Emissions Modeling Technical Support

Document: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle

Emission and Fuel Standards
Emissions Modeling Technical Support
Document: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards

By:
Alexis Zubrow, Rich Mason, Alison Eyth

Emissions Inventory an Analysis Group

Air Quality Assessment Division
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC

EPA-454/R-14-003
February 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................................................................................... III
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................................................. VI
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................................... VII
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
2 2007 EMISSION INVENTORIES AND APPROACHES ............................................................................................ 4
2.1 2007 NEI POINT SOURCES (PTIPM AND PTNONIPM) ......................................................................................................... 7
2.1.1 IPM sector (ptipm) ............................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.2 Non-IPM sector (ptnonipm) ................................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 2007 NONPOINT SOURCES (AFDUST, AG, NONPT)............................................................................................................. 9
2.2.1 Area fugitive dust sector (afdust) ....................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.2 Agricultural ammonia sector (ag) ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.3 Other nonpoint sources (nonpt) ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 FIRES (AVEFIRE) ........................................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 BIOGENIC SOURCES (BIOG) ........................................................................................................................................... 11
2.5 2007 MOBILE SOURCES (ONROAD, ONROAD_RFL, NONROAD, C1C2RAIL, C3MARINE) ................................................... 12
2.5.1 Onroad non-refueling (onroad).......................................................................................................................... 12
2.5.2 Onroad refueling (onroad_rfl) ........................................................................................................................... 14
2.5.3 Nonroad mobile equipment sources: (nonroad) ................................................................................................. 15
2.5.4 Class 1/Class 2 Commercial Marine Vessels and Locomotives and (c1c2rail) ................................................. 16
2.5.5 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (c3marine) ................................................................................................. 16
2.6 EMISSIONS FROM CANADA, MEXICO AND OFFSHORE DRILLING PLATFORMS (OTHPT, OTHAR, OTHON) ......................... 16
2.7 SMOKE-READY NON-ANTHROPOGENIC INVENTORIES FOR CHLORINE ......................................................................... 17
3 EMISSIONS MODELING SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 18
3.1 EMISSIONS MODELING OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 18
3.2 CHEMICAL SPECIATION ................................................................................................................................................ 21
3.2.1 VOC speciation .................................................................................................................................................. 23
3.2.2 PM speciation..................................................................................................................................................... 29
3.3 TEMPORAL ALLOCATION .............................................................................................................................................. 30
3.3.1 FF10 format and inventory resolution ............................................................................................................... 31
3.3.2 Ptipm Temporalization ....................................................................................................................................... 32
3.3.3 Meteorologically-based temporalization............................................................................................................ 32
3.3.4 Onroad and Onroad_rfl Temporalization .......................................................................................................... 34
3.3.5 Additional sector specific details ....................................................................................................................... 35
3.4 SPATIAL ALLOCATION .................................................................................................................................................. 35
3.4.1 Spatial Surrogates for U.S. emissions ................................................................................................................ 36
3.4.2 Allocation method for airport-related sources in the U.S. ................................................................................. 39
3.4.3 Surrogates for Canada and Mexico emission inventories .................................................................................. 39
4 DEVELOPMENT OF FUTURE YEAR EMISSIONS ................................................................................................ 43
4.1 STATIONARY SOURCE PROJECTIONS: EGU SECTOR (PTIPM) ......................................................................................... 47
4.2 STATIONARY SOURCE PROJECTIONS: NON-EGU SECTORS (PTNONIPM, NONPT, AG, AFDUST) ....................................... 47
4.2.1 RFS2 upstream future year inventories and adjustments (nonpt, ptnonipm) ..................................................... 49
4.2.2 Upstream agricultural and Livestock adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm).............................................. 60
4.2.3 Fuel sulfur rules (nonpt, ptnonipm) ................................................................................................................... 62
4.2.4 Portland Cement NESHAP projections (ptnonipm) ........................................................................................... 62
4.2.5 Controls, Closures and consent decrees from CSAPR and NODA Comments (nonpt, ptnonipm) ..................... 63
4.2.6 All other PROJECTION and CONTROL packets (ptnonipm, nonpt) ................................................................. 65
4.3 MOBILE SOURCE PROJECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 66
4.3.1 Onroad mobile (onroad and onroad_rfl) ........................................................................................................... 69
4.3.2 Nonroad mobile (nonroad)................................................................................................................................. 73
4.3.3 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (c1c2rail) ................................................................ 74
4.3.4 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (c3marine) ................................................................................................. 78
4.4 CANADA, MEXICO, AND OFFSHORE SOURCES (OTHAR, OTHON, AND OTHPT) ................................................................ 78

i
5 EMISSION SUMMARIES ............................................................................................................................................ 79
6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................... 99

ii
 Acronyms
ACI Activated Carbon Injection
AE5 CMAQ Aerosol Module, version 5, introduced in CMAQ v4.7
AE6 CMAQ Aerosol Module, version 6, introduced in CMAQ v5.0
AEO Annual Energy Outlook
AIM Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (coatings)
ARW Advanced Research WRF
BAFM Benzene, Acetaldehyde, Formaldehyde and Methanol
BEIS3.14 Biogenic Emissions Inventory System, version 3.14
BELD3 Biogenic Emissions Land use Database, version 3
Bgal Billion gallons
BPS Bulk Plant Storage
BTP Bulk Terminal (Plant) to Pump
C1/C2 Category 1 and 2 commercial marine vessels
C3 Category 3 (commercial marine vessels)
CAEP Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection
CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule
CAMD The EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division
CAMX Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions
CAP Criteria Air Pollutant
CARB California Air Resources Board
CB05 Carbon Bond 2005 chemical mechanism
CBM Coal-bed methane
CEC North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation
CEM Continuous Emissions Monitoring
CEPAM California Emissions Projection Analysis Model
CISWI Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
Cl Chlorine
CMAQ Community Multiscale Air Quality
CMV Commercial Marine Vessel
CO Carbon monoxide
CSAPR Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
EO, E10, E85 0%, 10% and 85% Ethanol blend gasolines, respectively
EBAFM Ethanol, Benzene, Acetaldehyde, Formaldehyde and Methanol
ECA Emissions Control Area
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EF Emission Factor
EGU Electric Generating Units
EIS Emissions Inventory System
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EMFAC Emission Factor (California’s onroad mobile model)
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAPRI Food and Agriculture Policy and Research Institute
FASOM Forest and Agricultural Section Optimization Model
FCCS Fuel Characteristic Classification System
FIPS Federal Information Processing Standards
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
iii
HCl Hydrochloric acid
HDGHG Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
Hg Mercury
HMS Hazard Mapping System
HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System
HWC Hazardous Waste Combustion
HWI Hazardous Waste Incineration
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
ICI Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (boilers and process heaters)
ICR Information Collection Request
I/M Inspection and Maintenance
IMO International Marine Organization
IPAMS Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States
IPM Integrated Planning Model
ITN Itinerant
LADCO Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
LDGHG Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
LPG Liquified Petroleum Gas
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MARAMA Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association
MATS Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
MCIP Meteorology-Chemistry Interface Processor
Mgal Million gallons
MMS Minerals Management Service (now known as the Bureau of Energy
Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE)
MOBILE6 OTAQ’s model for estimation of onroad mobile emissions factors, replaced by
MOVES2010b
MOVES Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator -- OTAQ’s model for estimation of onroad
mobile emissions – replaces the use of the MOBILE model
MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area
MSAT2 Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule
MTBE Methyl tert-butyl ether
MWRPO Mid-west Regional Planning Organization
NCD National County Database
NEEDS National Electric Energy Database System
NEI National Emission Inventory
NESCAUM Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NH3 Ammonia
NIF NEI Input Format
NLCD National Land Cover Database
NLEV National Low Emission Vehicle program
nm nautical mile
NMIM National Mobile Inventory Model
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NODA Notice of Data Availability
NONROAD OTAQ’s model for estimation of nonroad mobile emissions
NOX Nitrogen oxides
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NSR New Source Review
iv
OAQPS The EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OHH Outdoor Hydronic Heater
OTAQ The EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality
ORIS Office of Regulatory Information System
ORD The EPA’s Office of Research and Development
ORL One Record per Line
OTC Ozone Transport Commission
PADD Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts
PF Projection Factor, can account for growth and/or controls
PFC Portable Fuel Container
PM2.5 Particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns
PM10 Particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns
ppb, ppm Parts per billion, parts per million
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RBT Refinery to Bulk Terminal
RFS2 Renewable Fuel Standard
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RICE Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine
RRF Relative Response Factor
RWC Residential Wood Combustion
RPO Regional Planning Organization
RVP Reid Vapor Pressure
SCC Source Classification Code
SEMAP Southeastern Modeling, Analysis, and Planning
SESARM Southeastern States Air Resource Managers
SESQ Sesquiterpenes
SMARTFIRE Satellite Mapping Automated Reanalysis Tool for Fire Incident Reconciliation
SMOKE Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
SOA Secondary Organic Aerosol
SI Spark-ignition
SIP State Implementation Plan
SPDPRO Hourly Speed Profiles for weekday versus weekend
SPPD Sector Policies and Programs Division
TAF Terminal Area Forecast
TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
TOG Total Organic Gas
TSD Technical support document
ULSD Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
VOC Volatile organic compounds
VMT Vehicle miles traveled
VPOP Vehicle Population
WGA Western Governors’ Association
WRAP Western Regional Air Partnership
WRF Weather Research and Forecasting Model

v
 List of Tables
Table 1-1. List of base cases run in the Tier 3 FRM Emissions Modeling Platform ........................................ 2
Table 2-1. Platform sectors starting point for the 2007 platform ...................................................................... 5
Table 2-2. Summary of significant changes between 2007v5 platform and 2007 Tier 3 base case by sector .. 6
Table 2-3. Corn Ethanol Plant Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors (grams per gallon produced) .................... 9
Table 2-4. Toxic-to-VOC Ratios for Corn Ethanol Plants ................................................................................ 9
Table 2-5. 2007 Platform SCCs representing emissions in the ptfire and avefire modeling sectors .............. 11
Table 3-1. Key emissions modeling steps by sector........................................................................................ 19
Table 3-2. Descriptions of the 2007v5 platform grids .................................................................................... 20
Table 3-3. Emission model species produced for CB05 with SOA for CMAQ and CAMX* ......................... 22
Table 3-4. Integration approach for BAFM and EBAFM for each platform sector ........................................ 23
Table 3-5. HAP augmentation for c1c2rail ..................................................................................................... 25
Table 3-6. VOC profiles for WRAP Phase III basins ..................................................................................... 26
Table 3-7. Select VOC profiles 2007. 2018 and 2030 .................................................................................... 28
Table 3-8. PM model species: AE5 versus AE6 ............................................................................................. 29
Table 3-9. Temporal settings used for the platform sectors in SMOKE ......................................................... 31
Table 3-10. U.S. Surrogates available for the 2007 platform. ......................................................................... 36
Table 3-11. Spatial Surrogates for WRAP Oil and Gas Data .......................................................................... 37
Table 3-12. Counties included in the WRAP Dataset ..................................................................................... 37
Table 3-13. Spatial Surrogates for Mexico...................................................................................................... 39
Table 3-14. Canadian Spatial Surrogates for 2007-based platform Canadian Emissions ............................... 40
Table 4-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the 2018 and 2030 emissions inventories
from the 2007 base case ........................................................................................................................... 45
Table 4-2. Summary of non-EGU stationary projections subsections ............................................................ 49
Table 4-3. Renewable Fuel Volumes Assumed for Stationary Source Adjustments. ..................................... 50
Table 4-4. 2007 and 2018/2030 corn ethanol plant emissions [tons] .............................................................. 50
Table 4-5. Emission Factors for Biodiesel Plants (Tons/Mgal) ...................................................................... 51
Table 4-6. 2018/2030 biodiesel plant emissions [tons] ................................................................................... 51
Table 4-7. PFC emissions for 2007, 2018, and 2030 [tons] ............................................................................ 52
Table 4-8. Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors for Cellulosic Plants (Tons/RIN gallon) ............................... 53
Table 4-9. Toxic Emission Factors for Cellulosic Plants (Tons/RIN gallon) ................................................. 53
Table 4-10. 2018 and 2030 cellulosic plant emissions [tons] ......................................................................... 53
Table 4-11. 2018 and 2030 VOC working losses (Emissions) due to ethanol transport [tons] ...................... 54
Table 4-12. RVPs Assumed for 2018 ethanol and gasoline volumes with EISA ........................................... 56
Table 4-13. RVPs Assumed for 2018 ethanol and gasoline volumes without EISA ...................................... 56
Table 4-14. RVPs Assumed for 2030 ethanol and gasoline volumes with EISA ........................................... 56
Table 4-15. RVPs Assumed for 2030 ethanol and gasoline volumes without EISA ...................................... 56
Table 4-16. Storage and Transport Vapor Loss Emission Factors (g/mmBtu) ............................................... 57
Table 4-17. Adjustment factors applied to storage and transport emissions ................................................... 58
Table 4-18. Impact of VOC losses from reduced gasoline production due to EISA ...................................... 58
Table 4-19. 2018 adjustment factors applied to petroleum pipelines and refinery emissions associated with
gasoline and diesel fuel production. ......................................................................................................... 59
Table 4-20. 2030 adjustment factors applied to petroleum pipelines and refinery emissions associated with
gasoline and diesel fuel production. ......................................................................................................... 59
Table 4-21. Impact of refinery adjustments on 2007 emissions [tons] ........................................................... 60
Table 4-22. Adjustments to modeling platform agricultural emissions for the Tier 3 reference case ............ 61
Table 4-23. Composite NH3 projection factors to year 2018 and 2030 for animal operations ....................... 61
Table 4-24. Summary of fuel sulfur rules by state .......................................................................................... 62
Table 4-25. ISIS-based cement industry change (tons/yr) .............................................................................. 63
vi
Table 4-26. Factors used to project 2008 base-case aircraft emissions to 2020.............................................. 65
Table 4-27. Overview of Reference and Control Scenarios ............................................................................ 67
Table 4-28. Comparison of MOVES runs ........................................................................................................ 70
Table 4-29. CA LEVIII program states ............................................................................................................ 70
Table 4-30. Early NLEV states ........................................................................................................................ 71
Table 4-31. LEV2 states and MOVES databases ............................................................................................. 71
Table 4-32. RVP bins by representative county ............................................................................................... 72
Table 4-33. Non-California year 2018 and 2030 Projection Factors for locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2
Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions ..................................................................................................... 75
Table 4-34. Scalars Applied to Rail Combustion Emissions in 2030 to account for 2017-2025 LDGHG
emission standards .................................................................................................................................... 76
Table 4-35. Scalars Applied to C1/C2 Combustion Emissions in 2030 to account for 2017-2025 LDGHG
emission standards .................................................................................................................................... 77
Table 4-36. Cumulative RFS2 and LDGHG adjustments to c1c2rail sector emissions .................................. 77
Table 4-37. Growth factors to project the 2007 ECA-IMO inventory to 2018 and 2030 ............................... 78
Table 5-1. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2007 base case ............................................ 80
Table 5-2. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2018 reference case .................................... 81
Table 5-3. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2018 control case ........................................ 82
Table 5-4. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2030 reference case .................................... 83
Table 5-5. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2030 control case ........................................ 84
Table 5-6. CO emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state.............................................................................. 85
Table 5-7. NH3 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state ............................................................................ 87
Table 5-8. NOX emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state ........................................................................... 89
Table 5-9. PM2.5 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state .......................................................................... 91
Table 5-10. PM10 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state ......................................................................... 93
Table 5-11. SO2 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state ........................................................................... 95
Table 5-12. VOC emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state ......................................................................... 97

List of Figures
Figure 3-1. Air quality modeling domains ....................................................................................................... 20
Figure 3-2. Example of new animal NH3 emissions temporalization approach, summed to daily emissions 34
Figure 3-3. Example of SMOKE-MOVES temporal variability of NOX emissions ....................................... 35
Figure 4-1. Map of Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADD) ............................................... 55

vii
1 Introduction
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed a year 2007 air quality modeling platform in
support of the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards. The air quality modeling platform
consists of all of the emissions inventories, ancillary files needed for emissions modeling, and the
meteorological, initial condition, and boundary condition files needed to run the air quality model. This
platform uses all Criteria Air Pollutants (CAPs) and a select set of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). This
document focuses on the emissions modeling components of the 2007 platform, including the emission
inventories and the ancillary data and the approaches used to transform emission inventories for use in air
quality modeling.

The Tier 3 modeling platform was developed by implementing specific modifications to the “CAP-BAFM
2007-Based Platform, Version 5”, also known as the “2007v5” platform. The 2007v5 platform was used to
support the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) for the 2012 Final National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The Technical Support Document (TSD)
“Preparation of Emissions Inventories for the Version 5.0, 2007 Emissions Modeling Platform” contains
many additional details on the aspects of the Tier 3 and 2007v5 platforms that are shared. The TSD is
available from the Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse website, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/, under
the section entitled “Particulate Matter (PM) NAAQS (2007v5) Platform”. The appendices available for the
2007v5 TSD that do not reference the specific PM NAAQS modeling cases are also relevant to the “Tier 3”
platform.

Many emissions inventory components of the Tier 3 air quality modeling platform are based on the 2008
National Emissions Inventory version 2, hereafter referred to as the “2008 NEI”, with updated inventory data
for some emission sectors. In particular, a version of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES)
designed to represent the impacts of the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards
(MOVESTier3FRM) was used to generate emission factors for onroad mobile sources. The emissions
modeling tool used to create the air quality model-ready emissions from the emission inventories was the
Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) modeling system (http://www.smoke-
model.org/index.cfm) version 3.5 beta. Emissions were created for 36 km and 12 km national grids.

The gridded meteorological model used for Tier 3 is the Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF,
http://wrf-model.org) version 3.3, Advanced Research WRF (ARW) core (Skamarock, et al., 2008). The
WRF Model is a mesoscale numerical weather prediction system developed for both operational forecasting
and atmospheric research applications. WRF was run for 2007 over a domain covering the continental
United States at a 36 km and 12 km resolution with 35 vertical layers2. This meteorological run was different
than the one used for the 2007v5 platform.

The air quality model used for the Tier 3 platform is the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model
(http://www.epa.gov/AMD/CMAQ/). CMAQ supports modeling ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM)
and requires hourly and gridded emissions of chemical species from the following inventory pollutants:
carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOC), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
ammonia (NH3), particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10), and individual component
species for particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5). The CMAQ version used the
chemical mechanism called Carbon Bond 2005 (CB05) with chlorine chemistry, which is part of the “base”
version of CMAQ. CB05 allows explicit treatment of benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, and methanol

2
For more details on the meteorological models and the run see section 2.5.1.2.
1
(BAFM) and includes anthropogenic HAP emissions of hydrochloric acid (HCl) and chlorine (Cl). The
Tier 3 modeling used the most recent multi-pollutant version of CMAQ available at the time (CMAQ MP
version 5.0.1) the modeling was performed, and an additional set of HAPs (from here out referred to as
“CMAQ MP-lite HAPs”): acrolein, 1,3-butadiene and naphthalene were modeled.

The emissions and modeling effort for the Tier 3 platform consists of five emissions cases: 2007 base case,
2018 reference case, 2018 Tier 3 control case, 2030 reference case and 2030 Tier 3 control case. Table 1-1
provides more information on these emissions cases. The purpose of 2007 base case is to provide a 2007
case that is consistent with the methods used in the future-year base cases and ultimately, in the future year
reference and control cases for the Final Tier 3 Rule. For regulatory applications, the 2007 base case is used
with the outputs from the 2018 and 2030 reference cases in the relative response factor (RRF) calculations to
identify future areas of nonattainment. For more information on the use of RRFs and air quality modeling,
see “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating
Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5, and Regional Haze”, available from
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/final-03-pm-rh-guidance.pdf.

Table 1-1. List of base cases run in the Tier 3 FRM Emissions Modeling Platform
Internal EPA
Case Name Abbreviation Description
2007 base case 2007rg_v5 2007 case created using average-year wildfires data, smoothed
prescribed fires, and an average-year temporal allocation approach
for Electrical Generating Units (EGUs); used for computing
relative response factors with 2018 and 2030 reference scenario(s).
2018 reference 2018rg_ref2_v53 2018 future year reference scenario with EGU emissions that
case represent the implementation of Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
and final Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS), with upstream
stationary and mobile sources representing the implementation of
the EISA/EPAct fuel supply (RFS2 Rule)
2018 Tier 3 2018rg_ctl_v5 2018 Tier 3 control case scenario sharing many aspects of the
control case 2018 reference case, but also representing national Tier 3 vehicle
and fuel emissions standards.
2030 reference 2030rg_ref_v5 2030 future year reference scenario with EGU emissions that
case represent the implementation of Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
and final Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS), with upstream
stationary and mobile sources representing the implementation of
the EISA/EPAct fuel supply (RFS2 Rule)
2030 Tier 3 2030rg_ctl_v5 2030 Tier 3 control case scenario sharing many aspects of the
control case 2030 reference case, but also representing national Tier 3 vehicle
and fuel emissions standards.

This document contains five sections. Section 2 describes the inventories input to SMOKE for the 2007 base
case. Section 3 describes the emissions modeling and the ancillary files used to process the emission
inventories into a form that can be used by the air quality model. Section 4, describes the development of the
2018 and 2030 Tier 3 FRM reference and control case inventories (projected from 2007). Data summaries

3
The case 2018rg_ref2_v5 is identical to an earlier case that was created for Tier 3 FRM (2018rg_ref_v5), except that the “ref2”
case updated the following modeling sectors: nonpt, onroad, othpt, othar, and othon.
2
comparing the 2007 base case and the 2018 and 2030 reference and control cases are provided in Section 5.
Section 6 provides references.

3
2 2007 Emission Inventories and Approaches
This section describes the 2007 emissions data created for input to SMOKE that is part of the 2007 base
case; future year emissions inventory data development is discussed in Section 4. While providing some
background, this section focuses on the differences between the 2007v5 platform and the updated Tier 3
platform. The starting point for the 2007 stationary source emission inputs is the 2008 NEI version 2, for
which a draft TSD is available from http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html.

The NEI data are largely compiled from data submitted by state, local and tribal (S/L/T) agencies for CAPs.
HAP emissions data are more often augmented by EPA because they are voluntarily submitted. For fires,
EPA used the SMARTFIRE2 (SF2) system in the 2008 NEI. SF2 assigns all fires as either prescribed
burning or wildfire categories and includes improved emission factor estimates for prescribed burning.

The 2008 NEI includes five data categories: nonpoint (formerly called “stationary area”) sources, point
sources, nonroad mobile sources, onroad mobile sources, and fires. The 2008 NEI TSD uses approximately
sixty sectors to further describe the emissions. In addition to the NEI data, 2007 biogenic emissions,
emissions from the Canadian and Mexican inventories, and other non-NEI data are included in the 2007
platform. The non-NEI emissions components of the 2007 platform include primarily year-2007 onroad
mobile and nonroad mobile emissions, a computed average fires inventory, and data received from some
regional planning organizations (RPOs).

In the 2007v5 platform, some data in the 2008NEIv2 were updated with data from RPOs. The RPOs focused
on addressing visibility impairment from a regional perspective and updated related inventory and ancillary
data. A map of these RPOs can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/visibility/regional.html. The RPOs most
involved in providing data were:

 Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA): http://www.marama.org/

 Midwest Regional Planning Organization (MWRPO): http://www.ladco.org/
 Southeastern States Air Resource Managers (SESARM): http://www.metro4-sesarm.org/
 Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP): http://www.wrapair2.org/

For the purposes of preparing the air quality model-ready emissions, the 2007 emissions inventory was split
into inventories for each of the modeling “platform” sectors. The significance of an emissions modeling or
“platform” sector is that the data is run through all of the SMOKE programs except the final merge
(Mrggrid) independently from the other sectors. The final merge program is then used to combine the
sector-specific gridded, speciated, hourly emissions together to create CMAQ-ready emission inputs.

Table 2-1 presents the sectors in the 2007 platform and how they generally relate to the 2008 NEI as a
starting point. The sector abbreviations are provided in italics. These abbreviations are used in the SMOKE
modeling scripts, inventory file names, and throughout the remainder of this document. As discussed in
greater detail in Table 2-2, the Tier 3 platform emissions platform was modified in specific ways from the
original 2007v5 platform.

4
 Table 2-1. Platform sectors starting point for the 2007 platform
Platform Sector: 2008NEI
Description and resolution of the data input to SMOKE
abbreviation Sector
EGU (also called Point 2008 NEI point source EGUs that could be mapped to the Integrated
the IPM sector): Planning Model (IPM) model using the National Electric Energy
ptipm Database System (NEEDS) version 4.10. Annual resolution.
Non-EGU (non- Point All NEI point source records not matched to the ptipm sector.
IPM sector): Includes all aircraft emissions and some rail yard emissions. Annual
ptnonipm resolution.
Agricultural: Nonpoint NH3 emissions from NEI nonpoint livestock and fertilizer application,
ag county and annual resolution.
Area fugitive dust: Nonpoint PM10 and PM2.5 from fugitive dust sources from the NEI nonpoint
afdust inventory. Includes building construction, road construction, paved
roads, unpaved roads and agricultural dust. County and annual
resolution. Processed as a separate sector to allow for the application
of a land use based transport fraction and precipitation adjustments.
Class 1 & 2 CMV Mobile: Non-rail maintenance locomotives and category 1 and category 2
and locomotives: Nonroad commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions sources from the NEI
c1c2rail nonpoint inventory. County and annual resolution.
C3 commercial Mobile: Non-NEI, year 2007 category 3 (C3) CMV emissions projected from
marine: Nonroad year 2002. Developed for the rule called “Control of Emissions from
c3marine New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per
Cylinder”, also described as the Emissions Control Area- International
Maritime Organization (ECA-IMO) study:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm. (EPA-420-F-10-041,
August 2010). Annual resolution and treated as point sources.
Remaining Nonpoint
Primarily NEI nonpoint sources not otherwise included in other
nonpoint:
SMOKE sectors; county and annual resolution.
nonpt
Nonroad: Mobile: Monthly nonroad equipment emissions from the National Mobile
nonroad Nonroad Inventory Model (NMIM) using NONROAD2008 version NR08b.
NMIM was used for all states except California. Monthly emissions
for California created from annual emissions submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Onroad non- Mobile: Onroad mobile gasoline and diesel vehicles from parking lots and
refueling: onroad moving vehicles. Includes the following modes: exhaust, extended
onroad idle, evaporative, permeation, and brake and tire wear. For all states,
based on Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emission
factor tables and monthly activity data for 2007.
Onroad refueling: Mobile: Onroad mobile gasoline and diesel vehicle refueling emissions for all
onroad_rfl onroad states. Based on MOVES emission factor tables and 2007 activity
data.
Average-fire: N/A Average-year wildfire and prescribed fire emissions, county and daily
avefire resolution. This sector is used in all modeling cases.
Other point N/A
Point sources from Canada’s 2006 inventory and Mexico’s Phase III
sources not from
2008 inventory grown from year 1999. Includes annual U.S. offshore
the NEI:
oil 2008 NEI point source emissions. Annual resolution.
othpt
Other non-NEI N/A
Year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 2008 (grown from
nonpoint and
1999) Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) nonpoint and nonroad
nonroad:
mobile inventories, annual resolution.
othar
5
 Platform Sector: 2008NEI
Description and resolution of the data input to SMOKE
abbreviation Sector
Other non-NEI N/A Year 2006 Canada (province resolution) and year 2008 (grown from
onroad sources: 1999) Mexico Phase III (municipio resolution) onroad mobile
othon inventories, annual resolution.
Biogenic: N/A Year 2007, hour-specific, grid cell-specific emissions generated from
beis the BEIS3.14 model, including emissions in Canada and Mexico.

Table 2-2 provides a brief by-sector overview of the most significant differences between the Tier 3 platform
and the 2007v5 platform. The specific by-sector updates to the 2007 platform made for Tier 3 are described
in greater detail later in the following subsections. The remainder of Section 2 provides details about the
data contained in each of the 2007 platform sectors. Different levels of detail are provided for different
sectors, depending on the degree of changes or manipulation of the data needed to prepare it for input to
SMOKE, and on whether the Tier 3 2007 platform emissions are significantly different from the original
2007v5 platform.

Table 2-2. Summary of significant changes between 2007v5 platform and 2007 Tier 3 base case by sector
Platform Sector Summary of Significant Inventory Differences
IPM sector:
ptipm
 Included additional HAPs

 Updated ethanol inventory

Non-IPM sector:
ptnonipm  Replaced oil and gas emissions with Western Regional Air Partnership
(WRAP) Phase III year 2008 emissions in select oil and gas basins
Agricultural:
ag
 Temporalized to hours using the Tier 3 WRF output
Area fugitive dust:
afdust
 Performed meteorological adjustments with the Tier 3 WRF output
Remaining
 Replaced oil and gas emissions with Western Regional Air Partnership
nonpoint sector:
nonpt (WRAP) Phase III year 2008 emissions in select oil and gas basins
Class 1 & 2 CMV
and locomotives:  Augmented HAPs in California and RPO data
c1c2rail
C3 commercial
marine:  Augmented HAPs
c3marine
Nonroad sector:  Used updated fuels
nonroad  Augmented HAPs in California
Onroad non-
 Used MOVESTier3FRM emission factors
refueling:
onroad  Used updated fuels
Onroad non-
 Used MOVESTier3FRM emission factors
refueling:
onroad_rfl  Used updated fuels
Average fires:  Used 2007 through 2010 SMARTFIRE 2 data to generate average fire
avefire emissions

6
2.1 2007 NEI point sources (ptipm and ptnonipm)
Point sources are sources of emissions for which specific geographic coordinates (e.g., latitude/longitude) are
specified, as in the case of an individual facility. A facility may have multiple emission points, which may
be characterized as units such as boilers, reactors, spray booths, kilns, etc. A unit may have multiple
processes (e.g., a boiler that sometimes burns residual oil and sometimes burns natural gas). With a couple
of minor exceptions, this section describes only NEI point sources within the contiguous United States. The
offshore oil platform (othpt sector) and category 3 CMV emissions (c3marine sector) are also point source
formatted inventories that are discussed in Section 2.6 and Section 2.5.5, respectively.

After removing offshore oil platforms into the othpt sector, EPA created an initial version of two platform
sectors from the remaining 2008 NEI point sources for input into SMOKE: the EGU sector – also called the
IPM sector (i.e., ptipm) and the non-EGU sector – also called the non-IPM sector (i.e., ptnonipm). This split
facilitates the use of different SMOKE temporal processing and future-year projection techniques for each of
these sectors. The inventory pollutants processed through SMOKE for both the ptipm and ptnonipm sectors
were: CO, NOX, VOC, SO2, NH3, PM10, and PM2.5 and the following HAPs: HCl (pollutant code =
7647010), Cl (code = 7782505), and the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs (see Section 3.2 for details). For more
details on the development of these sectors and the differences between the inventories and the 2008 NEI see
the 2007v5 TSD.

2.1.1 IPM sector (ptipm)

The ptipm sector contains emissions from EGUs in the 2008 NEI point inventory that were matched to units
found in the May 2012 version 4.10 of the NEEDS database (http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-
ipm/BaseCasev410.html#needs). IPM provides future-year emission inventories for the universe of EGUs
contained in the NEEDS database. This matching was done (1) to provide consistency between the 2007
EGU sources and future-year EGU emissions for sources which are forecasted by IPM and (2) to avoid
double counting when projecting point source emissions to future years. A comprehensive description on
how EGU emissions were characterized and estimated in the 2008 NEI can be found in Section 3.10 in the
2008 NEI documentation (EPA, 2012a). The ptipm sector is identical to the 2007v5 platform except for the
inclusion of CMAQ MP-lite HAPs (see Section 3.2 for details) in the 2007 model-ready files4.

2.1.2 Non-IPM sector (ptnonipm)

With several exceptions, the non-IPM (ptnonipm) sector contains the remaining 2008 NEI point sources that
were not included in the IPM (ptipm) sector. The ptnonipm sector contains all sources not reflected in future
year IPM inventories. For the most part, the ptnonipm sector reflects the non-EGU component of the NEI
point inventory; however, as previously discussed, it is likely that some small low-emitting EGUs that are
not reflected in the CEMs database are present in the ptnonipm sector.

There are numerous modifications between the published 2008 NEI and the 2007 ptnonipm inventory used
for modeling. More details on some of these modifications can be found in the 2007v5 TSD. The
differences between the 2007v5 ptnonipm and the 2007 ptnonipm for this base case are limited to the
following:
 Integration of BAFM (see Section 3.2.1.1 for details)
 Inclusion of the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs (see Section 3.2 for details)

4
Note, these additional HAPs are not in the future year scenarios because IPM does not produce estimates for them.
7
  Removal of one cement kiln because of unreasonable emissions5
 Modification to the South Dakota point inventory to include 2005 NEI emissions for sources missing
in the 2008 NEI.
 Updated ethanol facilities (see below)
 Updated oil and gas (see below)

Additional Ethanol facilities

An updated set of corn ethanol facilities was developed for year 2008. Any facilities already included in the
2008 NEI were removed from the set prior to including them in the 2007 base case. Locations and FIPS
codes for these ethanol plants were verified using web searches and Google Earth. These emissions are
included in the 2007 case as a separate FF10-format inventory for HAPs and CAPs. Emission rates for the
facilities were obtained from EPA’s spreadsheet model for upstream impacts developed for the Renewable
Fuel Standard (RFS2) rule (EPA, 2010a). The plant emission rates for criteria pollutants used to estimate
impacts are given in Table 2-3. Toxic emission rates were estimated by applying toxic-to-VOC ratios in
Table 2-4 to the VOC emission rates shown in Table 2-3. For air toxics other than ethanol, toxic-to-VOC
ratios were developed using emission inventory data from the 2005 NEI (EPA, 2009a). Emission rates in
Table 2-3 and Table 2-4 were multiplied by facility production estimates for 2007, 2018 (via 2017 emission
factors), and 2030 based on analyses performed for the industry characterization described in Chapter 1 of
the RFS2 final rule regulatory impact analysis (RIA).

