## Environmental solutions de livered uncommonly well 

# Anadarko Petroleum Corporation

BlackHawk PSD/Title V Permit Application

Operations in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico

Revision 1

Prepared	By:

TRINITY CONSULTANTS

301	Main	Street,	Suite	900

Baton	Rouge,	LA	70816

(225)	292‐2661

September	2013

Project No. 131901.0020Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/ Title V Permit Application

Trinity Consultants 9 

### organic	compounds	(VOC),	and	green house	gases	(GHG)	exceed	thei r	respective	Signif icant	Emission

Rates	(SER).			Hence,	the	Best	Av ailable	Control	Technology	(BA CT)	review	for	all	air	emission

sources	with	emissions	of	these	p ollutants	has	been	conducted	a nd	is	included	in	this	permit

application.

Table 1

‐ 2. Project Potential

‐ to

‐ Emit (PTE) of Project

Pollutant Project Potential

to Emit

Tons/year Significant

Emission Rate

(SER)

Tons/year Exceeds

SER?

NO X 1,447 40 Yes

CO 540 100 Yes

PM 58 25 Yes

PM 10 56 15 Yes

PM 2.5 56 10 Yes

SO 2 1 40	 No

VOC 171 40 Yes

Pb 0.02 0.6	 No

H 2 SO 4 0.03 7	 No

GHG 125,000 75,000 Yes



### In	accordance	with	40	CFR	52.21(i )(3),	the	requirements	under	4 0	CFR	52.21(k),	(m),	and	(o)	do	not

apply	to	a	major	stationary	source	or	major	modification	with	r espect	to	a	particular	pollutant,	if	the

allowable	emissions	of	that	pollutant	from	the	source,	or	the	n et	increase	of	that	p ollutant	from	the

modification	would	not	impact	a	Class	I	area,	would	not	impact an	area	where	an	applicable

increment	is	known	to	be	violated,	and	when	the	source	would	be temporary	(i.e.,	less	than	two	(2)

years	of	operation).

The	proposed	project	does	not	m eet	these	criteria	and	does	not qualify	for	an	exemption	from	40

CFR	52.21(k),	(m),	and	(o)	as	expl ained	in	Section	4.2	of	this permit	application	report.		Therefore,

Class	II	area	modeling	analysis	and	additional	impact	analyses are	included	in	this	permit

application.

Based	on	the	locations	of	the	pr oposed	operations	and	analysis of	project	emissions,	air	quality

modeling	analyses	of	the	impacts on	federally	protected	Class	I areas	and	Class	II	areas	have	been

performed	to	demonstrate	complia nce	with	PSD	Class	I	area	and	C lass	II	area	Increment	standards

and	air	quality	related	values	(AQRV)	thresholds. 1 

### Accordingly,	a	Class	I	area	and	Class	II	area

modeling	analysis	and	report	has been	prepared	and	is	included in	Appendix	D	of	this	permit

application	report.

1 Anadarko’s EGOM Exploratory Project lease blocks are located wi thin 300 kilometers of three federally protected Class I areas in the Southern United States.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 22

Trinity Consultants 

### The	proposed	emissions	sources	du ring	each	scenario	and	associa ted	operating	parameters	are

provided	in	Appendix	B.		The	afo rementioned	operation	scenarios will	not	happen	concurrently.		Only

one	out	of	these	scenarios	OR	an y	‘equivalent’	combination	will be	conducted	an d	the	resulting

emissions	from	activities	involv ed	in	the	scenario	will	not	exc eed	the	worst‐case	em issions	among	the

six	scenarios.		The	drillship	and	supply	boats	will	also	be	ope rating	on	an	as	required	basis.		The

operation	of	the	aforem entioned	scenarios	w ill	typically	involv e	the	following	sources as	listed	below.

The	remainder	of	this	se ction	discusses	the short	term	and	long term	emission	calculation

methodologies	for	each	equipment ,	assumptions,	proposed	operati ng	parameters,	and the	derivation	of

the	fuel	based	emission	factors,	if	applicable.		Appendix	B	pro vides	a	summary	of	em issions	for	each

operating	scenario	for	each	c riteria	pollutant,	GHGs,	H 2 

### SO 4 

### ,	and	HAPs.



## 3.3. DRILLSHIP

The	emission	calculation	methodologies	for	the	air	pollution	so urces	on	the	BlackHawk	drillship	are

discussed	below.



### 3.3.1. Main Engines (DR-ME-01 through DR-ME-08)

The	drillship	consists	of	eight main	engines.		Six	of	the	eight engines	are	identical	HYUNDAI‐HiMSEN,

9H32/40V	6,035	HP	diesel‐fired	eng ines.		The	other	two	engines are	HYUNDAI‐HiMSEN,	18H32/40V

12,069	HP	diesel‐fired	engines.		The specification	sheets	for	t hese	engines	are	provided	in	Appendix	G‐1.

Emission Factors –	The	sources	of	emission	facto rs	used	to	estimate	emissions	f or	each	of	the	eight

engines	are	summarized	below.

AP

‐ 42, Section 3.4. Large Stationary Diesel and All Stationary Dual

‐ fuel Engines –CO	and

HAP	emissions	estimate s	for	the	eight	main engines	are	based	on AP‐42,	Section	3.4	emission

factors	(Table	3.4‐1,	Table 3.4‐2,	and	Table	3.4‐3).

Stack Test Results

– NOx,	VOC,	PM,	PM 10 

### ,	PM 2.5 

### ,	and	GHG	emission	rates	are	based	on	the

results	of	the	stack	tests	perf ormed	in	June	2014.		As	discusse d	in	the	“Hybrid	BACT	Approach”

technical	memorandum,	submitte d	to	EPA	on	July	18,	2014,	emissi on	factors	were	derived	for

50%	load.		These	derived	emission factors	were	used	for	emissio n	calculations.

EPA Guidance Documents –	Lead	emission	factor	is	obtained	from	EPA’s	guidance	documen t:

Locating and Estimating Air Emissions from Sources of Lead and Lead Compounds, EPA 454/R

‐ 98

‐

006, May 1998, Section 5.2.2 .		Emission	factor	for	distillate	oil‐fired	gas	turbines	was	us ed	as	a

surrogate	for	distillate	oil‐fired engines	due	to	unavailabilit y	of	emission	factors.

EPA Regulations

– CO 2 

### ,	CH 4, 

### and	N 2 

### O	emission	factors	are	obtain ed	from	40	CFR	98	Subpart	C,

Table	C‐1	(Default	CO 2 

### Emission	Factors	and	High	Heat	Values	for	Various	Types	of	Fue l)	and

Table	C‐2	(Default	CH 4 

### and	N 2 

### O	Emission	Factors	for	Various	Types	of	Fuel).		Emission	factor for

CO 2 

### e	has	been	calculated using	the	GWPs	obtaine d	from	40	CFR	98	Su bpart	A.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 23

Trinity Consultants 

### Mass Balance –	Anadarko	is	proposing	the	use	of	ULSD	fuel	for	all	diesel	co mbustion	sources.

Therefore,	SO 2 

### emissions	are	calculated	based	on	a	maximum	sulfur	content	of 15	ppm	in	diesel

fuel	assuming	that	98	percent	of	sulfur	in	the	fuel	is	oxidized to	SO 2 

### and	2	percent	of	sulfur	in	the

fuel	is	oxidized	to	sulfuric	acid	(H 2 

### SO 4 

### )	mist	based	on	Section	4.1.1 of	Draft	Regulatory	Impact

Analysis:	Control	of	Emissions	fr om	Nonroad	Diesel	Engines,	EPA 420‐R‐03‐008,	April	2003.

Emissions	of	Hydrogen	sulfide	(H 2 

### S),	total	reduced	sulfur	(TRS), and	reduced	sulfur	compounds

resulting	from	sulfur	content in	the	fuel	are	negligible.

Fuel Based Emission Factor Derivation :

Since	the	main	engines	operate	in	a	group,	the	PTE	is	calculate d	for	the	group	of	mai n	engines	based	on

the	maximum	power	req uirements	for	all	opera ting	scenario.		Bas ed	on	the	specifications	sheet

provided,	all	of	these	engines	h ave	a	break	specific	fuel	consu mption	(BSFC)	of	179	g/kW‐hr.		Since	the

main	engines	are	the	highest	emi tters	of	a	pollutant	on	a	lbs	o f	pollutant/cubic	met er	of	fuel	consumed

among	the	variou s	engines	on	the	drillsh ip,	the	fuel limits	est ablished	on	the	fuel	b ased	emission	factors

for	the	main	engines	represent	t he	worst	case	emission	scenario .		Hence,	Anadarko	is	proposing

drillship‐wide	fuel	limit	derive d	using	the	main engine	fuel	ba sed	emission	factors	(i. e.,	lbs	of	pollutant

per	cubic	meter	of	fue l.)			These	fuel	bas ed	emission	factor	ca lculation	is	presented	in	Appendix	B.

Proposed Operating Limits :

Anadarko	proposes	a	drillship‐wide	fuel	cap	of	112	cubic	meters /day	(m 3 

### /day)	for	all	the	diesel

combustion	sources	located	on	the	drillship.		This	fuel	cap	is the	highest	fu el	usage	of	all	the	six

scenarios.

Also,	Anadarko	proposes	to	use	18,438	m 3 

### /year	fuel	for	all	the	diesel	com bustion	sources	located	on	the

drillship.		The	annual	fuel	limit	is	calculated	based	on	approx imately	200	days	of	operation	and	the

power	requirement	of	86,400,000	KW. However,	Anadarko	proposes the	annual	fuel	limit	in	lieu	of

annual	operating	time	limit.		In	case	Anadarko	does	not	consume the	proposed	annual	fuel	in	200	days,

Anadarko	proposes	to	maintain	the	flexibility	of	operating	more than	200	days	as	long	as	total	fuel

consumption	is	within	the	propos ed	limit.		The	maximum	hourly, daily,	and	annual	emissions	from	the

main	engines	are calculated	based	on	the	derived	fuel	based	emi ssion	factor	as	described	below:

Maximum Hourly Emissions

– The	maximum	hourly	emissions	for the	main	engines	are	based	on the

fuel	based	emission	factor	and	ma ximum	fuel	requi rement	of	5.1 m 3 

### of	fuel.

Maximum Daily Emissions

– The	maximum	daily	emissions	for the	main	engines	are	based	on	t he	fuel

based	emission	factor	and	maxi mum	fuel	requirement	of	112	m 3 

### of	fuel.

Annual Emissions –	The	annual	emissions for	the	main	engines are	based	on	the	fu el	based	emission

factor	and	maximum	fuel	requirement	of	18,438	m 3 

### of	fuel.



### 3.3.2. Emergency Generator (DR-GE-01)

The	drillship	includes	one	2,547 HP	Cummins	QSK60 DMGE	diesel‐fi red	emergency	generator.		Air

emissions	are	generate d	as	a	result	of	combustion	of	diesel	fue l	in	the	engine.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 25

Trinity Consultants 

### Since	this	emission	unit	will	be a	part	of	drillship‐wide	fuel consumption	limit,	no	separate	fuel	limit	is

required	to	demonstrate	compliance .		Anadarko	will	maintain	ade quate	records	to	comply	with

proposed	daily	and	ann ual	operation	limits.



### 3.3.3. Emergency Air Compressor (DR-AC-01)

The	drillship	consists	of	one	39 HP	HATZ	2M41	diesel‐fired	emer gency	air	compre ssor,	which	is

compliant	with	EPA	Tier	3	standa rds	for	nonroad	engines.		The	s pecification	sheet	was	provided	as	a

part	of	the	response	to	incomple teness	determination	submitted on	November	26,	2013.		Emissions	are

generated	as	a	result	of	combust ion	of	diesel	fu el	in	the	engin e.

Emissions Factors –	The	sources	of	emission	facto rs	used	to	estimate	emissions	f or	each	of	the

emergency	air	compressor	en gine	is	summarized	below.

40 CFR 89 Control Of Emissions From New And In

‐ Use Nonroad Compression

‐ Ignition

Engines –Particulate	matter	(PM,	PM 10 

### ,	and	PM 2.5 

### ),	NO X 

### ,	and	CO	emissions estimates	for	the

third	party	engines	are	based	on 40	CFR	89	Tier	3	exhaust	emiss ion	standards.		NO X 

### emission

factors	are	assumed	to	b e	equal	to	the	NMHC	+	NO X 

### emission	factor.		Based	on	footnote	b	of	AP‐

42	Chapter	3,	Table	3.3‐1,	all	PM	i s	assumed	to	be	<	1	μm.		The refore,	it	is	assumed	PM 2.5 

### =	PM 10



### =	PM.

AP

‐ 42, Section 3.3. Gasoline and Diesel Industrial Engines –	VOC	and	HAP	Emissions	are

based	on	AP‐42	Section	3.3	emi ssion	factors	(Table	3.3‐2.)		An average	BSFC	of	7,000	Btu/HP‐hr

has	been	used	to	convert	emission	factors	from	lb/MMBtu	to	lb/H P‐hr.

EPA Guidance Documents –	Lead	emission	factor	is	obtained	from	EPA	guidance	document:

Locating	and	Estimating	Air	Emissions	from	Sources	of	Lead	and Lead	Compounds,	EPA	454/R‐

98‐006,	May	1998,	Section	5.2.2.		Emissi on	factor	for	distillat e	oil‐fired	gas	turbines	was	used	as

a	surrogate	for	distillate	oil‐fi red	engines	due	to	lack	of	emi ssion	factors.

