Presented by:

Eastern Research Group, Inc.

May 11, 2005

Status Report to the Stationary Sources Joint Forum:

Task 1.A: 2002 WRAP Inventory Review

and

Task 1.C: Emissions Projections to 2018

2

Overview

Scope and Schedule for Task 1.AProgress to DateNext Steps

Scope and Schedule for Task 1.CProgress to DateNext Steps

3

Scope: Task 1.AImprove 2002 WRAP point and area

source inventories using all available data

Assess completeness of geographic, facility, source category, and pollutant coverage

Collect comprehensive control technology information

Provide data for other tasks—projections, control technology analyses

4

Progress: Task 1.A

Compiled point and area source master inventory databases2002 WRAP EDMS files

Posted for ERG by the EDMS DBAMost files date stamped May-December 2004

2002 NEI February 1, 2005 version

2002 CAMD data (NOx and SO2) for utilities1999 NEI1996 WRAP inventory

Used in the §309 TSD

5

Progress: Task 1.A (cont.)

Additional Activities:Common facility identifiers assignedControl device information compiled Contacted several state and local agencies

to resolve questions, obtain missing data files

Can “select” or “deselect” records at the pollutant level for any base year in gap filling process

6

Master Database Used to Verify/correct EPA’s assignment of

common facility identifiersCompare reported emissions values to

ID outliersGap fill and apply surrogate data

Facility names, locationsFacilities, source categories, pollutantsControl device codesControl device efficienciesStack parametersSCC and SIC/NAICS codes

7

Examples of Questions Resolved Mobile asphalt records with county code 777

CO: OK to delete records MT: Allocate as area sources using road construction as surrogate

Possible area source duplicated records Clark County, NV Washoe County, NV OR

Obtained Pinal County, AZ database and converted to NIF

Incorporated Clark County, NV point and area source resubmitted files

Corrected data transposed for a WA facility Corrected NM Intel emissions Still outstanding

MT CAMD – Local site ID mapping WY VOC estimates (two facilities)

8

Next Steps: Task 1.AContact state/local/tribal agencies for

point versus area source reporting cutoffsTo make sure gap filling of point sources is

conducted correctlyTo identify area source categories that should be

adjusted for point source reported data

Incorporate tribal databases Make adjustments for any possible double counting

Incorporate oil and gas databasesMake adjustments for any possible double counting

9

Point vs. Area Source Reporting

Verify thresholds identified for oil and gas sourcesAK, CO, MT, ND, NM, NV, OR, SD, UT, WY

ID – 100 tpy actual

Maricopa County, AZ – Varies by pollutant

10

Resolve any conflicts in EGU controlsQA stack parameters in point source inventory

U.S. EPA QA’d the parameters for the draft NEI Several agencies agreed with U.S. EPA defaults Others provided comments to U.S. EPA U.S. EPA’s stack parameter QA procedure resulted in the

application of many defaults For WRAP, the QA/QC range need not be as tight as U.S.

EPA’s

Assign BART flags in point source Emission Unit field

Prepare NIF files for upload into EDMS

Next Steps: Task 1.A (continued)

11

Other Possible Additional Activities Related to 2002 EI Review (Task 1.A)

Incorporate state/local/tribal revisions provided via EDMS since December 2004

Incorporate state/local/tribal revisions provided via NEI review process

Prepare NIF files and allow state/local/tribal agencies to review and comment

12

EDMS and NEI Revisions to DateState/local/tribal revisions provided via EDMS

Version 1.1 has corrections to area source records for Clark and Washoe Counties, NV

Others?

State/local/tribal revisions provided via NEI review process AZ Maricopa County CA- Cortina Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians- Area

sources CO- Area sources ID- Area and Point sources MT- Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian

Reservation- Point sources NM Albuquerque- Area and Point sources OR- Area sources UT- Area and Point sources WA- Point sources

THANK YOU!

Any questions related

to Task 1.A?

14

Scope: Task 1.C (Projections)

A. Review previous projections, models

B. Update retirement rates for existing sources

C. Identify new (expected) sources, location, fuel

D. Develop projection variables

E. Write memo with findings from A-D

F. Identify/quantify impacts from laws/regulations not in full effect by 2002

EACs, agreements/enforcement actions, NEAPs, MACTs

Write memo

G. Other issues Handling CA projections

H. Develop baseline projections

Critical path = complete 2002 EI revision (Task 1.A)

I. Input to EDMS (June 1)J. Draft report (July 1)K. Final report (September 30)

15

Progress Since Last Update (February): Task 1.C

Work group calls on March 15, April 7, April 29 Regulatory research complete (potential post-2002 impacts from regulations, EACs,

agreements/ enforcements, NEAPs obtained on-line, MACTs) Follow-up questions and data requests being made to state/local agencies Results compiled in spreadsheet

Projections “roadmap” (2 drafts) developed Initial review of CAMD data as a basis to identify facilities with 2002 “atypical” operations Investigation of capacity factor Projections database format (draft) developed

16

Initial Results of Interviews with S/L Agencies (example)

Contact Facility NameState

Facility SICEmissions

(tpy)Type of Update Status/Comments

Next ERG Action

Tom BachmanRed Tail Energy (Richardton Plant)

None assigned 2869

spreadsheet gives permit limits New facility

New ethanol plant expected to operate in 2006.