WRAP Phase III oil and gas emissions

The Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) RPO created year 2008 “Phase III” oil and gas sector point
and non-point format emissions for several major basins in Colorado and Montana, New Mexico, Texas,
Utah and Wyoming. These basins are listed here: Denver-Julesburg, Uinta, San Juan (North and South),
Piceance, Southwest Wyoming (Green River), Powder River, Wind River and Permian. A map showing the
geographic area of these basins is provided at: http://www.eia.gov/oil_gas/rpd/shale_gas.jpg.

The WRAP oil and gas Phase III project was co-sponsored by the Independent Petroleum Association of
Mountain States (IPAMS) and is based on survey outreach efforts. Survey coverage varied, and survey data
were generally reflected as point sources in the inventory. Unpermitted sources were based somewhat on
surveys but also on activity and emission factor estimates and were generally reflected as nonpoint (nonpt
sector) sources.

Overall, the Phase III project estimated emissions for a couple dozen source types, including drilling rigs,
compressor stations, heaters and boilers, tank breathing venting and flashing, pneumatic devices, well and
pipeline/compressor fugitive emissions, dehydrators, amine units, truck loading and other miscellaneous
sources. Phase III emissions include basin-specific speciation, surrogates and hence SCCs to account for the
different products extracted: oil, gas and coal-bed methane (CBM). To prevent possible double-counting of
oil and gas sector emissions, all oil and gas emissions were removed from the 2008 NEI for counties that
comprise the 9 basins in the WRAP Phase III inventories. The list of oil and gas SCCs that were removed
from the point (and nonpoint) 2008 NEI are provided in Appendix A of the 2007v5 TSD6.

5
The cement kiln had emissions orders of magnitude higher than in any other year in the NEI. The particular facility is facility ID
4773111, FIPS 26017.
6
The 2007v5 platform used the 2006 WRAP Phase III inventory.
8
 Table 2-3. Corn Ethanol Plant Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors (grams per gallon produced)
Corn Ethanol Plant Type Year VOC CO NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NH3
2005, 2017 2.29 0.58 0.99 0.94 0.23 0.01 0.00
Dry Mill Natural Gas (NG)
2030 2.29 0.58 0.94 0.94 0.23 0.01 0.00
Dry Mill NG (wet distillers 2005, 2017 2.27 0.37 0.63 0.91 0.20 0.00 0.00
grains with solubles (DGS)) 2030 2.27 0.37 0.60 0.91 0.20 0.00 0.00
2005, 2017 2.29 0.62 1.05 0.94 0.23 0.01 0.00
Dry Mill Biogas
2030 2.29 0.62 1.00 0.94 0.23 0.01 0.00
2005, 2017 2.27 0.39 0.67 0.91 0.20 0.00 0.00
Dry Mill Biogas (wet DGS)
2030 2.27 0.39 0.63 0.91 0.20 0.00 0.00
2005, 2017 2.31 2.65 4.17 3.81 1.71 4.52 0.00
Dry Mill Coal
2030 2.31 2.65 3.68 3.64 1.54 3.48 0.00
2005, 2017 2.31 2.65 2.65 2.74 1.14 2.87 0.00
Dry Mill Coal (wet DGS)
2030 2.28 1.68 2.34 2.62 1.03 2.21 0.00
2005, 2017 2.42 2.55 3.65 1.28 0.36 0.14 0.00
Dry Mill Biomass
2030 2.42 2.55 3.65 1.28 0.36 0.14 0.00
Dry Mill Biomass (wet 2005, 2017 2.35 1.62 2.32 1.12 0.28 0.09 0.00
DGS) 2030 2.35 1.62 2.32 1.12 0.28 0.09 0.00
2005, 2017 2.35 1.62 1.77 1.12 0.28 0.09 0.00
Wet Mill NG
2030 2.33 1.04 1.68 1.00 0.29 0.01 0.00
2005, 2017 2.33 1.04 5.51 4.76 2.21 5.97 0.00
Wet Mill Coal
2030 2.33 3.50 4.86 4.53 1.98 4.60 0.00
Table 2-4. Toxic-to-VOC Ratios for Corn Ethanol Plants
Acetaldehyde Acrolein Benzene 1,3-Butadiene Formaldehyde
Wet Mill NG 0.02580 0.00131 0.00060 2.82371E-08 0.00127
Wet Mill Coal 0.08242 0.00015 0.00048 2.82371E-08 0.00108
Dry Mill NG 0.01089 0.00131 0.00060 2.82371E-08 0.00127
Dry Mill Coal 0.02328 0.00102 0.00017 2.82371E-08 0.00119

2.2 2007 nonpoint sources (afdust, ag, nonpt)

The nonpoint sectors use the 2008 NEI as a starting point. EPA created several sectors from the 2008 NEI
nonpoint inventory, and this section describes the stationary nonpoint sources. Class 1 & Class 2 (c1c2) and
Class 3 (c3) commercial marine vessels and locomotives are also in the 2008 NEI nonpoint data category.
However, these mobile sources are included in the mobile documentation in Sections 2.5.4 2.5.5 as the
c1c2rail and c3marine sectors, respectively.

The nonpoint tribal-submitted emissions were removed to prevent possible double counting with the county-
level emissions and also because spatial surrogates for tribal data were not available. Because the tribal
nonpoint emissions are small, these omissions will have a limited impact on the results at the 12-km scales
used for this modeling. The documentation for the nonpoint sector of the 2008 NEI is available on the 2008
NEI website (EPA, 2012a).

The following subsections describe the partitioning of the 2008 NEI nonpoint inventory into the 2007v5
modeling platform sectors, and also the differences between the nonpoint emissions in the 2007v5 platform
and the 2007 base case.

9
2.2.1 Area fugitive dust sector (afdust)
The area-source fugitive dust (afdust) sector contains PM10 and PM2.5 emission estimates for nonpoint SCCs
identified by the EPA staff as dust sources. Categories included in the afdust sector are paved roads,
unpaved roads and airstrips, construction (residential, industrial, road and total), agriculture production, and
mining and quarrying. It does not include fugitive dust from grain elevators because these are elevated point
sources.

This sector is separated from other nonpoint sectors to allow for the application of “transport fraction,” and
meteorology/precipitation-based reductions. These adjustments are applied via sector-specific scripts,
beginning with land use-based gridded transport fractions and then subsequent daily zero-outs for days
where at least 0.01 inches of precipitation occurs or days when there is snow cover on the ground. The land
use data used to reduce the NEI emissions explains the amount of emissions that are subject to transport.
This methodology is discussed in (Pouliot, et. al., 2010),
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conference/ei19/session9/pouliot_pres.pdf, and in Fugitive Dust Modeling for
the 2008 Emissions Modeling Platform (Adelman, 2012). The precipitation adjustment is then applied to
remove all emissions for days where measureable rain occurs. Both the transport fraction and
meteorological adjustments are based on the gridded resolution of the platform; therefore, different
emissions will result from different grid resolutions. Application of the transport fraction and meteorological
adjustments reduces the overestimation of fugitive dust impacts in the grid modeling as compared to ambient
samples.

For more details on this approach and the differences between the 2007 base case and the 2008 NEI, see the
2007v5 TSD. The afdust sector is identical to the 2007v5 platform except for the fact that the meteorological
adjustments were computed using the update WRF outputs.

2.2.2 Agricultural ammonia sector (ag)

The agricultural NH3 “ag” sector is based on livestock and agricultural fertilizer application emissions from
the 2008 NEI nonpoint inventory. The ag sector is identical to 2007v5 platform (see 2007v5 TSD for
details) except for the temporalization of animal NH3.
An updated temporal allocation methodology for animal NH3 that allocates emissions down to the hourly
level by taking into account temperature and wind speed was incorporated into the 2007 platform (see
Section 3.3.3 for more details).

2.2.3 Other nonpoint sources (nonpt)

Stationary nonpoint sources that were not subdivided into the afdust or ag sectors were assigned to the
“nonpt” sector. All fire emissions from the 2008 NEI nonpoint inventory were removed and replaced with
SMARTFIRE emissions, described in Section 2.3. Additionally, locomotives and CMV mobile sources
from the 2008 NEI nonpoint inventory are described in Section 2.5.
For more details on the development of the nonpt sector see the 2007v5 TSD. The differences between the
2007v5 nonpt and the 2007 nonpt for this base case are limited to the following:

 Replaced 2008 NEI oil and gas emissions (SCCs beginning with “23100”) with year 2008 Phase III
oil and gas emissions for several basins in the WRAP RPO states. These WRAP Phase III emissions
contain point and nonpoint formatted data are discussed in greater detail in Section 2.1.2 and here:
http://www.wrapair2.org/PhaseIII.aspx. These changes were made in counties affected by the WRAP
data.

10
  Updated speciation and spatial surrogates were used to support the addition of the Permian basin (see
Section 3.2.1.3 and3.4.1, respectively).

 Included the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs (see Section 3.2 for details)

 Updated the temporalization of the residential wood combustion (RWC) inventories to account for
the updated meteorology (see Section 3.3.3 for details).

2.3 Fires (avefire)

Wildfire and prescribed burning emissions are contained in the ptfire and avefire sectors. The ptfire sector
has emissions provided at geographic coordinates (point locations) and has daily emissions values, whereas
the avefire sector contains county-summed inventories also at daily resolution. EPA used the ptfire sector in
the 2007v5 evaluation case but not for this 2007 base case. For the 2007 and future base cases, the avefire
sector was used instead of point fires. The SCCs in Table 2-5 are considered “fires” – note that the complete
SCC description includes “Miscellaneous Area Sources” as the first tier level description.
Table 2-5. 2007 Platform SCCs representing emissions in the ptfire and avefire modeling sectors
SCC SCC Description
2810001000 Other Combustion; Forest Wildfires; Total
2810015000 Other Combustion; Prescribed Burning for Forest Management; Total
2811015000 Other Combustion-as Event; Prescribed Burning for Forest Management; Total
2811090000 Other Combustion-as Event; Prescribed Forest Burning ;Unspecified

The avefire sector excludes agricultural burning and other open burning sources, which are included in the
nonpt sector. The agricultural burning and other open burning sources are left in the nonpt sector because
these categories were not factored into the development of the average fire sector. Additionally, the
emissions are much lower and their year-to-year variability is much lower than that of wildfires and non-
agricultural prescribed/managed burns.

The purpose of the avefire sector is to represent emissions for a typical year’s fires for use in projection year
inventories, since the location and degree of future-year fires are not known. This approach keeps the fires
information constant between the 2007 base case and future-year cases to eliminate large and uncertain
differences between those cases that would be caused by changing the fires. Using an average of multiple
years of data reduces the possibility that a single-year's high or low fire activity would unduly affect future-
year model-predicted concentrations. Emissions are day-specific but aggregated to county-level where
spatial surrogates will allocate the fires to forest and crop/pasture land. The creation of the avefire daily
nonpoint inventory is distinct for prescribed burning and wildfires. For more details on Fire Averaging Tool
and the various smoothing techniques, see the 2007v5 TSD.

For this 2007 base case (and future years), EPA used 4 years (2007 through 2010) of fire data from the
Satellite Mapping Automated Reanalysis Tool for Fire Incident Reconciliation (SMARTFIRE) version 2 for
both prescribed and wildfires and used a 29 day averaging period.

2.4 Biogenic sources (biog)

The biogenic emissions were computed based on 2007 meteorology data using the Biogenic Emission
Inventory System, version 3.14 (BEIS3.14) model within SMOKE. The BEIS3.14 model creates gridded,
hourly, model-species emissions from vegetation and soils. It estimates CO, VOC (most notably isoprene,
terpine, and sesquiterpene), and NO emissions for the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. The BEIS3.14 model is
11
described further in http://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2008/slides/pouliot_tale_two_cmas08.ppt. The
2007v5 biog sector and the biog sector for this 2007 base case, the meteorology differed between the two
cases. The changes in meteorology will impact both the total emissions and the temporalization and spatial
distribution of these emissions. The BIOSEASONS file was also updated using the meteorology data for this
case.

2.5 2007 mobile sources (onroad, onroad_rfl, nonroad, c1c2rail, c3marine)

For the 2007 base case, as indicated in Table 2-1, EPA separated the 2007 onroad emissions into two sectors:
(1) “onroad” and (2) “onroad_rfl”. As discussed in Section 2.5.2, the onroad and onroad_rfl sectors are
processed separately to allow for different spatial allocation to be applied to onroad refueling (using a gas
station surrogate) versus onroad vehicles (using surrogates based on roads and population). All onroad and
onroad refueling emissions are generated using a new SMOKE-MOVES emissions modeling framework that
leverages MOVES generated outputs (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm) and hourly
meteorology.

The nonroad sector is based on NMIM except for California which uses data provided by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB). All nonroad emissions are compiled at the county/SCC level. NMIM (EPA,
2005) creates the nonroad emissions on a month-specific basis that accounts for temperature, fuel types, and
other variables that vary by month.

The locomotive and commercial marine vessel (CMV) emissions are divided into two nonroad sectors:
“c1c2rail” and “c3marine”. The c1c2rail sector includes all railway and most rail yard emissions as well as
the gasoline and diesel-fueled Class 1 and Class 2 CMV emissions. The c3marine sector emissions contain
the larger residual fueled ocean-going vessel Class 3 CMV emissions and are treated as point emissions with
an elevated release component; all other nonroad emissions are treated as county-specific low-level
emissions (i.e., are in model layer 1).

All tribal data from the mobile sectors have been dropped because EPA does not have spatial surrogate data
for tribal regions, the data may be double-counted with emissions submitted by state and local agencies for
the same areas, and the emissions are small.

2.5.1 Onroad non-refueling (onroad)

For the 2007 base case, EPA estimated emissions for every county in the continental U.S7. EPA used a
modeling framework that took into account the strong temperature sensitivity of the onroad emissions.
Specifically, EPA used county-specific inputs and tools that integrated the MOVES model with the SMOKE8
emission inventory model to take advantage of the gridded hourly temperature information available from
meteorology modeling used for air quality modeling. This integrated “SMOKE-MOVES” tool was
developed by EPA in 2010 and is in use by states and regional planning organizations for regional air quality
modeling. SMOKE-MOVES requires emission rate “lookup” tables generated by MOVES that differentiate
emissions by process (running, start, vapor venting, etc.), vehicle type, road type, temperature, speed, hour of
day, etc. To generate the MOVES emission rates that could be applied across the U.S., an automated process
ran MOVES to produce emission factors by temperature and speed for 146 “representative counties,” to
which every other county could be mapped. Using the MOVES emission rates, SMOKE selected
appropriate emissions rates for each county, hourly temperature, SCC, and speed bin and multiplied the

7
EPA estimated California as well, this is different than the approach for the 2007v5 platform.
8
A beta version of SMOKE v3.5 was used for modeling the Tier 3 FRM. The release version is available at: http://www.smoke-
model.org/index.cfm
12
emission rate by activity (VMT (vehicle miles travelled) or vehicle population) to produce emissions. These
calculations were done for every county, grid cell, and hour in the continental U.S.

SMOKE-MOVES can be used with different versions of the MOVES model. For the 2007 platform, EPA
used the latest publically released version: MOVES2010b
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm). However, since the release of MOVES2010b, EPA has
continued to collect and analyze emissions data. In particular, EPA completed two major studies of fuel
effects on emissions in Tier 2 light-duty gasoline vehicles, and an important collection of studies on
evaporative emissions. Because fuels and evaporative emissions are affected by Tier 3 standards, it was very
important to include these data in the modeling. Therefore, in estimating the impact of the Tier 3 vehicle and
fuel standards on air quality for the future years, MOVES2010b was updated to include the results from
these studies, along with numerous other updates. Furthermore, the new model incorporated the changes that
reflect recent EPA rules on light-duty and heavy-duty greenhouse gas emissions. These changes are
documented in the docket for the NPRM9 and in the docket for this rule10.

The following inputs and methodologies are identical to the 2007v5 platform11 and are detailed in the
2007v5 TSD:
 Activity data (VMT, VPOP, speed)
 Representative counties
 Fuel Months
 Local MOVES inputs
 Procedure for running MOVES to create emission factors
 Procedure for running SMOKE to create emissions
The following inputs differed between the 2007 base case and the 2007v5 modeling and are detailed below:
fuels, meteorology, and extended idle adjustments.

2.5.1.1 Fuels
Although state-submitted NMIM and MOVES input data may have included information about fuel
properties, the MOVES runs for the 2007 base case were run using a set of fuel properties for each county in
2007 generated by EPA. These data were developed using a combination of purchased fuel survey data,
proprietary fuel refinery information, ethanol and other biofuel production levels, and known federal and
local regulatory constraints. The fuel supply used in the Tier 3 FRM varies significantly from that used in
the NPRM, including the introduction of a new approach to aggregating fuels by region. For more
information regarding this new approach to fuels, please refer to the Tier 3 FRM, Chapter 7.1.3.2. The fuel
supplied used in the Tier 3 FRM varies slightly from that used in the 2007v5, including less ethanol overall
with a slightly different regional distribution, which more closely matched the new AEO regions. The fuel
properties themselves are the same in 2007v5 and in Tier 3 FRM (2007 base case).

2.5.1.2 Temperature and humidity

Ambient temperature can have a large impact on emissions. Low temperatures are associated with high start
emissions for many pollutants. High temperatures are associated with greater running emissions due to the
higher engine load of air conditioning. High temperatures also are associated with higher evaporative
emissions.

9
U.S. EPA. 2013. “Memorandum to Docket: Updates to MOVES for the Tier 3 NPRM”
10
U.S. EPA. 2014. “Memorandum to Docket: Updates to MOVES for the Tier 3 FRM Analysis”
11
Tier 3 NPRM was based on the 2005 platform and hence inputs such as the representative counties, activity data, and local
MOVES inputs were updated as part of the development of the 2007 platform (used for Tier 3 FRM).
13
The 36-km and 12-km gridded meteorological input data for the entire year of 2007 covering the continental
United States were derived from simulations of version 3.3 of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model
(WRF, http://wrf-model.org), Advanced Research WRF (ARW) core (Skamarock, et al., 2008). The WRF
Model is a mesoscale numerical weather prediction system developed for both operational forecasting and
atmospheric research applications. The Meteorology-Chemistry Interface Processor (MCIP) version 4.1.2
(http://www.cmascenter.org/help/model_docs/mcip/4.1/ReleaseNotes) was used as the software for
maintaining dynamic consistency between the meteorological model, the emissions model, and air quality
chemistry model. The meteorology run used for the 2007 base year12 is different than what was used for the
2007v5 platform. Specifically it used newer versions of WRF and MCIP and 25 vertical layers13 instead of
the 24 used in 2007v5.

The SMOKE-MOVES tool Met4moves reads the gridded, hourly meteorological data (output from MCIP) to
generate a list of the maximum temperature ranges, average relative humidity, and temperature profiles that
are needed for MOVES to create the emission-factor lookup tables. For more details on Met4moves and the
processing of meteorology for SMOKE-MOVES see the 2007v5 TSD.

2.5.1.3 Extended idle adjustments and SMOKE-MOVES

Emissions from the extended idling of long haul trucks are a subset of the exhaust emissions. These
emissions are typically from trucks, which have traveled across county and state boundaries. Federal rules
require that truck drivers may not drive more than 10 hours without rest. These long haul trucks are known
to stop for these rest periods at truck stops along their routes and idle their trucks for hours while they rest.
The MOVES model generates an estimate of the total number of extended idling hours and emissions for
every county. However, when MOVES is run using the County scale, the extended idling rate (in grams per
hour per truck) is not adjusted to account for allocation of the extended idling to counties where interstate
travel occurs.

SMOKE has an optional input that adjusts emissions (CFPRO) by county, SCC, and mode. To account for
the extended idle adjustment, EPA created an adjustment file that applies these allocation factors by county
for extended idle and for the long haul type SCCs (SCC7 2230073 and 2230074) only (see the 2011v1 NEI
TSD for more details).

SMOKE-MOVES, specifically Movesmrg, uses the adjustment factor file (CFPRO) for extended idle to
estimate 2007 emissions that incorporates these adjustments.

2.5.2 Onroad refueling (onroad_rfl)

Onroad refueling is modeled very similarly to other onroad emissions (see Section2.5.1).
MOVESTier3FRM can produce EFs for refueling. These EFs are at the resolution of the onroad SCCs. The
refueling EFs were run separately from the other onroad mobile sources to allow for different spatial
allocation. To facilitate this, the EFs from the refueling process were separated out into RPD refueling and
RPV refueling tables14. EPA then ran SMOKE-MOVES using these EF tables as inputs and spatially
allocated the results based on a gas stations surrogate (see Section 3.4.1).

Lastly, the Mrggrid SMOKE program combined RPD refueling and RPV refueling into a single onroad_rfl
model ready output for final processing with the other sectors prior to use in CMAQ.

12
Note the meteorology is consistent across all 3years: 2007, 2018 and 2030.
13
WRF was run at 35 layers and MCIP post-processed it to 25 layers.
14
The Moves2smk post-processing script has command line arguments that will either consolidate or split out the refueling EF.
14
2.5.3 Nonroad mobile equipment sources: (nonroad)
This sector includes monthly exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions from nonroad engines (not
including commercial marine, aircraft, and locomotives) that are derived from NMIM for all states except
California. Year-2007 inventories from CARB were used for California after the completion of several
preprocessing steps discussed in the 2007v5 TSD.

NMIM (non-California) nonroad

NMIM ran the version of NONROAD, NR08b, which models all in-force nonroad controls, including the
marine spark ignited (SI) and small SI engine final rule, published May 2009 (EPA, 2008). This version of
NONROAD is very similar to the publicly released version, but it can model ethanol blends up to E20. The
NMIM version is NMIM20090504d, which has the same results as the publicly-released NMIM version
NMIM20090504a. The underlying National County Database (NCD) is NCD20101201a, but with 2007
meteorology inserted into the countymonthhour table. NCD20101201a includes state inputs for the 2008
NEI.

The NMIM run, abs2007basenr, includes the lower 48 states plus Washington D.C. ; it excludes Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. To conserve processing time, NMIM was run using 392 county
groups. The county groups are in the same state and have the same fuels and similar temperature regimes.
The county from each group with the highest VMT was chosen as the representing county. All counties are
mapped to their representing county in the MySQL table countymap392. The fuels database,
countryyearmonth2007_Baseline_0906012, is a conversion to NMIM format of the MOVES fuels for the
2007 base case (see Section 2.5.1.1).

As with the onroad emissions, NMIM provides nonroad emissions for VOC by three emission modes:
exhaust, evaporative and refueling. Unlike the onroad sector, refueling emissions from nonroad sources are
not separated into a different sector.

The EPA ran NMIM to create county-SCC emissions and removed California emissions because they were
replaced with a CARB inventory. Emissions were converted from monthly totals to SMOKE-ready FF10
format (http://www.cmascenter.org/smoke/documentation/3.5.1/html/ch08s02s04.html) monthly average-day
based on the number of days in each month. EPA retained only CAPs and the necessary HAPs: BAFM,
acrolein, butadiene, and naphthalene.

California nonroad
California year 2007 nonroad emissions were provided by CARB and are documented in a staff report (ARB,
2010a). The nonroad sector emissions in California are developed using a modular approach and include all
rulemakings and updates in place by December 2010. These emissions were developed using Version 1 of
the California Emissions Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM) which support various California off-road
regulations such as in-use diesel retrofits (ARB, 2007), Diesel Risk-Reduction Plan (ARB, 2000) and 2007
State Implementation Plans (SIPS) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air basins (ARB, 2010b).

EPA converted the CARB-supplied nonroad annual inventory to monthly emissions values by using the
aforementioned EPA NMIM monthly inventories to compute monthly ratios by pollutant and SCC. Some
adjustments to the CARB inventory were needed to convert the provided total organic gas (TOG) to VOC
and augment the HAPs. See Section 3.2.1.3 for details on speciation of California nonroad data.

15
2.5.4 Class 1/Class 2 Commercial Marine Vessels and Locomotives and (c1c2rail)
The c1c2rail sector contains locomotive and commercial marine vessel (CMV) sources, except for category
3/residual-fuel (C3) CMV and railway maintenance. The “c1c2” portion of this sector name refers to the
Class I/II CMV emissions, not the railway emissions. Railway maintenance emissions are included in the
nonroad sector. The C3 CMV emissions are in the c3marine sector.

For more details on the development of the c1c2rail sector see the 2007v5 TSD. The differences between the
2007v5 c1c2rail and the 2007 c1c2rail for this base case are limited to the following:

 Updated an outdated FIPS in the RPO rail inventory. Specifically changed Clifton Forge, VA
(51560) to Alleghany County, VA (51005)

 Augmented the CARB c1c2rail and RPO rail inventories to include the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs (see
Section 3.2 and 3.2.1.3 for details)

2.5.5 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (c3marine)

The c3marine sector emissions data were developed based on a 4-km resolution ASCII raster format dataset
used since the Emissions Control Area-International Marine Organization (ECA-IMO) project began in
2005, then known as the Sulfur Emissions Control Area (SECA). These emissions consist of large marine
diesel engines (at or above 30 liters/cylinder) that until very recently, were allowed to meet relatively modest
emission requirements, often burning residual fuel. The emissions in this sector are comprised of primarily
foreign-flagged ocean-going vessels, referred to as Category 3 (C3) CMV ships. The c3marine inventory
includes these ships in several intra-port modes (cruising, hoteling, reduced speed zone, maneuvering, and
idling) and underway mode and includes near-port auxiliary engines. This sector is identical to the 2007v5
platform except for the addition of naphthalene (see Section 3.2.1.3). For more details on the development
of this sector’s emissions, see the 2007v5 TSD.

2.6 Emissions from Canada, Mexico and offshore drilling platforms (othpt,
othar, othon)
The emissions from Canada, Mexico, and offshore drilling platforms are included as part of three emissions
modeling sectors: othpt, othar, and othon.

The “oth” refers to the fact that these emissions are usually “other” than those in the U.S. state-county
geographic FIPS, and the third and fourth characters provide the SMOKE source types: “pt” for point, “ar”
for “area and nonroad mobile”, and “on” for onroad mobile. All “oth” emissions are CAP-only inventories.

For more details on the development of the “oth” sectors see the 2007v5 TSD. The differences between the
2007v5 “oth” and the 2007 “oth” for this base case are limited to the following:

 othar has updated spatial surrogates (see Sections 3.4.3)

 othon has updated speciation and spatial surrogates (see Sections 3.2.1.3 and 3.4.3, respectively)

 othpt has updated speciation (see Sections 3.2.1.3)

16
2.7 SMOKE-ready non-anthropogenic inventories for chlorine
The ocean chlorine gas emission estimates are based on the build-up of molecular chlorine (Cl2)
concentrations in oceanic air masses (Bullock and Brehme, 2002). Data at 36 km and 12 km resolution were
available and were not modified other than the name “CHLORINE” was changed to “CL2” because that is
the name required by the CMAQ model.

17
3 Emissions Modeling Summary
Both the CMAQ and CAMX models require hourly emissions of specific gas and particle species for the
horizontal and vertical grid cells contained within the modeled region (i.e., modeling domain). To provide
emissions in the form and format required by the model, it is necessary to “pre-process” the “raw” emissions
(i.e., emissions input to SMOKE) for the sectors described above in Section 2. In brief, the process of
emissions modeling transforms the emissions inventories from their original temporal resolution, pollutant
resolution, and spatial resolution into the hourly, speciated, gridded resolution required by the air quality
model. Emissions modeling includes temporal allocation, spatial allocation, and pollutant speciation. In
some cases, emissions modeling also includes the vertical allocation of point sources, but many air quality
models also perform this task because it greatly reduces the size of the input emissions files if the vertical
layer of the sources does not need to be included.

As seen in Section 2, the temporal resolutions of the emissions inventories input to SMOKE vary across
sectors, and may be hourly, daily, monthly, or annual total emissions. The spatial resolution, which also can
be different for different sectors, may be individual point sources, county/province/municipio totals, or
gridded emissions. This section provides some basic information about the tools and data files used for
emissions modeling as part of the modeling platform. In Section 2, the emissions inventories and how they
differ from the 2007v5 platform were described. In Section 3, the descriptions of data are limited to the
ancillary data SMOKE uses to perform the emissions modeling steps.

SMOKE version 3.5 beta was used to pre-process the emissions inventories into emissions inputs for
CMAQ. For sectors that have plume rise, the in-line emissions capability of the air quality models was used,
thereby creating source-based and two-dimensional gridded emissions files that are much smaller than full
three-dimensional gridded emissions files. For quality assurance of the emissions modeling steps, emissions
totals by specie for the entire model domain are output as reports that are then compared to reports generated
by SMOKE on the input inventories to ensure that mass is not lost or gained during the emissions modeling
process.

3.1 Emissions modeling Overview

When preparing emissions for the air quality model, emissions for each sector are processed separately
through SMOKE, and then the final merge program (Mrggrid) is run to combine the model-ready, sector-
specific emissions across sectors. The SMOKE settings in the run scripts and the data in the SMOKE
ancillary files control the approaches used by the individual SMOKE programs for each sector. Table 3-1
summarizes the major processing steps of each platform sector. The “Spatial” column shows the spatial
approach used: here “point” indicates that SMOKE maps the source from a point location (i.e., latitude and
longitude) to a grid cell; “surrogates” indicates that some or all of the sources use spatial surrogates to
allocate county emissions to grid cells; and “area-to-point” indicates that some of the sources use the
SMOKE area-to-point feature to grid the emissions. The “Speciation” column indicates that all sectors use
the SMOKE speciation step, though biogenics speciation is done within the Tmpbeis3 program and not as a
separate SMOKE step. The “Inventory resolution” column shows the inventory temporal resolution from
which SMOKE needs to calculate hourly emissions. Note that for some sectors (e.g., onroad, beis), there is
no input inventory; instead, activity data and emission factors are used in combination with meteorological
data to compute hourly emissions.

Finally, the “plume rise” column indicates the sectors for which the “in-line” approach is used. These
sectors are the only ones with emissions in aloft layers based on plume rise. The term “in-line” means that
18
the plume rise calculations are done inside of the air quality model instead of being computed by SMOKE.
The air quality model computes the plume rise using the stack data and the hourly air quality model inputs
found in the SMOKE output files for each model-ready emissions sector. The height of the plume rise
determines the model layer into which the emissions are placed. The c3marine, and othpt sectors are the only
sectors that contain only “in-line” emissions, meaning that all of the emissions are placed in aloft layers and
there are no emissions for those sectors in the two-dimensional, layer-1 files created by SMOKE.

Table 3-1. Key emissions modeling steps by sector.

Platform sector Inventory

Spatial Speciation resolution Plume rise
annual
ag Surrogates Yes
(some monthly)
afdust Surrogates Yes Annual
avefire Surrogates Yes daily
Pre-gridded
beis in BEIS3.14 computed hourly
land use
c1c2rail Surrogates Yes Annual
c3marine Point Yes Annual in-line
Surrogates & annual
nonpt Yes
area-to-point (some monthly)
Surrogates &
nonroad Yes Monthly
area-to-point
othar Surrogates Yes Annual
onroad Surrogates Yes computed hourly
onroad_rfl Surrogates Yes computed hourly
othon Surrogates Yes Annual
othpt Point Yes Annual in-line
ptipm Point Yes Daily in-line
ptnonipm Point Yes Annual in-line

SMOKE has the option of grouping sources so that they are treated as a single stack when computing plume
rise. For the 2007v5 platform, no grouping was performed because grouping combined with “in-line”
processing will not give identical results as “offline” (i.e., when SMOKE creates 3-dimensional files). This
occurs when stacks with different stack parameters or lat/lons are grouped, thereby changing the parameters
of one or more sources. The most straightforward way to get the same results between in-line and offline is
to avoid the use of grouping.

EPA ran SMOKE for the 36-km CONtinental United States “CONUS” modeling domain for the boundary
conditions and for the smaller CONUS US 12-km modeling domain (12US2) shown in Figure 3-1 and
described in Table 3-2.

19
 Figure 3-1. Air quality modeling domains

Both grids use a Lambert-Conformal projection, with Alpha = 33º, Beta = 45º and Gamma = -97º, with a
center of X = -97º and Y = 40º.
Table 3-2. Descriptions of the 2007v5 platform grids
Parameters listed in SMOKE grid
description (GRIDDESC) file:
Common Grid Description projection name, xorig, yorig,
Name (see Figure 3-1)
Cell Size Grid name xcell, ycell, ncols, nrows, nthik
Continental Entire conterminous
'LAM_40N97W', -2736000, -
36km grid 36km US plus some of 36US1_148X112
(36US1) Mexico/Canada 2088000, 36.D3, 36.D3, 148, 112, 1
Entire conterminous
Continental ‘LAM_40N97W', -2556000, -1728000,
12 km US plus some of 12US1_459X299
12km grid 12.D3, 12.D3, 459, 299, 1
Mexico/Canada
US 12 km or Smaller 12km
‘LAM_40N97W', -2412000 , -
“smaller” 12 km CONUS plus some of 12US2
1620000, 12.D3, 12.D3, 396, 246, 1
CONUS-12 Mexico/Canada

Section 3.4 provides the details on the spatial surrogates and area-to-point data used to accomplish spatial
allocation with SMOKE.

20
3.2 Chemical Speciation
The emissions modeling step for chemical speciation creates “model species” needed by the air quality
model for a specific chemical mechanism. These model species are either individual chemical compounds or
groups of species, called “model species.” The chemical mechanism used for the 2007 platform is the CB05
mechanism (Yarwood, 2005). The same base chemical mechanism is used with CMAQ and CAMX, but the
implementation differs slightly between the two models. The specific versions of CMAQ and CAMx used in
applications of this platform include secondary organic aerosol (SOA) and HONO enhancements.