EPA Regulations

– CO 2 

### ,	CH 4 

### ,	and	N 2 

### O	emission	factors	are	obtain ed	from	40	CFR	98	Subpart	C,

Table	C‐1	(Default	CO 2 

### Emission	Factors	and	High	Heat	Values	for	Various	Types	of	Fue l)	and

Table	C‐2	(Default	CH 4 

### and	N 2 

### O	Emission	Factors	for	Various	Types	of	Fuel).		Emission	factor for

CO 2 

### e	has	been	calculated using	the	GWPs	obtaine d	from	40	CFR	98	Su bpart	A.

Mass Balance

– Anadarko	is	proposing	the	use	of ULSD	fuel	for	all	diesel	combu stion	sources.

Therefore,	SO 2 

### emissions	are	calculated	based	on	a	maximum	sulfur	content	of 15	ppm	in	diesel

fuel	assuming	that	98	percent	of	sulfur	in	the	fuel	is	oxidized to	SO 2 

### and	2	percent	of	sulfur	in	the

fuel	is	oxidized	to	H 2 

### SO 4 

### mist	based	on	Section	4.1.1	of	Dr aft	Regulatory	Impact	Analysi s:	Control

of	Emissions	from	Nonroad	Die sel	Engines,	EPA420‐R‐03‐008,	Apri l	2003.		Emissions	of	H 2 

### S,

TRS,	and	reduced	sulfur	compound s	resulting	from	sulfur	content in	the	fuel	are	negligible.

The	maximum	hourly,	daily,	and	annual	emissions	from	the	emerge ncy	air	compressor	are	calculated	as

described	below:

Maximum Hourly Emissions

– The	maximum	hourly	emissions for	the	air	co mpressor	are

calculated	based	on	0.5 hours	of	operation.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 72

Trinity Consultants 

### Table 4

‐ 2. Applicable Engines Subject to Subpart IIII

EPN Description Manufacturing

Year Engine Rating

(HP) Displacement Per

Cylinder

Drillship

Main Engines

DR‐ME‐01 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#1 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐02 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#2 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐03 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#3 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐04 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#4 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐05 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#5 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐06 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#6 2012	 6,035	 32.2

DR‐ME‐07 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#7 2012	 12,069	 32.2

DR‐ME‐08 Main	Propulsion	Electrical

Generator	Engine	#8 2012	 12,069	 32.2

Emergency Engines

DR‐GE‐01	 Emergency	Generator April	2012	 2,547	 3.8

DR‐AC‐01	 Emergency	Air	Compressor September	2011	 38.5	 0.9



### 4.3.5.1. 

### Drillship Main Engines (D R-ME-01 through DR-ME-08)

The	eight	main	engines on	the	drillship	are subject	to	40	CFR	6 0.4200(a)(2)(i)	because	they	were

manufactured	after	April	1,	2006. These	engines are	required	t o	comply	with	the	following

requirements:



### NO X 

### and	PM	emission	standards	for	o wners	and	operators	as	outlined in	40	CFR	60.4204(c)

Use	of	fuels	that	meet	a	maximum per‐gallon	sulfur	content	of	1 ,000	ppm	[40	CFR	60.4207(d)].

Operation	and	maintenan ce	requirements	as	sp ecified	in	40	CFR	6 0.4211(a).

Initial	and	annual	performance	tests	for	NO X 

### and	PM,	as	well	as	continuous	operating	parameter

monitoring	per	40	CFR	60.4211(d),	and	40	CFR	60.4213.

Notification	and	recordkeeping requirements	as	specified	in	40 CFR	60.4214.

Note	that	NO X 

### and	PM	emission	standards	spe cified	in	40	CFR	60.4204(c)	are	a pplicable	when	engine	is

operating	at	the	maximum	design	load.		Anadarko	will	identify	t he	highest	achievabl e	load	(e.g.,	90%	of

the	design	load)	without	comprom ising	safety	of	the	vessel	and personnel	and	conduct the	stack	tests	to

demonstrate	compliance	with	NO X 

### and	PM	emission	standards	s pecified	in	40	CFR	60.4204(c).Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 74

Trinity Consultants 

### Table 4

‐ 4. Emergency Generator Residual Emissions

Pollutant PTE Emissions (tpy) EPA Tier 2 (tpy) Residual

Emissions

(tpy)

NOx	+	NMHC	 1.64	 1.34	 +0.30

CO	 0.08	 0.73	 ‐‐

PM	 0.089	 0.042	 +0.047



### 4.3.5.3. 

### Drillship Emergency Air Compressor (DR-AC-01)

Since	the	emergency	air	compre ssor	engine	is	a	post	2007	non‐fi re	pump	emergency	CI engine	less	than

50	HP	with	a	displacement	of	le ss	than	10	L	per	cylinder,	this engine	must	comply	with	emission

limitations	for	new	nonroad	CI	e ngines	as	specified	in	Table	2 of	NSPS	IIII,	40	CFR	1039.104,	40	CFR

1039.105,	40	CFR	1039.107,	and	40	CFR 1039.115.		As	specified	i n	the	submitted	EPA	certificate,	this

engine	complies	with	the	r equirements	of	40	CFR	1039.

Table	2	of	NSPS	IIII	requires	th is	engine	(i.e.,	38.5	HP	and	0. 9	L/cylinder	displaceme nt)	to	comply	with

the	following	exhaust emission	standards:



### NO X 

### –	7.5	g/kw‐hr

CO	–	5.5	g/kw‐hr

PM	–	0.3	g/kw‐hr

Additionally,	the	emergency	air	c ompressor	must	comply	with	the following	exhaust	opacity	limits

specified	in	40	CFR	1039.105(b):

20%	during	acceleration	mode

15%	during	the	lugging	mode

50%	during	the	peaks	in	acce leration	or	lugging	modes

Since	the	emergency	air	compresso r	is	an	EPA	Tier	3	certified	e ngine	compliance with	the	above

mentioned	emission	standard	is	d emonstrated.		In addition,	the emergency	air	compressor	must	comply

with	the	diesel	fuel	requirement s	for	nonroad	diesel	under	40	C FR	80.510(b)	for	15	ppm	sulfur	content,

a	minimum	cetane	index	of	40	or	a	maximum	aromatic	content	of	3 5	volume	percent.		Anadarko	will

comply	with	the	specified	fuel requirements	by	using	ULSD	for	a ll	diesel	combustion	sources.



### 4.3.5.4. 

### Drillship Temporary Third Party We ll Evaluation Engines (DR-TP-12

through DR-TP-16)

Per	40	CFR	60.4200(a)(2)(i),	above mentioned	CI	engines	are	not subject	to	this	regulation	because	the

engines	were	not	manufactured	a fter	April	1,	2006.		Also,	these engines	were	not	constructed,	modified,

or	reconstructed	a fter	July	11,	2005.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 87

Trinity Consultants 

### The	main	diesel	engines	will	not	be	able	to	sustain	constant	st eady	state	loads/exhaust	temperatures	for

sufficient	time	period s	that	are	critical	for	high	catalyst	per formance,	resulting	in	inconsistent	emission

control.		Several	non‐combustibl e	chemical	elements	that	may	be present	in	engine	lube	oils,	such	as

phosphorous,	lead	and	heavy	meta ls,	may	collect	over	time	and	d amage	the	catalyst.		T herefore,	it	is	not

technically	feasible	for	the main	propulsion	engines.

ITR

– Infeasible.

Changing	ignition	timing	is	not an	alternative	for	these	engine s	due	to	intrinsic	engine	design.	Alterations

of	 the	 injection	 timing	 can	 impact	 value	 and	 turbo	 charger	 perf ormance.	 	 Additionally,	 use	 of	 this

technology	can	 reduce	engine	pow er	and	combustion	stability	whi ch	can	hinder	operations.	For	 these

reasons	this	technology	is	infeas ible	for	the	main	engines	on	B lackHawk	drillship.



### Step 3

– Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness

Table 5

‐ 1. Ranks of Technologies Feasible for Main Engines

Technology Efficiency Rank

SCR	with	Urea	Injection	 79% 13 

### 1

Performance	manageme nt	system	including

Turbocharger	with	Aft ercooler	and	High	Fuel

Injection	Pressure	System ~30%	 2

LNE	design		 Baseline	 3

Good	Combustion	and	Manufacturer

Recommended	Maintenance	Practices Baseline	 N/A

All	feasible	technologies	for	th e	main	propulsion	engines	are	l isted	in	Table	5‐1.		Control	technologies	are

ranked	by	efficiency	i n	a	descending	order.

Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

SCR –	Based	on	the	very	conservativ e	cost	assumptions	(i.e.,	low	c ost),	the	cost	effectiveness	analysis	of

SCR	installation	is	estimated to	be	approximately	$10,080	per	t on	of	NO X 

### reduced,	making	this	option

cost	prohibitive.		A	detailed	co ntrol	cost	effectiveness	analys is	is	provided	in	Appendix	E.

Performance Management System including Turbocharger with Aftercooler and High Fuel

Injection Pressure System and Low NO

x 

### Design

– The	main	engines	are	eq uipped	with	a	performance

management	system	(als o	called	as	“optimized	supercharger	with miller	cycle	technology”	by	the

manufacturer),	which	is useful	to	reduce	the	NO X 

### emission	by	optimizing	the	intake	valve's	closing

timing	especially,	result	in	cha nging	the	effective	compression and	expansion	ratio.		In	order	to	apply

this	technology,	the	high	pressu re	ratio	turbocharger	is	requir ed	to	increase	the	cha rge	air	pressure	and

new	developed	Turbo	charger	with high	pressure	ratio	is	mounted on	the	main	engines.		The	optimized

supercharging	with	miller	cycle has	recently	been	designed	to	e nhance	the	load	ma nagement	of	the

engines.		Also,	the	main	engines are	equipped	with high	fuel	in jection	pressure	and	low	NO X 

### design.

Since	Anadarko	is	proposing	to	implement	this	technology,	a	con trol	cost	analysis	is	not	required.

13

Cost analysis presented in Appendix EAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 92

Trinity Consultants 

### ITR –	Infeasible.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identif ied	in	Section	5.1.1.

Step 3

– Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness

Table 5

‐ 3. Ranks of Technologies Feasible for Emergency Air Compressor Engine

Technology Efficiency Rank

Replacement	with	Newer	Engine	 varies	 1

Good	Combustion 

### and	Manufacturer

Recommended	Maintenance Practices Baseline	 N/A



### All	feasible	technologies	for	th e	air	compressor	are	listed	in Table	5‐3.		Control	tec hnologies	are	ranked

by	efficiency	in	a	descending	order.

Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

Engines	complying	with	40	CFR	89 Tier	3	standards	are	the	clean est	available	engines	in	this	category	of

equipment.		Anadarko’s	proposed	e quipment	is	certified	to	40	CF R	89	Tier	3	standards.

Step 5

‐ Select BACT

Anadarko	proposes	40	CFR	89,	EPA	T ier	3	standards	and	good	comb ustion	and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance	practices as	BACT	for	the	emergency	air compressor	engine.



### 5.1.4. NO X 

### BACT Analysis for Third Party Engi nes (DR-TP-01 through DR-TP-11 and

DR-TP-17 though DR-TP-21)

The	temporary	EPA	Tier	2	certifie d	third	party	en gines	are	divi ded	in	the	following	engine	categories:



### Third	party	engines	≤860	HP

Third	party	engines	≤300	HP

Third	party	engines	≤126	HP

Step 1

– Identify all Control Technologies

The	third	party	engines	on	the	d rillship	are	a	combination	of	s mall	(<500	HP)	and	large	(>500	HP)	diesel

engines,	and	the	NO X 

### control	options	identified	for the	drillship	main		engines	are assumed	to

sufficiently	account	fo r	all	the	possi ble	control	technologies for	the	third	party	en gines.		Therefore,	the

same	options	identified	for	the drillship	main	propulsion	engin es	and	emergency	air	compressor	are

considered	as	the	potential	contro l	technologies	for	the	third party	engines	on	the	drillship.



### Step 2

– Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options

SCR –	Infeasible.



### This	control	option	is	not	techn ically	feasible	for	use	on	the third	party	diesel	e ngines,	which	onlyAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 94

Trinity Consultants 

### Due	to	constantly	changing	sched ules	during	the	proposed	operat ions,	the	availabili ty	of	these	third

party	engines	changes on	short	notice.		Hence,	it	is	difficult to	determine	which	spec ific	engine	would	be

brought	onboard	on	any	given	day.		Since	availability	of	the	EP A	Tier	3	and	Tier	4	en gines	is	limited,

there	is	no	guarantee	that	these	e ngines	will	be	a vailable	when Anadarko	would	need	them.		Restricting

these	third	party	engi nes	to	EPA	Tier	3	or	T ier	4	certified	eng ines	will	significantly	impact	the

operations.		Hence,	this	control technology	is	deemed	technical ly	infeasible

LNE Design with Turbocharger, Aftercooler and High Pressure Fuel Injection System

– Infeasible

.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identified	in	Section	5.1.3.

CAM Shaft Replacement/ Retooling of Engines

– Infeasible

.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identified	in	Section	5.1.1.

4

‐ Way Catalyst Converter

– Infeasible

.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identified	in	Section	5.1.1.

ITR –	Infeasible.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identif ied	in	Section	5.1.1.

