996 250 2 0.0035 0.0001 

P Crane 1995 250 1 0.0019 0.0001 

P Crane 1994 250 1 0.0019 0.0001 

P Crane 1993 250 2 0.0057 0.0003 

P Crane 1992 250 1 0.0038 0.0002 

P Crane 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 250 2 0.0077 0.0004 

P Crane 1989 250 2 0.0049 0.0002 

P Crane 1988 250 2 0.0049 0.0002 

P Crane 1987 250 2 0.0067 0.0003 

P Crane 1986 250 2 0.0081 0.0004 

P Crane 1985 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 250 0 0.0014 0.0001 

P Crane 1983 250 0 0.0014 0.0001 

P Crane 1982 250 3 0.0125 0.0007 

P Crane 1981 250 1 0.0042 0.0002 

P Crane 1980 250 4 0.0182 0.0010 

P Crane 2004 500 8 0.0233 0.0005 

P Crane 2003 500 12 0.0354 0.0008 

P Crane 2002 500 8 0.0243 0.0005 

P Crane 2001 500 8 0.0269 0.0006 

P Crane 2000 500 1 0.0062 0.0001 

P Crane 1999 500 1 0.0063 0.0001 

P Crane 1998 500 18 0.0822 0.0018 

P Crane 1997 500 6 0.0287 0.0006 

P Crane 1996 500 3 0.0158 0.0003 

P Crane 1995 500 1 0.0083 0.0004 

P Crane 1994 500 1 0.0084 0.0004 

P Crane 1993 500 4 0.0253 0.0011 

P Crane 1992 500 3 0.0170 0.0008 

P Crane 1991 500 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 500 6 0.0346 0.0016 

P Crane 1989 500 3 0.0218 0.0010 

P Crane 1988 500 3 0.0220 0.0010 

P Crane 1987 500 3 0.0298 0.0015 

P Crane 1986 500 4 0.0360 0.0018 

P Crane 1985 500 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 500 1 0.0061 0.0003 

P Crane 1983 500 1 0.0061 0.0003 

P Crane 1982 500 6 0.0557 0.0029 

P Crane 1981 500 2 0.0187 0.0010 

P Crane 1980 500 9 0.0813 0.0044 

P Crane 2004 750 4 0.0178 0.0004 

P Crane 2003 750 6 0.0284 0.0006 

P Crane 2002 750 4 0.0204 0.0004 

P Crane 2001 750 4 0.0259 0.0005 

P Crane 2000 750 1 0.0048 0.0001 

P Crane 1999 750 1 0.0048 0.0001 

P Crane 1998 750 9 0.0629 0.0014 

P Crane 1997 750 3 0.0219 0.0005 

P Crane 1996 750 2 0.0121 0.0003 

P Crane 1995 750 1 0.0064 0.0003 

P Crane 1994 750 1 0.0064 0.0003 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 3 

P Crane 1993 750 2 0.0194 0.0009 

P Crane 1992 750 1 0.0130 0.0006 

P Crane 1991 750 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 750 3 0.0265 0.0012 

P Crane 1989 750 2 0.0167 0.0008 

P Crane 1988 750 2 0.0168 0.0008 

P Crane 1987 750 2 0.0228 0.0011 

P Crane 1986 750 2 0.0275 0.0014 

P Crane 1985 750 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 750 0 0.0047 0.0002 

P Crane 1983 750 0 0.0047 0.0002 

P Crane 1982 750 3 0.0426 0.0022 

P Crane 1981 750 1 0.0143 0.0008 

P Crane 1980 750 4 0.0622 0.0033 

P Crane 2004 999 2 0.0170 0.0003 

P Crane 2003 999 3 0.0258 0.0005 

P Crane 2002 999 2 0.0168 0.0003 

P Crane 2001 999 2 0.0170 0.0004 

P Crane 2000 999 0 0.0031 0.0001 

P Crane 1999 999 0 0.0041 0.0002 

P Crane 1998 999 4 0.0537 0.0023 

P Crane 1997 999 1 0.0188 0.0008 

P Crane 1996 999 1 0.0103 0.0004 

P Crane 1995 999 0 0.0042 0.0002 

P Crane 1994 999 0 0.0042 0.0002 

P Crane 1993 999 1 0.0127 0.0006 

P Crane 1992 999 1 0.0085 0.0004 

P Crane 1991 999 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1990 999 1 0.0173 0.0008 

P Crane 1989 999 1 0.0109 0.0005 

P Crane 1988 999 1 0.0110 0.0005 

P Crane 1987 999 1 0.0149 0.0007 

P Crane 1986 999 1 0.0180 0.0009 

P Crane 1985 999 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Crane 1984 999 0 0.0030 0.0002 

P Crane 1983 999 0 0.0031 0.0002 

P Crane 1982 999 1 0.0278 0.0015 

P Crane 1981 999 0 0.0093 0.0005 

P Crane 1980 999 2 0.0407 0.0022 

P Excavator 2004 250 1 0.0033 0.0001 

P Excavator 2003 250 1 0.0025 0.0001 

P Excavator 2002 250 1 0.0037 0.0001 

P Excavator 2001 250 0 0.0023 0.0001 

P Excavator 2000 250 1 0.0039 0.0001 

P Excavator 1999 250 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Excavator 1998 250 1 0.0034 0.0001 

