DRAFT
The
State
of
New
Jersey
Department
of
Environmental
Protection
2002
Periodic
Emission
Inventory
February
2006
i
Table
of
Contents
List
of
Figures
.................................................................................................................
iii
List
of
Tables
..................................................................................................................
iii
List
of
Attachments
.........................................................................................................
iv
Acronyms
and
Abbreviations...........................................................................................
v
I.
Introduction..................................................................................................................
1
A.
Statutory
and
Regulatory
Background
.................................................................
1
B.
Emissions
Inventory
Overview.............................................................................
5
C.
Emissions
Inventory
Summary
............................................................................
5
II.
Point
Sources
...........................................................................................................
14
A.
VOC,
NOx,
Carbon
Monoxide,
SO2,
and
PM10
Emissions
From
Emission
Statements
..............................................................................................................
14
B.
PM2.5
Emissions
.................................................................................................
15
C.
Ammonia
Emissions
..........................................................................................
15
D.
Rule
Effectiveness.............................................................................................
15
i.
Emissions
Calculation/
Reporting
Methodology.............................................
15
ii.
Overall
Efficiency
versus
Design
Efficiency
of
Control
Equipment
..............
16
iii.
Back
Calculating
Controlled/
Uncontrolled
Emissions
so
Rule
Effectiveness
Factors
Can
Be
Applied
.........................................................
16
E.
Summary
of
Point
Source
Inventory
Data..........................................................
17
III.
Area
Sources...........................................................................................................
19
A.
VOC,
NOx,
Carbon
Monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
Emission
Calculation
Procedures..............................................................................................................
19
i.
Annual
Emissions
.........................................................................................
19
ii.
Daily
Emissions............................................................................................
19
iii.
Seasonal
Adjustment
Factor
.......................................................................
20
iv.
County
Level
Emissions..............................................................................
20
v.
Strategies
to
Eliminate
Double
Counting.....................................................
20
vi.
Emission
Controls
.......................................................................................
21
B.
Ammonia
Emissions
..........................................................................................
22
C.
Summary
of
Area
Source
Inventory
Data
..........................................................
23
IV.
Onroad
Sources
......................................................................................................
24
A.
Daily
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled..............................................................................
24
B.
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
and
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
DVMT
Calculations............................................
26
C.
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
DVMT
Calculations
..............
27
D.
MOBILE
Model
and
Model
Inputs......................................................................
28
E.
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
and
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
Emission
Calculations
.......................................
31
ii
F.
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
Emission
Calculations    ...                    .     
31
G.
Summary
of
OnRoad
Inventory
Data                  
32
V.
Non­
road
Sources
....................................................................................................
33
A.
Non­
road
Equipment
Emissions
From
NONROAD
Model
.................................
33
B.
Aircraft
Emissions
..............................................................................................
35
C.
Locomotive
Emissions.......................................................................................
36
D.
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions...............................................................
36
E.
Ammonia
Emissions
..........................................................................................
37
F.
Summary
of
Non­
road
Source
Inventory
Data
...................................................
37
VI.
Biogenic
Sources
....................................................................................................
38
VII.
Quality
Assurance
..................................................................................................
41
A.
Point
Sources
....................................................................................................
41
i.
Data
Entry
Checks
........................................................................................
41
ii.
Completeness
Checks
&
Reasonableness
Checks
.....................................
41
iii.
Comparison
Checks
....................................................................................
42
B.
Area
Sources.....................................................................................................
44
C.
Onroad
Sources
................................................................................................
48
D.
Nonroad
Sources...............................................................................................
50
i.
Nonroad
Equipment
Emissions
From
NONROAD
Model...............................
50
ii.
Aircraft
Emissions
........................................................................................
53
iii.
Locomotive
Emissions.................................................................................
55
iv.
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
........................................................
57
E.
Biogenic
Sources...............................................................................................
59
F.
Emissions
Comparison
Summary
......................................................................
59
iii
List
of
Figures
Figure
1:
New
Jersey
8­
Hour
Ozone
Nonattainment
Area         ..   .
2
Figure
2:
New
Jersey
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(
PM2.5)
Nonattainment
Area.. .   ...
3
Figure
3:
New
Jersey
Carbon
Monoxide
(
CO)
Maintenance
Area         ..
4
Figure
4:
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
in
New
Jersey
.....................................
25
List
of
Tables
Table
1:
2002
Inventories
Prepared
...............................................................................
5
Table
2:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
Source
Sector
and
Pollutant................
6
Table
3:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant...........................
7
Table
4:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
..................
9
Table
5:
Emission
Statement
Information.....................................................................
14
Table
6:
2002
Statewide
Point
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
...
17
Table
7:
2002
Statewide
Area
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
....
23
Table
8:
Gasoline
Specifications
Used
for
2002
in
the
MOBILE
Model
.........................
30
Table
9:
2002
Statewide
On­
road
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
...............................................................................................................................
32
Table
10:
County
Level
LTOs
Used
in
the
NNEM
........................................................
34
Table
11:
Scenario
Specific
Parameters
Used
in
the
NNEM........................................
35
Table
12:
2002
Statewide
Nonroad
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
...............................................................................................................................
37
Table
13:
2002
Statewide
Biogenic
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
...............................................................................................................................
40
Table
14:
Statewide
Point
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
before
Application
of
Rule
Effectiveness..............................................................................................
44
Table
15:
Statewide
Area
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison............................
47
Table
16:
Statewide
Onroad
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison.........................
49
Table
17:
Statewide
Nonroad
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison......................
52
Table
18:
Statewide
Aircraft
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
....................................
54
Table
19:
Statewide
Locomotive
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
.............................
56
Table
20:
Statewide
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
Invnentory
Comparison
.57
Table
21:
Statewide
Biogenic
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison......................
59
Table
22:
1996
and
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
Source
Sector
and
Pollutant
...............................................................................................................................
60
iv
List
of
Attachments
Attachment
1
­
Inventory
Top
15
by
SCC
Graphs
Attachment
2
­
Fugitive
Dust
Inventory
Discussion
and
Summary
Attachment
3
­
Point
Source
 
Creating
the
2002
Point
Source
Inventory
*
Attachment
4
­
Point
Source
VOC
Inventory
*
Attachment
5
­
Point
Source
NOx
Inventory
*
Attachment
6
­
Point
Source
CO
Inventory
*
Attachment
7
­
Point
Source
PM10
Inventory
*
Attachment
8
­
Point
Source
PM2.5
Inventory
*
Attachment
9
­
Point
Source
SO2
Inventory
*
Attachment
10
­
Point
Source
NH3
Inventory
*
Attachment
11
­
Area
Source
Calculation
Sheets
*
Attachment
12
­
Area
Source
Inventories
*
Attachment
13
­
Onroad
Source
DVMT
*
Attachment
14
­
Onroad
Source
PPSUITE
Files
*
Attachment
15
­
Onroad
Source
NJTPA
Calculation
Files
*
Attachment
16
­
Onroad
Source
SJTPO
Calculation
Files
*
Attachment
17
­
Onroad
Source
DVRPC
Calculation
Files
*
Attachment
18
­
Onroad
Source
Inventory
*
Attachment
19
­
Onroad
Sources
Refueling
Emissions
by
County
*
Attachment
20
­
Non­
road
Calculation
Sheets
for
Orphan
Categories
*
Attachment
21
­
Non­
road
Source
Inventory
*
Attachment
22
­
Biogenic
Source
NH3
Inventory
Attachment
23
­
Point
Source
QA
Documentation
Attachment
24
­
Point
Source
Detailed
Information
*
Attachment
25
­
Area
Source
Inventory
Comparisons
*
NOTE:
These
attachments
are
only
available
electronically
v
Acronyms
and
Abbreviations
AADF
Annual
Activity
Day
Factors
APC
Air
Pollution
Control
BAQP
Bureau
of
Air
Quality
Planning
CAA
Clean
Air
Act
CE
Control
Efficiency
CERR
Consolidated
Emissions
Reporting
Rule
CFR
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
CMU
Carnegie
Mellon
University
CMV
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
CNG
Compressed
Natural
Gas
CO
Carbon
Monoxide
DVMT
Daily
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
DVRPC
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
EDMS
Emissions
and
Dispersion
Modeling
System
FAA
Federal
Aviation
Agency
FC
Fuel
Combustion
GSE
Ground
Support
Equipment
HDDV
Heavy
Duty
Diesel
Vehicles
I/
M
Inspection
and
Maintenance
LDGT
Light
Duty
Gasoline
Trucks
LDGV
Light
Duty
Gasoline
Vehicle
LPG
Liquefied
Petroleum
Gas
LTO
Landing
and
Take­
off
Operations
MPO
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
NH3
Ammonia
NAAQS
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standard
NAICS
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
NEI
National
Emissions
Inventory
NJDEP
New
Jersey
Department
of
Environmental
Protection
NJEMS
New
Jersey
Emission
Management
Systems
NJTPA
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
NLIA
Newark
Liberty
International
Airport
NNEM
NONROAD
Emission
Model
NOx
Oxides
of
Nitrogen
PM10
Particulate
Matter
less
than
10
micrometers
in
diameter
PM2.5
Particulate
Matter
less
than
2.5
micrometers
in
diameter
POTW
Publicly
Owned
Treatment
Works
ppm
parts
per
million
PPSUITE
Performance
Evaluation
and
Emissions
Analysis
QA
Quality
Assurance
RADIUS
Remote
Air
Data
Input
User
System
RE
Rule
effectiveness
RFG
Reformulated
Gasoline
RP
Rule
Penetration
RVP
Reid
Vapor
Pressure
vi
SCC
Source
Classification
Code
SIC
Standard
Industrial
Classification
SIP
State
Implementation
Plan
SMOKE
Sparse
Matrix
Operator
Kernel
Emissions
SJTPO
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
SO2
Sulfur
Dioxide
SOx
Oxides
of
Sulfur
TDM
Travel
Demand
Model
TPD
tons
per
day
TPY
tons
per
year
TSP
Total
Suspension
Particulates
USEPA
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
VMT
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
VOC
Volatile
Organic
Compound
WEBI
Web
Intelligence
Server
1
I.
Introduction
A.
Statutory
and
Regulatory
Background
Section
110
(
a)(
2)(
F)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
§
§
7410
(
a)(
2)(
F))
requires
the
submission
by
states
to
the
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
USEPA)
of
periodic
reports
on
the
nature
and
amounts
of
emissions
and
emissions
related
data.
The
1990
amendments
to
the
Clean
Air
Act
revised
many
of
the
provisions
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
including
establishing
periodic
emission
inventory
requirements
applicable
to
certain
areas
that
were
designated
nonattainment
for
certain
pollutants.
For
example,
42
U.
S.
C.
§
7511a.(
a)(
3)(
A)
required
states
to
submit
an
emission
inventory
every
three
years
for
1­
hour
ozone
nonattainment
areas
beginning
in
1993.
The
inventories
would
include
all
ozone
precursors
including
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC),
oxides
of
nitrogen
(
NOx),
and
carbon
monoxide.
Similarly,
42
U.
S.
C.
§
7512a.(
a)(
5)
required
States
to
submit
an
inventory
every
three
years
for
carbon
monoxide
nonattainment
areas
for
the
same
source
classes
as
ozone,
except
biogenic
sources.

The
USEPA
did
not
codify
these
statutory
requirements
in
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations,
but
has
simply
relied
on
the
statutory
language
to
implement
the
emissions
inventory
requirements.
As
part
of
the
NOx
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)
Call
rule
(
40
CFR
51.121)
the
USEPA
established
emissions
reporting
requirements
to
be
included
in
the
SIPs
submitted
by
the
affected
states.

In
2002,
the
USEPA
promulgated
the
Consolidated
Emission
Reporting
Rule,
40
CFR
51,
Subpart
A,
that
 
Consolidated
the
various
emissions
reporting
requirements
that
already
existed
into
one
place
in
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations;
 
Established
new
reporting
requirements
related
to
particulate
matter
less
than
2.5
micrometers
in
diameter
(
PM2.5),
its
precursors
(
ammonia
(
NH3),
oxides
of
sulfur
(
SOx),
NOx,
and
VOC),
and
regional
haze;
 
Established
new
requirements
for
the
statewide
reporting
of
area
source
and
mobile
source
emissions;
and,
 
Required
two
types
of
inventories
­
annual
inventories
and
three­
year
cycle
inventories.

The
following
maps
represent
New
Jersey's
nonattainment
areas
for
8­
hour
ozone
(
Figure
1)
and
PM2.5
(
Figure
2)
and
maintenance
areas
for
carbon
monoxide
(
Figure
3).
The
2002
periodic
emission
inventory
is
based
on
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
(
0.08
ppm)
as
the
1­
hour
ozone
standard
(
0.12
ppm)
was
revoked
by
the
USEPA
on
June
15,
20051.

1
70
Fed.
Reg.
44470
(
August
3,
2005).
2
Ocean
Burlington
Morris
Sussex
Atlantic
Salem
Warren
Monmouth
Hunterdon
Cumberland
Bergen
Mercer
Somerset
Middlesex
Gloucester
Camden
Passaic
Cape
May
Essex
Union
Hudson
Figure
5:
Recommended
New
Jersey
8­
Hour
Ozone
Non­
Attainment
Areas
Recommended
Areas
Northern
New
Jersey
­
New
York­
Conn.
Area
Southern
New
Jersey
­
Philadelphia
­
Delaware
Area
Based
on
Governor
McGreevy's
Recommendations
to
USEPA
Region
II
Administrator
Jane
Kenny,
dated
June
24,
2003
New
Jersey
8­
Hour
Ozone
Nonattainment
Areas
Figure
1:
Designated
8­
Hour
Ozone
Nonattainment
Areas
3
Ocean
Burlington
Morris
Sussex
Atlantic
Salem
Warren
Monmouth
Hunterdon
Cumberland
Bergen
Mercer
Somerset
Middlesex
Gloucester
Camden
Passaic
Cape
May
Essex
Union
Hudson
USEPA
Designations
of
Nonattainment
Areas
for
PM
2.5
in
New
Jersey
USEPA
Designations
In
Attainment
NY/
NJ/
LI/
CT
Nonattainment
Area
PA/
NJ/
DE
Nonattainment
Area
Date:
December
21,
2004
Source:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
pmdesignations/
finaltable.
htm
Map:
epa_
nj
New
Jersey
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(
PM2.5)
Nonattainment
Areas
4
OCEAN
SUSSEX
ATLANTIC
BURLINGTON
MORRIS
SALEM
WARREN
MONMOUTH
CUMBERLAND
HUNTERDON
BERGEN
MIDDLESEX
CAPE
MAY
SOMERSET
MERCER
CAMDEN
GLOUCESTER
PASSAIC
ESSEX
UNION
HUDSON
Camden
County
Nine
Not­
Classified
Northern
New
Jersey
New
Jersey
Carbon
Monoxide
(
CO)
Maintenance
Areas
In
Attainment
Figure
3:
NJ
Carbon
Monoxide
(
CO)
Maintenance
Area
5
B.
Emissions
Inventory
Overview
The
2002
Periodic
Emission
Inventory
is
a
compilation
of
the
emissions
from
sources
of
biogenic
(
natural)
and
anthropogenic
(
human­
made)
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
particulate
matter
less
than
10
micrometers
in
diameter
(
PM10),
PM2.5,
sulfur
dioxide
(
SO2)
and
ammonia
in
the
outdoor
air.
2
The
sources
are
divided
into
five
sectors
and
each
making
up
one
component
of
the
inventory:
point
sources,
area
(
nonpoint)
sources,
onroad
sources,
nonroad
sources
and
biogenic
sources.

This
report
includes
the
2002
emissions
inventory
for
the
parameters
listed
in
Table
1.

Table
1:
2002
Inventories
Prepared
Summer
Day
Winter
Day
Annual
VOC
 
 

NOx
 
 

CO
 
 
 

PM10
 
 

PM2.5
 
 

SO2
 

NH3
 

C.
Emissions
Inventory
Summary
A
summary
of
the
2002
Periodic
Emission
Inventory
for
New
Jersey
is
presented
in
Table
2
by
pollutant
and
source
sector.
Table
3
presents
the
inventory
data
by
pollutant
and
county.
Table
4
presents
the
inventory
data
by
pollutant,
source
sector,
and
county.
A
series
of
graphs
showing
the
top
fifteen
pollutants
by
Source
Classification
Code
(
SCC)
for
each
pollutant
and
source
sector
can
be
found
in
Attachment
1.

Note,
the
summary
tables,
graphs,
and
the
detailed
county
source
sector
tables
found
in
the
attachments
to
this
report
contain
adjusted
values
for
fugitive
dust.
Discussion
on
the
fugitive
dust
inventory
and
the
adjustment
can
be
found
in
Attachment
2.