Step 3

– Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness

Since	all	the	remaining	feasible technologies	are	being	propose d	as	BACT,	no	ranking	is	required



### Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

Since	all	the	remaining	feasible technologies	are	being	propose d	as	BACT,	a	cost	analysis	is	not	required.

Step 5

‐ Select BACT

Anadarko	proposes	40	CFR	89	EPA Tier	2	standards along	with	goo d	combustion	and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance	practices	as	NO X 

### BACT	for	the	temporary	third party	engines.		As	indicated

previously,	the	third	party	engi nes	and	the	hors epower	ratings shown	in	this	application	are	for

representation	purposes	only.		Ho wever,	a	third	party	engine	br ought	onto	the	drillshi p	will	at	least	be

certified	to	40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier 2	standards,	with	equivalent	or lower	emissions	than	the	engine

represented.		Refer	to	“Third	Part y	BACT	Clarification”	memoran dum	submitted	on	August	8,	2014	for

additional	details.



### 5.1.5. NO X 

### BACT Analysis for Third Party We ll Evaluation Engines (DR-TP-12

through DR-TP-16)

Step 1

– Identify all Control Technologies

EPA's	RBLC	search	was	used	to	ob tain	potential	control	technolo gies	for	NO X 

### from	smaller	dieselAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 102

Trinity Consultants 

### Table 5

‐ 6. Proposed NO X 

### BACT Emission Limits

Emission Unit BACT

Emission

Limit BACT Basis BACT Control Technologies

Drillship	Main		Engines

(DR‐ME‐01	thru	DR‐ME‐06) 10.57	g/kW‐

hr	for	engine

loads	50%

and	above

and	52.41

lbs/hr	for

engine	loads

less	than

50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum EPA	40	CFR	1042	Tier	2	Standards,



### NSPS	IIII,	IMO	Tier	2	standards,

LNE	Design,	Performance

Management	System	including

Turbocharger	with	Aftercooler

and	High	Fuel	Injection	Pressure,

good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Drillship	Main		Engines

(DR‐ME‐07	thru	DR‐ME‐08) 10.57	g/kW‐

hr	for	engine

loads	50%

and	above

and	104.82

lbs/hr	for

engine	loads

less	than

50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum EPA	40	CFR	1042	Tier	2	Standards,



### NSPS	IIII,	IMO	Tier	2	standards,

LNE	Design,	Performance

Management	System	including

Turbocharger	with	Aftercooler

and	High	Fuel	Injection	Pressure,

good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Drillship	Emergency

Generators	(DR‐GE‐01) ‐‐ IMO	Tier	2

Standard IMO	Tier	2	standards,



### Turbocharger	with	Aftercooler	&

High	Injection	Pressure,	good

combustion	and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance

practices

Emergency	Air	Compressor

Engine	(DR‐AC‐01) ‐‐ 40	CFR	89

EPA	Tier	3

Standard 40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier	3	Standard,

good	combustion 

### and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance practices

Third	Party	Engines	(DR‐TP‐01

through	DR‐TP‐11	and	DR‐TP‐

17	through	DR‐TP‐21) ‐‐ 40	CFR	89

EPA	Tier	2

Standard 40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier	2	Standard,



### good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Third	Party	Well	Evaluation

Engines	(DR‐TP‐12	through

DR‐TP‐16) ‐‐ AP‐42,

Chapter	3,

Table	3.3‐1 Good	combustion 

### and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance practices

Stimulation	Vessel	Pumps	(SV‐

PE‐01	thru	SV‐PE‐08) ‐‐ AP‐42,

Chapter	3,

Table	3.4‐1 Good	combustion 

### and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance practices

Flowback	Boiler	(DR‐TP‐22)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,

Chapter	1,

Table	1.3‐1 Good	combustion 

### and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance practices

Boom	Flare	(DR‐TP‐23)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,

Chapter	13,

Table	13.5‐1 Compliance	with	40	CFR	60.18	and

Good	combustion 

### and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance practicesAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 108

Trinity Consultants 

### Positive Crankcase Ventilation System (for VOCs only)

– Infeasible

.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	identif ied	in	Section	5.2.1.

Step 3

– Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness

Table 5

‐ 9. Ranks of Technologies Feasible for Emergency Air Compressor Engine

Technology Efficiency Rank



### Replacement	of	Engin e	to	meet	higher	EPA

Tier	standards 1

Good	Combustion	Practices	 Baseline	 N/A



### All	feasible	technologies	for	th e	air	compressor	are	listed	in Table	5‐9.		Control	tec hnologies	are	ranked

by	efficiency	in	a	descending	order.

Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

Engines	complying	with	40	CFR	89 Tier	3	standards	are	the	clean est	available	engines	in	this	category	of

equipment.		Anadarko’s	proposed	e quipment	is	certified	to	40	CF R	89	Tier	3	standards.

Step 5

‐ Select BACT

Anadarko	proposes	40	CFR	89,	EPA	T ier	3	standards	and	good	comb ustion	and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance	practices as	BACT	for	the	emergency	air compressor	engine.



### 5.2.4. CO and VOC BACT Analysis for Drills hip Third Party Engines (DR-TP-01

through DR-TP-11 and DR-T P-17 though DR-TP-21)

The	temporary	EPA	Tier	2	certifie d	third	party	en gines	include the	following	engin e	categories:



### Third	party	engines	≤860	H P		(DR‐TP‐01	and	DR‐TP‐02)

Third	party	engines	≤300	HP		(DR‐TP‐03	to	DR‐TP‐11)

Third	party	engines	≤126	HP		(DR‐TP‐17	to	DR‐TP‐21)

Step 1

– Identify all Control Technologies

The	third	party	engines	on	the	d rillship	are	a	combination	of	s mall	(<500	HP)	and	large	(>500	HP)	diesel

engines,	and	the	CO	and	VOC	cont rol	options	identified	for	the main	propulsion	electrical	generator

engines	are	assumed	to	sufficien tly	account	for	all	the	possibl e	control	technologies	for	the	third	party

engines.		Therefore,	the	same	op tions	identified	for	the	drills hip	main	diesel	engines	are	considered	as

the	potential	control	technologi es	for	the	third	party	engines on	the	drillship.



### Step 2

– Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options

DOC –	Infeasible.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	ident ified	in	Section	5.2.1.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 113

Trinity Consultants 

### 5.2.8. CO and VOC BACT Analysis for Boom Flare (DR-TP-23)

Step 1

– Identify all Control Technologies

EPA's	RBLC	search	was	used	to	ob tain	potential	control	technolo gies	for	CO	from	flares	and	review	of

the	permits	recently	pr oposed/issued	by	U.S.	EPA	Region	4	and	R egion	10	(and	corresponding	permit

applications)	for	similar	OCS	so urces	was	conducted	to	obtain	p otential	control	technologies	for	CO	from

flares.		The	most	recent	10‐year period	was	used	to	identify	ap plicable	control	technologies.		The	results

of	the	RBLC	search	are	included in	Appendix	E.		The	search	resu lts	for	potential	control	technologies	for

CO	from	flares	are	listed	below.

Comply	with	40	CFR	60.18

Good	Combustion	Practices	(Man ufacturer	recommended	operation	a nd	maintenance)



### Step 2

– Eliminate Technically Infeasible Option

Comply	with	40	CFR	60.18	– Feasible

.

Good	Combustion	Practices	– Feasible

.



### Step 3

– Rank Remaining Control Technologies by Control Effectiveness

Since	both	the	identified	techno logies	are	being	proposed	as	BA CT,	no	ranking	is	required



### Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

Since	both	the	identified	techno logies	are	being	proposed	as	BA CT,	a	cost	analysis	is	not	required.

Step 5

‐ Select BACT

Anadarko	proposes	compliance	w ith	the	requiremen ts	of	40	CFR	60 .18	and	good	combustion	practices

(manufacturer	recommended	operati on	and	maintenance)	as	the	BAC T	for	the	boom	flare.

A	summary	of	the	proposed	CO	and	VOC	BACT	emission	limitation	f or	each	source	associated	with	the

project	is	provided	be low	in	Table	5‐12.

Table 5

‐ 12. Proposed CO & VOC BACT Emission Limits

Emission Unit BACT Emission Limit BACT Basis BACT Control

Technologies

Drillship	Main	Propulsion

Electrical	Engines

(DR‐ME‐01	thru	DR‐ME‐06) CO ‐ 3.39 g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%	and

above	and	16.56	lbs/hr

for	engine	loads	less	than

50%

VOC ‐	0.92	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%	and

above	and	4.58	lbs/hr	for

engine	loads	less	than

50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum LNE	design	including

Turbocharger	with

Aftercooler	and	High

Fuel	Pressure

Injection,	and	Good

Combustion	PracticesAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 114

Trinity Consultants Emission Unit BACT Emission Limit BACT Basis BACT Control

Technologies

Drillship	Main	Propulsion

Electrical	Engines

(DR‐ME‐07	thru	DR‐ME‐08) 3.39 g/kW‐hr	for	engine

loads	50%	and	above	and

33.12	lbs/hr	for	engine

loads	less	than	50%

VOC ‐	0.92	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%	and

above	and	9.16	lbs/hr	for

engine	loads	less	than

50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum LNE	design	including

Turbocharger	with

Aftercooler	and	High

Fuel	Pressure

Injection,	and	Good

Combustion	Practices

Drillship	Emergency	Diesel

Engine	(DR‐GE‐01) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter

3,	Table	3.4‐1 LNE	design	and	Good

Combustion	Practices

Emergency	Air	Compressor

Engine	(DR‐AC‐01) ‐‐ 40	CFR	89 EPA

Tier	3	Standard EPA	Tier	3	Standard

Good	Combustion

Practices

Third	Party	Engines	(DR‐TP‐

01	through	DR‐TP‐11	and

DR‐TP‐17	through	DR‐TP‐21) ‐‐ 40	CFR	89	EPA

Tier	2	Standard

(CO)

AP‐42,	Chapter

3,	Table	3.4‐1

(VOC) 40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier	2

Standard	and	LNE

design

Third	Party	Well	Evaluation

Engines	(DR‐TP‐12	through

DR‐TP‐16) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter

3,	Table	3.3‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Stimulation	Vessel	Pumps

(SV‐PE‐01	thru	SV‐PE‐08) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter

3,	Table	3.4‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Flowback	Boiler	(DR‐TP‐22)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter

1,	Table	1.3‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Boom	Flare	(DR‐TP‐23)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter

13,	Table	13.5‐1 Compliance	with	40

CFR	60.18	and	Good

Combustion	PracticesAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 120

Trinity Consultants 

### Table 5

‐ 15. Ranks of Technologies Feasible for the Emergency Diesel Engine

Technology Efficiency Rank

Replacement	of	Engines	t o	meet	higher	EPA	Tier

standards varies	 1

ULSD	 N/A	 N/A

Good	Combustion	Practices	 Baseline	 N/A

Step 4

– Evaluate Most Effective Controls and Document Results

Engines	complying	with	40	CFR	89	Tier	3	standards	are	the	clean est	available	engines in	this	category	of

equipment.		Anadarko’s	proposed	e quipment	is	certified	to	40	CF R	89	Tier	3	standards.

Step 5

‐ Select BACT

Anadarko	proposes	40	CFR	89,	EPA	T ier	3	standards	and	good	comb ustion	and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance	practices as	BACT	for	the	emergency	air compressor	engine.



### 5.3.4. PM/PM 10 

### /PM 2.5 

### BACT Analysis for Drillship Third Party Engines (DR-TP-01

through DR-TP-11 and DR-T P-17 though DR-TP-21)

Step 1

– Identify all Control Technologies

The	third	party	engines	on	the	d rillship	are	a	combination	of	s mall	(<500	HP)	and	large	(>500	HP)	diesel

engines,	and	the	PM/PM 10 

### /PM 2.5 

### control	options	identified	for the	main	drillship	engines	are assumed	to

sufficiently	account	fo r	all	the	possi ble	control	technologies for	the	third	party	en gines.		Therefore,	the

same	options	identified	for	the drillship	main	diesel	engines	a re	considered	as	the	potential	control

technologies	for	the	third	par ty	engines	on	the	drillship.



### Step 2

– Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options

DOC –	Infeasible

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	ident ified	in	Section	5.3.1.

CDPF –	Infeasible.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	ident ified	in	Section	5.3.1.

4

‐ Way Catalyst Converter

– Infeasible

.

This	control	technology	is	deemed technically	infeasible	for	th e	same	reasons	ident ified	in	Section	5.3.1.

Replacement of Engines to meet higher EPA Tier standards (40 CFR part 89, 94, or 1042 )



### – Infeasible

.Anadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 129

Trinity Consultants 

### A	summary	of	the	proposed	PM/PM 10 

### /PM 2.5 

### BACT	emission	limitation	for	ea ch	source	associated	with	the

project	is	provided	be low	in	Table	5‐20.