P Excavator 1997 250 0 0.0015 0.0000 

P Excavator 1996 250 0 0.0017 0.0000 

P Excavator 1995 250 0 0.0014 0.0001 

P Excavator 1994 250 0 0.0030 0.0001 

P Excavator 1993 250 0 0.0025 0.0001 

P Excavator 1992 250 0 0.0010 0.0000 

P Excavator 1991 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Excavator 1990 250 0 0.0012 0.0001 

P Excavator 1989 250 0 0.0013 0.0001 

P Excavator 1988 250 1 0.0048 0.0002 

P Excavator 2004 500 3 0.0169 0.0004 

P Excavator 2003 500 2 0.0121 0.0003 

P Excavator 2002 500 2 0.0148 0.0003 

P Excavator 2001 500 1 0.0100 0.0002 

P Excavator 2000 500 2 0.0215 0.0005 

P Excavator 1999 500 1 0.0051 0.0001 

P Excavator 1998 500 2 0.0190 0.0005 

P Excavator 1997 500 1 0.0082 0.0002 

P Excavator 1996 500 1 0.0093 0.0002 

P Excavator 1995 500 1 0.0079 0.0004 

P Excavator 1994 500 1 0.0167 0.0008 

P Excavator 1993 500 1 0.0138 0.0007 

P Excavator 1992 500 0 0.0054 0.0003 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 4 

P Excavator 1991 500 0 0.0030 0.0001 

P Excavator 1990 500 0 0.0064 0.0003 

P Excavator 1989 500 1 0.0071 0.0004 

P Excavator 1988 500 2 0.0264 0.0014 

P Forklift 2004 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Forklift 2003 50 1 0.0003 0.0000 

P Forklift 2002 50 4 0.0009 0.0001 

P Forklift 2001 50 2 0.0005 0.0000 

P Forklift 2000 50 2 0.0006 0.0001 

P Forklift 1999 50 1 0.0002 0.0000 

P Forklift 1998 50 3 0.0008 0.0001 

P Forklift 1997 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Forklift 1996 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Forklift 1995 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Forklift 1994 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Forklift 1993 50 1 0.0003 0.0000 

P Forklift 1992 50 2 0.0005 0.0001 

P Forklift 1991 50 2 0.0006 0.0001 

P Forklift 1990 50 1 0.0004 0.0000 

P Forklift 1989 50 1 0.0002 0.0000 

P Forklift 1988 50 14 0.0042 0.0005 

P Forklift 2004 120 1 0.0005 0.0000 

P Forklift 2003 120 5 0.0032 0.0003 

P Forklift 2002 120 15 0.0103 0.0009 

P Forklift 2001 120 8 0.0052 0.0005 

P Forklift 2000 120 9 0.0066 0.0006 

P Forklift 1999 120 4 0.0026 0.0002 

P Forklift 1998 120 10 0.0070 0.0007 

P Forklift 1997 120 2 0.0017 0.0001 

P Forklift 1996 120 1 0.0013 0.0001 

P Forklift 1995 120 1 0.0008 0.0001 

P Forklift 1994 120 1 0.0013 0.0001 

P Forklift 1993 120 4 0.0039 0.0003 

P Forklift 1992 120 6 0.0057 0.0004 

P Forklift 1991 120 7 0.0066 0.0005 

P Forklift 1990 120 5 0.0049 0.0004 

P Forklift 1989 120 3 0.0027 0.0002 

P Forklift 1988 120 53 0.0503 0.0040 

P Forklift 2004 175 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Forklift 2003 175 4 0.0032 0.0001 

P Forklift 2002 175 13 0.0136 0.0007 

P Forklift 2001 175 7 0.0069 0.0003 

P Forklift 2000 175 8 0.0087 0.0004 

P Forklift 1999 175 3 0.0035 0.0002 

P Forklift 1998 175 9 0.0093 0.0005 

P Forklift 1997 175 2 0.0018 0.0001 

P Forklift 1996 175 1 0.0016 0.0001 

P Forklift 1995 175 1 0.0010 0.0000 

P Forklift 1994 175 1 0.0016 0.0001 

P Forklift 1993 175 4 0.0048 0.0002 

P Forklift 1992 175 5 0.0070 0.0003 

P Forklift 1991 175 6 0.0081 0.0004 

P Forklift 1990 175 5 0.0060 0.0003 

P Forklift 1989 175 3 0.0033 0.0002 

P Forklift 1988 175 47 0.0621 0.0029 

P Forklift 2004 250 1 0.0008 0.0000 

P Forklift 2003 250 5 0.0045 0.0001 

P Forklift 2002 250 15 0.0183 0.0004 

P Forklift 2001 250 7 0.0093 0.0002 

P Forklift 2000 250 9 0.0117 0.0003 

P Forklift 1999 250 4 0.0048 0.0001 

P Forklift 1998 250 10 0.0126 0.0003 

P Forklift 1997 250 2 0.0024 0.0001 

P Forklift 1996 250 1 0.0018 0.0000 

P Forklift 1995 250 1 0.0016 0.0001 

P Forklift 1994 250 1 0.0024 0.0001 

P Forklift 1993 250 4 0.0074 0.0004 

P Forklift 1992 250 6 0.0108 0.0005 

P Forklift 1991 250 7 0.0126 0.0006 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 5 