From the perspective of emissions preparation, the CB05 with SOA mechanism is the same as was used in
the 2007 platform. Table 3-3 lists the model species produced by SMOKE for use in CMAQ and CAMX. It
should be noted that the BENZENE model species is not part of CB05 in that the concentrations of
BENZENE do not provide any feedback into the chemical reactions (i.e., it is not “inside” the chemical
mechanism). Rather, benzene is used as a reactive tracer and as such is impacted by the CB05 chemistry.
BENZENE, along with several reactive CB05 species (such as TOL and XYL) plays a role in SOA
formation. Unlike the 2007v5 platform, the Tier3 FRM modeling included additional hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) and used slightly revised speciation. A “lite” version15 of the multi-pollutant CMAQ
(Version 5.0.1) was used that required additional HAP species16 (see Table 3-3 for details): ACROLEIN,
ALD2_PRIMARY, BUTADIENE13, ETOH, FORM_PRIMARY, and NAPHTHALENE .

The approach for speciating PM2.5 emissions supports both CMAQ 4.7.1 and CMAQ 5.0 and includes
speciation of PM2.5 into a larger set of PM model species than is listed above (see the 2007v5 TSD and
Section 3.2.2 for details). The TOG and PM2.5 speciation factors that are the basis of the chemical speciation
approach were developed from the SPECIATE4.3 database (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/speciate),
EPA's repository of TOG and PM speciation profiles of air pollution sources. However, a few of the profiles
used in this modeling will be published in later versions of the SPECIATE database after the release of this
documentation.

The approach for speciating NOX into NO, NO2, and HONO is consistent with the 2007v5 platform (see the
2007v5 TSD for details).

The SPECIATE database development and maintenance is a collaboration involving the EPA’s ORD,
OTAQ, and the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), and Environment Canada (EPA,
2006a). The SPECIATE database contains speciation profiles for TOG, speciated into individual chemical
compounds, VOC-to-TOG conversion factors associated with the TOG profiles, and speciation profiles for
PM2.5.

15
Note, that the MP version of CMAQ allows the user to control the list of HAPs that they wish to explicitly model.
16
These additional HAPs are referred to in this document as “CMAQ MP-lite HAPs”.
21
 Table 3-3. Emission model species produced for CB05 with SOA for CMAQ and CAMX*
Inventory Pollutant Model Species Model species description
CL2 CL2 Atomic gas-phase chlorine
HCl HCL Hydrogen Chloride (hydrochloric acid) gas
CO CO Carbon monoxide
NOX NO Nitrogen oxide
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
HONO Nitrous acid
SO2 SO2 Sulfur dioxide
SULF Sulfuric acid vapor
NH3 NH3 Ammonia
VOC ACROLEIN Acrolein from the HAP inventory
ALD2 Acetaldehyde for VOC speciation
ALD2_PRIMARY Acetaldehyde from the HAP inventory
ALDX Propionaldehyde and higher aldehydes
BENZENE Benzene (not part of CB05)
BUTADIENE13 1,3-butadiene from the HAP inventory
CH4 Methane17
ETH Ethene
ETHA Ethane
ETOH Ethanol
FORM Formaldehyde from VOC speciation
FORM_PRIMARY Formaldehyde from the HAP inventory
IOLE Internal olefin carbon bond (R-C=C-R)
ISOP Isoprene
MEOH Methanol
NAPHTHALENE Naphthalene from the HAP inventory
OLE Terminal olefin carbon bond (R-C=C)
PAR Paraffin carbon bond
TOL Toluene and other monoalkyl aromatics
XYL Xylene and other polyalkyl aromatics
VOC species from the biogenics SESQ Sesquiterpenes
model that do not map to model TERP Terpenes
species above
PM10 PMC Coarse PM > 2.5 microns and  10 microns
PM2.518 PEC Particulate elemental carbon  2.5 microns
PNO3 Particulate nitrate  2.5 microns
POC Particulate organic carbon (carbon only)  2.5
microns
PSO4 Particulate Sulfate  2.5 microns
PMFINE Other particulate matter  2.5 microns
Sea-salt species (non – PCL Particulate chloride
anthropogenic)19 PNA Particulate sodium

17
Technically, CH4 is not a VOC but part of TOG. Although we derive emissions of CH4, the AQ models do not use these
emissions because the anthropogenic emissions are dwarfed by the CH4 already in the atmosphere.
18
For CMAQ 5.0, PM2.5 is speciated into a finer set of PM components. Listed in this table are the AE5 species
19
These emissions are created outside of SMOKE
22
 *The same species names are used for the CAMX model with exceptions as follows:
1. CL2 is not used in CAMX
2. CAMX particulate sodium is NA (in CMAQ it is PNA)
3. CAMX uses different names for species that are both in CBO5 and SOA for the following: TOLA=TOL, XYLA=XYL,
ISP=ISOP, TRP=TERP. They are duplicate species in CAMX that are used in the SOA chemistry. CMAQ uses the same
names in CB05 and SOA for these species.
4. CAMX uses a different name for sesquiterpenes: CMAQ SESQ = CAMX SQT
5. CAMX uses particulate species uses different names for organic carbon, coarse particulate matter and other particulate
mass as follows: CMAQ POC = CAMX POA, CMAQ PMC = CAMX CPRM, CMAQ PMFINE= CAMX FCRS, and CMAQ
PMOTHR = CAMx FPRM

3.2.1 VOC speciation

3.2.1.1 The combination of HAP BAFM (benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde and
methanol) and VOC for VOC speciation
The VOC speciation includes HAP emissions from the NEI in the speciation process. Instead of speciating
VOC to generate all of the species listed in Table 3-3, EPA integrated emissions of four specific HAPs,
benzene, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde and methanol (collectively known as “BAFM”) from the NEI with the
NEI VOC. The integration process (described in more detail in the 2007v5 TSD) combines these HAPs with
the VOC in a way that does not double count emissions and uses the HAP inventory directly in the speciation
process. The basic process is to subtract the specified HAPs from VOC and to use a special integrated
profile to speciate the remainder of VOC to the model species excluding the specific HAPs. Generally, the
HAP emissions from the NEI are considered to be more representative of emissions of these compounds than
their generation via VOC speciation.

Specific sectors fell into 3 categories: all sources are speciated from VOC directly (no integration), all
sources are speciated with BAFM or EBAFM (ethanol plus BAFM) coming from the inventory (full
integration), or some sources have BAFM and other sources do not (partial integration). See Table 3-4 for
the integration status of each of the modeling sectors.

Table 3-4. Integration approach for BAFM and EBAFM for each platform sector
Platform Approach for Integrating NEI emissions of Benzene (B), Acetaldehyde (A),
Sector Formaldehyde (F), Methanol (M), and Ethanol (E)
ptipm No integration
ptnonipm Partial integration (BAFM)
avefire No integration
Ag N/A – sector contains no VOC
Afdust N/A – sector contains no VOC
Nonpt Partial integration (BAFM and EBAFM)
nonroad Partial integration (BAFM). Except for California: no integration
c1c2rail Partial integration (BAFM)
c3marine Full integration (BAFM)
Onroad Full integration (EBAFM and BAFM)
Biog N/A – sector contains no inventory pollutant "VOC"; but rather specific VOC species
Othpt No integration
Othar No integration
othon No integration

More details on the integration of specific sectors and additional details of the speciation are provided in
Section3.2.1.3 and the 2007v5 TSD.

23
3.2.1.2 County specific profile combinations (GSPRO_COMBO)
EPA used the SMOKE feature to compute speciation profiles from mixtures of other profiles in user-
specified proportions. The combinations are specified in the GSPRO_COMBO ancillary file by pollutant
(including pollutant mode, e.g., EXH__VOC), state and county (i.e., state/county FIPS code) and time period
(i.e., month).

EPA used this feature for onroad and nonroad mobile and gasoline-related related stationary sources
whereby the emission sources use fuels with varying ethanol content, and therefore the speciation profiles
require different combinations of gasoline profiles, e.g. E0 and E10 profiles. Since the ethanol content varies
spatially (e.g., by state or county), temporally (e.g., by month) and by modeling year (future years have more
ethanol) the feature allows combinations to be specified at various levels for different years. SMOKE
computes the resultant profile using the fraction of each specific profile assigned by county, month and
emission mode.

The GSREF file indicates that a specific source uses a combination file with the profile code “COMBO”.
Because the GSPRO_COMBO file does not differentiate by SCC and there are various levels of integration
across sectors, we typically have a sector specific GSPRO_COMBO. For the onroad and onroad_rfl sectors,
the GSPRO_COMBO uses E-profiles (i.e. there is EBAFM integration). Different profile combinations are
specified by the mode (e.g. exhaust, evaporative, refueling, etc.) by changing the pollutant name (e.g.
EXH__NONHAPTOG, EVP__NONHAPTOG, RFL__NONHAPTOG). For the nonpt sector, there is a
combination of BAFM and EBAFM integration. Due to the lack of SCC in the GSPRO_COMBO, the only
way to differentiate the sources that should use BAFM integrated profiles versus E-profiles is by changing
the pollutant name. For example, we changed the pollutant name for the PFC future year inventory so the
integration would use EVP__NONHAPVOC to correctly select the E-profile combinations while other
sources used NONHAPVOC to select the typical BAFM profiles.

3.2.1.3 Additional sector specific details

The decision to integrate HAPs into the speciation was made on a sector by sector basis. For some sectors
there is no integration (VOC is speciated directly), for some sectors there is full integration (all sources are
integrated), and for other sectors there is partial integration (some sources are not integrated and other
sources are integrated). The integrated HAPs are either BAFM (ethanol not subtracted from VOC with
BAFM HAPs) or EBAFM (ethanol and BAFM HAPs subtracted from VOC). Table 3-4 summarizes the
integration for each platform sector. The additional CMAQ MP-lite HAPs were evaluated and, where it was
needed, augmented in the mobile sectors, with details provided below.20

For the c1c2rail sector, EPA integrated BAFM for most sources from the 2008 NEI. There were a few
sources that had zero BAFM; therefore, they were processed as no integrate. The RPO and CARB
inventories did not include HAPs; therefore, EPA processed all non-NEI source emissions in the c1c2rail
sector as no integrate. For California, EPA converted the CARB inventory TOG to VOC by dividing the
inventory TOG by the available VOC-to-TOG speciation factor. For CARB and the RPO inventories, EPA
augmented the inventories to include the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs. In Table 3-5, “geography” indicates
whether the emission factor is applied nationally or to a subset of the country and “speciation base” is the
pollutant value to use in the emissions calculation.

20
EPA analyzed the presence of acroleine, 1,3-butadiene, and naphthalene in the nonpt and point sectors and found that the
coverage was very inconsistent; therefore the decision was made to augment only the mobile sectors where it was needed.
24
 Table 3-5. HAP augmentation for c1c2rail
Speciation Speciation
Pollutant Fraction Base Geography SCC SCC Description
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
1,3 Butadiene 6.146E-05 PM10-PRI California 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
1,3 Butadiene 6.146E-05 PM10-PRI California 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Acrolein 8.547E-05 PM10-PRI California 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Acrolein 8.547E-05 PM10-PRI California 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Napthalene 1.851E-03 PM10-PRI California 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Napthalene 1.851E-03 PM10-PRI California 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Napthalene 2.576E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Napthalene 2.576E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Acrolein 4.594E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
Acrolein 4.594E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
1,3 Butadiene 4.774E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002006 Locomotives: Class I Operations
Railroad Equipment; Diesel; Line Haul
1,3 Butadiene 4.774E-03 PM10-PRI 49 States 2285002007 Locomotives: Class II / III Operations
Acrolein 2.625E-03 VOC National 2280002100 Marine Vessels; Commercial; Diesel; Port
Marine Vessels; Commercial; Diesel;
Acrolein 2.188E-03 VOC National 2280002200 Underway
Naphthalene 1.051E-03 PM25-PRI National 2280002100 Marine Vessels; Commercial; Diesel; Port
Marine Vessels; Commercial; Diesel;
Naphthalene 8.756E-04 PM25-PRI National 2280002200 Underway

For the c3marine sector, EPA computed HAPs directly from the CAP inventory; therefore, the entire sector
is integrated to use the VOC BAFM HAP species directly, rather than VOC speciation profiles. There is no
methanol in the VOC speciation, but the remaining VOC BAF HAPs and the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs21
emissions are derived from the following equations:

Benzene = VOC * 9.795E-06

Acetaldehyde = VOC * 2.286E-04
Formaldehyde = VOC * 1.5672E-03
Naphthalene = PM2.5 * 1.990E-5

For the onroad and onroad_rfl sectors, there are series of unique speciation issues. First, SMOKE-MOVES
(see the 2007v5 TSD) is used to estimate these sectors, meaning that both the MEPROC and INVTABLE
files are involved in controlling which pollutants are ingested and speciated. Second, these sectors have
estimates of TOG as well as VOC; therefore, TOG can be speciated directly. Third, the gasoline sources use
21
The c3marine sources do not emit acrolein or 1,3-butadiene.
25
full integration of EBAFM (i.e. use E-profiles) and the diesel sources use full integration of BAFM. Fourth,
the onroad sector utilizes 7 different modes for speciation: exhaust, extended idle, auxiliary power units
(APU), evaporative, permeation (gasoline vehicles only), brake wear, and tire wear. The onroad_rfl sector
utilizes an eighth mode, refueling. Fifth, the gasoline exhaust profiles were updated to 8750a (revision to
Gasoline Exhaust - Reformulated gasoline) and 8751a (revision to Gasoline Exhaust - E10 ethanol
gasoline).22 Sixth, the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs are produced directly from the SMOKE-MOVES processing.

For the nonroad sector, CNG or LPG sources (SCC beginning with 2268 or 2267) were not integrated
because NMIM computed only VOC and no HAPs were available for these SCCs. All other nonroad
sources were integrated. For California, EPA converted the CARB inventory TOG to VOC by dividing the
inventory TOG by the available VOC-to-TOG speciation factor. SMOKE later applies the same VOC-to-
TOG factor prior to computing speciated emissions. The CARB-based nonroad data includes exhaust and
evaporative mode-specific data for VOC, but does not contain refueling. The CARB inventory also does not
include HAP estimates; therefore all California nonroad emissions are processed as no integrate so that the
HAP species are generated by speciating the TOG emissions. The CMAQ MP-lite HAPS are produced
directly by NMIM. In California, the CMAQ MP-lite HAPs were augmented by applying state-wide SCC
HAP to VOC ratios based on EPA’s NMIM estimates.

For the ptnonipm sector, there is partial integration limited to the 2007 ethanol inventory (SCC 30125010),
which includes BAFM . In the future year, there is also partial integration because both the ethanol and
biodiesel inventories (SCC 30125010) provided by OTAQ include BAFM. See the 2007v5 TSD for
additional details on this sector.

For the oil and gas sources in ptnonipm and nonpt, the WRAP Phase III sources have basin-specific VOC
speciation that takes into account the distinct composition of gas. ENVIRON developed these basin-specific
profiles using gas composition analysis data obtained from operators through surveys. ENVIRON separated
out emissions and speciation from conventional/tight sands/shale gas from coal‐bed methane (CBM) gas
sources. Table 3-6 lists the basin and gas composition specific profiles used for the WRAP Phase III
inventory.23
Table 3-6. VOC profiles for WRAP Phase III basins
Profile Code Description
SSJCB South San Juan Basin Produced Gas Composition for CBM Wells
SSJCO South San Juan Basin Produced Gas Composition for Conventional Wells
WRBCO Wind River Basin Produced Gas Composition for Conventional Wells
PRBCB Powder River Basin Produced Gas Composition for CBM Wells
PRBCO Powder River Basin Produced Gas Composition for Conventional Wells
DJFLA D-J Basin Flashing Gas Composition for Condensate
DJVNT D-J Basin Produced Gas Composition
UNT01 Uinta Basin Gas Composition at CBM Wells
UNT02 Uinta Basin Gas Composition at Conventional Wells
UNT03 Uinta Basin Flashing Gas Composition for Oil
UNT04 Uinta Basin Flashing Gas Composition for Condensate
PNC01 Piceance Basin Gas Composition at Conventional Wells

22
These revised profiles are expected to be in the yet to be released SPECIATE 4.4.
23
Profile PRM01 was used in Tier 3 but not in the 2007v5 modeling. All other profiles are the same between the two cases.
26
 Profile Code Description
PNC02 Piceance Basin Gas Composition at Oil Wells
PNC03 Piceance Basin Flashing Gas Composition for Condensate
SWFLA SW Wyoming Basin Flash Gas Composition
SWVNT SW Wyoming Basin Vented Gas Composition
PRM01 Permian Basin Produced Gas Composition
SWE01 Wyoming Flashing Gas Composition

Othon and othpt used a GSPRO_COMBO that included a gasoline exhaust profile updated to 8750a (revision
to Gasoline Exhaust - Reformulated gasoline).

For the remaining sectors, see the 2007v5 TSD for speciation details.

3.2.1.4 Future year speciation

The VOC speciation approach used for the future year case is customized to account for the impact of fuel
changes. These changes affect the onroad, onroad_rfl, nonroad, and parts of the nonpt and ptnonipm sectors.

Speciation profiles for VOC in the nonroad, onroad and onroad_rfl sectors that account for the changes in
ethanol content of fuels across years. The actual fuel formulations used can be found in Sections 2.5.1.1 and
4.3.1.2. For 2007, EPA used “COMBO” profiles to model combinations of profiles for E0 and E10 fuel use.
For 2018 and 2030, EPA used “COMBO” profiles to model combinations of E10, E15, and E85 fuel use.
The speciation of onroad exhaust VOC additionally accounts for changes in the fraction of the vehicle fleet
meeting different vehicle standards over time; currently, different exhaust profiles are available for pre-Tier
2 versus Tier 2 and later vehicles. Thus for onroad gasoline, VOC speciation uses different COMBO profiles
to take into account both the increase in ethanol use, and the increase in vehicles meeting Tier 2 and later
standards in the future case.

The speciation changes from fuels in the nonpt sector are for PFCs and fuel distribution operations
associated with the BTP distribution. For these sources, ethanol may be mixed into the fuels; therefore,
speciation is expect to change across years. The speciation changes from fuels in the ptnonipm sector
include BTP distribution operations inventoried as point sources. RBT fuel distribution and BPS speciation
does not change across the modeling cases because this is considered upstream from the introduction of
ethanol into the fuel. For PFC, ethanol was present in the future inventories and therefore EBAFM profiles
were used to integrate ethanol in the speciation. Mapping of fuel distribution SCCs to PFC, BTP, BPS, and
RBT emissions categories can be found in Appendix B of the 2007v5 TSD.
Error! Reference source not found. Table 3-7 summarizes the different profiles utilized for the fuel-related
sources in each of the sectors for 2007 and the future year cases. This table indicates when “E-profiles” were
used instead of BAFM integrated profiles. The term “COMBO” indicates that a combination of the profiles
listed was used to speciate that subcategory using the GSPRO_COMBO file. Note, the speciation for the
Tier3 2018 control case is identical to the 2018 reference case and the speciation for the 2030 control case is
identical to the 2030 reference case. Although many of the profiles making up the COMBO are the same
between 2018 and 2030, the ratio of the profiles changes between the two years.

27
 Table 3-7. Select VOC profiles 2007. 2018 and 2030
Sub-
Sector category 2007 2018 2030
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:
Pre-Tier 2 E0 Pre-Tier 2 E10
8750aE exhaust 8751aE exhaust 8751aE Pre-Tier 2 E10 exhaust
gasoline Pre-Tier 2 E10
onroad Tier 2 E10 Exhaust Tier 2 E10 Exhaust
exhaust 8751aE exhaust 8757E 8757E
Tier 2 E0
Tier 2 E15 Exhaust Tier 2 E15 Exhaust
8756E Exhaust 8758E 8758E
Tier 2 E10
8757E Exhaust 8855E Tier 2 E85 Exhaust 8855E Tier 2 E85 Exhaust
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:
gasoline 8753E E0 Evap 8754E E10 Evap 8754E E10 Evap
onroad
evaporative 8754E E10 Evap 8872E E15 Evap 8872E E15 Evap
8934E E85 Evap 8934E E85 Evap
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:
gasoline 8766E E0 evap perm 8769E E10 evap perm 8769E E10 evap perm
onroad
permeation
8769E E10 evap perm 8770E E15 evap perm 8770E E15 evap perm
8934E E85 Evap 8934E E85 Evap
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:

gasoline 8869E E0 Headspace 8870E E10 Headspace 8870E E10 Headspace

onroad_rfl E10
refueling
8870E Headspace 8871E E15 Headspace 8871E E15 Headspace
8934E E85 Evap 8934E E85 Evap
diesel Pre-2007 MY Weighted diesel Weighted diesel
onroad exhaust 8774 HDD exhaust 877P0 exhaust for 2018 87730T3 exhaust for 2030
diesel
extended Pre-2007 MY Weighted diesel Weighted diesel
onroad idle 8774 HDD exhaust 877EIT3 extended idle for 2018 877EIT3 extended idle for 2018
auxiliary Pre-2007 MY HDD Pre-2007 MY HDD
onroad power units N/A 8774 exhaust 8774 exhaust
diesel Diesel
onroad evaporative 4547 Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace
diesel Diesel
onroad_rfl refueling 4547 Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace
Pre-Tier 2 E10
COMBO: 8751a exhaust 8751a Pre-Tier 2 E10 exhaust
gasoline Pre-Tier 2 E0
nonroad
exhaust 8750a exhaust
Pre-Tier 2 E10
8751a exhaust
COMBO: 8754 E10 evap 8754 E10 evap
gasoline
nonroad
evaporative 8753 E0 evap
8754 E10 evap
COMBO: 8870 E10 Headspace 8870 E10 Headspace
gasoline
nonroad 8869 E0 Headspace
refueling
8870 E10 Headspace

28
 Sub-
Sector category 2007 2018 2030
diesel Pre-2007 MY Pre-2007 MY HDD Pre-2007 MY HDD
nonroad exhaust 8774 HDD exhaust 8774 exhaust 8774 exhaust
diesel Diesel
nonroad evaporative 4547 Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace
diesel Diesel
nonroad refueling 4547 Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace 4547 Diesel Headspace
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:
nonpt/ 8869E E0 Headspace 8870E E10 Headspace 8870E E10 Headspace
PFC
ptnonipm 8870E E10 Headspace 8871E E15 Headspace 8871E E15 Headspace
8934E E85 Evap 8934E E85 Evap
COMBO: COMBO: COMBO:
nonpt/ 8869 E0 Headspace 8870 E10 Headspace 8870 E10 Headspace
BTP
ptnonipm 8870 E10 Headspace 8871 E15 Headspace 8871 E15 Headspace
8934 E85 Evap 8934 E85 Evap
nonpt/
ptnonipm BPS/RBT 8869 E0 Headspace 8869 E0 Headspace 8869 E0 Headspace

3.2.2 PM speciation
In addition to VOC profiles, the SPECIATE database also contains the PM2.5 speciated into both individual
chemical compounds (e.g., zinc, potassium, manganese, lead), and into the “simplified” PM2.5 components
used in the air quality model. For CMAQ 4.7.1 modeling, these “simplified” components (AE5) are all that
is needed. For CMAQ 5.0.1, there is a new thermodynamic equilibrium aerosol modeling tool
(ISORROPIA) v2 mechanism that needs additional PM components (AE6), which are further subsets of
PMFINE (see Table 3-8). EPA speciated PM2.5 so that it included both AE5 and AE6 PM model species
without causing any double counting. Therefore, emissions from these scenarios can be used with either
CMAQ 4.7.1 or CMAQ 5.0.1.
Table 3-8. PM model species: AE5 versus AE6
species name species description AE5 AE6
POC organic carbon Y Y
PEC elemental carbon Y Y
PSO4 sulfate Y Y
PNO3 nitrate Y Y
PMFINE unspeciated PM2.5 Y N
PNH4 ammonium N Y
PNCOM non-carbon organic matter N Y
PFE iron N Y
PAL aluminum N Y
PSI silica N Y
PTI titanium N Y
PCA calcium N Y
PMG magnesium N Y
PK potassium N Y
PMN manganese N Y

29
 species name species description AE5 AE6
PNA sodium N Y
PCL chloride N Y
PH2O water N Y
PMOTHR unspeciated PM2.5 N Y

The majority of the PM profiles come from the 911XX series, which include updated AE6 speciation24.
Unlike the 2007v5 platform, the profile numbers used in the Tier 3 runs are consistent with SPECIATE 4.3.
Although the profile numbers changed, the underlying profiles (namely the percentage of AE6 components)
did not change between 2007v5 and this 2007 base case (see the 2007v5 TSD for details on the earlier profile
names). This change in profile numbers impacts most sectors with PM emissions25.

3.3 Temporal Allocation

Temporal allocation (i.e., temporalization) is the process of distributing aggregated emissions to a finer
temporal resolution, such converting annual emissions to hourly emissions. While the total emissions are
important, the timing of the occurrence of emissions is also essential for accurately simulating ozone, PM,
and other pollutant concentrations in the atmosphere. Many emissions inventories are annual or monthly in
nature. Temporalization takes these annual emissions and distributes them to the month, and then distributes
the monthly emissions to the day, and the daily emissions to the hour. This process is typically done by
applying temporal profiles to the inventories in this order: monthly, day of the week, and diurnal.

The temporal profiles and associated cross references used to create the hourly emissions inputs for the air
quality model were similar to those used for the 2007v5 platform. New methodologies introduced in this
platform and updated profiles are discussed in this section. Temporal factors are typically applied to the
inventory by some combination of country, state, county, SCC, and pollutant. The following values are used
in Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.: the value “all” means that hourly emissions computed for
every day of the year and that emissions potentially have day-of-year variation. The value “week” means
that hourly emissions computed for all days in one “representative” week, representing all weeks for each
month. This means emissions have day-of-week variation, but not week-to-week variation within the month.
The value “mwdss” means hourly emissions for one representative Monday, representative weekday
(Tuesday through Friday), representative Saturday, and representative Sunday for each month. This means
emissions have variation between Mondays, other weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays within the month, but
not week-to-week variation within the month. The value “aveday” means hourly emissions computed for
one representative day of each month, meaning emissions for all days within a month are the same. Special
situations with respect to temporalization are described in the following subsections.
Table 3-9 summarizes the temporal aspects of emissions modeling by comparing the key approaches used for
temporal processing across the sectors. The temporal aspects of SMOKE processing are controlled through
(a) the L_TYPE (temporal type) and M_TYPE (merge type) settings used, and (b) the temporal profiles
themselves. In the table, “Daily temporal approach” refers to the temporal approach for getting daily
emissions from the inventory using the SMOKE Temporal program. The values given are the values of the
SMOKE L_TYPE setting. The “Merge processing approach” refers to the days used to represent other days
in the month for the merge step. If this is not “all”, then the SMOKE merge step runs only for representative

24
The exceptions are 5674 (Marine Vessel – Marine Engine – Heavy Fuel Oil) used for c3marine and 92018 (Draft Cigarette
Smoke – Simplified) used in nonpt.
25
It impacts the profile names (numbers) used in the sector, but it does not impact the fraction of AE6 PM species and hence will
not impact the air quality model-ready files.
30
days, which could include holidays as indicated by the right-most column. The values given are those used
for the SMOKE M_TYPE setting (see below for more information).

The following values are used in Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.: the value “all” means that
hourly emissions computed for every day of the year and that emissions potentially have day-of-year
variation. The value “week” means that hourly emissions computed for all days in one “representative”
week, representing all weeks for each month. This means emissions have day-of-week variation, but not
week-to-week variation within the month. The value “mwdss” means hourly emissions for one
representative Monday, representative weekday (Tuesday through Friday), representative Saturday, and
representative Sunday for each month. This means emissions have variation between Mondays, other
weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays within the month, but not week-to-week variation within the month. The
value “aveday” means hourly emissions computed for one representative day of each month, meaning
emissions for all days within a month are the same. Special situations with respect to temporalization are
described in the following subsections.

Table 3-9. Temporal settings used for the platform sectors in SMOKE
Platform Monthly Daily Merge Process
Inventory
sector short profiles temporal processing Holidays as
resolutions
name used? approach approach separate days
ptipm Daily all all Yes
ptnonipm Annual yes mwdss mwdss Yes
othpt Annual yes mwdss mwdss
nonroad Monthly mwdss mwdss Yes
othar Annual yes week week
c1c2rail Annual yes mwdss mwdss
c3marine Annual yes aveday aveday
onroad annual & monthly1 all all Yes
onroad_rfl annual & monthly2 all all Yes
othon annual yes week week
nonpt annual & monthly yes all all Yes
ag annual & monthly yes all all Yes
afdust_adj annual yes week all Yes
avefire daily all all Yes
biog hourly n/a all Yes
1. Note the annual and monthly “inventory” actually refers to the activity data (VMT and VPOP) for
onroad. The actual emissions are computed on an hourly basis.
2. Note the annual and monthly “inventory” actually refers to the activity data (VMT and VPOP) for
onroad_rfl. The actual emissions are computed on an hourly basis.

See Section 3.3.5 for more details on the temporalization and inventory resolution of specific sectors.

In addition to the resolution, temporal processing includes a ramp-up period for several days prior to January
1, 2007, which is intended to mitigate the effects of initial condition concentrations. The ramp-up period
was 10 days (December 22-31, 2006). For most non-EGU sectors, our approach used the emissions from

31
December 2007 to fill in surrogate emissions for the end of December 2006. In particular, we used
December 2007 emissions (representative days) for December 2006. For biogenic emissions, we processed
December 2006 emissions using 2006 meteorology.

3.3.1 FF10 format and inventory resolution

The Flat File 2010 format (FF10) inventory format for SMOKE provides a more consolidated format for
monthly, daily, and hourly emissions inventories than previous formats supported. Previously, to process
monthly inventory data required the use of 12 separate inventory files. With the FF10 format, a single
inventory file can contain emissions for all 12 months and the annual emissions in a single record. This
helps simplify the management of numerous inventories. Similarly, daily and hourly FF10 inventories
contain individual records with data for all days in a month and all hours in a day, respectively.

SMOKE 3.5 prevents the application of temporal profiles on top of the “native” resolution of the inventory.
For example, a monthly inventory should not have annual to month temporalization applied to it; rather, it
should only have month-to-day and diurnal temporalization. This becomes particularly important when
specific sectors have a mix of annual, monthly, daily, and/or hourly inventories (e.g. the nonpt sector). The
flags that control temporalization for a mixed set of inventories are discussed in the SMOKE documentation.
The modeling platform sectors that make use of monthly values in the FF10 files are nonroad, onroad, and
the ag burning inventory within the nonpt sector.

3.3.2 Ptipm Temporalization

The approach for temporalization of the ptipm sector (EGUs) has not changed from the 2005 v4.3 platform,
and is consistent with the method described in the 2007v5 TSD. However, the importance of this sector
warrants a restating of the methodology.

Daily emissions were computed from the annual emissions using a structured query language (SQL) program
and state-average CEM data. To allocate the annual emissions to each month, state-specific, three-year
averages of 2006-2008 CEM data were created. These average annual-to-month factors were assigned to
sources by state. To allocate the monthly emissions to each day, the 2007 CEM data was used to compute
state-specific month-to-day factors, averaged across all units in each state. The factors were applied to the
annual emissions to calculate the daily emissions outside of SMOKE, and the resulting daily inventories
were used as inputs to SMOKE.

The daily-to-hourly allocation was performed in SMOKE using diurnal profiles. The state-specific and
pollutant-specific diurnal profiles were created by using the 2007 CEM data to create state-specific, day-to-
hour factors, averaged over the whole year and all units in each state. The diurnal factors were calculated for
SO2 emissions, NOX emissions, and heat input. The SO2 and NOX-specific factors were used to temporally
allocate those pollutants, and the factors created from the hourly heat input data were used to allocate all
other pollutants. The resulting profiles were assigned by state and pollutant. The same procedures and
factors were used to allocate the base and future year emissions.

3.3.3 Meteorologically-based temporalization

A significant improvement over previous platforms was the introduction of meteorologically-based
temporalization. There are many factors that impact the timing of when emissions occur. The benefits of
considering meteorology in support of temporalization are: (1) a meteorological dataset consistent with the
one used by the AQ model is available (e.g., outputs from WRF); (2) the meteorological model data is highly
resolved in terms of spatial resolution; and (3) the meteorological variables vary at hourly resolution and can
therefore be translated into hour-specific temporalization. Because the WRF output data for this study was
32
from a different run than that described in the 2007v5 platform TSD, any meteorologically-based
temporalization factors, adjustments, and other meteorological effects were recomputed for the Tier 3 runs.
This included updating the BIOSEASON file used for biogenic emissions.

The SMOKE program GenTPRO provides a method for developing meteorology-based temporalization.
Currently, the program can utilize three types of temporal algorithms: annual-to-day temporalization for
residential wood combustion (RWC), month-to-hour temporalization for agricultural livestock ammonia, and
a generic meteorology-based algorithm for other situations. For the 2011 platform, meteorological-based
temporalization was used for portions of the rwc sector and for livestock within the ag sector. GenTPRO
reads in gridded meteorological data (output from MCIP) along with spatial surrogates, and uses the
specified algorithm to produce a new temporal profile that can be input into SMOKE. The meteorological
variables and the resolution of the generated temporal profile (hourly, daily, etc.) depend on the selected
algorithm and the run parameters. For more details on the development of these algorithms and running
GenTPRO, see the GenTPRO documentation and the SMOKE documentation at
http://www.cmascenter.org/smoke/documentation/3.1/GenTPRO_TechnicalSummary_Aug2012_Final.pdf

For the RWC algorithm, GenTPRO uses the daily minimum temperature to determine the temporal
allocation of emissions to days. We ran GenTPRO so that it created annual-to-day temporal profiles for the
RWC sources within the nonpt sector. These generated profiles distribute the annual RWC emissions to the
coldest days of the year. On days where the minimum temperature does not drop below a user defined
threshold, RWC emissions are zero. Conversely, the program temporally allocates the largest percentage of
emissions to the coldest days. Similar to other temporal allocation profiles, the total annual emissions do not
change, only the distribution of the emissions within the year is affected. The default 50 ˚F threshold was
used for the majority of the states, and a 60 ˚F threshold for the following states: Alabama, Arizona,
California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas.

