## Appendix B

Emissions Estimation Methodology for Commercial Harbor Craft

Operating in California

### B

- 1



# Emission s Estimation Methodol ogy for

Commercial Harbor Craft Operating in California

### B

- 3 

## Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 6

I. INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 11

A. Background

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 11

B. Purpose and Overview

................................ ................................ .............................. 12

C. Public Process

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 13

II. EMISSION ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY

................................ ............................... 14

A. Emission Inventory Inputs

................................ ................................ ......................... 14

1. Base Year Vessel Population and Vessel Profiles

................................ ................ 14

2. Base Year Engine Population and Engine Profiles

................................ ............... 18

3. Future Year Vessel and Engine Population

................................ ........................... 19

4. Engine Activity

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 20

5. Zero

- hour Emission Factor

................................ ................................ ........................ 21

6. Fuel Correction Factor

................................ ................................ ............................... 22

7. Engine Deterioration

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 23

B. Methodology

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 24

1. Overview

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 24

2. S Ox Emission Estimation

................................ ................................ .......................... 25

3. Spatial Allocation

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 26

4. Additional Considerations and Assumptions

................................ .......................... 28

III. EMISSION ESTIMATES

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 30

REFERENCES

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 33

Appendix A Commercial Harbor Craft Emission Facto r Table

................................ ............ 34

### B

- 4 

## List of Tables

Table ES

- 1 Commercial Harbor Craft Emissions in California in 2004 (Tons/day)

.......... 7

Table ES

- 2 NOx Emissions By Engine Type and Vessel Type in 2004

............................. 7

Table ES

- 3 NOx, PM Emissions By Air District and Air Basin in 2004

............................... 9

Table I

- 1 Categories of Commercial Harbor Craft Included in the Emissions Inventory 13

Table II

- 1 California Commercial Harbor Craft Population by Vessel type and by Distri ct
in 2004

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 17

Table II

- 2 California Commercial Harbor Craft Engine Profile by Vessel Type

............... 19

Table II

- 3 Engine Load Factor b y Vessel Type and by Engine Use

................................ . 21

Table II

- 4 Fuel Correction Factor

................................ ................................ ............................ 23

Table II

- 5 Engine Deterioration Factor

................................ ................................ ................... 24

Table II

- 6 Statewide Average of Percent of Vessel Activity at Varying Distances from

Shore

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 26

Table II

- 7 Summary of Percent of Time Sp ent within Land Side Air Basins and Outer

Continental Shelf Air Basins

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 27

Table III

- 1 Commercial Harbor Craft Emissions in California in 2004 (Tons/day)

.......... 30

Table III

- 2 NOx Emissions By Engine Type and Vessel Type in 2004

............................. 31

Table III

- 3 NOx, PM Emissions By Air District and Air Basin in 2004

............................... 31

### B

- 5 

## List of Figure s

Figure ES

- 1 Illustration of California Air Districts and OCS Air Basins

............................... 8

Figure ES

- 2 Estimation of Commercial Harbor Craft NOx, PM Emissions 2004

- 2025

.... 9

Figure II

- 1 Illustration of Engine Attrition Curve

................................ ................................ .... 20

Figure II

- 2 Illu stration of the Commercial Harbor Emission Estimation Methodology

.... 25

Figure II

- 3 The Overlap Between the California Department of Fish and Game’s Fish Landings Grid System and the ARB’s “Cal ifornia Coastal Waters”

................................ .... 29

Figure III

- 1 Illustration of California Air Districts and OCS Air Basins

............................... 32

Figure III

- 2 Estimati on of Commercial Harbor Craft NOx, PM Emissions 2004

- 2025

.... 33

### B

- 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Air Resources Board ( ARB ) staff have developed a consistent methodology to estimate

emissions from commercial harbor craft in California. Th is updated inventory will be

used to support regulatory analysis of statewide regulations to reduce emissions from these marine engines. Other goals in undertaking this emissions inventory update were

to:

• Update the inventory to reflect the most current harbor craft fleet;

• Accurately reflect adopted regulations and other regulatory programs in the baseline inventory and in any forecasts.

• Establish a structure that would allow allocation of the statewide emissions to
individual air pollution control distr icts and air basins;

In the Proposed Regulation for Diesel Engines on Commercial Harbor Craft,

“c ommercial harbor craft ” means any private, commercial, government, or military

marine vessels includ ing , but not limited to, passenger ferries, tug boats, tow boats, push

- boats, crew vessels, work boats, pilot vessels, supply boats, research vessels, United States Coast Guard vessels, hovercraft, emergency response harbor craft, and barge vessels that do not otherwise meet the definition of ocean

- going vessels or
recreational vessel s

.

This inventory covers commercial harbor craft that operate within California coastal waters and inland waterways, and have a home port located in California. Due to limited information currently available about the number of U. S. Navy and/or U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) vessels, vessel characteristics, and vessel activity, we decided not to include emissions from these vessel types into this inventory.

For this inventory purpose, we grouped commercial harbor craft into nine types of vessels, including commercial fishing vessels, charter fishing vessels, crew and supply boats, ferry and excursion vessels, pilot vessels, tow boats, tug boats, work boats, and
“others”, i.e. other type of vessels that do not fit into the above eight cate gories.

To estimate California statewide commercial harbor craft emissions, we first estimated vessel type and region specific emissions rates, i.e. average emissions per engine per

year, us ing an activity

- based approach based on engine information col lected in the

2004 ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey . We then estimated statewide emissions by multiplying number of engine in each engine category and in each region by average emissions per engine

.

Using the proposed methodology, we estimate statewid e emissions from commercial

harbor craft diesel

- fueled engines in 2004 were about 3.3 tons per day of diesel PM, about 73.2 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOx ). Detailed emission estimates are presented in Table ES

- 1.

### B

- 7

Table ES

- 1 Commercial Harbo r Craft Emissions in California in 2004 (Tons/ d ay)

Vessel Type Vessel

Population Engine

Population NOx PM ROG CO
Charter Fishing 563 1,419 12.7 0.6 0.9 3.3

Commercial Fishing 2,727 4,309 17.4 0.8 1.3 4.8
Crew and Supply 64 230 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.4
Ferry/Ex cursion 416 1,348 21.0 0.9 1.4 5.6

Pilot Vessels 27 50 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1

Tow Boats 35 114 3.0 0.1 0.2 0.7
Tug Boats 128 449 15.3 0.6 1.0 3.8

Work Boats 89 158 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1

Others 136 214 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.4

Total 4,185 8,291 73.2 3.3 5.0 19.2



### Ferry/ex cursion vessel s and tug/tow boats jointly account for about 14% of the

s tatewide harbor craft population and 50% of the statewi de harbor craft emissions. The engines of these vessels are relatively larger and operate more often tha n other vessel categorie s. Commercial fishing vessels account for 65% of the harbor craft population but only emit around 25% of the emissions.

Table ES

- 2 provides NOx emissions by engine and vessel type. P r opulsion engines

account for 93% of NOx emissions from commercial harb or craft.