P Forklift 1990 250 5 0.0093 0.0005 

P Forklift 1989 250 3 0.0051 0.0003 

P Forklift 1988 250 51 0.0969 0.0050 

P Forklift 2004 500 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Forklift 2003 500 1 0.0008 0.0000 

P Forklift 2002 500 2 0.0027 0.0001 

P Forklift 2001 500 1 0.0015 0.0000 

P Forklift 2000 500 1 0.0024 0.0001 

P Forklift 1999 500 1 0.0010 0.0000 

P Forklift 1998 500 1 0.0026 0.0001 

P Forklift 1997 500 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Forklift 1996 500 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Forklift 1995 500 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Forklift 1994 500 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Forklift 1993 500 1 0.0015 0.0001 

P Forklift 1992 500 1 0.0022 0.0001 

P Forklift 1991 500 1 0.0026 0.0001 

P Forklift 1990 500 1 0.0019 0.0001 

P Forklift 1989 500 0 0.0011 0.0001 

P Forklift 1988 500 8 0.0198 0.0010 

P Container Handling Equip 2004 120 3 0.0065 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 2003 120 1 0.0046 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 2002 120 1 0.0032 0.0003

P Container Handling Equip 2001 120 1 0.0020 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 2000 120 1 0.0044 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 1999 120 0 0.0015 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1998 120 2 0.0052 0.0005

P Container Handling Equip 1997 120 1 0.0049 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 1996 120 1 0.0037 0.0003

P Container Handling Equip 1995 120 0 0.0013 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1994 120 1 0.0021 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 1993 120 1 0.0031 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 1992 120 0 0.0010 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1991 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1990 120 0 0.0010 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1989 120 0 0.0002 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1988 120 0 0.0007 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 2004 175 15 0.0484 0.0017 

P Container Handling Equip 2003 175 9 0.0315 0.0013

P Container Handling Equip 2002 175 6 0.0285 0.0014

P Container Handling Equip 2001 175 4 0.0177 0.0009

P Container Handling Equip 2000 175 8 0.0391 0.0020

P Container Handling Equip 1999 175 3 0.0135 0.0007

P Container Handling Equip 1998 175 10 0.0465 0.0025 

P Container Handling Equip 1997 175 7 0.0343 0.0018

P Container Handling Equip 1996 175 5 0.0308 0.0013

P Container Handling Equip 1995 175 2 0.0108 0.0005

P Container Handling Equip 1994 175 3 0.0177 0.0008

P Container Handling Equip 1993 175 4 0.0261 0.0012

P Container Handling Equip 1992 175 1 0.0083 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 1991 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1990 175 1 0.0084 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 1989 175 0 0.0014 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1988 175 1 0.0059 0.0003

P Container Handling Equip 2004 250 31 0.1359 0.0028 

P Container Handling Equip 2003 250 18 0.0871 0.0019 

P Container Handling Equip 2002 250 12 0.0755 0.0017 

P Container Handling Equip 2001 250 8 0.0470 0.0011

P Container Handling Equip 2000 250 17 0.1042 0.0024 

P Container Handling Equip 1999 250 6 0.0362 0.0009

P Container Handling Equip 1998 250 20 0.1251 0.0030 

P Container Handling Equip 1997 250 14 0.0927 0.0023 

P Container Handling Equip 1996 250 11 0.0705 0.0016 

P Container Handling Equip 1995 250 4 0.0325 0.0015

P Container Handling Equip 1994 250 6 0.0534 0.0025

P Container Handling Equip 1993 250 9 0.0789 0.0038

P Container Handling Equip 1992 250 3 0.0252 0.0012

P Container Handling Equip 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1990 250 3 0.0258 0.0013
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 6 

P Container Handling Equip 1989 250 0 0.0043 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 1988 250 2 0.0180 0.0009

P Container Handling Equip 2004 500 38 0.2076 0.0046 

P Container Handling Equip 2003 500 22 0.1220 0.0028 

P Container Handling Equip 2002 500 15 0.0889 0.0020 

P Container Handling Equip 2001 500 9 0.0608 0.0014

P Container Handling Equip 2000 500 21 0.1700 0.0039 

P Container Handling Equip 1999 500 7 0.0590 0.0014

P Container Handling Equip 1998 500 24 0.2041 0.0049 

P Container Handling Equip 1997 500 18 0.1512 0.0037 

P Container Handling Equip 1996 500 14 0.1151 0.0027 

P Container Handling Equip 1995 500 5 0.0529 0.0024

P Container Handling Equip 1994 500 8 0.0870 0.0041

P Container Handling Equip 1993 500 11 0.1287 0.0062 

P Container Handling Equip 1992 500 4 0.0411 0.0020

P Container Handling Equip 1991 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1990 500 4 0.0420 0.0021

P Container Handling Equip 1989 500 1 0.0071 0.0004

P Container Handling Equip 1988 500 2 0.0294 0.0015

P Container Handling Equip 2004 999 0 0.0060 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 2003 999 0 0.0036 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 2002 999 0 0.0025 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 2001 999 0 0.0015 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 2000 999 0 0.0034 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1999 999 0 0.0015 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1998 999 0 0.0053 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 1997 999 0 0.0040 0.0002