For the agricultural livestock NH3 algorithm, the GenTPRO algorithm is based on an equation derived by
Jesse Bash of EPA ORD based on the Zhu, Henze, et al. (2013) empirical equation. This equation was
updated from that described in the 2007v5 TSD, and is based on observations from the TES satellite
instrument with the GEOS-Chem model and its adjoint to estimate diurnal NH3 emission variations from
livestock as a function of ambient temperature, aerodynamic resistance, and wind speed. The equations are:

Ei,h = [161500/Ti,h x e(-1380/Ti,h)] x ARi,h

PEi,h = Ei,h / Sum(Ei,h)

where

 PEi,h = Percentage of emissions in county i on hour h

 Ei,h = Emission rate in county i on hour h
 Ti,h = Ambient temperature (Kelvin) in county i on hour h
 Vi,h = Wind speed (meter/sec) in county i (minimum wind speed is 0.1 meter/sec)
 ARi,h = Aerodynamic resistance in county i

GenTPRO was run using the “BASH_NH3” profile method to create month-to-hour temporal profiles for
these sources. Because these profiles distribute to the hour based on monthly emissions, the monthly

33
emissions are obtained from a monthly inventory, or from an annual inventory that has been temporalized to
the month26.

Figure 3-2 compares the daily emissions for Minnesota from the “old” approach (i.e., uniform monthly
profiles) with the “new” approach (i.e., GenTPRO generated month-to-hour profiles). Although the
GenTPRO profiles show daily (and hourly variability), the monthly total emissions are the same between the
two approaches.
Figure 3-2. Example of new animal NH3 emissions temporalization approach, summed to daily emissions

For the afdust sector, meteorology is not used in the development of the temporal profiles, but it is used to
reduce the total emissions based on meteorological conditions. These adjustments are applied through
sector-specific scripts, beginning with the application of land use-based gridded transport fractions and then
subsequent zero-outs for hours during which precipitation occurs or there is snow cover on the ground. The
land use data used to reduce the NEI emissions explains the amount of emissions that are subject to transport.
This methodology is discussed in (Pouliot, et. al., 2010,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conference/ei19/session9/pouliot_pres.pdf, and in Fugitive Dust Modeling for
the 2008 Emissions Modeling Platform (Adelman, 2012). The precipitation adjustment is applied to remove
all emissions for days where measureable rain occurs. Therefore, the afdust emissions vary day-to-day based
on the precipitation and/or snow cover for that grid cell and day. Both the transport fraction and
meteorological adjustments are based on the gridded resolution of the platform; therefore, somewhat
different emissions will result from different grid resolutions. Application of the transport fraction and
meteorological adjustments prevents the overestimation of fugitive dust impacts in the grid modeling as
compared to ambient samples.

3.3.4 Onroad and Onroad_rfl Temporalization

For the onroad and onroad_rfl sectors, meteorology was not used in the development of the temporal
profiles; rather, meteorology impacts the actual calculation of the hourly emissions through the program
Movesmrg. The result is that the emissions vary at the hourly level by grid cell. More specifically, the on-
network (RPD) and the off-network (RPV) exhaust, evaporative, and evaporative permeation modes use the
gridded meteorology (MCIP) directly. Movesmrg determined the temperature for that hour and grid cell and
used it to select the appropriate EF for that SCC/pollutant/mode. For the off-network RPP, Movesmrg used
the Met4moves output for SMOKE (daily minimum and maximum temperatures by county) to determine the
appropriate EF for that hour and SCC/pollutant. The result was that the emissions varied hourly by county.

26
SMOKE v3.5.1 will correctly read in a monthly inventory and apply GenTPRO ag NH3 month-to-hour temporalization. When
the emissions were developed for this sector, we were using SMOKE v3.1 beta that incorrectly applied an annual-to-month
temporal profile on top of a monthly inventory when temporalizing with GenTPRO ag NH 3 profiles. As an interim solution, a flat
monthly profile was applied to the states with a monthly ag NH3 inventory.
34
The combination of these three processes (RPD, RPV, and RPP) is the total onroad emissions, while the
combination of the two processes (RPD, RPV) for the refueling mode only is the total onroad_rfl emissions.
Both sectors show a strong meteorological influence on their temporal patterns (see Sections 2.5.1.2 and
Error! Reference source not found. for more details).

Figure 3-3 illustrates the difference between temporalization of the onroad sector used in previous platforms
and that from SMOKE-MOVES. In the plot, the “MOVES” inventory is a monthly inventory that is
temporalized by SCC to day-of-week and hour. Similar temporalization is done for the VMT in SMOKE-
MOVES, but the meteorologically varying EFs add an additional variable signal on top of the
temporalization. Note how the MOVES emissions have a repeating pattern within the month, while the
SMOKE-MOVES shows day-to-day (and hour-to-hour) variability. In addition to tracking the
meteorological influence, SMOKE-MOVES does not show the artificial jumps between the months.
Figure 3-3. Example of SMOKE-MOVES temporal variability of NOX emissions

For the onroad and onroad_rfl sectors, the “inventories” referred to in The following values are used in
Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.: the value “all” means that hourly emissions computed for
every day of the year and that emissions potentially have day-of-year variation. The value “week” means
that hourly emissions computed for all days in one “representative” week, representing all weeks for each
month. This means emissions have day-of-week variation, but not week-to-week variation within the month.
The value “mwdss” means hourly emissions for one representative Monday, representative weekday
(Tuesday through Friday), representative Saturday, and representative Sunday for each month. This means
emissions have variation between Mondays, other weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays within the month, but
not week-to-week variation within the month. The value “aveday” means hourly emissions computed for
one representative day of each month, meaning emissions for all days within a month are the same. Special
situations with respect to temporalization are described in the following subsections.

Table 3-9 are actually the activity data inventories. For RPP and RPV processes, the VPOP inventory is
annual and does not need temporalization. For RPD, the VMT inventory is monthly and is temporalized to
day of the week and then to hourly VMT through temporal profiles. In addition, the RPD processes used a
speed profile (SPDPRO) that had vehicle speed by hour for typical weekday and weekend. In addition,
35
RPD, RPV, and RPP all have additional temporal variability due to the meteorological based emissions
calculated through Movesmrg.

3.3.5 Additional sector specific details

For a discussion of additional sector-specific details related to temporalization, see Section 3.3.4 of the
2007v5 platform TSD. The topics discussed include updates made in the 2007 platform to agricultural
burning and residential wood combustion diurnal profiles.

3.4 Spatial Allocation

The methods used to perform spatial allocation for the 2007 platform are summarized in this section. For the
2007 platform, spatial factors are typically applied by country and SCC. As described in Section 3.1, spatial
allocation was performed for national 12-km and 36-km domains. To do this, SMOKE used national 12-km
and 36-km spatial surrogates and a SMOKE area-to-point data file. For the U.S., the surrogates were
updated to use 2010-based data wherever possible. For Mexico, we used the same spatial surrogates as were
used for the 2005 platform. For Canada we used a set of Canadian surrogates provided by Environment
Canada, also unchanged from the 2005v4.3 platform. The U.S., Mexican, and Canadian 12-km surrogates
cover the entire CONUS domain 12US1 shown in Figure 3-1. When SMOKE runs, it windows the
surrogates to the area needed, such as the 12US2 domain. For the original 2007v5 platform, SMOKE was
run on the 12US1 grid and windowed to 12US2 prior to air quality modeling. For the Tier 3 runs, SMOKE
was actually run on the 12US2 domain. The remainder of this subsection provides further detail on the origin
of the data used for the spatial surrogates and the area-to-point data.

3.4.1 Spatial Surrogates for U.S. emissions

There are 69 spatial surrogates available for spatially allocating U.S. county-level emissions to the 12-km
grid cells used by the air quality model. As described in Section 3.4.2, an area-to-point approach overrides
the use of surrogates for some sources. Table 3-10 lists the codes and descriptions of the surrogates.
Table 3-10. U.S. Surrogates available for the 2007 platform.
Code Surrogate Description Code Surrogate Description
N/A Area-to-point approach (see 3.3.1.2) 520 Commercial plus Industrial plus Institutional
Golf Courses + Institutional +Industrial +
100 Population 525 Commercial
110 Housing 527 Single Family Residential
120 Urban Population 530 Residential - High Density
Residential + Commercial + Industrial +
130 Rural Population 535 Institutional + Government
137 Housing Change 540 Retail Trade
140 Housing Change and Population 545 Personal Repair
150 Residential Heating - Natural Gas 550 Retail Trade plus Personal Repair
Professional/Technical plus General
160 Residential Heating – Wood 555 Government
0.5 Residential Heating - Wood plus 0.5 Low
165 Intensity Residential 560 Hospital
170 Residential Heating - Distillate Oil 565 Medical Office/Clinic
180 Residential Heating – Coal 570 Heavy and High Tech Industrial
190 Residential Heating - LP Gas 575 Light and High Tech Industrial
200 Urban Primary Road Miles 580 Food, Drug, Chemical Industrial
210 Rural Primary Road Miles 585 Metals and Minerals Industrial
220 Urban Secondary Road Miles 590 Heavy Industrial

36
 Code Surrogate Description Code Surrogate Description
230 Rural Secondary Road Miles 595 Light Industrial
240 Total Road Miles 596 Industrial plus Institutional plus Hospitals
250 Urban Primary plus Rural Primary 600 Gas Stations
255 0.75 Total Roadway Miles plus 0.25 Population 650 Refineries and Tank Farms
260 Total Railroad Miles 675 Refineries and Tank Farms and Gas Stations
Oil & Gas Wells, IHS Energy, Inc. and
270 Class 1 Railroad Miles 680 USGS
280 Class 2 and 3 Railroad Miles 700 Airport Areas
300 Low Intensity Residential 710 Airport Point
310 Total Agriculture 720 Military AIports
312 Orchards/Vineyards 800 Marine Ports
320 Forest Land 801 NEI Ports
330 Strip Mines/Quarries 802 NEI Shipping Lanes
340 Land 807 Navigable Waterway Miles
350 Water 810 Navigable Waterway Activity
400 Rural Land Area 850 Golf Courses
500 Commercial Land 860 Mines
505 Industrial Land 870 Wastewater Treatment Facilities
510 Commercial plus Industrial 880 Drycleaners
515 Commercial plus Institutional Land 890 Commercial Timber

The surrogates in bold have been updated with 2010-based data, including 2010 census data at the block
group level, 2010 American Community Survey Data for heating fuels, 2010 TIGER/Line data for railroads
and roads, and 2010 National Transportation Atlas Data for ports and navigable waterways. Not all of the
available surrogates are used to spatially allocate sources in the 2007 platform; that is, some surrogates
shown in Table 3-10 were not assigned to SCCs used in the 2007 platform. Alternative surrogates for ports
(801) and shipping lanes (802) were developed from the 2008 NEI shapefiles: Ports_032310_wrf and
ShippingLanes_111309FINAL_wrf. These new surrogates were used in the 2007 platform for c1 and c2
commercial marine emissions instead of the standard 800 and 810 surrogates, respectively. Note that the 800
surrogate was used for nonpoint SCCs starting with 250502, which are related to the storage and transfer of
petroleum products.

Specific updates made to the surrogates for the Tier 3 runs include updating of the land use-based 300-series
surrogates, gas stations (600), construction and mining (861), and dry cleaners (880). Updates to the oil and
gas surrogates (689-699) were made as described below, and updated surrogates were used for Mexico.

The creation of surrogates and shapefiles for the U.S. was generated via the Surrogate Tool. The tool and
updated documentation for it is available at http://www.ie.unc.edu/cempd/projects/mims/spatial/ and
http://www.cmascenter.org/help/documentation.cfm?MODEL=spatial_allocator&VERSION=3.6&temp_id=
99999. Note that the surrogate methodology “gapfills” surrogates with less spatial coverage in terms of
counties with surrogates that have more spatial coverage. This helps ensure no emissions are dropped during
SMOKE processing. Because the land use-based surrogates were updated and are used to gapfill many
other surrogates, there were some changes to most of the remaining 500 and 600 series surrogates in terms of
using new gapfiling values.

For the onroad sector, the on-network (RPD) emissions were spatially allocated to roadways, which the off-
network (RPP and RPV) emissions were allocated to parking areas. For the onroad_rfl sector, the emissions
were spatially allocated to gas station locations.

37
For the oil and gas sources in the nonpt sector, the WRAP Phase III sources have detailed basin-specific
spatial surrogates shown in Table 3-11. The remaining oil and gas sources used the 2005-based surrogate
“Oil & Gas Wells, IHS Energy, Inc. and USGS” (680) developed for oil and gas SCCs. The surrogates in
Table 3-11 were applied for the counties listed in Table 3-12. For the Tier 3 runs, surrogate data for the
Permian basin was added.
Table 3-11. Spatial Surrogates for WRAP Oil and Gas Data
Country Code Surrogate Description
USA 699 Gas production at CBM wells
USA 698 Well count - gas wells
USA 697 Oil production at gas wells
USA 696 Gas production at gas wells
USA 695 Well count - oil wells
USA 694 Oil production at Oil wells
USA 693 Well count - all wells
USA 692 Spud count
USA 691 Well count - CBM wells
USA 690 Oil production at all wells
USA 689 Gas production at all wells

Table 3-12. Counties included in the WRAP Dataset

FIPS State County FIPS State County FIPS State County
08001 CO Adams 08103 CO Rio Blanco 48107 TX Crosby
08005 CO Arapahoe 08107 CO Routt 48109 TX Culberson
08007 CO Archuleta 08115 CO Sedgwick 48115 TX Dawson
08013 CO Boulder 08121 CO Washington 48125 TX Dickens
08014 CO Broomfield 08123 CO Weld 48135 TX Ector
08029 CO Delta 08125 CO Yuma 48141 TX El Paso
08031 CO Denver 30003 MT Big Horn 48151 TX Fisher
08039 CO Elbert 30075 MT Powder River 48165 TX Gaines
08043 CO Fremont 35005 NM Chaves 48169 TX Garza
08045 CO Garfield 35015 NM Eddy 48173 TX Glasscock
08051 CO Gunnison 35015 NM Lea 48219 TX Hockley
08059 CO Jefferson 35031 NM Mc Kinley 48227 TX Howard
08063 CO Kit Carson 35039 NM Rio Arriba 48229 TX Hudspeth
08067 CO La Plata 35041 NM Roosevelt 48235 TX Irion
08069 CO Larimer 35043 NM Sandoval 48263 TX Kent
08073 CO Lincoln 35045 NM San Juan 48269 TX King
08075 CO Logan 48003 TX Andrews 48301 TX Loving
08077 CO Mesa 48033 TX Borden 48303 TX Lubbock
08081 CO Moffat 48079 TX Cochran 48305 TX Lynn
08087 CO Morgan 48081 TX Coke 48317 TX Martin
08095 CO Phillips 48103 TX Crane 48329 TX Midland
08097 CO Pitkin 48105 TX Crockett 48335 TX Mitchell

38
 FIPS State County FIPS State County FIPS State County
48353 TX Nolan 49007 UT Carbon 56023 WY Lincoln
48371 TX Pecos 49009 UT Daggett 56025 WY Natrona
48383 TX Reagan 49013 UT Duchesne 56027 WY Niobrara
48389 TX Reeves 49015 UT Emery 56033 WY Sheridan
48413 TX Schleicher 49019 UT Grand 56035 WY Sublette
48415 TX Scurry 49043 UT Summit 56037 WY Sweetwater
48431 TX Sterling 49047 UT Uintah 56041 WY Uinta
48435 TX Sutton 56001 WY Albany 56045 WY Weston
48445 TX Terry 56005 WY Campbell
48451 TX Tom Green 56007 WY Carbon
48461 TX Upton 56009 WY Converse
48475 TX Ward 56011 WY Crook
48495 TX Winkler 56013 WY Fremont
48501 TX Yoakum 56019 WY Johnson

3.4.2 Allocation method for airport-related sources in the U.S.

There are numerous airport-related emission sources in the 2008 NEI, such as aircraft, airport ground support
equipment, and jet refueling. The 2007 platform includes the aircraft emissions as point sources. For the
2007 platform, the SMOKE “area-to-point” approach was used for airport ground support equipment
(nonroad sector) and jet refueling (nonpt sector). The approach is described in detail in the 2002 platform
documentation: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/reports/Emissions%20TSD%20Vol1_02-28-08.pdf.

The ARTOPNT file that lists the nonpoint sources to locate using point data was unchanged from the 2005-
based platform.

3.4.3 Surrogates for Canada and Mexico emission inventories

The Mexican spatial surrogates were updated from the 207v5 platform to use the surrogates shown in Table
3-13. The same surrogates for Canada were used to spatially allocate the 2006 Canadian emissions as were
used for the 2005v4.2 platform. The spatial surrogate data came from Environment Canada, along with cross
references. The surrogates they provided were outputs from the Surrogate Tool (previously referenced). Per
Environment Canada, the surrogates are based on 2001 Canadian census data. The Canadian surrogates used
for this platform are listed in Table 3-14. We added the leading “9” to the surrogate codes to avoid duplicate
surrogate numbers with U.S. surrogates.

Table 3-13. Spatial Surrogates for Mexico

Srg code Description
22 MEX Total Road Miles
10 MEX Population
12 MEX Housing
14 MEX Residential Heating - Wood
16 MEX Residential Heating - Distillate Oil

39
 20 MEX Residential Heating - LP Gas
22 MEX Total Road Miles
24 MEX Total Railroads Miles
26 MEX Total Agriculture
28 MEX Forest Land
32 MEX Commercial Land
34 MEX Industrial Land
36 MEX Commercial plus Industrial Land
38 MEX Commercial plus Institutional Land
Residential (RES1-
4)+Comercial+Industrial+Institutional+
40 Government
42 MEX Personal Repair (COM3)
44 MEX Airports Area
46 MEX Marine Ports
48 Brick Kilns - Mexico
50 Mobile sources - Border Crossing - Mexico

Table 3-14. Canadian Spatial Surrogates for 2007-based platform Canadian Emissions
Code Description Code Description
9100 Population 9493 Warehousing and storage
9101 Total dwelling 9494 Total Transport and warehouse
9102 Urban dwelling 9511 Publishing and information services
9103 Rural dwelling 9512 Motion picture and sound recording industries

9104 Total Employment 9513 Broadcasting and telecommunications

9106 ALL_INDUST 9514 Data processing services
9111 Farms 9516 Total Info and culture
9113 Forestry and logging 9521 Monetary authorities - central bank
9114 Fishing hunting and trapping 9522 Credit intermediation activities
9115 Agriculture and forestry activities 9523 Securities commodity contracts and other
financial investment activities
9116 Total Resources 9524 Insurance carriers and related activities
9211 Oil and Gas Extraction 9526 Funds and other financial vehicles
9212 Mining except oil and gas 9528 Total Banks
9213 Mining and Oil and Gas Extract activities 9531 Real estate
9219 Mining-unspecified 9532 Rental and leasing services
9221 Total Mining 9533 Lessors of non-financial intangible assets
(except copyrighted works)
9222 Utilities 9534 Total Real estate
9231 Construction except land subdivision and land 9541 Professional scientific and technical services
development
9232 Land subdivision and land development 9551 Management of companies and enterprises

40
Code Description Code Description
9233 Total Land Development 9561 Administrative and support services
9308 Food manufacturing 9562 Waste management and remediation services

9309 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 9611 Education Services

9313 Textile mills 9621 Ambulatory health care services
9314 Textile product mills 9622 Hospitals
9315 Clothing manufacturing 9623 Nursing and residential care facilities
9316 Leather and allied product manufacturing 9624 Social assistance
9321 Wood product manufacturing 9625 Total Service
9322 Paper manufacturing 9711 Performing arts spectator sports and related
industries
9323 Printing and related support activities 9712 Heritage institutions
9324 Petroleum and coal products manufacturing 9713 Amusement gambling and recreation
industries
9325 Chemical manufacturing 9721 Accommodation services
9326 Plastics and rubber products manufacturing 9722 Food services and drinking places
9327 Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing 9723 Total Tourism
9331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 9811 Repair and maintenance
9332 Fabricated metal product manufacturing 9812 Personal and laundry services
9333 Machinery manufacturing 9813 Religious grant-making civic and professional
and similar organizations
9334 Computer and Electronic manufacturing 9814 Private households
9335 Electrical equipment appliance and component 9815 Total other services
manufacturing
9336 Transportation equipment manufacturing 9911 Federal government public administration
9337 Furniture and related product manufacturing 9912 Provincial and territorial public administration
(9121 to 9129)
9338 Miscellaneous manufacturing 9913 Local municipal and regional public
administration (9131 to 9139)
9339 Total Manufacturing 9914 Aboriginal public administration
9411 Farm product wholesaler-distributors 9919 International and other extra-territorial public
administration
9412 Petroleum product wholesaler-distributors 9920 Total Government
9413 Food beverage and tobacco wholesaler- 9921 Commercial Fuel Combustion
distributors
9414 Personal and household goods wholesaler- 9922 TOTAL DISTRIBUTION AND RETAIL
distributors
9415 Motor vehicle and parts wholesaler-distributors 9923 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL AND
GOVERNEMNT
9416 Building material and supplies wholesaler- 9924 Primary Industry
distributors
9417 Machinery equipment and supplies wholesaler- 9925 Manufacturing and Assembly
distributors

41
Code Description Code Description
9418 Miscellaneous wholesaler-distributors 9926 Distribution and Retail (no petroleum)
9419 Wholesale agents and brokers 9927 Commercial Services
9420 Total Wholesale 9928 Commercial Meat cooking
9441 Motor vehicle and parts dealers 9929 HIGHJET
9442 Furniture and home furnishings stores 9930 LOWMEDJET
9443 Electronics and appliance stores 9931 OTHERJET
9444 Building material and garden equipment and 9932 CANRAIL
supplies dealers
9445 Food and beverage stores 9933 Forest fires
9446 Health and personal care stores 9941 PAVED ROADS
9447 Gasoline stations 9942 UNPAVED ROADS
9448 clothing and clothing accessories stores 9943 HIGHWAY
9451 Sporting goods hobby book and music stores 9944 ROAD
9452 General Merchandise stores 9945 Commercial Marine Vessels
9453 Miscellaneous store retailers 9946 Construction and mining
9454 Non-store retailers 9947 Agriculture Construction and mining
9455 Total Retail 9950 Intersection of Forest and Housing
9481 Air transportation 9960 TOTBEEF
9482 Rail transportation 9970 TOTPOUL
9483 Water Transportation 9980 TOTSWIN
9484 Truck transportation 9990 TOTFERT
9485 Transit and ground passenger transportation 9993 Trail
9486 Pipeline transportation 9994 ALLROADS
9487 Scenic and sightseeing transportation 9995 30UNPAVED_70trail
9488 Support activities for transportation 9996 Urban area
9491 Postal service 9997 CHBOISQC
9492 Couriers and messengers 9991 Traffic

42
4 Development of Future Year Emissions
This section describes the methods used for developing the emissions for the 2018 and 2030 future-year
scenarios. Within the 2018 and 2030 cases, the future year emissions for the Tier 3 FRM “reference” and
“control” cases are the same for all stationary sources. For 2018 and 2030, the Tier 3 FRM control case
emissions include Tier 3 engine and fuel controls that impact emissions for onroad mobile and nonroad
mobile sources. EPA analyzed emission impacts of the Tier 3 vehicle emissions and fuel standards by
comparing projected emissions for future years without the Tier 3 rule (reference scenario) to projected
emissions for future years with the Tier 3 standards in place (control scenario). For more details on the
differences between the reference and control scenarios, see the onroad and nonroad sections (Section 4.3.1
and 4.3.2, respectively).

The future scenarios’ projection methodologies vary by sector. The 2018 and 2030 reference scenarios
represent predicted emissions in the absence of any further controls beyond those Federal and State measures
already promulgated, or under reconsideration before emissions processing began in March, 2013. The
future base-case scenario reflects projected economic changes and fuel usage for EGU and mobile sectors.
The 2020 (used as a surrogate for 2018) and 2030 EGU projected inventories represent demand growth, fuel
resource availability, generating technology cost and performance, and other economic factors affecting
power sector behavior. It also reflects the expected 2020 and 2030 emissions effects due to environmental
rules and regulations, consent decrees and settlements, plant closures, control devices updated since 2007,
and forecast unit construction through the calendar year 2020 and 2030. In this analysis, the projected EGU
emissions include the Final Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule announced on December 21, 2011, the
Clean Air Interstate Rule issued on March 10, 2005, including impacts of electric vehicle penetration
resulting from the Light-duty Greenhouse Gas (LDGHG) Rule.

For the other mobile sources (c1c2rail and c3marine sectors), all national measures for which data were
available at the time of modeling have been included.

For nonEGU point (ptnonipm sector) and nonpoint stationary sources (nonpt, ag, and afdust sectors), local
control programs are generally not included in the future base-case projections for most states unless
information was provided by the states. One exception are some NOX and VOC reductions associated with
the New York, Virginia, and Connecticut State Implementation Plans (SIP), that were added as part of a
larger effort to start including more local control information on stationary non-EGU sources; this is
described further in Section 4.2. The following bullets summarize the projection methods used for sources in
the various sectors, while additional details and data sources are given in the following subsections and Table
4-1. For information on control/growth strategies that are not different from the 2007v5 platform, please
reference the 2007v5 TSD, available at:
http://epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/2007v5/2007v5_2020base_EmisMod_TSD_13dec2012.pdf

 IPM sector (ptipm): Unit-specific estimates from IPM, version 4.10 Final MATS with CAIR and the
penetration of electric vehicles anticipated due to the LDGHG rule.
 Non-IPM sector (ptnonipm): Projection factors and percent reductions reflect Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) comments and emission reductions due to national rules, control programs,
plant closures, consent decrees and settlements, and 1997 and 2001 ozone State Implementation Plans
in NY, CT, and VA. Also used projection approaches for corn ethanol and biodiesel plants, refineries
and upstream impacts from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). Terminal
area forecast (TAF) data aggregated to the national level were used for aircraft to account for
projected changes in landing/takeoff activity.
43
  Average fires sector (avefire): No growth or control.
 Agricultural sector (ag): Projection factors for livestock estimates based on expected changes in
animal population from 2005 Department of Agriculture data, updated based on personal
communication with EPA experts in July 2012; fertilizer application NH3 emissions projections
include upstream impacts EISA.
 Area fugitive dust sector (afdust): Projection factors for dust categories related to livestock estimates
based on expected changes in animal population and upstream impacts from EISA.
 Remaining Nonpoint sector (nonpt): Projection factors that implement Cross State Air Pollution Rule
comments and reflect emission reductions due to control programs. Residential wood combustion
projections are based on growth in lower-emitting stoves and a reduction in higher emitting stoves.
PFC projection factors reflecting impact of the final Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT2) rule.
Upstream impacts from EISA, including post-2007 cellulosic ethanol plants are also reflected.
 Nonroad mobile sector (nonroad): Other than for California, this sector uses data from a run of
NMIM that utilized NONROAD2008b, using future-year equipment population estimates and control
programs to the year 2018 and 2030 and using national level inputs. Fuels are consistent with the
onroad sector. Final controls from the final locomotive-marine and large spark ignition OTAQ rules
are included. California-specific data were provided by CARB.
 Locomotive, and non-Class 3 commercial marine sector (c1c2rail): For all states except California,
projection factors for Class 1 and Class 2 commercial marine and locomotives which reflect final
locomotive-marine controls. California projected year-2017 (used for 2018) and 2030 inventory data
were provided by CARB. Additional RFS2-related county-level emissions adjustments were applied
to reflect different fuel volume characteristics from increased ethanol fuel transport on rail and
commercial marine vessels.
 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (c3marine): Base-year 2007 emissions grown and controlled to
2018 and 2030, incorporating controls based on Emissions Control Area (ECA) and International
Marine Organization (IMO) global NOX and SO2 controls.
 Onroad mobile, not including refueling (onroad): focus of the rule, see Section 4.3.1.
 Onroad refueling mode (onroad_rfl): Uses the same projection approach as the onroad sector and
processing as described in Section 2.5.2.
 Other onroad (othar): No growth or control for Canada because data are not available from Canada.
Mexico inventory data were grown from 1999 to years 2018 and 2030.
 Other nonroad/nonpoint (othon): No growth or control for Canada. Mexico inventory data were
grown from 1999 to years 2018 and 2030.
 Other point (othpt): No growth or control for Canada and offshore oil. Mexico inventory data were
grown from 1999 to years 2018 and 2030.
 Biogenic: 2007 emissions used for all future-year scenarios.

Table 4-1 summarizes the control strategies and growth assumptions by source type that were used to create
the U.S. 2018 and 2030 scenario emissions from the 2007 base-case inventories. The control, closures,
projection packets (datasets) used to create stationary non-EGU and c1c2rail sector 2018 and 2030 future
years scenario inventories from the 2007 base case are described in the following sections. These datasets
(i.e., “packets”) were processed through the EPA Control Strategy Tool (CoST) to create future year
inventories. CoST is described here: http://www.epa.gov/ttnecas1/cost.htm.

44
The remainder of this section is organized either by source sector or by specific emissions category within a
source sector for which a distinct set of data were used or developed for the purpose of projections for the
2018 and 2030 scenarios. This organization allows consolidation of the discussion of the emissions
categories that are contained in multiple sectors, because the data and approaches used across the sectors are
consistent and do not need to be repeated. Sector names associated with the emissions categories are
provided in parentheses. If a strategy is identical to the 2007v5 platform, it is noted in the Section as
“2007v5” and is documented in the 2007v5 TSD.
Table 4-1. Control strategies and growth assumptions for creating the 2018 and 2030 emissions inventories
from the 2007 base case
Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions CAPs
(grouped by standard and approach used to apply to the inventory) affected Section
Non-EGU Point (ptnonipm sector) Controls and Growth Assumptions
Ethanol plants that account for increased ethanol production due to EISA mandate Error!
Referen
ce
All
source
not
found.
Biodiesel plants producing 1.6 billion gallons of production due to EISA mandate All 4.2.1.2
Ethanol distribution vapor losses adjustments due to EISA mandate VOC 0
Refinery upstream adjustments from EISA mandate All 4.2.1.7
Livestock emissions growth from year 2008 to 2018 and 2030, also including upstream RFS2
All 4.2.2
impacts on agricultural-related activities such as pesticide and fertilizer production
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP with reconsiderations NOX,
CO, PM, 2007v5
SO2
State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil – as of July, 2012, effective only in Maine, Massachusetts, SO2
4.2.3
New Jersey, New York and Vermont
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters MACT with Reconsideration CO, PM,
Amendments SO2, 2007v5
VOC
NESHAP: Portland Cement (09/09/10) – plant level based on Industrial Sector Integrated Solutions All
(ISIS) policy emissions in 2013. The ISIS results are from the ISIS-Cement model runs for the 4.2.4
NESHAP and NSPS analysis of July 28, 2010 and include closures.
Future baseline inventory improvements received from a 2005 platform NODA and comments from All
4.2.5
the CSAPR proposal, including local controls, fuel switching, unit closures and consent decrees

Facility and unit closures obtained from various sources such as states, industry and web posting, All
2007v5
EPA staff and post-2008 inventory submittals: effective prior to spring 2012

Aircraft growth via Itinerant (ITN) operations at airports to 2018 and 2030 All 4.2.6.1
Emission reductions resulting from controls put on specific boiler units (not due to MACT) after
2008, identified through analysis of the control data gathered from the Information Collection SO2 2007v5
Request (ICR) from the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boiler NESHAP.
New York ozone SIP controls NOX 2007v5
Boat Manufacturing MACT rule, VOC: national applied by SCC VOC 2007v5
NOX,
Lafarge and Saint Gobain consent decrees 2007v5
PM, SO2
CO,
Consent decrees on companies (based on information from the Office of Enforcement and NOX,
2007v5
Compliance Assurance – OECA) apportioned to plants owned/operated by the companies PM, SO2,
VOC
Refinery Consent Decrees: plant/unit controls NOX, 2007v5
45
Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions CAPs
(grouped by standard and approach used to apply to the inventory) affected Section
SO2
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) revised NSPS PM, SO2 2007v5
Hazardous Waste Incineration (HWI), Phase I and II PM 2007v5
Nonpoint (afdust, ag and nonpt sectors) Controls and Growth Assumptions
MSAT2 and RFS2 impacts on portable fuel container growth and control from 2007 to 2018 and
VOC 0
2030
Cellulosic ethanol and diesel emissions from EISA mandate All 4.2.1.4
Ethanol transport working losses inventory from EISA mandate VOC 0
Ethanol distribution vapor losses adjustments due to EISA mandate VOC 0
Livestock emissions growth from year 2008 to 2018 and 2030, also including upstream RFS2
All 4.2.2
impacts on agricultural-related activities such as pesticide and fertilizer production
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) NESHAP with reconsiderations NOX,
CO, PM, 2007v5
SO2
State fuel sulfur content rules for fuel oil –as of July, 2012, effective only in Maine, Massachusetts,
SO2 4.2.3
New Jersey, New York and Vermont
Residential wood combustion growth and change-outs from year 2008 to 2018 All 2007v5
Future baseline inventory improvements received from a 2005 platform NODA and comments from NOX,
4.2.5
the CSAPR proposal, reflecting local controls VOC
New York ozone SIP controls 2007v5Er
ror!
Referen
NOX ce
source
not
found.
Texas oil and gas projections to year 2018 All 4.2.6.2
Onroad Mobile Controls
(All national in-force regulations are modeled. The list includes key recent mobile control strategies but is
not exhaustive.)
National Onroad Rules:
All onroad control programs finalized as of the date of the model run, including most recently:
Light-Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule: October, 2012
Heavy (and Medium)-Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule: September, 2011
Renewable Fuel Standard: March, 2010
Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule: May, 2010 All 4.3
Corporate-Average Fuel Economy standards for 2008-2011, April, 2010
2007 Onroad Heavy-Duty Rule: February, 2009
Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2): February, 2007
Tier 2 Rule: Signature date February, 2000
National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV): March, 1998
Local Onroad Programs:
California LEVIII Program
Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV Program: January,1995
VOC 4.3
Inspection and Maintenance programs
Fuel programs (also affect gasoline nonroad equipment)
Stage II refueling control programs
Nonroad Mobile Controls
(All national in-force regulations are modeled. The list includes recent key mobile control strategies but is
not exhaustive.)
National Nonroad Controls:
All 4.3.2
All nonroad control programs finalized as of the date of the model run, including most recently:

46
Control Strategies and/or growth assumptions CAPs
(grouped by standard and approach used to apply to the inventory) affected Section
Emissions Standards for New Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines, Equipment, and Vessels: October,
2008
Control of Emissions from Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engines, and Recreational Engines
(Marine and Land-Based), November 8, 200227
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4: June, 200428
Locomotives:
Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines
All 4.3.3
Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder: March, 2008
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4: May, 2004
Commercial Marine:
Category 3 marine diesel engines Clean Air Act and International Maritime Organization standards:
April, 2010
All 4.3.4
Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotives and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines
Less than 30 Liters per Cylinder: March, 2008
Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Final Rule – Tier 4: May, 2004

The ancillary input data in the future-year scenarios are very similar to those used in the 2007 base case
except for the speciation profiles used for gasoline-related sources, which change in the future to account for
increased ethanol usage in gasoline (see Section 3.2.1.4 for details).