2
SO2
has
been
reported
in
the
inventory
instead
of
SOx
as
required
in
the
Consolidated
Emissions
reporting
Rule
because
the
USEPA
MOBILE
and
NON­
ROAD
models
and
the
majority
of
USEPA
guidance
on
emission
factors
is
based
on
SO2,
not
SOx.
In
addition,
the
USEPA
National
Emissions
Inventory
(
NEI)
reports
SO2.
6
Table
2:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
Source
Sector
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
Source
Sector
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Annual
Inventory
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Annual
Inventory
Point
113.15
30,169
6.41%
280.36
52,121
14.77%
Area
369.83
127,673
27.12%
35.92
26,742
7.58%
On­
road
274.74
106,589
22.65%
558.66
206,280
58.44%
Non­
road
220.60
70,407
14.96%
231.56
66,443
18.82%
Biogenic
371.95
135,851
28.86%
3.78
1,382
0.39%
Total
in
State
1,350.27
470,689
1,110.28
352,968
CO
PM10
*

Source
Sector
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Annual
Inventory
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Annual
Inventory
Point
89.35
13,254
0.60%
5,555
13.37%
Area
66.45
94,067
4.26%
24,760
59.61%
On­
road
2,856.37
1,421,004
64.39%
4,718
11.36%
Non­
road
2,497.80
665,944
30.18%
6,505
15.66%
Biogenic
34.09
12,451
0.56%
0
0.00%
Total
in
State
5,544.06
2,206,720
41,538
PM2.5*
SO2
NH3
Source
Sector
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Inventory
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Inventory
Tons
per
Year
%
of
Total
Inventory
Point
4,868
16.02%
61,231
64.68%
38
0.15%
Area
16,230
53.42%
10,876
11.49%
8,005
31.37%
On­
road
3,361
11.06%
5,793
6.12%
7,469
29.27%
Non­
road
5,922
19.49%
16,772
17.72%
970
3.80%
Biogenic
0
0.00%
0
0.00%
9,032
35.40%
Total
in
State
30,381
94,672
25,514
*
These
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.
7
Table
3:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
74.67
27,426
33.81
9,706
231.77
85,555
Bergen
105.32
34,106
94.16
34,452
687.72
261,862
Burlington
87.21
31,814
58.36
18,214
297.03
126,456
Camden
65.00
22,629
41.44
15,119
270.08
107,408
Cape
May
52.34
19,481
34.50
8,636
138.02
50,041
Cumberland
54.20
19,375
30.04
7,829
112.23
40,088
Essex
68.06
22,580
89.32
29,578
377.37
152,468
Gloucester
84.24
30,076
42.19
14,615
183.71
74,719
Hudson
46.01
15,111
95.68
25,367
167.29
67,897
Hunterdon
28.22
10,636
32.07
8,651
122.31
50,996
Mercer
46.45
16,068
81.81
25,295
231.18
90,194
Middlesex
104.31
34,222
123.50
33,048
554.28
212,020
Monmouth
91.54
32,769
57.20
21,301
444.87
180,921
Morris
69.79
25,153
50.34
18,978
443.06
174,989
Ocean
103.91
37,326
38.56
13,676
314.69
125,240
Passaic
49.71
17,014
34.46
12,682
206.71
85,648
Salem
34.63
11,726
31.01
7,727
74.94
26,533
Somerset
42.74
14,963
36.61
12,602
228.79
88,817
Sussex
34.90
14,544
10.86
4,140
84.05
43,747
Union
77.80
22,468
73.69
23,906
286.09
117,897
Warren
29.22
11,204
20.70
7,451
87.90
43,226
Total
in
State
1,350.27
470,689
1,110.28
352,968
5,544.06
2,206,720
8
Table
3
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
County
PM10*
Tons
per
Year
PM2.5*
Tons
per
Year
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
2,282
1,889
886
823
Bergen
2,164
1,540
2,155
2,390
Burlington
3,209
2,362
3,568
1,535
Camden
1,823
1,382
2,038
1,238
Cape
May
1,468
1,254
13,409
334
Cumberland
1,467
1,201
3,281
652
Essex
1,682
1,280
4,597
1,934
Gloucester
2,103
1,514
7,275
1,006
Hudson
2,690
1,825
21,653
1,325
Hunterdon
1,426
908
695
934
Mercer
1,613
1,062
15,594
1,032
Middlesex
2,561
1,643
2,395
2,122
Monmouth
2,520
1,781
1,947
1,725
Morris
2,473
1,812
1,529
1,464
Ocean
3,091
2,341
1,196
1,291
Passaic
1,242
881
974
1,126
Salem
1,234
927
5,504
657
Somerset
1,435
797
744
1,092
Sussex
1,849
1,449
733
674
Union
1,569
1,330
3,856
1,467
Warren
1,629
1,205
643
688
Total
in
State
41,538
30,381
94,672
25,514
*
These
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.
9
Table
4:
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
VOC
Tons
per
Summer
Day
VOC
Tons
per
Year
County
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Non­
road
Sources
Biogenic
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Atlantic
0.15
11.04
12.85
10.25
40.38
52
5,492
3,613
3,521
14,748
Bergen
5.72
36.86
36.09
22.05
4.60
773
11,243
14,048
6,361
1,681
Burlington
4.02
17.54
15.80
10.01
39.84
927
7,057
6,278
3,000
14,552
Camden
1.23
22.68
13.80
7.23
20.06
453
7,228
5,512
2,110
7,326
Cape
May
0.20
5.26
4.72
22.61
19.55
39
2,474
1,348
8,480
7,140
Cumberland
0.46
8.93
5.37
11.03
28.41
102
3,208
1,492
4,196
10,377
Essex
2.95
31.53
18.26
11.92
3.40
791
9,568
7,238
3,739
1,244
Gloucester
32.01
20.39
9.10
5.91
16.83
11,560
7,032
3,650
1,686
6,148
Hudson
7.33
21.09
9.10
5.22
3.27
2,104
6,628
3,567
1,617
1,195
Hunterdon
0.64
5.49
5.99
3.66
12.44
144
2,468
2,441
1,038
4,545
Mercer
2.13
13.06
11.60
7.01
12.65
446
4,445
4,636
1,922
4,619
Middlesex
16.08
34.87
26.00
14.58
12.78
4,366
10,594
10,478
4,115
4,669
Monmouth
1.37
24.65
22.26
21.26
22.00
287
8,477
8,973
6,996
8,036
Morris
1.27
20.81
18.87
15.09
13.75
309
7,947
7,662
4,211
5,024
Ocean
0.26
24.01
14.30
21.54
43.80
76
7,746
5,792
7,714
15,998
Passaic
1.99
19.84
10.22
6.62
11.04
253
6,537
4,109
2,081
4,034
Salem
4.92
3.47
4.23
3.37
18.64
1,034
1,516
1,205
1,162
6,809
Somerset
0.73
12.29
10.65
6.87
12.20
224
4,075
4,311
1,898
4,455
Sussex
0.25
5.69
4.62
3.86
20.48
38
3,656
1,881
1,490
7,479
Union
26.56
25.26
15.92
7.75
2.31
5,382
7,652
6,354
2,237
843
Warren
2.88
5.07
4.99
2.78
13.50
809
2,631
2,001
832
4,931
Total
in
State
113.15
369.83
274.74
220.60
371.95
30,169
127,673
106,589
70,407
135,851
10
Table
4
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
NOx
Tons
per
Summer
Day
NOx
Tons
per
Year
County
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Non­
road
Sources
Biogenic
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Atlantic
1.67
1.17
24.50
6.26
0.21
129
964
6,764
1,771
78
Bergen
3.64
3.83
63.24
23.38
0.07
988
2,815
23,917
6,707
25
Burlington
12.35
1.77
31.10
12.88
0.26
1,273
1,424
11,644
3,776
97
Camden
2.69
2.10
27.00
9.44
0.21
776
1,523
10,074
2,669
77
Cape
May
19.15
0.42
8.82
5.92
0.19
3,819
357
2,433
1,959
68
Cumberland
10.50
0.65
10.61
7.94
0.34
1,778
469
2,883
2,574
125
Essex
16.18
3.31
44.06
25.70
0.07
2,441
2,436
16,537
8,137
27
Gloucester
14.48
1.01
18.50
8.01
0.19
4,645
800
6,899
2,200
71
Hudson
51.61
2.24
21.05
20.71
0.07
9,776
1,735
7,853
5,976
27
Hunterdon
9.47
0.54
17.17
4.70
0.19
491
424
6,444
1,223
69
Mercer
47.87
1.72
22.70
9.32
0.20
13,034
1,257
8,505
2,427
72
Middlesex
44.47
3.33
58.00
17.54
0.16
3,651
2,343
22,147
4,849
58
Monmouth
0.86
2.23
38.15
15.74
0.22
240
1,806
14,860
4,316
79
Morris
1.18
2.40
35.06
11.58
0.12
284
1,752
13,748
3,151
43
Ocean
3.68
2.39
24.65
7.57
0.27
395
1,507
9,538
2,138
98
Passaic
0.68
1.79
23.01
8.88
0.10
122
1,361
8,748
2,413
38
Salem
15.26
0.31
11.91
3.21
0.32
3,267
227
3,185
932
116
Somerset
3.60
1.44
23.85
7.57
0.15
313
1,048
9,090
2,097
54
Sussex
0.21
0.57
7.47
2.46
0.15
39
495
2,936
615
55
Union
18.88
2.26
32.22
20.25
0.08
4,080
1,621
12,294
5,883
28
Warren
1.93
0.47
15.60
2.48
0.22
580
379
5,782
631
79
Total
in
State
280.36
35.92
558.66
231.56
3.78
52,121
26,742
206,280
66,443
1,382
11
Table
4
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
CO
Tons
per
Summer
Day
CO
Tons
per
Year
County
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Non­
road
Sources
Biogenic
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Non­
road
Sources
Biogenic
Atlantic
0.36
2.66
155.53
70.26
2.96
66
10,726
53,885
19,798
1,080
Bergen
2.36
2.07
324.50
358.25
0.54
619
1,453
166,589
93,002
199
Burlington
1.48
1.97
168.90
121.35
3.33
413
9,709
83,768
31,350
1,216
Camden
3.28
6.89
145.90
112.44
1.57
1,154
3,789
72,489
29,402
574
Cape
May
2.18
0.66
53.58
80.06
1.54
311
4,145
18,758
26,265
562
Cumberland
1.56
1.13
56.91
50.35
2.28
126
3,196
19,994
15,941
831
Essex
3.61
2.40
187.93
182.98
0.45
624
1,306
96,967
53,407
164
Gloucester
3.27
1.54
99.80
77.69
1.41
1,029
4,513
49,458
19,203
516
Hudson
9.42
1.22
87.49
68.72
0.44
2,058
896
44,767
20,015
161
Hunterdon
6.43
1.03
64.94
48.31
1.60
259
3,973
34,283
11,896
585
Mercer
1.51
1.37
122.70
104.18
1.42
323
2,567
61,101
25,685
518
Middlesex
34.20
2.54
287.54
228.84
1.16
3,034
1,309
149,288
57,965
424
Monmouth
1.28
1.79
227.22
212.60
1.98
381
5,252
118,952
55,614
722
Morris
2.24
2.35
209.14
227.91
1.42
266
8,121
109,947
56,136
519
Ocean
1.21
29.78
135.96
143.85
3.89
271
10,563
72,072
40,914
1,420
Passaic
0.40
1.23
105.86
98.09
1.13
68
2,985
55,414
26,769
412
Salem
2.28
0.57
49.04
21.42
1.63
487
2,389
17,071
5,991
595
Somerset
5.96
1.16
112.52
107.75
1.40
226
2,079
59,270
26,731
511
Sussex
0.33
1.80
42.35
37.57
2.00
83
8,995
23,055
10,883
731
Union
3.87
1.11
162.44
118.31
0.36
1,012
794
84,178
31,780
133
Warren
2.12
1.19
56.12
26.89
1.58
444
5,306
29,700
7,198
578
Total
in
State
89.35
66.45
2,856.37
2,497.80
34.09
13,254
94,067
1,421,004
665,944
12,451
12
Table
4
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
PM10*

Tons
per
Year
PM2.5*

Tons
per
Year
County
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Atlantic
17
1,863
154
248
NA
19
1,541
104
225
NA
Bergen
135
981
524
524
NA
149
537
376
478
NA
Burlington
318
2,145
275
471
NA
308
1,448
193
413
NA
Camden
126
1,210
238
249
NA
233
754
167
228
NA
Cape
May
102
799
58
509
NA
109
637
40
468
NA
Cumberland
266
721
73
407
NA
280
495
52
374
NA
Essex
203
646
389
444
NA
185
411
291
393
NA
Gloucester
531
1,169
161
242
NA
426
754
112
222
NA
Hudson
1,705
431
179
375
NA
1,077
269
134
345
NA
Hunterdon
50
1,115
148
113
NA
50
644
111
103
NA
Mercer
221
967
201
224
NA
188
530
141
203
NA
Middlesex
537
1,162
486
376
NA
483
467
347
346
NA
Monmouth
48
1,575
352
545
NA
55
981
244
501
NA
Morris
46
1,813
305
309
NA
39
1,284
209
280
NA
Ocean
39
2,377
229
446
NA
38
1,734
160
409
NA
Passaic
18
835
195
194
NA
19
543
141
178
NA
Salem
435
590
77
132
NA
371
377
57
122
NA
Somerset
76
984
211
164
NA
55
441
152
149
NA
Sussex
6
1,667
77
99
NA
5
1,301
54
89
NA
Union
434
512
261
362
NA
540
272
185
333
NA
Warren
240
1,195
123
71
NA
240
809
92
64
NA
Total
in
State
5,555
24,760
4,718
6,505
NA
4,868
16,230
3,361
5,922
NA
*
These
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.
13
Table
4
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Source
Sector
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
County
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Point
Sources
Area
Sources
On­
road
Sources
Nonroad
Sources
Biogenic
Atlantic
10
498
202
176
NA
0
184
297
13
329
Bergen
82
819
634
620
NA
0
543
821
163
863
Burlington
286
459
361
2,462
NA
0
522
454
39
520
Camden
162
506
313
1,057
NA
0
281
393
46
518
Cape
May
12,178
163
75
993
NA
5
86
107
6
130
Cumberland
665
412
89
2,115
NA
1
310
118
20
203
Essex
2,110
1,078
429
980
NA
0
598
492
82
762
Gloucester
5,431
390
211
1,243
NA
0
445
265
22
274
Hudson
19,250
625
196
1,582
NA
14
461
222
56
572
Hunterdon
18
391
163
123
NA
0
569
187
14
164
Mercer
14,379
450
264
501
NA
3
310
331
41
347
Middlesex
504
689
590
612
NA
11
492
765
108
746
Monmouth
55
510
453
929
NA
0
399
628
47
651
Morris
52
798
403
276
NA
0
273
572
75
544
Ocean
38
652
290
216
NA
0
258
396
21
616
Passaic
26
494
231
223
NA
0
264
292
65
505
Salem
4,590
156
85
673
NA
1
463
97
7
89
Somerset
41
273
250
180
NA
0
423
317
43
309
Sussex
0
566
98
69
NA
0
296
135
8
235
Union
1,253
602
321
1,680
NA
3
456
425
82
501
Warren
101
345
134
63
NA
0
371
152
12
153
Total
in
State
61,231
10,876
5,793
16,772
NA
38
8,005
7,469
970
9,032
14
II.
Point
Sources
For
the
purposes
of
this
2002
emissions
inventory,
a
point
source
is
defined
as
a
stationary
facility
that
emits
or
has
the
potential
to
emit
at
or
above
any
of
the
following
thresholds:

 
10
tons
per
year
of
VOC
 
25
tons
per
year
of
NOx
 
100
tons
per
year
of
carbon
monoxide,
PM2.5,
PM10,
SO2,
ammonia
The
remaining
stationary
sources
are
included
in
the
area
sources
emissions
inventory.

A.
VOC,
NOx,
Carbon
Monoxide,
SO2,
and
PM10
Emissions
From
Emission
Statements
The
2002
point
source
inventories
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
and
PM10
were
developed
using
data
reported
by
facilities
to
the
NJDEP
through
the
Emission
Statement
Program.
Facilities
are
required
to
prepare
an
annual
accounting
of
air
emissions
for
each
pollutant
source
at
the
facility
and
to
report
those
emissions
by
submitting
an
Emission
Statement
to
the
NJDEP
in
accordance
with
N.
J.
A.
C.
7:
27­
21.
A
total
of
662
facilities
were
identified
in
New
Jersey
as
meeting
one
of
the
required
criteria
in
2002.
Attachment
3
outlines
the
procedure
for
developing
the
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
and
PM10
point
source
inventories
from
the
Emission
Statement
database.
Any
modifications
made
to
the
data
reported
in
the
Emission
Statement
database
that
was
incorporated
into
the
inventory
is
also
documented
in
this
attachment.

Emission
Statement
data
are
submitted
through
NJDEP's
data
entry
software,
known
as
Remote
Air
Data
Input
Users
System
(
RADIUS).
Table
5
provides
a
brief
description
of
the
Emission
Statement
information
collected.

Table
5:
Emission
Statement
Information
Screen
Name
Description
of
Emission
Statement
Data
Facility
Profile
(
General)
Plant
level
data
(
Facility
Information)
Facility
Profile
(
Planning)
Estimates
of
plant
activities
for
planning
purposes
Non­
Source
Fugitive
Emissions
Fugitive
emissions
Insignificant
Source
Emissions
List
of
sources
not
requiring
permits
Equipment
Inventory
List
of
permitted
sources
Control
Device
Inventory
List
of
control
devices
Emission
Point
Inventory
List
of
emission
points
(
stacks)
for
the
permitted
sources
Emission
Unit/
Batch
Process
Inventory
List
of
emission
units
and
batch
processes
containing
the
permitted
sources
Subject
Item
Group
Inventory
List
of
sources
grouped
for
various
permitting
purposes
Emission
Statement
Process
and
emission
data
for
all
sources,
including
control
efficiency
and
source
details
15
B.
PM2.5
Emissions
The
2002
PM2.5
emissions
were
calculated
by
the
NJDEP.
The
PM10
emissions
reported
by
facilities
in
their
emission
statements
were
input
into
the
USEPA
PM2.5
calculator.
If
PM10
emissions
were
not
reported,
then
total
suspended
particulate
emissions
(
TSP)
were
used
in
the
calculator.
Filterable
PM2.5
and
condensable
PM2.5
emissions
were
calculated,
then
these
emissions
were
added
together
to
produce
the
final
PM2.5
emissions.

C.
Ammonia
Emissions
Ammonia
emissions
for
point
sources
were
taken
from
estimates
prepared
by
the
USEPA
and
presented
in
the
2002
National
Emissions
Inventory
(
NEI)
v1.
3
D.
Rule
Effectiveness
Per
the
USEPA's
guidance,
4
a
rule
effectiveness
factor
was
applied
to
all
applicable
sources
for
the
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
and
SO2
inventories.
The
purpose
of
the
rule
effectiveness
factor
is
to
account
for
noncompliance
with
existing
rules,
pollution
control
equipment
failures
and
control
equipment
downtime.
The
USEPA
guidance
requires
states
to
apply
a
default
rule
effectiveness
factor
of
eighty
percent
unless
other,
state­
specific
data
exist
to
justify
the
use
of
a
different
value.
New
Jersey
has
chosen
to
apply
state­
specific
rule
effectiveness
factors
to
most
of
the
point
sources
in
the
2002
inventory,
for
the
reasons
discussed
below.
All
remaining
sources
had
the
eighty
percent
rule
effectiveness
applied
in
accordance
with
USEPA
guidance.

Rule
effectiveness
was
not
applied
to
PM10
and
PM2.5
emissions.
Per
the
USEPA
guidance,
there
is
insufficient
evidence
to
draw
broad
conclusions
on
the
application
of
rule
effectiveness
to
the
PM
related
inventories,
therefore,
no
rule
effectiveness
was
applied
to
PM
inventories
or
its
precursors.
5
Rule
effectiveness
was
not
applied
to
the
ammonia
inventory
because
the
emissions
were
taken
from
the
USEPA
NEI.

i.
Emissions
Calculation/
Reporting
Methodology
Facilities
had
the
option
to
calculate
and
report
pollutant
source
emissions
based
on
several
calculation
methods.
If
a
facility
calculated
their
emissions
based
on
continuous
emissions
monitoring,
predictive
emissions
monitoring,
source
test
or
material
balance,
using
engineering
knowledge
of
the
process,
the
NJDEP
concluded
that
these
facilities
had
accounted
for
factors
for
which
a
rule
effectiveness
factor
is
otherwise
applied.
Therefore,
in
these
cases,
the
eighty
percent
rule
effectiveness
factor
was
not
applied.

3
USEPA,
2004,
"
Documentation
for
the
2002
Nonpoint
Source
National
Emission
Inventory
for
Criteria
and
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
(
January
2004
Version)".
4
USEPA,
"
Guidelines
for
Estimating
and
Applying
Rule
Effectiveness
for
Ozone/
CO
State
Implementation
Plan
Base
Year
Inventories",
November
1992.
Hereafter
cited
as
Rule
Effectiveness
Guidance.
5
USEPA,
"
Emissions
Inventory
Guidance
for
Implementation
of
Ozone
and
Particulate
Matter
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
(
NAAQS)
and
Regional
Haze
Regulations",
June
2003.
16
ii.
Overall
Efficiency
versus
Design
Efficiency
of
Control
Equipment
As
part
of
their
Emission
Statement,
facilities
can
report
either
overall
efficiency
or
design
efficiency
of
control
equipment.
The
overall
efficiency
is
the
combined
control
efficiency
of
all
devices
that
control
a
given
source.
The
overall
efficiency
accounts
for
the:

1)
Amount
of
time
a
control
device
is
operating
while
a
process
or
source
is
in
use,
2)
Control
efficiency,
and
3)
Capture
efficiency
of
any
and
all
control
devices
present
for
a
process
or
source.