P Container Handling Equip 1996 999 0 0.0030 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1995 999 0 0.0011 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1994 999 0 0.0017 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1993 999 0 0.0026 0.0001

P Container Handling Equip 1992 999 0 0.0008 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1991 999 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1990 999 0 0.0008 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1989 999 0 0.0001 0.0000

P Container Handling Equip 1988 999 0 0.0006 0.0000

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 120 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 120 1 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 120 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 120 1 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 120 1 0.0006 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 120 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 120 1 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 7 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 120 1 0.0007 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 175 1 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 175 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 175 1 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 175 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 175 0 0.0007 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 250 1 0.0011 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 250 1 0.0009 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 250 1 0.0013 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 250 1 0.0008 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 250 1 0.0013 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 250 1 0.0012 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 250 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 250 1 0.0010 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 250 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 250 1 0.0016 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 500 1 0.0020 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 500 1 0.0014 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 500 1 0.0018 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 500 1 0.0012 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 500 1 0.0026 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 500 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 500 1 0.0023 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 500 0 0.0010 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 500 0 0.0011 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 500 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 500 0.56 0.0020 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 500 0 0.0016 0.0001 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 500 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 500 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 500 0 0.0008 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 500 0 0.0008 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 500 1 0.0031 0.0002 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2004 750 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2003 750 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2002 750 0 0.0008 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2001 750 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 2000 750 0 0.0011 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1999 750 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1998 750 0 0.0010 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1997 750 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1996 750 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1995 750 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1994 750 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1993 750 0 0.0007 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1992 750 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1991 750 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1990 750 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1989 750 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Other General Industrial Equip 1988 750 0 0.0013 0.0001 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 8 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2004 50 1 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2003 50 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2002 50 1 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2001 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2000 50 1 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1999 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1998 50 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1997 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1996 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1995 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1994 50 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1993 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1992 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1991 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1990 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1989 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1988 50 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2004 120 1 0.0013 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2003 120 1 0.0012 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2002 120 1 0.0013 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2001 120 1 0.0008 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2000 120 1 0.0014 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1999 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1998 120 1 0.0012 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1997 120 0 0.0007 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1996 120 0 0.0007 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1995 120 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1994 120 1 0.0010 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1993 120 0 0.0008 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1992 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1991 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1990 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1989 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1988 120 1 0.0016 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2004 175 1 0.0010 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2003 175 1 0.0008 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2002 175 1 0.0012 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2001 175 0 0.0008 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2000 175 1 0.0013 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1999 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1998 175 1 0.0011 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1997 175 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1996 175 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1995 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1994 175 0 0.0009 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1993 175 0 0.0007 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1992 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1991 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1990 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1989 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1988 175 1 0.0014 0.0001 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2004 250 1 0.0009 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2003 250 0 0.0007 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2002 250 1 0.0010 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2001 250 0 0.0006 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 2000 250 1 0.0011 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1999 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1998 250 0 0.0010 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1997 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1996 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1995 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1994 250 0 0.0008 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1993 250 0 0.0007 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1992 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1991 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1990 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1989 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Sweeper/Scrubber 1988 250 0 0.0013 0.0001 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 9 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 50 1 0.0002 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 50 4 0.0013 0.0001 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 50 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 50 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 50 0 0.0000 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 50 1 0.0004 0.0000 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 120 0 0.0002 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 120 2 0.0015 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 120 1 0.0005 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 120 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 120 11 0.0084 0.0008 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 120 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 120 1 0.0013 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 120 1 0.0010 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 120 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 120 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 120 3 0.0035 0.0003

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 175 0 0.0001 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 175 1 0.0013 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 175 0 0.0002 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 175 6 0.0071 0.0004

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 175 0 0.0002 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 175 1 0.0010 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 175 1 0.0008 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 175 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 175 2 0.0028 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 250 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 250 1 0.0023 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 250 0 0.0008 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 250 0 0.0004 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 250 8 0.0129 0.0003

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 250 0 0.0004 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 250 1 0.0016 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 250 1 0.0016 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 250 0 0.0006 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 250 2 0.0058 0.0003

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 500 1 0.0010 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 500 0 0.0000 0.0000
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 10 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 500 3 0.0067 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 500 1 0.0025 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 500 1 0.0016 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 500 18 0.0519 0.0013 

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 500 1 0.0016 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 500 2 0.0065 0.0002

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 500 2 0.0065 0.0003

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 500 1 0.0023 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 500 6 0.0234 0.0012

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 750 0 0.0002 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 750 0 0.0013 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 750 0 0.0006 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 750 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 750 2 0.0095 0.0002

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 750 0 0.0003 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 750 0 0.0012 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 750 0 0.0012 0.0001

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 750 0 0.0004 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 750 0 0.0000 0.0000

P Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 750 0 0.0043 0.0002

P Yard Tractor 2004 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 2003 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 2002 120 0 0.0004 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 2001 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 2000 120 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1999 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1998 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1997 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1996 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1995 120 0 0.0002 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1994 120 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1993 120 0 0.0003 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 1992 120 0 0.0005 0.0000 