4.1 Stationary source projections: EGU sector (ptipm)

The future-year data for the ptipm sector used in the air quality modeling were created by the Integrated
Planning Model (IPM) version 4.10 (v4.10) Final MATS (Mercury and Air Toxics Standards)
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/toxics.html). IPM is a multiregional, dynamic,
deterministic linear programming model of the U.S. electric power sector. IPM 4.10 was updated from the
previous version to include adjustments to assumptions regarding the performance of acid gas control
technologies, new costs imposed on fuel-switching (e.g., bituminous to sub-bituminous), correction of lignite
availability to some plants, incorporation of planned retirements, implementation of a scrubber upgrade
option, and the availability of a scrubber retrofit to waste-coal fired fluidized bed combustion units without
an existing scrubber.

The scenario used for this modeling represents CAIR, MATS, and the penetration of electric vehicles
anticipated due to the LDGHG rule. IPM v4.10 Final MATS originally included the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR), but the rule was stayed by the D.C. circuit court pending judicial review.
Therefore, the original CAIR rule was included in the run for this project. Electric vehicle penetration
expected from the Light-duty Greenhouse Gas Rule was also included.

The Boiler MACT reconsideration was not represented in the 2020 IPM dataset because the rule was not
final at the time the IPM modeling was performed. Further details on the future-year EGU emissions
inventory used for this rule can be found in the incremental documentation of the IPM v.4.10 platform,
available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/transport.html. .

While NOx, SO2, and mercury are specific outputs from IPM, directly emitted PM emissions (i.e., PM2.5 and
PM10) from the EGU sector are computed via a post processing routine that applies emission factors to the

27
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2002/11/08/02-23801/control-of-emissions-from-nonroad-large-spark-ignition-engines-
and-recreational-engines-marine-and
28
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/nonroad-diesel.htm
47
IPM-estimated fuel throughput based on fuel, configuration and controls to compute the filterable and
condensable components of PM.

4.2 Stationary source projections: non-EGU sectors (ptnonipm, nonpt, ag,

afdust)
To project U.S. stationary sources other than the ptipm sector, EPA applied growth factors and/or controls to
certain categories within the ptnonipm, nonpt, ag and afdust platform sectors. This subsection provides
details on the data and projection methods used for these sectors. In estimating future-year emissions, EPA
assumed that emissions growth does not track with economic growth for many stationary non-IPM sources.
This “no-growth” assumption is based on an examination of historical emissions and economic data. For
more details on the projection methodology and justification for the approaches, see the 2007v5 TSD.

Year-specific projection factors (PROJECTION packets) for year 2018 and 2030 were used for creating the
scenarios unless noted otherwise. The contents of these projection packets (and control reductions) are
provided in the following sections where feasible. However, some sectors used growth or control factors
that varied geographically and their contents could not be provided in the following sections (e.g., facilities
and units subject to the Boiler MACT reconsideration has thousands of records). If the growth or control
factors for a sector are not provided in a table in this document, they are available as a “projection”,
“control”, or “closures” packet for input to SMOKE on the 2007v5 platform website. This document only
summarizes the impact of controls and projections that differ between Tier 3 and the previous modeling for
PM NAAQS (2007v5 platform). The following projection, control or closure packets had identical or nearly
identical impact in 2018 (as well as 2030) for Tier 3 as in 2020 of PM NAAQS modeling and are detailed in
the 2007v5 TSD:
 RICE NESHAP
 Industrial Boiler MACT reconsideration
 Residential wood combustion growth
 Remaining non-EGU plant closures
 Boiler reductions not associated with the MACT rule
 NY Ozone SIP controls
 Boat manufacturing MACT
 Lafarge and St Gobain settlements
 OECA consent decrees
 Refinery consent decrees
 CISWI/HWI controls

This section is divided into several subsections that are summarized in Table 4-2. Note that for some
sources, future year inventories were used rather than projection or control packets.

48
 Table 4-2. Summary of non-EGU stationary projections subsections
Subsection Title Sector(s) Brief Description
4.2.1 RFS2 upstream future year nonpt 1) Point and non-point inventories received from
inventories and ptnonipm OTAQ that account for the upstream impact of
adjustments the RFS2 and the EISA mandate.
2) Point and non-point adjustment factors that we
apply to the 2007 inventory to reflect RFS2
4.2.2 Agricultural and livestock afdust, ag, Adjustment factors to all ag-related sources that also
adjustments, including nonpt, reflect upstream RFS2 impacts on ag-related
RFS2 ptnonipm processes impacted by increased ethanol use
Error! Fuel sulfur rules nonpt Control packet reflecting state and local fuel sulfur
Reference ptnonipm rules, including ULSD
source not
found.
4.2.3 Portland cement NESHAP ptnonipm Year-2013 ISIS policy case reflecting closures,
projections controls at existing kilns and an inventory containing
new kilns constructed after 2008 that account for
shifting capacity from some closed units to open units
Error! CSAPR and NODA nonpt Post-2008 controls, adjustments, and closures
Reference comments ptnonipm received in response to preparing the 2005 NEI for a
source not future year baseline. These are not reflective of
found. CSAPR; but rather of non-EGU future year
information received from comments.
4.2.4 All other PROJECTION nonpt All other non-EGU stationary source PROJECTION
and CONTROL packets ptnonipm and CONTROL packets not covered in previous
subsections.

4.2.1 RFS2 upstream future year inventories and adjustments (nonpt, ptnonipm)
EPA incorporated adjustments for some stationary source categories to account for impacts of the Energy
Independence and Security Act (EISA) renewable fuel standards mandate in the Renewable Fuel Standards
Program (RFS2; EPA, 2010a) ), as estimated by Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2013, as well as impacts of
recent 2017-2025 light duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and heavy-duty greenhouse gas
standards. These mandates not only impact emissions associated with highway vehicles and nonroad engines,
but also emissions associated with point and nonpoint sources. The "upstream" emission impacts of the
renewable fuels mandate are associated with all stages of biofuel production and distribution, including
biomass production (agriculture, forestry), fertilizer and pesticide production and transport, biomass
transport, biomass refining (corn or cellulosic ethanol production facilities), biofuel transport to
blending/distribution terminals, and distribution of finished fuels to retail outlets. These impacts are
accounted for in the 2018 and 2030 inventories. A portion of these impacts are discussed in this section,
with additional impacts due to transport discussed in the onroad and c1c2rail sectors (see Section 4.3.1.1 and
4.3.3, respectively). There are also impacts on domestic crude emissions upstream of petroleum refineries,
due to displacement of gasoline and diesel fuel with biofuels, but these are not accounted for in these
projections as these data were not available. Greenhouse gas standards also affect production and
distribution of gasoline and diesel fuels, but the impacts of these rules will be very small in 2018 and were
not accounted for. Where it was feasible, EPA included the impact of these greenhouse gas standards in the
2030 estimates.

49
EPA assumed that an unadjusted 2018 inventory, which does not account for the impacts of the EISA
renewable fuel mandate, would have comparable ethanol volumes to 2007, approximately 6.9 billion gallons.
However, analyses done to support the RFS2 rule (EPA, 2010a) suggest a significant increase in renewable
fuel volumes in 2018 and 2030 (see Table 4-3). Adjustments applied to the inventories (described in the
following subsections) reflect the impacts on emissions due to the difference between the 2007 ethanol
volumes and the renewable fuel volumes shown in Table 4-3. In 2018, EPA assumed 1 Bgal (billion gallons)
of ethanol would be used as E85, 10 Bgal as E10, and about 4 Bgal as E15. In 2030, EPA assumed 1.4 Bgal
of ethanol would be used as E85, 6.8 Bgal as E10, and 6.5 Bgal as E15.
Table 4-3. Renewable Fuel Volumes Assumed for Stationary Source Adjustments.
Renewable Fuel 2018 Volume (Bgal) 2030 Volume (Bgal)
Corn Ethanol 14.7 14.4
Cellulosic Ethanol 0.235 0.235
Imported Ethanol 1.061 0.707
Biodiesel 1.887 1.887
Renewable Diesel 0.236 1.179
Cellulosic Diesel 0.290 0.915

4.2.1.1 Corn Ethanol plants inventory (ptnonipm)

Future year inventories: “ethanol_plants_2018_NEI” and “ethanol_plants_2018_OTAQ_revised”

As discussed in Section 2.1.2, EPA supplemented the 2007 NEI with corn ethanol plants that EPA/OTAQ
developed. The 2007 emissions were projected to account for the increased domestic corn ethanol
production assumed in this modeling, specifically an increase from 6.9 Bgal in 2007 to approximately 15
Bgal in 2018 and 2030. An industry characterization (EPA, 2012b) was also used to project the 2007
inventory to future years, based on new plants, changes in production capacity since 2007, or changes in
progress. Table 4-4 provides the summaries of estimated emissions for the corn ethanol plants in year 2007
and 201829. Note, EPA estimated the same amount of ethanol plant production in the future years for 2018
and 2030 and assumed that the control scenarios would have limited to no impact on the ethanol production.

Table 4-4. 2007 and 2018/2030 corn ethanol plant emissions [tons]
pollutant 2007 2018/2030
1,3-Butadiene 0.0015 0.0021
Acrolein 30 70
Formaldehyde 31 65
Benzene 13 26
Acetaldehyde 746 857
Naphthalene 0.028 0.030
CO 12,821 21,811
NH3 1,036 1,072
NOX 13,403 25,618
PM10 11,468 21,054
PM2.5 4,452 7,827
SO2 16,930 20,235

29
The 2007 emissions are the sum of the NEI and OTAQ facilities. The same is true for 2018.
50
 VOC 19,271 41,146

4.2.1.2 Biodiesel plants inventory (ptnonipm)

New Future year inventory: “Biodiesel_Plants_2018_ff10”

EPA/OTAQ developed an inventory of biodiesel plants for 2018 and 2030. Plant location and production
volume data came from the Tier 3 proposed rule.30,31 The total volume of biodiesel came from the AEO
2013 early release, 1.3 BG for 2018 and 2030. To reach the total volume of biodiesel, plants that had current
production volumes were assumed to be at 100% production and the remaining volume was split among
plants with planned production. These emission factors in Table 4-5 are in tons per million gallons (Mgal)
and were obtained from EPA’s spreadsheet model for upstream EISA impacts developed for the RFS2 rule
(EPA, 2010a). Inventories were modeled as point sources with Google Earth and web searching validating
facility coordinates and correcting state-county FIPS. Table 4-6 provides the 2018 and 2030 biodiesel plant
emissions estimates. Emissions in 2007 are assumed to be near zero, and HAP emissions in 2018 and 2030
are nearly zero. Note, EPA estimated the same amount of biodiesel plant production in the future years for
2018 and 2030 and assumed that the control scenarios would have limited to no impact on the biodiesel
production.

Table 4-5. Emission Factors for Biodiesel Plants (Tons/Mgal)

Pollutant Emission Factor
VOC 4.3981E-02
CO 5.0069E-01
NOX 8.0790E-01
PM10 6.8240E-02
PM2.5 6.8240E-02
SO2 5.9445E-03
NH3 0
Acetaldehyde 2.4783E-07
Acrolein 2.1290E-07
Benzene 3.2458E-08
1,3-Butadiene 0
Formaldehyde 1.5354E-06
Ethanol 0

Table 4-6. 2018/2030 biodiesel plant emissions [tons]

Pollutant 2018/2030
CO 649
NOX 1048
PM10 89
PM2.5 89
SO2 8

30
US EPA 2013. Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis for Tier 3 Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards Program. EPA-420-D-13-002.
31
Cook, R. 2012. Development of Air Quality Reference Case Upstream and Portable Fuel Container Inventories for Tier 3
Proposal. Memorandum to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162.
51
 VOC 57

4.2.1.3 Portable fuel container inventory (nonpt)

Future year inventories: “2018_PFC_inventory_FF10_revision2”, “2030_PFC_inventory_FF10_revision2”

EPA used future-year VOC emissions from Portable Fuel Containers (PFCs) from inventories developed and
modeled for the EPA’s MSAT2 rule (EPA, 2007a). The 10 PFC SCCs are summarized below (note that the
full SCC descriptions for these SCCs include “Storage and Transport; Petroleum and Petroleum Product
Storage” as the beginning of the description).

 2501011011 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Permeation

 2501011012 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Evaporation
 2501011013 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Spillage During Transport
 2501011014 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement
 2501011015 Residential Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Spillage
 2501012011 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Permeation
 2501012012 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Evaporation
 2501012013 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Spillage During Transport
 2501012014 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Vapor Displacement
 2501012015 Commercial Portable Fuel Containers: Refilling at the Pump: Spillage

The large majority of spillage emissions occur when refueling equipment, and this is already included in the
nonroad equipment inventory. Thus we did not include these emissions in the PFC inventory for this rule.
Vapor displacement for nonroad equipment container refueling was also subtracted from vapor displacement
in the PFC inventory to avoid double counting these emissions. The future-year emissions reflect projected
increases in fuel consumption, state programs to reduce PFC emissions, standards promulgated in the
MSAT2 rule, and impacts of the EISA on gasoline volatility. OTAQ provided year 2018 and 2030 PFC
emissions that include estimated Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) and oxygenate impacts on VOC emissions, and
more importantly, large increases in ethanol emissions from EISA. Because the future year PFC inventories
contain ethanol in addition to benzene, EPA developed a VOC E-profile that integrated ethanol and benzene;
see Section 3.2.1.1 and Section 3.2.1.4for more details. Emissions for 2007, 2018, and 2030 are provided in
Table 4-7.

Table 4-7. PFC emissions for 2007, 2018, and 2030 [tons]
pollutant 2007 2018 2030
Benzene 1,049 645 829
Naphthalene 0.6 7.1 9.3
Ethanol 3,719 4,969
VOC 220,472 29,119 37,947

4.2.1.4 Cellulosic fuel production inventory (nonpt)

New Future year inventories: “2018_cellulosic_inventory”, “2030_cellulosic_inventory”

Depending on available feedstock, cellulosic plants are likely to produce fuel through either a biochemical
process or a thermochemical process. OTAQ developed county-level inventories for biochemical and
thermochemical cellulosic fuel production for 2018 and 2030 to reflect AEO2013 (early release) renewable
fuel volumes. Emissions factors for each cellulosic biofuel refinery reflect the fuel production technology
used rather than the fuel produced. Emission rates in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9 were used to develop
52
 cellulosic plant inventories. Criteria pollutant emission rates are in tons per RIN gallon. Emission factors
from the cellulosic diesel work in the Tier 3 NPRM were used as the emission factors for the
thermochemical plants in the FRM modeling. Cellulosic ethanol VOC and related HAP emission factors
from the Tier 3 NPRM were used as the biochemical VOC and related HAP emission factors. Because the
future year cellulosic inventory contains ethanol, we developed a VOC E-profile that integrated ethanol, see
Sections 3.2.1.1 and 3.2.1.3 for more details.

Plants were treated as area sources spread across the entire area of whatever county they were considered to
be located in. Cellulosic biofuel refinery siting was based on utilizing the lowest cost feedstock, accounting
for the cost of the feedstock itself as well as feedstock storage and the transportation of the feedstock to the
cellulosic biofuel refinery. The total number of cellulosic biofuel refineries was projected using volumes
from AEO2013 (early release). The methodology used to determine most likely plant locations is described
in Section 1.8.1.3 of the RFS2 RIA (EPA, 2010a). Table 4-10 provides the 2018 and 2030 cellulosic plant
emissions estimates.
Table 4-8. Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors for Cellulosic Plants (Tons/RIN gallon)
Cellulosic Plant VOC CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 SOx NH3
Type
Thermochemical 5.92E-07 8.7E-06 1.31E-05 1.56E-06 7.81E-07 1.17E-06 1.44E-10
Biochemical 1.82E-06 1.29E-05 1.85E-05 3.08E-06 1.23E-06 6.89E-07 0

Table 4-9. Toxic Emission Factors for Cellulosic Plants (Tons/RIN gallon)
Plant Type Acetaldehyde Acrolein Benzene 1,3-Butadiene Formaldehyde Ethanol
Thermochemical 2.95E-08 1.27E-09 9.61E-10 0 5.07E-09 2.09E-07
Biochemical 3.98E-07 1.11E-08 1.39E-08 0 2.28E-08 6.41E-07

Table 4-10. 2018 and 2030 cellulosic plant emissions [tons]

pollutant 2018 2030
Acrolein 0.9 3.1
Formaldehyde 3.5 10.3
Benzene 0.7 2.9
Acetaldehyde 20.6 86.1
CO 6,087 15,196
Ethanol 146 397
NH3 0.1 0.2
NOX 9,199 22,867
PM10 1,088 2,792
PM2.5 547 1,372
SO2 819 1,941
VOC 414 1,125

4.2.1.5 Ethanol working loss inventory (nonpt)

New Future year inventories: “Ethanol_transport_vapor_2018rg_ref”,
“Ethanol_transport_vapor_2030rg_ref”

53
These inventories were provided by OTAQ to represent upstream impacts of loading and unloading at
ethanol terminals. Emissions are entirely evaporative and were computed by county for truck, rail and
waterway loading and unloading and intermodal transfers (e.g., highway to rail). Inventory totals are
summarized in Table 4-11. The leading descriptions are “Industrial Processes; Food and Agriculture;
Ethanol Production” for each SCC.
Table 4-11. 2018 and 2030 VOC working losses (Emissions) due to ethanol transport [tons]
SCC description 2018 2030
30205031 Denatured Ethanol Storage Working Loss 23,420 22,396
30205052 Ethanol Loadout to Truck 14,425 13,794
30205053 Ethanol Loadout to Railcar 10,484 10,025

4.2.1.6 Vapor losses from Ethanol transport and distribution (nonpt, ptnonipm)
Packets: “PROJECTION_2008_2018_distribution_upstream_OTAQ_Tier3FRM”,
“PROJECTION_2008_2030_distribution_upstream_OTAQ_Tier3FRM”
OTAQ developed county-level inventories for ethanol transport and distribution for 2018 and 2030 to
account for losses for the processes such as truck, rail and waterways loading/unloading and intermodal
transfers such as highway-to-rail, highways-to-waterways, and all other possible combinations of transfers.
These emissions are entirely evaporative and therefore limited to VOC and HAPs in VOC.

2018 and 2030 inventories which included EISA impacts were developed by adjusting the 2007 platform
inventory. Impacts of the light-duty greenhouse gas rule are small enough to ignore for 2018. EISA
adjustments were made using an updated version of EPA’s spreadsheet model for upstream emission
impacts, developed for the RFS2 rule32. The development of emission factors and fuel volumes to make
these adjustments with the RFS2 impacts spreadsheet are described below.

Vapor loss VOC emission factors (EFs) for gasoline were first developed, based on inventory estimates from
the 2005 NEI (EPA, 2009a). Total volume of gasoline was based on gasoline sales as reported by the Energy
Information Administration (2006). Emissions were partitioned into refinery to bulk terminal (RBT), bulk
plant storage (BPS), and bulk terminal to gasoline dispensing pump (BTP) components. Emissions for the
BTP component are greater than the RBT and BPS components.

Total nationwide emissions for these components were divided by the energy content of the total volume of
gasoline distributed in 2005 to obtain emission factors in grams per million metric British Thermal Units
(g/mmBTU). Total volume of gasoline was based on gasoline sales as reported by the Energy Information
Administration.33 In addition to gasoline VOC emission factors for the RBT/BPS components, emission
factors were developed for the BTP component, for 10% ethanol, 15% ethanol, and 85% ethanol. Emission
factors were calculated by applying adjustment factors to the gasoline EFs. The BTP adjustment factors
were based on an algorithm from the 1994 On-Board Refueling Vapor Recovery Rule (EPA, 1994):

EF (g/gal) = exp[-1.2798 - 0.0049(ΔT) + 0.0203(Td) + 0.1315(RVP)]

Here delta T is the difference in temperature between the fuel in the tank and the fuel being dispensed, and
Td is the temperature of the gasoline being dispensed. We assumed delta T is zero, and the temperature of
the fuel being dispensed averages 60 ºF over the year.
32
U.S. EPA. 2013. Spreadsheet “upstream_emissions_rev T3.xls.
33
Source: Energy Information Administration. 2006. Annual Energy Outlook 2006. Report #:DOE/EIA-0383(2006) Available at
<http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo06/aeoref_tab.html>
54
Average summer RVPs at the Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADD) level was used to
calculate adjustments. The U.S. is broken into five PADDs for petroleum products data collection purposes
via the U.S. Energy Information Administration; see: http://www.eia.gov/oog/info/twip/padddef.html. These
PADD regions are shown in Figure 4-1.
Figure 4-1. Map of Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADD)

All counties within a PADD received the same adjustment for BTP emissions. Volumes for each fuel type
and summer RVPs for 2018 with EISA impacts are provided in Table 4-12 while volumes without EISA are
in Table 4-13. Volumes with and without EISA for 2030 are provided in Table 4-14 and Table 4-16. These
volumes and RVPs were obtained from analyses done for the Tier 3 rule. These two sets of volumes were
used to estimate emissions using an updated version of the RFS2 impacts spreadsheet (EPA, 2013a).

55
 Table 4-12. RVPs Assumed for 2018 ethanol and gasoline volumes with EISA
Total E85(74)
Fuel Gasoline Ethanol E10 Only E15 Only Only Weighte Weighted Weighted Weighted
PADD Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume d RVP E10 RVP E15 RVP E85 RVP
1 4.50E+10 3.99E+10 5.18E+09 3.71E+10 7.43E+09 4.73E+08 8.536 8.651 8.056 7
2 3.46E+10 3.03E+10 4.25E+09 2.31E+10 1.11E+10 3.63E+08 9.051 9.35 8.493 7
3 2.14E+10 1.89E+10 2.48E+09 1.72E+10 3.95E+09 2.25E+08 8.399 8.515 7.973 7
4 5.07E+09 4.48E+09 5.89E+08 4.06E+09 9.53E+08 5.33E+07 9.322 9.536 8.536 7
5 2.35E+10 2.08E+10 2.71E+09 1.91E+10 4.13E+09 2.47E+08 7.906 7.974 7.645 7
Total 1.30E+11 1.14E+11 1.52E+10 1.01E+11 2.75E+10 1.36E+09 8.567 8.696 8.175 7

Table 4-13. RVPs Assumed for 2018 ethanol and gasoline volumes without EISA

Total Fuel Ethanol Gasoline E0 Only E10 Only Weighted Weighted E0 Weighted E10
PADD Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume RVP RVP RVP
1 4.42E+10 2.47E+09 4.17E+10 1.95E+10 2.47E+10 8.63 8.301 8.883
2 3.38E+10 1.92E+09 3.19E+10 1.47E+10 1.92E+10 9.48 8.925 9.907
3 2.09E+10 1.02E+09 1.99E+10 1.07E+10 1.02E+10 8.77 8.391 9.166
4 4.96E+09 2.54E+08 4.71E+09 2.43E+09 2.54E+09 9.18 8.674 9.674
5 2.30E+10 1.27E+09 2.17E+10 1.03E+10 1.27E+10 7.77 7.602 7.911
Total 1.27E+11 6.93E+09 1.20E+11 5.76E+10 6.93E+10 8.75 8.372 9.059

Table 4-14. RVPs Assumed for 2030 ethanol and gasoline volumes with EISA
Total E85(74) Wtd.
Fuel Gasoline Ethanol E10 Only E15 Only Only Wtd. Wtd. E15 Wtd. E85
PADD Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume RVP E10 RVP RVP RVP
1 3.92E+10 3.41E+10 5.02E+09 2.43E+10 1.43E+10 6.02E+08 8.444 8.763 7.962 7
2 2.97E+10 2.58E+10 3.91E+09 1.62E+10 1.31E+10 4.56E+08 8.942 9.333 8.525 7
3 1.95E+10 1.68E+10 2.63E+09 9.32E+09 9.85E+09 2.98E+08 8.245 8.644 7.905 7
4 4.69E+09 4.08E+09 6.14E+08 2.64E+09 1.98E+09 7.20E+07 9.063 9.524 8.524 7
5 2.05E+10 1.81E+10 2.47E+09 1.60E+10 4.24E+09 3.17E+08 7.884 7.93 7.774 7
Total 1.14E+11 9.89E+10 1.46E+10 6.84E+10 4.34E+10 1.75E+09 8.464 8.716 8.126 7

Table 4-15. RVPs Assumed for 2030 ethanol and gasoline volumes without EISA
Total Fuel Ethanol Gasoline E0 Only E10 Only Weighted Weighted Weighted
PADD Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume RVP E0 RVP E10 RVP
1 3.83E+10 2.47E+09 3.59E+10 1.36E+10 2.47E+10 8.68 8.301 8.883
2 2.90E+10 1.92E+09 2.71E+10 9.88E+09 1.92E+10 9.57 8.925 9.907
3 1.89E+10 1.02E+09 1.79E+10 8.78E+09 1.02E+10 8.81 8.391 9.166
4 4.57E+09 2.54E+08 4.32E+09 2.04E+09 2.54E+09 9.23 8.674 9.674
5 2.02E+10 1.27E+09 1.89E+10 7.48E+09 1.27E+10 7.80 7.602 7.911
Total 1.11E+11 6.93E+09 1.04E+11 4.18E+10 6.93E+10 8.80 8.372 9.059
56
A benzene g/mmgal emission factor for 2018 and 2030 was based on benzene inventory projections used in
the 2011 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and projected gasoline volumes obtained from the Annual Energy
Outlook 2011 Early Release Overview. This emission factor was used to estimate g/mmBTU emission
factors based on the energy content of E0, E10, and E15 gasoline. Aside from energy content, we did not
account for the effect of other fuel parameters on emission rates for E0, E10, and E15 blends. Thus, the E10
emission rate is slightly higher than the E0 rate due to the lower energy content of E10, and the E15 emission
rate is higher still. The E85 emission rate was estimated for the RFS2 rule. Emission factors are summarized
in Table 4-16.
Table 4-16. Storage and Transport Vapor Loss Emission Factors (g/mmBtu)
Process Fuel Benzene
E0 0.250
E10 0.259
BTP
E15 0.264
E85 0.023
RBT/BPS E0 0.059

These emission factors for VOC and benzene were used in conjunction with an updated version of EPA’s
spreadsheet model for upstream emission impacts, developed for the RFS2 rule, to estimate PADD-level
inventory changes of the changes in gasoline volume in 2018 with 2007 ethanol volumes versus projected
volumes with EISA. VOC inventory changes were used to develop nationwide adjustment factors that were
applied to modeling platform inventory SCCs associated with storage and transport processes (see Table
4-17). Benzene emission estimates were obtained either by application of the adjustments in Table 4-17 or
through speciation of VOC in SMOKE.

A similar approach was used to develop adjustment factors for 2030. However, in addition to the impacts of
EISA, the 2017-2025 light-duty greenhouse gas rule will significantly reduce gasoline production. The
impact of this rule was small enough to ignore for 2018, but quite significant in 2030. To account for
impacts of this rule in 2030, an additional scalar of 0.7916 was applied.

Ethanol emissions were estimated in SMOKE by applying the ethanol to VOC ratios from headspace profiles
to VOC emissions for E10 and E15, and an evaporative emissions profile for E85. These ratios are 0.065 for
E10, 0.272 for E15, and 0.61 for E85. The E10 and E15 profiles were obtained from an ORD analysis of
fuel samples from the EPAct exhaust test program34 and have been submitted for incorporation into EPA’s
SPECIATE database. The E85 profile was obtained from data collected as part of the CRC E-80 test
program (Environ, 2008) and has also been submitted for incorporation into EPA’s SPECIATE database.
For more details on the change in speciation profiles between 2007 and the future years, see Section
3.2.1.4Error! Reference source not found..

After developing emissions for 2018 with EISA volumes versus 2018 without EISA volumes, and 2030 with
EISA and the light-duty greenhouse gas rule versus 2030 without those rules, EPA created ratios of these
two cases to apply against the 2007 platform emissions. From this, EPA created 2018 and 2030 reference
cases.

34
U.S. EPA. 2011. Hydrocarbon Composition of Gasoline Vapor Emissions from Enclosed Fuel Tanks. Office of Research and
Development and Office of Transportation and Air Quality. Report No. EPA-420-R-11-018. EPA Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-
0135.

57
 Table 4-17. Adjustment factors applied to storage and transport emissions
Adjustment
Year Process PADD Pollutant Factor
VOC 0.9515
1
benzene 0.9905
VOC 0.9619
2
benzene 0.9882
VOC 0.9778
BTP 3
benzene 0.9879
2018
VOC 0.8983
4
benzene 0.9885
VOC 0.9430
5
benzene 0.9901
VOC 0.9553
RBT/BPS All
benzene 0.9893
VOC 0.8005
1
benzene 0.7871
VOC 0.8436
2
benzene 0.7865
VOC 0.8318
BTP 3
benzene 0.7824
2030
VOC 0.7905
4
benzene 0.7840
VOC 0.7700
5
benzene 0.7888
VOC 0.8114
RBT/BPS All
benzene 0.7863

It should be noted that these adjustment factors are based on summer RVP, but applied to emissions for the
whole calendar year. However, higher RVPs in winter corresponding to lower temperatures result in roughly
the same vapor pressure of the fuel and roughly the same propensity to evaporate. Significant evaporative
emissions are not expected from storage and transport of biodiesel, renewable or cellulosic diesel fuel due to
their low volatility. The cumulative impacts are a reduction in VOC emissions from 2007 levels (see Table
4-18). See 2007v5 TSD, Appendix B for the complete cross-walk between SCC, and state-SCC for BTP
components, and each type of petroleum transport and storage.
Table 4-18. Impact of VOC losses from reduced gasoline production due to EISA
Sector 2018 Reductions 2030 Reductions
ptnonipm 2,039 7,884
nonpt 22,082 97,030
Total 24,121 104,914

4.2.1.7 Pipeline and Refinery EISA adjustments (ptnonipm)

Packets: “PROJECTION_2018rg_ref_pipelines_refineries”,
“PROJECTION_2030rg_ref_pipelines_refineries”

58
Pipeline usage, refinery, and bulk terminal emissions were adjusted for changes in fuels due to EISA and
reductions in gasoline and diesel volumes due to greenhouse gas emission standards. These adjustments
were developed by EPA/OTAQ and impact processes such as process heaters, catalytic cracking units,
blowdown systems, wastewater treatment, condensers, cooling towers, flares and fugitive emissions.

Calculation of the emission inventory impacts of decreased gasoline and diesel production, due to EISA and
greenhouse gas rules, on nationwide refinery emissions was done in the updated version of EPA's
spreadsheet model for upstream emission impacts. Emission inventory changes reflecting EISA and
greenhouse gas rules implementation were used to develop adjustment factors that were applied to
inventories for each petroleum refinery in the U.S. (Table 4-19 and Table 4-20). These impacts of decreased
production were assumed to be spread evenly across all U. S. refineries. Toxic emissions were estimated in
SMOKE by applying speciation to VOC emissions. It should be noted that the adjustment factors in Table
4-19 are estimated relative to that portion of refinery emissions associated with gasoline and diesel fuel
production. Production of jet fuel, still gas and other products also produce emissions. If these emissions
were included, the adjustment factors would not be as large. The impact of the EISA and greenhouse gas
rules is shown in

59
Table 4-21.
Table 4-19. 2018 adjustment factors applied to petroleum pipelines and refinery emissions associated with
gasoline and diesel fuel production.
Pollutant Pipelines Refineries Both
CO 0.996 0.978 0.974
NOX 0.982 0.987 0.969
PM10 0.997 0.984 0.981
PM2.5 0.998 0.979 0.977
SO2 0.998 0.978 0.976
NH3 n/a 0.952 n/a
VOC 0.999 0.972 0.971

Table 4-20. 2030 adjustment factors applied to petroleum pipelines and refinery emissions associated with
gasoline and diesel fuel production.
Pollutant Pipelines Refineries Both
CO 0.981 0.773 0.763
NOX 0.890 0.781 0.695
PM10 0.985 0.779 0.767
PM2.5 0.989 0.775 0.766
SO2 0.986 0.774 0.763
NH3 n/a 0.750 n/a
VOC 0.994 0.769 0.764

60
 Table 4-21. Impact of refinery adjustments on 2007 emissions [tons]
reductions reductions
pollutant 2018 2030
CO 2,148 19,952
NH3 111 572
NOX 2,884 28,116
PM10 515 6,185
PM2.5 555 5,503
SO2 3,401 33,913
VOC 1,891 15,341

4.2.2 Upstream agricultural and Livestock adjustments (afdust, ag, nonpt, ptnonipm)
Packets: “PROJECTION_2008_2018_ag_including_upstream_OTAQ”;
“PROJECTION_2008_2030_ag_including_upstream_OTAQ”

Inventory adjustments were previously developed for 2030 as part of final RFS2 rule modeling35. For the
Tier 3 proposal, adjustments for 2017 were scaled by the ratio of 2017 renewable fuel volumes versus 2030
volumes. Although 2018 was modeled for this rule rather than 2017, EPA continued to use the 2017
adjustments. Impacts on farm equipment emissions were not accounted for, however. Emission rates from
the GREET model (fertilizer and pesticide production)36 or based on the 2002 National Emissions Inventory
(fertilizer and pesticide application, agricultural dust, livestock waste) were combined with estimates of
agricultural impacts from FASOM (Forest and Agricultural Section Optimization Model). Since FASOM
modeling used a reference case of 13.2 billion gallons of ethanol, impacts used in the modeling for this rule
are underestimates.