In
contrast,
the
design
efficiency
is
the
percent
reduction
in
the
amount
of
an
air
contaminant
by
the
control
device
as
it
was
initially
anticipated
or
designed
before
actual
construction
and
operation.
The
NJDEP
determined
that
facilities
reporting
an
overall
efficiency
for
a
source
have
already
accounted
for
factors
which
a
rule
effectiveness
factor
is
otherwise
applied.
Therefore,
in
these
cases,
the
eighty
percent
rule
effectiveness
factor
was
not
applied.
However,
if
the
facility
reports
a
design
efficiency
for
a
source,
then
pollution
control
equipment
failures
and
control
equipment
downtime
have
not
been
accounted
for,
therefore,
the
eighty
percent
rule
effectiveness
factor
was
applied
to
these
sources.

iii.
Back
Calculating
Controlled/
Uncontrolled
Emissions
so
Rule
Effectiveness
Factors
Can
Be
Applied
As
discussed
above,
the
NJDEP
allows
facilities
the
option
of
using
design
efficiency
for
control
devices
when
calculating
and
reporting
emissions.
In
these
cases,
it
is
necessary
to
back­
calculate
uncontrolled
emissions
for
these
sources
and
then
re­
apply
the
controlled
design
efficiencies
which
now
include
the
rule
effectiveness
factor.
This
is
done
using
the
following
basic
equation:

ECRR
=
EUNC
x
[
1­(
CE/
100)]
OR
(
1)

EUNC
=
ECRR
(
2)
[
1
­
(
CE/
100)]
AND
ECR
=
EUNC
x
[
1­(
RP
x
(
CE/
100)
x
(
RE/
100)]
(
3)

where:
ECRR
=
Controlled
Emissions
Reported
ECR
=
Controlled
Emissions
with
RE
Applied
EUNC
=
Uncontrolled
Emissions
CE
=
The
Reported
Design
Efficiency
RE
=
Rule
Effectiveness
Factor
RP
=
Rule
Penetration
(
1.00
for
all
point
sources).
17
Example
of
actual
emission
unit
with
Rule
Effectiveness
applied
 
VOC
emissions
 
Best
engineering
judgement
was
used
as
the
calculation
method
 
Emission
unit
has
a
control
device
with
89%
overall
efficiency
 
Reported
emissions
are
30.49
pounds
per
day
and
3.66
tons
per
year
EUNC
=
3.66
tons
per
year
=
33.27
tons
per
year
of
uncontrolled
emissions
[
1­(
89/
100)]

ECR
=
33.27
tons
per
year
*
[
1­(
1
*
(
89/
100)
*
(
80/
1000))]
=
9.58
tons
per
year
of
emissions
emitted
E.
Summary
of
Point
Source
Inventory
Data
Table
6
presents
the
2002
point
source
emission
inventory
by
county.
Attachments
4
through
9
contain
the
detailed
point
source
emission
inventories
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
SO2,
respectively.
Ammonia
emissions
for
point
sources
can
be
found
in
Attachment
10.
These
attachments
are
only
available
electronically.

Table
6:
2002
Statewide
Point
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
0.15
52
1.67
129
0.36
66
Bergen
5.72
773
3.64
988
2.36
619
Burlington
4.02
927
12.35
1,273
1.48
413
Camden
1.23
453
2.69
776
3.28
1,154
Cape
May
0.20
39
19.15
3,819
2.18
311
Cumberland
0.46
102
10.50
1,778
1.56
126
Essex
2.95
791
16.18
2,441
3.61
624
Gloucester
32.01
11,560
14.48
4,645
3.27
1,029
Hudson
7.33
2,104
51.61
9,776
9.42
2,058
Hunterdon
0.64
144
9.47
491
6.43
259
Mercer
2.13
446
47.87
13,034
1.51
323
Middlesex
16.08
4,366
44.47
3,651
34.20
3,034
Monmouth
1.37
287
0.86
240
1.28
381
Morris
1.27
309
1.18
284
2.24
266
Ocean
0.26
76
3.68
395
1.21
271
Passaic
1.99
253
0.68
122
0.40
68
Salem
4.92
1,034
15.26
3,267
2.28
487
Somerset
0.73
224
3.60
313
5.96
226
Sussex
0.25
38
0.21
39
0.33
83
Union
26.56
5,382
18.88
4,080
3.87
1,012
Warren
2.88
809
1.93
580
2.12
444
Total
in
State
113.15
30,169
280.36
52,121
89.35
13,254
18
Table
6
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Point
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
County
PM10*
Tons
per
Year
PM2.5*
Tons
per
Year
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
17
19
10
0
Bergen
135
149
82
0
Burlington
318
308
286
0
Camden
126
233
162
0
Cape
May
102
109
12,178
5
Cumberland
266
280
665
1
Essex
203
185
2,110
0
Gloucester
531
426
5,431
0
Hudson
1,705
1,077
19,250
14
Hunterdon
50
50
18
0
Mercer
221
188
14,379
3
Middlesex
537
483
504
11
Monmouth
48
55
55
0
Morris
46
39
52
0
Ocean
39
38
38
0
Passaic
18
19
26
0
Salem
435
371
4,590
1
Somerset
76
55
41
0
Sussex
6
5
0
0
Union
434
540
1,253
3
Warren
240
240
101
0
Total
in
State
5,555
4,868
61,231
38
*
These
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.
19
III.
Area
Sources
The
area
source
component
of
the
2002
emission
inventory
includes
emissions
from
numerous
facilities
or
activities
that
individually
release
small
amounts
of
a
given
pollutant,
but
collectively
they
can
release
significant
amounts
of
a
pollutant.
This
includes
small
stationary
sources
that
fall
below
required
emission
reporting
thresholds
by
the
Emission
Statement
Program.
Area
sources
are
small
and
numerous
and
have
emissions
which
are
not
readily
associated
with
a
single
point
or
a
small
set
of
points.
Some
of
the
stationary
sources
in
this
sector
are
sometimes
referred
to
as
minor
point
sources.

A.
VOC,
NOx,
Carbon
Monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
Emission
Calculation
Procedures
The
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
emissions
from
area
source
categories
were
calculated,
for
the
most
part,
by
multiplying
a
USEPA
published
emission
factor
by
a
known
indicator
of
activity
for
each
source
category,
such
as
employment,
population
and
fuel
usage.
The
emissions
were
first
calculated
on
an
annual
basis
since
most
activity
data
was
provided
on
an
annual
basis.
The
annual
emission
estimates
were
allocated
to
each
season,
based
on
seasonal
adjustment
factors.
A
calculation
methodology
sheet
was
created
to
document
the
data
used
to
estimate
the
emissions
from
each
area
source
category.
In
general,
the
calculation
methodology
sheets
document
the
calculation
methodology
selected,
the
process
used
to
estimate
the
emissions,
all
assumptions
required
to
calculate
the
emissions,
and
all
sources
of
data.
A
complete
set
of
calculation
methodology
sheets
is
included
in
Attachment
11.

The
following
sections
describe
how
the
area
source
emission
inventory
was
developed.

i.
Annual
Emissions
Most
USEPA
emission
factors
are
in
pounds
of
pollutant
emitted
per
unit
of
activity.
The
general
calculation
methodology
to
estimate
tons
of
pollutant
emitted
per
year
can
be
expressed
as:

EmissionsAnnual
=
EF
x
AL/
CF
(
1)

where:
EmissionsAnnual
=
Annual
pollutant
emissions
in
tons
per
year
EF
=
Annual
emission
factor
AL
=
Annual
activity
level
CF
=
Factor
to
convert
pounds
to
tons
ii.
Daily
Emissions
Daily
emissions
were
estimated
by
incorporating
annual
activity
day
factors
for
a
given
area
source
category
operation
into
the
annual
emission
estimate
calculation.
The
annual
activity
day
factor
is
determined
by
the
activity
of
a
given
source
category
during
20
a
week.
For
example,
automobile
refinishing
establishments
typically
operate
five
(
5)
days
per
week
while
the
use
of
consumer
products
occurs
seven
(
7)
days
per
week.
The
annual
activity
day
factors
are
calculated
by:

AADF
=
(
WAF)
*
(
52
weeks/
year)
(
2)

where:
AADF
=
Annual
activity
day
factor
WAF
=
Weekly
Activity
Factor
(
Activity
Days/
Week)

iii.
Seasonal
Adjustment
Factor
Activity
for
several
source
categories
fluctuates
on
a
seasonal
basis.
For
example,
architectural
surface
coating
and
pesticide
application
activities
occur
more
in
the
warmer
months
(
June,
July
and
August).
Conversely,
some
activities
do
not
occur
very
often
in
the
warmer
months
such
as
heating
activities.
Some
activities
are
considered
uniform
throughout
the
year,
such
as
marine
vessel,
aircraft,
railroad,
and
industrial
surface
coating
operations.
In
order
to
estimate
seasonal
average
daily
emissions,
the
annual
emissions
are
adjusted
as
follows:

EmissionsSeason
=
EmissionsAnnual
*
SAF/
AADF
(
3)

where:
SAF
=
Seasonal
Adjustment
Factor
iv.
County
Level
Emissions
Depending
on
the
activity
data
obtained
for
a
particular
category,
emissions
are
either
calculated
on
a
statewide
basis
and
allocated
to
the
county
level
based
on
a
secondary
activity
indicator,
or
are
calculated
on
a
county
basis
and
totaled
for
statewide
emissions.
For
example,
architectural
coatings
emissions
are
calculated
at
the
county
level
using
county
population
and
dry
cleaning
emissions
are
calculated
at
the
county
level
using
county
employment.
Residential
natural
gas
combustion
is
calculated
at
the
state
level
using
statewide
fuel
use
estimates
published
by
the
United
States
Department
of
Energy
and
is
allocated
to
the
county
level
based
on
census
data
regarding
the
number
of
houses
using
natural
gas
as
a
primary
heat
source.

v.
Strategies
to
Eliminate
Double
Counting
Emissions
for
some
source
categories
are
estimated
in
both
the
area
source
portion
of
the
inventory
and
in
the
point
source
inventory.
Reporting
the
emissions
in
each
category
results
in
double
counting
of
the
emissions.
Therefore,
the
area
source
portion
of
the
inventory
must
be
adjusted
for
the
emissions
already
accounted
for
in
the
point
source
inventory.
There
are
three
ways
to
eliminate
this
double
counting.
One
approach
is
to
delete
a
known
point
source
from
the
database
used
to
calculate
the
area
source
inventory.
For
example,
if
a
particular
landfill
submits
an
emission
statement
then
it
is
included
in
the
point
source
inventory
and
is
not
included
in
the
area
source
inventory.
A
second
approach
involves
adjusting
the
source
category
activity
level
by
subtracting
the
activity
reported
in
the
point
source
inventory.
For
example,
21
industrial
fuel
combustion
emissions
are
estimated
in
both
the
point
source
and
the
area
source
inventories.
Since
the
industrial
fuel
use
activity
level
reported
by
facilities
is
accounted
for
in
the
point
source
inventory,
this
fuel
can
be
subtracted
from
the
area
source
statewide
industrial
fuel
use
activity
level
in
the
area
source
inventory.
The
resulting
area
source
activity
level
is
then
utilized
in
the
calculation
to
estimate
the
emissions
for
this
category
for
area
sources.
A
third
approach
involves
adjusting
the
source
category
emission
estimate
by
subtracting
the
point
source
emission
estimate
from
the
area
source
emission
estimate.
For
example,
emissions
from
graphic
arts
operations
are
estimated
in
both
the
point
and
area
source
inventories.
The
point
source
emissions
are
based
on
emission
statements
submitted
by
the
graphic
arts
facility.
The
area
source
emissions
are
based
on
population
activity
at
the
county
level.
The
reported
point
source
emissions
are
subtracted
from
calculated
area
source
emissions
for
that
county.

vi.
Emission
Controls
New
Jersey
has
developed
a
number
of
air
pollution
control
measures
to
reduce
area
source
emissions
by
either
requiring
VOC
content
limitations
on
specific
products
or
requiring
installation
of
a
control
apparatus
to
capture
a
specified
percentage
of
pollutant
emissions.
For
example,
the
New
Jersey
Architectural
Coatings
Rule
(
N.
J.
A.
C.
7:
27­
23)
limits
the
VOC
content
in
paints,
while
the
Marine
Tank
Vessel
Loading
and
Ballasting
Operations
rule
(
N.
J.
A.
C.
7:
27­
16.5)
requires
that
most
marine
vessel
terminals
that
load
or
ballast
gasoline
install
and
operate
a
control
apparatus
that
reduces
total
VOC
emissions
to
the
outdoor
atmosphere
by
no
less
than
95%.

Control
efficiency
factors
have
been
developed
to
adjust
the
emission
inventory
in
response
to
New
Jersey
APC
measures.
For
example,
the
control
efficiency
for
any
marine
vessel
gasoline
loading/
ballasting
operations
must
be
95%
in
accordance
with
the
aforementioned
New
Jersey
Marine
Vessel
rule.
The
USEPA
has
also
developed
air
pollution
control
measures,
which
are
reflected
in
the
calculations,
if
applicable,
such
as
the
National
Consumer
Products
rule
which
sets
standards
for
consumer
products,
automobile
refinish
coatings,
and
architectural
coatings.

The
USEPA
requires
that
rule
effectiveness
and
rule
penetration
factors
be
applied
to
adjust
the
emission
inventory
whenever
control
measures
have
been
applied
to
an
inventory.
6
The
purpose
of
the
rule
effectiveness
factor
is
to
account
for
the
underestimation
of
emissions
due
to
noncompliance
with
the
existing
control
measures,
control
device
equipment
downtime
or
operating
problems,
process
upsets,
and
the
inability
of
most
emission
estimate
calculation
procedures
to
incorporate
these
problems.
7
Rule
penetration
is
a
measure
of
the
extent
to
which
a
rule
applies
to
a
given
source
category.

Whenever
a
control
measure
is
applied
to
a
specific
area
source
category,
the
three
factors
of
control
efficiency
(
CE),
rule
effectiveness
(
RE),
and
rule
penetration
(
RP)
are
incorporated
into
the
two
emission
estimation
equations
(
1)
and
(
3)
as
follows:

6
Guidelines
for
Estimating
and
Applying
Rule
Effectiveness
for
Ozone/
CO
State
Implementation
Plan
Base
Year
Inventories,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
USEPA,
November
1992,
page
21.
7
Ibid.
page
3.
22
EmissionsAnnual
=
{
EF
x
AL
x
[
1
­
(
CE
x
RE
x
RP)]}/
CF
(
5)

EmissionsDaily
=
{
EF
x
AL
x
SAF
x
[
1­
(
CE
x
RE
x
RP)]}/
(
AADF
x
CF)
(
6)

Control
efficiency,
rule
effectiveness,
and
rule
penetration
are
normally
expressed
as
percentages
but
used
as
fractions
in
the
above
equations.
For
the
area
emission
inventory,
the
USEPA
default
rule
effectiveness
value
of
eighty
percent
and
rule
penetration
value
of
100
percent
was
used
the
majority
of
the
time.

B.
Ammonia
Emissions
Wildfire
ammonia
emissions
were
estimated
using
the
activity
data
and
emission
factors
supplied
with
v3.1
of
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
(
CMU)
application.
8
Estimated
ammonia
emissions
for
industrial
refrigeration,
composting,
and
publicly
owned
treatment
works
were
taken
from
inventory
work
completed
by
E.
H.
Pechan
&
Associates,
Inc.
for
the
Mid­
Atlantic/
Northeast
Visibility
Union
Regional
Planning
Organization
(
MANE­
VU
RPO).
9
In
preparing
for
the
2002
inventory
effort,
New
York
emission
inventory
staff
noted
that
the
first
two
of
these
source
categories
were
not
accounted
for
in
the
USEPA's
1999
NEI
inventory
and
that
they
may
represent
significant
sources
of
ammonia.
In
addition,
MANE­
VU
determined
that
there
was
a
large
variability
in
the
existing
estimates
of
emissions
from
POTWs
and
decided
to
prepare
an
independent
estimate
of
ammonia
emissions
from
this
source.
Therefore,
MANE­
VU
committed
to
prepare
inventories
for
these
source
categories
for
the
MANEVU
states.

Estimated
ammonia
emissions
for
livestock
waste
were
taken
from
recent
estimates
prepared
by
the
USEPA.
10
These
emission
estimates
address
beef,
dairy,
swine,
poultry,
sheep,
goat,
and
horse
operations
that
raise
animals
both
in
confined
animal
feeding
operations
or
on
pasture.

Estimated
ammonia
emissions
for
fertilizer
application,
industrial
and
commercial
combustion
sources,
and
prescribed
burning
were
taken
from
estimates
prepared
by
the
USEPA
and
presented
in
the
2002
NEI
v1.11
8
Wildfire
Activity
Levels:
National
Interagency
Fire
Center.
http://
www.
nifc.
gov.
Fax
received,
fall
2000.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1998.
"
National
Air
Pollutant
Emission
Trends,
Procedures
Document,
1900­
1996."
USEPA­
454/
R­
98­
008.
Emission
Factors:
Hegg
D.
A.,
Radke,
L.
F.,
and
Hobbs
P.
V.,
1988.
"
Ammonia
Emissions
from
Biomass
Burning.
"
Geophysical
Research
Letters,
Vol.
15,
No.
4
Pages
335­
337.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1998.
"
National
Air
Pollutant
Emission
Trends,
Procedures
Document,
1900­
1996",
USEPA­
454/
R­
98­
008.
9
E.
H.
Pecan
&
Associates,
Inc.,
2004,
"
Technical
Memorandum:
MANE­
VU
2002
Ammonia
Emissions
Inventory
for
Miscellaneous
Sources".
10
USEPA,
2004,
"
National
Emission
Inventory­
Ammonia
Emissions
from
Animal
Husbandry
Operationsraft
Report".
11
USEPA,
2004,
"
Documentation
for
the
2002
Nonpoint
Source
National
Emission
Inventory
for
Criteria
and
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
(
January
2004
Version)".
23
C.
Summary
of
Area
Source
Inventory
Data
Table
7
presents
the
2002
area
source
emission
inventory
by
county.
Attachment
12
contains
the
detailed
area
source
emission
inventory
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5
PM10,
and
ammonia,
respectively.
These
attachments
are
only
available
electronically.

Table
7:
2002
Statewide
Area
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
11.04
5,492
1.17
964
2.66
10,726
Bergen
36.86
11,243
3.83
2,815
2.07
1,453
Burlington
17.54
7,057
1.77
1,424
1.97
9,709
Camden
22.68
7,228
2.10
1,523
6.89
3,789
Cape
May
5.26
2,474
0.42
357
0.66
4,145
Cumberland
8.93
3,208
0.65
469
1.13
3,196
Essex
31.53
9,568
3.31
2,436
2.40
1,306
Gloucester
20.39
7,032
1.01
800
1.54
4,513
Hudson
21.09
6,628
2.24
1,735
1.22
896
Hunterdon
5.49
2,468
0.54
424
1.03
3,973
Mercer
13.06
4,445
1.72
1,257
1.37
2,567
Middlesex
34.87
10,594
3.33
2,343
2.54
1,309
Monmouth
24.65
8,477
2.23
1,806
1.79
5,252
Morris
20.81
7,947
2.40
1,752
2.35
8,121
Ocean
24.01
7,746
2.39
1,507
29.78
10,563
Passaic
19.84
6,537
1.79
1,361
1.23
2,985
Salem
3.47
1,516
0.31
227
0.57
2,389
Somerset
12.29
4,075
1.44
1,048
1.16
2,079
Sussex
5.69
3,656
0.57
495
1.80
8,995
Union
25.26
7,652
2.26
1,621
1.11
794
Warren
5.07
2,631
0.47
379
1.19
5,306
Total
in
State
369.83
127,673
35.92
26,742
66.45
94,067
PM10*
PM2.5*
SO2
NH3
24
County
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
1,863
1,541
498
184
Bergen
981
537
819
543
Burlington
2,145
1,448
459
522
Camden
1,210
754
506
281
Cape
May
799
637
163
86
Cumberland
721
495
412
310
Essex
646
411
1,078
598
Gloucester
1,169
754
390
445
Hudson
431
269
625
461
Hunterdon
1,115
644
391
569
Mercer
967
530
450
310
Middlesex
1,162
467
689
492
Monmouth
1,575
981
510
399
Morris
1,813
1,284
798
273
Ocean
2,377
1,734
652
258
Passaic
835
543
494
264
Salem
590
377
156
463
Somerset
984
441
273
423
Sussex
1,667
1,301
566
296
Union
512
287
602
456
Warren
1,195
809
345
371
Total
in
State
24,760
16,230
10,876
8,005
*
These
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.