MDU/Westmoreland Energy

None assigned 4911

ss gives permit limits New facility

New power plant expected to operate in 2009

Retired facility None

Tesoro (Mandan Refinery) 226 2911

Reductions: 3,500-4,000 tpy (SO2); 500 tpy (PM10) Consent decree

2002 emission reductions effective 12/1/04

Est. control factor

ArcherDanielsMidland (Walhalla) 251 2869

Reductions: VOC 100 tpy Consent decree

2002 emission reductions effective 3/31/03

Est. control factor

Alchem, Ltd. 261 2869Reductions: VOC 75 tpy Consent decree

2002 emission reductions effective 2/23/04

Est. control factor

Consent decree

Unnamed power plant: consent decree being negotiated; 2 units affected are both BART-eligible

None Rule/reg

NORTH DAKOTA

2018 Emissions

Oil and Gas Emissions

CA Emissions

2002 Point Sources

2002 Area Sources

All Others

RefineriesSmeltersEGUs

OtherRefineries SmeltersEGUs

All OthersPopulation-based

Livestock Sources

Energy-based

Other Population-based

Livestock Sources

Energy-based

CAMD/E-GRID

Industry Information EGAS

Agreements, Enforcements, New Rules, Regulations, NEAPs, EACs, etc.

DOE Pop. Proj.

USDA EGAS

Revised 2002 Point andArea Source Inventory

(excluding fire and windblown dust)

2002 Emissions

CA Emissions

CENRAP Emissions

Oil and Gas Emissions

2018 Baseline Emissions

Known Retired Point Sources

2018 Point Sources

Known New Point Sources

2002 Atypical to Typical Operation (Shutdowns, Repairs, High/Low Levels, etc.)

QA Checks:* Compare to SO2 Annex and plant-wide permit limits* Others TBD

Atypical Adjustment

Control Factors

Growth Factors

Road Map for Projection Task 1.C

18

Adjusting for “Atypical” OperationAtypical hours of operation resulting from

decreased production, unexpected/prolonged outages, etc.

Adjustments are needed to bring baseline emissions to typical rate as a basis for accurate projections

U.S. EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) data for EGUs 2002 hours of operation were calculated as a percentage of

8,760 hours for 1995 through 2004 Percentages were highlighted in quartiles (<25%, 25-50%,

50-75%, >75%) Limited value in examining annual trends

19

Adjusting for “Atypical” Operation (cont.)VISTAS analysis for modeling

inventory focused on development of hourly profiles for EGUs (Stella)Adjustments made in modeling files to

account for hourly operationsConversations underway with Stella to

devise WRAP methodIf typical, then replace annual emissions with

hourly emissions (CAMD CEM)If atypical, then adjust with monthly profiles

20

Investigating Capacity FactorPrevious WRAP projections methodology:

Electricity sector growth applied to existing EGUs After 85% capacity is achieved, new units are built Need to understand basis for 85% capacity factor, and

assess if change is warranted

U.S. EPA’s Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) Tracks large number of data fields 493 EGU records; capacity only for 157 records (1996-

2000) 86 (55%) operated between 50-85% capacity (1999) 12 (8%) operated >85% capacity (1999)

21

Investigating Capacity Factor (cont.)

Interviews with DOE/EIA and EPRI staffDOE/EIA staff (Martin) provided “fixed

reserve margins” for regionsEPRI staff (Miller, Booras) said 85% factor

sounded reasonable

Additional research may needed in order to reach agreement

22

Projections Database Objectives

Provides transparent methodology

Easily output to spreadsheets for S/L/T review

Easily updated and used for “what if” analyses

Comprehensive set of growth and control factors in one place

23

Spreadsheet LayoutNew

FacilityRetired

FlagAtypical

FlagAtypical Factor

Facility X 10,000 Y 2.000 20,000Facility Y 5,000 Y 0Facility Z 5,000 5,000Area Source V 30,000 30,000Area Source W 40,000 40,000

Facility/CategoryInventory

A

AdjustmentsInventory

B

Factor RefPermit Flag

Permit Limit

Annex Flag

Annex Factor

Facility X 1.100 EGAS 15,400 Y 13,000 1.000 13,000Facility Y 1.000 0 1.000 0Facility Z 1.200 Other 4,800 Y 4,000 Y 0.750 3,000Area Source V 1.300 EGAS 35,100 1.000 35,100Area Source W 1.400 DOE 47,600 1.000 47,600

Inventory DFacility/Category

Growth FactorInventory

C

Limits/QA Checks

A = 2002 Revised

B = Baseline Planning

C = Initial 2018

D = Final 2018

Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor Ref Flag Factor RefsOverall Factor

Facility X Y 0.300 District 0.700Facility Y 1.000Facility Z Y 0.200 State 0.800Area Source V Y 0.100 State 0.900Area Source W Y 0.150 State 0.850

EACs

Facility/Category

Agreements/Enforcements Regulations NEAPsControl Factor

24

Next Steps: Task 1.CWork Plan Element F:

Complete interviews with agenciesCalculate emissions impacts based on priority

SCCsSubmit memo

Work Plan Elements A-E:Continue to review previous models, data Update retirement rates for existing sourcesDevelop projection variablesSubmit memo

25

Next Steps: Task 1.C (continued)

Calculate baseline projections for 2018 Receive comments, make changes Upload baseline projections to EDMS Draft and final reports

THANK YOU!

Any questions related

to Task 1.C?