Adjustment factors are provided in

35
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis.
Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor, MI. Report No. EPA-420-R-10-006,
February, 2010. Available at <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/regulations.htm>.
36
GREET, version 1.8c. Available at < http://greet.es.anl.gov/>.
61
Table 4-22. These adjustments were applied equally to all counties having any of the affected sources. This
is an area of uncertainty in the inventories, since there would likely be variation from one county to another
depending on how much of the predicted agricultural changes occurred in which counties. By using percent
change adjustments rather than attempting to calculate absolute ton changes in each county, EPA attempted
to minimize the inventory distortions that could occur if the calculated change for a given county was out of
proportion to the reference case emissions for that county. For instance, a different approach could estimate
reductions that were larger than the reference case NEI emissions, since there was no linkage between the
NEI inventories and the FASOM modeling. The specific sources (SCCs) and affected pollutants that these
adjustments were applied to are listed in a docket reference37.

37
U. S. EPA. 2011. Spreadsheet “agricultural sector adjustments.xls.” Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0135.
62
 Table 4-22. Adjustments to modeling platform agricultural emissions for the Tier 3 reference case
Source Description 2018 Adjustment 2030 Adjustment
Nitrogen Fertilizer Application 1.0242 1.0573
Fertilizer Production 1.0603 1.0603
Pesticide Production 0.9544 0.9954
Tilling/Harvesting Dust 1.0079 1.0265
Agricultural Burning 1.0000 1.0000
Livestock Dust 0.9868 0.9983
Livestock Waste 0.9901 0.9983
For the animal waste sources, EPA also estimated animal population growth in ammonia (NH3) and dust
(PM10 and PM2.5) emissions from livestock in the ag and afdust and ptnonipm sectors. Therefore, a
composite set of projection factors is needed for animal operations that also reflect the minor 0.99% decrease
resulting from the EISA mandate. These composite projection factors by animal category are provided in
Table 4-23. As discussed below, Dairy Cows and Turkeys are assumed to have no growth in animal
population, and therefore the projection factor for these animals is the same as the upstream agriculture-
related projection factor. The PROJECTION packet used for these sources, including the cross-reference to
the animal categories listed in Table 4-23 and the source categories in

63
Table 4-22.
Table 4-23. Composite NH3 projection factors to year 2018 and 2030 for animal operations
Animal Category 2018 Factors 2030 Factors
Dairy Cow 0.9901 0.9983
Beef 0.9927 0.9460
Pork 1.0798 1.1614
Broilers 1.1399 1.1795
Turkeys 0.9050 0.8953
Layers 1.0974 1.1281
Poultry Average 1.0865 1.1149
Overall Average 1.0428 1.0505

Except for dairy cows and turkey production, the animal projection factors are derived from national-level
animal population projections from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and
Agriculture Policy and Research Institute (FAPRI). This methodology was initiated in 2005 for the 2005
NEI, but was updated on July 24, 2012 in support of the 2007v5 platform (EPA, 2012). For dairy cows,
EPA assumed that there would be no growth in emissions based on little change in U.S. dairy cow
populations from year 2007 through 2030 according to linear regression analyses of the FAPRI projections.
This assumption was based on an analysis of historical trends in the number of such animals compared to
production rates. Although productions rates have increased, the number of animals has declined. Based on
this analysis, EPA concluded that production forecasts do not provide representative estimates of the future
number of cows and turkeys; therefore, EPA did not use these forecasts for estimating future-year emissions
from these animals. In particular, the dairy cow population is projected to decrease in the future as it has for
the past few decades; however, milk production will be increasing over the same period. Note that the
ammonia emissions from dairies are not directly related to animal population but also nitrogen excretion.
With the cow numbers going down and the production going up, the excretion value will likely change, but
EPA assumed no change because of the lack of a quantitative estimate. Appendix H of the 2007v5 platform
TSD provides the animal population data and regression curves used to derive the growth factors.

4.2.3 Fuel sulfur rules (nonpt, ptnonipm)

Packets: CONTROL_SULF_2020_2007v5; CONTROL_SULF_2030_2007v5

Fuel sulfur rules that were signed by July, 2012 are limited to Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York
and Vermont. The fuel limits for these states are incremental starting after year 2012, but are fully
implemented by year 2018 in all of these states. In 2030, New York City had additional controls
implemented, mandating that all sources burn ULSD (15 ppm). For more details on these rules, see the
2007v5 TSD.A summary of the sulfur rules by state, with emissions reductions is provided inTable 4-24.
Table 4-24. Summary of fuel sulfur rules by state
State/ Fuel % % 2008 2018 2018 2030 2030
Metro reduction reduction Emissions Emissions Reductions Emissions Reductions
2018 2030
ME Distillate 99.5 99.5
12,076 1,056 11,021 1,056 11,021
ME Residual 75 75
MA Distillate 99.5 99.5 17,265 86 17,178 86 17,178
NJ Distillate 99.5 99.5
7,285 45 7,240 45 7,240
NJ Kerosene 96.25 96.25
NY Distillate 99.5 99.5 54,093 655 53,439 274 53,819
64
 NYC Residual 75 99.25
VT Distillate 99.5 99.5 2,018 10 2,008 10 2,008

4.2.4 Portland Cement NESHAP projections (ptnonipm)

As indicated in Table 4-1, the Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) model (EPA, 2010b) was used to
project the cement industry component of the ptnonipm emissions modeling sector to 2013. This approach
provided reductions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants, including mercury (Hg). The ISIS cement
emissions were developed in support for the Portland Cement NESHAPs and the NSPS for the Portland
cement manufacturing industry.

The ISIS model produced a Portland Cement NESHAP policy case of multi-pollutant emissions for
individual cement kilns (emission inventory units) that were relevant for years 2013 through 2017; however,
no additional policy case scenario for later future years (i.e., 2018) are available. Therefore, the 2013 policy
case is used for the 2018 and 2030 base case. These ISIS-based emissions are reflected using CoST packets
and a cement inventory for new kilns:

1) Inventory: “cement_newkilns_ISIS2013_2007v5_POINT_ff10”
Contains information on new cement kilns constructed after year 2008. This inventory was
accidentally not included in projections for all future year scenarios.
2) Packet: “CLOSURES_cement_ISIS_2007v5_2013policy”
Contains facility and unit-level closures,
3) Packet: “PROJECTION_ISIS2013_cement_2007v5“
Contains updated policy case emissions at existing cement kilns which we include via projection
factors. The units that opened or closed before 2010 were included in the 2020 base case.

The ISIS model results for the future show a continuation of the recent trend in the cement sector of the
replacement of lower capacity, inefficient wet and long dry kilns with bigger and more efficient preheater
and precalciner kilns. Multiple regulatory requirements such as the NESHAP and NSPS currently apply to
the cement industry to reduce CAP and HAP emissions. Additionally, state and local regulatory
requirements might apply to individual cement facilities depending on their locations relative to ozone and
PM2.5 nonattainment areas. The ISIS model provides the emission reduction strategy that balances: 1)
optimal (least cost) industry operation, 2) cost-effective controls to meet the demand for cement, and 3)
emission reduction requirements over the time period of interest. Table 4-25 shows the magnitude of the
ISIS-based cement industry reductions in the future-year emissions that represent 2018 and 2030, and the
impact that these reductions have on total stationary non-EGU point source (ptnonipm) emissions. The
impact of accidentally not including the inventory of new kilns in future year modeling is quantified below.
This error has the most significant impact on NOX emissions; however, nationally, NOX from cement kilns
would still decrease from 2008 by over 50% had these new kilns been included in the future year scenarios.
Table 4-25. ISIS-based cement industry change (tons/yr)
Cement Industry Cement Industry New cement kilns % decrease in
emissions in 2008 projected emissions in erroneously dropped Cement
Pollutant 2018 & 2030 from inventory projections
CO 46,317 8,713 0 81%
NH3 270 77 0 71%
NOX 156,579 57,477 17,699 63%
PM10 6,621 1,005 2 85%
PM2.5 3,689 800 1 78%

65
 SO2 98,277 22,287 1,543 77%
VOC 6,954 1,131 135 84%

4.2.5 Controls, Closures and consent decrees from CSAPR and NODA Comments
(nonpt, ptnonipm)
EPA released a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) after the CSAPR proposal to seek comments and
improvements from states and outside agencies. The goal was to improve the future baseline emissions
modeling platform prior to processing the Final CSAPR. EPA received several control programs and other
responses that were used for future year projections. However, this effort was performed on a version of the
2005 modeling platform, which used the NEI2005v2 as a base year starting point for future year projections.
Now with the 2007 platform using the 2008 NEI for most non-EGU point and nonpoint sources, many of
these controls and data improvements were removed from this 2007 base case projection. But for those
controls, closures and consent decree information that are implemented after 2008, EPA used these
controls/data after mapping them to the correct SCCs and/or facilities in the 2008 NEI. This subsection
breaks down the controls used for the nonpt and ptnonipm sectors separately, and also describes the consent
decrees separately. EPA used July 1, 2008 as the cut-off date for assuming whether controls were included
in the 2007 modeling platform (2008 NEI). For example, if a control had a compliance date of December
2008 it was assumed that the 2008 NEI emissions did not reflect this control and would need to reflect this
control in our 2018 or 2030 scenarios. It is important to note that these controls are not comprehensive for
all state/counties and source categories. These only represent post-year 2008 controls for those areas and
categories where EPA received usable feedback from the CSAPR comments and related 2005 platform
NODA.

Nonpoint controls: packet “CONTROL_CSAPR_nonpoint_2018_2007v5”

The remaining nonpt sector CSAPR comments controls with compliance dates after 2008 are limited to state-
level Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) VOC controls in Connecticut and local controls around
Richmond Virginia. These controls target many of the same sources in the previously-discussed NY SIP
ozone control packet: AIM coating, Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing, Adhesives and Sealants and
Consumer Products. Cumulatively, these controls reduce VOC by approximately 1,400 tons. This control
packet also impacts Texas oil and gas drill rigs (SCC 2310000220), were though factors for these emissions
were available through year 2021, EPA only projected these to 2018. The impact in TX is a reduction of
NOX by 17,244 tons, PM2.5 by 1,158 tons and VOC by 1,470 tons with minor reductions for other pollutants.
The control packet is used for both 2018 and 2030 and has the same impact in both years.

Ptnonipm controls: packet “CONTROL_CSAPR_ptnonipm_2020_2007v5”

EPA created a CONTROL packet for the ptnonipm sector that contains reductions needed to achieve post
year-2008 emissions values from the CSAPR response to comments. These reductions reflect fuel
switching, cleaner fuels, and permit targets via specific information on control equipment and unit and
facility zero-outs in the following states: California, Delaware, Georgia, New Hampshire, New York and
Virginia. Cumulatively, these controls reduce NOX about 1,000 tons and SO2 by approximately 4,100 tons.
The control packet is used for both 2018 and 2030 and has the same impact in both years.

Ptnonipm closures: packet “CLOSURES_TR1_2008NEIv2”

This packet contains observed unit and facility-level closures based on CSAPR comments. This packet
includes only units that reported by states as closed prior to receipt of the CSAPR comments in year 2012 or
sooner. EPA found a couple of units in the 2008 NEI-based inventory that were reported as closed in year
2007; therefore, the compliance dates in this packet range from 2007 to 2012. EPA also retained all year-
2007 closures to allow for this packet to potentially be used on RPO year-2007 point inventories. All

66
closures were provided for the 2005 NEI facility and unit identifier codes. EPA matched these
units/facilities to the 2008 NEI using the “agy_facility_id” and “agy_point_id” codes in the NEI and
searching the EIS for closure information. Overall, these facility and unit closures reduced NOX, SO2 and
PM2.5 emissions by approximately 8,800, 1,300 and 50,000 tons respectively distributed amongst the
following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, New
Hampshire, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia. The closure packet is used for both 2018
and 2030 and has the same impact in both years.

Ptnonipm projection: packet “PROJECTION_CSAPR_WVunit_ptnonipm_2020_2007v5”

This packet contains the only post-2008 unit-level growth projection resulting from CSAPR comments. The
Sunoco Chemicals Neal Plant in Wayne County West Virginia replaced a 155MM Btu/hour coal-fired boiler
with a 96.72 MM Btu/hour natural gas-fired unit in 2010. The shutdown of the coal boiler was included in
the CLOSURES_TR1_2008NEIv2” packet just discussed and simply added the emissions from the new
natural gas unit to an existing unit by computing the new cumulative total from the new and old natural gas
units. The closing of the coal-fired boiler removed 51 tons of NOX and 234 tons of SO2 while this packet
resulted in only 28 more tons of NOX and minimal emissions from PM and SO2. The projection packet is
used for both 2018 and 2030 and has the same impact in both years.

Consent decrees (ptnonipm): packet “CONTROLS_CSAPR_consent_2008NEIv2”

These controls reflect consent decree and settlements that were identified in our preparation of the Final
CSAPR emissions modeling platform. These controls generally consist of one or more facilities and target
future year reductions. After removing all consent decrees with compliance dates prior to late-2008, EPA
matched the remaining controls to the 2008 NEI using a combination of EIS facility codes, “agy_facility_id”,
“agy_point_id” and searching the EIS. Then, the percent reductions were recomputed such that the future
year emissions would match those for facilities originally projected from the 2005 platform. EPA did not
retain consent decree controls if the emissions in 2007 (2008 NEI) were less than the controlled future year
emissions based on the 2005 platform. The remaining consent decree controls are in sixteen states (AL, CA,
IN, KS, KY, LA, MI, MS, MO, OH, OK, TN, TX, UT, WI, WY) and accounted for 3,835 tons of NOX and
37,368 tons of SO2 cumulative reductions in 2018 and approximately 3,411 tons of NOX and 36,878 tons of
SO2 cumulative reductions in 2030. The control packet is used for both 2018 and 2030, but compliance
dates for 2 facilities are in late-2018; therefore these controls were not applied in 2018 but were applied for
2030.

4.2.6 All other PROJECTION and CONTROL packets (ptnonipm, nonpt)

This section describes all remaining non-EGU stationary sources not already discussed. These control
packets and projection packets generally have lesser national-level impact on future year projections than
those items above. However, some of the consent decrees discussed below have significant local impacts.

4.2.6.1 Aircraft growth (ptnonipm)

Packets: “PROJECTION_2008_2018_aircraft”; “PROJECTION_2008_2030_aircraft”

Aircraft emissions are contained in the ptnonipm inventory. These 2008 point-source emissions are
projected to future years by applying activity growth using data on itinerant (ITN) operations at airports.
The ITN operations are defined as aircraft take-offs whereby the aircraft leaves the airport vicinity and lands
at another airport, or aircraft landings whereby the aircraft has arrived from outside the airport vicinity. We
used projected ITN information available from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Terminal Area
Forecast (TAF) System: http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/main/taf.asp (publication date March, 2012). This
information is available for approximately 3,300 individual airports, for all years up to 2030. EPA

67
aggregated and applied this information at the national level by summing the airport-specific (U.S. airports
only) ITN operations to national totals by year and by aircraft operation, for each of the four available
operation types: commercial, general, air taxi, military. Growth factors were computed for each operation
type by dividing future-year 2018 and 2030 ITN by 2008-year ITN. EPA assigned factors to inventory SCCs
based on the operation type.

The methods that the FAA used for developing the ITN data in the TAF are documented in:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/taf_reports/media/TAF_su
mmary_report_FY20112040.pdf. Table 4-26 provides the national growth factors for aircraft; all factors are
applied to year 2008 emissions. For example, year 2018 commercial aircraft emissions are 7.5% higher than
year 2008 emissions.

None of the aircraft emission projections account for any control programs. EPA considered the NOX
standard adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Committee on Aviation
Environmental Protection (CAEP) in February 2004, which is expected to reduce NOX by approximately 3%
in 2020. However, this rule has not yet been adopted as an EPA (or U.S.) rule; therefore, the effects of this
rule were not included in the future-year emissions projections.
Table 4-26. Factors used to project 2008 base-case aircraft emissions to 2020
SCC Description 2018 2030
Commercial Aircraft: Diesel Airport Ground Support Equipment, Air Ground Support
1.0750 1.3502
2270008005 Equipment
2275000000 All Aircraft Types and Operations 1.0750 1.3502
2275001000 Military Aircraft, Total 1.0620 1.0623
2275020000 Commercial Aviation, Total 1.0750 1.3502
2275050000 General Aviation, Total 0.9206 0.9709
2275050011 General Aviation, Piston 0.9206 0.9709
2275050012 General Aviation, Turbine 0.9206 0.9709
2275060000 Air Taxi, Total 0.9381 1.0965
2275060011 Air Taxi, Total: Air Taxi, Piston 0.9381 1.0965
2275060012 Air Taxi, Total: Air Taxi, Turbine 0.9381 1.0965
2275070000 Commercial Aircraft: Aircraft Auxiliary Power Units, Total 1.0750 1.3502
Military aircraft: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Military;
1.0620 1.0623
27501014 Jet Engine: JP-4
Military aircraft, This SCC is in 2005v2: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed Wing Aircraft L
1.0620 1.0623
27501015 & TO Exhaust; Military; Jet Engine: JP-5
Commercial Aircraft, Total, This SCC is in 2005v2 NEI: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed
1.0750 1.3502
27502001 Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Piston Engine: Aviation Gas
Commercial Aircraft, Total, This SCC is in 2005v2 NEI: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed
1.0750 1.3502
27502011 Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A
General Aviation Total. This SCC is in 2005v2 NEI: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed
0.9206 0.9709
27505001 Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Civil; Piston Engine: Aviation Gas
General Aviation Total. This SCC is in 2002 NEI: Internal Combustion Engines; Fixed Wing
0.9206 0.9709
27505011 Aircraft L & TO Exhaust; Civil; Jet Engine: Jet A
Military aircraft: Internal Combustion Engines; Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust;
1.0620 1.0623
27601014 Military; Jet Engine: JP-4
Military aircraft: Internal Combustion Engines; Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust;
1.0620 1.0623
27601015 Military; Jet Engine: JP-5
Commercial aircraft: Internal Combustion Engines; Rotary Wing Aircraft L & TO Exhaust;
1.0750 1.3502
27602011 Commercial; Jet Engine: Jet A

68
4.2.6.2 Oil and gas projections in TX, and non-California WRAP states (nonpt)
EPA used a suite of intermediate-year projected WRAP Phase III oil and gas emissions for all future year
scenarios. These intermediate-year inventories are 2008 for the Permian basin, and 2010, 2012 or 2015 for
the remaining WRAP area basins. These point and nonpoint inventories are discussed in the 2007 base case
Sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.3, respectively. Summaries of these mid-term projections are posted on the WRAP
Phase III oil and gas project website: http://www.wrapair2.org/PhaseIII.aspx. As discussed in Section
4.2.6.2, for drilling rig operations in the remaining counties in Texas (non-Permian basin), EPA applied year-
2018 projections from a TCEQ report
(http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/implementation/air/am/contracts/reports/ei/5820783985FY0901-
20090715-ergi-Drilling_Rig_EI.pdf).

4.3 Mobile source projections

EPA analyzed emission impacts of the Tier 3 vehicle emissions and fuel standards by comparing projected
emissions for future years without the Tier 3 rule (reference scenario) to projected emissions for future years
with the Tier 3 standards in place (control scenario). Table 4-27 presents an overview of the reference and
control scenarios for calendar years 2018 and 2030. Both scenarios reflect the renewable fuel volumes and
market fractions projected by the Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Report (“AEO2013”)38

38
U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 (April 15, 2013)
69
 Table 4-27. Overview of Reference and Control Scenarios
Reference Scenario Control Scenario
Renewable Fuels: AEO 2013a Renewable Fuels: AEO 2013a
17.5 B gallons renewable fuels 17.5 B gallons renewable fuels
(18.3 B ethanol-equivalent gallons): (18.3 B ethanol-equivalent gallons):
16.0 B gallons ethanol: E10 b, E15c, E85d 16.0 B gallons ethanol: E10 b, E15c, E85d
2018
Fuel Sulfur Level: 30 ppm (10 ppm California) Fuel Sulfur Level: 10 ppm
Fleet: e Fleet: e
96 percent Tier 2 and older vehicles 86 percent Tier 2 and older vehicles
4 percent LEV III vehicles 14 percent Tier 3/LEV III vehicles
Renewable Fuels: AEO 2013a Renewable Fuels: AEO 2013a
17.6 B gallons renewable fuels 17.6 B gallons renewable fuels
(18.6 B ethanol-equivalent gallons): (18.6 B ethanol-equivalent gallons):
15.3 B gallons ethanol: E10 b, E15c, E85d 15.3 B gallons ethanol: E10 b, E15c, E85d
2030
Fuel Sulfur Level: 30 ppm (10 ppm California) Fuel Sulfur Level: 10 ppm
Fleet: e Fleet: e
76 percent Tier 2 and older vehicles 21 percent Tier 2 and older vehicles
24 percent LEV III vehicles 79 percent Tier 3/LEV III vehicles
a
U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 (April 15, 2013)
b
Gasoline containing 10 percent ethanol by volume
c
Gasoline containing 15 percent ethanol by volume
d
Gasoline containing up to 85 percent ethanol by volume (74 percent nominal used in this analysis)
e
Fraction of the vehicle population

The reference scenarios assumed an average fuel sulfur level of 30 ppm in accordance with the Tier 2
gasoline sulfur standards. Under the Tier 3 program, federal gasoline will contain no more than 10 ppm
sulfur on an annual average basis by January 1, 2017, and therefore EPA assumed a nationwide fuel sulfur
level of 10 ppm for both future year control cases.
EPA assumed a continuation of the existing Tier 2 standards for model years 2017 and later in modeling
emissions for the reference scenario, with the exception of California and Section 177 states that have
adopted the LEV III program. The Tier 3 control scenario modeled the suite of exhaust and evaporative
emission standards for light-duty vehicles (LDVs), light duty trucks (LDTs: 1-4), medium passenger vehicles
(MDPVs) and large pick-ups and vans (Class 2b and 3 trucks) including:
 Fleet average Federal Test Procedure (FTP) NMOG+NOX standards of 30 mg/mi for LDVs, LDTs
and MDPVs, phasing in from MYs 2017 to 2025 for the light-duty fleet under 6,000 lbs. GVWR and
phasing in from MYs 2018 to 2025 for the light-duty fleet over 6,000 lbs. GVWR, and MDPVs
 Fleet average Supplemental Federal Test Procedure (SFTP) NMOG+NOX standards of 50 mg/mi for
LDVs, LDTs and MDPVs, phasing in from MYs 2017 to 2025 for the light-duty fleet under 6,000
lbs. GVWR and phasing in from MYs 2018 to 2025 for the light-duty fleet over 6,000 lbs. GVWR,
and MDPVs
 Per-vehicle FTP PM standard of 3 mg/mi for LDVs, LDTs and MDPVs, phasing in from MYs 2017
to 2022 for the light-duty fleet under 6,000 lbs. GVWR and phasing in from MYs 2018 to 2022 for
the light-duty fleet over 6,000 lbs. GVWR, and MDPVs

70
  Per-vehicle US06-only PM standard of 10 mg/mi for LDVs, LDTs and MDPVs through MY2021
and of 6 mg/mi for MY2022 and later model years
 New standards for Class 2b and 3 trucks phasing in by MY 2022 including NMOG+NOX declining
fleet average, and more stringent PM standards
 More stringent evaporative emission standards for diurnal plus hot soak emissions, a new canister
bleed test and emission standard, and new requirements addressing evaporative leaks on in-use
vehicles.
 New refueling emission control requirements for all complete HDGVs equal to or less than 14,000
lbs GVWR (i.e., Class 2b/3 HDGVs), starting in the 2018 model year, and for all larger HDGVs by
the 2022 model year

Implementation of the Tier 3 standards is aligned with the model year 2017-2025 Light-Duty GHG
standards39 to achieve significant criteria pollutant and GHG emissions reductions while providing
regulatory certainty and compliance efficiency to the auto and oil industries. Accordingly, the analyses for
the Tier 3 rule include the final LD GHG standards in both the reference and control scenarios, and thus
account for their impacts on the future vehicle fleet and future fuel consumption.

The analysis described here accounts for the following national onroad rules:
 Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements (65 FR 6698,
February 10, 2000)
 Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements
(66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001)
 Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (72 FR 8428, February 26, 2007)
 Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Changes to Renewable Fuel Standard Program (75 FR
14670, March 26, 2010)
 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Standards for 2012-2016 (75 FR 25324, May 7, 2010)
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Engines and Vehicles (76 FR 57106, September 15, 2011)
 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average
Fuel Economy Standards (77 FR 62623, October 15, 2012)

In addition, the modeling accounts for state and local rules including local fuel standards,
Inspection/Maintenance programs, Stage II refueling controls, the National Low Emission Vehicle Program
(NLEV), and the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) LEV Program. Furthermore, the Tier 3 emissions
modeling for both the national inventory and air quality analysis includes California’s LEV III program and
its associated emission reductions from both California and the states that adopted the LEV III program, in
the baseline scenario.

Onroad mobile sources are comprised of several components and are discussed in the next subsection (4.3.1).
Monthly nonroad mobile emission projections are discussed in subsection 4.3.2. Locomotives and Class 1
and Class 2 commercial marine vessel (C1/C2 CMV) projections are discussed in subsection 4.3.3, and Class
3 (C3) CMV projected emissions are discussed in subsection 4.3.4.

39
2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards;
Final Rule (77 FR 62623–63200), October 2012.
71
4.3.1 Onroad mobile (onroad and onroad_rfl)
The onroad emissions for 2018 and 2030 use the same SMOKE-MOVES system as for the base year (see
Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2). Meteorology, speed, spatial and temporal surrogates, representative counties, and
fuel months were the same as for 2007, discussed above.

4.3.1.1 VMT and vehicle population

EPA estimates of total national Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) in 2018 and 2030 came from DOE's Annual
Energy Outlook (AEO) 2013 early release (http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/). The VMT was allocated
between vehicle types using a version of MOVES2010b that had been modified with VMT growth factors
from the AEO and with historical data from FHWA
(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics.cfm). The growth rates by SCC were applied to the
VMT values from the 2007 base year in each county to generate the future year VMT estimates. These
VMT values were normalized such that the total national VMT from the growth calculations matched the
total VMT estimates in the AEO for 2018 and 2030. Vehicle populations by county, month and vehicle type
were estimated by dividing annual VMT by national estimates of annual VMT per vehicle.

Tank trucks are used to transport ethanol mandated by EISA from production facilities to bulk terminals and
from terminals to bulk plants and dispensing facilities. Impacts of this activity on emissions from tank trucks
transporting ethanol (Class 8 trucks) are accounted for in these inventories by adjusting VMT used in
SMOKE-MOVES. The VMT adjustments were derived from an Oak Ridge National Laboratory analysis of
ethanol transport (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2009), scaled to account for the difference in ethanol
volume for AEO 2013 future year projections versus the 2007 platform volume of 8.7 billion gallons. It
should be noted that the Oak Ridge analysis only addressed ethanol transport and did not account for impacts
of other biofuels on transportation activity. Impacts from the 2017-2025 light duty vehicle GHG emission
standards were assumed to be negligible in 2018 and were accounted for with a 0.997 scalar in 2030.

4.3.1.2 Set up and Run MOVES to create EF

Emission factor tables were created by running SMOKE-MOVES using the same procedures and models as
2007 (see Section 2.5.1 and the 2007v5 TSD). The same meteorology and the same representative counties
were used. Changes between 2007, 2018, and 2030 are predominantly VMT, fuels, national and local rules,
and the model-year distribution of the fleet, which is built into MOVES. Fleet turnover resulted in a greater
fraction of newer vehicles meeting stricter emission standards.

A detailed list of the differences between the runs for each case are described in

72
Table 4-28.

73
 Table 4-28. Comparison of MOVES runs
Year 2007 2018 2018 2030 2030
Case base ref ctl ref Ctl
Version 20130130 20130609 20130610 20130603 20130604
Run Name abs2007base_201 tier3frm2018ref_20 tier3frm2018ctl_20 tier3frm2030ref_20 tier3frm2030ctl_20
30130 130609 130610 130603 130604
MOVES moves20121002f moves20121002f moves20121002f moves20121002f moves20121002f
code
MOVES movesdb20121002 movesdb20121002 movesdb20121002 movesdb20121002 movesdb20121002
default f k_truncatedgfre k_truncatedgfre k_truncatedgfre k_truncatedgfre
database
CDBs 2007PFCdb146Re 2018PM146Counti 2018PM146Counti 2030146Counties2 2030146Counties2
pCnties20120402 es20120724 es20120724 0130312 0130312
Early NLEV early_nlev N/A N/A N/A N/A
LEV rates tier3_lev_standard lev3_standards_SS lev3_standards_SS lev3_standards_SS lev3_standards_S
s_YYYY _20130603 _20130603 _20130603 S_20130603
VMT and nationaldefaultvmt nationaldefaultvmtp nationaldefaultvmtp nationaldefaultvmtp nationaldefaultvmt
VPOP pop_20120410 op_20120410 op_20120410 op_20120410 pop_20120410
GFRE N/A non-LEV: tier3frm3010gfre_0 non-LEV: tier3frm3010gfre_0
tier3frm3030gfre 53013 tier3frm3030gfre 53013
LEV: LEV:
tier3frm3010gfre_0 tier3frm3010gfre_0
53013 53013
hcspeciation N/A tier3frm_ref2018_h tier3frm_ref2018_h tier3frm_ref2030_h tier3frm_ref2030_h
cspec_M_rvpB cspec_M_rvpB cspec_M_rvpB cspec_M_rvpB
Fuels 2007_Baseline_09 tier3frm2018reffuel tier3frm2018ctrlfuel tier3frm2030reffuel tier3frm2030ctrlfuel
062012 s_02252013 s_03152013 s_03072013 s_03152013
Tier 3 N/A N/A tier3ctldbs_060313 N/A tier3ctldbs_060313
control rates

The following states were modeled as having adopted the California LEV II and LEV III programs (see
Table 4-29)
Table 4-29. CA LEVIII program states
FIPS State Name
06 California
09 Connecticut
10 Delaware
23 Maine
24 Maryland
25 Massachusetts
34 New Jersey
36 New York
41 Oregon
42 Pennsylvania
44 Rhode Island
50 Vermont
53 Washington

74
Early NLEV refers to states which adopted the California “low emission vehicle” (LEV) standards in the
1990’s “early”, since the California LEV standards were adopted nationally (NLEV) starting in 2001. The
following states were modeled as using the early NLEV program in 2007 (see Table 4-30).
Table 4-30. Early NLEV states
FIPS State Name
09 CONNECTICUT
10 DELAWARE
11 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
23 MAINE
24 MARYLAND
33 NEW HAMPSHIRE
34 NEW JERSEY
42 PENNSYLVANIA
44 RHODE ISLAND
50 VERMONT
51 VIRGINIA

The following table indicates when the LEV states adopted the LEV2 standards and lists the emission
standards databases used in the 2007 base run (see Table 4-31)
Table 4-31. LEV2 states and MOVES databases
FIPS State Name Database
6 CALIFORNIA tier3_lev_standards_1994
9 CONNECTICUT tier3_lev_standards_2008
10 DELAWARE tier3_lev_standards_2014
23 MAINE tier3_lev_standards_2001
24 MARYLAND tier3_lev_standards_2011
25 MASSACHUSETTS tier3_lev_standards_1995
34 NEW JERSEY tier3_lev_standards_2009
35 NEW MEXICO tier3_lev_standards_2016
36 NEW YORK tier3_lev_standards_1996
41 OREGON tier3_lev_standards_2009
42 PENNSYLVANIA tier3_lev_standards_2008
44 RHODE ISLAND tier3_lev_standards_2008
50 VERMONT tier3_lev_standards_2000
53 WASHINGTON tier3_lev_standards_2009

The use of RVP bins for specifying hydrocarbon speciation (HCspeciation) database for January and July for
both 2018 and 2030 runs are listed by representative county (see Table 4-32) Because the hydrocarbon
speciation is dependent on the level of RVP, four RVP bins were generated based on RVP of the fuels in
each representative county for each month. The HCspeciation database contains hydrocarbon speciation
profiles for NMOG and VOC and applies only to fuels containing 70% or more ethanol by volume (i.e.,
E85).