IV.
On­
road
Sources
The
onroad
source
component
of
the
2002
emission
inventory
is
an
estimate
of
exhaust
(
i.
e.,
tailpipe)
emissions,
fuel
evaporative
emissions,
and
brake/
tire
fugitive
emissions
from
all
vehicles
(
both
gasoline
and
diesel­
fueled)
operating
on
New
Jersey
roadways.
In
general,
the
emissions
from
this
component
of
the
emission
inventory
are
calculated
by
multiplying
an
activity
level
by
an
emission
factor.
In
the
case
of
onroad
mobile
sources,
the
activity
level
is
daily
vehicle
miles
traveled
(
DVMT).
The
emission
factors
are
calculated
using
the
latest
version
of
the
USEPA
MOBILE
computer
model.

A.
Daily
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
The
DVMT
used
in
this
emission
inventory
was
calculated
with
the
travel
demand
models
(
TDMs)
used
by
the
three
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
in
the
State.
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
are
charged
with
developing
transportation
plans
and
programs
that
promote
the
safe
and
efficient
management,
operation,
and
development
of
transportation
systems
while
minimizing
fuel
consumption
and
air
pollution.
The
three
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
with
jurisdiction
in
New
Jersey
are
the
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority,
the
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
and
the
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization.
Figure
4
is
a
map
showing
the
counties
included
in
each
of
the
three
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations.
25
Figure
4:
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
in
New
Jersey
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
26
In
general,
the
TDMs
use
demographic
data,
such
as
population,
employment,
housing
density,
and
shopping
patterns,
to
estimate
the
demand
for
travel
in
the
modeled
area.
This
travel
demand
is
then
distributed
throughout
the
available
roadways
and
transit
routes,
referred
to
as
links.
The
model
is
based
on
an
algorithm
which
takes
into
account
factors
such
as
transit
fares,
tolls,
traffic
volume,
and
time
of
day
to
estimate
how
many
people
travel
from
one
point
to
another
on
any
given
link.
The
number
of
vehicles
traveling
on
each
link
is
then
used
to
estimate
the
speed
of
travel
and
the
total
number
of
vehicle
miles
traveled
in
a
day.
The
TDM
output
is
adjusted
for
any
vehicle
miles
traveled
that
are
not
accounted
for
in
the
model,
such
as
reductions
due
to
transportation
control
measures
or
increases
due
to
local
roadway
traffic.
Attachment
13
presents
the
DVMT
used
for
the
2002
inventory
by
roadway
class
and
vehicle
type.

B.
SJTPO
and
NJTPA
DVMT
Calculations
The
current
South
Jersey
Travel
Demand
Model
(
SJTDM)
was
validated
for
the
year
2000.
The
comparisons
between
estimated
and
observed
DVMT
by
facility
type
were
within
a
range
of
80%
to
150%.

The
current
North
Jersey
Regional
Transportation
Model
(
NJRTM)
was
validated
for
the
year
1996.
The
NJRTM
estimated
DVMT
is
approximately
99.6%
of
the
regional
observed
DVMT.
The
comparisons
between
estimated
and
observed
DVMT
by
facility
type
were
within
a
range
of
96%
to
110%.

For
the
purpose
of
emissions
analyses,
Highway
Performance
Monitoring
System
(
HPMS)
adjustment
files
for
2002
were
created
to
account
for
DVMT
of
the
nonmodeled
roads
within
the
MPO
region.
The
HPMS
adjustment
files
simply
offset
the
difference
between
model
DVMT
and
the
regional
DVMT
data
collected
by
the
HPMS.

Traffic
at
the
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
and
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
boundaries
was
established
via
observed
count
data
for
the
validation
year.
Since
each
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
utilizes
the
same
New
Jersey
Department
of
Transportation
database
for
traffic
counts
to
set
boundary
volumes,
these
estimates
should
be
generally
consistent.
Any
minor
variation
in
estimates
could
occur
if
an
observed
count
was
not
available
at
the
exact
"
border"
link
between
two
models.

The
SJTDM
chain
contains
a
"
temporal"
module
that
factors
the
validated
model
analysis
day
to
the
desired
winter
and
summer
analysis
day
for
emissions
purposes.
The
factors
are
based
on
month­
to­
month
as
well
as
day­
to­
day
variations
for
each
trip
purpose.
The
factors
were
calculated
from
traffic
counts
and
household
travel
surveys.

The
NJRTM
DVMT
for
emission
analysis
were
adjusted
into
two
seasons
(
summer
and
winter).
The
adjustment
factors
were
developed
by
first
comparing
model
DVMT
with
the
DVMT
values
from
the
Highway
Performance
Management
System
database,
thus
correcting
for
any
variation
between
the
annual
average
daily
traffic
volumes.
A
second
adjustment
addresses
seasonal
variation
using
seasonal
factors
by
both
facility
and
county.
This
results
in
two
seasonal
adjustment
files
(
winter
and
summer)
that
are
used
in
the
emissions
forecasting
process.
27
The
emission
estimates
include
all
DVMT
within
the
model
region,
including
local
"
offmodel
roadways.
Since
the
highway
network
covers
the
entire
non­
attainment
region,
there
are
no
areas
for
which
DVMT
is
not
included.
The
entire
State
of
New
Jersey
is
covered
by
the
summation
of
three
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
models,
so
that
the
DVMT
from
the
entire
state
is
covered
as
part
of
the
"
modeled"
DVMT.

The
NJRTM
and
SJTDM
contain
two
types
of
external
trips
(
External­
External,
External­
Internal)
used
to
estimate
DVMT
from
vehicles
moving
into
and
out
of
the
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
regions.
The
external­
external
purpose
represents
trips
that
have
both
origin
and
destination
outside
of
the
modeled
region.
These
trips
are
referred
to
as
"
pass­
through"
trips.
The
External­
Internal
trip
purpose
includes
trips
for
which
one
of
its
trip
"
ends"
is
inside
the
model
region
while
the
other
is
outside
of
the
region.
The
vehicle
trips
at
the
edge
of
the
respective
Metropolitan
Planning
Organization
models
are
obtained
from
observed
counts
provided
by
the
New
Jersey
Department
of
Transportation
and
other
agencies
such
as
the
Port
Authority
of
New
York
and
New
Jersey,
to
help
ensure
traffic
volume
consistency
at
the
boundaries
between
the
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations.

C.
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
DVMT
Calculations
The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission's
travel
demand
model
follows
the
traditional
steps
of
trip
generation,
trip
distribution,
modal
split,
and
traffic
assignment.
However,
an
iterative
feedback
loop
is
employed
from
traffic
assignment
to
the
trip
distribution
step.
The
feedback
loop
ensures
that
the
congestion
levels
used
by
the
model
when
determining
trip
origins
and
destinations
are
equivalent
to
those
that
result
from
the
traffic
assignment
step.
Additionally,
the
iterative
model
structure
allows
tripmaking
patterns
to
change
in
response
to
changes
in
traffic
volumes,
congestion
levels,
and
improvements
to
the
transportation
system.

The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
travel
simulation
process
uses
the
Evans
Algorithm
to
iterate
the
model.
Evans
re­
executes
trip
distribution
and
modal
split
based
on
updated
highway
speeds
after
each
iteration
of
highway
assignment.
This
algorithm
converges
rapidly
to
the
equilibrium
solution
on
highway
travel
speeds
and
congestion
levels.
After
equilibrium
is
achieved,
the
transit
trip
tables
are
assigned
to
the
transit
networks
to
produce
link
and
route
passenger
volumes.

The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
travel
simulation
models
are
segregated
into
separate
peak,
midday,
and
evening
time
periods.
This
segregation
begins
in
trip
generation
where
factors
are
used
to
separate
daily
trips
into
time­
period
specific
travel.
The
enhanced
process
then
utilizes
separate
model
chains
for
peak,
midday,
and
evening
travel
simulation
runs.
Time
of
day
sensitive
inputs
to
the
models
such
as
highway
capacities
and
transit
service
levels
are
segregated
to
be
reflective
of
time­
period
specific
conditions.
Capacity
factors
are
used
to
allocate
daily
highway
capacity
to
each
time
period.

The
first
step
in
the
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
modeling
process
involves
generating
the
number
of
trips
that
are
produced
by,
and
destined
for,
each
traffic
zone
and
cordon
station
throughout
the
nine­
county
region.
Internal
trip
generation
is
based
on
estimates
of
demographic
and
employment
data,
while
external
28
trips
are
derived
from
cordon
line
traffic
counts.
The
latter
also
include
trips
that
pass
through
the
Delaware
Valley
region.
Trip
distribution
is
the
process
whereby
the
trip
ends
established
in
trip
generation
are
linked
together
to
form
origin­
destination
patterns
in
trip
table
format.
Peak,
midday,
and
evening
trip
ends
are
distributed
separately.
The
modal
split
model
is
also
run
separately
for
the
peak,
midday,
and
evening
time
periods.
The
modal
split
model
calculates
the
fraction
of
each
person­
trip
interchange
in
the
trip
table,
which
should
be
allocated
to
transit,
and
then
assigns
the
residual
to
the
highway
side.
The
choice
between
highway
and
transit
usage
is
made
on
the
basis
of
comparative
cost,
travel
time,
frequency
of
service,
and
auto
ownership.
For
highway
trips,
the
final
step
in
the
focused
simulation
process
is
the
assignment
of
current
or
future
vehicle
trips
to
the
highway
network.
The
assignment
model
is
"
capacity
restrained"
in
that
congestion
levels
are
considered
when
determining
the
best
route.
After
equilibrium
is
achieved,
the
transit
trip
tables
are
assigned
to
the
transit
network
to
produce
link
and
route
passenger
volumes.

The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission's
travel
demand
model
was
validated
in
2000
for
the
1997
base
year
and
again
in
2005
for
2000
conditions.
Both
of
these
validations
included
a
comparison
of
simulated
and
counted
traffic
volumes
at
355
locations
that
cross
a
series
of
14
screenlines.
For
1997
conditions,
the
simulated
traffic
volumes
were
1.4
percent
higher
than
the
counted
volumes,
with
an
overall
R2
of
0.83,
an
acceptable
correspondence.
As
part
of
the
validation
exercise,
simulated
transit
ridership
is
also
compared
to
passenger
counts.
These
differences
for
the
1997
and
2000
validations
were
6.1
percent
and
4.0
percent,
respectively.

DVMT
estimates
are
output
from
the
highway
traffic
assignment
step
of
the
model.
The
travel
model's
highway
network
includes
all
facilities
with
federal
functional
class
of
collector
or
higher.
Some
local
roads
are
included
in
the
highway
network,
but
DVMT
outputs
must
be
adjusted
to
account
for
the
local
facilities
that
are
not
included.
This
adjustment
is
done
at
the
county
level
based
on
the
mileage
of
local
roads
that
are
missing
and
the
average
daily
traffic
volume
of
local
roads
in
that
county
determined
from
available
traffic
counts.

Traffic
volumes
crossing
the
travel
demand
model
boundary,
or
cordon,
are
controlled
through
an
extensive
traffic
counting
program.
The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
generally
counts
traffic
at
all
of
its
cordon
crossings
every
five
years.
Future
year
traffic
volumes
at
cordon
stations
are
projected
by
first
extrapolating
historical
trends
and
then
adjusting
these
trends
to
account
for
the
long
range
population
and
employment
forecasts
in
the
counties
surrounding
the
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
region.
The
cordon
volumes
used
in
the
2002
inventory
were
interpolated
between
2000
and
2005
volumes.

The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
develops
monthly
and
seasonal
traffic
variation
factors
that
are
derived
from
the
Pennsylvania
and
New
Jersey
Departments
of
Transportation
continuous
traffic
counting
stations.
These
stations
produce
traffic
volumes
for
every
day
of
the
year
and
are
used
to
calculate
monthly
and
seasonal
factors
by
federal
functional
class.
For
emission
modeling
purposes,
the
12
federal
functional
classes
must
be
combined
into
the
four
functional
classes
used
by
MOBILE6.
The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
does
this
at
the
county
29
level
using
a
weighted
average
based
upon
county­
level
vehicle
miles
traveled
by
functional
class
from
the
Highway
Performance
Modeling
System
data.

D.
MOBILE
Model
and
Model
Inputs
The
USEPA
MOBILE
computer
model
estimates
vehicle
emission
factors
for
carbon
monoxide;
exhaust,
brake
and
tire
wear
direct
particulate
matter;
and
ozone
and
particulate
matter
precursors.
Over
time,
there
have
been
several
versions
of
the
MOBILE
model
developed
and
released
by
the
USEPA
for
use
by
the
states
in
estimating
emissions
from
onroad
sources.
The
NJDEP
used
version
MOBILE6.2.03
(
hereafter
referred
to
as
MOBILE6)
dated
September
24,
2003
and
officially
released
on
May
19,
2004
(
69
FR
28830
(
May
19,
2004))
in
developing
the
2002
inventory.

The
emission
factors
calculated
by
the
MOBILE6
model
are
dependent
on
a
variety
of
data,
including
temperature,
humidity,
distribution
of
travel
speeds,
fuel
type,
vehicle
age
distribution,
type
of
inspection
and
maintenance
(
I/
M)
program,
and
roadway
type.
The
model
is
designed
so
that
the
user
can
input
state­
specific
data
for
many
of
the
variables
that
affect
vehicle
emissions.
If
state­
specific
data
are
unavailable,
default
values
are
also
available
for
many
of
the
inputs
required
for
the
model.
The
inputs
are
shown
in
the
calculation
files
included
in
Attachments
14
through
17.
The
model
will
estimate
emission
factors
for
any
calendar
year
between
1952
and
2050,
inclusive.
The
25
most
recent
vehicle
model
years
are
considered
to
be
in
operation
in
each
calendar
year.

MOBILE6
differs
significantly
from
its
predecessor,
MOBILE5.
MOBILE6
contains
new
and
improved
data
including
basic
emission
data
derived
from
more
realistic
driving
conditions.
MOBILE6
also
incorporates
the
effects
of
the
Federal
regulations
affecting
onroad
mobile
sources
adopted
since
1992.
As
such,
the
MOBILE6
model's
new
design
no
longer
requires
separate
calculations
to
incorporate
the
effects
of
the
Tier
I
and
Tier
2
vehicle
regulations
and
the
Heavy
Duty
Diesel
NOx
consent
decree.
In
addition
the
overall
effectiveness
of
an
I/
M
program
can
be
directly
specified
in
the
MOBILE6
input
file,
eliminating
the
need
to
perform
multiple
runs
to
accurately
model
the
effects
of
the
New
Jersey
"
hybrid"
I/
M
program,
i.
e.,
a
program
which
includes
both
centralized
and
decentralized
facilities.

With
regard
to
the
State's
I/
M
program,
the
NJDEP
assumed
for
the
2002
inventory
that
New
Jersey's
I/
M
program
consisted
of
seventy­
four
percent
centralized
facilities
and
twenty­
six
percent
decentralized
facilities
in
2002.
This
assumption
is
based
on
data
from
the
NJDEP's
I/
M
program
database.
A
detailed
description
of
many
of
the
specific
I/
M
program
inputs
used
for
the
2002
inventory
are
documented
in
the
November
2002
Revised
Performance
Standard
Modeling
SIP
Revision.
12
In
addition,
the
NJDEP
adjusted
the
I/
M
effectiveness
values
for
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
from
the
performance
standard
values
to
account
for
the
fact
that
ten
percent
of
New
Jersey's
vehicles
(
i.
e.,
those
with
non­
switchable
four
wheel­
drive
or
non­
switchable
traction
control)
receive
a
2500
RPM
exhaust
emission
test
instead
of
an
ASM5015
exhaust
emission
test.
By
adjusting
the
I/
M
effectiveness
values
to
match
the
performance
12
The
State
of
New
Jersey,
Department
of
Environmental
Protection,
Enhanced
Inspection
and
Maintenance
(
I/
M)
Program
for
the
State
of
New
Jersey,
Revised
Performance
Standard
Modeling,
SIP
Revision,
November
27,
2002.
30
standard
emission
factors
for
the
entire
fleet
(
accounting
for
both
the
vehicles
receiving
the
ASM
5015
test
and
the
vehicles
receiving
the
2500
RPM
test),
the
New
Jersey
I/
M
program
was
represented
by
one
model
run
instead
of
a
combination
of
two
model
runs.
Also,
the
latest
vehicle
registration
information,
updated
in
2003,
was
used
to
develop
the
2002
inventory.

Maximum
and
minimum
temperatures
for
specific
counties
were
compiled
from
normal
maximum/
minimum
temperatures
reported
for
the
Newark,
Allentown,
Philadelphia,
and
Atlantic
City
airports
in
the
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration
Local
Climatological
Data
for
2002.
The
calculation
file
from
the
USEPA
MOBILE6
website
was
used
to
calculate
absolute
humidity
using
the
normal
dry
bulb
temperature,
the
average
normal
relative
humidity
and
the
average
mean
station
pressure.
The
validity
of
the
calculated
absolute
humidity
was
then
checked
by
computing
the
corresponding
relative
humidity
at
the
minimum
temperature.
If
the
resulting
relative
humidity
exceeded
100%
the
absolute
humidity
was
reduced
until
the
relative
humidity
no
longer
exceeded
100%
at
the
minimum
temperature.
Temperatures
and
absolute
humidities
were
established
for
each
month
because
the
MOBILE6
model
was
run
for
each
month
to
generate
the
annual
emission
estimates.
Also,
temperatures
and
absolute
humidities
were
established
for
average
summer
(
June,
July,
and
August)
and
average
winter
(
December,
January,
and
February)
periods
for
use
in
the
MOBILE6
runs
to
generate
summer
and
winter
emissions,
respectively.

The
following
gasoline
specifications
for
2002
were
specified
as
inputs
to
the
MOBILE6
model:

Table
8:
Gasoline
Specifications
Used
for
2002
in
the
MOBILE6
Model
Gasoline
Specifications
Used
for
2002
in
the
MOBILE
Model
Northern
RFG
 
Summer*
Northern
RFG
 
Winter*
Reid
Vapor
Pressure
(
psi)
6.7
15
Ether
Oxygen
Content
(%
by
weight)
2.1
1.5
Ether
Market
Share
100
70
Ethanol
Oxygen
Content
(%
by
weight)
NA
3.5
Ethanol
Market
Share
0
30
Sulfur
Content
 
Average
(
ppm)
129
279
Sulfur
Content
 
Maximum
(
ppm)
1000
1000
*
Northern
RFG
Summer
specifications
were
used
for
MOBILE
runs
for
the
months
of
May
through
September.
Northern
RFG
Winter
specifications
were
used
for
MOBILE
runs
for
the
months
of
October
through
April.