Table 5

‐ 20. Proposed PM/PM 10 

### /PM 2.5 

### BACT Emission Limits

Emission Unit BACT Emission Limit BACT Basis BACT Control

Technologies

Drillship	Main	Diesel	Engines

(DR‐ME‐01	thru	DR‐ME‐06) 0.4	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%	and

above	and	1.97	lbs/hr

for	engine	loads	less

than	50% June	2014

BlackHawk	Source

Test	Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach	technical

Memorandum NSPS	IIII	standards,	LNE

design	including

Turbocharger	with

Aftercooler	and	High	Fuel

Pressure	Injection,	ULSD

and	Good	Combustion

Practices

Drillship	Main	Diesel	Engines

(DR‐ME‐07	thru	DR‐ME‐08) 0.4	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%	and

above	and	3.94	lbs/hr

for	engine	loads	less

than	50% June	2014

BlackHawk	Source

Test	Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach	technical

Memorandum NSPS	IIII	standards,	LNE

design	including

Turbocharger	with

Aftercooler	and	High	Fuel

Pressure	Injection,	ULSD

and	Good	Combustion

Practices

Drillship	Emergency	Diesel

Engine	(DR‐GE‐01) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	3,

Table	3.4‐1 EPA	Tier	2,	LNE	design,

ULSD	and	Good

Combustion	Practices

Air	Compressor	Diesel	Engine

(DR‐AC‐01) ‐‐ 40	CFR	94	EPA	Tier

3	Standard Use	of	ULSD,	EPA	Tier	3

Standard,	Good

Combustion	Practices

Third	Party	Engines	(DR‐TP‐01

through	DR‐TP‐11	and	DR‐TP‐17

through	DR‐TP‐21) ‐‐ 40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier

2	Standard 40	CFR	89	EPA	Tier	2

Standard	and	LNE	design

Third	Party	Well	Evaluation

Engines	(DR‐TP‐12	through	DR‐

TP‐16) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	3,

Table	3.3‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Stimulation	Vessel	Pumps	(SV‐

PE‐01	thru	SV‐PE‐08) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	3,

Table	3.4‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Flowback	Boiler	(DR‐WC‐05)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	1,

Table	1.3‐1 Good	Combustion

Practices

Boom	Flare	(DR‐WC‐06)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	1,

Table	1.4‐2 Compliance	with	40	CFR

60.18	and	Good

Combustion	Practices

Cement	and	Mud	Mixing

Operations	(DR‐DC‐01	thru

DR‐DC‐03) ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	11,

Table	11.12‐2 Dust	Collectors

Painting	Operations	(DR‐PO‐01)	 ‐‐ Paint	Composition Best	Manageme nt

Practices

Welding	Operations	(DR‐WO‐ 01)	 ‐‐ AP‐42,	Chapter	12,

Table	12.19‐1 Best	Management

PracticesAnadarko Petroleum Corporation | Diamond BlackHawk EGOM PSD/Titl e V Permit Application 138

Trinity Consultants 

### A	summary	of	the	proposed	GHG	BAC T	emission	limitation	for	each source	associated	with	the	project

is	provided	below	in	Table	5‐22.

Table 5

‐ 22. Proposed CO 2 

### e BACT Emission Limits

Emission Unit BACT Emission

Limit BACT Basis BACT Control Technologies

Drillship	Main		Engines

(DR‐ME‐01	thru	DR‐ME‐06) 837	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%

and	above	and

4,149	lbs/hr	for

engine	loads	less

than	50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum 

### LNE	Design	with	Turbocharger

with	Aftercooler	&	High

Injection	Pressure,	Optimized

Supercharger	with	Miller

Cycle,	Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Drillship	Main		Engines

(DR‐ME‐07	thru	DR‐ME‐08) 837	g/kW‐hr	for

engine	loads	50%

and	above	and

8,299	lbs/hr	for

engine	loads	less

than	50% June	2014

BlackHawk

Source	Test

Results	and

Hybrid	BACT

Approach

technical

Memorandum 

### LNE	Design	with	Turbocharger

with	Aftercooler	&	High

Injection	Pressure,	Optimized

Supercharger	with	Miller

Cycle,	Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Drillship	Emergency

Generators	(DR‐GE‐01) ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Turbocharger	with	Aftercooler

&	High	Injection	Pressure,

Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Emergency	Air	Compressor

Engine	(DR‐AC‐01) ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Third	Party	Engines		 ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Stimulation	Vessel	Pumps	(SV‐

PE‐01	thru	SV‐PE‐07) ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Flowback	Boiler	(DR‐TP‐22)	 ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Boom	Flare	(DR‐TP‐23)	 ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Good	combustion	and

manufacturer	recommended

maintenance	practices

Mud	degasser	Vent	(DR‐VG‐01)	 ‐‐ 40	CFR	98

Subpart	C 

### Best	management	practices

and	manufacturer

recommended	maintenance

practicesEconomic Parameters Factors and Reference

Equipment Life (n), year Term of Anadarko lease [1] 5

Annual Interest Rate (I ) Estimation [2] 7%

Consumer Price Index, CP I CPI to convert 2009 USD to 2013 USD [3] 1.09

Consumer Price Index, CPI CPI to convert 1998 USD to 2013 USD [3] 1.43

Total Direct Costs (TDC) Factor and reference Cost

Purchased Equipment Cost

SCR Equipment Cost (A ) Equipment for 8 SCRs [4 ] $2,580,000

Instrumentation (Instr ) 0.1A [5] $258,000

Sales Tax (ST) 0.03A [5] $77,400

Freight (Fr ) 0.05A [5] $129,000.00

B= A + Instr + ST + F r $3,044,400

Direct Installation Cost (DI)

Foundations and Support (F&S ) 0.08 B [6] $243,552

Total Purchased Equipment Installation (Install) [4] Per phone call with vendor, up to 15% discount in unit installation cost is applied fo r

installation of eight units. $310,000 per unit installation. Hence, total installation for 8 units =

(1-0.15)*310,000*8 $2,108,000

Installation Cost at Doc k $495,000/day for 25 days [7],[4 ] $12,375,000

Daily Spread Rate Above Rig Cost (spr ) $136,753/day for 25 days and 9% increase to adjust 2009 rate to 2013 [8 ] $3,726,519

Electrical (Electric ) 0.04B [6] $121,776

Piping (Pipe) 0.02B [6] $60,888

Insulation for Ductwork (Insul ) 0.01B [6] $30,444

Painting (Paint ) 0.01B [6] $30,444

DI = F&S + Install + Dock +spr+ electric + Pipe + Insul + Pain t $18,696,623

Total Direct Cost (TDC) = B + DI $21,741,023

Indirect Costs (IC)

Construction Expenses (CE ) 0.05 B [6] $152,220

Engineering and Supervision (E&S ) 0.1 B [6] $304,440

Contractor Fee (Contract ) 0.1 B [6] $304,440

Startup (SU) 0.02 B [6] $60,888

Total Indirect Costs (TIC) = CE + E&S + Contract + S U $821,988

Total Capital Investment (TCI) TCI = TDC + TIC $22,563,011

Direct Annual Costs (DAC) Factor and reference Cost

Operating Labor (L ) 0.5 hr/8 hr shift * $12.95/hr * 200 days *3 shift/day *CPI for 1998 [9 ] $5,556

Supervisory Labor (S ) 0.15L [9] $833

Maintenance (M ) 0.015 * TCI [10] $338,445

Urea cost (U) 20 g/KW-hr of Urea @ $(0.85*3)/gal urea [11] $881,840

Catalyst Replacement (Cat) Assumed one replacement over 5-year duration. Assumed catalyst cost is 50% of equipment c o $1,290,000

Utility (electricity cost, E ) 0.059 $/kW-hr * engine rating (kW) * engine load % * Operating hours * 0.5% [9 ] $25,488

DAC= L + S+ M + U+ Cat + E $2,542,162

Indirect Annual Costs (IAC)

Overhead (O) 0.6 (L+S + M) [9] $206,900

Administrative Charges (A ) 2% of TCI [9] $451,260

Property Taxes (P ) 1% of TCI [9] $225,630

insurance (Ins ) 1% of TCI [9] $225,630

Capital Recovery Factor, CR F (i * (1 + i)^n) / ((1 + i)^n - 1) [12] 0.24389

Capital recovery (CR ) CRF * [TCI -1.08(cat.cost)] [9] $5,163,120

IAC = O + A + P + Ins + C R $6,272,541

Total Annual Cost (TAC) TAC = DAC + IAC $8,814,702

N Ox factor before SCR, g/kW-h r IMO Tier II (NOx ) 10.57

N Ox factor after SCR, g/kW-h r [13] 2

SCR NOx Removal Efficiency, eff % 100 - (post control EF / pre control EF*100) [14] 81%

Average Annual Power Requirement, kW Based on application [15] 86,400,000

N Ox emissions without SCR, tp y Refer to Emission Calculations in Appendix B 1,006.67

N Ox emissions with SCR, tp y emission without SCR * (1-eff% ) 190.48

N Ox reduced, tp y 816.19

Cost Effectiveness of SCR TAC/NOx reduced $10,800 Drillship Main Engines - HHI 9H32/40V and 18H32/40V

DESIGN CONDITIONS

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI)

TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS

NOx REDUCTION EFFECTIVENESS EPN: DR-ME-01 thru DR-ME-08

[15] Annual emissions were estimated based on the annual power output requirements for the drillship. Control Cost Analysis for Selective Catalyst Reduction (SCR) Installation

[1] Anadarko holds the lease for five years for this drillship.

[2] Estimated using guidance from EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL , Sixth Edition, EPA/452/B-02-001, January 2002..

[3] http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

[13] Based on the vendor (Wartsila) guarantee for post-control emission factor of 2 g/kW-hr. The vendor guarantee is provided in Appendix E-2. [4] Based on budgetary proposal provided by Wartsila, dated 8/27/2013. The amount quoted in the proposal was converted from Eu ros ( €) to Dollars ($) using a factor of 1.29 (per exchange rate on

8/22/2013). The proposal is provided in Appendix E. Installation time for one SCR is 14 to 25 days. Hence, it is conservativel y assumed that 8 SCRs will be installed in 8 days.

[9] Based on example shown on page 2-45 of Section 3.2, Chapter 2 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL, Sixth Edition,

EPA/452/B-02-001 , January 2002.

[10] Based on equation 2.46 shown on page 2-45 of Section 4.2, Chapter 2 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL, Sixth Edition,

EPA/452/B-02-001 , January 2002.

[11] The cost of urea is based on example shown on page 1-39 of Section 4.2, Chapter 1 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUA L, Sixth Edition, EPA/452/B-02-001, January 2002.

The price of urea has more than tripled since 2002. Hence, the cost of urea provided in the air pollution cost manual is multi plied by 3. Source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=urea&months=180

[12] Based on equation 2.55 shown on page 2-49 of Section 4.2, Chapter 2 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL, Sixth Edition,

EPA/452/B-02-001 , January 2002 as shown below. [5] Based on general cost ranges as presented on page 2-27 of Section 1, Chapter 2 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL, Sixth Edition, EPA/452/B-02-001 , January 2002.

[6] Based on factors used on page 1-22 of Section 3.1, Chapter 1 of EPA AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COST MANUAL, Sixth Edition, EPA/452/B-02-001 , January 2002.

[7] Based on Personal Communication, E-mail from Ms.Sara Carlson (Anadarko) to Mr. Rahul Pendse (Trinity), 8/23/13.

[8] Based on budgetary proposal provided on 11/4/2009. However, "Rig Contingencies" and "Project Contingencies" costs are not included as part of "Daily Spread Rate Above Rig Cost" for control

cost analysis purposes. The proposal is provided in Appendix E.

[14] The control efficiency is determined based on pre-control emission factor of 10.57 g/kW-hr and the vendor guarantee for po st-control emission factor of 2 g/kW-hr. The vendor guarantee is

provided in Appendix E-2.

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation

Diamond Blackhawk EGOM PSD/Title V Permit Application 1 of 1 Trinity Consultants

131901.0020

SCR Cost FinalAnadarko Petroleum Corporat ion 2-1 Trinity Consultants 

## 2. REPRESENTATION OF MODELED SOURCES

2.1. EMISSIONS SOURCES AND POTENTIAL TO EMIT

The	sources	of	emissions	for	the proposed	project	primarily	con sist	of	internal	combustion	engines,

painting	operation,	we lding	operation,	dust	collectors,	mud‐deg assing,	water	blasting	operation,

miscellaneous	equipment,	and	fue l	storage	tanks.		For	the	suppo rt	vessels,	the	only	emission	sources

are	internal	combustion	engines and	fuel	storage	tanks.		Anadar ko	will	use	the	“worst‐case”

potential‐to‐emit	scenario	among	all	the	operating	scenario	dis cussed	in	the	Section	3	for	assessing

air	quality	impacts	to	demonstra te	compliance	with	the	Class	I Increments,	AQRVs	an d	Class	II	SILs.

This	will	give	Anadark o	the	flexibility	to	d rill	and	operate	at any	location	within	the	worse‐case	lease

block	(nearest	to	respective	Cla ss	I	and	Class	II	areas)	or	at any	other	location	f urther	away	from	a

Class	I	area	withi n	the	“wedge.”

As	described	in	the	Section	3	of this	report,	the	project	inclu des	six	possible	opera ting	scenario	or	an

equivalent	combination	thereof. Refer	to	Section	3	for	the	det ails	of	each	operati ng	scenario	and	the

proposed	air	emission	sources	and their	operating	conditions	as sociated	with	it.