75
 Table 4-32. RVP bins by representative county
FIPS Jan Jul FIPS Jan Jul FIPS Jan Jul FIPS Jan Jul
1073 2 2 23019 2 3 39041 3 4 47163 2 4
4013 2 1 23031 2 2 39049 3 4 48001 2 2
4019 2 4 24005 2 1 39061 3 3 48003 2 4
4021 2 4 24015 2 1 39113 3 3 48005 2 2
6025 2 1 24029 2 1 39119 3 4 48011 2 4
6037 2 1 24033 2 1 39151 3 4 48039 1 1
8031 3 3 24043 2 4 40143 2 4 48047 2 4
8041 3 4 24045 2 4 41005 3 3 48139 2 2
8101 3 4 25017 2 1 41019 3 4 48141 2 1
9003 2 1 26081 3 4 41029 3 4 48143 2 4
10003 2 1 26163 3 2 41037 3 4 48221 2 2
10005 2 1 27003 4 4 41039 3 4 48251 2 2
11001 2 1 27053 4 4 41047 3 3 48439 1 1
12011 2 3 27111 4 4 41051 3 3 49005 3 4
12033 2 4 27137 4 4 41067 3 3 49009 3 4
12086 2 3 27145 4 4 41071 3 4 49011 3 3
13015 2 2 27165 4 4 42003 3 2 49017 3 4
13051 2 4 29095 2 2 42005 3 2 49035 3 3
13121 2 2 29189 2 1 42009 2 4 49043 3 4
16001 3 4 32003 2 4 42017 2 1 49045 3 4
16027 3 4 32005 2 4 42019 3 2 49049 3 4
17031 2 1 32007 2 4 42039 3 4 49057 3 4
17093 2 1 32009 2 4 42043 2 4 50007 2 4
18019 3 3 32027 2 4 42049 3 4 51036 2 1
18089 2 1 32031 2 3 42051 3 2 51041 2 1
18097 3 4 33009 2 4 42055 2 4 51059 2 1
19095 2 4 33015 2 1 42063 3 4 51087 2 1
19133 2 4 34003 2 1 42071 2 4 51107 2 1
19153 2 4 35001 2 4 42073 3 4 51683 2 1
19163 2 4 35013 2 4 42089 2 4 51740 2 1
20091 2 2 36029 2 3 42091 2 1 53033 3 4
21029 2 1 36103 2 1 42101 2 1 53063 3 4
21111 2 1 37051 2 4 42129 3 2 53067 3 4
21117 2 1 37081 2 3 44007 2 1 55025 4 4
22033 2 3 37119 2 3 46099 4 4 55079 2 1
22047 2 3 39023 3 3 47157 3 3 55117 4 4
23005 2 2 39035 3 4

Fuels were projected into the future using estimates from the AEO2013 (http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/),
release dates April 15th-May 2nd 2013. . The fuel supply used in the Tier 3 FRM varies significantly from
that used in the NPRM, including the introduction of a new approach to aggregating fuels by region. For
more information regarding this new approach to fuels, please refer to the Tier 3 FRM, Chapter 7.1.3.2.
Reference fuels contain E10, E15, and E85 at a market share fraction determined regionally from the
AEO2013 report. Additional fuel properties for the reference cases are based on local fuel surveys as well as
EPA fuel compliance and certification reports. All sulfur levels were set at 30ppm in the reference cases in
order to reduce possible calculation artifacts. Fuel property changes associated with this sulfur adjustment
were also calculated appropriately by region. The Tier 3 control cases adjust this sulfur level to 10ppm, as
well as adjusting associated fuel properties with this sulfur reduction. Market shares between E10, E15 and
76
E85 remain unchanged between the reference and the control cases but changed across the years (2018
versus 2030).

4.3.1.3 Long Haul truck adjustments and SMOKE-MOVES

A set of adjustments were calculated for SMOKE-MOVES to estimate 2018 and 2030 emissions in each
county to account for extended idle and the use of auxiliary power units (APU). These adjustments use the
same approach as was used in 2007 (see Section 2.5.1.3 and the 2011 NEI v1 TSD for details) except for the
vehicle population (VPOP) was updated to be consistent with 2018 or 2030. These adjustments are by
county, vehicle type (long-haul truck SCCs only), and mode (extended idle or APU only) and impacted the
RPV process only. The set of adjustments created for the extended idle mode are identical for APU because
it was assumed that the distribution of APU usage and emissions would mirror extended idle activity.

SMOKE-MOVES, specifically Movesmrg, uses the adjustment factor file (CFPRO) for extended idle and
APU to estimate 2018 and 2030 emissions that incorporates each of these adjustments.

4.3.2 Nonroad mobile (nonroad)

The nonroad sector includes a wide range of mobile emission sources ranging from construction equipment
to hand-held lawn tools. In the nonroad sector, the only emissions that are directly affected by the Tier 3
regulation are the emissions from gasoline-powered equipment such as lawn-mowers, recreational boats and
all-terrain vehicles. Their SO2 emissions are reduced with the decrease in gasoline sulfur levels. As with
onroad, reference and control case emissions were generated using the fuel supply inputs reflecting the
projected fuel volumes from AEO2013.

Gasoline and land-based diesel nonroad emissions were estimated using EPA’s NONROAD2008b model40,
as run by the EPA’s consolidated modeling system known as the National Mobile Inventory Model
(NMIM).41 The fuels in the NMIM database, NCD2010201a, were developed from the reference and control
fuels used for onroad vehicles, as described in Section 4.3.1.2. Onroad and nonroad gasoline formulations
are assumed to be identical for all years. In 2018 and 2030, nonroad equipment is assumed to use E10 only.
For all years, the reference case included the higher sulfur reference gasoline and the control case met the
sulfur limits.

This sector includes monthly exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions from nonroad engines (not
including commercial marine, aircraft, and locomotives) derived from NMIM for all states except California.

The version of NONROAD models all in-force nonroad controls (see nonroad section under Table 4-1). Not
included are voluntary local programs such as encouraging either no refueling or evening refueling on Ozone
Action Days.

California nonroad emissions

40
This version of NONROAD is very similar to the publicly released version, but it can model ethanol blends up to E20. The
NMIM version is NMIM20090504d, which has the same results as the publicly-released NMIM version NMIM20090504a. The
underlying National County Database (NCD) is NCD20101201a, but with 2007 meteorology inserted into the countymonthhour
table. NCD20101201a includes state inputs for the 2008 NEI.
41
U.S. EPA. 2005 EPA’s National Inventory Model (NMIM), A Consolidated Emissions Modeling System for MOBILE6 and
NONROAD; EPA420-R-05-024; Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor, MI.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nmim/420r05024.pdf
77
Similar to the 2007 base nonroad mobile, NMIM was not used to generate future-year nonroad emissions for
California, other than for NH3. EPA used NMIM for California future nonroad NH3 emissions because
CARB did not provide these data for any nonroad vehicle types. For the rest of the pollutants, EPA
converted the CARB-supplied 2017 (surrogate for 2018) and 2030 nonroad annual inventories to monthly
emissions values by using the NMIM monthly inventories to compute monthly ratios by pollutant and SCC.
Some adjustments to the CARB inventory were needed to convert the provided TOG to VOC and to augment
the HAPs. See Section 3.2.1.3 for details on speciation of California nonroad data. The CARB nonroad
emissions include nonroad rules reflected in the December 2010 Rulemaking Inventory
(http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/offroadlsi10/offroadisor.pdf) and those in the March 2011 Rule
Inventory, the Off-Road Construction Rule Inventory for “In-Use Diesel”.

4.3.3 Locomotives and Class 1 & 2 commercial marine vessels (c1c2rail)

Recall from Section 2.5.4 that there are several non-NEI components to the c1c2rail sector in the 2007 base
case. There are three distinct approaches used to craft year 2018 and 2030 inventories from the 2007 base
case. The first component of the 2018 and 2030 c1c2rail inventories is the non-California data projected
from the 2007 base case. The second component is the CARB-supplied year 2017 (used for 2018 scenarios)
and year 2030 data for California. The third component is a set of OTAQ-provided county-specific
emissions adjustments that account for different fuel transport characteristics resulting from the EISA
(RFS2) mandate. Specifically, these adjustments reduce finished petroleum-based fuel transport by rail and
barge (CMV) and add ethanol-based finished fuel transport by rail and barge.

Step 1: Project non-California CMV and rail emissions

Packet: “PROJECTION_2008_2018_c1c2rail”; “PROJECTION_2008_2030_c1c2rail”

In this step, a projection packet creates an intermediate set of year 2018 and year 2030 emissions,
respectively, for all states except California. This packet does not reflect emission impacts from ethanol
volume impacts from the EISA (RFS2) mandate; the EISA impacts are applied for all states in Step 3. This
packet consists of national projection factors by SCC and pollutant between 2007 and 2018 and 2030 that
reflect the May 2004 “Tier 4 emissions standards and fuel requirements”
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/documents/nonroad-diesel/420r04007.pdf) as well as the March 2008 “Final
locomotive-marine rule” controls (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420f08004.pdf).

Projection factors are based on year 2008 rather than year 2007 for a couple of reasons. First, many states
with large c1c2rail emissions utilize the 2008 NEI emissions; Texas is one example. Second, the year 2007
emissions are mostly lower than the 2008 RIA summaries, and these emissions generally decrease in the
future. By choosing year 2008, the projections are unlikely to overly-reduce emissions by years 2018 and
2030. In addition, the 2007 platform emissions are often much different than the RIA emissions for any
year. EPA OTAQ experts determined that the 2007 platform estimates were more up-to date and likely more
reliable than the RIA estimates in 2007/2008 and 2018 and 2030. However, the controls and hence the
relative reductions in the RIA are expected to be fairly close to what would be expected from the 2007
platform. Therefore, EPA simply apply the ratio of the RIA 2018 or 2030 to 2008 emissions to project the
2007 platform emissions. These projection ratios are provided in

78
Table 4-33.

79
Table 4-33. Non-California year 2018 and 2030 Projection Factors for locomotives and Class 1 and Class 2
Commercial Marine Vessel Emissions
SCC Description Pollutant 2018 2030
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions CO 0.9284 0.9506
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions NOX 0.7042 0.3931
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM10 0.6429 0.3696
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions PM2.5 0.6429 0.3696
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions SO2 0.1213 0.0647
2280002X00 Marine Vessels, Commercial;Diesel;Underway & port emissions VOC 0.7529 0.4065
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations CO 1.1720 1.4180
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations NOX 0.7523 0.4426
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM10 0.6168 0.2939
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations PM2.5 0.6168 0.2939
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations SO2 0.0334 0.0405
2285002006 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class I Operations VOC 0.5453 0.2914
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations CO 1.1709 1.4174
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations NOX 1.1092 1.1014
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM10 1.0700 1.0250
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations PM2.5 1.0722 1.0206
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations SO2 0.0349 0.0349
2285002007 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Class II / III Operations VOC 1.1740 1.4189
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) CO 1.0832 1.1915
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) NOX 0.5292 0.2723
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM10 0.5457 0.1926
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) PM2.5 0.5445 0.1908
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) SO2 0.0286 0.0343
2285002008 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Passenger Trains (Amtrak) VOC 0.4735 0.1527
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines CO 1.0832 1.1918
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines NOX 0.5292 0.2723
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM10 0.5444 0.1918
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines PM2.5 0.5446 0.1906
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines SO2 0.0335 0.0335
2285002009 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Line Haul Locomotives: Commuter Lines VOC 0.4730 0.1535
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives CO 1.1720 1.4180
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives NOX 0.9948 0.7533
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM10 0.9562 0.7271
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives PM2.5 0.9567 0.7269
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives SO2 0.0337 0.0404
2285002010 Railroad Equipment;Diesel;Yard Locomotives VOC 0.9511 0.6851

The future-year locomotive emissions account for increased fuel consumption based on Energy Information
Administration (EIA) fuel consumption projections for freight rail, and emissions reductions resulting from
emissions standards from the Final Locomotive-Marine rule (EPA, 2009d). This rule lowered diesel sulfur
content and tightened emission standards for existing and new locomotives and marine diesel emissions to
lower future-year PM, SO2, and NOX, and is documented at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/marine.htm#2008final.

EPA applied HAP factors for VOC HAPs by using the VOC projection factors to obtain 1,3-butadiene,
acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, and formaldehyde. C1/C2 CMV diesel emissions (SCC = 2280002100 and
2280002200) were projected based on the Final Locomotive Marine rule national-level factors provided in
Table 4-33. Similar to locomotives, VOC HAPs were projected based on the VOC factor.

80
Step 2: Intermediate California year 2018 and year 2030 inventories

Obtained from CARB, the locomotive, and class 1 and 2 commercial marine emissions used for California
reflect year 2017 and year 2030 and include nonroad rules reflected in the December 2010 Rulemaking
Inventory (http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/offroadlsi10/offroadisor.pdf), those in the March 2011 Rule
Inventory, the Off-Road Construction Rule Inventory for “In-Use Diesel”, cargo handling equipment rules in
place as of 2011 (see http://www.arb.ca.gov/ports/cargo/cargo.htm), and the 2007 and 2010 regulations to
reduce emissions diesel engines on commercial harbor craft operated within California waters and 24
nautical miles of the California baseline.

The C1/C2 CMV emissions for both 2017 and 2030 were obtained from the CARB nonroad mobile dataset
“ARMJ_RF#2002_ANNUAL_MOBILE.txt”. These emissions were developed using Version 1 of the
CEPAM which supports various California off-road regulations. The locomotive emissions were obtained
from the CARB trains dataset “ARMJ_RF#2002_ANNUAL_TRAINS.txt”. Documentation of the CARB
offroad methodology, including c1c2rail sector data, is provided here:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles. EPA converted the CARB inventory
TOG to VOC by dividing the inventory TOG by the available VOC-to-TOG speciation factor. Note there
was no attempt to modify year 2017 CARB emissions to year 2018 via linear interpolation or other schemes.
EPA simply assigned year 2018 emissions as the 2017 CARB submittal with these medications as well as
those discussed next in step 3.

Step 3: Adjusting intermediate year 2018 and 2030 c1c2rail emissions to reflect the EISA mandate and
LD GHG emission standards

Rail category 1 and commercial marine activity are impacted by both the EISA mandate and the 2017-2025
light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards. The inventories were adjusted to account for both.

Inventories were adjusted to account for (a) differences in C1/C2 CMV and rail emission rates in 2018 and
2030 versus 2007, (b) the difference in ethanol volume impacts for AEO 2013 future year projections versus
the 2007 platform volume of 8.7 billion gallons and (c) impacts on gasoline production and distribution from
the 2017-2025 light duty vehicle GHG emissions standards (EPA, 2013b). Adjustments to C1/C2 CMV and
rail emission rates were calculated using ton/ton-mile emission factors that were obtained from the Tier 3
proposed rule inventory and AEO 2013 projected domestic shipping estimates (EPA, 2013c; Energy
Information Administration, 2013). The ethanol volume impacts were allocated to individual counties using
factors developed from the ORNL analysis (ORNL, 2013). Impacts on C1/C2 CMV and rail emissions from
the 2017-2025 light duty vehicle GHG emission standards were calculated using the RFS2 impacts
spreadsheet. Impacts from the 2017-2025 light duty vehicle GHG emission standards were assumed to be
negligible in 2018 but were accounted for by the scalars in Table 4-34 and Table 4-35 for 2030.
Table 4-34. Scalars Applied to Rail Combustion Emissions in 2030 to account for 2017-2025 LDGHG
emission standards
Pollutant Scalar
CO 0.998
NOX 0.998
PM2.5 0.997
PM10 0.996
SO2 0.997
VOC 0.997

81
 Table 4-35. Scalars Applied to C1/C2 Combustion Emissions in 2030 to account for 2017-2025 LDGHG
emission standards
Pollutant Scalar
CO 0.996
NOX 0.993
PM2.5 0.994
PM10 0.993
SO2 0.991
VOC 0.978

These emissions from updated ethanol volumes via RFS/EISA and LDGHG are not included in the
previously-discussed non-California loco-marine rule-based projections (Step 1) and CARB 2017 and 2030
inventories (Step 2). Nationally, these adjusted emissions are modest.

On average, for year 2018 rail emissions, the impact of the adjustment for transporting more ethanol is an
increase in emissions by 1.24%, and the adjustment for transporting less gasoline is -0.04%, leaving a small
increase in rail emissions in year 2018. For year 2030 rail emissions, the impact of the adjustment for
transporting more ethanol is an increase in emissions by 0.92%, and the adjustment for transporting less
gasoline is -0.06%, and the adjustment for the LD GHG rule is a reduction of 0.24%, leaving a small increase
in emissions in year 2030. These small increases in rail emissions are evident in Table 4-36. For CMV
emissions in year 2018, the impact of transporting more ethanol by 0.21% is offset by the adjustment for
transporting less gasoline by -1.32%. For 2030, as shown in the “2030 Error” column in Table 4-36, we
erroneously misapplied these RFS2 as well as LDGHG decreasing emissions adjustments: increased ethanol
by 0.19%, decreased gasoline by 2.05% and LDGHG rule reductions of -0.78%. In short, in year 2030,
national total NOX emissions from C1/C2 CMV are 2,678 tons larger than intended, a 0.6% error for C1/C2
CMV nationally.
Table 4-36. Cumulative RFS2 and LDGHG adjustments to c1c2rail sector emissions
2030
2018 Final Applied Final Intended 2030
Pollutant Source Adjustment 2018 adjustment 2030 2030 Error
CO cmv -855 88,226 0 92,593 90,360 2,233
CO rail 1,715 152,424 1,296 185,916 185,916 0
NH3 cmv -2 218 0 225 221 4
NH3 rail 5 358 5 357 357 0
NOX cmv -3,635 343,725 0 197,537 192,590 4,947
NOX rail 8,346 683,017 2,678 430,577 430,577 0
PM10 cmv -139 11,584 0 7,060 6,869 192
PM10 rail 198 18,530 31 9,672 9,672 0
PM2.5 cmv -155 11,102 0 6,773 6,504 269
PM2.5 rail -10 16,857 -36 8,826 8,826 0
SO2 cmv -296 5,380 0 4,249 3,870 379
SO2 rail 80 482 -7 478 478 0
VOC cmv -136 11,452 0 7,484 7,293 191
VOC rail 357 28,272 91 17,143 17,143 0

82
4.3.4 Class 3 commercial marine vessels (c3marine)
As discussed in Section 2.5.5, the c3marine sector emissions data were developed for year 2002 and
projected to year 2007 for the 2007 base case. The ECA-IMO project provides pollutant and geographic-
specific projection factors to year 2007, and also projection factors to years 2018 and 2030 that reflect
assumed growth and final ECA-IMO controls. The ECA-IMO rule, published in December 2009, applies to
Category 3 (C3) diesel engines (engines with per cylinder displacement at or above 30 liters) installed on
U.S. vessels. The ECA-IMO rule includes an implementation of Tier 2 and Tier 3 NOX limits for C3 engines
beginning in 2011 and 2016, respectively. The ECA-IMO rule also imposes fuel sulfur limits of 1,000 ppm
(0.1%) by 2015 in the ECA region -generally within 200 nautical miles of the U.S. and Canadian coastlines,
as well as 5,000 ppm (0.5%) for “global” areas –those areas outside the ECA region. For comparison, with
the exception of some local areas, year 2007 sulfur content limits are as high as 15,000 ppm (1.5%) in U.S.
waters and 45,000 ppm (4.5%) in global areas. More information on the ECA-IMO rule can be found in the
Category 3 marine diesel engines Regulatory Impact Assessment:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm.

Projection factors for creating the year 2018 and year 2030 c3marine inventories from the 2007 base case are
provided in Table 4-37. Background on the region and EEZ FIPS is provided in the discussion on the
c3marine inventory for 2007 –Section 2.5.5. The impact of the Tier 2 and Tier 3 NOX engine standards is
less noticeable because of the inevitable delay in fleet turnover for these new engines; however, the
immediate and drastic cuts in fuel sulfur content are obvious. VOC and CO are mostly unaffected by the
engine and fuel standards, thus providing an idea on how much these emissions would have grown without
ECA-IMO controls. VOC HAPs are assigned the same growth rates as VOC.
Table 4-37. Growth factors to project the 2007 ECA-IMO inventory to 2018 and 2030
Region EEZ FIPS Year NOX PM10 PM2.5 VOC CO SO2
2018 1.166 0.221 0.219 1.623 1.623 0.058
East Coast (EC) 85004
2030 0.900 0.373 0.373 2.752 2.752 0.098
2018 0.984 0.187 0.186 1.370 1.370 0.049
Gulf Coast (GC) 85003
2030 0.633 0.264 0.265 1.930 1.930 0.069
2018 1.061 0.197 0.196 1.429 1.429 0.055
North Pacific (NP) 85001
2030 0.773 0.293 0.297 2.128 2.126 0.082
2018 1.255 0.241 0.239 1.731 1.730 0.068
South Pacific (SP) 85002
2030 1.009 0.456 0.457 3.290 3.254 0.128
2018 1.023 0.159 0.158 1.204 1.204 0.043
Great Lakes (GL) n/a
2030 1.013 0.195 0.195 1.474 1.474 0.052
2018 1.401 1.606 1.606 1.606 1.606 1.606
Outside ECA 98001
2030 2.083 0.612 0.606 2.778 2.778 0.506

4.4 Canada, Mexico, and Offshore sources (othar, othon, and othpt)
Emissions for Canada and offshore sources were not projected to future years, and are therefore the same as
those used in the 2007 base case. Canada did not provide future-year emissions that were consistent with the
base year emissions. The Mexico emissions are based on year 1999 but projected to years 2018 and 2030. A
background on the development of year-2018 and year-2030 Mexico emissions from the 1999 inventory is
available at: http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ef/inventories/MNEI/index.html.

83
5 Emission Summaries
The following tables summarize the emissions for the 2007 base case, 2018 reference and control cases, and
the 2030 reference and control cases. These summaries are provided for the contiguous U.S. and for the
portions of Canada and Mexico inside the smaller 12km domain (12US2) discussed in Section 3.1. The
afdust sector emissions represent the summaries after application of both the land use (transport fraction) and
meteorological adjustments (see Section 2.2.1); therefore, this sector is called “afdust-adj” in these
summaries. The onroad and onroad refueling (onroad_rfl) sector totals are post-SMOKE-MOVES totals,
representing air quality model-ready emission totals. Biogenic emissions totals are only given within the
United States. The “c3marine-US” sector represents c3marine sector emissions with U.S. FIPS only; these
extend to roughly 3-5 miles offshore and include all U.S. waters in the Great Lakes along with all U.S. ports.
The Offshore c3marine represents all non-U.S. c3marine emissions outside of U.S. state waters. The
c3marine sector is discussed in Section 2.5.5. The “Off-shore othpt” sector is the non-Canada, non-Mexico
component of the othpt sector, i.e., the offshore oil platform emissions from the 2008 NEI.

National emission totals by air quality model-ready sector are provided for all CAP emissions for the 2007
base case and 2007 evaluation case in Table 5-1. The total of all U.S. emissions in all sectors is provided.
The lower portion of the table provides the non-U.S. emissions including subtotals for Canada, Mexico, and
all non-U.S. emissions. Tables 5-2 through 5-5 provide similar CAP emission totals by sector for the 2018
reference case, 2018 control case, 2030 reference case, and 2030 control case, respectively.

Table 5-6 provides total emissions for CO by state for all five cases: 2007 base case, 2018 reference and
control cases, and 2030 reference and control cases. Tables 5-7 through 5-12 provide the same summaries
for NH3, NOX, PM2.5, PM10, SO2 and VOC, respectively. Note that all of these tables use average fire
emissions and do not include biogenic emissions. Emission totals by state for each modeling platform
sector, for CAPs and air quality model species, can be found in these spreadsheets available in the docket:
2007rg_state_totals.xlsx, 2018rg_ref2_state_totals.xlsx, 2018rg_ctl_state_totals.xlsx,
2030rg_ref_state_totals.xlsx, and 2030rg_ctl_state_totals.xlsx.

84
 Table 5-1. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2007 base case
US Totals
Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM25 SO2 VOC
afdust 6,124,268 863,738
ag 3,595,613
biogenic 6,522,111 1,049,976 40,283,861
c1c2rail 218,827 557 1,338,134 43,832 41,015 48,805 61,547
nonpt 4,329,593 155,297 1,199,385 768,986 677,339 406,290 6,529,064
nonroad 17,834,128 1,915 1,877,955 187,707 178,342 100,652 2,517,282
onroad 38,519,970 140,897 7,612,080 365,017 282,304 40,008 4,273,876
avefire 18,347,571 300,999 243,561 1,860,459 1,576,667 135,806 4,326,863
ptipm 703,760 25,427 3,357,349 437,210 329,585 9,136,112 38,071
ptnonipm 2,963,103 67,997 2,136,694 582,397 406,476 1,586,719 1,101,615
c3marine 12,724 138,033 12,476 11,452 104,822 4,902
Total 89,451,787 4,288,703 18,953,168 10,382,352 4,366,917 11,559,214 59,137,081

Non-US Totals
Country/Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 VOC*
Canada othar 2,809,975 386,148 463,154 810,685 248,902 61,190 932,086
Canada othon 1,207,227 6,123 150,856 6,402 5,199 3,679 94,610
Canada othpt 571,728 15,546 338,967 65,952 39,787 831,669 155,906
Canada Subtotal 4,588,930 407,816 952,977 883,039 293,889 896,539 1,182,601
Mexico othar 410,176 109,861 171,735 71,082 47,115 53,424 450,935
Mexico othon 2,685,132 14,114 326,165 11,805 9,115 5,462 192,045
Mexico othpt 100,075 0 343,480 120,802 89,358 731,675 77,255
Mexico Subtotal 3,195,383 123,975 841,380 203,690 145,588 790,560 720,235
Offshore othpt 82,133 0 74,277 780 769 1,021 60,756
Canada c3marine 2,607 31,870 2,633 2,402 19,504 1,109
Offshore
c3marine 55,599 674,615 55,891 51,386 417,293 23,635
Total 7,924,652 531,791 2,575,119 1,146,033 494,033 2,124,917 1,988,337

85
 Table 5-2. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2018 reference case
US Totals:
Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM25 SO2 VOC
afdust 6,139,289 866,710
ag 3,717,417
biogenic 6,522,111 1,049,976 40,283,861
c1c2rail 236,042 567 1,008,203 29,525 27,390 5,693 39,272
nonpt 4,613,119 157,772 1,185,288 808,719 715,966 317,310 6,423,764
nonroad 12,702,891 2,276 1,067,481 106,715 100,588 2,670 1,408,935
onroad* 16,144,911 80,053 2,495,021 191,678 111,049 26,089 1,800,164
avefire 18,347,571 300,999 243,561 1,860,459 1,576,667 135,806 4,326,863
ptipm 857,784 40,255 1,941,441 295,290 233,699 2,131,278 46,057
ptnonipm 2,639,792 68,053 2,010,662 536,133 368,215 957,178 1,013,798
c3marine 18,960 151,489 2,530 2,304 5,734 7,290
Total 62,083,182 4,367,393 11,153,123 9,970,338 4,002,588 3,581,760 55,350,004

Non-US Totals
Country/Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 VOC*
Canada othar 2,809,975 386,148 463,154 810,685 248,902 61,190 932,086
Canada othon 1,207,227 6,123 150,856 6,402 5,199 3,679 94,610
Canada othpt 571,728 15,546 338,967 65,952 39,787 831,669 155,906
Canada Subtotal 4,588,930 407,816 952,977 883,039 293,889 896,539 1,182,601
Mexico othar 527,942 109,840 226,387 70,937 47,201 19,287 577,084
Mexico othon 2,572,443 15,225 304,436 13,185 10,317 3,177 178,219
Mexico othpt 148,760 0 544,711 170,913 127,736 1,066,523 94,351
Mexico Subtotal 3,249,146 125,065 1,075,534 255,035 185,254 1,088,987 849,654
Offshore othpt 82,133 0 74,277 780 769 1,021 60,756
Canada c3marine 3,750 34,364 518 469 1,054 1,595
Offshore
c3marine 87,463 807,580 32,180 29,537 190,969 37,173
Total 8,011,422 532,881 2,944,732 1,171,552 509,917 2,178,569 2,131,779

86
 Table 5-3. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2018 control case
US Totals:
Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM25 SO2 VOC
afdust 6,139,289 866,710
ag 3,717,417
biogenic 6,522,111 1,049,976 40,283,861
c1c2rail 236,042 567 1,008,203 29,525 27,390 5,693 39,272
nonpt 4,613,119 157,772 1,185,288 808,719 715,966 317,310 6,423,764
nonroad 12,702,891 2,276 1,067,481 106,715 100,588 1,912 1,408,935
onroad* 15,893,583 80,053 2,248,595 191,209 110,617 11,493 1,757,359
avefire 18,347,571 300,999 243,561 1,860,459 1,576,667 135,806 4,326,863
ptipm 857,784 40,255 1,941,441 295,290 233,699 2,131,278 46,057
ptnonipm 2,639,792 68,053 2,010,662 536,133 368,215 957,178 1,013,798
c3marine 18,960 151,489 2,530 2,304 5,734 7,290
Total 61,831,854 4,367,393 10,906,697 9,969,869 4,002,157 3,566,405 55,307,199

Non-US Totals
Country/Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 VOC*
Canada othar 2,809,975 386,148 463,154 810,685 248,902 61,190 932,086
Canada othon 1,207,227 6,123 150,856 6,402 5,199 3,679 94,610
Canada othpt 571,728 15,546 338,967 65,952 39,787 831,669 155,906
Canada Subtotal 4,588,930 407,816 952,977 883,039 293,889 896,539 1,182,601
Mexico othar 527,942 109,840 226,387 70,937 47,201 19,287 577,084
Mexico othon 2,572,443 15,225 304,436 13,185 10,317 3,177 178,219
Mexico othpt 148,760 0 544,711 170,913 127,736 1,066,523 94,351
Mexico Subtotal 3,249,146 125,065 1,075,534 255,035 185,254 1,088,987 849,654
Offshore othpt 82,133 0 74,277 780 769 1,021 60,756
Canada c3marine 3,750 34,364 518 469 1,054 1,595
Offshore
c3marine 87,463 807,580 32,180 29,537 190,969 37,173
Total 8,011,422 532,881 2,944,732 1,171,552 509,917 2,178,569 2,131,779

87
 Table 5-4. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2030 reference case
US Totals:
Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM25 SO2 VOC
afdust 6,174,969 873,719
ag 3,784,658
biogenic 6,522,111 1,049,976 40,283,861
c1c2rail 273,741 574 617,480 16,392 15,270 4,633 24,372
nonpt 4,622,228 157,772 1,198,956 809,404 716,460 318,053 6,353,099
Nonroad 13,926,036 2,702 715,617 68,626 63,839 3,045 1,182,812
onroad* 14,434,283 84,796 1,367,429 175,639 82,137 22,310 1,260,883
Avefire 18,347,571 300,999 243,561 1,860,459 1,576,667 135,806 4,326,863
Ptipm 1,064,259 49,461 1,997,303 300,645 238,259 2,188,169 52,061
Ptnonipm 2,693,137 67,596 2,022,539 532,186 364,598 935,044 1,001,777
c3marine 29,906 116,493 3,972 3,654 9,104 11,479
Total 61,913,273 4,448,559 9,329,353 9,942,292 3,934,603 3,616,164 54,497,206

Non-US Totals
Country/Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 VOC*
Canada othar 2,809,975 386,148 463,154 810,685 248,902 61,190 932,086
Canada othon 1,207,227 6,123 150,856 6,402 5,199 3,679 94,610
Canada othpt 571,728 15,546 338,967 65,952 39,787 831,669 155,906
Canada Subtotal 4,588,930 407,816 952,977 883,039 293,889 896,539 1,182,601
Mexico othar 794,133 109,861 326,219 75,903 51,815 9,909 798,874
Mexico othon 2,673,052 17,507 293,017 17,129 13,873 3,499 180,518
Mexico othpt 222,044 0 812,593 249,006 185,682 1,552,126 119,095
Mexico Subtotal 3,689,230 127,368 1,431,829 342,038 251,370 1,565,534 1,098,487
Offshore othpt 82,133 0 74,277 780 769 1,021 60,756
Canada c3marine 5,650 26,704 780 718 1,584 2,405
Offshore
c3marine 146,574 784,389 23,561 21,600 83,949 62,442
Total 8,512,517 535,184 3,270,176 1,250,198 568,346 2,548,627 2,406,691

88
 Table 5-5. National and non-U.S. CAP emissions by sector for 2030 control case
US Totals:
Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM25 SO2 VOC
afdust 6,174,969 873,719
ag 3,784,658
biogenic 6,522,111 1,049,976 40,283,861
c1c2rail 273,741 574 617,480 16,392 15,270 4,633 24,372
nonpt 4,622,228 157,772 1,198,956 809,404 716,460 318,053 6,353,099
nonroad 13,926,036 2,702 715,617 68,626 63,839 2,176 1,182,812
onroad* 10,780,871 84,796 1,018,962 166,388 73,619 10,040 1,079,042
avefire 18,347,571 300,999 243,561 1,860,459 1,576,667 135,806 4,326,863
ptipm 1,064,259 49,461 1,997,303 300,645 238,259 2,188,169 52,061
ptnonipm 2,693,137 67,596 2,022,539 532,186 364,598 935,044 1,001,777
c3marine 29,906 116,493 3,972 3,654 9,104 11,479
Total 58,259,861 4,448,559 8,980,886 9,933,042 3,926,085 3,603,025 54,315,365

Non-US Totals
Country/Sector CO NH3 NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 VOC*
Canada othar 2,809,975 386,148 463,154 810,685 248,902 61,190 932,086
Canada othon 1,207,227 6,123 150,856 6,402 5,199 3,679 94,610
Canada othpt 571,728 15,546 338,967 65,952 39,787 831,669 155,906
Canada Subtotal 4,588,930 407,816 952,977 883,039 293,889 896,539 1,182,601
Mexico othar 794,133 109,861 326,219 75,903 51,815 9,909 798,874
Mexico othon 2,673,052 17,507 293,017 17,129 13,873 3,499 180,518
Mexico othpt 222,044 0 812,593 249,006 185,682 1,552,126 119,095
Mexico Subtotal 3,689,230 127,368 1,431,829 342,038 251,370 1,565,534 1,098,487
Offshore othpt 82,133 0 74,277 780 769 1,021 60,756
Canada c3marine 5,650 26,704 780 718 1,584 2,405
Offshore
c3marine 146,574 784,389 23,561 21,600 83,949 62,442
Total 8,512,517 535,184 3,270,176 1,250,198 568,346 2,548,627 2,406,691