No
actual
data
for
RVP
winter
gasoline
in
New
Jersey
could
be
found
so
this
value
was
set
at
the
maximum
specification
of
15
psi.

The
MOBILE6
inputs
for
Stage
2
effectiveness
has
been
set
at
62%
based
on
calculations
performed
pursuant
to
New
Jersey
rule
amendments
involving
Stage
2
controls.

The
2002
inventory
was
developed
using
a
MOBILE6
Rebuild
Program
effectiveness
rate
of
14%
to
reduce
heavy­
duty
diesel
vehicle
NOx
off­
cycle
emissions.
Recent
national
data
on
the
actual
numbers
of
chip
reflashes
being
performed
during
engine
31
rebuilds
has
indicated
that
the
effectiveness
of
this
program
has
been
significantly
less
than
the
suggested
MOBILE6
value
of
90%.
New
Jersey
has
used
an
effectiveness
rate
of
14%
for
2002
based
on
the
USEPA
program
summary
data
reported
as
of
March
31,
2003.

Annual
emissions
were
calculated
by
performing
separate
MOBILE
runs
for
each
month
and
averaging
the
monthly
results
together
to
obtain
annual
averages.
The
SEASON
command
was
set
appropriately
for
each
month
so
that
the
correct
reformulated
gasoline
rules
would
be
applied
to
each
month.

E.
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
and
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
Emission
Calculations
Both
the
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
and
the
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
use
a
computer
model
called
PPSUITE
to
estimate
emissions
from
onroad
sources.
PPSUITE
is
a
group
of
computer
programs
that
modifies
and
converts
output
data
from
the
TDMs,
generates
MOBILE6
input
files,
and
summarizes
MOBILE6
output
files,
including
the
calculation
of
emission
inventories
using
DVMT
and
emission
factors.
PPSUITE
Version
5
was
designed
to
be
compatible
with
MOBILE6
and
was
the
version
used
to
develop
the
2002
emission
inventory.
The
PPSUITE
computer
files
are
contained
in
Attachment
14.

PPSUITE
allows
the
user
to
perform
adjustments
to
the
raw
outputs
from
the
TDMs.
In
addition,
PPSUITE
calculates
link
capacities
and
speed
distributions
for
each
hour.
Speeds
are
adjusted
when
roadways
experience
overcapacity
situations
(
i.
e.,
traffic
jams).
PPSUITE
then
combines
the
adjusted
traffic
activity
data
with
the
non­
trafficactivity
MOBILE6
input
parameters
(
such
as
the
I/
M
program
description)
to
generate
a
MOBILE6
input
file
(
this
file
is
called
M6input.
in).
A
separate
MOBILE6
run
is
performed
for
each
county
with
separate
scenarios
for
each
roadway
type.
After
MOBILE6
is
run,
PPSUITE
multiples
vehicle
miles
traveled
by
the
MOBILE6
emission
factors
to
produce
emission
inventory
results.
To
accomplish
this,
PPSUITE
uses
the
composite
MOBILE6
emission
factors
from
the
MOBILE6
descriptive
output.
In
order
to
calculate
annual
emissions,
separate
sets
of
MOBILE6
runs
were
performed
for
each
month
and
then
the
12
months
of
results
were
averaged
together
to
compute
the
annual
emissions.
For
the
typical
summer
or
winter
weekday
emissions,
only
one
set
of
MOBILE6
runs
were
necessary.

The
files
used
to
generate
the
2002
onroad
source
emission
inventory
for
the
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
and
the
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
are
contained
in
Attachments
15
and
16,
respectively.

F.
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
Emission
Calculations
The
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
uses
a
slightly
different
process
to
calculate
onroad
emissions.
First,
the
TDM
is
used
to
determine
the
highway/
transit
volumes
and
the
resultant
vehicle
miles
traveled
inventory.
Output
from
the
TDM
is
input
into
a
postprocessor
along
with
speed
curve
data
to
generate
MOBILE6
input
files.
The
MOBILE6
input
files
consist
of
speed
distribution
files
(*.
sp
files),
vehicle
miles
traveled
by
facility
files
(*.
fc
files),
and
hourly
vehicle
miles
traveled
files
(*.
hr
files)
for
32
each
county.
MOBILE6
is
then
run
with
each
scenario
representing
a
different
county.
Composite
emission
factors
from
the
MOBILE6
descriptive
output
are
combined
with
vehicle
miles
traveled
data
in
a
spreadsheet
to
calculate
emission
inventories
by
county.
Similar
to
the
other
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations,
in
order
to
calculate
annual
emissions
separate
sets
of
MOBILE6
runs
were
performed
for
each
month
and
then
the
twelve
months
of
results
were
averaged
together
to
compute
the
annual
emissions.
Separate
single
runs
were
performed
to
calculate
summer
and
winter
emissions
respectively.
The
files
used
to
generate
the
2002
on­
road
source
emission
inventory
for
the
Delaware
Valley
Regional
Planning
Commission
are
contained
in
Attachment
17.

G.
Summary
of
On­
road
Inventory
Data
Table
9
presents
the
2002
onroad
source
emission
inventory
by
county.
Attachment
18
contains
the
detailed
onroad
emission
inventory
by
county
and
SCC
(
vehicle
type).
Attachment
19
contains
the
Stage
2
vehicle
refueling
emissions
by
county.
These
VOC
emissions
were
calculated
and
reported
for
average
summer
and
average
annual
conditions.
The
2002
statewide
Stage
2
refueling
emissions
are
11.83
tons
per
summer
day
and
5,281
tons
per
year.

Table
9:
2002
Statewide
On­
road
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
12.85
3,613
24.50
6,764
155.53
53,885
Bergen
36.09
14,048
63.24
23,917
324.50
166,589
Burlington
15.80
6,278
31.10
11,644
168.90
83,768
Camden
13.80
5,512
27.00
10,074
145.90
72,489
Cape
May
4.72
1,348
8.82
2,433
53.58
18,758
Cumberland
5.37
1,492
10.61
2,883
56.91
19,994
Essex
18.26
7,238
44.06
16,537
187.93
96,967
Gloucester
9.10
3,650
18.50
6,899
99.80
49,458
Hudson
9.10
3,567
21.05
7,853
87.49
44,767
Hunterdon
5.99
2,441
17.17
6,444
64.94
34,283
Mercer
11.60
4,636
22.70
8,505
122.70
61,101
Middlesex
26.00
10,478
58.00
22,147
287.54
149,288
Monmouth
22.26
8,973
38.15
14,860
227.22
118,952
Morris
18.87
7,662
35.06
13,748
209.14
109,947
Ocean
14.30
5,792
24.65
9,538
135.96
72,072
Passaic
10.22
4,109
23.01
8,748
105.86
55,414
Salem
4.23
1,205
11.91
3,185
49.04
17,071
Somerset
10.65
4,311
23.85
9,090
112.52
59,270
Sussex
4.62
1,881
7.47
2,936
42.35
23,055
Union
15.92
6,354
32.22
12,294
162.44
84,178
Warren
4.99
2,001
15.60
5,782
56.12
29,700
Total
in
State
274.74
106,589
558.66
206,280
2,856.37
1,421,004
33
Table
9
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
On­
road
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
County
PM10
Tons
per
Year
PM2.5
Tons
per
Year
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
154
104
202
297
Bergen
524
376
634
821
Burlington
275
193
361
454
Camden
238
167
313
393
Cape
May
58
40
75
107
Cumberland
73
52
89
118
Essex
389
291
429
492
Gloucester
161
112
211
265
Hudson
179
134
196
222
Hunterdon
148
111
163
187
Mercer
201
141
264
331
Middlesex
486
347
590
765
Monmouth
352
244
453
628
Morris
305
209
403
572
Ocean
229
160
290
396
Passaic
195
141
231
292
Salem
77
57
85
97
Somerset
211
152
250
317
Sussex
77
54
98
135
Union
261
185
321
425
Warren
123
92
134
152
Total
in
State
4,718
3,361
5,793
7,469
V.
Non­
road
Sources
A.
Nonroad
Equipment
Emissions
From
NONROAD
Model
Nonroad
equipment
emissions
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
SO2
for
the
2002
inventory
were
calculated
using
the
NONROAD
Emissions
Equipment
Model
(
NNEM),
Version
2.3c
(
April
2004)
developed
by
the
USEPA
for
use
by
the
states
in
estimating
emissions
from
nonroad
sources.
The
NNEM
includes
more
than
eighty
basic
and
two
hundred
sixty
specific
types
of
nonroad
equipment,
which
are
stratified
by
equipment
types,
horsepower
rating
and
fuel.
Fuel
types
include
gasoline,
diesel,
compressed
natural
gas
(
CNG),
and
liquefied
petroleum
gas
(
LPG).

The
NNEM
contains
default
equipment
population
data.
The
default
equipment
population
values
were
used
except
for
the
population
of
airport
ground
support
equipment
(
GSE).
An
actual
inventory
of
ground
support
equipment
(
GSE)
for
Newark
Liberty
International
Airport
(
NLIA)
was
used,
since
it
was
available.
Using
this
approach
is
believed
to
enhance
the
accuracy
of
the
inventory
since
it
is
based
upon
an
actual
equipment
count
for
the
largest
airport
operation
within
the
state.
Although
2002
ground
support
equipment
population
data
were
requested,
the
Port
Authority
of
New
York
and
New
Jersey
(
The
Port
Authority)
submitted
population
data
for
2003.
The
34
Port
Authority
indicated
that
any
differences
between
the
2002
and
2003
population
were
minimal.

The
NLIA
GSE
inventory
was
also
used
to
calculate
GSE
population
for
other
airports
in
the
state.
In
order
to
estimate
the
amount
of
ground
support
equipment
at
other
major
New
Jersey
airports,
for
which
the
NJDEP
lacks
specific
data,
a
scaling
factor
was
calculated
by
comparing
the
number
of
air
carrier
(
commercial)
and
air
taxi
aircraft
landing
and
take­
off
operation
(
LTOs)
for
NLIA,
as
reported
by
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration,
to
the
number
of
these
aircraft
LTOs
for
each
major
airport
in
Atlantic,
Essex,
Burlington,
Mercer,
Bergen,
and
Morris
counties.
The
LTOs
are
shown
in
Table
10.
The
scaling
factor,
per
airport,
was
then
applied
to
the
NLIA
ground
support
equipment
(
GSE)
population
data
and
the
resultant
new
population
data
for
each
airport
was
combined
with
the
NLIA
data
to
determine
the
total
statewide
GSE
population.
The
statewide
GSE
population
was
input
into
the
NNEM
model
to
generate
statewide
emissions.
These
emissions
were
allocated
to
the
county
level
by
inputting
the
LTOs
into
the
NNEM
model
for
each
of
the
six
counties
shown
in
Table
10.

The
NNEM
also
contains
default
human
population
data,
however,
the
NJDEP
input
state
specific
2002
human
population
data
for
New
Jersey.
The
human
population
data
is
the
same
as
those
used
by
the
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations
in
their
travel
demand
models
to
calculate
onroad
sector
emissions.
For
certain
SCCs,
the
NNEM
uses
human
population
as
a
factor
in
calculating
equipment
activity
levels.

Other
parameters
input
into
the
NNEM
model
to
calculate
the
2002
nonroad
emissions
inventory
are
shown
in
Table
11.

Table
10:
County
Level
LTOs
Used
in
the
NONROAD
MODEL
COUNTY
AIR
CARRIERS
AIR
TAXI
TOTAL
LTO'S
ATLANTIC
5,675
6,055
11,730
ESSEX
145,402
50,466
195,868
MORRIS
1
9,198
9,199
BERGEN
15,732
11,997
27,729
MERCER
2
2,008
2,010
BURLINGTON(
1)
599
5,884
6,483
TOTAL
STATE
167,411
85,608
253,019
(
1)
The
air
taxi
category
for
Burlington
County
constitutes
military
aircraft
LTOs
from
McGuire.
35
Table
11:
Scenario
Specific
Parameters
Used
in
the
NONROAD
Model
Typical
Summer
Day
Typical
Winter
Day
Annual
Fuel
RVP(
1)
(
psi)
6.77
15.00
11.60
Fuel
Oxygen(
1)
weight
%
2.12
1.93
2.01
Gasoline
Sulfur(
1)
%
0.0103
0.0164
0.0139
Diesel
Sulfur(
2)
%
0.3080
0.3080
0.3080
LPG/
CNG
Sulfur
%
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
Minimum
Temperature(
3)
66.30
26.70
46.30
Maximum
Temperature(
3)
82.90
41.20
62.60
Average
Ambient
Temp.(
3)
74.90
33.00
54.30
Altitude
of
Region
LOW
Stage
II
Control
%
0.00
0.00
0.00
Period
Parameters
Year
of
Inventory
2002
Inventory
for
Seasonal
period
Seasonal
period
Annual
period
Emissions
summed
for
Typical
day
Typical
day
Period
total
Season
Summer
Winter
N/
A
Day
of
week
Weekday
Weekday
N/
A
(
1)
Gasoline
parameters
for
the
summer
RVP,
oxygen,
and
sulfur
levels
were
obtained
from
the
USEPA
survey
data
for
New
Jersey
for
2002.
The
winter
RVP
value
was
set
at
the
maximum
specification
level.
The
annual
values
were
the
time
weighted
average
(
five
months
for
summer
and
seven
months
for
winter)
of
summer
and
winter
gasoline.
(
2)
Diesel
sulfur
for
nonroad
fuel
was
obtained
from:
"
Draft
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis:
Control
of
Emissions
from
Non­
road
Diesel
Engines"
Section
7.1.4.2
(
USEPA
420­
R­
03­
008
April
2003).
The
average
value
for
Petroleum
Administration
for
Defense
District
1
(
3384
parts
per
million
(
ppm))
was
combined
with
a
10%
contribution
for
the
spillover
of
highway
diesel
fuel
(
340
ppm)
to
nonroad
equipment.
(
3)
Normal
daily
max/
min
temperatures
and
normal
dry
bulb
temperatures
were
obtained
from
the
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration,
Local
Climatological
Data
for
2002.
Values
from
airports
in
Newark,
Allentown
PA,
Philadelphia
PA,
and
Atlantic
City
were
used
to
represent
the
counties
within
the
respective
air
quality
areas.
Statewide
values
were
the
averages
for
the
twenty­
one
counties.

B.
Aircraft
Emissions
Aircraft
emissions
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
SO2
were
calculated
based
on
the
number
of
landing
and
take­
off
(
LTO)
cycles
generated
at
each
airport.
The
six
major
airports
in
New
Jersey,
Newark
Liberty
International,
Teterboro,
Atlantic
City,
Morris
Municipal,
Essex
County,
and
Mercer
County,
supplied
the
NJDEP
with
their
aircraft
fleet
mix.
These
values
were
used
as
inputs
to
the
Emissions
and
Dispersion
Modeling
System
(
EDMS),
the
Federal
Aviation
Agency
(
FAA)
modeling
tool.
LTO
numbers
for
the
aircraft
categories
of
commercial,
military,
air
taxi
and
general
aviation
for
all
remaining
smaller
airports
were
obtained
from
the
FAA.
McGuire
Air
Force
Base
(
McGuire)
supplied
LTO
and
Touch
and
Go
information
for
that
facility.
Information
on
time­
in­
mode,
number
of
engines
and
emission
factors
for
military
aircraft
was
obtained
from
Air
Emission
Inventory
Guidance
for
Mobile
Sources
at
Air
Force
Installations,
January
2002.
Specifics
on
the
equations
and
model
used
for
the
36
calculation
of
these
emissions,
other
assumptions
and
references
for
data
can
be
found
in
the
calculation
sheet
for
aircraft
included
in
Attachment
20.

C.
Locomotive
Emissions
Locomotive
emissions
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
SO2
were
calculated
based
on
the
estimated
fuel
consumption
of
individual
railroad
systems
operating
in
New
Jersey.
The
NJDEP
received
specific
fuel
use
data
from
many
short
line
freight
and
commuter
railroads.
An
estimation
of
fuel
consumption
based
on
gross
tons
miles
(
tons
of
freight
and
number
of
cars
multiplied
by
the
miles
traveled)
and
a
fuel
consumption
index
(
gross
ton
miles
per
gallon
of
fuel)
was
prepared
for
those
railroads
that
did
not
submit
statewide
fuel
data.
For
example,
the
larger
freight
haul
operations,
i.
e.
CSX
and
Norfork
Southern,
reported
nationwide
fuel
use
and
national
and
statewide
gross
ton
miles
from
which
a
state
fuel
index
was
obtained
to
calculate
state
and
county
level
fuel
use.
Specifics
on
the
equations
used
for
the
calculation
of
these
emissions,
other
assumptions,
and
references
for
data
can
be
found
in
the
calculation
sheet
for
locomotives
included
in
Attachment
20.

D.
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
emissions
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
SO2
for
Northern
New
Jersey
were
taken
from
the
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
Inventory
Report
prepared
by
Starcrest
Consulting
Croup,
LLC.
13
This
inventory
was
prepared
as
a
part
of
the
New
York
Harbor
Deepening
Project.
This
report
relied
on
actual
operational
data,
to
the
extent
such
information
was
available,
and
then
used
local
activity
parameters
to
extend
emission
estimates
to
those
portions
not
directly
inventoried.
Actual
operational
data
was
obtained
from
extensive
interviews
with
vessel
operators,
crew,
pilots,
and
the
United
States
Coast
Guard's
vessel
traffic
system
that
tracks
oceangoing
commercial
marine
vessels
from
points
of
origin
and
destination.
From
this
information
emissions
estimates
were
prepared
based
on
estimated
horsepower
demand.

Commercial
marine
vessel
emissions
for
the
Southern
New
Jersey
were
estimated
using
fuel
purchases
for
diesel
and
residual
fuels
and
the
number
of
trips
of
self
propelled
vessels
along
the
Delaware
River.
Emissions
on
the
Delaware
River
were
split
between
Pennsylvania
and
New
Jersey
by
assuming
that
all
northbound
emissions
were
in
New
Jersey
and
all
southbound
emissions
were
in
Pennsylvania.
This
allocation
process
was
agreed
to
by
the
two
states
as
part
of
the
1990­
emission
inventory
submittal.
This
fuel­
based
approach
tends
to
overestimate
commercial
marine
vessel
emissions
because
some
of
the
fuel
purchased
was
used
outside
of
the
Delaware
River.
However,
NJDEP
did
not
have
comprehensive
information
similar
to
above
referenced
Starcrest
report
for
the
Philadelphia/
Wilmington/
Trenton
nonattainment
area.
Specifics
on
the
equations
used
for
the
calculation
of
these
emissions,
other
assumptions
and
references
for
data
can
be
found
in
the
calculation
sheet
included
in
Attachment
20.

13
Starcrest
Consulting
Group,
LLC,
2003,
"
The
New
York,
Northern
New
Jersey,
Long
Island
Nonattainment
Area
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
Inventory"
37
E.
Ammonia
Emissions
Ammonia
emissions
for
non­
road
equipment
contained
in
the
NNEM
were
calculated
using
the
following
emission
factors,
presented
in
Recommended
Improvements
to
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
Ammonia
Emission
Inventory
Model
for
use
by
LADCO:
Final
Report
902350­
2249­
FR,
dated
March
10,
2003:

Diesel­
powered
engines:
0.17g
NH3/
gallon
fuel
Gasoline­
fueled
2­
and
4­
stroke
engines:
0.15g
NH3/
gallon
fuel
No
guidance
was
issued
by
the
USEPA
for
ammonia
emissions
for
LPG
or
CNG
fueled
engines,
aircraft,
locomotives,
and
commercial
marine
vessels,
therefore
the
emissions
are
reported
as
zero.