Among	all	the	support	v essels,	the	supply	bo ats	will	be	very	fr equently	used.		All	other	support

vessels	such	as	well	evaluation	v essels,	stimulation	vessels,	t ugs,	and	barges,	will	be	used	in	a

specific	operating	scenario.		Mo reover,	the	supply	boats	genera te	higher	emissions when	they	are	in

transit	arriving/departing	from the	drill	ship	than	emissions	g enerated	when	the	s upply	boats	are

located	adjacent	to	the	drill	sh ip	during	loading/unloading	ope rations.		The	other	support	vessels

generally	generate	more	emission s	during	performing	operations in	the	vicinity	of	the	drill	ship

when	compared	against	the	emission s	generated	during	their	tran sit.		Hence,	placing	a	supply	boat

source	at	a	distance	of	25	nautical	miles	from	the	worst‐case	d rillship	location	i n	the	direction	of

nearest	receptor	should represent	the	worst case	support	vessel emission	scenario	for	air

dispersion	modeling	analysis.		T he	worst‐case	support	vessels	e missions	(i.e.,	su pply	boats	with

highest	PTE)	were	utilized	for this	modeling analysis.

For	performing	air	dispersion	an alysis,	maximum	total	emissions (i.e.,	sum	of	the	drillship	and

supply	boat	emissions)	for	eac h	pollutant	were	considered.		Tab le	2‐1	compares	the	emissions	from

different	operational	scenarios	an d	modeled	emission	rates.		Th e	modeled	emission	rates	represent

the	worst	case	combination	among the	different	operating	scenar io.

Table 2

‐ 1. Emission Rates Comparison

Pollutant Source Emission Rates (lb/hr)

Model

ed Gas

Flowback

Scenario Oil

Flowback

Scenario Stimulat

ion

Vessel

Scenario General

Well

Complet

ion

Scenario Well

Evaluatio

n Vessel

Scenario Drilling

NO

x 

### Supply

Boats	 84 42 42 42 84 42 84



### Drill

ship	 540 421 

### 509 572 510 569 531



### Total 624 463 551 614 594 611 615Anadarko Petroleum Corporat ion 2-2 Trinity Consultants 

### Pollutant Source Emission Rates (lb/hr)

Model

ed Gas

Flowback

Scenario Oil

Flowback

Scenario Stimulat

ion

Vessel

Scenario General

Well

Complet

ion

Scenario Well

Evaluatio

n Vessel

Scenario Drilling

PM 10 

### Supply

Boats	 3 1 1 1 2 1 2



### Drill

ship	 27 29 29 19 20 20 21



### Total 30 30 30 20 22 21 23



### SO 2 

### Supply

Boats	 0.5	 0.04	 0.04	 0.04	 0.08	 0.04	 0.08

Drill

ship	 1.5 1.64 1.25 0.36 0.33 0.34 0.33

Total 2 1.68 1.29 0.4 0.41 0.38 0.41

CO Supply

Boats	 100	 29	 29	 29	 58	 29	 58

Drill

ship	 1,000 1,004 696 180 161 168 166

Total	 1,100 1,033 775 209 219 197 224



## 2.2. Q/D ANALYSIS

Anadarko	has	completed	a	Q/d	calculation	to	assess	potential	im pacts	of	the	proposed	drilling	and

well	completion	operations	on	the	nearest	Class	I	area.		The	Q/ d	analysis	compares	the	ratio	of	the

sum	of	proposed	annualized	maximum	24‐hour	emission	rates	of	al l	visibility	impairing	pollutants

(in	tons	per	year)	and	the	distan ce	to	the	neares t	Class	I	area (in	km)	to	a	threshold	value	of	10,	as

determined	by	the	FLM.		The	“Q”	i s	the	combined	emissions	incre ase	from	a	source	of	SO 2 

### ,	NO X 

### , PM 10 

### ,	and	H 2 

### SO 4 

### in	tons	per	year	(tpy)	based	on	the	maximum	hourly	emissions	a nd	“d”	is	the

nearest	distance	to	a	Class	I area	in	km	from	the	source. 11 

### Emissions	from	sou rces	that	operate

intermittently	or	seasonally	wil l	be	adjusted	to	account	for	ye ar	round	operation .			The	emissions

represented	in	the	Q/d	analysis are	conservatively	based	on	the highest	emissions	between	the

drilling	and	well	completion	op erations.		Based	on	the	results, a	Class	I	area	AQRV	analysis	is

required	for	the	project	because	t he	Q/d	ratio	for	the	proposed source	is	greater	th an	10.		A	copy	of

the	Q/d	analysis	is	pr ovided	in	Appendix	F.



## 2.3. MODELED PARAMETERS

As	mentioned	previously,	Anadarko is	requesting	the	flexibility to	drill	and	complete	one	or	more

wells	in	any	of	the	lease	blocks within	the	“wedge”	while	compl ying	with	any	operational	and

emission	limitations	prescribed	i n	the	air	permit s	that	will	be issued.		Therefore,	the	Class	I	area

modeling	analysis	was	performed for	each	Class	I	area	with	the drillship	assumed	to	be	located	at

the	closest	point	within	the	“we dge”	of	the	project	(worst‐case location)	to	the	Class	I	areas.

For	Breton‐NWR,	the	NW corner	of	the	Desoto	Canyon	lease	block 141	was	determined	to	be	the

worst‐case	drillship	location.		For	St.	Marks	NWR	and	Bradwell Bay	Wilderness,	the	NE	corner	of	the

11 U.S. Forest Service – Air Quality Program, National Park Service – Air Resources Division, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service – Air Quality Branch , Phase I Report of the Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Workgroup