P Yard Tractor 2004 175 153 0.5160 0.0144 

P Yard Tractor 2003 175 101 0.4318 0.0117 

P Yard Tractor 2002 175 118 0.6316 0.0211 

P Yard Tractor 2001 175 71 0.3840 0.0131 

P Yard Tractor 2000 175 134 0.7319 0.0256 

P Yard Tractor 1999 175 25 0.1359 0.0048 

P Yard Tractor 1998 175 45 0.2520 0.0092 

P Yard Tractor 1997 175 33 0.1852 0.0069 

P Yard Tractor 1996 175 46 0.2988 0.0091 

P Yard Tractor 1995 175 36 0.2310 0.0094 

P Yard Tractor 1994 175 86 0.6260 0.0287 

P Yard Tractor 1993 175 56 0.3990 0.0187 

P Yard Tractor 1992 175 94 0.6949 0.0329 

P Yard Tractor 2004 250 152 0.6144 0.0116 

P Yard Tractor 2003 250 100 0.5110 0.0084 

P Yard Tractor 2002 250 117 0.7217 0.0123 

P Yard Tractor 2001 250 71 0.4412 0.0077 

P Yard Tractor 2000 250 133 0.8453 0.0153 

P Yard Tractor 1999 250 24 0.1578 0.0029 

P Yard Tractor 1998 250 45 0.2940 0.0056 

P Yard Tractor 1997 250 33 0.2172 0.0043 

P Yard Tractor 1996 250 46 0.3065 0.0057 

P Yard Tractor 1995 250 35 0.2958 0.0130 

P Yard Tractor 1994 250 85 0.8054 0.0401 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 11 

P Yard Tractor 1993 250 56 0.5156 0.0263 

P Yard Tractor 1992 250 93 0.9018 0.0467 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 12 

R Crane 2004 250 0 0.0011 0.0000 

R Crane 2003 250 0 0.0010 0.0000 

R Crane 2002 250 0 0.0015 0.0000 

R Crane 2001 250 0 0.0015 0.0000 

R Crane 2000 250 0 0.0015 0.0000 

R Crane 1999 250 0 0.0008 0.0000 

R Crane 1998 250 0 0.0010 0.0000 

R Crane 1997 250 0 0.0013 0.0000 

R Crane 1996 250 0 0.0013 0.0000 

R Crane 1995 250 0 0.0017 0.0001 

R Crane 1994 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Crane 1993 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Crane 1992 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Crane 1991 250 0 0.0010 0.0000 

R Crane 1990 250 0 0.0007 0.0000 

R Crane 1989 250 0 0.0011 0.0000 

R Crane 1988 250 0 0.0014 0.0001 

R Crane 1987 250 0 0.0014 0.0001 

R Crane 1986 250 0 0.0029 0.0002 

R Crane 2004 500 6 0.0152 0.0003 

R Crane 2003 500 5 0.0123 0.0003 

R Crane 2002 500 6 0.0157 0.0003 

R Crane 2001 500 6 0.0174 0.0004 

R Crane 2000 500 6 0.0221 0.0005 

R Crane 1999 500 3 0.0111 0.0002 

R Crane 1998 500 4 0.0150 0.0003 

R Crane 1997 500 5 0.0189 0.0004 

R Crane 1996 500 5 0.0187 0.0004 

R Crane 1995 500 5 0.0246 0.0011 

R Crane 1994 500 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Crane 1993 500 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Crane 1992 500 1 0.0050 0.0002 

R Crane 1991 500 3 0.0153 0.0007 

R Crane 1990 500 2 0.0103 0.0005 

R Crane 1989 500 3 0.0155 0.0007 

R Crane 1988 500 4 0.0208 0.0010 

R Crane 1987 500 3 0.0212 0.0011 

R Crane 1986 500 5 0.0426 0.0021 

R Forklift 2004 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2003 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2002 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2001 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2000 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1999 120 1 0.0002 0.0000 

R Forklift 1998 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1997 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1996 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1995 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1994 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1993 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1992 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1991 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1990 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1989 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 1988 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1987 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 13 

R Forklift 1986 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1985 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1984 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Forklift 2004 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Forklift 2003 175 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Forklift 2002 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2001 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 2000 175 1 0.0007 0.0000 

R Forklift 1999 175 3 0.0022 0.0001 

R Forklift 1998 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1997 175 1 0.0007 0.0000 

R Forklift 1996 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 1995 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 1994 175 1 0.0009 0.0000 

R Forklift 1993 175 1 0.0009 0.0000 

R Forklift 1992 175 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 1991 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1990 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1989 175 1 0.0009 0.0000 

R Forklift 1988 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1987 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1986 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1985 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1984 175 0 0.0006 0.0000 

R Forklift 2004 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Forklift 2003 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Forklift 2002 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 2001 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 2000 250 1 0.0008 0.0000 

R Forklift 1999 250 3 0.0024 0.0001 

R Forklift 1998 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1997 250 1 0.0008 0.0000 

R Forklift 1996 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Forklift 1995 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

R Forklift 1994 250 1 0.0011 0.0001 

R Forklift 1993 250 1 0.0011 0.0001 

R Forklift 1992 250 0 0.0006 0.0000 

R Forklift 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1990 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1989 250 1 0.0011 0.0001 