F.
Summary
of
Nonroad
Source
Inventory
Data
Table
12
presents
the
2002
nonroad
source
emission
inventory
by
county.
Attachment
21
contains
the
detailed
nonroad
source
emission
inventory
for
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
PM2.5,
SO2,
and
ammonia,
respectively.
Emissions
for
all
pollutants
are
calculated
on
an
annual
basis.
In
addition,
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
are
calculated
for
a
typical
summer
day
and
carbon
monoxide,
PM10,
and
PM2.5
are
calculated
for
a
winter
day.
Emissions
are
calculated
and
presented
by
SCC
and
county.
These
attachments
are
only
available
electronically.

Table
12:
2002
Statewide
Non­
road
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
10.25
3,521
6.26
1,771
70.26
19,798
Bergen
22.05
6,361
23.38
6,707
358.25
93,002
Burlington
10.01
3,000
12.88
3,776
121.35
31,350
Camden
7.23
2,110
9.44
2,669
112.44
29,402
Cape
May
22.61
8,480
5.92
1,959
80.06
26,265
Cumberland
11.03
4,196
7.94
2,574
50.35
15,941
Essex
11.92
3,739
25.70
8,137
182.98
53,407
Gloucester
5.91
1,686
8.01
2,200
77.69
19,203
Hudson
5.22
1,617
20.71
5,976
68.72
20,015
Hunterdon
3.66
1,038
4.70
1,223
48.31
11,896
Mercer
7.01
1,922
9.32
2,427
104.18
25,685
Middlesex
14.58
4,115
17.54
4,849
228.84
57,965
Monmouth
21.26
6,996
15.74
4,316
212.60
55,614
Morris
15.09
4,211
11.58
3,151
227.91
56,136
Ocean
21.54
7,714
7.57
2,138
143.85
40,914
Passaic
6.62
2,081
8.88
2,413
98.09
26,769
Salem
3.37
1,162
3.21
932
21.42
5,991
Somerset
6.87
1,898
7.57
2,097
107.75
26,731
Sussex
3.86
1,490
2.46
615
37.57
10,883
Union
7.75
2,237
20.25
5,883
118.31
31,780
Warren
2.78
832
2.48
631
26.89
7,198
Total
in
State
220.60
70,407
231.56
66,443
2,497.80
665,944
38
Table
12
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Non­
road
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
County
PM10
Tons
per
Year
PM2.5
Tons
per
Year
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
248
225
176
13
Bergen
524
478
620
163
Burlington
471
413
2,462
39
Camden
249
228
1,057
46
Cape
May
509
468
993
6
Cumberland
407
374
2,115
20
Essex
444
393
980
82
Gloucester
242
222
1,243
22
Hudson
375
345
1,582
56
Hunterdon
113
103
123
14
Mercer
224
203
501
41
Middlesex
376
346
612
108
Monmouth
545
501
929
47
Morris
309
280
276
75
Ocean
446
409
216
21
Passaic
194
178
223
65
Salem
132
122
673
7
Somerset
164
149
180
43
Sussex
99
89
69
8
Union
362
333
1,680
82
Warren
71
64
63
12
Total
in
State
6,505
5,922
16,772
970
VI.
Biogenic
Sources
Biogenic
emissions
are
produced
by
living
organisms
or
biological
processes.
This
biogenic
inventory
includes
emissions
from
plant
matter
as
well
as
humans,
domestic
animals,
and
wild
animals.

The
biogenic
emissions
for
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
were
calculated
by
the
USEPA
using
the
BEIS
model,
version
3.12.
These
estimates
were
created
using
the
following
data:
1)
2001
annual
meteorology
2)
BEIS3.12
model
via
the
Sparse
Matrix
Operator
Kernel
Emissions
(
SMOKE)
modeling
system
3)
Recently
revised
BEIS3.12
emission
factors
file
4)
BELD3
land
use
data
(
1­
km
original
data
aggregated
to
36­
km
grid),
and
5)
Post
processing
summation
of
county­
total
emissions
from
SMOKE,
calculated
from
36­
km
gridded
emissions
using
the
"
land
area"
spatial
surrogate.
This
means
that
when
calculating
the
county­
total
numbers,
the
36­
km
gridded
emissions
were
assumed
to
be
uniformly
distributed
over
the
grid
cell
for
purposes
of
mapping
to
the
counties.
39
Biogenic
ammonia
emissions
were
estimated
using
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
ammonia
emissions
modeling
tool.
The
current
version,
v3.1,
of
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application
was
used
to
generate
ammonia
inventories
for
human,
domestic
animal,
and
wild
animal
emissions.
Several
Regional
Haze
Planning
Organizations
are
planning
to
use
this
application
to
generate
part
or
all
of
their
ammonia
inventory,
including
MANE­
VU,
LADCO,
and
CENRAP.

The
New
Jersey
population
values
in
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application
were
altered
and
the
2002
New
Jersey
population
values
supplied
by
the
New
Jersey
Department
of
Transportation
that
were
used
throughout
this
inventory
were
used
to
calculate
ammonia
emissions
associated
with
human
breath
and
perspiration.
The
emission
estimates
were
calculated
using
the
emission
factors
for
human
emissions
supplied
with
v3.1
of
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application.
14
The
New
Jersey
cat
and
dog
population
values
in
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application
were
updated
with
2001
statewide
values
from
the
U.
S.
Pet:
Ownership
and
Demographic
Sourcebook
based
on
the
American
Veterinary
Medical
Association
Household
Pet
Survey
for
2001.
These
statewide
population
values
were
apportioned
to
the
county
level
based
on
the
proportion
found
in
the
existing
population
Carnegie
Mellon
University
activity
file.
The
emission
estimates
were
calculated
using
the
emission
factors
for
domestic
animals
supplied
with
v3.1
of
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application.
15
Emissions
for
wild
animals
were
estimated
using
the
activity
data
and
emission
factors
supplied
with
v3.1
of
the
Carnegie
Mellon
University
application.
16
Table
13
presents
the
2002
biogenic
source
emission
inventory
by
county.
The
more
detailed
ammonia
inventory
by
SCC
and
county
is
included
in
Attachment
22.

14
Emission
Factors:
Battye
R.,
Battye
W.,
Overcash
C.,
and
Fudge
S.,
1994.
"
Development
and
selection
of
ammonia
emission
factors."
Prepared
by
EC/
R,
Inc
for
the
USEPA
Atmospheric
Research
and
Exposure
Assessment
Laboratory.
15
Ibid.
16
Wild
Animals
Activity
Levels:
The
American
Bear
Association.
Fax
received
giving
bear
populations
for
1993.
Quality
Deer
Management
Association.
http://
www.
qdma.
com.
Fax
received,
fall
2000.
Rocky
Mountain
Elk
Foundation.
"
Status
of
Elk
in
North
America
1975­
1995."
Emission
Factors:
Chitjian,
M.,
Koizumi,
J.,
Botsford,
C.
W.,
Mansell,
G.,
Winegar,
E.,
2000.
"
1997
Gridded
Ammonia
Emission
Inventory
Update
for
the
South
Coast
Air
Basin."
Prepared
for
the
South
Coast
Air
Quality
Management
District.
40
Table
13:
2002
Statewide
Biogenic
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
VOC*
NOx
*
CO*

County
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
40.38
14,748
0.21
78
2.96
1,080
Bergen
4.60
1,681
0.07
25
0.54
199
Burlington
39.84
14,552
0.26
97
3.33
1,216
Camden
20.06
7,326
0.21
77
1.57
574
Cape
May
19.55
7,140
0.19
68
1.54
562
Cumberland
28.41
10,377
0.34
125
2.28
831
Essex
3.40
1,244
0.07
27
0.45
164
Gloucester
16.83
6,148
0.19
71
1.41
516
Hudson
3.27
1,195
0.07
27
0.44
161
Hunterdon
12.44
4,545
0.19
69
1.60
585
Mercer
12.65
4,619
0.20
72
1.42
518
Middlesex
12.78
4,669
0.16
58
1.16
424
Monmouth
22.00
8,036
0.22
79
1.98
722
Morris
13.75
5,024
0.12
43
1.42
519
Ocean
43.80
15,998
0.27
98
3.89
1,420
Passaic
11.04
4,034
0.10
38
1.13
412
Salem
18.64
6,809
0.32
116
1.63
595
Somerset
12.20
4,455
0.15
54
1.40
511
Sussex
20.48
7,479
0.15
55
2.00
731
Union
2.31
843
0.08
28
0.36
133
Warren
13.50
4,931
0.22
79
1.58
578
Total
in
State
371.95
135,851
3.78
1,382
34.09
12,451
*
The
USEPA
only
supplied
Tons
per
Year
values.
In
order
to
prepare
this
comparison
it
was
assumed
that
biogenic
emissions
were
constant
over
the
year.
Therefore,
2002
actual
Tons
per
Day
values
were
calculated
by
dividing
the
annual
value
by
365.24.
41
Table
13
(
continued):
2002
Statewide
Biogenic
Source
Emission
Inventory
by
County
and
Pollutant
County
PM10
Tons
per
Year
PM2.5
Tons
per
Year
SO2
Tons
per
Year
NH3
Tons
per
Year
Atlantic
0
0
0
329
Bergen
0
0
0
863
Burlington
0
0
0
520
Camden
0
0
0
518
Cape
May
0
0
0
130
Cumberland
0
0
0
203
Essex
0
0
0
762
Gloucester
0
0
0
274
Hudson
0
0
0
572
Hunterdon
0
0
0
164
Mercer
0
0
0
347
Middlesex
0
0
0
746
Monmouth
0
0
0
651
Morris
0
0
0
544
Ocean
0
0
0
616
Passaic
0
0
0
505
Salem
0
0
0
89
Somerset
0
0
0
309
Sussex
0
0
0
235
Union
0
0
0
501
Warren
0
0
0
153
Total
in
State
0
0
0
9,032
VII.
Quality
Assurance
A.
Point
Sources
This
section
outlines
and
discusses
the
quality
assurance
checks
performed
on
the
point
source
emission
statement
data
submitted
to
the
NJDEP.

i.
Data
Entry
Checks
Pursuant
to
N.
J.
A.
C.
7:
27­
21
et
seq.,
2002
point
source
emissions
were
reported
by
applicable
facilities
to
the
NJDEP
through
the
Emission
Statement
Program.
All
applicable
facilities,
with
the
exception
of
two,
reported
their
2002
emissions
in
electronic
format.
The
NJDEP
Bureau
of
Air
Quality
Planning
staff
performed
data
entry
of
the
two
paper
submittals.

ii.
Completeness
Checks
&
Reasonableness
Checks
All
the
662
Emission
Statements
submitted
by
applicable
facilities
in
2002
were
checked
for
completeness.
The
checklist
in
Attachment
23
was
used
for
emission
statement
review.
NJDEP
staff
accessed
data
from
both
the
New
Jersey
Environmental
Management
System
and
the
NJDEP
Emission
Statement
Program
Confidential
Cabinet
and
compiled
data
into
various
reports
using
the
Web
Intelligence
Software
and
42
Microsoft
Access
software
(
Access)
to
assist
in
determining
responses
to
the
questions
in
this
checklist.
NJEMS
is
the
database
that
the
NJDEP
uses
to
store
all
emission
statement
data.
The
Confidential
Cabinet
contains
all
the
confidential
process
data,
which
are
manually
reviewed
by
the
NJDEP
staff.
Web
Intelligence
Software
is
the
report
writer
software
that
the
NJDEP
uses
to
access
the
data
stored
in
the
New
Jersey
Environmental
Management
System,
while
Access
is
the
software
that
the
NJDEP
uses
to
configure
the
data
from
Web
Intelligence
Software
into
other
useful
reports
for
error
checks.
The
data
source
used
for
determining
the
response
to
each
specific
question
in
the
checklist
is
identified
after
each
question.

iii.
Comparison
Checks
Two
reports
were
created
using
Business
Objects
software
to
conduct
quality
assurance
checks
on
the
emissions
data
collected
in
2002
compared
to
the
emissions
data
collected
in
1999,
2000
and
2001.
In
addition,
the
Emission
Statement
contractor
conducted
further
evaluations.
The
details
of
the
reports
are
described
in
Attachment
23.

Table
14
presents
the
comparison
of
the
Summer
1999
"
actual"
point
source
emission
inventory
to
the
Summer
2002
"
projected"
and
"
actual"
point
source
inventory,
without
RE.
The
inventories
are
compared
without
RE
so
that
base
line
reported
emissions
can
be
compared,
because
RE
is
not
applied
to
all
baseline
emissions
as
discussed
above
in
Section
II.
The
2002
"
actual"
point
source
emissions
show
an
increase
in
emissions
for
VOC
and
carbon
monoxide
in
comparison
to
the
1999
"
actual"
emissions.
This
increase
is
attributed
to
growth.
There
is
a
slight
decrease
in
NOx
emissions,
due
to
a
decrease
from
the
NOx
Budget
Program,
which
is
greater
than
the
increase
due
to
growth.
The
difference
between
the
2002
"
actual"
and
"
projected"
point
source
emissions
is
due
to
the
growth
factors
used
to
project
out
the
1999
"
actual"
point
source
emissions,
which
overestimated
projected
emissions.
In
addition,
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
has
fifty­
nine
less
facilities
than
the
1999
"
actual"
point
source
inventory
due
to
facility
closures
and
nonapplicability
to
the
emission
statement
rule.

Table
14
also
shows
the
comparison
of
the
Annual
1999
"
actual"
point
source
emission
inventory
to
the
Annual
2002
"
projected"
and
"
actual"
point
source
inventory,
without
RE.
Again,
the
inventories
are
shown
without
RE
so
that
any
methodological
differences
are
not
a
factor
in
comparing
the
base
line
emissions.
As
discussed
above,
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
has
less
facilities
than
the
1999
"
actual"
inventory,
which
is
the
cause
for
the
decrease
in
emissions
between
the
two
years.

Table
14
also
shows
the
comparison
of
1999
USEPA
NEI
data,
the
2002
USEPA
NEI
v1
data
and
the
2002
"
actual"
point
source
inventory.
The
2002
"
actual"
point
source
emissions
for
SO2,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
ammonia
are
slightly
higher
than
the
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
emissions
but
are
very
close
considering
that
emissions
data
are
from
different
sources.

A
review
of
the
2002
"
actual"
point
source
inventory
in
Attachment
4
shows
that
the
Chemical
Manufacturing
General
Process
SCC
is
a
top
VOC
emitter
during
the
summer
but
not
annually.
This
difference
in
emissions
appears
to
be
because
the
majority
of
the
43
activity
occurs
in
the
summer
and
also
due
to
the
reporting
of
summer
emissions
in
pounds
and
converting
them
to
tons
and
then
applying
rule
effectiveness.

A
series
of
graphs
showing
the
top
15
pollutants
by
SCC
code
for
each
pollutant
and
source
sector
can
be
found
in
Attachment
1.
The
graphs
comparing
the
1996
and
2002
inventories
show
a
large
discrepancy
in
emissions
by
SCC
code.
This
discrepancy
is
because
in
2002,
facilities
were
required
to
submit
SCC
codes
for
each
of
their
emission
units.
This
is
different
than
in
1996,
when
facilities
were
not
required
to
submit
SCC
codes,
and
SCC
codes
were
assigned
to
the
units
by
the
NJDEP.
When
the
facility
assigns
the
SCC
codes,
it
is
a
more
accurate
representation
of
the
emission
units
due
to
their
specific
knowledge
of
the
source.
However,
due
to
the
large
variety
of
SCC
codes
to
choose
from,
when
the
facilities
choose
SCC
codes,
it
also
leads
to
a
much
higher
variability
in
the
SCC
code
chosen
for
a
similar
source
by
each
facility.
For
example,
the
SCC
code
used
by
one
facility
may
not
match
the
SCC
code
used
by
another
facility
for
the
same
source.
Another
example
shows
that
there
were
471
SCC
codes
used
for
1996
VOC
inventory
compared
to
698
SCC
codes
used
for
the
2002
VOC
inventory.
For
the
purposes
of
the
comparison
in
creating
the
graphs,
Standard
Industrial
Classification
Codes
numbers
4­
06­
002­
98
&
4­
06­
002­
99
were
added
together
as
the
source
descriptions
are
the
same.

Another
discrepancy
noted
was
that
some
of
the
PM2.5
emissions
are
higher
than
PM10
emissions.
This
is
because
the
PM10
data
was
reported
by
the
facilities
and
may
or
may
not
contain
condensable
PM.
The
PM2.5
emissions
were
calculated
by
the
NJDEP
using
the
PM10
reported
emissions
(
and
total
suspended
particulates
if
PM10
was
not
reported)
in
the
USEPA
PM2.5
calculator.
Two
calculations
were
made,
one
for
filterable
and
one
for
condensable
emissions.
These
emissions
were
added
together
to
show
the
final
PM2.5
emissions.
It
appears
as
though
the
condensable
emissions
were
not
included
in
the
PM10
emissions
reported
by
the
facilities
for
2002.
44
Table
14:
Statewide
Point
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
before
Application
of
Rule
Effectiveness
Summer
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1999
Actual
wo/
RE
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
wo/
RE
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
wo/
RE
VOC
89.45
175.99
100.94
NOx
281.67
272.8
280.35
CO
75.26
62.06
89.34
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
New
Jersey
1999
Actual
wo/
RE
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
wo/
RE
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
wo/
RE
VOC
22,777
30,507
17,408
NOx
55,749
60,421
51,642
CO
14,964
15,485
12,398
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
wo/
RE
SO2
135,256
60,927
61,231
PM10*
17,846
4,585
5,555
PM2.5*
14,337
3,713
4,868
NH3
539,304
38
38
*
The
2002
actual
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.

B.
Area
Sources
The
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
emissions
from
area
source
categories
were
calculated,
for
the
most
part,
by
multiplying
a
USEPA
published
emission
factor
by
a
known
indicator
of
activity
for
each
source
category
such
as
employment,
population
and
fuel
usage.
There
are
several
area
source
categories
and
methodologies,
resulting
in
numerous
calculations.
The
area
source
emissions
calculations
were
checked
for
accuracy
by
adding
county
emission
totals
and
comparing
them
with
the
statewide
emission
totals.
The
calculations
were
randomly
reviewed
by
NJDEP
Bureau
of
Air
Quality
Planning
staff
to
check
for
accuracy.

The
2002
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
area
source
inventories
were
compared
to
the
1996
inventories
and
to
the
projected
2002
inventories
in
order
to
identify
any
45
anomalies
that
might
indicate
calculation
or
data
errors,
and
to
verify
reasons
for
trends
towards
higher
or
lower
emissions.
The
1996
inventory
was
chosen
for
comparison,
because
the
1999
inventory
was
a
projection
of
the
1996
base
year
inventory,
and
therefore
is
also
a
reflection
of
the
growth
factors
chosen,
in
addition
to
the
methodologies
used
to
calculated
emissions.
A
summary
of
the
inventory
comparison
is
included
in
Attachment
25.
The
comparison
shows
summer
and
annual
estimated
emissions,
differences
from
1996
to
2002,
and
explanations
for
significant
differences.
An
overall
summary
of
statewide
emission
differences
is
shown
in
Table
15
below.