(FLAG)--Revised, 2010.AnadarkoPetroleumCorporationPotentialtoEmit(PTE)lb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrlb/hr lb/day ton/yrPM30 721 43 32 770 58 22 532 44 22 533 45 23 545 54 24 570 45 32 770 58PM1030 716 43 30 718 56 19 456 40 22 520 44 21 499 49 23 557 44 30 718 56PM2.530 716 43 30 716 56 19 453 43 22 523 44 21 500 49 22 530 44 30 716 56NOx463 11119 1120 551 13218 1418 614 14733 1162 594 14244 1208 611 14670 1447 61514765 1210 615 14765 1447CO1033 24793 455 775 18608 540 209 5009 405 219 5260 458 197 4718 466 224 5372 4581033 24793 540VOC394 9462 162 287 6884 171 61 1460 128 69 1660 132 64 1547 138 71 1702 132 394 9462171Pb3.69E‐03 8.86E‐02 1.34E‐02 5.49E‐03 1.32E‐01 1.73E‐02 7.16E‐03 1.72E‐01 1.40E‐02 7.34E‐03 1.76E‐01 1.51E‐02 6.86E‐03 1.65E‐01 1.62E‐02 7.48E‐03 1.80E‐01 1.51E‐02 7.48E‐03 1.80E‐01 1.73E‐02SO21.68E+00 4.04E+01 8.49E‐01 1.29E+00 3.10E+01 1.02E+00 3.95E‐01 9.49E+00 7.74E‐01 4.06E‐01 9.74E+00 8.34E‐01 3.79E‐01 9.10E+00 8.97E‐01 4.14E‐01 9.92E+00 8.34E‐01 1.68E+00 4.04E+01 1.02E+00H2SO46.24E‐03 1.50E‐01 2.32E‐02 9.36E‐03 2.25E‐01 2.98E‐02 1.24E‐02 2.96E‐01 2.42E‐02 1.27E‐02 3.04E‐01 2.61E‐02 1.18E‐02 2.84E‐01 2.80E‐02 1.29E‐02 3.10E‐01 2.61E‐02 1.29E‐02 3.10E‐01 2.98E‐02GHG3.16E+05 7.59E+06 1.10E+05 2.29E+05 5.50E+06 1.25E+05 4.51E+04 1.08E+06 9.24E+04 4.80E+04 1.15E+06 9.81E+04 4.44E+04 1.07E+06 1.05E+05 4.88E+04 1.17E+06 9.81E+04 3.16E+05 7.59E+06 1.25E+05HAPs12 280 13 10 246 13 7 174 12 7 175 12 7 174 12 7 175 12 12 280 13Note:The	Potential	To	Emit	calculation	includes	the	sum	of	emissionsfrom	the	following	emission	sources:*Drillship	Main	Propulsion	Engines	&	Emergency	Electrical	Generator*Cement	and	Mud	Mixing	Dust	collectors*Mud	Degasser	Vent*Painting	Operations*Welding	Operations*Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines*Flowback	Boiler*Boomflare*Condensate	Tanks*Support	Vessels*Drillship	Diesel	and	Jet	Fuel	Tanks*Drillship	Fugitive	ComponentsPollutantGasFlowback OilFlowback StimulationVessel Completion WellEvaluationVesselDrillingScenario PotentialtoEmitScenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5Anadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1PTEAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationMatrixCalculatorUnits/hr Units/day Units/year Units/hr Units/day Units/year Units/hr Units/day Units/year Units/hr Units/day Units/year Units/hr Units/day Units/year Units/hr Units/day Units/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 2.3 55 18438 2.5 59 18438 3.2 78 18438 4.7 112 18438 3.9 94 18438 4.7 112 18438Emergency	Air	CompressorDR‐AC‐01hours 0.5 0.5 100 0.5 0.5 100 0.5 0.5 100 0.5 0.5 100 0.5 0.5100 0.5 0.5 100Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours* 1.0 1100 1.0 1.0 100 1.00 1.0 100 1.0 1.0 100 1.0 1.0100 1.0 1.0 100Fast	Rescue	CraftDR‐FR‐01hours 1.0 1100 1.0 1.0 100 1.00 1.0 100 1.0 1.0 100 1.0 1.0100 1.0 1.0 100Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours* 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours* 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800Drillship	Fugitive	EmissionsDR‐FE‐01hours 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800Mud	Degasser	VentDR‐VG‐01hours 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	OperationsDR‐PO‐01gals2.1 50 6500 2.1 50 6500 2.1 50 6500 2.1 50 6500 2.1 50 6500 2.1 50 6500Welding	OperationsDR‐WE‐01lbs 3.3 80 16000 3.3 80 16000 3.3 80 16000 3.3 80 16000 3.3 80 16000 3.3 80 16000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800 1.0 24 4800Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours* 00000 0000000000124 125EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours* 00000 0000000000124 4800EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours* 00000 0000000000124 4800EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours* 00000 0000000000124 4800EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours 00000 0000124 4800 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours 00000 0124 4800 124 4800 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours 00000 0000124 4800 000000Flowback	BoilerDR‐TP‐22MMBtu 8.0 192 1152 8.0 192 1152 000000000000Boom	FlareDR‐TP‐23MMscf 2.5 60 360 1.7 40 240 000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours 00000 0000124 4800 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours 00000 0000124 4800 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours* 00000 0000124 4800 000000Condensate	TanksDR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours* 1 2401 24 0000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	EnginesVariousbbl 00000 09 225 4725 000000000BargesBG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0001 24 4800 000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0005 125 25000 000000000000Well	Evaluation	VesselVariousbbl 00000 00000006 144 28800 000Supply	BoatsVariousbbl 4.2 100 20000 4.2 100 20000 4 100 20000 8 200 40000 4 100 20000 8 200 40000*	Hours	per	unit.DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselScenario1Scenario2Scenario3Scenario4Scenario5EPNAirEmissionSourcesUnitDrillShipTemporaryThirdPartyEnginesSupportVesselsAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1Matrix	CalculatorAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationNOxEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 250 6,005 1,007 268 6,442 1,007 355 8,517 1,007 510 12,229 1,007 428 10,264 1,007 510 12,229 1,007Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.01Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 7.6 7.6 0.4 7.6 7.6 0.4 7.6 7.6 0.4 7.6 7.6 0.4 7.6 7.6 0.4 7.6 7.6 0.4Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 3 78 7.82 3 78 7.82 3 78 7.82 3 78 7.82 3 78 7.82 3 78 7.82EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours* 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 5211.36EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours* 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 15615.64EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours* 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 666.57EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours* 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 15615.64EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 1 333.28000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33 3.28 1 33 3.28000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 7 15615.64000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu 1 27 0.08 1 27 0.08000000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 170 4078 12.24 113 2719 8.16000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 9 21721.72000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 9 21721.72000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours* 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 7 15615.64000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours* 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 5209 54.70000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 42 1018 101.78000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 84 2004 200.41000000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1423399 339.92 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 42 1008 101 42 1008 101 42 1008 101 84 2015 202 42 1008 101 84 2015 202463 11119 1120 551 13218 1418 614 14733 1162 594 14244 1208 611 14670 1447 61514765 1210TotalUnitAirEmissionSourcesSupportVesselsThirdPartyEnginesEPNDrillShipNOxScenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselScenario1NOx NOx NOx NOx NOxAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1NOx	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationPMEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 9 227 38 10 244 38 13 322 38 19 463 38 16 388 38 19 463 38Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours00000000 0 00 0 00 00.00 0.00 0.00Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours00000000 0 00 0 00 00.00 0.00 0.00Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours00000000 0 00 0 00 00.00 0.00 0.00Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HPDR‐TP‐03hours 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*00000000 0 00 0 00 01.54E+00 3.70E+01 9.63E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*00000000 0 00 0 00 01.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*00000000 0 00 0 00 01.24E‐01 2.98E+00 2.98E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*00000000 0 00 0 00 01.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours00000000 06.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000006.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours00000000 01.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 1.86E+01 4.47E+02 1.34E+00 1.24E+01 2.98E+02 8.94E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours00000000 02.83E‐01 6.79E+00 6.79E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours00000000 02.83E‐01 6.79E+00 6.79E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*00000000 01.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01 0 0 0 0 0 0Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*00000000 0 00 0 00 0 00 0Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.98E+00 1.68E+02 1.76E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.01E+00 7.22E+01 7.22E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.53E+00 1.09E+02 1.09E+01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 4.76E+00 1.14E+02 1.14E+01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00Supply	Boats Variousbbl 1.17E+00 2.81E+01 2.81E+00 1.17E+00 2.81E+01 0.00E+00 1.17E+00 2.81E+01 2.81E+00 2.34E+00 5.62E+01 5.62E+00 1.17E+00 2.81E+01 2.81E+00 2.34E+00 5.62E+01 5.62E+0030 721 43 32 770 58 22 532 44 22 533 45 23 545 54 24 570 45Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3AirEmissionSources EPN UnitDrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselPM PM PMScenario4 Scenario5PM PM PMDrillshipSupportVesselsThirdPartyEnginesTotalAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1PM	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationPM10EmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 9 227 38 10 244 38 13 322 38 19 463 38 16 388 38 19 463 38Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 2.34E‐06 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 2.34E‐06 4.38E‐06 4.68E‐03 2.34E‐06Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 2.71E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐04 2.71E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐04 1.46E‐02 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐04Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 2.71E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐05 2.71E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐05 1.47E‐04 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐05Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours 0 00000000000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours 0 00000000000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours 0 00000000000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 1.19E‐03 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 1.19E‐03 2.34E‐02 2.37E+00 1.19E‐03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 7.46E‐04 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 7.46E‐04 9.28E‐03 1.49E+00 7.46E‐04Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours* 0.00E+00 000000000000001.54E+00 3.70E+01 9.63E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours* 0.00E+00 000000000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours* 0.00E+00 000000000000001.24E‐01 2.98E+00 2.98E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours* 0.00E+00 000000000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours 0.00E+00 000000006.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours 0.00E+00 000006.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours 0.00E+00 000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01 000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02000000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 1.86E+01 4.47E+02 1.34E+00 1.24E+01 2.98E+02 8.94E‐01000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours 0.00E+00 000000001.62E‐01 3.89E+00 3.89E‐01 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours 0.00E+00 000000001.62E‐01 3.89E+00 3.89E‐01 000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours* 0000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01 000000Condensate	TanksDR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours* 000000000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	EnginesVariousbbl0 0 0 0 0 04.00E+00 9.60E+01 1.01E+00000000000BargesBG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 000 3.01E+00 7.22E+01 7.22E+00000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 000 2.60E+00 6.23E+01 6.23E+00000000000000Well	Evaluation	VesselVariousbbl0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03.18E+00 7.64E+01 7.64E+00 000Supply	BoatsVariousbbl 9.71E‐01 2.33E+01 2.33E+00 9.71E‐01 2.33E+01 2.33E+00 9.71E‐01 2.33E+01 0.00E+00 1.94E+00 4.66E+01 4.66E+00 9.71E‐01 2.33E+01 2.33E+00 1.94E+00 4.66E+01 4.66E+0029.9 716 43.0 29.9 718 56.0 19.0 456 40.3 21.7 520 43.6 20.8 499 48.9 23.2 557 43.7PM10PM10Scenario1Scenario2Scenario3Scenario4Scenario5PM10ThirdPartyEnginesSupportVesselsDrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselPM10PM10PM10TotalDrillshipUnitAirEmissionSourcesEPNAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1PM10	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationPM2.5EmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 9 227 38 10 244 38 13 322 38 19 463 38 16 388 38 19 463 38Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐03 4.68E‐04Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02 5.41E‐01 5.41E‐01 2.71E‐02Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03 5.42E‐02 5.42E‐02 2.71E‐03Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01 1.49E‐01 3.56E+00 3.56E‐01Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours000000000000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours000000000000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours000000000000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01 2.61E‐01 6.26E+00 4.07E‐01Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01 1.90E‐01 4.56E+00 4.56E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HPDR‐TP‐03hours 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01 9.88E‐02 2.37E+00 2.37E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*0000000000000003.08E‐01 7.39E+00 1.93E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*0000000000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*0000000000000001.24E‐01 2.98E+00 2.98E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*0000000000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours0000000006.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000006.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01 6.22E‐02 1.49E+00 1.49E‐01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours0000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02 1.89E‐01 4.53E+00 1.36E‐02000000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 1.86E+01 4.47E+02 1.34E+00 1.24E+01 2.98E+02 8.94E‐01000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours0000000001.57E‐01 3.77E+00 3.77E‐01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours0000000001.57E‐01 3.77E+00 3.77E‐01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*0000000001.98E‐01 4.74E+00 4.74E‐01000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*000000000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 03.88E+00 9.31E+01 9.78E‐01000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 3.01E+00 7.22E+01 7.22E+00000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 2.52E+00 6.04E+01 6.04E+00000000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03.12E+00 7.49E+01 7.49E+00 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 9.44E‐01 2.27E+01 2.27E+00 9.44E‐01 2.27E+01 2.27E+00 9.44E‐01 2.27E+01 2.27E+00 1.89E+00 4.53E+01 4.53E+00 9.44E‐01 2.27E+01 2.27E+00 1.89E+00 4.53E+01 4.53E+0029.8 716 43 29.8 716 56 18.9 453 43 21.8 523 44 20.8 500 49 22.1 530 44Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselPM2.5PM2.5PM2.5PM2.5PM2.5PM2.5ThirdPartyEnginesTotalEPNAirEmissionSources UnitDrillshipSupportVesselsAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1PM2.5	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationCOEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 79 1901 319 85 2039 319 112 2696 319 161 3871 319 135 3249 319 161 3871 319Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐02 8.58E‐03Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02 1.64E+00 1.64E+00 8.22E‐02Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02 4.97E‐01 4.97E‐01 2.49E‐02Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours000000000000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours000000000000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours000000000000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours000000000000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals000000000000000000Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00 1.73E+00 4.15E+01 4.15E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*0000000000000004.68E+00 1.12E+02 2.92E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*0000000000000003.46E+00 8.30E+01 8.30E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*0000000000000002.07E+00 4.97E+01 4.97E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*0000000000000003.46E+00 8.30E+01 8.30E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours0000000001.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000001.