R Forklift 1988 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1987 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1986 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1985 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Forklift 1984 250 0 0.0008 0.0000 

R Container Handling Equip 2004 175 0 0.0002 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2003 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2002 175 0 0.0007 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2001 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2000 175 0 0.0007 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1999 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1998 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1997 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1996 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1995 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1994 175 0 0.0022 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1993 175 0 0.0004 0.0000
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 14 

R Container Handling Equip 1992 175 0 0.0004 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1991 175 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1990 175 0 0.0013 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1989 175 0 0.0018 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1988 175 0 0.0005 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1987 175 0 0.0006 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1986 175 0 0.0006 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2004 250 1 0.0021 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2003 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2002 250 1 0.0058 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 2001 250 1 0.0029 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 2000 250 1 0.0059 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1999 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1998 250 1 0.0030 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1997 250 1 0.0031 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1996 250 1 0.0031 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1995 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1994 250 3 0.0204 0.0010

R Container Handling Equip 1993 250 1 0.0041 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1992 250 1 0.0042 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1990 250 2 0.0128 0.0006

R Container Handling Equip 1989 250 2 0.0173 0.0009

R Container Handling Equip 1988 250 1 0.0044 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1987 250 1 0.0060 0.0003

R Container Handling Equip 1986 250 1 0.0059 0.0003

R Container Handling Equip 2004 500 0 0.0020 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2003 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 2002 500 1 0.0043 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 2001 500 0 0.0024 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 2000 500 1 0.0061 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1999 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1998 500 0 0.0031 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1997 500 0 0.0032 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1996 500 0 0.0031 0.0001

R Container Handling Equip 1995 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1994 500 2 0.0210 0.0010

R Container Handling Equip 1993 500 0 0.0042 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1992 500 0 0.0043 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1991 500 0 0.0000 0.0000

R Container Handling Equip 1990 500 1 0.0132 0.0007

R Container Handling Equip 1989 500 2 0.0178 0.0009

R Container Handling Equip 1988 500 0 0.0045 0.0002

R Container Handling Equip 1987 500 0 0.0061 0.0003

R Container Handling Equip 1986 500 0 0.0061 0.0003

R Other General Industrial Equip 2004 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2003 175 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2002 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2001 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2000 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1999 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1998 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1997 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1996 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1995 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1994 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1993 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 15 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1992 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1991 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1990 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1989 175 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1988 175 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2004 250 0 0.0007 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2003 250 0 0.0005 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2002 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2001 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2000 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1999 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1998 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1997 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1996 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1995 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1994 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1993 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1992 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1990 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1989 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1988 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2004 500 1 0.0024 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2003 500 0 0.0015 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2002 500 0 0.0009 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2001 500 0 0.0007 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 2000 500 0 0.0008 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1999 500 0 0.0005 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1998 500 0 0.0015 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1997 500 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1996 500 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1995 500 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1994 500 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1993 500 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1992 500 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1991 500 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1990 500 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1989 500 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Other General Industrial Equip 1988 500 0 0.0010 0.0001 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 2004 250 0 0.0004 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 2003 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 2002 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 2001 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 2000 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1999 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1998 250 0 0.0003 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1997 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1996 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1995 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1994 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1993 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1992 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1991 250 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1990 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1989 250 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Sweeper/Scrubber 1988 250 0 0.0002 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2004 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 
2004 Emission Estimates (tons per day) by Facility Type, by Equipment Type, by 

Model Year, and by Horsepower Category

BB - 16 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2003 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2002 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2001 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 2000 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1999 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1998 120 0 0.0001 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1997 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1996 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1995 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1994 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1993 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1992 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1991 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1990 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1989 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1988 120 0 0.0000 0.0000 

R Yard Tractor 2004 175 70 0.1071 0.0030 

R Yard Tractor 2003 175 42 0.0791 0.0021 

R Yard Tractor 2002 175 22 0.0518 0.0017 

R Yard Tractor 2001 175 13 0.0302 0.0010 

R Yard Tractor 2000 175 10 0.0241 0.0008 

R Yard Tractor 1999 175 3 0.0081 0.0003 

R Yard Tractor 1998 175 27 0.0674 0.0024 

R Yard Tractor 1997 175 2 0.0050 0.0002 

R Yard Tractor 1996 175 2 0.0054 0.0002 

R Yard Tractor 2004 250 36 0.0715 0.0014 

R Yard Tractor 2003 250 21 0.0525 0.0009 

R Yard Tractor 2002 250 11 0.0332 0.0006 

R Yard Tractor 2001 250 6 0.0195 0.0003 

R Yard Tractor 2000 250 5 0.0156 0.0003 

R Yard Tractor 1999 250 2 0.0053 0.0001 

R Yard Tractor 1998 250 14 0.0441 0.0008 

R Yard Tractor 1997 250 1 0.0033 0.0001 

R Yard Tractor 1996 250 1 0.0031 0.0001 
California Air Resources Board Survey: 

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermodal Facilities 

BC - 1 

Survey Instructions 

Before you begin filling out the Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment Survey (Survey) form, 

please read the instructions carefully. A sample Survey has been included in this 

packet for your assistance. 