As
shown
in
Table
15,
summer
and
annual
VOC
and
carbon
monoxide
estimated
emissions
have
increased
significantly
from
the
1996
inventory.
The
reasons
for
these
increases
are
varied.
The
estimated
emissions
for
residential
wood
combustion
have
increased
due
to
an
error
in
the
calculations
in
the
1996
inventory.
The
estimated
emissions
for
consumer
products
have
increased
more
than
projected
due
to
a
larger
increase
in
population
than
projected.
Metal
containers
surface
coating
estimated
emissions
have
increased
due
to
a
change
in
reporting
methodology.
Previously,
employment
figures
obtained
from
the
Department
of
Labor
were
reported
by
Standard
Industrial
Classification
codes,
whereas
for
2002,
employment
figures
were
reported
by
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
codes.
Several
area
source
categories
that
use
employment
to
calculate
estimated
emissions
were
affected
by
this
change.
Some
emissions
increased
due
to
this
change
and
some
decreased.
Two
new
categories
were
included
into
the
VOC
inventory
that
increased
VOC
emissions
significantly,
industrial
adhesives
and
portable
fuel
containers.
The
permeation,
diurnal
and
transport
portions
of
emissions
from
portable
fuel
containers
were
included
in
the
area
source
inventory.
(
Diurnal
emissions
are
when
stored
fuel
vapors
escape
to
the
outside
of
a
gas
can
through
any
possible
openings.)
The
refueling
(
spillage
and
vapor
displacement)
emissions
are
included
in
the
nonroad
inventory
because
they
are
part
of
the
nonroad
model.
The
1996
balanced
submerged
filling
emissions
were
revised
to
reflect
the
New
Jersey
rule
in
place
prior
to
2003,
N.
J.
A.
C.
7:
27­
16.3,
which
required
ninety
percent
efficiency
for
this
type
of
gasoline
loading.
Rule
amendments
effective
June
2003
have
increased
the
efficiency
requirement
from
ninety
percent
to
ninety­
eight
percent,
which
will
be
reflected
in
future
year
inventories.
Large
forest
fires
in
Ocean
County
in
the
summer
of
2002
significantly
increased
wildfire
emissions.

Some
decreases
in
emissions
were
also
noted
in
individual
categories.
The
reasons
for
these
decreases
are
varied.
Industrial
natural
gas
combustion
showed
a
decrease
in
emissions
due
to
changes
in
point
source
reporting.
Point
source
fuel
use
is
subtracted
from
total
statewide
fuel
use
to
determine
area
source
emissions.
Therefore,
an
increase
in
the
reporting
of
natural
gas
use
in
the
point
source
inventory
resulted
in
a
decrease
in
the
area
source
emissions
for
this
category.
Bakery
emissions
decreased
due
to
the
change
in
employment
reporting
discussed
above.
Managed
burning
emissions
decreased
due
to
a
decrease
in
managed
burning.
Gasoline
refueling
(
stage
II)
emissions
were
removed
from
the
area
source
inventory
because
they
are
a
mandatory
part
of
the
mobile
model
emission
reporting
and
are
therefore
now
included
in
the
onroad
mobile
inventory.

The
2002
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
area
source
inventories
were
compared
to
the
1999
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
preliminary
USEPA
NEI
inventories
in
order
to
identify
any
anomalies
that
might
indicate
calculation
or
data
46
errors,
and
to
verify
reasons
for
trends
towards
higher
or
lower
emissions.
A
summary
of
the
inventory
comparison
is
included
in
Attachment
25.
The
comparison
shows
annual
emissions
and
differences.
An
overall
summary
of
statewide
emission
differences
is
shown
in
Table
15.
The
USEPA
NEI
for
the
most
part
shows
higher
emissions
than
the
New
Jersey
inventory
for
all
pollutants.
The
reasons
for
these
differences
is
not
entirely
clear,
but
appears
to
be
due
to
outdated
data
in
the
NEI
and
the
use
of
state
specific
data
in
the
New
Jersey
inventory.
There
are
numerous
differences
between
the
VOC
inventories,
with
one
of
the
largest
being
the
addition
of
the
portable
fuel
container
category
in
the
New
Jersey
area
source
inventory.
The
largest
discrepancies
in
the
carbon
monoxide
and
PM
(
without
fugitive
dust)
inventories
are
open
burning
and
wildfires.
The
largest
discrepancies
in
the
PM
fugitive
dust
inventories
(
the
2002
actual
totals
include
adjusted
emissions
from
fugitive
dust
categories,
see
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion)
are
paved
roads,
construction
and
agricultural
tilling.
The
largest
discrepancy
in
the
SO2
inventory
is
the
industrial
bituminous
coal
category.
The
industrial
and
commercial
residual
oil
categories
also
have
large
discrepancies.
47
Table
15:
Statewide
Area
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Summer
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1996
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
305.03
319.62
369.83
NOx
39.66
39.66
35.92
CO
26.88
27.14
66.45
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
New
Jersey
1996
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
97,589
NA
127,673
NOx
28,034
NA
26,742
CO
40,598
NA
94,067
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
174,710
1
142,582
1
127,673
NOx
39,472
39,043
26,742
CO
180,669
146,825
94,067
SO2
46,216
45,392
10,876
PM10
wo
fugitive
dust
43,710
26,300
15,479
PM10
fugitive
dust
229,790
90,804
46,405
PM10
fugitive
dust2
NA
NA
9,281
PM2.5
wo
fugitive
dust
39,168
24,138
15,210
PM2.5
fugitive
dust
52,314
14,639
5,099
PM2.5
fugitive
dust2
NA
NA
1,020
NH3
NA
NA
8,005
Notes:
1.
The
USEPA
NEI
does
not
include
portable
fuel
container
emissions,
which
would
increase
the
NEI
by
8,887
tpy.
2.
Adjusted
fugitive
dust.
See
Attachment
2
of
this
report
for
further
discussion.
48
C.
Onroad
Sources
This
section
outlines
and
discusses
the
various
quality
assurance
checks
performed
on
the
onroad
source
emissions.

Table
16
presents
the
comparison
of
the
1999
"
actual"
on­
road
source
emission
inventory
to
the
2002
"
projected"
and
"
actual"
on­
road
source
inventory.

The
2002
"
projected"
inventory
differs
significantly
from
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
and
the
1999
"
actual"
inventory
because
a
different
emission
factor
prediction
model
was
used
to
calculate
each
inventory.
The
1999
"
actual"
inventory
was
calculated
after
the
2002
"
projected"
inventory
using
the
USEPA
MOBILE6.2
model.
The
2002
"
projected"
inventory
was
calculated
using
the
USEPA
MOBILE5a­
h
model.
The
2002
"
actual"
inventory
was
calculated
using
the
USEPA
MOBILE6.2.03
model.
As
shown
by
the
values
in
Table
16,
the
change
from
MOBILE5a­
h
to
MOBILE6.2
results
in
increased
emission
estimates
for
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide.

Comparison
of
the
1999
"
actual"
inventory
to
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
indicates
that
emissions
of
VOC
and
carbon
monoxide
are
lower.
Both
of
these
inventories
were
estimated
using
the
MOBILE6
model.
Even
though
the
vehicles
miles
traveled
increased
between
1999
and
2002,
the
effect
of
lower
average
emission
factors
due
to
fleet
turnover
(
emission
standards
for
newer
vehicles
are
lower
due
to
the
historical
implementation
of
Federal
rules)
for
the
2002
fleet
was
apparently
stronger.
This
resulted
in
a
decrease
in
the
emission
inventories
for
VOC
and
carbon
monoxide.

The
significant
decrease
in
VOC
emissions
between
1999
and
2002
is
also
a
result
of
the
change
in
assumptions
regarding
the
temperatures/
humidities
used
in
the
inventory
calculations.
In
accordance
with
the
Consolidated
Emissions
Reporting
Rule,
the
2002
"
actual"
summer
inventory
was
generated
using
average
summer
day
temperatures/
humidities.
In
previous
inventories
temperatures/
humidities
for
high
ozone
days
were
used.
The
average
summer
day
temperatures/
humidities
were
significantly
lower
than
the
high
ozone
day
temperatures/
humidities.
The
use
of
lower
temperatures/
humidities
in
the
model
results
in
predictions
of
lower
evaporative
emissions
of
VOCs.

The
significant
decrease
in
carbon
monoxide
emissions
between
the
1999
"
actual"
and
2002
"
actual"
can,
at
least
partially,
be
explained
by
a
model
change.
Although
both
the
1999
"
actual"
and
2002
"
actual"
inventories
were
calculated
using
MOBILE6,
a
later
version
of
MOBILE6
was
used
for
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory.
One
of
the
differences
between
the
two
model
versions
is
that
the
most
recent
version
(
MOBILE6.02.03)
predicts
generally
lower
emission
factors
for
carbon
monoxide.

The
significant
increase
in
NOx
emissions
for
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
relative
to
the
two
previous
inventories
is
primarily
due
to
an
increase
in
the
vehicle
miles
traveled
estimate
for
heavy
duty
diesel
vehicles
(
HDDVs).
The
"
actual"
2002
inventory
is
based
on
an
updated
distribution
of
vehicle
miles
traveled
between
the
various
vehicle
types
for
the
North
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Authority
and
South
Jersey
Transportation
Planning
Organization
models.
49
A
series
of
graphs
showing
the
top
15
pollutants
by
SCC
code
for
each
pollutant
and
source
sector
can
be
found
in
Attachment
1.
Attachment
1
contains
a
file
(
Graphs3
compare96­
02.
xls)
that
consists
of
a
series
of
charts
that
compare
the
1996
and
2002
emissions
by
SCC
for
various
pollutants.
In
some
cases
the
2002
emissions
differ
significantly
from
the
1996
emissions.

The
chart
that
compares
the
NOx
emissions
for
the
onroad
sector
sources
shows
that
the
NOx
emissions
from
HDDVs
increased
from
69.89
tpd
for
1996
to
285.37
tpd
for
2002.
Also,
the
NOx
emissions
from
light
duty
gasoline
vehicles
(
LDGVs)
decreased
from
223.02
tpd
for
1996
to
139.27
tpd
for
2002.
The
large
increase
in
NOx
emissions
from
HDDVs
is
due
primarily
to
an
increase
in
the
estimated
DVMT
for
HDDVs.
The
1996
emissions
estimate
was
based
on
an
activity
level
of
4,156,423
miles
per
day
for
HDDVs
while
the
2002
emissions
estimate
was
based
on
an
activity
level
of
8,065,321
miles
per
day.
The
DVMT
estimates
were
established
by
the
Metropolitan
Planning
Organizations.
The
decrease
in
NOx
emissions
from
LDGVs
between
1996
and
2002
is
due
to
both
lower
emission
factors
and
lower
DVMT.
The
emission
factors
are
lower
because
of
fleet
turnover
to
lower
emitting
vehicles.
The
DVMT
is
lower
due
to
the
increased
preference
for
sport
utility
vehicles
relative
to
passenger
cars
during
the
1996­
2002
period.
Sport
utility
vehicles
are
generally
classified
as
light
duty
gasoline
trucks
(
LDGTs)
and
not
LDGVs.

The
chart
that
compares
the
carbon
monoxide
emissions
for
the
onroad
sector
sources
indicates
that
the
carbon
monoxide
emissions
from
LDGVs
increased
from
1,182.89
tpd
for
1996
to
1538.48
tpd
for
2002.
Also,
the
carbon
monoxide
emissions
from
light
duty
gasoline
trucks
less
than
6,000
pounds
(
LDGT1s)
increased
from
362.97
tpd
for
1996
to
837.50
tpd
for
2002.
The
carbon
monoxide
estimates
for
LDGVs
and
LDGT1s
are
greater
in
2002
than
1996
primarily
because
of
the
change
in
the
model
used
to
estimate
emission
factors
from
MOBILE5
for
the
1996
estimates
to
MOBILE6
for
the
2002
estimates.
MOBILE6
generates
higher
carbon
monoxide
emission
factors
for
these
vehicle
classes.
Another
reason
for
the
significant
increase
in
carbon
monoxide
emission
estimates
for
LDGT1s
is
a
large
increase
in
the
DVMT
for
2002
relative
to
1996.
This
is
a
result
of
the
significant
increase
in
the
use
of
sport
utility
vehicles
(
LDGT1s)
as
passenger
cars
(
LDGVs)
that
occurred
during
this
period.

The
USEPA
2002
NEI
emissions
for
SO2,
PM10,
PM2.5,
and
ammonia
are
similar
to
the
2002
"
actual"
inventories.
The
differences
between
the
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
"
actual"
inventories
are
significantly
less
for
the
USEPA
2002
inventories
than
the
USEPA
1999
inventories.
The
USEPA
1999
NEI
emissions
for
ammonia
are
less
than
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
while
the
USEPA
2002
NEI
emissions
for
ammonia
are
slightly
greater
than
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory.
50
Table
16:
Statewide
Onroad
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Summer
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1999
Actual
(
MOBILE6)
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
(
MOBILE5)
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
(
MOBILE6)
VOC
369.59
212.92
274.74
NOx
473.53
346.25
558.66
CO
3,538.65
1,374.76
2,856.37
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v2
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
SO2
7,535
3,758
5,793
PM10
5,461
3,864
4,718
PM2.5
4,121
2,592
3,361
NH3
6,562
7,629
7,469
D.
Nonroad
Sources
i.
Nonroad
Equipment
Emissions
From
NONROAD
Model
This
section
outlines
and
discusses
the
various
quality
assurance
and
comparison
checks
performed
on
the
non­
road
source
emissions
for
the
categories
in
the
NNEM.
General
quality
assurance
checks
consisted
of
comparing
the
final
tabulated
nonroad
2002
emissions
inventory
against
the
output
file
data
produced
by
the
NNEM
to
serve
as
a
check
on
calculations
performed
in
Microsoft
Access
and
Microsoft
Excel.
In
addition,
random
manual
calculations
were
performed
to
serve
as
a
check
on
calculations
performed
in
Microsoft
Access
and
Microsoft
Excel.

The
2002
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
nonroad
inventories
were
compared
to
the
1999
inventories
and
to
the
projected
2002
inventories
in
order
to
identify
any
anomalies
that
might
indicate
calculation
or
data
errors,
and
to
verify
reasons
for
trends
towards
higher
or
lower
emissions.
Table
17
presents
the
comparison
of
the
1999
"
actual"
nonroad
source
emission
inventory
to
the
2002
"
projected"
and
"
actual"
nonroad
source
inventory.

The
2002
"
actual"
inventory
differs
significantly
from
the
1999
"
actual"
and
2002
"
projected"
inventories
because
different
versions
of
the
USEPA
NNEM
were
used
to
calculate
each
inventory.
The
2002
"
actual"
inventory
was
calculated
using
version
2.3c
(
April
2004)
of
the
NNEM
while
version
2.1
(
December
1998)
was
used
to
prepare
the
other
two
inventories.
Also,
a
new
methodology
for
calculating
the
emissions
from
commercial
marine
vessels
was
used
for
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory,
as
discussed
below
in
a
separate
section.
51
Comparison
of
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
to
the
other
inventories
indicates
that
emissions
estimates
of
VOCs
and
carbon
monoxide
are
currently
higher
while
emissions
estimates
of
NOx
are
currently
lower.
The
primary
increase
in
VOCs
is
due
to
the
modeled
emissions
from
outboards
and
personal
watercraft,
which
is
substantially
different
due
to
revised
population
data
as
further
explained
below.
The
reductions
in
NOx
emissions
are
a
result
of
the
use
of
the
newer
NONROAD
version
as
well
as
the
new
methodology
for
the
estimation
of
emissions
from
commercial
marine
vessels.
In
addition,
there
was
a
reduction
in
NOx
in
aircraft
LTO
emissions
which
reflects
the
use
of
the
updated
2003
FAA
EDMS.
Previously,
an
older
version
of
the
NESCAUM
aircraft
emissions
model
was
used
to
determine
these
emissions
for
just
Newark
and
Teterboro
airports
because
only
these
airports
supplied
fleet
mix
data
for
the
emission
inventory
year
of
1996.
The
1996
LTO
emissions
for
every
other
airport
had
to
be
determined
by
application
of
the
USEPA
default
emission
factors.
17
These
default
emission
factors
generate
very
conservative
emissions
in
comparison
to
the
more
accurate
EDMS
model.

The
increase
in
carbon
monoxide
emissions
in
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory
is
attributed
to
changes
in
the
NNEM.
The
most
significant
impact
upon
these
emissions
is
noticed
in
SCCs
having
4­
stroke
gasoline­
fueled
engines,
where
in
some
cases
the
calculated
carbon
monoxide
values
increased
by
20­
121
percent.
This
was
also
found
to
have
occurred
in
emissions
estimates
for
Industrial
Forklifts
fueled
by
liquefied
petroleum
gas.
In
most
of
these
source
classes,
there
was
also
an
increase
in
population.
SCCs
significantly
impacted
in
this
manner
include:
Inboard/
Sterndrive
Pleasure
Craft,
Commercial
Pumps,
Commercial
Rotary
Tillers
<
6
Horsepower,
Commercial
Welders,
Commercial
Pressure
Washers,
Residential
Lawn
Mowers,
Commercial
Lawn
and
Garden
Tractors,
Generator
Sets,
Residential
Lawn
and
Garden
Tractors,
Offroad
Motorcycles,
Commercial
Turf
Equipment,
and
Industrial
Forklifts
fueled
by
liquefied
petroleum
gas.

As
shown
in
the
graphs
in
Attachment
2,
there
are
significant
differences
amongst
certain
SCCs
for
VOC
and
NOx
emissions
between
the
1996
inventory
and
the
2002
inventory.
These
differences,
except
for
watercraft
as
characterized
below,
are
attributed
to
revisions
in
the
newer
model
whereby
a
combination
of
emissions,
usage,
load,
and
other
factors
resulted
in
a
net
increase
in
estimated
outputs.
Since
the
newer
versions
of
the
NONROAD
(
v2.3c)
draft
model
are
generally
accepted
to
produce
more
accurate
accountings
of
emissions,
it
is
believed
that
the
differences
found
when
comparing
the
2002
inventory
against
the
1996
inventory
are
primarily
a
result
of
the
model
revisions.
Also
contributing
to
these
differences
is
the
phasing­
in
of
emissions
standards
for
small
engines,
which
produces
a
reduction
in
VOC
emissions.
Other
notable
differences
in
the
2002
inventory
are
reduced
VOC
emissions
from
small
4­
stroke
gasoline
engines
caused
by
new
engine
emissions
standards,
increased
VOC
emissions
from
small
2­
stroke
engines
attributed
to
emission
factor
and
population
revisions,
and
reduced
NOx
emissions
from
diesel­
powered
equipment
attributed
to
model
revisions.

17
Procedures
for
Emission
Inventory
Preparation
Vol
IV:
Mobile
Sources,
1992,
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
USEPA­
450/
4­
81­
026d
Revised.
52
Pollutants
from
watercraft
powered
by
2­
stroke
engines
increased
significantly.
The
primary
cause
of
the
increase
is
attributed
to
revised
population
files
in
the
newer
model
versions.
The
NONROAD
v2.3c
draft
model
equipment
population
file
for
New
Jersey
contains
a
significantly
greater
population
of
pleasure
craft
with
outboard
2­
stroke
engines
and
personal
watercraft
with
2­
stroke
engines
when
compared
to
the
earlier
NONROAD
v2.1
model
used
to
compile
the
1996
inventory.
The
equipment
population
in
NONROAD
v2.1
for
this
source
sector
is
46,627
pleasure
craft
with
outboard
2­
stroke
engines
as
the
statewide
population,
whereas
NONROAD
v2.3c
draft
model
population
for
this
SCC
is
305,978.
The
population
of
personal
watercraft
with
2­
stroke
engines
changed
from
5,552
in
the
NNEM
to
41,364
in
NONROAD
v2.3c.