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00 1.04E+00 2.49E+01 2.49E+00000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours0000000003.46E+00 8.30E+01 8.30E+00000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu 2.86E‐01 6.86E+00 2.06E‐02 2.86E‐01 6.86E+00 2.06E‐02000000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 9.25E+02 2.22E+04 6.66E+01 6.16E+02 1.48E+04 4.44E+01000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours0000000004.95E+00 1.19E+02 1.19E+01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours0000000004.95E+00 1.19E+02 1.19E+01000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*0000000003.46E+00 8.30E+01 8.30E+00000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*000000000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 06.75E+01 1.62E+03 1.70E+01000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 9.14E+00 2.19E+02 2.19E+01000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 3.56E+01 8.54E+02 8.54E+01000000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03.23E+01 7.74E+02 7.74E+01 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 29 694 69 29 694 69 29 694 69 58 1389 139 29 694 69 58 1389 1391033 24793 455 775 18608 540 209 5009 405 219 5260 458 197 4718 466 224 5372 458SupportVesselsTotalUnitAirEmissionSources EPNScenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselCO CO CO CO CO CODrillshipThirdPartyEnginesAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1CO	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationVOCEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 22 523 88 23 561 88 31 741 88 44 1065 88 37 893 88 44 1065 88Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐02 2.39E‐03Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02 6.18E‐01 6.18E‐01 3.09E‐02Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03 1.38E‐01 1.38E‐01 6.91E‐03Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 0 0 000000000000000 0Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours 0 0 6.93E‐0100000000000000 0Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02 1.08E‐02 2.60E‐01 2.60E‐02Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00 2.23E+00 5.36E+01 5.36E+00Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01 1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01 1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01 1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01 1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01 1.82E+01 4.36E+02 2.84E+01Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00 7.54E‐01 1.81E+01 1.81E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours* 0 0 00000000000001.76E+00 4.22E+01 1.10E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours* 0 0 00000000000001.51E+00 3.62E+01 3.62E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours* 0 0 00000000000006.33E‐01 1.52E+01 1.52E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours* 0 0 00000000000001.51E+00 3.62E+01 3.62E+00EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours 0 0 000000008100000 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐01 3.16E‐01 7.59E+00 7.59E‐0100000 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours 0 0 00000001.51E+00 3.62E+01 3.62E+0000000 0Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMbtu 1.14E‐02 2.74E‐01 8.23E‐04 1.14E‐02 2.74E‐01 8.23E‐0400000000000 0Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 3.50E+02 8.40E+03 2.52E+01 2.33E+02 5.60E+03 1.68E+0100000000000 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours 0 0 00000005.52E‐01 1.32E+01 1.32E+0000000 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours 0 0 00000005.52E‐01 1.32E+01 1.32E+0000000 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours* 0 0 00000001.51E+00 3.62E+01 3.62E+0000000 0Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours* 0 0 9.65E+00 0 0 9.65E+0000000000000 0Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.32E+00 1.76E+02 1.84E+0000000000 0Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 3.44E+00 8.25E+01 8.25E+0000000000000 0Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 4.15E+00 9.96E+01 9.96E+0000000000000 0Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04.60E+00 1.10E+02 1.10E+01 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 2.19E+00 5.27E+01 5.27E+00 2.19E+00 5.27E+01 5.27E+00 2.19E+00 5.27E+01 5.27E+00 4.39E+00 1.05E+02 1.05E+01 2.19E+00 5.27E+01 5.27E+00 4.39E+00 1.05E+02 1.05E+01394 9462 162 287 6884 171 61 1460 128 69 1660 132 64 1547 138 71 1702 132Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselVOC VOC VOC VOC VOC VOCThirdPartyEnginesTotalEPNAirEmissionSources UnitDrillshipSupportVesselsAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1VOC	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationPbEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 2.92E‐03 7.02E‐02 1.18E‐02 3.14E‐03 7.53E‐02 1.18E‐02 4.15E‐03 9.95E‐02 1.18E‐02 5.95E‐03 1.43E‐01 1.18E‐02 5.00E‐03 1.20E‐01 1.18E‐02 5.95E‐03 1.43E‐01 1.18E‐02Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐06 1.93E‐07Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06 4.99E‐05 4.99E‐05 2.50E‐06Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07 1.12E‐05 1.12E‐05 5.58E‐07Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours00000000 0000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours00000000 0000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours00000000 0000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours00000000 0000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals00000000 0000000000Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04 6.09E‐05 1.46E‐03 1.46E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*00000000 00000001.42E‐04 3.41E‐03 8.88E‐06EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*00000000 00000001.22E‐04 2.92E‐03 2.92E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*00000000 00000005.12E‐05 1.23E‐03 1.23E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*00000000 00000001.22E‐04 2.92E‐03 2.92E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours00000000 02.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000002.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05 2.56E‐05 6.14E‐04 6.14E‐05000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours00000000 01.22E‐04 2.92E‐03 2.92E‐04000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMbtu 7.20E‐05 1.73E‐03 5.18E‐06 7.20E‐05 1.73E‐03 5.18E‐06 0 0 0000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf00000000 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours00000000 01.75E‐04 4.19E‐03 4.19E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours00000000 01.75E‐04 4.19E‐03 4.19E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*00000000 01.22E‐04 2.92E‐03 2.92E‐04000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*00000000 0000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 02.32E‐03 5.56E‐02 5.84E‐04000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 2.78E‐04 6.66E‐03 6.66E‐04 0 0 0000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 1.31E‐03 3.15E‐02 3.15E‐03 0 0 0000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01.17E‐03 2.81E‐02 2.81E‐03 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 6.94E‐04 1.67E‐02 1.67E‐03 6.94E‐04 1.67E‐02 1.67E‐03 6.94E‐04 1.67E‐02 1.67E‐03 1.39E‐03 3.33E‐02 3.33E‐03 6.94E‐04 1.67E‐02 1.67E‐03 1.39E‐03 3.33E‐02 3.33E‐033.69E‐03 8.86E‐02 1.34E‐02 5.49E‐03 1.32E‐01 1.73E‐02 7.16E‐03 1.72E‐01 1.40E‐02 7.34E‐03 1.76E‐01 1.51E‐02 6.86E‐03 1.65E‐01 1.62E‐02 7.48E‐03 1.80E‐01 1.51E‐02UnitAirEmissionSources EPNDrillshipThirdPartyEnginesPbScenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselScenario1Pb Pb Pb Pb PbSupportVesselsTotalAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1Pb	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationGHGEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 1.99E+04 4.77E+05 7.99E+04 2.13E+04 5.12E+05 7.99E+04 2.82E+04 6.76E+05 7.99E+04 4.05E+04 9.71E+05 7.99E+04 3.40E+04 8.15E+05 7.99E+04 4.05E+04 9.71E+05 7.99E+04Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 11 11 1.09 11 11 1.09 11 11 1.09 11 11 1.09 11 11 1.09 11 11 1.09Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 282 282 14.09 282 282 14.09 282 282 14.09 282 282 14.09 282 282 14.09 282282 14.09Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 63 63 3.15 63 63 3.15 63 63 3.15 63 63 3.15 63 63 3.15 63 63 3.15Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours000000000000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours000000000000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours000000000000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours 113 2714 271 113 2714 271 113 2714 271 113 2714 271 113 2714 271 113 2714 271Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals000000000000000000Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 348 8342 834 348 8342 834 348 8342 834 348 8342 834 348 8342 834 348 8342 834EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 144 3463 346 144 3463 346 144 3463 346 144 3463 346 144 3463 346 144 3463 346Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*0000000000000008.02E+02 1.92E+04 5.01E+01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*0000000000000006.95E+02 1.67E+04 1.67E+03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*0000000000000002.89E+02 6.93E+03 6.93E+02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*0000000000000006.95E+02 1.67E+04 1.67E+03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours0000000001.44E+02 3.46E+03 3.46E+02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000001.44E+02 3.46E+03 3.46E+02 1.44E+02 3.46E+03 3.46E+02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours0000000.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 6.95E+02 1.67E+04 1.67E+03000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMbtu 5.45E+01 1.31E+03 3.93E+00 5.45E+01 1.31E+03 3.93E+00000000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 2.92E+05 7.02E+06 2.11E+04 1.95E+05 4.68E+06 1.40E+04000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours0000000009.85E+02 2.36E+04 2.36E+03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours0000000009.85E+02 2.36E+04 2.36E+03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*0000000006.95E+02 1.67E+04 1.67E+03000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*000000000000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 013068 313627 3293000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 1567 37600 3760000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 7410 177846 17785000000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06596 158313 15831 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 3719 89264 8926 3719 89264 8926 3719 89264 8926 7439 178529 17853 3719 89264 8926 7439 178529 178533.16E+05 7.59E+06 1.10E+05 2.29E+05 5.50E+06 1.25E+05 4.51E+04 1.08E+06 9.24E+04 4.80E+04 1.15E+06 9.81E+04 4.44E+04 1.07E+06 1.05E+05 4.88E+04 1.17E+06 9.81E+04Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3EPNScenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselGHG GHG GHG GHG GHG GHGThirdPartyEnginesTotalAirEmissionSources UnitDrillshipSupportVesselsAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1GHG	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationSO2EmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 1.62E‐01 3.88E+00 6.50E‐01 1.73E‐01 4.16E+00 6.50E‐01 2.29E‐01 5.50E+00 6.50E‐01 3.29E‐01 7.89E+00 6.50E‐01 2.76E‐01 6.63E+00 6.50E‐01 3.29E‐01 7.89E+00 6.50E‐01Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐04 1.06E‐05Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04 2.76E‐03 2.76E‐03 1.38E‐04Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05 6.17E‐04 6.17E‐04 3.08E‐05Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours00000000 0000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours00000000 0000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours00000000 0000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours00000000 0000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals00000000 0000000000Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03 3.36E‐03 8.08E‐02 8.08E‐03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*00000000 00000007.85E‐03 1.88E‐01 4.91E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*00000000 00000006.73E‐03 1.62E‐01 1.62E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*00000000 00000002.83E‐03 6.78E‐02 6.78E‐03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*00000000 00000006.73E‐03 1.62E‐01 1.62E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours00000000 01.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000001.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03 1.41E‐03 3.39E‐02 3.39E‐03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours00000000 06.73E‐03 1.62E‐01 1.62E‐02000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMbtu 1.22E‐02 2.92E‐01 8.76E‐04 1.22E‐02 2.92E‐01 8.76E‐04 0 0 0000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf 1.47E+00 3.53E+01 1.06E‐01 9.80E‐01 2.35E+01 7.06E‐02 0 0 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours00000000 09.65E‐03 2.31E‐01 2.31E‐02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours00000000 09.65E‐03 2.31E‐01 2.31E‐02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*00000000 06.73E‐03 1.62E‐01 1.62E‐02000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*00000000 0000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 01.28E‐01 3.07E+00 3.23E‐02000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 1.53E‐02 3.68E‐01 3.68E‐02 0 0 0000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 7.26E‐02 1.74E+00 1.74E‐01 0 0 0000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06.46E‐02 1.55E+00 1.55E‐01 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 3.84E‐02 9.21E‐01 9.21E‐02 3.84E‐02 9.21E‐01 9.21E‐02 3.84E‐02 9.21E‐01 9.21E‐02 7.67E‐02 1.84E+00 1.84E‐01 3.84E‐02 9.21E‐01 9.21E‐02 7.67E‐02 1.84E+00 1.84E‐01Total1.68E+00 4.04E+01 8.49E‐01 1.29E+00 3.10E+01 1.02E+00 3.95E‐01 9.49E+00 7.74E‐01 4.06E‐01 9.74E+00 8.34E‐01 3.79E‐01 9.10E+00 8.97E‐01 4.14E‐01 9.92E+00 8.34E‐01UnitAirEmissionSources EPNDrillshipThirdPartyEnginesSO2Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselScenario1SO2 SO2 SO2 SO2 SO2SupportVesselsAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1SO2	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationH2SO4EmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 5.05E‐03 1.21E‐01 2.03E‐02 5.41E‐03 1.30E‐01 2.03E‐02 7.16E‐03 1.72E‐01 2.03E‐02 1.03E‐02 2.47E‐01 2.03E‐02 8.62E‐03 2.07E‐01 2.03E‐02 1.03E‐02 2.47E‐01 2.03E‐02Emergency	Air	Compressor	 DR‐AC‐01hours 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐06 3.32E‐07Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	no.	1	to	6 DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06 8.62E‐05 8.62E‐05 4.31E‐06Fast	Rescue	Craft DR‐FR‐01hours 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07 1.93E‐05 1.93E‐05 9.64E‐07Dust	Collectors	no.	1	to	3 DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours00000000 0000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours00000000 0000000000Drillship	Fugitive	Emissions DR‐FE‐01hours00000000 0000000000Mud	Degasser	Vent DR‐VG‐01hours00000000 0000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	Operations DR‐PO‐01 gals00000000 0000000000Welding	Operations DR‐WE‐01lbs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04 1.05E‐04 2.52E‐03 2.52E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours*00000000 00000002.45E‐04 5.89E‐03 1.53E‐05EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours*00000000 00000002.10E‐04 5.05E‐03 5.05E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours*00000000 00000008.83E‐05 2.12E‐03 2.12E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours*00000000 00000002.10E‐04 5.05E‐03 5.05E‐04EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours00000000 04.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours0000004.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04 4.41E‐05 1.06E‐03 1.06E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours00000000 02.10E‐04 5.05E‐03 5.05E‐04000000Flowback	Boiler DR‐TP‐22MMBtu00000000 0000000000Boom	Flare DR‐TP‐23MMscf00000000 0000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours00000000 03.01E‐04 7.23E‐03 7.23E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours00000000 03.01E‐04 7.23E‐03 7.23E‐04000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours*00000000 02.10E‐04 5.05E‐03 5.05E‐04000000Condensate	Tanks DR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours*00000000 0000000000Stimulation	Vessel	Engines Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 04.00E‐03 9.60E‐02 1.01E‐03000000000Barges BG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 0 0 0 4.79E‐04 1.15E‐02 1.15E‐03 0 0 0000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 0 0 0 2.27E‐03 5.44E‐02 5.44E‐03 0 0 0000000000Well	Evaluation	Vessel Variousbbl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02.02E‐03 4.84E‐02 4.84E‐03 0 0 0Supply	Boats Variousbbl 1.20E‐03 2.88E‐02 2.88E‐03 1.20E‐03 2.88E‐02 2.88E‐03 1.20E‐03 2.88E‐02 2.88E‐03 2.40E‐03 5.75E‐02 5.75E‐03 1.20E‐03 2.88E‐02 2.88E‐03 2.40E‐03 5.75E‐02 5.75E‐036.24E‐03 1.50E‐01 2.32E‐02 9.36E‐03 2.25E‐01 2.98E‐02 1.24E‐02 2.96E‐01 2.42E‐02 1.27E‐02 3.04E‐01 2.61E‐02 1.18E‐02 2.84E‐01 2.80E‐02 1.29E‐02 3.10E‐01 2.61E‐02EPNAirEmissionSources UnitDrillshipThirdPartyEnginesH2SO4Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	Flowback Oil	Flowback Stimulation	Vessel Completion Well	Evaluation	VesselScenario1H2SO4 H2SO4 H2SO4 H2SO4 H2SO4SupportVesselsTotalAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1H2SO4	MatrixAnadarkoPetroleumCorporationHAPEmissionsMatrixlb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/year lb/hr lb/day ton/yearDrillship	Main	Propulsion	Electrical	GeneratorEngines	and	Emergency	GeneratorDR‐ME‐01	to	DR‐ME‐08	andDR‐GE‐01m3 1.59E‐01 3.81E+00 6.38E‐01 1.70E‐01 4.08E+00 6.38E‐01 2.25E‐01 5.40E+00 6.38E‐01 3.23E‐01 7.75E+00 6.38E‐01 2.71E‐01 6.51E+00 6.38E‐01 3.23E‐01 7.75E+00 6.38E‐01Emergency	Air	CompressorDR‐AC‐01hours 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐04 2.57E‐05Life	Boat	Diesel	Engines	No.	1	to	6DR‐LB‐01	to	DR‐LB‐06hours 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04 6.67E‐03 6.67E‐03 3.34E‐04Fast	Rescue	CraftDR‐FR‐01hours 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05 1.49E‐03 1.49E‐03 7.46E‐05Dust	Collectors	No.	1	to	3DR‐DC‐01	to	DR‐DC‐03hours 00000000 0000000000Drill	Ship	Diesel		and	Jet	Fuel	Storage	Tanks DR‐FT‐01	to	DR‐FT‐18hours 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 3.65E‐02Drillship	Fugitive	EmissionsDR‐FE‐01hours 00000000 0000000000Mud	Degasser	VentDR‐VG‐01hours 00000000 0000000000Painting	(paint	+	thinner)	OperationsDR‐PO‐01gals6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01 6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01 6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01 6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01 6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01 6.61E+00 1.59E+02 1.03E+01Welding	OperationsDR‐WE‐01lbs 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01 2.67E‐01 6.42E+00 6.42E‐01EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines≤300	HP DR‐TP‐03hours 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02 8.13E‐03 1.95E‐01 1.95E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐17hours 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03Third	Party	Well	Evaluation	Engines	≤	140	HPDR‐TP‐12	to	DR‐TP‐16hours* 00000000 00000001.90E‐02 4.56E‐01 1.19E‐03EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐04	and	DR‐TP‐05hours* 00000000 00000001.63E‐02 3.90E‐01 3.90E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐18	and	DR‐TP‐19hours* 00000000 00000006.83E‐03 1.64E‐01 1.64E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐06	and	DR‐TP‐07hours* 00000000 00000001.63E‐02 3.90E‐01 3.90E‐02EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐20hours 00000000 03.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	126	HPDR‐TP‐21hours 0000003.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03 3.42E‐03 8.20E‐02 8.20E‐03000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐08	and	DR‐TP‐09hours 00000000 01.63E‐02 3.90E‐01 3.90E‐02000000Flowback	BoilerDR‐TP‐22MMBtu 1.89E‐04 4.53E‐03 1.36E‐05 1.89E‐04 4.53E‐03 1.36E‐05 000000000000Boom	FlareDR‐TP‐23MMscf 4.61E+00 1.11E+02 3.32E‐01 3.07E+00 7.37E+01 2.21E‐01 000000000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐01hours 00000000 01.03E‐02 2.46E‐01 2.46E‐02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	860	HPDR‐TP‐02hours 00000000 01.03E‐02 2.46E‐01 2.46E‐02000000EPA	Tier	II	Third	Party	Engines	≤	300	HPDR‐TP‐10	and	DR‐TP‐11hours* 00000000 01.63E‐02 3.90E‐01 3.90E‐02000000Condensate	TanksDR‐TP‐25	to	DR‐TP‐27hours* 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 5.02E‐01 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 5.02E‐01 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 1.82E‐05 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 1.82E‐05 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 1.82E‐05 7.59E‐06 1.82E‐04 1.82E‐05Stimulation	Vessel	EnginesVariousbbl0 0 0 0 0 01.26E‐01 3.02E+00 3.17E‐02000000000BargesBG‐LP‐01	to	BG‐LP‐03hours 000 3.71E‐02 8.90E‐01 8.90E‐02 000000000000Tug	BoatsTG‐ME‐01	to	TG‐ME‐03	&	TG‐GE‐01	to	TG‐GE‐02bbl 000 7.13E‐02 1.71E+00 1.71E‐01 000000000000Well	Evaluation	VesselVariousbbl0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07.61E‐02 1.83E+00 1.83E‐01 000Supply	BoatsVariousbbl 3.81E‐02 9.14E‐01 9.14E‐02 3.81E‐02 9.14E‐01 9.14E‐02 3.81E‐02 9.14E‐01 9.14E‐02 7.62E‐02 1.83E+00 1.83E‐01 3.81E‐02 9.14E‐01 9.14E‐02 7.62E‐02 1.83E+00 1.83E‐011.17E+01 2.80E+02 1.26E+01 1.03E+01 2.46E+02 1.27E+01 7.26E+00 1.74E+02 1.17E+01 7.28E+00 1.75E+02 1.18E+01 7.26E+00 1.74E+02 1.19E+01 7.29E+00 1.75E+02 1.18E+01Note:	Highest	single	HAP	emission: Xylene5.71E+00tpyUnitAirEmissionSourcesEPNDrillshipThirdPartyEnginesHAPScenario2Scenario3Scenario4Scenario5DrillingScenarioGas	FlowbackOil	FlowbackStimulation	VesselCompletionWell	Evaluation	VesselScenario1HAPHAPHAPHAPHAPSupportVesselsTotalAnadarko	Petroleum	CorporationEGOM	Exploratory	Project	‐	Blackhawk1	of	1HAP	Matrix