89
 Table 5-6. CO emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 1,924,241 1,360,917 1,351,229 1,355,227 1,255,631
Arizona 1,466,047 957,043 944,935 1,011,463 871,117
Arkansas 1,600,242 1,212,877 1,206,827 1,205,866 1,154,433
California 6,868,040 5,236,858 5,217,036 5,027,026 5,027,026
Colorado 1,190,074 809,875 792,847 872,740 763,605
Connecticut 574,605 357,385 354,137 333,723 332,897
Delaware 162,704 105,413 104,551 93,324 93,129
District of
Columbia 60,932 35,900 35,291 36,923 30,370
Florida 5,022,400 3,138,544 3,105,671 3,230,725 2,815,295
Georgia 3,792,250 2,457,784 2,438,401 2,418,199 2,227,785
Idaho 1,953,101 1,772,944 1,767,029 1,772,829 1,738,622
Illinois 2,288,411 1,436,945 1,421,535 1,493,876 1,330,020
Indiana 1,860,666 1,204,836 1,191,445 1,214,686 1,095,670
Iowa 906,397 498,846 492,379 498,959 455,151
Kansas 1,085,160 754,279 748,374 757,743 706,892
Kentucky 1,313,600 920,767 913,119 919,051 844,092
Louisiana 1,901,576 1,443,889 1,436,282 1,461,086 1,378,073
Maine 417,956 251,190 248,837 230,967 230,019
Maryland 1,054,787 708,961 704,541 666,789 666,962
Massachusetts 876,162 604,516 598,218 578,757 577,788
Michigan 2,970,746 1,688,062 1,668,056 1,628,993 1,486,651
Minnesota 2,785,008 2,148,692 2,137,462 2,094,983 2,011,938
Mississippi 1,170,077 835,928 829,347 836,297 765,258
Missouri 2,144,179 1,422,916 1,411,751 1,422,427 1,311,400
Montana 1,330,031 1,214,531 1,210,079 1,213,708 1,193,598
Nebraska 531,194 310,062 306,155 316,475 283,905
Nevada 724,335 518,145 513,004 542,295 490,562
New Hampshire 304,620 209,280 206,548 215,511 194,314
New Jersey 1,352,241 902,273 893,855 867,908 865,761
New Mexico 677,284 453,892 448,885 445,239 413,092
New York 2,641,178 1,649,663 1,632,656 1,615,599 1,608,909
North Carolina 3,273,181 1,954,088 1,932,231 1,907,338 1,749,607
North Dakota 293,318 209,600 208,195 206,779 195,525
Ohio 3,087,510 1,726,198 1,703,457 1,707,663 1,536,234
Oklahoma 1,686,238 1,214,110 1,204,794 1,221,253 1,133,433
Oregon 2,201,777 1,749,839 1,740,219 1,670,492 1,665,955

90
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Pennsylvania 2,460,443 1,440,750 1,427,500 1,353,066 1,350,221
Rhode Island 151,235 106,761 105,767 101,731 101,681
South Carolina 1,424,534 898,530 890,759 906,112 822,767
South Dakota 321,482 236,051 234,446 234,663 220,361
Tennessee 1,788,332 1,035,150 1,022,408 1,012,970 898,967
Texas 5,466,088 3,430,870 3,388,430 3,632,059 3,119,557
Utah 824,426 589,517 580,111 590,348 538,323
Vermont 188,782 147,145 145,493 140,898 140,486
Virginia 1,837,272 1,146,294 1,134,028 1,174,277 1,039,507
Washington 2,215,115 1,341,308 1,322,137 1,175,059 1,166,307
West Virginia 655,801 432,831 429,529 427,734 401,919
Wisconsin 1,396,496 919,043 910,135 957,000 861,066
Wyoming 656,091 562,905 559,282 562,888 546,433
TOTAL 82,878,364 55,764,204 55,269,404 55,361,723 51,708,312

91
 Table 5-7. NH3 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 78,589 84,806 84,806 86,662 86,662
Arizona 41,818 41,331 41,331 42,090 42,090
Arkansas 135,328 142,800 142,800 145,796 145,796
California 393,315 390,595 390,595 395,474 395,474
Colorado 74,561 74,495 74,495 74,938 74,938
Connecticut 5,158 4,612 4,612 4,691 4,691
Delaware 14,044 15,331 15,331 15,764 15,764
District of
Columbia 366 281 281 308 308
Florida 63,410 60,707 60,707 62,042 62,042
Georgia 116,050 123,001 123,001 125,862 125,862
Idaho 130,482 130,704 130,704 130,326 130,326
Illinois 119,703 122,450 122,450 126,561 126,561
Indiana 98,051 101,698 101,698 104,955 104,955
Iowa 301,952 316,176 316,176 327,804 327,804
Kansas 161,525 162,607 162,607 162,849 162,849
Kentucky 60,996 62,786 62,786 63,724 63,724
Louisiana 84,106 85,334 85,334 86,389 86,389
Maine 7,264 7,353 7,353 7,482 7,482
Maryland 31,585 32,929 32,929 34,163 34,163
Massachusetts 7,229 6,421 6,421 6,700 6,700
Michigan 69,890 69,713 69,713 71,021 71,021
Minnesota 210,960 214,414 214,414 220,096 220,096
Mississippi 68,874 73,643 73,643 75,479 75,479
Missouri 139,500 142,734 142,734 145,793 145,793
Montana 72,677 73,473 73,473 74,049 74,049
Nebraska 179,531 182,275 182,275 182,928 182,928
Nevada 10,483 10,706 10,706 10,761 10,761
New Hampshire 2,303 2,214 2,214 2,266 2,266
New Jersey 11,949 11,042 11,042 11,530 11,530
New Mexico 43,094 42,928 42,928 43,343 43,343
New York 51,428 48,036 48,036 49,238 49,238
North Carolina 187,827 198,254 198,254 206,640 206,640
North Dakota 86,696 88,085 88,085 89,930 89,930
Ohio 111,991 114,657 114,657 117,372 117,372
Oklahoma 112,918 116,127 116,127 118,004 118,004
Oregon 64,640 65,193 65,193 65,684 65,684
Pennsylvania 80,223 81,438 81,438 83,198 83,198
Rhode Island 1,135 1,097 1,097 1,123 1,123
South Carolina 39,330 40,054 40,054 41,038 41,038
South Dakota 134,157 136,513 136,513 139,008 139,008

92
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 42,899 43,506 43,506 43,838 43,838
Texas 320,410 323,482 323,482 326,720 326,720
Utah 42,676 43,006 43,006 42,859 42,859
Vermont 8,404 8,395 8,395 8,507 8,507
Virginia 51,371 51,793 51,793 52,776 52,776
Washington 53,330 53,641 53,641 54,200 54,200
West Virginia 16,526 17,102 17,102 17,436 17,436
Wisconsin 120,740 120,384 120,384 122,140 122,140
Wyoming 26,768 26,877 26,877 26,851 26,851
TOTAL 4,288,260 4,367,201 4,367,201 4,448,408 4,448,408

93
 Table 5-8. NOX emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 419,234 229,845 224,086 194,697 186,751
Arizona 321,030 166,137 162,417 131,427 123,261
Arkansas 244,131 156,429 152,943 134,335 129,259
California 1,013,990 534,773 534,207 401,302 401,302
Colorado 316,568 193,930 188,903 169,439 160,990
Connecticut 100,231 47,836 45,256 35,480 33,745
Delaware 47,738 22,292 21,481 16,641 16,142
District of
Columbia 14,360 6,129 5,797 4,603 3,930
Florida 924,488 415,734 396,122 307,302 278,307
Georgia 648,360 309,555 295,898 232,426 215,596
Idaho 97,617 68,588 66,444 58,280 55,122
Illinois 706,849 374,954 364,591 308,293 291,621
Indiana 578,412 303,868 296,821 253,053 242,065
Iowa 277,985 181,738 178,314 147,307 142,454
Kansas 313,735 187,508 184,433 153,618 149,064
Kentucky 423,640 210,206 205,730 179,350 172,780
Louisiana 547,743 386,244 382,129 313,834 307,329
Maine 73,939 45,873 44,558 38,031 37,127
Maryland 244,074 110,763 106,299 86,801 84,079
Massachusetts 184,511 98,027 94,083 78,391 75,973
Michigan 596,927 322,122 312,688 274,422 260,185
Minnesota 436,436 251,574 245,143 203,733 195,604
Mississippi 264,622 152,848 148,935 128,683 123,054
Missouri 484,132 250,506 242,841 197,412 186,391
Montana 150,854 90,351 88,666 75,197 72,858
Nebraska 232,064 154,028 152,036 114,138 111,001
Nevada 113,273 68,916 66,421 56,506 52,503
New Hampshire 53,845 28,002 26,788 24,553 21,983
New Jersey 279,205 156,200 150,033 126,532 122,477
New Mexico 242,966 214,189 211,475 193,579 189,554
New York 512,170 288,870 278,693 233,250 225,541
North Carolina 470,574 240,195 229,296 189,772 174,568
North Dakota 158,552 109,343 108,580 90,989 89,772
Ohio 780,928 380,073 367,931 308,996 292,899
Oklahoma 422,925 276,827 271,902 246,670 239,147
Oregon 191,065 117,844 114,051 71,781 69,227
Pennsylvania 649,142 382,391 373,752 323,768 318,208
Rhode Island 24,475 13,179 12,437 9,836 9,418
South Carolina 260,234 147,083 142,073 126,278 119,008
South Dakota 72,894 47,905 47,011 36,593 35,209
94
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 453,075 196,382 188,871 151,166 140,425
Texas 1,643,416 1,049,545 1,027,205 915,168 877,443
Utah 217,960 159,486 156,268 142,187 137,588
Vermont 23,019 13,139 12,430 10,261 9,800
Virginia 409,546 233,194 225,015 186,346 171,417
Washington 338,856 195,727 189,118 120,291 115,573
West Virginia 283,713 133,980 132,031 118,343 115,759
Wisconsin 313,623 181,705 176,143 161,856 152,732
Wyoming 245,053 202,613 201,270 185,500 183,713
TOTAL 17,824,174 10,108,647 9,849,620 8,268,417 7,919,951

95
 Table 5-9. PM2.5 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 108,906 106,546 106,536 105,571 105,391
Arizona 74,270 69,748 69,738 68,653 68,436
Arkansas 108,112 104,947 104,941 104,175 104,073
California 399,796 378,847 378,829 373,435 373,435
Colorado 59,418 58,602 58,625 57,615 57,347
Connecticut 11,334 10,251 10,243 9,806 9,803
Delaware 6,098 4,945 4,943 4,762 4,761
District of
Columbia 1,606 1,283 1,282 1,173 1,156
Florida 167,089 140,539 140,509 137,516 136,937
Georgia 167,573 160,387 160,368 158,003 157,632
Idaho 149,633 148,313 148,322 147,911 147,826
Illinois 114,168 103,352 103,280 101,102 100,555
Indiana 111,294 91,698 91,658 91,207 90,845
Iowa 65,220 57,874 57,863 56,419 56,278
Kansas 114,378 110,828 110,820 109,983 109,854
Kentucky 76,841 76,393 76,371 75,463 75,273
Louisiana 148,650 136,251 136,244 132,771 132,630
Maine 13,644 12,574 12,570 12,117 12,116
Maryland 33,292 24,795 24,770 24,009 23,994
Massachusetts 24,024 21,679 21,663 20,663 20,656
Michigan 92,529 89,602 89,545 87,489 86,974
Minnesota 182,166 176,876 176,837 174,485 174,123
Mississippi 67,639 63,514 63,507 62,644 62,521
Missouri 113,722 104,744 104,718 102,905 102,623
Montana 114,123 115,121 115,126 113,412 113,360
Nebraska 54,712 52,061 52,055 50,565 50,466
Nevada 47,003 47,297 47,291 46,785 46,684
New Hampshire 11,396 11,424 11,418 11,329 11,251
New Jersey 32,028 24,540 24,520 23,033 23,023
New Mexico 73,249 73,117 73,111 72,514 72,402
New York 67,804 59,517 59,483 56,787 56,772
North Carolina 131,243 109,172 109,152 107,654 107,324
North Dakota 45,406 47,772 47,767 46,969 46,914
Ohio 130,887 93,624 93,558 91,451 90,922
Oklahoma 119,448 113,347 113,336 112,259 112,075
Oregon 136,821 134,681 134,692 133,082 133,101
Pennsylvania 121,002 73,505 73,474 71,428 71,413
Rhode Island 3,551 3,283 3,280 3,154 3,153
South Carolina 67,530 54,106 54,098 53,836 53,683
South Dakota 34,265 32,640 32,636 32,079 32,023
96
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 70,324 62,282 62,261 60,406 60,155
Texas 304,810 287,235 287,156 280,355 279,426
Utah 42,657 43,349 43,361 42,052 41,932
Vermont 8,798 10,084 10,081 9,934 9,933
Virginia 56,025 51,254 51,225 50,234 49,896
Washington 81,218 74,509 74,529 72,302 72,341
West Virginia 55,146 37,131 37,124 36,655 36,583
Wisconsin 52,086 53,545 53,507 53,172 52,783
Wyoming 88,542 83,455 83,459 82,734 82,690
TOTAL 4,361,473 4,002,642 4,001,882 3,934,060 3,925,542

97
 Table 5-10. PM10 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 183,182 178,922 178,911 178,468 178,272
Arizona 221,304 216,564 216,553 216,217 215,981
Arkansas 213,094 209,261 209,254 209,464 209,354
California 767,701 746,021 746,001 741,688 741,688
Colorado 167,205 166,169 166,194 166,316 166,024
Connecticut 14,555 13,095 13,085 12,687 12,683
Delaware 8,759 8,981 8,979 8,814 8,813
District of
Columbia 2,263 1,917 1,916 1,814 1,796
Florida 293,334 267,282 267,250 266,055 265,425
Georgia 293,557 280,599 280,578 279,207 278,803
Idaho 255,419 253,805 253,814 253,162 253,069
Illinois 360,962 349,384 349,306 349,836 349,241
Indiana 249,264 232,131 232,088 233,654 233,260
Iowa 231,578 223,006 222,994 223,494 223,341
Kansas 431,017 427,337 427,329 429,770 429,630
Kentucky 127,958 127,539 127,514 127,013 126,807
Louisiana 213,933 198,283 198,275 195,160 195,006
Maine 18,899 17,372 17,368 16,930 16,928
Maryland 47,375 37,502 37,474 36,883 36,867
Massachusetts 50,126 47,953 47,935 47,152 47,144
Michigan 183,520 179,905 179,843 178,640 178,081
Minnesota 379,202 370,541 370,499 369,565 369,172
Mississippi 135,088 130,000 129,992 129,689 129,555
Missouri 313,634 301,513 301,485 300,857 300,552
Montana 240,329 242,981 242,987 241,375 241,319
Nebraska 244,975 242,296 242,290 242,488 242,380
Nevada 207,718 208,009 208,002 207,635 207,525
New Hampshire 13,604 13,375 13,369 13,332 13,247
New Jersey 42,034 34,824 34,801 33,564 33,554
New Mexico 499,439 499,598 499,591 499,279 499,157
New York 110,972 100,461 100,425 98,415 98,399
North Carolina 188,502 162,820 162,799 161,721 161,362
North Dakota 184,477 187,463 187,458 188,449 188,389
Ohio 228,328 190,228 190,156 189,335 188,760
Oklahoma 395,287 387,332 387,320 387,718 387,518
Oregon 202,601 200,067 200,080 198,682 198,702
Pennsylvania 155,601 104,914 104,881 103,180 103,163
Rhode Island 4,623 4,348 4,345 4,248 4,246
South Carolina 126,413 110,963 110,955 111,480 111,314
South Dakota 120,429 119,324 119,319 119,870 119,809
98
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 112,667 104,066 104,043 102,637 102,364
Texas 1,214,912 1,197,608 1,197,521 1,195,116 1,194,108
Utah 134,321 134,782 134,795 133,513 133,383
Vermont 11,723 13,032 13,028 12,912 12,912
Virginia 89,603 83,362 83,330 82,778 82,411
Washington 155,262 148,701 148,723 147,304 147,346
West Virginia 71,742 52,483 52,475 52,054 51,975
Wisconsin 125,130 123,545 123,504 124,019 123,597
Wyoming 328,164 316,276 316,281 315,609 315,562
TOTAL 10,371,781 9,967,938 9,967,113 9,939,248 9,929,998

99
 Table 5-11. SO2 emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 532,060 120,900 120,556 127,284 127,008
Arizona 95,311 63,737 63,547 65,920 65,743
Arkansas 96,013 53,257 53,084 56,039 55,890
California 63,232 47,581 47,579 49,907 49,907
Colorado 74,021 24,643 24,328 25,224 24,933
Connecticut 20,638 13,765 13,603 14,143 14,013
Delaware 45,503 8,554 8,506 8,286 8,248
District of
Columbia 1,685 906 882 898 879
Florida 405,072 102,249 100,910 108,181 107,040
Georgia 698,480 135,516 134,826 132,415 131,818
Idaho 28,009 23,180 23,072 23,168 23,073
Illinois 409,821 187,550 186,932 189,244 188,731
Indiana 815,212 227,783 227,371 237,607 237,259
Iowa 189,267 78,977 78,817 81,301 81,157
Kansas 138,105 48,411 48,244 49,836 49,688
Kentucky 417,969 174,597 174,335 179,587 179,376
Louisiana 252,229 146,547 146,284 138,417 138,188
Maine 24,257 6,038 5,953 6,056 5,987
Maryland 312,223 49,690 49,385 50,476 50,225
Massachusetts 84,476 13,227 12,908 13,390 13,126
Michigan 427,357 200,680 200,117 211,957 211,496
Minnesota 129,765 83,686 83,355 88,071 87,797
Mississippi 95,879 37,150 36,918 38,561 38,366
Missouri 418,246 189,346 188,954 191,943 191,609
Montana 38,639 20,432 20,369 18,784 18,729
Nebraska 77,017 57,286 57,181 58,990 58,894
Nevada 18,667 14,363 14,206 14,387 14,245
New Hampshire 51,031 9,421 9,342 9,791 9,723
New Jersey 61,773 15,013 14,554 14,664 14,279
New Mexico 34,258 25,728 25,580 26,093 25,967
New York 240,983 58,409 57,631 58,321 57,641
North Carolina 440,967 116,993 116,434 116,411 115,949
North Dakota 149,603 32,717 32,676 32,833 32,797
Ohio 1,111,660 206,919 206,273 211,543 211,001
Oklahoma 148,867 75,536 75,257 72,933 72,688
Oregon 31,045 26,354 26,152 13,415 13,244
Pennsylvania 1,102,035 189,787 189,263 200,627 200,180
Rhode Island 4,576 3,727 3,674 3,733 3,689
South Carolina 217,175 66,623 66,343 67,591 67,357
South Dakota 13,097 14,981 14,932 15,638 15,595
100
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 297,935 63,903 63,502 64,567 64,236
Texas 651,329 236,570 235,013 207,330 205,952
Utah 35,663 28,388 28,232 26,626 26,490
Vermont 4,173 2,346 2,292 2,426 2,379
Virginia 258,286 72,522 72,082 74,142 73,757
Washington 36,638 16,137 15,781 16,421 16,106
West Virginia 422,049 85,518 85,418 91,986 91,910
Wisconsin 207,922 53,394 53,044 60,050 59,760
Wyoming 115,330 51,648 51,596 49,837 49,794
TOTAL 11,545,544 3,582,687 3,567,299 3,617,050 3,603,918

101
 Table 5-12. VOC emissions (tons/yr) for each case and state
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Alabama 394,478 312,021 311,865 295,361 290,621
Arizona 299,405 226,453 229,150 219,068 212,501
Arkansas 367,862 314,065 313,618 301,947 299,537
California 1,493,672 1,203,729 1,214,353 1,155,135 1,151,387
Colorado 359,741 265,489 265,909 259,229 254,687
Connecticut 91,124 56,030 55,574 49,410 49,018
Delaware 30,272 19,775 19,737 17,633 17,506
District of
Columbia 11,564 7,841 7,783 7,516 7,224
Florida 970,251 685,446 685,391 630,355 610,660
Georgia 731,394 580,549 578,596 541,521 532,475
Idaho 491,700 465,738 465,639 458,300 456,974
Illinois 490,297 358,934 357,262 340,282 332,759
Indiana 348,813 264,712 263,731 247,129 241,765
Iowa 189,536 142,561 141,889 132,241 130,142
Kansas 238,892 199,124 198,562 189,268 186,925
Kentucky 284,125 224,140 223,611 210,998 207,531
Louisiana 502,713 427,256 427,040 406,847 402,894
Maine 80,956 56,005 55,813 48,750 48,542
Maryland 172,580 111,856 111,432 101,205 100,363
Massachusetts 180,220 128,399 127,673 118,733 117,986
Michigan 565,194 398,966 397,029 357,995 351,667
Minnesota 622,926 515,939 514,442 481,519 477,844
Mississippi 267,564 213,246 213,264 199,541 196,050
Missouri 423,126 323,326 322,071 302,292 297,093
Montana 293,547 276,893 276,801 272,858 272,065
Nebraska 105,934 82,394 81,972 75,541 74,071
Nevada 152,771 132,532 134,495 132,199 129,597
New Hampshire 57,530 39,034 38,770 35,049 33,985
New Jersey 261,426 177,994 177,196 164,288 163,145
New Mexico 311,387 280,189 280,751 273,093 271,173
New York 535,040 337,635 336,195 307,325 305,271
North Carolina 620,323 474,236 473,183 440,230 432,671
North Dakota 64,768 52,510 52,365 49,120 48,609
Ohio 479,576 317,531 315,292 283,813 276,248
Oklahoma 512,690 450,517 449,649 435,508 431,452
Oregon 435,314 387,230 386,735 367,051 366,503
Pennsylvania 455,475 336,441 337,248 312,623 311,092
Rhode Island 27,159 18,437 18,318 16,762 16,627
South Carolina 292,949 220,191 219,953 205,620 201,702
South Dakota 81,613 70,455 70,331 67,162 66,511
102
State 2007rg 2018rg_ref 2018rg_ctl 2030rg_ref 2030rg_ctl
Tennessee 354,294 256,459 255,849 235,103 229,819
Texas 2,414,946 2,158,320 2,155,608 2,108,224 2,083,716
Utah 297,616 287,999 288,306 279,249 276,992
Vermont 30,384 22,924 22,977 20,511 20,367
Virginia 360,687 265,016 264,007 247,344 240,525
Washington 353,447 277,515 276,658 239,200 238,165
West Virginia 117,626 88,643 88,413 82,210 81,028
Wisconsin 337,259 241,006 240,083 222,276 217,957
Wyoming 251,477 260,241 260,208 256,390 255,740
TOTAL 18,813,646 15,013,942 15,002,796 14,201,023 14,019,183

103
6 References
Adelman, Z. 2012. Memorandum: Fugitive Dust Modeling for the 2008 Emissions Modeling Platform.
UNC Institute for the Environment, Chapel Hill, NC. September, 28, 2012.

Anderson, G.K.; Sandberg, D.V; Norheim, R.A., 2004. Fire Emission Production Simulator (FEPS) User's
Guide. Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/fera/feps/FEPS_users_guide.pdf

ARB, 2000. “Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and
Vehicles”. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Control
Division, Sacramento, CA. October, 2000. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/documents/rrpFinal.pdf.

ARB, 2007. “Proposed Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles”. California Environmental
Protection Agency Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Control Division, Sacramento, CA. April,
2007. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/isor.pdf

ARB, 2010a. “Proposed Amendments to the Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets and the
Off-Road Large Spark-Ignition Fleet Requirements”. California Environmental Protection Agency
Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Control Division, Sacramento, CA. October, 2010. Available
at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/offroadlsi10/offroadisor.pdf.

ARB, 2010b. “Estimate of Premature Deaths Associated with Fine Particle Pollution (PM2.5) in California
Using a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Methodology”. California Environmental Protection
Agency Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Control Division, Sacramento, CA. August, 2010.
Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/pm-mort/pm-report_2010.pdf.

Bullock Jr., R, and K. A. Brehme (2002) “Atmospheric mercury simulation using the CMAQ model:
formulation description and analysis of wet deposition results.” Atmospheric Environment 36, pp
2135–2146.

Department of Energy, 2012 Annual Energy Outlook 2012, Early Release. Report No. DOE/EIA-
0383(2012), June 2012. Available at: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/
ERG, 2006. Mexico National Emissions Inventory, 1999: Final, prepared by Eastern Research Group for
Secratariat of the Environment and Natural Resources and the National Institute of Ecology, Mexico,
October 11, 2006. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/mexico/1999_mexico_nei_final_report.pdf
Energy Information Administration. 2006. Annual Energy Outlook 2006. Report #:DOE/EIA-0383(2006)
Available at: http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo06/aeoref_tab.html.
Energy Information Administration. 2010. Annual Energy Outlook 2011 Early Release Overview. U.S.
Department of Energy, December 2010. Report # DOE/EIA-0383ER (2011). Available at:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/forecasts/aeo/tables_ref.cfm
Environ Corp. 2008. Emission Profiles for EPA SPECIATE Database, Part 2: EPAct Fuels (Evaporative
Emissions). Prepared for U. S. EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, September 30, 2008.
EPA, 1994. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery for Motor Vehicles, Fact Sheet. April, 1994. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/ld-hwy/onboard/orvrfact.txt

104
EPA, 2000. Light-Duty Vehicle, Light-Duty Truck, and Medium-Duty Passenger Vehicle Tier 2 Exhaust
Emission Standards. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division.
Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/light-duty/tier2stds.htm
EPA, 2005. EPA’s National Inventory Model (NMIM), A Consolidated Emissions Modeling System for
MOBILE6 and NONROAD, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Assessment and Standards Division. Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-05-024, December
2005. Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nmim/420r05024.pdf.
EPA 2006a. SPECIATE 4.0, Speciation Database Development Document, Final Report, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management
Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA600-R-06-161, February 2006.
Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/speciate/speciate4/documentation/speciatedoc_1206.pdf.
EPA, 2006b. Regulatory Impact Analyses, 2006 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle
Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
October, 2006. Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017, # EPAHQ-OAR-2006-0834. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/ria.html.
EPA. 2007a. National Scale Modeling for the Final Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Emissions Analysis and Monitoring Division, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711, EPA 454/R-07-002, February 2007. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/toxics/454r07002.pdf
EPA, 2007b. Guidance for Estimating VOC and NOX Emission Changes from MACT Rules, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy
Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA-457/B-07-001, May 2007. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/o3imp8hr/documents/guidance/200705_epa457_b-07-
001_emission_changes_mact_rules.pdf.
EPA, 2008. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions from Marine SI and Small SI Engines,
Vessels, and Equipment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-08-014, September,
2008. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/marinesi-equipld/420r08014.pdf
EPA, 2009a. 2005 National Emissions Inventory, Version 2. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2005inventory.html.
EPA. 2009b. “Impact Calculations RFS-Docket.xls.” Available on the RFS2 Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–
2010–0133 at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!home;tab=search.
EPA, 2009c. Exhaust Emission Profiles for EPA SPECIATE Database: Energy Policy Act (EPAct) Low-
Level Ethanol Fuel Blends and Tier 2 Light-Duty Vehicles. Assessment and Standards Division,
Office of Transportation and Air Quality. Report No. EPA-420-R-09-002.
EPA, 2009d. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Locomotive Engines
and Marine Compression Ignition Engines Less than 30 Liters Per Cylinder. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division,
Ann Arbor, MI 48105, EPA420-R-08-001a, May 2009. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/420r08001a.pdf
EPA, 2009e. Emission Factors for Locomotives. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and
Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI EPA-420-F-09-25. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf.
105
EPA, 2009f. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Category 3 Marine
Diesel Engines. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Ann
Arbor, MI. Report No. EPA-420-R-09-019. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420r09019.pdf.
EPA. 2010a. Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis. Assessment and
Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor, MI. Report No. EPA-420-
R-10-006, February, 2010. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/regulations.htm.
EPA, 2010b. Technical Support Document: The Industrial Sectors Integrated Solutions (ISIS) Model and
the Analysis for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source
Performance Standards for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Sectors Policies and Program Division and Air Pollution Prevention and Control
Division, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, August 2010.
EPA, 2010c. Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards, Final Rule. April, 2010. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/ld-
hwy/greenhouse/ld-ghg.htm
EPA, 2011a. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas (HDGHG) Emissions Inventory for Air Quality
Modeling Technical Support Document, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality
Assessment Division, Research Triangle Park, NC. Report No. EPA-420-R-11-008, August 2011.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r11008.pdf
EPA. 2011b. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Final CAP-BAFM 2005-Based Platform, Version 4.2.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/index.html#final
EPA, 2012a. 2008 National Emissions Inventory, version 2 Technical Support Document. Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html#inventorydoc
EPA, 2012b. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Final Rulemaking for 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse
Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Ann Arbor, MI. Report No. EPA-420-R-12-
016, August, 2012. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420r12016.pdf
EPA. 2012c. “upstream emissions_2020 AEO.xls”,” upstream emissions_2020 PM NAAQS rev.xls,”
Available on the PM NAAQS Docket [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0955] at:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!home;tab=search.
Frost & Sullivan, 2010. “Project: Market Research and Report on North American Residential Wood
Heaters, Fireplaces, and Hearth Heating Products Market (P.O. # PO1-IMP403-F&S). Final Report
April 26, 2010”. Prepared by Frost & Sullivan, Mountain View, CA 94041.
Joint Fire Science Program, 2009. Consume 3.0--a software tool for computing fuel consumption. Fire
Science Brief. 66, June 2009. Consume 3.0 is available at:
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/fera/research/smoke/consume/index.shtml

Kochera, A., 1997. “Residential Use of Fireplaces,” Housing Economics, March 1997, 10-11. Also see:
http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei10/area/houck.pdf.
LADCO, 2012. “Regional Air Quality Analyses for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze: Base C Emissions
Inventory (September 12, 2011)”. Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Rosemont, IL 60018.

106
 Available at:
http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basecv8/Base_C_Emissions_Documentation_Sept_12.pdf
McCarty, J.L., Korontzi, S., Jutice, C.O., and T. Loboda. 2009. The spatial and temporal distribution of crop
residue burning in the contiguous United States. Science of the Total Environment, 407 (21): 5701-
5712.
McKenzie, D.; Raymond, C.L.; Kellogg, L.-K.B.; Norheim, R.A; Andreu, A.G.; Bayard, A.C.; Kopper, K.E.;
Elman. E. 2007. Mapping fuels at multiple scales: landscape application of the Fuel Characteristic
Classification System. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 37:2421-2437. Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 2009. Analysis of Fuel Ethanol Transportation Activity and Potential Distribution
Constraints. U.S. Department of Energy, March 2009. Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0133.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2009. Analysis of Fuel Ethanol Transportation Activity and Potential
Distribution Constraints. U.S. Department of Energy, March 2009. Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2010–0133.
Ottmar, R.D.; Sandberg, D.V.; Bluhm, A. 2003. Biomass consumption and carbon pools. Poster. In: Galley,
K.E.M., Klinger, R.C.; Sugihara, N.G. (eds.) Proceedings of Fire Ecology, Prevention, and
Management. Misc. Pub. 13, Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station.

Ottmar, R.D.; Prichard, S.J.; Vihnanek, R.E.; Sandberg, D.V. 2006. Modification and validation of fuel
consumption models for shrub and forested lands in the Southwest, Pacific Northwest, Rockes,
Midwest, Southeast, and Alaska. Final report, JFSP Project 98-1-9-06.

Ottmar, R.D.; Sandberg, D.V.; Riccardi, C.L.; Prichard, S.J. 2007. An Overview of the Fuel Characteristic
Classification System – Quantifying, Classifying, and Creating Fuelbeds for Resource Planning.
Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 37(12): 2383-2393. FCCS is available at:
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/fera/fccs/index.shtml

Pouliot, G., H. Simon, P. Bhave, D. Tong, D. Mobley, T. Pace, and T. Pierce . (2010) “Assessing the
Anthropogenic Fugitive Dust Emission Inventory and Temporal Allocation Using an Updated
Speciation of Particulate Matter.” International Emission Inventory Conference, San Antonio, TX.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conference/ei19/session9/pouliot.pdf

Raffuse, S., D. Sullivan, L. Chinkin, S. Larkin, R. Solomon, A. Soja, 2007. Integration of Satellite-Detected
and Incident Command Reported Wildfire Information into BlueSky, June 27, 2007. Available at:
http://getbluesky.org/smartfire/docs.cfm

Russell, A.G. and G.R. Cass, 1986. Verification of a Mathematical Model for Aerosol Nitrate and Nitric
Acid Formation and Its Use for Control Measure Evaluation, Atmospheric Environment, 20: 2011-
2025.

SESARM, 2012a. “Development of the 2007 Base Year and Typical Year Fire Emission Inventory for the
Southeastern States”, Air Resources Managers, Inc., Fire Methodology, AMEC Environment and
Infrastructure, Inc. AMEC Project No.: 6066090326, April, 2012

SESARM, 2012b. “Area and Nonroad 2007 Base Year Inventories. Revised Final Report”, Contract No. S-
2009-06-01, Prepared by Transystems Corporation, January 2012. Available at:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjA
C&url=ftp%3A%2F%2Fwsip-70-164-45-
196.dc.dc.cox.net%2Fpublic%2FSESARM%2FRevised%2520Final%2FSESARM%2520Base%252
107
 0Year%2520Revised%2520Final%2520Report_Jan2012.docx&ei=xU-
AUPu1F4WA0AHC5YHYCg&usg=AFQjCNFhjgx3Ej-
hbfYmMUP4zGI_HBiqZA&sig2=hWWN0m3WYPSO28QSzn5BIA.

Skamarock, W., J. Klemp, J. Dudhia, D. Gill, D. Barker, M. Duda, X. Huang, W. Wang, J. Powers, 2008. A
Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 3. NCAR Technical Note. National Center for
Atmospheric Research, Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division, Boulder, CO. June 2008.
Available at: http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/docs/arw_v3.pdf

Sullivan D.C., Raffuse S.M., Pryden D.A., Craig K.J., Reid S.B., Wheeler N.J.M., Chinkin L.R., Larkin
N.K., Solomon R., and Strand T. (2008) Development and applications of systems for modeling
emissions and smoke from fires: the BlueSky smoke modeling framework and SMARTFIRE: 17th
International Emissions Inventory Conference, Portland, OR, June 2-5. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conferences.html

Wang, Y., P. Hopke, O. V. Rattigan, X. Xia, D. C. Chalupa, M. J. Utell. (2011) “Characterization of

Residential Wood Combustion Particles Using the Two-Wavelength Aethalometer”, Environ. Sci.
Technol., 45 (17), pp 7387–7393

Yarwood, G., S. Rao, M. Yocke, and G. Whitten, 2005: Updates to the Carbon Bond Chemical Mechanism:
CB05. Final Report to the US EPA, RT-0400675. Available at
http://www.camx.com/publ/pdfs/CB05_Final_Report_120805.pdf.

108
United States Office of Air Quality Planning and Publication No. EPA-454/R-
Environmental Protection Standards 14-003
Agency Air Quality Assessment Division February, 2014
Research Triangle Park, NC