The
2002
VOC,
NOx,
carbon
monoxide,
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
area
source
inventories
were
compared
to
the
1999
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
preliminary
USEPA
NEI
inventories
in
order
to
identify
any
anomalies
that
might
indicate
calculation
or
data
errors,
and
to
verify
reasons
for
trends
towards
higher
or
lower
emissions.
The
USEPA
1999
NEI
emissions
for
SO2
are
significantly
lower
than
the
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
and
the
2002
"
actual"
inventory.
The
reason
for
the
difference
may
be
that
the
USEPA
used
the
"
Lockdown
C"
draft
version
of
the
Nonroad
Model
(
USEPA
2002)
to
generate
emissions
for
SO2
for
the
1999
NEI.
In
addition,
the
sulfur
inputs
used
in
the
model
are
unknown.
The
differences
between
the
2002
NEI
and
2002
"
actual
"
inventory
are
not
significant.

Lastly,
some
SCCs
for
equipment
powered
by
diesel
engines
may
appear
to
have
elevated
emissions
compared
to
the
1999
actual
since
the
NONROAD
v2.3c
reports
equipment
powered
by
2­
and
4­
stroke
diesel
engines
without
differentiation.
In
some
instances
the
earlier
NONROAD
reported
them
separately
in
distinct
SCCs.
Thus,
some
minor
elevations
in
emissions
from
diesel­
powered
equipment
may
be
attributed
to
the
lumping
of
2­
and
4­
stroke
diesel
engines
into
singular
SCCs.
53
Table
17:
Statewide
Nonroad
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Summer
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1999
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
173.29
160.78
220.60
NOx
286.76
292.08
231.56
CO
2,081.57
2,050.28
2,497.80
Annual
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
70,740
79,793
70,407
NOx
57,296
65,864
66,443
CO
700,969
709,810
665,944
SO2
6,238
16,845
16,772
PM10
5,803
6,595
6,505
PM2.5
5,326
6,004
5,922
NH3
73
961
970
ii.
Aircraft
Emissions
The
2002
Aircraft
Fuel
Combustion
Emissions
inventories
have
been
reviewed
for
quality
assurance
purposes.
The
aircraft
inventory
is
composed
of
4
distinct
inventory
workbooks:
Commercial
Aviation
Fuel
Combustion,
Military
Fuel
Combustion,
Air
Taxi
Fuel
Combustion,
and
General
Aviation
Fuel
Combustion.
Each
inventory
was
reviewed
as
described
below.

Methodology
The
methodology
used
to
prepare
the
2002
actual
inventory
was
compared
against
the
one
used
to
prepare
the
1996
actual
inventory.
The
1996
inventory
was
chosen
for
comparison,
because
the
1999
inventory
was
a
projection
of
the
1996
base
year
inventory,
and
therefore
is
also
a
reflection
of
the
growth
factors
chosen,
in
addition
to
the
methodologies
used
to
calculated
emissions.
For
non­
military
emission
calculations,
the
primary
difference
between
the
two
inventory
methodologies
was
that
two
different
models
were
used
to
generate
emissions,
both
based
on
LTOs.
The
1996
inventory
relied
upon
the
airport
model
developed
by
NESCAUM;
the
2002
inventory
used
the
EDMS
developed
by
the
Federal
Aviation
Administration.
EDMS
is
the
more
advanced
model
and
incorporates
detailed
factors
for
each
specific
aircraft
type.
EDMS
also
factors
local
fuel
consumption
in
generating
local
emissions.

For
military
aircraft
emission
calculations
for
McGuire,
the
1996
actual
inventory
was
calculated
by
securing
LTO
and
Touch
and
Go
operation
(
TGO)
information
from
McGuire
as
well
as
information
on
time­
in­
mode,
number
of
engines
and
emission
54
factors.
For
the
2002
actual
inventory,
McGuire
supplied
the
LTO
and
TGO
information
and
the
remaining
data
was
obtained
from
Air
Emission
Inventory
Guidance
for
Mobile
Sources
at
Air
Force
Installations,
January
2002.
The
data
contained
in
this
report
was
an
update
for
the
data
previously
supplied
directly
by
McGuire
in
1996
and
is
a
direct
result
of
the
Air
Force's
attempt
to
standardize
and
formalize
such
data.
What
was
different
was
a
change
in
fleet
mix
that
included
larger
aircraft
with
higher
emission
factors
in
2002
then
in
1996.

Calculations
The
calculations
were
followed
through
their
respective
Microsoft
Excel
workbooks
and
the
series
of
calculations
necessary
to
arrive
at
the
total
inventory.
Samples
of
each
inventory
component
on
a
spreadsheet
page
were
checked
to
ensure
that
the
formulas
conformed
to
the
methodology.
References
to
other
worksheets
were
sampled
to
ensure
proper
referencing
and
correct
inputs
into
the
calculations.

Comparison
of
Inventories
The
emissions
of
VOC,
NOx,
and
carbon
monoxide
were
totaled
from
the
five
Excel
workbooks
and
compared
against
the
total
aircraft
emissions
from
the
1996
actual
and
2002
projected
inventories.
The
primary
factor
contributing
to
the
difference
between
the
2002
projected
and
2002
actual
emissions
is
believed
to
be
the
change
in
models
used
in
calculating
2002
projected
inventories
as
compared
to
the
2002
actual
inventory.
Table
18
below
shows
these
values.
In
addition,
LTO
activity
in
the
2002
actual
inventory
as
compared
to
the
2002
projected
inventory
was
lower,
by
nearly
21%.

Table
18
also
shows
a
comparison
of
the
2002
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
inventories
against
the
1999
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
preliminary
USEPA
NEI
inventories.
The
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
emissions
are
grown
from
the
New
Jersey
1999
actual
emissions
inventory
submittal.
This
actual
emission
inventory
relied
on
the
same
methodology
conducted
in
1996.
Thus
the
New
Jersey
2002
actual
emission
inventory
is
more
accurate
since
it
was
based
on
updated
methodology.
55
Table
18:
Statewide
Aircraft
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1996
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
5.80
7.03
3.81
NOx
10.11
16.99
8.97
CO
35.35
40.37
27.19
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
SO2
218
366
283
PM10
56
272
272
PM2.5
38
126
188
NH3
NC(
1)
NC
NC
NOTES:
(
1)
NC
=
Not
Calculated
iii.
Locomotive
Emissions
The
2002
Locomotive
Fuel
Combustion
Emissions
inventory
has
been
reviewed
for
quality
assurance
purposes.
The
inventory
was
reviewed
as
described
below.

Methodology
The
methodology
used
to
prepare
the
2002
locomotive
inventory
was
compared
against
the
one
used
for
the
1996
actual
inventory.
The
1996
inventory
was
chosen
for
comparison,
because
the
1999
inventory
was
a
projection
of
the
1996
base
year
inventory,
and
therefore
is
also
a
reflection
of
the
growth
factors
chosen,
in
addition
to
the
methodologies
used
to
calculated
emissions.
The
2002
actual
inventory
differed
from
the
1996
actual
in
the
methods
used
to
calculate
"
yard"
or
"
switch"
locomotives
and
updated
emission
factors
were
used
in
2002
and
more
detailed
information
was
provided
on
line­
haul
freight
locomotive
operations
then
had
been
available
in
1996.

The
1996
method
for
switching
yard
locomotive
emissions
used
standard
annual
emissions
allocations
for
each
pollutant
based
on
the
number
of
locomotives
operating
at
the
yards
indicated
by
Conrail
for
the
1990
inventory.
For
example,
a
single
yard
locomotive
was
considered
to
generate
41
tons
of
NOx
and
2
tons
of
VOC
emissions
on
an
annual
basis
regardless
of
whether
this
locomotive
may
have
only
operated
forty
hours
a
week.
The
2002
method
would
assess
emissions
of
0.32
tons
of
VOC
and
8.64
tons
of
NOx
for
the
same
operation.
Thus
the
1996
method
greatly
overestimated
yardswitching
emissions.

The
period
from
1996
to
2002
reflects
an
emission
factor
increase
for
all
line­
haul
freight
and
passenger
locomotive
engines
of
21%
for
NOx,
6.3%
for
carbon
monoxide
and
4%
56
for
VOC.
This
difference
in
emission
factors
was
offset
by
a
17.6%
decrease
in
fuel
consumption
for
all
line
haul
locomotives
from
1996
to
2002.

The
2002
method
also
included
more
detailed
information
concerning
major
line
haul
railroad
operations
conducted
in
New
Jersey
in
2002.
For
example,
Gross
Tonnage
(
GT)
of
freight
transported
by
major
line
haul
freight
railroads
along
each
measured
mile
of
rail
line
could
be
determined
from
the
detailed
information
provided
by
the
major
line
haul
railroads
for
the
2002
inventory.
For
example,
CSX
railroad
indicated
that
in
2002
it
transported
59,160,000
GT
of
freight
along
16.8
miles
of
its
River
line
located
in
Bergen
and
Hudson
Counties.
All
major
railroads
provided
similar
detailed
information
for
the
majority
of
their
rail
line
operations
in
New
Jersey.
In
1996,
the
only
activity
data
available
for
major
line
haul
freight
operations
was
that
4,871,067
GT
of
freight
were
transported
along
948
miles
of
rail
lines
within
the
State.

Calculations
The
calculations
were
followed
through
their
respective
Microsoft
Excel
spreadsheets
and
the
series
of
calculations
necessary
to
arrive
at
the
total
inventory.
Samples
of
each
inventory
component
on
an
Excel
spreadsheet
page
were
checked
to
ensure
that
the
formulas
conformed
to
the
methodology.
References
to
other
worksheets
were
sampled
to
ensure
proper
referencing
and
correct
inputs
into
the
calculations.

Comparison
of
Inventories
The
2002
actual
emission
inventory
showed
a
very
slight
increase
in
NOx
emissions
and
a
small
decrease
in
VOC
and
carbon
monoxide
emissions
from
what
was
projected
for
this
year
from
the
1996
actual
emission
inventory
as
shown
below
in
Table
19.
The
2002
emission
inventory
is
more
accurate
since
it
was
based
on
the
updated
methodology
and
more
detailed
activity
data
as
referenced
above
in
the
methodology
section.

Table
19
also
shows
a
comparison
of
the
2002
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
inventories
against
the
1999
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
preliminary
USEPA
NEI
inventories.
The
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
emissions
are
grown
from
the
New
Jersey
1999
actual
emissions
inventory
submittal.
This
actual
emission
inventory
relied
on
the
same
methodology
conducted
in
1996.
Thus,
the
NJ
2002
actual
emission
inventory
is
more
accurate
since
it
was
based
on
the
updated
methodology
and
more
detailed
activity
data.
57
Table
19:
Statewide
Locomotive
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1996
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
VOC
0.82
0.82
0.60
NOx
14.44
13.51
15.70
CO
2.01
2.01
1.55
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
SO2
16
351
351
PM10
14
142
142
PM2.5
137
127
127
NH3
NC(
1)
NC
NC
NOTES:
(
1)
NC
=
Not
Calculated
iv.
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
The
2002
Marine
Fuel
Combustion
emissions
inventory
has
been
reviewed
for
quality
assurance
purposes.
As
discussed
in
a
previous
section,
it
is
important
to
note
that
there
are
two
inventories
for
this
purpose:

1)
For
South
Jersey,
the
"
old
method",
based
upon
fuel
consumption,
was
used,
and
2)
For
North
Jersey,
the
"
new
method",
based
upon
vessel
usage,
was
used.

Each
inventory
was
reviewed
as
described
below.

Methodology
The
methodology
used
to
prepare
the
2002
commercial
marine
vessel
inventory
was
compared
against
the
one
used
for
the
1996
actual
inventory.
The
1996
inventory
was
chosen
for
comparison
because
the
1999
inventory
was
a
projection
of
the
1996
base
year
inventory,
and
therefore
is
also
a
reflection
of
the
growth
factors
chosen,
in
addition
to
the
methodologies
used
to
calculated
emissions.
The
methods
applied
were
based
on
fuel
usage
for
activity
conducted
on
the
territorial
waters
of
New
Jersey
in
the
Delaware
River
and
vessel
usage
for
activity
conducted
on
the
territorial
waters
of
New
Jersey
in
the
New
York
Harbor
system.
The
fuel
usage
method
was
the
same
one
used
for
the
1996
actual
inventory.
The
new
methodology,
based
upon
vessel
usage,
was
incomparable
to
the
1996
method.

Calculations
The
calculations
(
old
and
new
methods)
were
followed
through
their
respective
Excel
spreadsheets
and
the
series
of
calculations
necessary
to
arrive
at
the
total
inventory.
Samples
of
each
inventory
component
on
an
Excel
spreadsheet
page
were
checked
to
58
ensure
that
the
formulas
conformed
to
the
methodology.
References
to
other
worksheets
were
sampled
to
ensure
proper
referencing
and
correct
inputs
into
the
calculations.

Comparison
of
Inventories
The
2002
new
method
showed
significant
reductions
of
forty­
five
percent
NOx,
thirty­
two
percent
carbon
monoxide
and
forty­
seven
percent
VOC
emissions
as
compared
to
the
1996
inventory
and
the
2002
projections
as
shown
below
in
Table
20.
This
was
expected
as
the
new
method
is
a
much
more
accurate
assessment
of
marine
source
combustion
within
the
territorial
waters
of
New
Jersey
in
the
New
York
Harbor
system.
The
old
methodology
based
on
fuel
consumption
most
likely
included
estimates
of
fuel
combustion
that
did
not
take
place
in
the
New
York
Harbor
system,
i.
e.,
ships
refueled
before
setting
to
sea
and
therefore,
most
of
the
fuel
purchased
was
not
combusted
in
the
New
York
Harbor
system.
Moreover,
this
geographic
area
generates
the
major
portion
of
the
commercial
marine
vessel
emission
inventory.

Table
20
also
shows
a
comparison
of
the
2002
SO2,
PM2.5,
and
PM10
inventories
against
the
1999
USEPA
NEI
inventories
and
the
2002
preliminary
USEPA
NEI
inventories.
The
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
emissions
are
grown
from
the
New
Jersey
1999
actual
emissions
inventory
submittal.
This
actual
emission
inventory
relied
on
the
same
methodology
conducted
in
1996.
Thus,
the
New
Jersey
2002
actual
emission
inventory
is
more
accurate
since
it
was
based
on
the
updated
methods.

Table
20:
Statewide
Commercial
Marine
Vessel
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
New
Jersey
1996
Actual
New
Jersey
2002
Projected
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
(
Old
Method)
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
(
New
Method)
VOC
2.20
2.33
2.13
1.13
NOx
52.34
55.53
54.59
30.12
CO
5.82
6.17
5.67
3.90
Controlled
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Year)
USEPA
1999
NEI
USEPA
2002
NEI
v1
New
Jersey
2002
Actual
SO2
1,676
11,444
11,444
PM10
474
796
851
PM2.5
436
732
783
NH3
NC(
1)
NC
NC
NOTES:
(
1)
NC
=
Not
Calculated
59
E.
Biogenic
Sources
The
1996
biogenic
emission
inventory
was
supplied
to
the
NJDEP
by
the
USEPA.
They
calculated
the
inventory
using
the
BEIS
model
v2.3
and
1996
land
use
and
meteorological
data.

The
2002
biogenic
emission
inventory
was
also
supplied
to
the
NJDEP
by
the
USEPA.
They
calculated
the
inventory
using
the
BEIS
model
v3.12.
The
inventory
was
created
using
the
following
data:

1)
2001
annual
meteorology
2)
BEIS3.12
model
via
the
SMOKE
modeling
system
3)
Recently
revised
BEIS3.12
emission
factors
file
(
also
provided
as
a
separate
file
with
this
spreadsheet)
4)
BELD3
land
use
data
(
1­
km
original
data
aggregated
to
36­
km
grid).
5)
Post
processing
summation
of
county­
total
emissions
from
SMOKE,
calculated
from
36­
km
gridded
emissions
using
the
"
land
area"
spatial
surrogate.
This
means
that
when
calculating
the
county­
total
numbers,
the
36­
km
gridded
emissions
were
assumed
to
be
uniformly
distributed
over
the
grid
cell
for
purposes
of
mapping
to
the
counties.

The
USEPA
did
not
provide
the
NJDEP
with
actual
data
used
for
either
the
1996
or
the
2002
inventories,
so
it
is
difficult
to
discuss
the
decrease
in
VOC
and
NOx
emissions
in
the
2002
inventory.
The
comparison
of
these
two
inventories
can
be
found
in
Table
21.

Table
21:
Statewide
Biogenic
Source
Emissions
Inventory
Comparison
Controlled
Emissions
1996
Actual
(
Tons
per
Day)
2002
Actual(
1)

(
Tons
per
Day)
VOC
687.52
371.95
NOx
8.81
3.78
CO
NC(
2)
34.09
NH3
NC
24.73
NOTES:
(
1)
The
USEPA
only
supplied
Tons
per
Year
values.
In
order
to
prepare
this
comparison
it
was
assumed
that
biogenic
emissions
were
constant
over
the
year.
Therefore,
2002
actual
Tons
per
Day
values
were
calculated
by
dividing
the
annual
value
by
365.24.
(
2)
NC
=
Not
Calculated
F.
Emissions
Comparison
Summary
A
comparison
of
the
1996
man­
made
emission
inventory
to
the
2002
man­
made
emission
inventory
for
New
Jersey
is
presented
in
Table
22,
by
pollutant
and
source
sector.
The
1996
inventory
was
chosen
for
comparison,
because
the
1999
area
source
inventory
and
portions
of
the
1999
nonroad
inventory
were
projections
of
the
1996
base
year
inventory,
therefore
are
also
a
reflection
of
the
growth
factors
chosen,
in
addition
to
the
methodologies
used
to
calculated
emissions.
This
comparison
shows
the
following:
60
 
Total
man­
made
VOC,
summer
tpd:
Overall
slight
decrease,
decreases
in
point
and
onroad,
increases
in
area
and
nonroad
 
Total
man­
made
NOx
summer
tpd:
Overall
slight
increase,
slight
decreases
in
point,
area
and
nonroad,
increase
in
onroad
 
Total
man­
made
carbon
monoxide
summer
tpd:
Overall
increase,
increases
in
point,
area,
nonroad
and
onroad.

More
detailed
discussions
of
increases
and
decreases
were
included
above
in
the
individual
sector
comparisons.
Decreases
are
due
primarily
to
federal
and
state
rules.
Increases
are
due
primarily
to
changes
in
calculation
and
model
methodologies
and
inputs,
additions
of
new
emission
sources
not
previously
included
in
the
inventory,
and
growth
of
emissions
from
existing
sources.

Table
22:
1996
and
2002
Statewide
Emission
Inventory
by
Source
Sector
and
Pollutant
VOC
NOx
CO
Source
Sector
1996
Tons
per
Summer
Day
2002
Tons
per
Summer
Day
1996
Tons
per
Summer
Day
2002
Tons
per
Summer
Day
1996
Tons
per
Summer
Day
2002
Tons
per
Summer
Day
Point
173.22
113.15
291.05
280.36
78.45
89.35
Area
304.98
369.83
39.66
35.92
26.89
66.45
On­
road
309.01
274.74
453.82
558.66
2,182.99
2,856.37
Non­
road
203.73
220.60
269.24
231.56
2,152.25
2,497.80
Total
in
State
990.94
978.32
1,053.77
1106.50
4,440.58
5,509.97