THE SURVEY FORM 

Explanations for each Survey data field are provided below. If you have more than one 

terminal, please complete a separate Survey for each terminal. Please complete all 

pages of the Survey to the best of your knowledge. If you do not have exact numbers 

or data for specific fields, please provide your best estimation. If you need additional 

forms for any of the sections, you may either photocopy each page needed or download 

blank survey pages from the following web site address: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/cargo/documents/survey.htm. 

Please return the completed Surveys by January 31, 2005, to the following: 

California Air Resources Board 

Attn: Lisa Williams 

Stationary Source Division 

P.O. Box 2815 

Sacramento, CA 95812-2815 

CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS ENCLOSED (if that’s the 

case) 

In an effort to simplify and streamline the data gathering process, we have made the 

Survey forms available electronically. If you prefer to submit the Survey forms 

electronically, please see the Electronic Submittal Form in Part II for the information 

about how to obtain a diskette (or download the Survey from the Internet). To access 

the Survey on our website, please go to: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/cargo/documents/survey.htm. 

If you have any questions, please contact Lisa Williams at (916) 327-1498 or via e-mail 

at lwilliam@arb.ca.gov. 

Survey Data Fields

Section I: Terminal Information 

Terminal/Facility Name: Please enter the terminal or facility that owns or operates the 

cargo handling equipment. 

Port/Rail Yard: Port or rail yard where the terminal operates. 

Address, City, Zip: Mailing address, city, and zip code for the terminal/facility. 
California Air Resources Board Survey: 

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermodal Facilities 

BC - 2 

Contact Name, Phone, E-mail: Please enter the name and title of the person to be 

contacted by ARB if we have questions about the information provided. 

Small Business: If your terminal/facility is a California Small Business as defined by 

California Gov. Code Sec. 11342.610, please check the "Yes" box. 

Confidential: Please indicate as to whether or not you would like ARB to treat your 

information as confidential information. If you designate information as confidential, you 

also need to fill out the confidential information submittal form and return that to ARB 

with your Survey. 

Section II: Forecasted Growth 

This section is intended to provide us with your best estimates on forecasted growth. 

This information will be used to help provide us with a general estimate of emissions 

and trends. 

Avg # New Replacement Equipment Purchased Annually: Please enter the average 

number of new pieces of equipment purchased to replace previously existing equipment 

over a 12-month period for each equipment type. 

Expected Average Useful Life in # Years: Please enter the average # of years each 

equipment type is expected to last. 

Forecasted Growth for 2010 

Expected % Increase in # of Equipment: Please indicate the percentage of increase in 

the number of each equipment type that you expect to see by 2010. 

Expected % Increase in # of Hours: Please indicate the expected percentage of 

increase by 2010 in the number of hours each equipment type will be operated. 

Forecasted Growth for 2020 

Expected % Increase in # of Equipment: Please indicate the percentage of increase in 

the number of each equipment type that you expect to see between now and 2020. 

Expected % Increase in # of Hours: Please indicate the expected percentage of 

increase between now and 2020 in the number of hours each equipment type will be 

operated. 

Comments: Please provide any additional comments you may have. 

Section III: In-Use Equipment and Engine Information 

Equipment Type: Please enter the type of equipment (i.e., forklift, yard truck, RTG 

crane, etc.). 
California Air Resources Board Survey: 

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermodal Facilities 

BC - 3 

# of Equipment: If you have multiple equipment with identical information (same make, 

model, engines, fuel, horsepower, rebuild/repower info, and average hours), please 

enter the number of equipment here. If any of the equipment information differs (i.e., 

one was repowered but one was not), please enter each one individually on its own line. 

Equipment Make and Model Year: The manufacturer and model year of the equipment 

(not the engine). 

Engine Make, Model, and Model Year: Please enter the manufacturer, model number, 

and model year for the engine (not the equipment). 

Fuel Type: Please enter one of the following fuel type codes for the equipment: 

Rated HP: The rated horsepower of the engine. 

Repowered?: Please indicate if the engine were repowered, and if so, what year(s) the 

repower occurred. Repowered means that the engine was replaced (into the existing 

equipment). 

Rebuilt?: Please indicate if the engine were rebuilt, and if so, what year(s). 

Avg. Annual Hours: The average number of hours the equipment operates each 12-

month year. 

Section IV: Emission Controls 

Please only complete this section for the equipment that have emission controls 

installed. 

# from Section III: Please enter the corresponding # from Section III column 1. 

Control Equipment: Please check the appropriate box(es) for the emission control(s) 

installed (DOC for diesel oxidation catalyst, DPF for diesel particulate filter, SCR for 

selective catalytic reduction, or Other). If Other is checked, please indicate the 

emission control system. 

Year Installed: The year the emission control equipment was installed on the engine. 

Installed cost: The cost of the equipment including installation. 

Avg. Annual Maintenance Cost: The average cost of maintenance over each 12-month 

period. 

• A = EPA Off-Road Diesel 

• B = CARB Diesel #2 

• C = Ultra-low Sulfur (15 ppm) Diesel 

• D = Ethanol-blended Diesel (i.e., O2 Diesel) 

• E = Emulsified Diesel (i.e., PuriNOx)

• F = Biodiesel 20% (B20) 

• G = Biodiesel 100% (B100) 

• H = Natural Gas (CNG, LNG) 

• I = Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) 

• J = Electricity
California Air Resources Board Survey: 

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermodal Facilities 

BC - 4 

Purchased with new equipment or engine?: Please indicate if the emission controls 

came with a new piece of equipment or with a new engine. 