# MEMORANDUM

To: Kelly	Fortin,	EPA	Region	4

CC: Sara	Carlson	and	Katie	Maness,	Anadarko

From: Rahul	Pendse,	Trinity

Date: August	22,	2014

RE: BlackHawk	PSD/Title	V	Application:	Proposed	Parametric	Emissio ns	Monitoring	System	and	BACT

Limits	Compliance	Demonstration



## BACKGROUND

New	Source	Performance	Standard s	(NSPS)	Subpart	IIII,	Standards of	Performance	for	Stationary	Compression

Ignition	Internal	Combustion	Engi nes,	provides	standards	for	ma nufacturers,	owners, and	operators	of

stationary	compression	ignition (CI)	internal	combustion	engine s.			As	described	in	the regulatory	applicability

section	of	the	BlackHawk	PSD/Title	V	permit	application	package submitted	in	September	2013,	the	main

engines	on	the	BlackHawk	drillshi p	are	subject	to	NSPS	Subpart IIII.

Per	§	60.4211(d)(2),	an	owner	or	o perator	must	establish	operat ing	parameters	to	be	m onitored	continuously

to	ensure	the	stationary	internal combustion	engine	continues	t o	meet	the	emission	standards.		The	owner	or

operator	must	petition	the	Admini strator	(i.e.,	EPA	in	this	cas e)	for	approval	of	operating	parameters	to	be

monitored	continuously. The	petition	must include	the	informat ion	specified	below:

 Identification	of	the	specific	p arameters	proposed	to	be	monito red	continuously;

 A	discussion	of	the	rel ationship	between	these	parameters	and	o xides	of	nitrogen	(NO X 

### )	and	particulate

matter	(PM)	emissions,	identifyi ng	how	the	emissions	of	these	p ollutants	change	wit h	changes	in	these

parameters,	and	how	limitations on	these	parameters	will	serve to	limit	NO X 

### and	PM	emissions;

 A	discussion	of	how	th e	upper	and/or	lower	values	for	these	par ameters	were	established;

 A	discussion	identifying	the	met hods	and	the	instruments	you	wi ll	use	to	monitor	th ese	parameters,	as

well	as	the	relative	accuracy	and precision	of	these	methods	an d	instruments;	and

 A	discussion	identifying	the	freq uency	and	methods	for	recalibr ating	the	instruments	you	will	use	for

monitoring	these	parameters.

Moreover,	EPA	has	included	an	emissions	monitoring	system	as	th e	BACT	limits	compli ance	demonstration

option.		Anadarko	is	proposing	t o	utilize	a	combination	of	engi ne	load	vs.	exhaust	flow	plot	and	a	Parametric

Emissions	Monitoring	System	(PEM S),	developed	by	Air	Hygiene,	I nc.,	for	demonstrating	compliance	with	the

requirements	specified	in	§	60.4211( d)(2)	and	the	BACT	limits	f or	certain	pollutants	as	described	in	this

technical	memorandum.



## PEMS DIRECT MEASUREMENTS

The	proposed	PEMS	has	the	capabi lity	to	monitor	concentrations of	the	following:

 Oxides	of	nitrogen	(NO	and	NO 2 

### –	collectively	referred	as	NO

x 

### )	in	parts	per	million	by	volume	(ppmv),

 Carbon	monoxide	(CO)	in	ppmv,	and

 Oxygen	(O 2 

### )	in	volume	percent.

### The	proposed	PEMS	does	not	have the	capability	to	monitor	the	f ollowing:

 Carbon	dioxide	(CO 2 

### )	concentrations,

 Volatile	organic	compounds (VOCs)	concentrations,

 Particulate	matter	species	(PM/PM 10 

### /PM 2.5 

### )	concentrations,

 Exhaust	flow	rate,	and

 Moisture	content	of	the	exhaust.

Since	the	PEMS	is	not	capable	of	monitoring	VOCs	and	particulat e	matter,	Anadarko	is	pro posing	to	utilize	the

compliance	stack	test	results	al ong	with	the	continuous	monitor ing	of	engine	load	to demonstrate	ongoing

compliance	with	the	BACT	limits for	VOCs	and	particulate	matter .		Although	the	propos ed	PEMS	does	not	have

the	capability	to	monitor	CO 2 

### concentrations,	CO 2 

### concentrations	will	be	calc ulated	using	the	monitored	O 2



### concentrations	as	described	below.



## CO 2 

## CONCENTRATION DETERMINATION

Appendix	F	to	Code	of	Federal	Re gulations	Title	40	Part	75	prov ides	an	equation	to	calculate	CO 2 

### on	a	dry	basis:

ܥܱ ଶௗ 

### ൌ 100 ܨ

௖



### ܨ ൬ 20.9 െ ܱ ଶௗ



### 20.9 ൰ (1)

Where:

 CO 2d 

### is	the	hourly	average	CO 2 

### concentration	during	operation ,	volume	percent,	dry	basis;

 F

c 

### and	F	are	the	F‐Factors	as shown	in	Table	1	below;

 O 2d 

### is	the	hourly	average	O 2 

### concentration	during	operation ,	volume	percent,	dry	basis.



### Table 1: F and F

c 

### ‐ Factors for Fuel Oil

F

‐ Factor Value Unit

F	 9,190	 dscf/MMBtu

F

c 

### 1,420	 scf	CO 2 

### /MMBtu

Note: These	values	were	determined	at the	standard	conditions	20	°C	( 68	°F)	and

760	mmHg	(29.92	in.	Hg)



## ENGINE LOAD MONITORING

Since	the	BACT	limits	for	NO

x 

### ,	CO,	and	greenhouse	gases	(measured	as	CO 2 

### )	are	proposed	in	g/ kW‐hr	and	lbs/hr,

a	flow	rate	and	an	engine	load are	required	to	convert	the	conc entrations	(in	ppmv	or	volume	%)	to	emission

rates	in	grams	of	pollutant/ kW‐hr	of	engine	output.

The	PEMS	on	the	drills hip	will	have	the	capa bility	of	continuou sly	monitoring	a	power output	in	electrical

kilowatts	(kW

e 

### ).		Anadarko	proposes	to	utilize the	PEMS	for	documenting	power output	at	least	once	every

operational	hour	for each	main	engine.		A nadarko	will	convert	a power	output	in	electrical	kilowatts	(kW

e 

### )	to	a

power	output	in	mechanical	kilowatts	(kW

m 

### )	by	using	a	typical	conversion	factor	of 1 kW

m 

### output = 0.95 kW

e



### output.

Since	the	PEMS	does	not	have	the capability	to	monitor	the	exha ust	flow	rate,	Anadarko proposes	to	develop	a

plot	of	exhaust	flow	rate	vs.	en gine	load	during	the	compliance stack	tests	as	discussed	below.

## EXHAUST FLOW RATE VS. ENGINE LOAD PLOT

Anadarko	expects	the	main	engine loads	to	vary	from	20%	to	60% during	the	operations.		Anadarko	proposes	to

measure	the	flow	rate	at	a	minim um	of	three	loads within	20%	to 60%	using	an	EPA	approved	exhaust	flow

measurement	method(s)	during	the compliance	stack	tests.		Using the	engine	loads	and	th e	measured	flow	rates,

an	exhaust	flow	rate	vs.	an	engi ne	load	plot	could	be	developed as	shown	in	Figure	1	below.		The	flow	rate	will

be	referenced	at	a	fixed	oxygen	co ntent	so	that	an	exhaust	flow at	any	other	oxygen	conte nt	could	be	normalized

to	the	reference	oxygen	content.



## EMISSION RATE CALCULATION PROCEDURES

Using	the	monitored	or	calculated data	as	described	in	the	sect ions	above,	emission	rates	for	comparison	against

NSPS	Subpart	IIII	standards	as	we ll	as	the	BACT	limits	could	be calculated	as	shown	in	the	example	below.

 NO

x 

### concentration	dry	basis	(moni tored)	–	800	ppmv	(source	–	PEMS direct	measurement)

 NO

x 

### concentration	dry	basis	(calc ulated)	–	0.043	grams/dry	standar d	cubic	feet	(dscf)

 Power	output	(monitored) –	2,565	kWe	(source	–	PEMS)

 Power	output	(calculated)	–	2,700 kWm	(source	–	conversion	fact or	1	kW

m 

### output	=	0.95	kW

e 

### output)

 Engine	load	(calculated)	–	2,700 kWm/4,500	kWm	=	60%	(maximum	e ngine	output	=	4,500	kW

m 

### )

 Exhaust	Flow	(calculated)	–	10,50 0	dscfm	(source	–	exhaust	flow rate	vs.	engine	load	plot)

 NO

x 

### mass	emissions	(calculated)	– 0.043	grams/dscf	*	10,500	dscfm *	60	minutes/hour	=	27,000

grams/hr

 NO

x 

### mass	emission	rate	(calculate d)	–	27,000	grams/hr	*	1/2,700	kW m	=	10	grams/kW‐hr

Similar	calculations	will	be	perf ormed	to	demonstrate	complianc e	with	BACT	limits	on	24‐hr	rolling	basis.



## PEMS MONITORING AND CALIBRATION FREQUENCY

Anadarko	is	proposing	to	monitor	the	NO

x, 

### CO,	and	O 2 

### concentrations	at	least	onc e	per	operational	hour	per

engine	using	the	PEMS.		Anadarko proposes	to	calibrate	the	PEMS at	least	once	per	oper ational	week.		The

calibration	tests	will	be	perfor med	using	the	manufacturer	reco mmended	calibration	gases.		These	calibration

gases	need	to	be	stored	in	a	temp erature	controlled	room	on	the drillship.		Moreover,	transportation	and	storage

of	the	calibrations	gases	poses challenges	due	to	the	area	the PEMS	is	located	on	the	drillship	and	could	pose	a

safety	threat	to	the	drillship	a nd	personnel.		Hence,	Anadarko believes	more	frequent	calibration	than	the 0 5000 10000 15000 20000

0 20 40 60 80 100Flow	Rate	(dscfm)

Engine	Load	(%) 

### Figure	1:	Typical	Flow	Rate	vs	Engine	Load

### proposed	frequency	could	be	diffi cult	to	manage.		Should	more	f requent	calibration	be	required	due	to

unforeseen	issues	or	malfunctions ,	Anadarko	will	perform	the	ca libration	at	a	higher	frequency.



## PEMS MISSING DATA PROCEDURES

If	the	PEMS	monitored	data	is	mi ssing	due	to	malfunctions	or	an y	unforeseen	issues,	the missing	concentration

value(s)	will	be	substituted	wit h	the	previously	monitored	conc entration	for	the	same	eng ine	load.		Moreover,	in

order	to	conservatively	estimate the	emission	rate	associated	w ith	the	missing	concentra tion,	the	engine	load

will	be	increased	by	10%	while	o btaining	the	exhaust	flow	rate for	the	emission	rate	calc ulation.		For	example,	if

the	concentration	of	NO

x 

### is	missing	for	a	particular	hour	with	an	engine	load	of	60%	th en	the	NO

x 

### emission	rate

for	that	hour	will	be calculated	by	replaci ng	the	concentration of	NO

x 

### by	previously	monitored	concentration	for

60%	engine	load	and	using	a	flow	rate	for	66%	engine	load	(60% +	10%	of	60%).



## SUMMARY

Anadarko	believes	a	combination	of	the	engine	load	vs.	exhaust flow	curve	and	the	propo sed	PEMS	satisfies	the

requirements	specified	in	§	60.4211( d)(2).		A	few	requirements specified	in	§	60.4211(d)(2),	not	address

previously,	are	discussed	below:

 A	discussion	of	the	rel ationship	between	these	parameters	and	N O X 

### and	PM	emissions,	identifying	how

the	emissions	of	these	pollutant s	change	with	ch anges	in	these parameters,	and	how	li mitations	on	these

parameters	will	serve	to	limit	NO X 

### and	PM	emissions;

As	engine	load	increases,	the	exh aust	flow	rate	as	well	as	the mass	emission	rates	of		NO X 

### and	PM

increase.		The	proposed	methodology	of	calculating	emission	rat e	is	valid	for	engines	operating	at	any

load.		However,	the	accuracy	of the	results	increases	between	t he	expected	operation	load	range	of	20%

to	60%.

 A	discussion	of	how	th e	upper	and/or	lower	values	for	these	par ameters	were	established;

The	proposed	methodology	of	calc ulating	emission	rate	is	valid for	engines	operati ng	at	any	load.

However,	the	accuracy	of	the	res ults	increases	be tween	the	expe cted	operation	load	range	of	20%	to

60%.		The	expected	operation	load range	was	obtained	from	histo rical	data	while	performing	similar

projects	outside	of	the Eastern	Gulf	of	Mexico.

 A	discussion	identifying	the	met hods	and	the	instruments	you	wi ll	use	to	monitor	th ese	parameters,	as

well	as	the	relative	accuracy	and precision	of	these	methods	an d	instruments

The	system	is	not	installed	on	the	drillship	yet.		Anadarko	wil l	provide	the	details	of	the	PEMS

instruments	as	well	as information	about	the relative	accuracy and	precision	after	completion	of

installation	on	the	drillship.

Anadarko	also	believes	a	combina tion	of	the	engi ne	load	vs.	exh aust	flow	curve	and	the proposed	PEMS	could	be

effectively	utilized	to	satisfy ongoing	compliance	demonstratio n	with	the	BACT	limits as	discussed	in	this

technical	memorandum.