Table ES

- 2 NOx Emissions By Engine Type and Vessel Type in 2004

Main Engine Auxiliary Engine

Vessel Type Number of Engines T ons/day

NOx Number of

Engines T ons/day

NOx
Charter Fishing 997 12.1 422 0.6

Commercial Fishing 3,054 14.8 1,254 2.6
Crew and Supply 160 1.1 70 0.4
Ferry/Excursion 836 20.2 512 0.8

Pilot Vessels 46 0.4 4 0.0

Tow Boats 74 2.8 41 0.2
Tug Boats 246 14.9 204 0.4

Work Boats 130 0.5 28 0.0

Others 151 1.4 63 0.1

Total 5,693 68.1 2,598 5.1



### Table ES

- 3 summarizes NOx and PM emissions by Air Quality Management District (AQMD) or Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) air basin in calendar year 2004. The AQMDs and APCDs are commonly called air districts.

OCS air basin covers 3

- 100 nautical miles from shore. Figure ES

- 1 illustrates these air

districts and OCS air basins.

### B

- 8

Figure ES

- 1 Illustration of California Air Districts and OCS Air Basins

About one third of the state harbor craft are in the Bay Area AQMD. These vessels

account f or about 37% of statewide NOx or PM emissions. South Coast AQMD has

18% of the statewide harbor craft and account for about 26% of the NOx or PM emissions. San Diego County APCD only has 7% of the statewide population but these

vessels emitted about 12% o f statewide harbor craft NOx or PM emissions. These three air districts jointly are home to 60% of the statewide harbor craft and these vessels are responsible for 75% of statewide NOx or PM emissions.

### B

- 9

Table ES

- 3 NOx, PM Emissions By Air District and Air Basin in 2004

Air Districts Number of

Vessels NOx

Tons/year NOx in

OCS PM

Tons/day PM in

OCS
Bay Area AQMD (BA) 1,468 26.9 10.2 1.2 0.5

El Dorado County APCD (ED) 9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Mendocino County AQMD (MEN) 169 1.3 1.1 0.1 0.0

Monterey Bay Uni fied APCD (MBU) 379 3.6 2.7 0.2 0.1

North Coast Unified APCD (NCU) 299 2.3 1.9 0.1 0.1
Northern Sonoma County APCD (NS) 145 1.2 1.0 0.1 0.0
Placer County APCD (PLA) 9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
San Diego County APCD (SD) 307 9.2 5.5 0.4 0.2
San Joaquin Valley Un ified APCD (SJU) 43 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
San Luis Obispo County APCD (SLO) 145 1.4 1.1 0.1 0.1
Santa Barbara County APCD (SB) 193 2.7 2.0 0.1 0.1

South Coast AQMD (SC) 745 18.7 11.7 0.8 0.5
Ventura County APCD (VEN) 194 2.5 1.8 0.1 0.1

Yolo/Solano AQMD (YS ) 81 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.0

Total 4,185 73.2 38.9 3.3 1.8



### Statewide about 53% of the emissions occur in the Outer Continental Shelf air basin. Generally fishing vessels spend the most time in the Outer Continental Shelf, while ferries tend to spend the most time closer to shore.

Figure ES

- 2 Estimation of Commercial Harbor Craft NOx, PM Emissions 2004

- 2025

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025

Calendar YearTons/day NOx



### 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4Tons/day PM



### NOx PM

### B

- 10

Figure ES

- 2 illustrates the change of commercial harbor craft NOx and PM emissions

over time from 2004 to 2025. NOx emissions from harbor craft in California will

decrease from 73 tons per day in 2004 to about 32 tons per day in 2025 and PM emissions will decrease from 3.3 tons per day to about 1.2 tons during the same period.

The decline of emissions between 2004 and 2009 is partially caused by the decline of

the fishing fleet from 2004 to 2009 as we project based on fish landing data , natural engine turnover

, and the more stringent EPA marin e engine emissions standards. N ew engines need to comply with EPA standards and are cleaner than the old engi ne s which

are replaced. The decrease in emissions after 2009 reflects the gradual phase in of new engines replacing old engines retired from the fleet.

### B

- 11

I. INTRODUCTION

T his section provides background on the commercial harbor craft emissions inventory,

the purpose and goals in preparing this emissions inventory, and a general overview of the methodology used to estimate emissions from commercial harbor craft.

A. Background

In the Proposed Regulation for Diesel Engines on Commercial Harbor Craft,

“com mercial harbor craft” means any private, commercial, government, or military marine vessels including, but not limited to, passenger ferries, tug boats, tow boats, push

- boats, crew vessels, work boats, pilot vessels, supply boats, research vessels,

United States Coast Guard vessels, hovercraft, emergency response vessels , and barge s that do not otherwise meet the definition of ocean

- going vessels or recreational vessels. Except for commercial fishing vessels, commercial harbor craft spend most of

their tim e within 100 nautical miles from shore.

M ost commercial harbor craft are powered by marine diesel engines, including propulsion engines and auxiliary engines (1)

. P ropulsion engines are the primary engines that move vessels through the water. Auxiliary engines generally provide power to vessel electrical systems and may also provide additional power to unique, essential vessel equipment (i.e. refrigeration units) during the normal day

- to

- day operation of the vessel.

M arine diesel engines powering commercial harbor craft are usually larger than onroad

and land based o ffroad diesel engines. These engine s also last longer and have much longer operating lifetime. According to the 200 4 ARB survey

, the average age of commercial harbor craft propulsion engines in 2004 is about 18 years old with about

44% of the them older than twenty years, and about 20% of them older than thirty years ( 1)

. In contrast, the average age of California in

- state trucks is about 12 years old. 1



### These marine engines are also among the least regulated sources of air pollutants in

California

. The first U.S. EPA rule regulating these engines, “Control of Emissi ons of Air Pollution from New CI Marine Engines at or above 37 kW”, was published in 1999. The emission standard in this rule only applies to new engines and became mandatory in

2004. M arine engines are less controlled and tend to emit more air pollutant s than land based engine s . E ven with a smaller population, commercial harbor craft are important sources of air emissions in California especially for coastal a reas with heavy marine

activities. It is estimated that emissions from commercial harbor craft in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District are equivalent to nearly 60% of the emissions from heavy heavy duty diesel trucks in this area. 2

1 Based on ARB’s EMFAC2007 model, http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/latest_version.htm

2 Compared to emission estimates for heavy heavy duty diesel truck in the emissions inventory for Proposed State Strategy for California's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the New Federal PM2.5 and

8

- Hour Ozone Standard, http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm

### B

- 12

B. Purpose and Overview

To avoid inconsistencies in the statewide emissions inventory

, ARB staff develop ed a consistent methodology which can be used statewide to estimate emissions from harbor

craft. Th is updated inventory will be used to support analysis of statewide regulations to reduce emissions from these marine engines. Other goals in undertaking this

em issions inventory update were to:

• Update the inventory to reflect the most current harbor craft fleet;

• Accurately reflect adopted regulations and other regulatory programs in the baseline inventory and in any forecasts.

• Establish a structure that would allow allocation of the statewide emissions to
individual air pollution control districts and air basins;

This inventory covers commercial harbor craft that operate within California coastal waters and inland waterways, and have a home port located in Ca lifornia. Due to limited information currently available about the number of U.S. Navy and/or U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) vessels, vessel characteristics, and vessel activity, we decided not to include emissions from these vessel types into this inventory.

F or this inventory purpose, we grouped commercial harbor craft into nine types of vessels, including commercial fishing vessels, charter fishing vessels, crew and supply boats, ferry and excursion vessels, pilot vessels, tow boats, tug boats, work boats, an d “others”, i.e. other type of vessels that do not fit into the above eight categories. The nine categories are described in Table I

- 1.

This inventory provides e stimates of emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), reactive organic gas (ROG), carbon monoxi de (CO), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur oxides (SOx). We chose year 2004 as the base year of this inventory because that’s the end of the period when the population data were collected . We forecast emissions for the future years (2005

- 2025) based on projected fleet growth, turnover, engine deterioration, and the change of emission rates.

### B

- 13

Table I

- 1 Categories of Commercial Harbor Craft Included in the Emissions Inventory

Vessel Type Description

Commercial Fishing Vessels used in the s earch and collection of fish for the purpose

of sale at market.

Charter Fishing Vessels available for hire by the general public and used for the

search and collection of fish for the purpose of personal consumption.

Crew and Supply Vessels used for ca rrying personnel and supplies to and from off

shore and in

- harbor locations, including vessels at anchorage, construction sites, and off

- shore platforms.

Ferry/Excursion Vessels used for public use in the transportation of persons or

property as a part o f the public transport systems and commercial vessels used for sightseeing, whale watching, and dinner cruising, etc.

Pilot Vessel Vessels used to carry pilots to and from ships to provide pilot

service into and out of a port or harbor.

Towboat/Pushboat Vessels used to push barges and pontoons. Towboats are

characterized by a square bow with steel knees for pushing, a shallow draft, and powerful engines. They are most often seen on inland waterways since their hull designs (like little freeboard)

would make open ocean operations dangerous.

Tug Boat Vessels primarily used to assist other vessel s maneuvering in

harbors, over the open sea or through rivers and canals by pushing and towing. They are also used to tow barges, or other floating structures

.

W ork boat Vessels used to perform duties such as fire/rescue, law

enforcement, hydrographic surveys, spill/response research, training, and construction.

Other Vessels used in various commercial operations that do not fit into

any other category such as vessels used to dispose of cremated

remains.



### C. Public Process

Allowing stakeholders and the general public to review and comment on a product associated with a rulemaking process is a critical element of that rulemaking process. The following steps we re taken to ensure interested parties could provide input.

### B

- 14

Comments on impacts were solicited from the Commercial Harbor Craft Working Group. Members of the working group include representatives of the groups and agencies that would be impacted by any ru lemaking undertaken by the ARB. Representatives include

diesel

- fueled compression ignition engine manufacturers, environmental groups, ferry operators, local air pollution control and air quality management districts, and control technology manufacturers.

We provided local air dist ricts and the public the opportunity to review, comment on the methodology and the inventory by conducting work ing group meetings/teleconferences, and public workshops. The inventory was presented to six public workshops and

se veral teleconferences with air districts. Comments obtained through these meetings, teleconferences and workshops were used to assess and modify the inventory.

II. EMISSION ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY

To estimate California statewide commercial harbor craft emissions, we first estimated vessel type and region specific emissions rates, i.e. average emissions per engine per year, using an activity

- based approach based on engine information collected in the 2004 ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey (1)

. We then estimated statewide emissions by multiplying number of engine in each engine category and in each region by average emissions per engine.

A. Emission Inventory Inputs

Data needed for estimating harbor craft emissions include:

• Base year vessel and engine population

• Future fleet growth and engine turn over

• Engine hours of operation and engine load

• Zero

- hour (new engine) emission factor

• Engine deterioration and other adjustments

• Spatial allocation surrogate

Engine population for a given year was estimated using base year vessel population

, vessel profiles information collected from various sources, engine and vessel information collected in the ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey (1) , fleet growth rates provided by air districts, and engine attrition rates based on the ARB’s OFFROAD

model.

1. Base Year Vessel Population and Vessel Profiles

Since there is no one available data set t hat covers all commercial harbor craft operating in California, vessel population data were collected from various sources, including the U.S. Coast Guard documentation data, the California Department of Fish and Game registration data, the ARB Harbor Craf t Survey (1) , and information from recent emission inventory esti mates generated for the Port of Los Angeles. Each of

### B

- 15

these sources of commercial harbor craft information is described in greater depth below. In addition, the specific steps taken to develop estimates of numbers of specific vessel types and spatially al locate those populations are also described below. 3 

### Based on available information, we estimate that there were approximately 4,1 85 harbor craft vessels operating in California in year 2004.

United States Coast Guard Vessel Data:

The United States Coast G uard (USCG) administers a vessel documentation program. The USCG vessel documentation program is a national form of registration. The ARB purchased the U.S. Coast Guard documentation data through the National Technical

Information Service.

Types of vess els that are documented in the data set include:

• vessels that measure at least five net tons (a measure of the vessel’s volume, most vessels more than 25 feet in length will measure five net tons or more)

• vessels wholly owned by a citizen of the United St ates (with the exception of certain oil spill response vessels)

• vessels of five net tons or more used in fishing activities on navigable waters of the United States or in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

• vessels used in coastwise trade (transportation of merchandize or passengers between points in the United States)

• towboats operating between points and dredges operating in United States or the

EEZ must be documented.

The information provided represents nation

- wide vessel documentation information for

the years 1985 through June 2001. ARB staff sorted the data by state and removed all

non

- California documented vessels. The majority of the vessels that are California documented vessels fall into one of five categories of vessels. Those categories are

com mercial boats , fishing, offshore supply, passenger, tow/tugboats, and unclassified.

California Department of Fish and Game Data:

The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) registers all commercial fishing vessels, passenger fishing boats, and fish b usinesses in California. We obtained their file of the commercial fishing permits registrations issued for 2004. That information was used to augment the USCG documentation and ARB Survey data when evaluating the commercial and charter fishing categories of commercial harbor craft.

3 In early 2004, ARB staff contacted approximately 60 of California’s harbormasters and port and marina administrators. Using a brief two

- page survey, ARB staff collected estimates of the current commercial harbor craft populations for the nine vessel types described earlier in this document. ARB staff was able to obtain numbers of
commercial harbor craft at all but one of the harbors, ports, and marinas contacted. This information was used as a reality check of the estimates using the four population data sources listed above.

### B

- 16

Port of Los Angeles Fishing Vessel Data:

During the course of the development of a port

- wide emission s inventory, the Port of Los Angeles collected information about the commercial fishing vessels that operate out

of the Port. The Port provided the ARB with vessel names and owner/operator contact information for approximately 250 commercial fishing vessels.

ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey (March 2004):

In 2004, ARB staff conducted a survey of commercial harbor craft owner/ operators in an effort to collect information about where the different types of harbor craft in the State operate, vessel activity, and engine

- specific information (ARB’s Statewide Commercial Harbor Craft Survey, or ARB Survey) (1) . Owners/operators of commercial fishing vessels, tugs, ferries and excursion vessels, w ork and tow boats, and crew and supply boats were sent a copy of the ARB’s survey in late 2002. The survey requested information about the home port, the type of vessel, if the vessel was used for commercial fishing, the type of fishery targeted, annual f uel use, information about where the vessel generally operated, and engine information (make and model of the engine, is it a propulsion or auxiliary engine, horsepower, was it a repower, annual hours of use, etc.). The survey was sent to more than 5,000 o wner/operators statewide and the ARB received more than 700 responses representing approximately 850

vessels.

Estimating Vessel Population :

To establish a data base from which to estimate the statewide commercial harbor craft vessel population, we first se gregated the information from the USCG, the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the Port of Los Angeles (POLA), and the ARB commercial harbor craft survey into four major groups: Ferry/excursion vessels , fishing

vessels

, work boats, and other typ es of vessels

. We chose t hese four groupings

because th ey are the four primary groups the USGC uses to classify commercial harbor

craft. We grouped t he information from the DFG, the POLA and the USCG fishing with

the information from the ARB’s commercial harbor craft survey for commercial fishing and charter vessel data to develop th e statewide population estimate for commercial fishing vessels. Ferry, crew and supply, and pilot vessel information from the ARB commercial harbor craft survey w ere grouped w ith the USCG ferry /excursion vessel data to develop statewide population estimates for f erry/excursion vessels. We added

t he ARB commercial harbor craft survey data for tugs, tow boats and work boats to the USCG work group data to develop statewide popula tion estimates for work boats. Remaining vessels from the ARB commercial harbor craft survey were added to the

USCG’s “ other ” group data to develop statewide population estimates for other types of

commercial harbor craft.

### B

- 17 Table II

- 1 California Commerc ial Harbor Craft Population by Vessel type and by District in 2004

District Charter Fishing Commercial

Fishing Crew and

Supply Ferry/

Excursion Others Pilot

Vessels Tow

Boats Tug

Boats Work

Boats Total by

District

Bay Area 164 972 9 140 64 4 23 57 34 1, 468
El Dorado County 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 9
Mendocino County 5 158 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 169
Monterey Bay Unified 18 336 0 17 7 0 0 1 0 379

North Coast Unified 6 285 2 1 0 0 2 2 299
Northern Sonoma County 9 132 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 145
Placer County 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 9
San Diego County 84 106 0 76 15 0 8 16 2 307 San Joaquin Valley Unified 9 23 1 5 1 1 0 1 1 43

San Luis Obispo County 8 131 1 3 0 0 0 2 1 145
Santa Barbara County 31 119 23 11 4 0 0 1 3 193

South Coast 191 274 15 134 37 21 1 38 33 745

Ventura Count y 16 148 12 11 4 1 0 3 0 194

Yolo/Solano 11 43 0 3 2 0 3 8 11 81

Total by Vessel Type 563 2,727 64 416 136 27 35 128 89 4,185

### B

- 18

Each population was then assigned to a county and a district based on their reported home port. 4 

### The distribution of vesse ls into the nine inventory categories was

determined based on district

- specific vessel distribution ratios developed using information from the ARB commercial harbor craft survey. As shown in Table II

- 1, fishing vessels account for the largest percentage of vessels at 77 % of the total commercial harbor craft population. Table II

- 1 also shows the summary of the commercial harbor craft vessel population by AQMD or APCD.

2. Base Year Engine Population and Engine Profiles

As described previously, the ARB’s S tatewide Commercial Harbor Craft Survey collected information about the various commercial harbor craft and associated engines operating in California's coastal waters and inland waterways, harbors, and ports during

2002

- 2004 . The vessel information includ ed vessel home port, vessel use and age, annual fuel use, and percent of time operated at various distances off the California coast. In addition, the Survey collected information about the engines powering those

vessels. Th e engine information included number of engines per vessel , engine make and model, engine age, engine horsepower, annual hours of operation, and other information. Detailed information for about 850 vessels with about 400 auxiliary engines and about 1000 propulsion engines were collect ed during the survey.

Based on the Survey, individual engine profiles were developed by combining specific information about an engine. That information includes engin e use (propulsion or auxiliary), type of vessel the engine is associated with, model y ear of the engine, engine horsepower, annual hours of operation, etc. These data were used to estimate emissions from individual engines.

Table II

- 2 summarizes the statewide commercial harbor craft engine profiles developed using the vessel and engine dat a collected in the ARB Survey. Since most commercial harbor craft are doing routine work, the operation profile remains relatively stable. Because the information needed to project harbor craft engine profiles in the future was
not available, w e assumed t he engine profiles developed from the ARB survey hold throughout the future years for which we estimated emissions . Number of engines per vessel by vessel type was used to estimate statewide engine population and engine

useful life was used to account for engine attrition and engine deterioration described in the following sections. Total life is defined as the age when 90% of engines retire and

u seful life (UL) is defined as half of total life

.

4 Those vessels with home ports far from navigable waters were assigned to the closest ports. Those
vessels that did not have a “home port” listed (11 percent of the vessels) were assigned one based on the address of the owner/operator. Those vessels that reported a “home port” outside of California (4 percent of the vessels) were assigned to the ports, harbors, and marinas in counties and districts wh ere they

“landed” their catch.

### B

- 19

Table II

- 2 California Commercial Harbor Craft Engine Pr ofile by Vessel Type

Propulsion Engine Auxiliary Engine

Vessel Type # of

Engines per Vessel Average

Annual Operating Hrs Useful

Life # of

Engines per Vessel Average

Annual Operating Hrs Useful

Life

Commercial Fishing 1.12 1,250 21 0.46 1,633 15

Charte r Fishing 1.77 1,622 16 0.75 2,077 15 Ferry/excursion

Vessels 2.01 1,843 20 1.23 1,254 20
Crew and Supply 2.5 788 22 1.1 3,036 22

Pilot Vessels 1.7 1,031 19 0.14 994 25
Tug Boats 1.92 2,274 21 1.59 2,486 23

Tow Boats 2.1 1,993 26 1.17 2,965 25

Work B oats 1.46 675 17 0.32 750 23

Others 1.11 779 23 0.46 805 22



### 3. Future Year Vessel and Engine Population

We estimated future year vessel and engine population based on fleet growth rates and engine turnover rates.

We used air districts’ fleet growth ra tes to project commercial harbor craft population in the future years. We adjusted these growth rates based on available information. Since tug boats are generally over

- powered and are capable of handling larger vessels,

we assume d tug boats fleet growth is flat throughout the future years we projected. We adjusted growth rate for California’s commercial fishing fleet to re flect the most recent fish landings (tons per year) data available. The data indicate that there has been a six percent per year decl ine in fish landings over the last decade. Since there is no way to accurately predict whether or not that trend continues indefinitely, an annual decline of six percent in the numbers of vessels in California’s waters is continued through 2009.

From 2010 on, the growth is flat.

We assume d vessels in the future years have the same number of engines and same engine profile as the vessels in the base year. Future year engine population was estimated using vessel population and number of engines by vessel typ e as shown in

Table II

- 2.

We estimated engine turnover using attrition curve of ARB’s OFFROAD model. Figure

II

- 1 illustrates the engine attrition curve we applied to commercial harbor craft engines. Age/UL represents the ratio between engine age and usef ul life. The basic assumption

of the attrition curve is that 50% of the engines of certain model year retire before they reach their useful life (when age/ UL = 1), and 100% of the engines of certain model year

retire when they reach their total life (when age/ UL = 2). Vessel and engine use specific useful life are presented in Table II

- 2.

### B

- 20 Figure II

- 1 Illustration of Engine Attrition Curve

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Age/ULCumulative % Scrapped



### We estimated number of new engines in each future calendar year using the difference between the population est imated based on growth rates and the population estimated

based on engine turnover . The calendar year was used as engine model year of the new engines. Vessel type and horsepower range specific average horsepower and average hours of operation were estima ted using engine information collected in the 2004 ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey (1) and were assigned to these new engines

.

4. Engine Activity

Two of the key inputs of the emission estimation methodology include the engine’s annual hours of operation and the typical engine load. Annual hours of operation for

e ach individual engines collected in the ARB survey were used to estimate emissions from these engines.

We chose the marine engine load factor (43%) in the U.S. EPA’s Nonroad model for commercial harbor craft auxiliary engines. We adjusted tug boats auxili ary engine load factor to 31% following the Port of Los Angeles’ emission inventory developed by the Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC based on more detailed data.

We estimated main engine load factor based on fuel consumption data, engine horsepower, and a nnual hours of operation data collected in the ARB Survey. The ARB Survey provided engine

- specific annual use values. We assumed that all of an engine’s hours of operation occurred within the California Coastal Waters. Vessel type specific propulsion en

gine load factor was estimated using the following equation.

### B

- 21 

## TF Hr HP BSFC LF /

* * =

Where:

LF is the vessel type specific propulsion engine load factor;

BSFC is brake specific fuel consumption rate; we used 0.078 gal/kW

- hr or 0.058 gal/hp

- hr estimated from manufacturers’ marine engine data;

HP is rated horsepower of the engine;

Hr is the number of annual operating hours of the engine;

TF is total fuel consumption per engine pe r year.

Table II

- 3 summarizes the engine load factors used to estimate commercial harbor craft

emissions.

Table II

- 3 Engine Load Factor by Vessel Type and by Engine Use

Vessel Type Propulsion Engine Load Auxiliary Engine Load

Commercial Fishing 0.27 0 .43
Charter Fishing 0.52 0.43
Ferry/Excursion 0. 42 0.43
Crew and Supply 0.45 0.43

Pilot Vessels 0.51 0.43
Tug Boats 0.50 0.31

Tow Boats 0.68 0.43

Work Boats 0.45 0.43

Others 0.52 0.43



### 5. Zero

-

hour Emission Factor

ARB staff collected potential co mmercial harbor craft emission factors from a broad range of sources. Those sources included the U.S. EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP

- 42), Lloyd's Register of Ships, U.S. EPA Category 1 marine engine emission factors, U.S. EPA Mari ne Engine Certification data, ARB OFFROAD Model, and actual emission testing results from a variety of vessels.

. ARB staff reviewed the emission factors from all of these sources in an effort to select those that would be the most applicable to the develo pment of a commercial harbor craft emission inventory. Applicability was based on a number key engine

- related of factors to make that determination. Those factors included the horsepower of the engine, the model year, whether there were emission factors for the pollutants of interest (NOx, PM, HC, and CO), and the engine test cycle associated with the emission

factor.

ARB’s OFFROAD Model emission factors have been used in the past to estimate

emissions from off

- road equipment and those emission factors m et the criteria set forth

### B

- 22

by the ARB’s emission inventory staff, the balance of the potential emission factor sets were compared to those emission factors.

After evaluation of the available data, we chose the emission factors in the ARB’s

OFFROAD Model with the following adjustments:

• for 1996 through 1999 model year engines, use the Tier Zero (1996) emission
factors;

• for 200 0 and beyond model year engines, use the U.S. EPA emission standards for marine engines or the NOx limits of the IMO MARPOL Annex V I whichever is lower ; 5



### and

• adjust the OFFROAD Model emission factors to reflect an “E3” test cycle for propulsion engines and “D2” test cycle for auxiliary engines

. 6



### No changes were made to the OFFROAD emission factors to differentiate between

“wet” and “dry” exhaust from marine engines. This decision was made based on a lack of information definitively supporting any difference between the characteristics of the two methods of exhausting marine engine combustion gases.

No changes were made to the OFFR OAD emission factors to differentiate between emissions from 2 stroke and 4 stroke engines. This decision was also based on a lack of information on the differences in emissions between the two types of engines that

would allow ARB staff to make that dist inction at this time.

The harbor craft emission factors are shown in Appendix A.

6. Fuel Correction Factor

ARB OFFROAD m odel’s fuel correction factors are used to account for the benefits of

cleaner diesel fuel (2) . Engines certified using federal on

- and off

- road diesel fuel receive NOx and PM benefit of 7% and 20% respective ly, due to the lower aromatic content of California diesel fuel. Engines certified using federal off

- road diesel fuel

receive an additional 5% PM benefit due to the lower sulfur content of California diesel fuel. A fuel correction factor of 0.72 for hydroc arbon emissions will be applied to all

diesel

- powered engines beginning with the 1994 calendar year. Starting in 2007, California will require s the use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD

- 15 ppmw sulfur).

An additional 4% PM benefit is assumed for all engines not certified on this fuel (2)

. Table II

- 4 summarizes the fuel co rrection factors

.

5 We compared OFFROAD emissions factors, U.S. EPA Tier I, II and proposed Tier III and Tier IV
standards, and the NOx limits of the Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships (MARPOL)

. We chose the lowest of these emission factors.

6 Because the OFFROAD Model emission factors are based on a “C1” engine test cycle, ARB staff compared emission results from similar engines testing for both the “C1” and “E3” test cycles. Based on

this eval uation, we recommended that the OFFROAD Model emission factors be adjusted to better reflect the “E3” test cycle. The adjustment factors for propulsion engines are 1.19 for NOx, 0.73 for CO, and 0.94 for PM. The same evaluation was conducted to compare “ C1” and “D2” testing cycles for auxiliary engines are 1.19 for HC, 1.03 for CO, and 0.84 for PM.

### B

- 23 Table II

- 4 Fuel Correction Factor

Calendar Years Horsepower Range Model Years NOx PM

<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 1 997

- 2010

176+ 1996

- 2010 0.948 0.800 2007+

All 2011+ 0.948 0.852

Source: Off

- road Exhaust Emissions Inventory Fuel Correction Factors (2)



### 7. Engine Deterioration

As an engine ages, the pollutant

- specific emission factors slowly increase with age. This phenomenon is described as “deterioration” which is primarily due to the wear on

the va rious parts of an engine associated with its day

- to

- day activities and is a result of malfunction of emissions related components. Deterioration occurs at different rates for each pollutant. When developing emission estimates, it is essential that deteri oration be taken into account and factored in the emission estimation methodology.

We adopted engine deterioration factors from ARB’s OFFROAD model (3) . Table II

- 5 summarizes the deterioration factor we used for estimating emissions from commercial harbor craft operating in California. The values represent the increase of emission factors at the end of the useful life of engines. For example, for an engine larger than 250 horsepower, the NOx, PM, HC, and CO emission factors will increase 21%, 67%, 44% and 25%, respectively, at the end of its useful life.

### B

- 24 Table II

- 5 Engine Deterioration Factor

Horsepower Range NOx PM HC CO

25

- 50 0.06 0.31 0.51 0.41

51

- 250 0.14 0.44 0.28 0.16

>251 0.21 0.67 0.44 0.25



### B

. Methodology

1. Overview

The basic equation for the estimating emissions from a commercial harbor craft engine

is:



## Hr LF HP UL A D F EF E × × × × + × × = )

1 (
0



### Where:

E is the amount of emissions of a pollutant (ROG, CO, NOx, or PM) emitted during one period; 7



### EF 0 

### is the model year, horsepower and engine use (propulsion or auxiliary) specific zero hour emission factor (when engine is new);

F is the fuel correction factor which accounts for emission reduction benefits from burning cleaner fuel;

D is the horsepower and pollutant specific engine deterioration factor, which is the percentage increase of emission factors at the end of the useful life of the engine;

A is the age of the engine when the emissions are estimated;

UL is the vessel type and engine use specific engine useful life;

HP is rated horsepower of the engine;

LF is the vessel type and engine use specific engine load factor;

Hr is the number of ann ual operating hours of the engine.

Total emissions from the California statewide commercial harbor craft fleet can be

estimated by summing up the emissions from individual engines or by multiplying the emissions rates, average emissions per engine per ye ar, with the engine population.

The data described in the previous section were feed into a database driven harbor craft

emissions estimation model. The model estimates vessel type specific emission rates

7 SO 2 will be estimated using the percent sulfur found in the different types of diesel fuel used statewide
and estimated fuel consumption

. This methodology is described in section B.2.

### B

- 25

based on survey data and scale s up to the statewi de population. The model is able to project future year emissions by taking into account fleet growth, engine deterioration, the change of emission standards, and other factors.

Figure II

- 2 shows the relationship among the elements of the model . Emissio ns are estimated based on engine population and emission rates. Engine population is estimated based on vessel population and the average number of engines per vessel. Vessel population is estimated based on base year fleet population and growth rates

.

Figure II

- 2 Illustration of the Commercial Harbor Emission Estimation
Methodology

Future engine data are based on the base year engine data collected in the ARB survey, the growth rates, and attrition rates. The methodology also accounts for the impacts of regulations on engine emission factors and engine turnover rates. These projections reflect expected growth rates in the commercial harbor craft populations

, changes in emission factors over time as the new engine standar ds are implemented, and the fleet

turnover

, and proposed regulations.

2

. SOx Emission Estimation

We used a fuel

- based methodology to estimate SOx emissions from commercial harbor craft. We first estimated annual fuel consumption of individual engines bas ed on the following equation.

BSFC

Hr LF HP F
C 

### ×

× × =

Where

Fc is fuel consumed per engine per year;

HP is rated horsepower of the engine;

Hr is the number of annual operating hours of the engine; ARB Survey Data

Emission Rates Statewide Population

Statewide Emissions

Vessel Population Spatial

Distribution Emissions Allocated to
Regions

### B

- 26

LF is the load factor;

LF is the vessel type specifi c engine load factor;

BSFC is brake specific fuel consumption rate; we used 0.078 gal/kW

- hr or 184 g/hp

- hr estimated from ma nufacturers’ marine engine data.

We then converted fuel consumption to SOx emissions based on mass based sulfur

content of fuels. We assume d that 1) f uel consump tion rate is constant over time ; 2) a ll (100%) sulfur is emitted as SO 2 

### ; 3) SO 2 

### emission rate is a function of fuel consumption and sulfur content only ; and 4) SO 2 

### emission rate is not subject to engine deterioration.

S ulfur content will be vessel type and air district specific before calendar year 2007, when all California commercial harbor craft are required to use ultra low sulfur fu e l with 15 ppm sulfur. We assume d all commercial craft use EPA on

- road diesel with 330 ppm

sulfur content before year 2007 , except:

• In c alendar year s 2002

- 2007, ferries were required to use CARB diesel with 140 ppm sulfur. All commercial harbor craft fueling in the following districts receive
CARB diesel: Mendocino, North Coast Unified, Northe rn Sonoma, and Tehama;

• From 2006, all south coast commercial harbor craft use ultra low sulfur fuel with 15 ppm sulfur.

3

. Spatial Allocation

We allocated emissions to counties, air districts, and air basins based on where the home ports of the vessels a re and/or where the activities occur using our best engineering judgment

. We also split emissions between land side air basin s and Outer

Continental Shelf (OCS) air basin s based on the ARB ’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey which collected the percent of ti me vessels spend at varying distances from shore, including percent of time spent in harbor, within 0

- 25, 25

- 50, 50

- 75, 75

- 100, and beyond 100 nautical miles. The land side air basins cover the areas 3 nautical miles

from shore and the Outer Continental S helf air basin cover the areas 3

- 100 nautical

miles from shore. Table II

- 6 summarizes the statewide average of percent of vessel activity at varying distances from shore by ship type.

Table II

- 6 Statewide Average of Percent of Vessel Activity at Varying Distances

from Shore

Vessel Type Harbor 0

- 25nm 25

- 50nm 50

- 75nm 75

- 100 nm >100nm

Commercial Fishing 6% 37% 16% 11% 8% 22%

Charter Fishing 8% 40% 20% 19% 12% 0%

Ferries 51% 40% 6% 2% 1% 0%

Tow Boats 40% 22% 14% 9% 8% 7%
Tug Boats 34% 15% 12% 13% 20% 6%

Pilot Vessels 33% 30% 13% 10% 12% 1%

Work Boats 35% 32% 5% 10% 9% 8%
Crew and Supply 29% 27% 13% 11% 13% 8%

Others 30% 30% 12% 11% 10% 7%

### B

- 27

Source: ARB Commercial Harbor Craft 2002 survey



### Table II

- 7 summarizes the percent of time commercial harbor cra ft spend within land

side air basins or the Outer Continental Shelf air basins based on the information

collected in the ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey

.

Table II

- 7 Summary of Percent of Time Spent within Land Side Air Basin s and

Outer Continental Sh elf Air Basin s

Vessel Type Land side Air Basin Outer Continental Shelf Air Basin

Commercial Fishing 12% 88%

Charter Fishing 15% 85%

Ferries 59% 41%

Tow Boats 43% 57%
Tug Boats 36% 64%

Pilot Vessels 39% 61%

Work Boats 42% 58%
Crew and Supply 33% 67 %

Others 35% 65%



### We received several comments and suggestions to improve the spatial allocation. These comments reflected regional specific differences in vessel operations. According to Ventura County APCD, tug boats meet vessels one nautical mile fr om port and most

emissions should be allocated to the land air basin. We believe there are tugs pushing barges transiting along the coast and these activities account for the emissions we
allocated to the Outer Continental Shelf air basin. Ventura APCD sug gests 36% of Crew & Supply vessel emissions occur within the South Central Coast air basin while 64% occur in the Outer Continental Shelf air basin. These numbers agree wel l with the

statewide allocation

in Table II

- 7.

Santa Barbara APCD suggests emissio ns from commercial boats are split evenly

between the South Central Coast air basin and the Outer Continental Shelf air basin.

We believe that t his allocation sounds reasonable for commercial boats other than fishing vessels. This also agrees with the stat ewide allocation within acceptable range.

Because we understand that most fishing activities occur beyond the 3 nautical mile zone, we assign more than 85% of fishing vessel emissions to the Outer Continental

Shelf.

Considering the heavy marine traffic in the San Francisco air basin, we conducted

additional analysis to allocat e emissions with in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). W e allocate 84% of commercial fishing and charter fishing vessel
emissions to the OCS air basin, and allocat e the remaining 16% to the San Francisco air basin; we allocate tow boat emissions following the statewide default to reflect the

inter

- port long haul activity; we allocate 5% of emissions from all the other type of vessels to the OCS air basin, and alloca te the remaining 95% to the San Francisco air

basin.

### B

- 28

4

. Additional Considerations and Assumptions

a

. Operation in California Coastal Waters

The emission estimation methodology assumes all of the hours of operation occur within the boundaries defined by t he California Coastal Waters. T he two vessel types

that might deviate from this assumption would be commercial fishing and charter fishing vessels. In an effort to address the issue as it pertains to those two types of commercial
harbor craft, the ARB st aff contacted the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and requested information about the region off California where fishing primarily occurs. The DFG segregates the waters off the coast of California into 10 minute by 10 minute grid system in an effort to track the types and quantities of marine resources taken off the California coast and landed at California’s ports and harbors. Comparison of the DFG grid system with the ARB’s definition of “California Coastal Waters” reveals that for

the ma jority of the coastline, the DGF Fisheries Charts were within California Coastal Water boundaries. The results of that comparison are illustrated in Figure II

- 3

.

We noticed an area of the DFG Fisheries Charts associated with the waters west of the

Catalin a Islands that lie outside California’s Coastal Waters. ARB staff evaluated the DFG 2002 landings data and found that the resources caught in that area amounted to less than one percent of the total 2002 landings for the counties associated with those

wat ers (Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego). With that being the case, the ARB determined that it would

make little or no difference in the emission estimates to continue to include emissions

fro m commercial fishing vessels and charter fishing vessels associated with that area.

### B

- 29

Figure II

- 3 The Overlap Between the California Department of Fish and Game’s Fish Landings Grid System and the ARB’s “California Coastal Waters”

### B

- 30

b

. Fuel Type

T he emission estimation methodology assumes all commercial harbor craft engines are powered by diesel fuel. During the course of reviewing and collating the responses to the ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey, the ARB staff noticed that the percentage

of vessel owner/operators that indicated they use gasoline as the primary fuel for their propulsion or auxiliary engines was less than five percent of all engines reported. When preparing the Survey data for use to typify commercial harbor craft engines, th e ARB staff removed any engines that were clearly powered by gasoline.

c

. Vessel Profile and Future I mprovement s
The ARB’s Commercial Harbor Craft Survey collected information for about 850 vessels which represent about 20% of the statewide population. T he emission methodology assumes the results of the Survey are representative of California’s commercial harbor craft and used these profiles to scale up to statewide population.

ARB’s proposed commercial harbor craft regulation will require vessel owner s and operators to report more detailed information of the vessels and the engines. We will build a more complete and more reliable California commercial harbor craft data set which will provide a foundation for us to improve the emissions estimation in t he future.

III. EMISSION ESTIMATES

Using the proposed methodology, we estimate statewide emissions from commercial

harbor craft diesel

- fueled engines in 2004 were about 3.3 tons per day of diesel PM, about 73.2 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Detailed emission estimates are presented in Table III

- 1.

Table III

- 1 Commercial Harbor Craft Emissions in California in 2004 (Tons/day)

Vessel Type Vessel Population NOx PM ROG CO
Charter Fishing 563 12.7 0.6 0.9 3.3

Commercial Fishing 2,727 17.4 0.8 1.3 4.8
Crew and Supply 64 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.4
Ferry/Excursion 416 21.0 0.9 1.4 5.6

Pilot Vessels 27 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1

Tow Boats 35 3.0 0.1 0.2 0.7
Tug Boats 128 15.3 0.6 1.0 3.8

Work Boats 89 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1

Others 136 1.5 0.1 0.1 0.4

Total 4,185 73.2 3.3 5.0 19.2



### Ferry/excursion vessels and tug/tow boats jointly account for about 14% of the statewide harbor craft population and 50% of the statewide harbor craft emissions. The engines of these vessels are relatively larger and operate more often than other vessel

### B

- 31

categories. Commercial fishing vessels account for 65% of the harbor craft population but only emit around 25% of the emissions.

Table III

- 2 provides NOx emissions by engine and vessel type. Propulsio n engines

account for 93% of NOx emissi ons from commercial harbor craft.

Table III

- 2 NOx Emissions By Engine Type and Vessel Type in 2004

Main Engine Auxiliary Engine

Vessel Type Number of
Engines Tons/day

NOx Number of

Engines Tons/day

NOx
Charter Fishing 997 12.1 422 0.6

Commercial Fish ing 3,054 14.8 1,254 2.6
Crew and Supply 160 1.1 70 0.4
Ferry/Excursion 836 20.2 512 0.8

Pilot Vessels 46 0.4 4 0.0

Tow Boats 74 2.8 41 0.2
Tug Boats 246 14.9 204 0.4

Work Boats 130 0.5 28 0.0

Others 151 1.4 63 0.1

Total 5,693 68.1 2,598 5.1



### Tabl e III

- 3 summarizes NOx and PM emissions by Air Quality Management District (AQMD) or Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) air basin in calendar year 2004. The AQMDs and APCDs are commonly called air districts.

OCS air b asin covers 3

- 100 nautical miles from shore. Figure III

- 1 illustrates these air

districts and OCS air basins.

Table III

- 3 NOx, PM Emissions By Air District and Air Basin in 2004

Air Districts Number of

Vessels NOx

Tons/year NOx in

OCS PM

Tons/day PM in

OCS
Bay Area AQMD (BA) 1,468 26.9 10.2 1.2 0.5

El Dorado County APCD (ED) 9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Mendocino County AQMD (MEN) 169 1.3 1.1 0.1 0.0
Monterey Bay Unified APCD (MBU) 379 3.6 2.7 0.2 0.1

North Coast Unified APCD (NCU) 299 2.3 1.9 0.1 0.1

Northe rn Sonoma County APCD (NS) 145 1.2 1.0 0.1 0.0
Placer County APCD (PLA) 9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
San Diego County APCD (SD) 307 9.2 5.5 0.4 0.2
San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD (SJU) 43 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
San Luis Obispo County APCD (SLO) 145 1.4 1.1 0.1 0.1

San ta Barbara County APCD (SB) 193 2.7 2.0 0.1 0.1

South Coast AQMD (SC) 745 18.7 11.7 0.8 0.5
Ventura County APCD (VEN) 194 2.5 1.8 0.1 0.1

Yolo/Solano AQMD (YS) 81 1.9 0.0 0.1 0.0

Total 4,185 73.2 38.9 3.3 1.8

### B

- 32

Figure III

- 1 Illustration of Californi a Air Districts and OCS Air Basins

About one third of the state harbor craft are in the Bay Area AQMD. These vessels

account for about 37% of statewide NOx or PM emissions. South Coast AQMD has

18% of the statewide harbor craft and account for about 2 6% of the NOx or PM emissions. San Diego County APCD only has 7% of the statewide population but these

vessels emitted about 12% of statewide harbor craft NOx or PM emissions. These three air districts jointly are home to 60% of the statewide harbor craft and these vessels are responsible for 75% of statewide NOx or PM emissions.

Statewide about 53% of the emissions occur in the Outer Continental Shelf air basin. Generally fishing vessels spend the most time in the Outer Continental Shelf, while

ferries tend to spend the most time closer to shore.

### B

- 33

Figure III

- 2 illustrates the change of commercial harbor craft NOx and PM emissions

over time from 2004 to 2025. NOx emissions from harbor craft in California will

decrease from 73 tons per day in 2004 to abo ut 32 tons per day in 2025 and PM emissions will decrease from 3.3 tons per day to about 1.2 tons during the same period.

The decline of emissions between 2004 and 2009 is partially caused by the decline of the fishing fleet from 2004 to 2009 as we proje ct based on fish landing data, natural engine turnover, and the more stringent EPA marin e engine emissions standards. New engines need to comply with EPA standards and are cleaner than the old engines which are replaced. The decrease in emissions after 2 009 reflects the gradual phase in of new engines replacing old engines retired from the fleet.

Figure III

- 2 Estimation of Commercial Harbor Craft NOx, PM Emissions 2004

- 2025

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025

Calendar YearTons/day NOx



### 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4Tons/day PM



### NOx PM



### REFERENCES

1. California Air Resources Board, Statewide Commercial Harbor Craft Survey

. 2004. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ports/marinevess/documents/hcsurveyrep0304.pdf

2. California Air Resources Board, Off

- road Exhau st Emissions Inventory Fuel

Correction Factors . 2005. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/techmemo/arb_offroad_fuels.pdf

. 3. California Air Resources Board, Mail

- Out #: MSC 99

- 32: Notice of Public Meeting to Consider Approval of California's Emissions Inventory for Off

- Road Large Compression Ignited Engines (>25HP) Using the New OFFROAD Emissions

Model . 1999: Sacramento. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/pubs/mo9932.zip

.

### B

- 34

APPENDIX A COMMERCIAL HARBOR CR AFT EMISSION FACTOR TABLE

HP Range Model Year ME

NOx ME

PM ME

ROG ME

CO AE

NOx AE

PM AE

ROG AE

CO

pre

- 1998 8.14 0.72 1.84 3. 65 6.90 0.64 2.19 5.15

1998

- 1999 8.14 0.72 1.80 3.65 6.90 0.64 2.14 5.15

2000

- 2004 7.31 0.72 1.80 3.65 6.90 0.64 2.14 5.15

2005

- 2008 5.32 0.30 1.80 3.73 5.32 0.30 2.14 3.73 25

- 50 hp

2009

- 2020 5.32 0.22 1.80 3.73 5.32 0.22 2.14 3.73

pre

- 1997 15.34 0.80 1.44 3.50 13.00 0.71 1.71 4.94

1997

- 1999 10.33 0.66 0.99 2.55 8.75 0.58 1.18 3.59

2000

- 2004 7.31 0.66 0.99 2.55 7.31 0.58 1.18 3.59

2005

- 2008 5.32 0.30 0.99 3.73 5.32 0.30 1.18 3.73 51

- 120 hp

2009

- 2020 5.32 0.22 0.99 3.73 5.32 0.22 1.18 3.73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.73 1.32 3.21 14.00 0.65 1.57 4.53

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.63 1.10 3.21 13.00 0.55 1.31 4.53

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.52 1.00 3.21 12.00 0.46 1.19 4.53

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.52 0.94 3.14 11.00 0.46 1.12 4.43

1987

- 1995 12.98 0.52 0.88 3.07 11.00 0. 46 1.05 4.33

1996

- 1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2003 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2004

- 2012 5.10 0.22 0.68 3.73 5.10 0.22 0.81 3.73 121

- 175 h p

2013

- 2020 3.80 0.09 0.68 3.73 3.80 0.09 0.81 3.73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.73 1.3 2 3.21 14.00 0.65 1.57 4.53

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.63 1.10 3.21 13.00 0.55 1.31 4.53

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.52 1.00 3.21 12.00 0.46 1.19 4.53

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.52 0.94 3.14 11.00 0.46 1.12 4.43

1987

- 1994 12.98 0.52 0.88 3.07 11.00 0.46 1.05 4.33

1995

- 1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2003 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2004

- 2013 5.10 0.15 0.68 3.73 5.10 0.15 0.81 3.73 176

- 250 hp

2014

- 2020 3.99 0.08 0.68 3.73 3.99 0.08 0.81 3.73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.70 1.26 3.07 14.00 0.62 1.50 4. 33

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.60 1.05 3.07 13.00 0.53 1.25 4.33

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.50 0.95 3.07 12.00 0.45 1.13 4.33

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.50 0.90 3.07 11.00 0.45 1.07 4.33

1987

- 1994 12.98 0.50 0.84 2.99 11.00 0.45 1.00 4.22

1995

- 1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2003 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2004

- 2013 5.10 0.15 0.68 3.73 5.10 0.15 0.81 3.73 251

- 500 hp

2014

- 2020 3.99 0.08 0.68 3.73 3.99 0.08 0.81 3.73

### B

- 35

Continued from previous page

HP Range Model Year ME

NOx ME

PM ME

ROG ME

C O AE

NOx AE

PM AE

ROG AE

CO

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.70 1.26 3.07 14.00 0.62 1.50 4.33

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.60 1.05 3.07 13.00 0.53 1.25 4.33

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.50 0.95 3.07 12.00 0.45 1.13 4.33

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.50 0.90 3.07 11.00 0.45 1.07 4.33

1 987

- 1994 12.98 0.50 0.84 2.99 11.00 0.45 1.00 4.22

1995

- 1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2006 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2007

- 2012 5.10 0.15 0.68 3.73 5.10 0.15 0.81 3.73 501

- 750 hp

2013

- 2020 3.99 0.08 0.68 3.73 3.99 0.08 0.81 3. 73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.70 1.26 3.07 14.00 0.62 1.50 4.33

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.60 1.05 3.07 13.00 0.53 1.25 4.33

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.50 0.95 3.07 12.00 0.45 1.13 4.33

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.50 0.90 3.07 11.00 0.45 1.07 4.33

1987

- 1998 12.98 0.50 0.84 2.99 11.00 0.45 1.00 4.22

1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2006 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2007

- 2011 5.53 0.20 0.68 3.73 5.53 0.20 0.81 3.73

2012

- 2016 4.09 0.08 0.68 3.73 4.09 0.08 0.81 3.73 751

- 1900 hp

2017

- 2020 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.73 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.70 1.26 3.07 14.00 0.62 1.50 4.33

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.60 1.05 3.07 13.00 0.53 1.25 4.33

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.50 0.95 3.07 12.00 0.45 1.13 4.33

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.50 0.90 3.07 11.00 0.45 1.07 4.33

1 987

- 1998 12.98 0.50 0.84 2.99 11.00 0.45 1.00 4.22

1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2006 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2007

- 2012 5.53 0.20 0.68 3.73 5.53 0.20 0.81 3.73

2013

- 2015 4.37 0.10 0.68 3.73 4.37 0.10 0.81 3.73 1901

- 3300 hp

2016

- 2020 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.73 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.73

pre

- 1971 16.52 0.70 1.26 3.07 14.00 0.62 1.50 4.33

1971

- 1978 15.34 0.60 1.05 3.07 13.00 0.53 1.25 4.33

1979

- 1983 14.16 0.50 0.95 3.07 12.00 0.45 1.13 4.33

1984

- 1986 12.98 0.50 0.90 3.07 11.00 0.45 1.07 4.33

1987

- 1998 12.98 0.50 0.84 2.99 11.00 0.45 1.00 4.22

1999 9.64 0.36 0.68 1.97 8.17 0.32 0.81 2.78

2000

- 2006 7.31 0.36 0.68 1.97 7.31 0.32 0.81 2.78

2007

- 2013 5.53 0.20 0.68 3.73 5.53 0.20 0.81 3.73

2014

- 2015 4.94 0.25 0.68 3.7 3 4.94 0.25 0.81 3.75 3301

- 5000 hp

2016

- 2020 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.73 1.30 0.03 0.18 3.75