Grants Received: Please indicate if either a port grant or Carl Moyer Program funding 

was provided for the emission controls. 

Notes or Comments: Please provide any additional information you feel might be 

valuable (i.e., your experience with the emission control equipment failures or 

successes). 

Section V: Confidentiality Statement 

Please complete this section if you have indicated in Section I that the information you 

have provided on this Survey is confidential. 
California Air Resources Board Survey: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermod

BC - 5 

Section I: Terminal/Facility Information Terminal/Facility Name: Port/Rail Yard: 

Address: City: 

Contact Name: Small Business*: Yes No Contact Phone: Contact E-Mail: 

* Small business as defined by California Gov. Code 1134

 Confidential? Yes No If "Yes", pl

Statement 

Section II: Forecasted Growth 

Equipment Type 

Yard Trucks 

RTG Cranes

Cranes (not RTG) 

Top Picks 

Side Picks 

Reach Stackers 

RubberTired Loaders Forklifts 

Skid Steer Loaders Exc

Avg # New Replacement Equipment Purchased Annually Expected Useful Life in # Years Forecasted Growth for 2010Expected % Increase in # of Equipment Expected % Increase in # of Hours Forecasted Growth for 2020Expected % Increase in # of Equipment Expected % Increase in # of Hours Comments: 
California Air Resources Board Survey: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermod

BC - 6 

Terminal/Facility Name: Port/Rail Yard: Section III: In-Use Equipment and Engine Information 

# Equipment Type # of Equipment Equipment Make Equipment Model Year Engine Make Engine Model Engine Model Year Fuel Type* Rated HP Repow1 

No 

2 

No 

3 

No 

4 

No 

5 

No 

6 

No 

* Fuel Type Codes: 

Please photocopy this page if additional room is needed.

• A = EPA Off-Road Diesel • B = CARB Diesel #2 • C = Ultra-low Sulfur (15 ppm) Diesel • D = Ethanol-blended Diesel (i.e., O2 Diesel) • E = Emulsified Diesel (i.e., PuriNOx)

• F = Biodiesel 20% (B20) • G = Biodiesel 100% (B100) • H = Natural Gas (CNG, LNG) • I = Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) • J = Electricity
California Air Resources Board Survey: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermod

BC - 7 

Terminal/Facility Name: Port/Rail Yard: 

Section IV: Emission Controls 

# from 

Section III Control Equipment* Year Installed Installed Cost Avg. Annual Maintenance Cost Purchased with new equipment or engine? Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

DOC DPF SCR Other 

_____________ 

No Yes Port Gra

Please photocopy this page if additional room is needed.
California Air Resources Board Survey: 

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Intermodal Facilities 

BC - 8 

Section V: Confidentiality Statement

If you wish to designate any information contained in your survey data as CONFIDENTIAL 

INFORMATION, please provide the information requested below and return it with your 

completed Survey form.

In accordance with Title 17, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Sections 91000 to 

91022, and the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq.), 

the information that a company provides to the Air Resources Board (ARB) may be 

released (1) to the public upon request, except trade secrets which are not emissions 

data or other information which is exempt from disclosure or the disclosure of which is 

prohibited by law, and 2) to the Federal Environmental Protection Agency, which 

protects trade secrets as provided in Section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act and 

amendments thereto (42 USC 7401 et seq.) and in federal regulation, and 3) to other 

public agencies provided that those agencies preserve the protections afforded 

information which is identified as a trade secret, or otherwise exempt from disclosure by 

law (Section 39660(e)).

Trade secrets, as defined in Government Code 6254.7, are not public records and therefore will 

not be released to the public. However, the California Public Records Act states that air 

pollution emission data are always public records, even if the data comes within the definition of 

trade secrets. Even so, the information used to calculate air pollution data is not "emission 

data," and will not be released to the public if it is a trade secret. 

If any company believes that any of the information it may provide is a trade secret or otherwise 

exempt from disclosure under any provision of law, it must identify the confidential 

information as such at the time of submission to the ARB and must provide the name, 

address, and telephone number of the individual to be consulted. If the ARB receives a 

request for disclosure or seeks to disclose the data claimed to be confidential, the ARB may ask 

the company to provide documentation of its claim of trade secret or exemption at a later date. 

Data identified as confidential will not be disclosed unless the ARB determines, in accordance 

with the above referenced regulations, that the data do not qualify for a legal exemption from 

disclosure. The regulations establish substantial safeguards before any such disclosure. 

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 

In accordance with the provisions of Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 91000 to 

91022, and the California Public Records Act (Government Code Sections 6250 et seq.) 

Company Name: 

declares that all the information submitted in response to the California Air Resources Board’s 

information request on the Survey is confidential “trade secret” information, and request that it 

be protected as such from public disclosure. All inquiries pertaining to the confidentiality of this 

information should be directed to the following person:

Printed Name: Title: 

Signature: Date: 

Mailing Address: 

City/State: Zip/Country: 

Telephone: E-Mail Address: