2008 PM10 Periodic Emissions Inventory
for the
Maricopa County, Arizona, Nonattainment Area

June 2010

2008 PM10 Periodic Emission Inventory
for the Maricopa County, Arizona Nonattainment Area

June 2010

Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5

1.6

1.7

Overview.......................................................................................................................................1
Agencies responsible for the emissions inventory ........................................................................1
Temporal scope .............................................................................................................................2
Geographic scope..........................................................................................................................2
Overview of local demographic and land use data .......................................................................3
1.5.1 Demographic profile ..........................................................................................................3
1.5.2 Land use data .....................................................................................................................3
Emissions overview by source category .......................................................................................4
1.6.1 Point sources ......................................................................................................................4
1.6.2 Area sources .......................................................................................................................4
1.6.3 Nonroad mobile sources ....................................................................................................5
1.6.4 Onroad mobile sources ......................................................................................................5
1.6.5 Biogenic sources ................................................................................................................6
1.6.6 Summary of all source categories ......................................................................................6
Public review process .................................................................................................................10

2. Point Sources ................................................................................................................................11
2.1
2.2
2.3

2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7

2.8

Introduction and scope ................................................................................................................11
Identification of point sources ....................................................................................................11
Procedures for estimating emissions from point sources............................................................12
2.3.1 Calculation of PM2.5 emissions ........................................................................................13
2.3.2 Application of rule effectiveness .....................................................................................13
Detailed overview of point source emissions .............................................................................13
Emission reduction credits ..........................................................................................................14
Summary of point source emissions ...........................................................................................15
Quality assurance / quality control procedures ...........................................................................15
2.7.1 Emission survey preparation and data collection.............................................................15
2.7.2 Submission processing .....................................................................................................16
2.7.3 Analysis of annual point source emissions data for this inventory ..................................17
References ...................................................................................................................................17

3. Area Sources .................................................................................................................................19
3.1
3.2

Scope and methodology ..............................................................................................................19
Fuel combustion..........................................................................................................................20
3.2.1 Industrial natural gas ........................................................................................................21
3.2.2 Industrial fuel oil ..............................................................................................................22
3.2.3 Commercial/institutional natural gas ...............................................................................24

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

i

June 2010

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.2.4 Commercial/institutional fuel oil .....................................................................................25
3.2.5 Residential natural gas .....................................................................................................27
3.2.6 Residential wood combustion ..........................................................................................28
3.2.7 Residential fuel oil ...........................................................................................................29
3.2.8 Summary of all area-source fuel combustion ..................................................................30
Industrial processes .....................................................................................................................30
3.3.1 Chemical manufacturing ..................................................................................................30
3.3.2 Food and kindred products...............................................................................................31
3.3.2.1 Commercial cooking ..........................................................................................31
3.3.2.2 Grain handling/processing..................................................................................34
3.3.2.3 Ammonia cold storage .......................................................................................35
3.3.3 Secondary metal production ............................................................................................35
3.3.4 Non-metallic mineral processes .......................................................................................36
3.3.5 Mining and quarrying ......................................................................................................36
3.3.6 Wood product manufacturing ..........................................................................................37
3.3.7 Rubber/plastics manufacturing ........................................................................................38
3.3.8 Fabricated metal products manufacturing ........................................................................39
3.3.9 Construction .....................................................................................................................41
3.3.10 Electrical equipment manufacturing ................................................................................44
3.3.11 State-permitted portable sources ......................................................................................45
3.3.12 Paved/unpaved road travel on industrial sites ..................................................................46
3.3.13 Industrial processes not elsewhere classified (NEC) .......................................................46
3.3.14 Summary of all area-source industrial processes .............................................................47
Waste treatment and disposal .....................................................................................................48
3.4.1 On-site incineration ..........................................................................................................48
3.4.2 Open burning ...................................................................................................................49
3.4.3 Landfills ...........................................................................................................................52
3.4.4 Publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) .....................................................................52
3.4.5 Other industrial waste disposal ........................................................................................52
3.4.6 Summary of all area-source waste disposal .....................................................................53
Miscellaneous area sources .........................................................................................................53
3.5.1 Other combustion .............................................................................................................53
3.5.1.1 Wildfires .............................................................................................................53
3.5.1.2 Prescribed fires ...................................................................................................56
3.5.1.3 Structure fires .....................................................................................................57
3.5.1.4 Vehicle fires .......................................................................................................59
3.5.1.5 Engine testing .....................................................................................................60
3.5.2 Agricultural activities.......................................................................................................60
3.5.2.1 Tilling .................................................................................................................60
3.5.2.2 Harvesting ..........................................................................................................64
3.5.2.3 Travel on unpaved agricultural roads .................................................................67
3.5.2.4 Cotton ginning ....................................................................................................69
3.5.2.5 Fertilizer application ............................................................................................69
3.5.3 Livestock ..........................................................................................................................70
3.5.4 Health services: crematories ............................................................................................72
3.5.5 Accidental releases ...........................................................................................................72
3.5.6 Humans ............................................................................................................................72
3.5.7 Leaf blower fugitive dust .................................................................................................73
3.5.8 Offroad recreation vehicles fugitive dust .........................................................................74

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

ii

June 2010

3.6
3.7
3.8

3.5.9 Unpaved parking lots fugitive dust ..................................................................................76
3.5.10 Windblown dust ...............................................................................................................79
3.5.11 Summary of all miscellaneous area sources ....................................................................80
Summary of all area sources .......................................................................................................81
Quality assurance/quality control procedures .............................................................................83
References ...................................................................................................................................85

4. Nonroad Mobile Sources .............................................................................................................89
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15

Introduction .................................................................................................................................89
Agricultural equipment ...............................................................................................................91
Airport ground support equipment and auxiliary power units ....................................................92
Commercial equipment ...............................................................................................................93
Construction and mining equipment ...........................................................................................94
Industrial equipment ...................................................................................................................94
Lawn and garden equipment .......................................................................................................95
Pleasure craft...............................................................................................................................95
Railway maintenance equipment ................................................................................................96
Recreational equipment ..............................................................................................................96
Aircraft ........................................................................................................................................97
Locomotives..............................................................................................................................101
Summary of all nonroad mobile source emissions ...................................................................103
Quality assurance procedures ...................................................................................................103
References .................................................................................................................................103

5. Onroad Mobile Sources .............................................................................................................105
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5

5.6
5.7

5.8

Introduction ...............................................................................................................................105
VMT estimation ........................................................................................................................106
Speed estimation .......................................................................................................................107
Monthly VMT factors ...............................................................................................................108
Emission factor estimation........................................................................................................109
5.5.1 MOBILE6.2 emission factor model ...............................................................................109
5.5.1.1 MOBILE6.2 inputs ...........................................................................................109
5.5.1.2 MOBILE6.2 outputs .........................................................................................109
5.5.1.3 MOBILE6.2 emission estimates ......................................................................110
5.5.2 Fugitive dust emissions ..................................................................................................115
5.5.2.1 Paved road fugitive dust emissions ..................................................................115
5.5.2.2 Unpaved road and alley fugitive dust emissions ..............................................117
Summary of particulate emissions from onroad mobile sources ..............................................119
Quality assurance process .........................................................................................................119
5.7.1 VMT estimates ...............................................................................................................119
5.7.2 Emission factor estimates ..............................................................................................119
5.7.3 Draft particulate matter emissions inventory .................................................................119
References .................................................................................................................................120

6. Biogenic Sources.........................................................................................................................121
6.1
6.2

Introduction ...............................................................................................................................121
Modeling domain ......................................................................................................................121

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

iii

June 2010

6.3

6.4
6.5
6.6

Input data ..................................................................................................................................121
6.3.1 Land cover data ..............................................................................................................122
6.3.2 Weather data ..................................................................................................................123
Emissions estimation ................................................................................................................124
Summary of biogenic source emissions....................................................................................126
References .................................................................................................................................126

List of Tables
Table 1.2–1.
Table 1.5–1.
Table 1.5–2.
Table 1.6–1.
Table 1.6–2.
Table 1.6–3.
Table 1.6–4.
Table 1.6–5.
Table 1.6–6.
Table 1.6–7.
Table 1.6–8.
Table 1.6–9.
Table 1.6–10.
Table 2.2–1.
Table 2.4–1.
Table 2.5–1.
Table 2.6–1.
Table 3.1–1.
Table 3.2–1.
Table 3.2–2.
Table 3.2–3.
Table 3.2–4.
Table 3.2–5.
Table 3.2–6.

Chapter authors and QA/QC contacts for this report. ....................................................1
Demographic profile of Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area. ..............3
Land use categories used to apportion emissions. .........................................................4
Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from point sources in
Maricopa County. ..........................................................................................................4
Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from area sources in Maricopa
County. ...........................................................................................................................4
Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from area sources in the PM10
NAA. ..............................................................................................................................5
Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in Maricopa
County. ...........................................................................................................................5
Annual and typical daily emissions from all nonroad mobile sources in the
PM10 NAA. ....................................................................................................................5
Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in
Maricopa County. ..........................................................................................................6
Annual and typical daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in the
PM10 NAA. ....................................................................................................................6
Annual and season-day NOx emissions from biogenic sources. ....................................6
Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in Maricopa County. ..................7
Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in the PM10
nonattainment area. ........................................................................................................9
Name and location of all point sources in Maricopa County.......................................12
Annual and typical daily point source emissions, by facility. .....................................14
Emission reduction credits. ..........................................................................................14
Annual and typical daily point source emissions (including emission reduction
credits)..........................................................................................................................15
List of area-source categories included in this PM10 inventory. ..................................19
Maricopa County natural gas sales data by supply company and end-user
category. .......................................................................................................................20
Natural gas usage, emission factors, and annual emissions from area-source
industrial natural gas combustion, by combustion type. ..............................................21
Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source industrial natural gas
combustion. ..................................................................................................................22
Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source industrial fuel oil
combustion, by combustion type. ................................................................................23
Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source industrial fuel oil
combustion. ..................................................................................................................24
Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source
commercial/institutional natural gas combustion, by combustion type. ......................24

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

iv

June 2010

Table 3.2–7. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source commercial/institutional
natural gas combustion. ...............................................................................................25
Table 3.2–8. Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source
commercial/institutional fuel oil combustion, by combustion type. ............................26
Table 3.2–9. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source commercial/institutional
fuel oil combustion. .....................................................................................................27
Table 3.2–10. Residential natural gas combustion emission factors. .................................................27
Table 3.2–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential natural gas combustion. ............27
Table 3.2–12. Annual wood usage, emission factors, and annual emissions from residential
wood combustion. ........................................................................................................28
Table 3.2–13. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential wood combustion. ....................29
Table 3.2–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential fuel oil combustion. ..................29
Table 3.2–15. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source fuel combustion in
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................30
Table 3.2–16. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source fuel combustion for
the PM10 NAA..............................................................................................................30
Table 3.3–1. NAICS codes and descriptions for chemical manufacturing. ......................................30
Table 3.3–2. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source chemical manufacturing. ........31
Table 3.3–3. Number of Maricopa County restaurants, by restaurant type. .....................................32
Table 3.3–4. Percentages of restaurants with each type of cooking equipment. ..............................32
Table 3.3–5. Average number of equipment pieces per restaurant, by type. ....................................32
Table 3.3–6. Total pieces of cooking equipment, by restaurant type. ..............................................33
Table 3.3–7. Meat cooked weekly per restaurant (in pounds), by equipment type. .........................33
Table 3.3–8. Total meat cooked weekly (in tons), by equipment type. ............................................33
Table 3.3–9. PM10and PM2.5 emission factors for commercial cooking equipment, by device
type. ..............................................................................................................................34
Table 3.3–10. Annual and daily emissions from commercial cooking equipment in Maricopa
County. .........................................................................................................................34
Table 3.3–11. Annual and daily PM emissions from commercial cooking equipment in the
PM10 NAA. ..................................................................................................................34
Table 3.3–12. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source grain handling and
processing. ...................................................................................................................34
Table 3.3–13. Annual and typical daily ammonia emissions from ammonia cold storage. ...............35
Table 3.3–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from secondary metal production. ......................36
Table 3.3–15. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source non-metallic mineral
products. .......................................................................................................................36
Table 3.3–16. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source mining and quarrying
operations. ....................................................................................................................37
Table 3.3–17. County-level employment estimates for wood product manufacturing, by
NAICS code. ................................................................................................................37
Table 3.3–18. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source wood product
manufacturing. .............................................................................................................38
Table 3.3–19. County-level employment estimates for rubber and plastic manufacturing, by
NAICS code. ................................................................................................................39
Table 3.3–20. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source rubber/plastic product
manufacturing. .............................................................................................................39
Table 3.3–21. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source fabricated metal product
manufacturing. .............................................................................................................40
Table 3.3–22. Maricopa County dust control permits issued in 2008, by type. .................................41
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

v

June 2010

Table 3.3–23. Average project duration and emission factor, by project type. ..................................42
Table 3.3–24. Annual emissions from construction in Maricopa County, by project type. ...............43
Table 3.3–25. Annual emissions from construction within the Maricopa County portion of
the PM10 nonattainment area, by project type. .............................................................43
Table 3.3–26. Annual emissions from construction in the Pinal County portion of the PM10
NAA, by project type. ..................................................................................................44
Table 3.3–27. Annual and typical daily emissions from construction in Maricopa County and
the PM10 NAA..............................................................................................................44
Table 3.3–28. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source electric equipment
manufacturing. .............................................................................................................44
Table 3.3–29. Annual and typical daily emissions from ADEQ-permitted portable sources.............46
Table 3.3–30. Annual and typical daily emissions from paved and unpaved road travel at
industrial facilities........................................................................................................46
Table 3.3–31. Annual and typical daily emissions from other industrial processes not
elsewhere classified. ....................................................................................................46
Table 3.3–32. Annual and daily emissions from all area-source industrial processes in
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................47
Table 3.3–33. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source industrial processes in
the PM10 NAA..............................................................................................................48
Table 3.4–1. Annual and typical daily emissions from on-site incineration.....................................49
Table 3.4–2. Summary of 2008 Maricopa County burn permit activity. ..........................................49
Table 3.4–3. Emission and fuel loading factors for open burning. ...................................................50
Table 3.4–4. Annual and typical daily emissions from open burning in Maricopa County. ............51
Table 3.4–5. Surrogate land use classes and County:NAA activity ratios for burn permit
categories. ....................................................................................................................51
Table 3.4–6. Annual and typical daily emissions from open burning in the PM10 NAA. ................51
Table 3.4–7. Annual and typical daily emissions from landfills. .....................................................52
Table 3.4–8. NH3 emissions from publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs). ..............................52
Table 3.4–9. Annual and typical daily emissions from other industrial waste disposal. ..................52
Table 3.4–10. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source waste disposal for
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................53
Table 3.4–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source waste disposal for the
PM10 NAA. ..................................................................................................................53
Table 3.5–1. Sources and input data used to estimate emissions from fires in Maricopa
County. .........................................................................................................................54
Table 3.5–2. NFDRS fuel model categories and fuel loading factors for 2008 Maricopa
County wildfires...........................................................................................................54
Table 3.5–3. Summary of data on fire occurrence, total acres burned, and total material
burned in 2008. ............................................................................................................55
Table 3.5–4. Summary of emission factors for prescribed fire. ........................................................55
Table 3.5–5. Annual emissions from wildfires in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA. ...............55
Table 3.5–6. Average daily emissions from wildfires in Maricopa County and the PM10
NAA. ............................................................................................................................56
Table 3.5–7. Summary of data used to estimate emissions from prescribed fires. ...........................56
Table 3.5–8. Emission factors for prescribed fires. ..........................................................................56
Table 3.5–9. Annual and typical daily emission from prescribed fire in Maricopa County
and the PM10 NAA. ......................................................................................................57
Table 3.5–10. Material burned, emission and fuel loading factors for structure fires. .......................58
Table 3.5–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from structure fires in Maricopa County
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

vi

June 2010

and the NAA. ...............................................................................................................58
Table 3.5–12. Estimated material burned, fuel loading factors, and emission factors for
vehicle fires. .................................................................................................................59
Table 3.5–13. Annual and typical daily emissions from vehicle fires. ...............................................59
Table 3.5–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from engine testing. ............................................60
Table 3.5–15. 2008 crop acreage, activity, and annual uncontrolled PM10 emissions in
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................61
Table 3.5–16. Annual emissions from agricultural tillage in Maricopa County and Area A
(tons/yr). .......................................................................................................................63
Table 3.5–17. Annual emissions from agricultural tillage in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr). .....................63
Table 3.5–18. Controlled typical daily emissions from tillage (in lbs/day). .......................................64
Table 3.5–19. Maricopa County harvested acres and emission factors. .............................................64
Table 3.5–20. Annual emissions from harvesting in Maricopa County and Area A (in
tons/yr). ........................................................................................................................66
Table 3.5–21. Annual emissions from harvesting in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr). ..................................66
Table 3.5–22. Typical daily emissions from harvesting, by crop (in lbs/day). ...................................67
Table 3.5–23. Annual and typical daily emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads. .........69
Table 3.5–24. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source cotton ginning. ........................69
Table 3.5–25. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from fertilizer application. ..........................70
Table 3.5–26. Maricopa County cattle populations and PM emission factors. ..................................71
Table 3.5–27. Maricopa County cattle inventory for 2002 and 2008. ................................................71
Table 3.5–28. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from livestock in Maricopa County. ...........71
Table 3.5–29. Annual and typical daily emissions from livestock. ....................................................72
Table 3.5–30. Annual and typical daily emissions from crematories. ................................................72
Table 3.5–31. Annual and typical daily emissions from accidental releases. .....................................72
Table 3.5–32. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from human activity....................................73
Table 3.5–33. Leaf blower equipment populations, activity levels and emission factors for
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................73
Table 3.5–34. Annual and typical daily emissions from leaf blower fugitive dust. ...........................74
Table 3.5–35. 2008 offroad recreational vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces in Maricopa
County. .........................................................................................................................75
Table 3.5–36. 2008 uncontrolled emissions from offroad recreational vehicles. ...............................75
Table 3.5–37. Benefits of measures that reduce offroad recreational vehicle emissions. ..................76
Table 3.5–38. 2008 controlled emissions from offroad recreational vehicles. ...................................76
Table 3.5–39. 2008 uncontrolled emissions from vehicles traveling on unpaved parking lots. .........78
Table 3.2–40. Benefits of measure that reduces unpaved parking lot emissions................................78
Table 3.5–41. Annual and typical daily controlled emissions from unpaved parking lots. ................78
Table 3.5–42. Annual and typical daily emissions from fugitive windblown dust for
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................79
Table 3.5–43. Annual and typical daily emissions from fugitive windblown dust for the
PM10 NAA. ..................................................................................................................79
Table 3.5–44. Annual and typical daily emissions from all miscellaneous area sources for
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................80
Table 3.5–45. Annual and typical daily emissions from all miscellaneous area sources for the
PM10 NAA. ..................................................................................................................80
Table 3.6–1. Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in
Maricopa County. ........................................................................................................81
Table 3.6–2. Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in the
PM10 NAA. ..................................................................................................................82
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

vii

June 2010

Table 4.1–1.
Table 4.1–2.
Table 4.2–1.
Table 4.2–2.
Table 4.2–3.
Table 4.2–4.
Table 4.3–1.
Table 4.3–2.
Table 4.4–1.
Table 4.4–2.
Table 4.5–1.
Table 4.5–2.
Table 4.6–1.
Table 4.6–2.
Table 4.7–1.
Table 4.7–2.
Table 4.8–1.
Table 4.8–2.
Table 4.9–1.
Table 4.9–2.
Table 4.10–1.
Table 4.10–2.
Table 4.11–1.
Table 4.11–2.
Table 4.11–3.
Table 4.11–4.
Table 4.11–5.
Table 4.12–1.
Table 4.12–2.
Table 4.12–3.
Table 4.12–4.
Table 4.12–5.
Table 4.13–1.
Table 4.13–2.
Table 5.2–1.
Table 5.2–2.
Table 5.2–3.
Table 5.2–4.
Table 5.3–1.

NONROAD model county temperature- and fuel-related inputs. ...............................90
Default weekday and weekend day activity allocation fractions. ................................91
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from agricultural equipment in Maricopa County. ..........91
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from agricultural equipment in the PM10 NAA. ..............91
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from agricultural equipment in Maricopa
County. .........................................................................................................................91
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from agricultural equipment in the PM10
nonattainment area. ......................................................................................................92
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from all airport ground support equipment (GSE)
and auxiliary power units (APUs)................................................................................93
Typical daily emissions (lb) from airport GSE and APU usage. .................................93
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from commercial equipment usage..................................93
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from commercial equipment usage. .......................93
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from construction and mining equipment usage..............94
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from construction and mining equipment
usage. ...........................................................................................................................94
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from industrial equipment usage. ....................................94
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from industrial equipment usage. ..........................94
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from lawn and garden equipment. ...................................95
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from lawn and garden equipment. .........................95
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from pleasure craft equipment. ........................................95
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from pleasure craft equipment. ..............................95
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from railway maintenance equipment. ............................96
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from railway maintenance equipment. ..................96
Annual emissions (tons/yr) from recreational equipment. ...........................................96
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from recreational equipment. .................................96
Annual airport operations (by aircraft category), and related data sources. ................98
Example showing how most common aircraft-specific activity was grown for
EDMS modeling. .........................................................................................................99
EPA’s default PM10 emission factors for aircraft, by activity type. ............................99
Annual and average daily emissions, by airport and aircraft type, from airports
within the PM10 NAA. ...............................................................................................100
Annual and average daily emissions, by aircraft type, from airports outside the
PM10 NAA. ................................................................................................................101
Emission factors for locomotives...............................................................................101
Total diesel use and annual emissions from locomotives in Maricopa County. ........101
Annual emissions (in tons/yr) from locomotives in the PM10 NAA. .........................102
Typical daily emissions (in lbs/day) from locomotives in Maricopa County. ...........102
Typical daily emissions (in lbs/day) from locomotives in the PM10
nonattainment area. ....................................................................................................102
Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in Maricopa
County. .......................................................................................................................103
Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in the PM10
NAA. ..........................................................................................................................103
2008 daily VMT by facility type (annual average daily traffic). ...............................107
2008 VMT by silt loading category for paved roads. ................................................107
2008 VMT on unpaved roads in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County. ..................107
2008 VMT on all roads in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County. ............................107
Average daily speeds for the 2008 periodic emissions inventory..............................108

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

viii

June 2010

Table 5.4–1. Average daily VMT adjustment factors by month. ...................................................108
Table 5.5–1. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and
vehicle class in the PM10 NAA. .................................................................................111
Table 5.5–2. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and
vehicle class in Maricopa County. .............................................................................113
Table 5.5–3. Fugitive dust emission factors for paved roads..........................................................116
Table 5.5–4. Daily uncontrolled fugitive dust emissions from paved roads...................................116
Table 5.5–5. 2008 benefits of measures that reduce paved road fugitive dust in the PM10
NAA. ..........................................................................................................................116
Table 5.5–6. Annual controlled fugitive dust emissions from paved roads. ...................................117
Table 5.5–7. Daily uncontrolled unpaved road and alley fugitive dust emissions. ........................117
Table 5.5–8. 2008 benefits of measures that reduce unpaved road and alley fugitive dust in
the PM10 NAA............................................................................................................118
Table 5.5–9. Annual and average daily controlled fugitive dust emissions from unpaved
roads. ..........................................................................................................................118
Table 5.6–1. Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in
Maricopa County. ......................................................................................................119
Table 5.6–2. Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in the
PM10 NAA. ................................................................................................................119
Table 6.2–1. Two modeling domains defined in the UTM coordinate system. ..............................121
Table 6.4–1. Daily mean biogenic emissions of NOx in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa
County, by month.......................................................................................................125
Table 6.4–2. Monthly biogenic emissions of NOx in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County. ........126
Table 6.5–1. Daily mean and annual total NOx emissions from biogenic sources. ........................126

List of Figures
Figure 1.4–1. Map of Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area. ........................................2
Figure 2.7–1. Data flow for annual point source emission inventory reporting. ...............................16
Figure 6.3–1. Mask of the PM10 NAA in the 4-km modeling domain (top) and mask of
Maricopa County in the 12-km modeling domain (bottom). .....................................122
Figure 6.3–2. Boundaries of the PM10 NAA (red line), the 4-km eight-hour ozone modeling
domain (pink line), Maricopa County (blue line), and the meteorological
observation site (red star). ..........................................................................................123
Figure 6.3–3. Annual mean diurnal cycles of measured temperature (top panel) and
downward short wave radiation (bottom panel) in 2008. ..........................................124
Figure 6.4–1. Monthly emissions of NOx in Maricopa County (pink solid line, abbreviated
as “MC”) and the PM10 NAA (blue solid line, abbreviated as “NA”). ......................125

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

ix

June 2010

Appendices

Appendix 1

Public Comment Period Documentation ............................................................ A1-1
– MCAQD News Release re: Publication of Draft Report (April 26, 2010)
– Announcement of Public Workshop at MCAQD (May 14, 2010)

Appendix 2

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Annual Air Pollution Emissions ................... A2-1

Appendix 3

Rule Effectiveness (RE) Studies........................................................................... A3-1
Executive Summary ................................................................................................ A3-1
Background ............................................................................................................. A3-2
Calculation of Rule Effectiveness (RE) Rates ........................................................ A3-4
A. Rule 310 RE Rate........................................................................................ A3-4
B. Rule 310.01 RE Rate................................................................................... A3-4
C. Rule 316 RE Rate........................................................................................ A3-5
D. Agricultural Activities RE Rate .................................................................. A3-5
E. Title V and Non-Title V RE Rates .............................................................. A3-6
References ............................................................................................................... A3-6
Appendix 3A. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 310 .......................................... A3-7
Appendix 3B. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 310.01 ..................................... A3-9
Appendix 3C. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 316 ........................................ A3-11
Appendix 3D. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Agricultural Activities .................. A3-13
Appendix 3E. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Title V Facilities............................ A3-15
Appendix 3F. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for non-Title V Facilities .................... A3-19

Appendix 4

Windblown Dust Emission Estimation Methodology ........................................ A4-1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. A4-1
Meteorological Data................................................................................................ A4-2
Wind Speed ....................................................................................................... A4-3
Precipitation ...................................................................................................... A4-7
Land Use Data......................................................................................................... A4-8
Determination of Emission Rates ........................................................................... A4-9
Estimating Emissions from Harvested Agricultural Areas ................................... A4-12
Summary of Windblown Dust Emissions Estimates ............................................ A4-12
References ............................................................................................................. A4-13

Appendix 5

MOBILE6.2 Inputs, Outputs, and Emission Factors ........................................ A5-1
Table A5–1. Sample of MOBILE6.2 Input Files. .................................................. A5-1
Table A5–2. Sample of MOBILE6.2 Output Files ............................................... .A5-7
Table A5–3. MOBILE6.2 Emission Factors for Maricopa County ..................... A5-14

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

x

June 2010

1.

Introduction

1.1

Overview

This 2008 periodic PM10 emissions inventory was developed to meet requirements set forth in
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). The CAAA require development of
a baseline emission inventory and periodic revisions for areas that fail to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). A portion of Maricopa County is classified as serious
nonattainment for PM10.
PM10 is defined as particulate matter less than or equal to ten micrometers in diameter. This
inventory includes primary emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 as well as three particulate matter
precursors: nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxides (SOx) and ammonia (NH3). The inventory
provides emission estimates from point, area, nonroad mobile, onroad mobile and biogenic
sources. Note that totals shown in tables may not equal the sum of individual values due to
independent rounding.

1.2

Agencies responsible for the emissions inventory

Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) has primary responsibility for preparing
and submitting the 2008 Periodic PM10 Emissions Inventory for Maricopa County. Point sources
and the majority of area, and nonroad mobile source emission estimates were prepared by
MCAQD. The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) prepared the emission estimates
for onroad mobile, biogenic, and some area and nonroad mobile source categories. Table 1.2–1
lists those responsible for inventory preparation and quality assurance/ quality control activities,
which are described in the respective chapters.
Table 1.2–1. Chapter authors and QA/QC contacts for this report.
Chapter
Author(s)
QA/QC contacts
2. Point Sources
Matt Poppen, MCAQD (602) 506-6790
–Eric Raisanen and Dena Konopka
MCAQD (602) 506-6790

3. Area Sources

–Matt Poppen, Eric Raisanen and Dena
Konopka, MCAQD (602) 506-6790

–Cathy Arthur, MAG (602) 254-6300
–Bob Downing, MCAQD (602) 506-6790

4. Nonroad Mobile
Sources

–Cathy Arthur, MAG (602) 254-6300
Matt Poppen and Bob Downing
MCAQD (602) 506-6790

–Cathy Arthur, MAG (602) 254-6300
–Eric Raisanen and Dena Konopka
MCAQD (602) 506-6790

5. Onroad Mobile
Sources

Ieesuck Jung and Cathy Arthur
MAG (602) 254-6300

–Cathy Arthur, MAG (602) 254-6300
Bob Downing and Dena Konopka
MCAQD (602) 506-6790

6. Biogenic Sources

Feng Liu
MAG (602) 254-6300

Bob Downing and Dena Konopka
MCAQD (602) 506-6790

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

1

June 2010

1.3

Temporal scope

Annual and typical daily emissions were estimated for the year 2008, for Maricopa County and
the Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area (NAA).
1.4

Geographic scope

This inventory includes emission estimates for Maricopa County and for the Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area. Maricopa County encompasses approximately 9,223 square miles of
land area, while the Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area is approximately 2,880 square
miles or approximately 31 percent of the Maricopa County land area. A map of Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area is provided in Figure 1.4–1.
Figure 1.4–1. Map of Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

2

June 2010

1.5

Overview of local demographic and land use data

Many of the emissions estimates generated in this report were calculated using demographic and
land use data provided by the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). These data were
used to apportion and/or scale Maricopa County emissions estimates to the nonattainment area
and vice versa. (For example, county-level emissions from residential natural gas usage in Maricopa County were apportioned to the nonattainment area using the ratio of total population in
each area). Detailed explanations of how emission estimates were apportioned or scaled are
presented in each of the following chapters, along with the data sources used.
1.5.1

Demographic profile

The demographic data provided by MAG included population, employment data, and single
family/multi-family splits for calendar year 2008, for both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area. Table 1.5–1 provides an overview of the demographic data used in this report.
As noted throughout the text, these data are frequently used to derive estimates of activity or
emissions within the PM10 NAA from county-level calculations. It is important to note,
however, that the nonattainment area includes a portion of Pinal County, AZ (Apache Junction)
as shown in Figure 1.4–1. Thus in some cases (e.g., those source categories calculated based on
total population), the multiplier used to derive nonattainment area estimates from County-level
values may be greater than 1, and thus the resulting NAA emission totals are larger than the
County-level estimates from which they are derived.
Table 1.5–1.

Demographic profile of Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Maricopa
Percent within
Demographic variable
County
PM10 NAA
PM10 NAA
Total resident population
4,026,000
4,024,530
99.96%
Total non-resident population
253,760
272,610
107.43%
Total population:
4,279,760
4,297,140
100.41%
Retail employment
Office employment
Industrial employment
Public employment
Other employment
Construction
Work at Home
Total employment:

537,430
444,170
412,580
278,610
191,770
79,680
65,620
2,009,860

Single Family/Multi-Family Household Split:
Single Family
75%
Multi-Family
25%

536,100
444,980
411,520
274,500
189,010
78,980
64,940
2,000,030

99.75%
100.18%
99.74%
98.52%
98.56%
99.12%
98.96%
99.51%

75%
25%

Source: Maricopa Association of Governments

1.5.2

Land use data

MAG provided draft 2009 land use data (as of March 2010). The draft 2009 land use data was
assumed to be representative of 2008. Table 1.5–2 presents a summary of the land use categories
and acreage used to develop emission estimates for this inventory.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

3

June 2010

Table 1.5–2.

Land use categories used to apportion emissions.
Acreage in
Maricopa
Land Use Category
County
General/active open space/golf course (e.g., parks)
228,295
Passive/restricted open space (e.g., mountain preserves)
2,373,545
Lakes
12,525
Agriculture
295,509
Vacant (e.g., developable land)
2,227,981

1.6

Emissions overview by source category

1.6.1

Point sources

Acreage
within PM10
NAA
223,290
302,999
9,510
130,445
472,831

Percentage
within PM10
NAA
97.81%
12.77%
75.93%
44.14%
21.22%

The point source category includes those stationary sources that emit a significant amount of
pollution into the air such as power plants, industrial processes and large manufacturing
facilities. MCAQD utilizes the US EPA’s Annual Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR)
Rule to define which stationary sources are listed as point sources. A detailed definition of a
point source can be found in Section 2.1 of Chapter 2.
Table 1.6–1 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from point sources in Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively. A detailed breakdown of emissions
calculations for all point sources is contained in Chapter 2.
Table 1.6–1.

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from point sources in Maricopa County.
Annual (tons/yr)
Typical day (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
601.27 555.15 2,206.71 81.15 279.06
3,323.2 3,069.1 12,161.4 449.3 1,534.2
PM10 NAA
149.84 132.94 1,319.65 28.76 132.18
841.2
747.7 7,264.2 158.2
727.0

1.6.2

Area sources

Area sources are facilities or activities whose individual emissions do not qualify them as point
sources. Area sources represent numerous facilities or activities that individually release small
amounts of a given pollutant, but collectively they can release significant amounts of a pollutant.
Emissions from stationary sources that were not identified as point sources in this report have
been included in the area source inventory. Examples of area source categories include residential wood burning, commercial cooking, waste incineration and wildfires.
Tables 1.6–2 and 1.6–3 summarize annual and season-day emissions of the chief area source
categories, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively. A detailed
breakdown of emissions calculations for each area source category is contained in Chapter 3.
Table 1.6–2.
Category

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from area sources in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Fuel combustion
1,303.61 1,271.30 12,289.62 898.83
51.27
Industrial processes
14,928.89 3,268.45
362.58 129.60 1,731.34
Waste treatmt./disposal
230.52
204.35
77.47
58.20 1,488.07
Misc. area sources
135,133.31 14,269.99
126.52
32.64 13,059.05
All area sources:
151,596.33 19,014.09 12,856.18 1,119.27 16,329.74

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

4

9,673.4
96,246.9
1,613.0
758,826.5
866,359.8

9,370.0
21,076.1
1,438.8
83,717.8
115,602.7

78,161.3
2,816.5
515.3
1,676.1
83,169.2

5,773.3
328.7
1,005.8 11,077.2
320.0 8,131.5
446.4 71,686.1
7,545.5 91,223.5

June 2010

Table 1.6–3.
Category

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from area sources in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Fuel combustion
Industrial processes
Waste treatmt./disposal
Misc. area sources
All area sources:

1.6.3

1,300.65
13,327.74
120.77
26,097.92
40,847.07

1,268.35 12,248.07 895.83
3,047.62
360.48 129.58
95.42
50.30
56.85
3,268.14
115.94
29.74
7,679.53 12,774.79 1,112.00

51.11
1,724.27
1,494.12
7,693.04
10,962.54

9,653.8
85,937.0
799.8
156,539.2
252,929.8

9,350.6
19,656.9
630.5
25,024.8
54,662.7

77,895.2
2,802.3
309.9
2,318.0
83,325.3

5,754.1
327.6
1,005.7 11,034.4
312.6 8,164.6
622.4 42,455.4
7,694.7 61,982.0

Nonroad mobile sources

Nonroad mobile sources include off-highway vehicles and engines that move or are moved within a 12-month period. Tables 1.6–4 and 1.6–5 summarize annual and season-day emissions from
nonroad mobile sources, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively. A
detailed breakdown of emissions calculations for each source category is contained in Chapter 4.
Table 1.6–4.
Category

Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

Agricultural
Airport GSE (+APU)
Commercial
Construction & mining
Industrial
Lawn and garden
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance
Recreational equipment
Aircraft
Locomotives
All nonroad
mobile sources:

Table 1.6–5.
Category

33.24
365.55
26.68
586.73
112.98 1,395.23
1,220.75 14,796.63
98.96 2,593.13
168.79
798.14
8.54
77.74
1.10
9.23
41.98
63.80
181.41 2,625.94
65.53 1,854.62

0.14
26.43
2.40
6.60
3.22
3.16
0.85
0.00
0.42
317.64
18.72

0.67
21.12
28.10
56.23
19.63
1.73
0.02
2.10

2,038.46

1,959.95 25,166.75

379.58

NH3

213.1
145.8
724.2
7,825.3
634.4
1,156.9
114.9
7.6
358.8
991.3
358.1

2,343.3
3,206.1
8,943.8
94,850.2
16,622.7
5,571.5
1,046.5
63.9
545.3
14,349.4
10,134.5

0.9
144.4
15.4
42.3
20.6
23.1
11.4
0.0
3.6
1,735.8
102.3

135.4
180.1
360.5
144.6
23.3
0.1
18.0

4.45

219.7
148.7
756.2
8,083.2
651.8
1,250.1
124.5
7.8
389.6
1,026.8
383.6

4.3

134.06

13,042.0

12,530.3

157,677.4

2,099.8

890.6

24.3

Annual and typical daily emissions from all nonroad mobile sources in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Agricultural
Airport GSE (+APU)
Commercial
Construction & mining
Industrial
Lawn and garden
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance
Recreational equipment
Aircraft
Locomotives
All nonroad
mobile sources:

1.6.4

34.27
27.21
117.97
1,260.98
101.69
182.28
9.25
1.13
45.58
187.91
70.21

15.13
26.99
117.66
1,249.88
101.42
183.02
7.02
1.13
7.68
183.80
34.16

14.67
161.35
26.48
578.95
112.69 1,391.61
1,210.00 14,666.42
98.71 2,586.39
169.48
801.41
6.48
59.03
1.10
9.26
7.08
10.76
177.60 2,620.31
31.88
907.76

0.06
26.22
2.39
6.55
3.21
3.17
0.64
0.00
0.07
316.00
9.11

0.30
21.06
27.85
56.09
19.71
1.32
0.02
0.35
2.16

97.0
147.5
754.2
8,012.1
650.1
1,255.3
94.5
7.8
65.7
1,004.3
186.7

1,927.89

1,856.17 23,793.26

367.42

128.87

12,275.2

94.0
144.7
722.4
7,756.4
632.7
1,161.6
87.3
7.6
60.5
970.5
174.2

1,034.3
3,163.7
8,920.6
94,015.6
16,579.4
5,594.4
794.6
64.1
91.9
14,318.6
4,960.4

0.4
143.3
15.3
42.0
20.6
23.2
8.6
0.0
0.6
1,726.8
49.8

1.9
135.0
178.5
359.5
145.2
17.7
0.1
3.0

11,811.9 149,537.7

2,030.5

852.9

11.8

Onroad mobile sources

Emissions from onroad mobile sources were calculated for the PM10 nonattainment area located
primarily within Maricopa County, as well as for Maricopa County as a whole. A detailed
breakout of emissions calculations for each area source category is contained in Chapter 5.
Tables 1.6–6 and 1.6–7 summarize annual and typical daily emissions from onroad mobile
sources in Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

5

June 2010

Table 1.6–6.

Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in Maricopa County.

Emission
Category
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
Paved road
fugitive dust
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust
Totals:

Table 1.6–7.

PM10

Annual emissions (tons/year)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

1,601.53
18,556.4
12,358.2
32,516.13

NH3

999.17 51,609.08 309.83 3,330.43
617.4

—

—

—

1,233.6
—
—
—
2,850.17 51,609.08 309.83 3,330.43

PM10

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

NH3

8,752.0

5,459.7

282,017.2

1,692.6

18,199.0

101,401.2

3,373.8

—

—

—

—
282,017.2

—
1,692.6

—
18,199.0

67,530.9 6,741.0
177,684.1 15,574.5

Annual and typical daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in the PM10 NAA.

Annual emissions (tons/year)
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
Emission
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
1,529.54
954.23 49,142.49 295.90 3,180.66 8,357.7
5,213.8 268,538.4 1,616.4 17,380.4
Paved road
fugitive dust
17,245.1
547.9
—
—
—
94,235.7 2,994.2
—
—
—
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust 11,710.7 1,169.0
—
—
—
63,993.1 6,387.8
—
—
—
Totals:
30,485.34 2,671.13 49,142.49 295.90 3,180.66 166,586.5 14,595.8 268,538.4 1,616.4 17,380.4

1.6.5

Biogenic sources

The biogenic source category includes emissions from all vegetation (e.g., crops, indigenous
vegetation, landscaping, etc.) in Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area. Emissions
were estimated using the Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN).
MEGAN is a state-of-the-art biogenic emissions model developed by the National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Some corrections and improvements were made in the latest
version of MEGAN2.04. MEGAN2.04 was used to compute biogenic emissions in Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area. Annual and daily NOx emissions from biogenic
sources are shown in Table 1.6–8 for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 1.6–8.

Annual and season-day NOx emissions from biogenic sources.
Annual emissions
Typical daily emissions
Geographic area
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
Maricopa County
896.27
4,890.0
PM10 NAA
332.77
1,815.3

1.6.6

Summary of all source categories

Tables 1.6–9 and 1.6–10 provide summary totals of annual and typical daily emissions from all
emission sources in Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

6

June 2010

Table 1.6–9.

Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in Maricopa County.

Section
Point Sources
Area Sources:
Fuel combustion
Industrial natural gas
Industrial fuel oil
Comm./ind. natural gas
Comm./ind. fuel oil
Residential natural gas
Residential wood
Residential fuel oil
All combustion
Industrial Processes
Chemical manufacturing
Food products
Commercial cooking
Grain handling
Ammonia storage
Secondary metal prod.
Mineral processes
(concrete batch, etc.)
Mining & quarry (sand &
gravel)
Wood products
Rubber/plastics mfg.
Fabricated metal mfg.
Residential const.
Commercial const.
Road construction
Construction – other
Electric equip. mfg.
ADEQ portables
Unpaved road travel
Industrial proc. NEC
All Ind. Processes
Waste Treatment/Disp.
On-site incineration
Open burning
Landfills
POTWs
Other waste
All Waste Treat/Disp.

PM10
601.27

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
555.15
2,206.71
81.15

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
3,069.1
12,161.4
449.3

NH3
279.06

PM10
3,323.2

197.3
2,941.0
426.5
1,436.8
337.5
4,030.8
0.1
9,370.0

3,687.7
40,865.9
8,122.5
20,983.3
4,173.8
325.7
2.3
78,161.3

15.5
3,907.8
33.5
1,738.9
26.6
50.1
0.9
5,773.3

81.4
168.3
26.9
52.1

0.0

2.6

0.9

358.8

142.7

10,759.2
0.0

30.78
458.79
66.54
224.14
61.75
461.59
0.01
1,303.61

30.78
458.79
66.54
224.14
61.75
429.28
0.01
1,271.30

575.29
6,375.08
1,267.11
3,273.40
763.81
34.69
0.25
12,289.62

2.42
609.61
5.23
271.27
4.88
5.34
0.10
898.83

12.70
26.25
4.20
8.13

51.27

197.3
2,941.0
426.5
1,436.8
337.5
4,334.2
0.1
9,673.4

187.43

151.42

0.00

0.34

0.03

1,445.8

1,164.5

988.99
20.59

917.18
6.71

5,434.0
149.3

5,039.5
49.5

60.56

52.16

442.7

386.2

195.81

97.28

1,357.4

671.7

210.39
217.26
140.94
51.48
2,451.72
5,739.18
3,580.67
258.16
13.94
59.00
608.17
144.60
14,928.89

59.56
203.25
105.96
42.62
245.17
573.92
358.07
25.82
9.64
29.50
282.95
107.24
3,268.45

1,442.1
1,668.6
953.3
538.1
15,716.1
36,789.6
22,953.0
1,654.9
76.9
492.9
4,178.8
953.3
96,246.9

390.8
1,548.3
698.8
460.6
1,571.6
3,679.0
2,295.3
165.5
53.2
246.5
1,928.8
726.4
21,076.1

0.06
111.46
86.21

0.7
902.15
486.1

49.73

18.65

1,678.43
0.04

4.50

20.45
282.18

0.18
88.93

31.55

10.22
362.58

21.49
129.60

16.79
1,731.34

0.04
111.46
75.92

5.01
29.96
24.11

0.01

32.78
230.52

16.93
204.35

18.39
77.47

50.62
58.20

470.39
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.18
2,059.00
136.93
1,739.52
17.90

403.43
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.17
308.85
20.54
173.95
5.11

103.79
0.39
1.95
1.20
6.74

28.46
0.11

455.80
0.93
0.01

50.14
0.62
0.01

891.36

336.41

7.57

1,488.07
1,488.07

193.7

69.6
2,816.5

137.7
1,005.8

94.6
11,077.2

0.4
902.15
425.4

38.9
242.37
132.9

0.1
41.7

224.1
1,613.0

110.9
1,438.8

101.0
515.3

278.1
320.0

6,271.8
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.3
22,932.4
3,938.9
11,150.8
103.8

5,379.0
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.2
3,439.9
590.8
1,115.1
29.7

1,383.8
131.2
10.7
6.6
50.5

379.4
36.0

2,490.7
7.0
0.1

274.0
4.7
0.1

4,870.8

1,838.3

1,200.11

66,022.5

6,558.0

4,445.36
112,788.23
135,133.31

446.24
11,278.82
14,269.99

126.52

32.64

13,059.05

24,291.6
616,329.1
758,826.5

All Area Sources:

151,596.33

19,014.09

12,856.18

1,119.27

16,329.74

866,359.8

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

1.58

2,276.43
9,583.89
1,176.93

7

28.9

1.1
721.7

12,082.12

12.39
0.06

2.49

328.7

112.4
2,275.7

Misc. Area Sources
Wildfires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Aircraft engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved agric. roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer application
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers fugitive
Offroad rec. vehicles
fugitive dust
Travel on unpaved
parking lots
Windblown dust
All Misc. Area Sources

21.76
0.03

NH3
1,534.2

8,131.5
8,131.5
290.2
10.6

19.0

12,439.5
52,514.5

93.1
0.3

11.9

2,438.5
61,632.9
83,717.8

1,676.1

446.4

71,686.1

115,602.7

83,169.2

7,545.5

91,223.5

6,431.3

June 2010

Table 1.6–9 (continued). Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in Maricopa County.
Section
Nonroad Sources:
Agricultural equipment
Airport GSE (+APU)
Commercial equipment
Construction and mining
equipment
Industrial equipment
Lawn and garden
equipment
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance
equipment
Recreational equipment
Aircraft
Locomotives
All Nonroad Sources
Onroad Sources:
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
Paved road
fugitive dust
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust
All Mobile Sources:

PM10

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

PM10

NH3

0.67

213.1
145.8
724.2

2,343.3
3,206.1
8,943.8

0.9
144.4
15.4

135.4

34.27
27.21
117.97

33.24
26.68
112.98

365.55
586.73
1,395.23

0.14
26.43
2.40

21.12

219.7
148.7
756.2

1,260.98
101.69

1,220.75
98.96

14,796.63
2,593.13

6.60
3.22

28.10
56.23

8,083.2
651.8

7,825.3
634.4

94,850.2
16,622.7

42.3
20.6

180.1
360.5

182.28
9.25

168.79
8.54

798.14
77.74

3.16
0.85

19.63
1.73

1,250.1
124.5

1,156.9
114.9

5,571.5
1,046.5

23.1
11.4

144.6
23.3

1.13
45.58
187.91
70.21
2,038.46

1.10
41.98
181.41
65.53
1,959.95

9.23
63.80
2,625.94
1,854.62
25,166.75

0.00
0.42
317.64
18.72
379.58

0.02
2.10

7.6
358.8
991.3
358.1
12,530.3

63.9
545.3
14,349.4
10,134.5
157,677.4

0.0
3.6
1,735.8
102.3
2,099.8

0.1
18.0

4.45
134.06

7.8
389.6
1,026.8
383.6
13,042.0

24.3
890.6

1,601.53

999.17

51,609.08

309.83

3,330.43

8,752.0

5,459.7

282,017.2

1,692.6

18,199.0

18,556.4

617.4

101,401.2

3,373.8

12,358.2
32,516.13

1,233.6
2,850.17

67,530.9
177,684.1

6,741.0
15,574.5

282,017.2

1,692.6

18,199.0

11,787.1

111,847.3

51,609.08

Biogenic Sources:
TOTAL, All Sources:

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

NH3

309.83

3,330.43

896.27
186,752.18

24,379.36

91,838.72

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

4.3

4,890.0
1,889.83

8

20,073.28

1,060,409.1

146,776.6

535,025.1

June 2010

Table 1.6–10. Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in the PM10 nonattainment area.
Section
Point Sources
Area Sources:
Fuel combustion
Industrial natural gas
Industrial fuel oil
Comm./ind. natural gas
Comm./ind. fuel oil
Residential natural gas
Residential wood
Residential fuel oil
All combustion
Industrial Processes
Chemical manufacturing
Food products
Commercial cooking
Grain handling
Ammonia storage
Secondary metal prod.
Mineral processes
(concrete batch, etc.)
Mining & quarry (sand &
gravel)
Wood products
Rubber/plastics mfg.
Fabricated metal mfg.
Residential const.
Commercial const.
Road construction
Construction – other
Electric equip. mfg.
ADEQ portable sources
Unpaved road travel
Industrial proc. NEC
All Ind. Processes
Waste Treatment/Disp.
On-site incineration
Open burning
Landfills
POTWs
Other waste
All Waste Treat/Disp.

PM10
149.84

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
132.94
1,319.65
28.76

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
747.7
7,264.2
158.2

NH3
132.18

PM10
841.2

196.8
2,933.3
424.4
1,429.5
337.3
4,029.2
0.1
9,350.6

3,678.2
40,759.6
8,081.1
20,876.3
4,172.2
325.6
2.3
77,895.2

15.5
3,897.6
33.3
1,730.0
26.6
50.1
0.9
5,754.1

81.2
167.9
26.8
51.8

0.0

2.6

0.9

358.8

142.7

10,731.2
0.0

30.70
457.60
66.20
223.00
61.73
461.41
0.01
1,300.65

30.70
457.60
66.20
223.00
61.73
429.11
0.01
1,268.35

573.79
6,358.50
1,260.65
3,256.70
763.51
34.67
0.25
12,248.07

2.41
608.03
5.20
269.88
4.87
5.33
0.10
895.83

12.66
26.19
4.18
8.09

51.11

196.8
2,933.3
424.4
1,429.5
337.3
4,332.5
0.1
9,653.8

186.94

151.03

0.00

0.34

0.03

1,442.0

1,161.5

993.04
16.73

920.94
5.68

5,456.3
125.3

5,060.1
43.0

60.56

52.16

442.7

386.2

190.45

93.72

1,320.7

647.9

184.25
216.69
140.57
51.35
2,245.39
5,380.95
2,724.87
215.70
13.94
59.00
511.29
136.00
13,327.74

50.64
202.72
105.68
42.51
224.54
538.10
272.49
21.57
9.64
29.50
227.58
99.12
3,047.62

1,266.6
1,664.3
950.9
536.7
14,465.2
34,382.4
17,471.4
1,385.5
76.9
492.9
3,551.3
906.0
85,937.0

331.9
1,544.3
697.0
459.4
1,446.5
3,438.2
1,747.1
138.6
53.2
246.5
1,573.8
681.7
19,656.9

0.06
27.67
60.25

0.7
232.6
342.4

49.73

18.65

1,674.07
0.04

4.49

20.45
282.18

0.18
88.93

31.55

8.12
360.48

21.47
129.58

14.10
1,724.27

0.04
27.67
50.78

5.01
7.44
19.47

0.01

32.78
120.77

16.93
95.42

18.39
50.30

50.62
56.85

423.56
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.18
834.20
54.14
731.03
4.86

363.27
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.17
125.13
8.12
73.10
1.39

93.46
0.16
1.96
1.21
6.74

25.62
0.04

260.95
0.93
0.01

28.70
0.62
0.01

894.98

337.78

6.22

1,494.12
1,494.12

193.7

55.4
2,802.3

137.6
1,005.7

79.8
11,034.4

0.4
232.6
286.6

38.9
62.5
107.4

0.1
34.3

224.1
799.8

110.9
630.5

101.0
309.9

278.1
312.6

9,412.5
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.3
9,327.3
1,560.0
4,686.1
26.7

8,072.7
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.2
1,399.1
234.0
468.6
7.6

2,076.8
80.6
10.7
6.59
50.5

569.4
22.1

1,426.0
7.0
0.1

156.9
4.6
0.1

4,890.6

1,845.8

200.09

11,006.4

1,093.4

2,368.07
18,468.36
26,100.92

237.45
1,846.84
3,268.14

115.94

29.74

7,693.04

12,923.9
100,920.0
156,539.2

All Area Sources:

40,847.07

7,679.53

12,774.79

1,112.00

10,962.54

252,929.8

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

1.58

1,004.82
5,486.90
1,181.71

9

28.8

1.1
721.7

2,014.17

12.36
0.06

2.49

327.6

112.4
2,275.7

Misc. Area Sources
Wildfires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Aircraft engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved agric. roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer application
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers fugitive
Offroad rec. vehicles
fugitive dust
Travel on unpaved
parking lots
Windblown dust
All Misc. Area Sources

19.60
0.01

NH3
727.0

8,164.6
8,164.6
435.5
6.5

19.0

5,490.8
30,065.2

92.6
0.3

11.8

1,297.5
10,092.0
25,024.8

2,318.0

622.4

42,455.4

54,662.7

83,325.3

7,694.7

61,982.0

6,457.5

June 2010

Table 1.6–10 (cont’d). Annual and typical daily emissions from all sources in the PM10 nonattainment area.
Section
Nonroad Sources:
Agricultural
equipment
Airport GSE
(+APU)
Commercial
equipment
Construction and
mining equipment
Industrial equipment
Lawn and garden
equipment
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance equipment
Recreational
equipment
Aircraft
Locomotives
All Nonroad
Sources:
Onroad Sources:
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
Paved road
fugitive dust
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust
All Mobile Sources:

PM10

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

NH3

PM10

15.13

14.67

161.35

0.06

0.30

97.0

94.0

1,034.3

0.4

26.99

26.48

578.95

26.22

147.5

144.7

3,163.7

143.3

117.66

112.69

1,391.61

2.39

21.06

754.2

722.4

8,920.6

15.3

135.0

1,249.88
101.42

1,210.00
98.71

14,666.42
2,586.39

6.55
3.21

27.85
56.09

8,012.1
650.1

7,756.4
632.7

94,015.6
16,579.4

42.0
20.6

178.5
359.5

183.02
7.02

169.48
6.48

801.41
59.03

3.17
0.64

19.71
1.32

1,255.3
94.5

1,161.6
87.3

5,594.4
794.6

23.2
8.6

145.2
17.7

1.13

1.10

9.26

0.00

0.02

7.8

7.6

64.1

0.0

0.1

7.68
183.80
34.16

7.08
177.60
31.88

10.76
2,620.31
907.76

0.07
316.00
9.11

0.35

60.5
970.5
174.2

91.9
14,318.6
4,960.4

0.6
1,726.8
49.8

3.0

2.16

65.7
1,004.3
186.7

11.8

1,927.89

1,856.17

23,793.26

367.42

128.87

12,275.2

11,811.9

149,537.7

2,030.5

852.9

1,529.54

954.23

49,142.49

295.90

3,180.66

8,357.7

5,213.8

268,538.4

1,616.4

17,380.4

17,245.1

547.9

94,235.7

2,994.2

11,710.7
30,485.34

1,169.0
2,671.13

63,993.1
166,586.5

6,387.8
14,595.8

268,538.4

1,616.4

17,380.4

11,499.8

80,942.3

Biogenic Sources:
TOTAL, All
Sources:

1.7

49,142.49

295.90

3,180.66

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

332.77
73,410.15

12,339.77

87,030.19

NH3
1.9

1,815.3
1,804.08

14,404.25

432,632.7

81,818.2

508,665.6

Public review process

Maricopa County Air Quality Department released a draft version of this document, its 2008
PM10 emission inventory, for a 30-day public review and comment period on April 26, 2010.
(The department’s news release announcing the availability of the draft report, and outlining the
schedule for public review and comment, is contained in Appendix 1). The department held a
public workshop on May 14, 2010 to discuss the draft inventory. No formal comments were
received during the 30-day public comment period.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

10

June 2010

2.

Point Sources

2.1

Introduction and scope

This inventory of PM10 and related pollutants is one of a number of emission inventories being
prepared to meet US EPA reporting requirements.
In addition to preparing periodic emissions inventories for the PM10 nonattainment area (NAA)
as a commitment under the current PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP), the federal Air Emission Reporting Requirements (AERR) rule requires that state and local agencies prepare emissions estimates on a county basis, and submit data electronically to the US EPA for inclusion in
the National Emission Inventory (NEI) for 2008. This inventory is being developed concurrently
with similar inventories for CO and ozone precursors (VOC, NOx, and CO), as part of Maricopa
County's requirements under the respective SIPs.
In order to provide consistency among all these inventories, it was decided to standardize the
definition of a “point source” by adopting the designation of point sources as outlined in the
AERR:
We are basing the requirement for point source format reporting on whether the source is
major under 40 CFR part 70 for the pollutants for which reporting is required, i.e., CO,
VOC, NOx, SO2, PM2.5, PM10, lead and NH3 but without regard to emissions of
HAPs…this approach will result in a more stable universe of reporting point sources,
which in turn will facilitate elimination of overlaps and gaps in estimating point source
emissions, as compared to nonpoint source emissions. Under this requirement, states
will know well in advance of the start of the inventory year which sources will need to be
reported. (US EPA, 2008)
Additionally, EPA guidance requires emission inventories prepared for SIP development purposes to consider point sources with 25 miles of the nonattainment area boundary. No additional
point sources met this reporting threshold.
Several tables have been constructed to provide the point source emissions and category totals.
Table 2.2–1 provides an alphabetical listing of all point sources and their location. Table 2.4–1
shows the 2008 annual and typical day emissions of PM10, PM2.5, NOx, SOx and NH3 for those
point sources which reported emissions of one or more of these pollutants broken out by facility.
Table 2.6–1 summarizes point source emissions by source category for the county and PM10 nonattainment area. Note that totals shown in the tables may not equal the sum of individual values
due to independent rounding.

2.2

Identification of point sources

The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) identified point sources within Maricopa County through its electronic permit system database, EMS, and the 2008 annual emissions
reports submitted to the department. A total of 25 stationary sources were identified as point
sources using the definition described in Section 2.1. There are no additional point sources
within the 25-mile boundary around the PM10 nonattainment area with permits issued by the
Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD). While the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) retains permitting authority for a limited number of industrial
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

11

June 2010

source categories in Maricopa County, no ADEQ-permitted facilities are considered point
sources, and are addressed instead as area sources.
Table 2.2–1 contains an alphabetical listing of all point sources, including a unique business
identification number, NAICS industry classification code, business name, and physical address.
Table 2.2–1. Name and location of all point sources in Maricopa County.
ID #
NAICS Business name
Address
245
337122 AF Lorts Manufacturing Company
8120 W Harrison St
3313
221112 APS West Phx Power Plant
4606 W Hadley St
43063 221112 Dynegy Arlington Valley LLC
39027 W Elliot Rd
44439 221112 Gila River Power Station
1250 E Watermelon Rd
1418
326299 Goodrich Aircraft Interior Products
3414 S 5th St
355
336412 Honeywell-Engines Systems & Services
111 S 34th St
3300
92811
Luke AFB – 56th Fighter Wing
14002 W Marauder St
62
33711
Mastercraft Cabinets Inc
305 S Brooks
44186 221112 Mesquite Generating Station
37625 W Elliot Rd
43530 221112 New Harquahala Generating Co
2530 N 491st Ave
20706 32614
New Wincup Holdings Inc
7980 W Buckeye Rd
1331
337122 Oak Canyon Manufacturing Inc
3021 N 29th Dr
52382 221112 Ocotillo Power Plant
1500 E University Dr
1341
33992
Penn Racquet Sports Inc
306 S 45th Ave
42956 221112 Redhawk Generating Facility
11600 S 363rd Ave
303
332431 Rexam Beverage Can Company
211 N 51st Ave
3315
221112 Santan Generating Station
1005 S Val Vista Rd
4175
424710 SFPP LP Phoenix Terminal
49 N 53rd Ave
3316
221112 SRP Agua Fria Generating Station
7302 W Northern Ave
3317
221112 SRP Kyrene Generating Station
7005 S Kyrene Rd
552
337122 Thornwood Furniture Mfg
5125 E Madison St
1210
337122 Trendwood Inc (S. 15th Ave.)
2402 S 15th Ave
1211
337122 Trendwood Inc (E. University)
261 E University Dr
174
325998 W R Meadows of Az Inc
4220 S Sarival Ave
1382
33711
Woodcase Fine Cabinetry Inc
3255 W Osborn Rd

City
Tolleson
Phoenix
Arlington
Gila Bend
Phoenix
Phoenix
Glendale
Mesa
Arlington
Tonopah
Phoenix
Phoenix
Tempe
Phoenix
Arlington
Phoenix
Gilbert
Phoenix
Glendale
Tempe
Phoenix
Phoenix
Phoenix
Goodyear
Phoenix

ZIP
85353
85043
85322
85337
85040
85034
85309
85202
85322
85354
85043
85017
85281
85043
85322
85043
85296
85043
85303
85283
85034
85007
85004
85338
85017

*
*

*
*

*

* = Facility is outside the PM10 nonattainment area.

2.3

Procedures for estimating emissions from point sources

Annual and typical daily emission estimates were determined from annual source emission
reports, MCAQD investigation reports, permit files and logs, or telephone contacts with sources.
For most of the sources, material balance methods were used for determining emissions. Emissions were estimated using the emission factors from AP–42, source tests, engineering calculations, or manufacturers' specifications.
MCAQD distributes annual emissions survey forms to nearly all facilities for which MCAQD
has issued an operating permit. Facilities are required to report detailed information on stacks,
control devices, operating schedules, and process-level information concerning their annual
activities. (See Appendix 2 for a copy of the instructions to complete the emissions inventory.)
These instructions include examples and explanations on how to complete the annual emissions
reporting forms that facilities must submit to MCAQD.
After a facility has submitted an annual emissions report to MCAQD, emissions inventory staff
check all reports for missing and questionable data, and check the accuracy and reasonableness
of all emissions calculations with AP–42, the Factor Information and REtrieval (webFIRE)
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

12

June 2010

software, and other EPA documentation. Control efficiencies are determined by source tests
when available, or by AP–42 factors, engineering calculations, or manufacturers' specifications.
MCAQD has conducted annual emissions surveys for permitted facilities since 1988, and the
department's database system, EMS, contains numerous automated quality assurance/quality
control checks for data input and processing.

2.3.1

Calculation of PM2.5 emissions

For all county-permitted sources that submitted an annual emission inventory report, all processlevel emissions for PM10, NOx, SOx, and NH3 were calculated for each facility. Actual emissions
for these pollutants were calculated using reported emission factors (from AP–42 or source test
results) and reflecting any control devices installed. PM2.5 was calculated using a variety of
methods, depending on the Source Classification Code (SCC) of the process reported:
1. For those SCCs and control device combinations included in EPA’s WebFIRE, this
database was used to calculate PM2.5, using EPA-recommended emission factors and
typical control efficiencies.
2. For processes with no PM10 controls, emission factors for PM2.5 published by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB, 2004) were used where available.
3. For all other processes (where neither of the above resources provided guidance), PM2.5
was assumed equal to PM10 as a conservative estimate.

2.3.2

Application of rule effectiveness

Rule effectiveness reflects the actual ability of a regulatory program to achieve the emission
reductions required by regulation. The concept of applying rule effectiveness in a SIP emission
inventory has evolved from the observation that regulatory programs may be less than 100 percent effective for some source categories. Rule effectiveness (“RE”) is applied to those sources
affected by a regulation and for which emissions are determined by means of emission factors
and control efficiency estimates.
MCAQD has estimated RE for three distinct groups of industrial processes. (See Appendix 3 for
details on the methods and data used in computing RE rates):
• For manually controlled processes that are regulated under Maricopa County Rule 316 (Nonmetallic Mineral Processing), the analysis showed an overall rule effectiveness of 49.62%.
• For most other processes that claimed emissions reductions through the use of a control
device, RE calculations were performed separately for Title V and non-Title V sources.
Overall RE values of 90.94% (for Title V processes) and 84.27% (for non-Title V) were
calculated.

2.4

Detailed overview of point source emissions

Table 2.4–1 provides a summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all point sources,
within and outside the PM10 nonattainment area. Sources for which rule effectiveness has been
applied (for PM10 emissions) are noted. Values of “0.00” and “0.0” for annual and daily emissions denote a value below the level of significance (0.005 tons/yr and 0.05 lbs/day,
respectively).
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

13

June 2010

Table 2.4–1.
ID #
245
3313
43063
44439
1418
355
3300
62
44186
43530
20706
1331
52382
1341
42956
303
3315
4175
3316
3317
552
1210
1211
174
1382

Annual and typical daily point source emissions, by facility.

Business name
AF Lorts Manufacturing Company
APS West Phx Power Plant
Dynegy Arlington Valley LLC
Gila River Power Station
Goodrich Aircraft Interior Products
Honeywell-Engines Systems & Srvs.
Luke AFB – 56th Fighter Wing
Mastercraft Cabinets Inc
Mesquite Generating Station
New Harquahala Generating Co
New Wincup Holdings Inc
Oak Canyon Manufacturing Inc
Ocotillo Power Plant
Penn Racquet Sports Inc
Redhawk Generating Facility
Rexam Beverage Can Company
Santan Generating Station
SFPP LP Phoenix Terminal
SRP Agua Fria Generating Station
SRP Kyrene Generating Station
Thornwood Furniture Mfg
Trendwood Inc (S. 15th Ave.)
Trendwood Inc (E. University)
W R Meadows of Az Inc
Woodcase Fine Cabinetry Inc

*
†*
†
*
*
†
†

*
†
*

*

PM10
2.69
22.94
6.40
99.50
0.16
3.17
0.60
0.18
152.65
116.35
0.94
0.01
8.37
1.74
76.53
0.33
51.88
0.63
25.21
26.24
2.66
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.23

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
2.68
0.01
0.00
19.47 394.24
4.51
3.58
35.50
2.20
92.13 343.01
17.36
0.16
0.42
0.00
3.16
51.42
9.91
0.59
7.15
0.15
0.14
0.04
0.00
144.01 243.09
17.12
116.11
86.29
6.46
0.94
12.42
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.48
64.45
0.29
1.74
3.51
0.02
66.38 179.16
9.25
0.33
4.39
0.03
50.33 313.85
10.59
0.61
4.96
0.24
18.01 392.20
0.58
25.64
60.60
2.19
2.42
0.10
0.00
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.12
0.00
0.18
0.00
0.00

NH3
0.00
81.39
5.38
5.77
0.01
0.65
0.02
0.00
15.56
93.52
0.40
0.00
1.67
0.11
26.65
0.14
35.55
0.00
3.67
8.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

PM10
20.7
126.0
36.5
546.9
1.5
17.7
3.7
1.4
838.8
639.3
5.2
0.0
46.0
13.4
420.5
1.8
285.1
3.5
138.5
144.2
20.5
0.4
0.1
0.1
1.8

Typical daily (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
20.6
0.1
0.0
107.0 2,166.1
24.8
20.9
214.4
15.2
506.4 1,887.5
95.4
1.5
3.2
0.0
17.6
282.5
54.5
3.7
43.1
1.0
1.1
0.3
0.0
791.3 1,336.4
94.1
638.0
474.1
35.5
5.2
68.3
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
35.6
354.1
1.6
13.4
27.0
0.2
364.7
984.8
50.9
1.8
24.1
0.1
276.5 1,724.4
58.2
3.3
27.2
1.3
98.9 2,154.9
3.2
140.9
333.0
12.1
18.6
0.8
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.5
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.0

NH3
0.0
447.2
29.6
31.8
0.1
4.0
0.1
0.0
85.5
513.9
2.2
0.0
9.2
0.9
146.4
0.8
195.3
0.0
20.1
47.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

† = Facility is outside the PM10 nonattainment area.
* = Facility for which rule effectiveness has been applied.

2.5

Emission reduction credits

A major source or major modification planned in a nonattainment area must obtain emissions
reductions as a condition for approval. These emissions reductions, generally obtained from
existing sources located in the vicinity of a proposed source must offset the emissions increase
from the new source or modification. The obvious purpose of acquiring offsetting emissions
decreases is to allow an area to move towards attainment of the national ambient air quality
standards while still allowing some industrial growth.
In order for these emission reductions to be available in the future for offsetting, they must be: 1)
explicitly included and quantified as growth in projection year inventories required in rate of
progress plans or attainment demonstrations that were based on 1990 actual inventories, and 2)
meet the requirements outlined in MCAQD Rule 240 (Permit Requirements for New Major
Sources and Major Modification to Existing Major Sources).
Table 2.5–1 provides a list of emission reduction credits for PM10, NOx, and SOx. Only one
previously operational facility maintains emission reduction credits that are still valid for
inclusion in this report and the rate of progress plan.
Table 2.5–1.

Emission reduction credits.
Emission reduction credits (tons/yr)

ID
1151

Facility
Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. (formerly Motorola Mesa)

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

14

PM10

NOx

SOx

1.80

9.80

0.16

June 2010

2.6

Summary of point source emissions

Table 2.6–1 provides an overview of source category contributions to point source emissions for
Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 2.6–1.

Annual and typical daily point source emissions (including emission reduction credits).
Annual (tons/yr)
Typical day (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
599.47 555.15 2,196.91 80.99 279.06 3,313.4 3,069.1 12,107.8 448.4 1,534.2
PM10 NAA
148.04 132.94 1,309.85 28.60 132.18
831.4
747.7
7,210.6 157.3
727.0

2.7

Quality assurance / quality control procedures

2.7.1

Emission survey preparation and data collection

The MCAQD's Emissions Inventory (EI) Unit annually collects point source criteria pollutant
emission data from sources in the county. MCAQD annually reviews EPA guidance, documents
from the Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), and other source materials to ensure
that the most current emission factors and emission calculation methods are used for each year's
survey. Each January, the EI Unit prepares a pre-populated hard copy of the preceding year’s
submissions and mails reporting forms to permitted sources, along with detailed instructions for
completing the forms. (A copy of these instructions is included as Appendix 2). The EI Unit
asks sources to verify and update the data. The EI Unit also holds workshops from February
through April to assist businesses in completing EI forms.
The general data flow for data collection and inventory preparation is shown in Figure 2.7–1.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

15

June 2010

Figure 2.7–1. Data flow for annual point source emission inventory reporting.

EI Reporting
Forms
•
•

Hard Copy Forms/
Instructions
Instruction on Web

EI Reporting
Forms

Log In EI
reports/ Issue
Receipts

Issue NOVs for
late submitters

•
•
•

Data Entry

EMS

Code/field check
Range checks
Referential value checks

Create
Inventory files

Automated QA checks

Technical QA/
QC

Using completed survey data

Finalized Inventory
Data
Reconciliation

2.7.2

Submission processing

Submitted EI reports are logged in as they are received, and receipts are issued for emissions fees
paid. The data are input “as received” into the department's data base. During data entry, a variety of automated quality control (QC) checks are performed, including:
•
•
•
•
•

pull-down menus to minimize data entry errors (e.g., city, pollutant, emission factor unit,
etc.)
mandatory data field requirement checks (e.g., a warning screen appears if a user tries to
save an emission record with a missing emission factor).
range checks (e.g., were valid SCC, Tier, SIC, and NAICS codes entered?)
referential value checks (e.g., emission factor units, annual throughput units)
automatic formatting of date, time, telephone number fields, etc.

Automated quality assurance (QA) checks on the report that has been entered include the
following:
•
•

Comparing reported emission factors to SCC reference lists
Comparing reported emission factors to material name reference list

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

16

June 2010

•
•

Checking the report for calculation errors. This includes annual throughput, emission
factors, unit conversion factors (e.g., BTU to therms), capture efficiency, primary /
secondary control device efficiency, and any offsite recycling credits claimed.
Checking the report for completeness of required data.

When data entry is complete, an electronic version of the original data is preserved separately to
document changes made during the technical review and QA/QC process.
When errors are flagged, the businesses are contacted and correct information is obtained and
input to the EMS. Outstanding reporting issues are documented. Confidential business information (CBI) is identified by a checkbox on the form, and these data elements are flagged during
data entry and are not transmitted to the EPA. To prepare the inventory for submittal to the
National Emissions Inventory (NEI), the EI Unit runs Microsoft Access queries on the data in the
EMS to pull fields for the NEI Input format (NIF) tables.

2.7.3

Analysis of annual point source emissions data for this inventory

Two air quality planners checked inventory accuracy and reasonableness, and assured that all
point sources had been identified and that the methodology applied to calculate emissions was
appropriate and that the calculations were correct. Other reasonableness checks were conducted
by recalculating emissions using methods other than those used to make the initial emissions calculations and then comparing results. QA was conducted by checking all emissions reports submitted to MCAQD for the year 2008 for missing and questionable data and by checking the
accuracy and reasonableness of all emissions calculations made for such reports. Notes concerning follow-up calls and corrections to calculations were documented on each 2008 annual
emissions report.
The QA point source coordinator reviewed and checked calculations, identified errors, and
performed completeness, reasonableness and accuracy checks.

2.8

References

CARB, 2004. Speciation Profiles and Size Fractions. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/
speciate/speciate.htm.
US EPA, 2008. Air Emissions Reporting Requirements. 73 Fed. Reg. 76539. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/aerr/final_published_aerr.pdf.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

17

June 2010

This page intentionally blank.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

18

June 2010

3.

Area Sources

3.1

Scope and methodology

This chapter considers all stationary sources which are too small or too numerous to be treated as
point sources. EPA guidance documents, including “Introduction to Area Source Inventory
Development” (US EPA, 2001a) as well as permit and emissions data in the MCAQD’s Environmental Management System (EMS) database, and previous SIP inventories, were evaluated to
develop the list of area-source categories for inclusion. Some source categories were deemed
“insignificant” because there are no large production facilities and/or very few small sources, and
therefore emissions were not quantified. MCAQD prepared the area-source emission estimates
for all area sources and provided quality assurance checks on all data. Table 3.1–1 contains a list
of all area-source categories, with Source Classification Codes (SCCs), addressed in this chapter.
Table 3.1–1. List of area-source categories included in this PM10 inventory.
SCC Code
Category Description
Section
Fuel combustion:
2102006000
Industrial natural gas
3.2.1
2102004000
Industrial fuel oil
3.2.2
2103006000
Commercial/institutional natural gas
3.2.3
2103004000
Commercial/institutional fuel oil
3.2.4
2104006000
Residential natural gas
3.2.5
2104008000
Residential wood
3.2.6
2104004000
Residential fuel oil
3.2.7

2301010000
2302002000
2302040000
2302080000
2304000000
2305000000
2325000000
2307000000
2308000000
2309000000
2311010000
2311020000
2311030000
n/a
2312000000
n/a
n/a
2399000000

Industrial processes:
Chemical manufacturing
Commercial cooking
Grain handling/processing
Ammonia cold storage
Secondary metal production
Non-metallic mineral processes
Mining and quarrying
Wood product manufacturing
Rubber/plastics manufacturing
Fabricated metal products manufacturing
Residential construction
Commercial construction
Road construction
Other construction
Electrical equipment manufacturing
State-permitted portable sources
Paved/unpaved road travel on industrial sites
Industrial processes not elsewhere classified (NEC)

3.3.1
3.3.2.1
3.3.2.2
3.3.2.3
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
3.3.6
3.3.7
3.3.8
3.3.9
3.3.9
3.3.9
3.3.9
3.3.10
3.3.11
3.3.12
3.3.13

2601000000
2610000000
2620000000
2630000000
2650000000

Waste treatment and disposal:
On-site incineration
Open burning
Landfills
Publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)
Other industrial waste disposal

3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.4.4
3.4.5

2810001000
2810014000

Miscellaneous area sources:
Wildfires
Prescribed fires

3.5.1.1
3.5.1.2

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

19

June 2010

Table 3.1–1. (continued) List of area-source categories.
SCC Code
Category Description
Miscellaneous area sources: (continued)
2810030000
Structure fires
2810050000
Vehicle fires
2810040000
Engine testing
2801000003
Tilling
2801000005
Harvesting
n/a
Travel on unpaved agricultural roads
2801000000
Cotton ginning
2801700000
Fertilizer application
2810060000
Livestock
2810060000
Health services: crematories
2830000000
Accidental releases
2810010000
Humans
n/a
Leaf blower fugitive dust
n/a
Offroad recreational vehicle fugitive dust
n/a
Unpaved parking lots fugitive dust
2730100000
Windblown dust

Section
3.5.1.3
3.5.1.4
3.5.1.5
3.5.2.1
3.5.2.2
3.5.2.3
3.5.2.4
3.5.2.5
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5.5
3.5.6
3.5.7
3.5.8
3.5.9
3.5.10

For nearly all categories, emissions were calculated in one of the following ways:
• Emissions estimates for some categories were developed by conducting surveys on local
usage (e.g., natural gas consumption) or derived from state-wide data (e.g., fuel oil use).
• For some widespread or diverse categories (e.g., ammonia cold storage), emissions were
calculated using published per-capita or per-employee emission factors.
• For source categories with some information available from annual emissions reports
(e.g., wood product manufacturing), these data were combined with employment data to
“scale up” reported emissions to reflect the entire source category.
• For those source categories that have detailed emissions data available from most or all of
the significant sources in the category, emissions were calculated based on the detailed
process-level and operational data provided by these sources.
The specific emissions estimation methodologies used for each source category (including the
derivation and application of rule effectiveness) are described in greater detail in the respective
sections.

3.2

Fuel combustion

Area-source emissions for the following seven categories of fuel consumption were calculated:
Industrial natural gas, industrial fuel oil, commercial/institutional natural gas, commercial/
institutional fuel oil, residential natural gas, residential wood, and residential fuel oil. Data for
emissions calculations from natural gas combustion came from a survey of the three natural gas
suppliers in Maricopa County. Table 3.2–1 summarizes the natural gas sales data received from
Maricopa County natural gas suppliers.
Table 3.2–1.

Maricopa County natural gas sales data by supply company and end-user category.
Sales by end user category (in MMCF/yr)
Electric
Commercial/
Natural gas
Utilities
Industrial
Institutional
Residential
Transport*
Other*
supplier
Southwest Gas
17.07
1,543.27
15,643.15
14,911.67
6,487.35
n/a
City of Mesa
6.52
93.02
1,609.12
1,339.62
n/a
244.97
El Paso
227,608.92
201.90
n/a
n/a
n/a
6.07

* For emissions calculations, sales from transport and other were grouped with industrial sales.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

20

June 2010

Area-source emissions for wood and fuel oil combustion were calculated from Arizona statelevel sales and consumption data as described in the following subsections. Area-source emissions from coal and liquid petroleum gas were not calculated, as emissions from these categories
were determined to be insignificant.

3.2.1

Industrial natural gas

All natural gas suppliers in Maricopa County were surveyed to gather information on the volume
of natural gas distributed, by user category, within the county in 2008. Area-source industrial
natural gas usage for the county is based on the reported total volume of natural gas sold to
industrial sources, minus natural gas used by industrial point sources:
County area-source
industrial natural gas usage

= Total reported industrial
natural gas sales

– Industrial point source
natural gas usage

= 8,576.57 MMCF

– 516.15 MMCF

= 8,060.43 MMCF

Natural gas is used for both external combustions (boilers and heaters) and internal combustion
(generators), each of which have different emission factors. Thus the area-source natural gas
usage derived above must be divided between these two categories. This apportionment was
based on the percentages of external and internal natural gas combustion reported by all industrial area sources in 2008.
Annual emissions for the county and the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying natural gas usage by the respective AP-42 emission factors for external and internal combustion, as in this example for PM10 emissions from external natural gas combustion:
PM10 emissions from
external natural gas
combustion

= External industrial natural × PM10 emission factor for ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
gas usage (MMCF)
external natural gas
combustion (lb/MMCF)
= 7,934.68

× 7.6

÷ 2,000

= 30.78 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–2. Natural gas usage, emission factors, and annual emissions from area-source industrial natural
gas combustion, by combustion type.
Emission factors (lb/MMCF)
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Type of
% of Natural gas
Combustion total use (MMCF) PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx NH3 PM10 PM2.5 NOx
SOx NH3
External
98.44
7,934.68
7.6
7.6 100
0.6
3.2 30.15 30.15 396.73 2.38 12.70
Internal
1.56
125.74
10.0 10.0 2840
0.6
n/a
0.63 0.63 178.55 0.04
n/a
Total:
100.00
8,060.43
30.78 30.78 575.29 2.42 12.70

Typical daily emissions for the county were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the
number of days that activity occurs throughout the year:
Typical daily PM10 emissions
from industrial natural gas (lbs/day)

= Annual PM10 emissions

÷ (days/week × wks/yr) × 2,000 lbs/ton

= 30.78 tons/yr

÷ (6 × 52)

× 2,000

= 197.3 lbs PM10/day

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

21

June 2010

Annual and typical daily emissions within the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by
applying the ratio of industrial employment in the nonattainment area to county-level emission
calculations. (See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the employment data used).
Emissions from area-source
industrial natural gas combustion

= Annual county PM10 × NAA:County industrial employment ratio
emissions (tons/yr)
in the PM10 NAA
= 30.78

× 0.9974

= 30.70 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–3.

Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source industrial natural gas combustion.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx SOx NH3
Maricopa County
30.78
30.78 575.29 2.42 12.70
197.3
197.3 3,687.7 15.5 81.4
PM10 NAA
30.70
30.70 573.79 2.41 12.66
196.8
196.8 3,678.2 15.5 81.2

3.2.2

Industrial fuel oil

Area-source emissions from industrial fuel oil combustion were calculated by a multi-step
process which allocates Arizona state-level industrial fuel oil sales as reported by the U.S.
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (US DOE, 2010a) to Maricopa
County.
To derive industrial fuel oil usage in Maricopa County, reported Arizona state-level sales of
high-sulfur diesel for 2008 are first subtracted from Arizona state-level total industrial fuel oil
sales, as it is presumed that no high-sulfur diesel fuel is used in Maricopa County due to local air
quality regulations and market conditions.
State industrial fuel oil sales
other than high-sulfur diesel
(in thousand gallons, or Mgal)

= Reported state total
– Reported state high-sulfur diesel sales
industrial fuel oil sales
= 137,044 Mgal

– 224 Mgal

= 136,820 Mgal/yr

Arizona state industrial fuel oil sales (less high-sulfur diesel fuel) are then multiplied by the ratio
of industrial employment in Maricopa County to Arizona State (0.70), as determined by data
from the US Census Bureau (2010a) to estimate annual Maricopa County-level industrial fuel oil
sales, as follows:
Maricopa County
= Arizona state industrial fuel
× Maricopa County:State
industrial fuel oil sales
oil sales less high-sulfur diesel
industrial employment ratio
= 136,820 Mgal

× 0.7007

= 95,869.77 Mgal/yr

To avoid double-counting, industrial fuel oil use attributable to stationary point sources
(addressed in Chapter 2) and nonroad mobile sources (addressed in Chapter 4) are subtracted
from County industrial fuel oil sales to estimate county fuel oil usage by area sources:

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

22

June 2010

Maricopa County area = Maricopa County
– Fuel oil used by industrial – Fuel oil used by industrial
source fuel oil sales
industrial fuel oil sales
nonroad mobile equipment
stationary point sources
= 95,869.77 Mgal

– 11,596.87 Mgal

– 136.82 Mgal

= 84,136.09 Mgal/yr

Industrial fuel oil is used for both external combustions (boilers, heaters) and internal combustion (generators), each of which have different emission factors. Thus the area-source industrial
fuel oil sales derived above must be apportioned between these two categories. This apportionment was based on the percentages of external and internal fuel oil combustion reported by all
industrial area sources surveyed in 2008 (shown in Table 3.2–4 below).
Annual emissions for the county and the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying industrial fuel oil sales by the respective AP-42 emission factors for external and internal
combustion, as in this example for PM10 emissions from external fuel oil combustion:
Annual PM10 emissions = External industrial fuel
from external industrial
oil sales (Mgal)
fuel oil combustion
= 65,634.56

× PM10 emission factor for external ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
fuel oil combustion (lb/Mgal)
× 2

÷ 2,000

= 65.63 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–4. Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source industrial fuel oil combustion, by
combustion type.
Emission factors (lb/Mgal)
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Annual
Combustion % of
sales
type
total
(Mgal)
PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx NH3 PM10 PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
External
78.01 65,634.56
2.0
2.0
24 7.39 0.8 65.63 65.63
787.61 242.36 26.25
Internal
21.99 18,501.53 42.5 42.5 604 39.70
– 393.16 393.16 5,587.46 367.26
n/a
Totals:
100.00 84,136.09
458.79 458.79 6,375.08 609.61 26.25

Typical daily emissions for the county were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the
number of days during which activity occurs throughout the year, as recommended by EIIP
guidance (US EPA, 2001a):
Typical daily PM10 emissions
from industrial fuel oil

= Annual PM10 emissions
(tons/yr)

÷ (days/week × wks/yr) × 2,000 lbs/ton

= 458.79

÷ (6 × 52)

× 2,000

= 2,941.0 lbs PM10/day

Annual and typical daily emissions in the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by applying
the ratio of industrial employment in the nonattainment area to county-level emission
calculations. (See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the employment data used).
PM10 NAA emissions from area
source industrial fuel oil combustion

= Annual county
PM10 emissions

× NAA:County industrial employment ratio

= 458.79 tons/yr

× 0.9974

= 457.60 tons PM10/yr

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

23

June 2010

Table 3.2–5.

Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source industrial fuel oil combustion.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area PM10 PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County 458.79 458.79 6,375.08 609.61 26.25 2,941.0 2,941.0 40,865.9 3,907.8 168.3
PM10 NAA
457.60 457.60 6,358.50 608.03 26.19 2,933.3 2,933.3 40,759.6 3,897.6 167.9

3.2.3

Commercial/institutional natural gas

All natural gas suppliers in Maricopa County were surveyed to gather information on the volume
of natural gas distributed, by user category, within the county in 2008. Area-source commercial
and institutional (C&I) natural gas usage for the county is based on the reported total volume of
natural gas sold to C&I sources, minus natural gas used by C&I point sources:
County area-source C&I = Reported C&I natural gas sales
natural gas usage
= 17,503.31 MMCF

– C&I point source natural gas usage
– 84.08 MMCF

= 17,419.23 MMCF

Natural gas is used for both external combustion (boilers, heaters) and internal combustion
(generators), each of which have different emission factors. Thus the area-source natural gas
usage derived above must be apportioned between these two categories. This apportionment was
based on the percentages of external and internal natural gas combustion reported by all C&I
area sources in 2008.
Annual emissions for the county were calculated by multiplying natural gas usage by the
respective AP-42 emission factors for external and internal combustion, as in this example for
PM10 emissions from external natural gas combustion:
Annual PM10 emissions = External C&I natural
from external natural gas
gas usage (MMCF)
combustion
= 17,130.07

× PM10 emission factor for ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
external natural gas
combustion (lb/MMCF)
× 7.6

÷ 2,000

= 65.09 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–6. Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source commercial/institutional natural gas
combustion, by combustion type.
C&I natural Emission factors (lb/MMCF)
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Combustion % of
gas usage
type
total
(MMCF) PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx NH3 PM10 PM2.5
NOx
SOx NH3
External
98.34
17,130.07
7.6
7.6 100
0.6 0.49 65.09 65.09
856.50 5.14 4.20
Internal
1.66
289.16 10.0 10.0 2840
0.6
n/a
1.45 1.45
410.61 0.09 n/a
Total:
100.00
17,419.23
66.54 66.54 1,267.11 5.23 4.20

Typical daily emissions for the county were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the
number of days that activity occurs throughout the year:
Typical daily PM10 emissions
from comm./inst. natural gas

=

Annual PM10 emissions ÷ (days/week × wks/yr)
(tons/yr)

= 66.54

÷ (6 × 52)

× 2,000 lbs/ton
× 2,000

= 426.54 lbs/day
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

24

June 2010

Annual and typical daily emissions within the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by
applying the combined ratio of retail, office, public and other employment in the nonattainment
area to county-level emission calculations. (See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the employment data used).
PM10 NAA emissions from area-source = Annual county PM10 emissions × NAA:County C&I employment ratio
comm./inst. natural gas combustion
(tons/yr)
= 66.54

× 0.9949

= 66.20 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–7.
combustion.

Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source commercial/institutional natural gas

Geographic area
Maricopa County
PM10 NAA

3.2.4

PM10
66.54
66.20

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
66.54 1,267.11
5.23
66.20 1,260.65
5.20

NH3
4.20
4.18

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
426.5
426.5 8,122.5
33.5 26.9
424.4
424.4 8,081.1
33.3 26.8

Commercial/institutional fuel oil

Area-source emissions from commercial and institutional (C&I) fuel oil combustion were
calculated by a multi-step process of allocating Arizona state-level C&I fuel oil sales as reported
by the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (US DOE, 2010b) to
Maricopa County.
To derive commercial/institutional fuel oil usage in Maricopa County, reported Arizona statelevel sales of high-sulfur diesel for 2008 are first subtracted from Arizona state-level total C&I
fuel oil sales, as it is presumed that no high-sulfur diesel fuel is used in Maricopa County due to
local clean air act requirements and market conditions.
State C&I fuel oil sales
other than high-sulfur diesel
(in thousand gallons, or Mgal)

= Reported state total
C&I fuel oil sales

– Reported state high-sulfur diesel sales

= 47,586 Mgal

– 367 Mgal

= 47,219 Mgal/yr

Arizona state commercial/institutional fuel oil sales (less high-sulfur diesel fuel) are then
multiplied by the ratio of C&I employment in Maricopa County to Arizona state (0.80), as
determined by data from the US Census Bureau (2010a) to estimate annual Maricopa Countylevel commercial/institutional fuel oil sales, as follows:
Maricopa County
C&I fuel oil sales

= Arizona state C&I fuel oil
sales (less high-sulfur diesel)

× Maricopa County:state commercial/
institutional employment ratio

= 47,219 Mgal

× 0.7973

= 37,647.71 Mgal/yr

To avoid double-counting, C&I fuel oil use attributable to stationary point sources (addressed in
Chapter 2) and nonroad mobile sources (addressed in Chapter 4) are subtracted from County
C&I fuel oil sales to estimate county fuel oil usage used by area sources:
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

25

June 2010

Annual Maricopa County
commercial/institutional
area-source fuel oil sales

= Maricopa County
C&I fuel oil sales

– Fuel oil used by C&I
– Fuel oil used by C&I
nonroad mobile equipment
stationary point sources

= 37,647.71 Mgal

– 7,291.00 Mgal

– 3.94 Mgal

= 30,352.78 Mgal/yr

Fuel oil is used for both external combustions (boilers, heaters) and internal combustion
(generators), each of which have different emission factors. Thus the area-source C&I fuel oil
sales derived above must be apportioned between these two categories. This apportionment was
based on the percentages of external and internal fuel oil combustion reported by all commercial
and institutional area sources surveyed in 2008 (shown in Table 3.2–8 below).
Annual emissions for the county were calculated by multiplying comm./inst. fuel oil sales by the
respective AP-42 emission factors for external and internal combustion, as in this example for
PM10 emissions from external fuel oil combustion:
Annual PM10 emissions from = External C&I fuel oil
external fuel oil combustion
sales (Mgal)
= 20,321.18

×

PM10 emission factor for external
fuel oil combustion (lb/Mgal)

÷ 2,000 lbs/ton

×

1.08

÷ 2,000

= 10.97 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–8. Emission factors and annual emissions from area-source commercial/institutional fuel oil
combustion, by combustion type.
Emission factors (lb/Mgal)
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Combustion % of C&I fuel oil
NOx
SOx NH3
type
total sales (Mgal) PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx NH3 PM10 PM2.5
External
66.95
20,321.18
1.08 1.08
24
7.1
0.8 10.97 10.97
243.85 72.14 8.13
Internal
33.05
10,031.59
42.5 42.5 604 39.7
n/a 213.17 213.17 3,029.54 199.13 n/a
Total:
100.00
30,352.78
224.14 224.14 3,273.40 271.27 8.13

Typical daily emissions for the county were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the
number of days activity occurs throughout the year, as recommended by EIIP guidance (US
EPA, 2001a):
Typical daily PM10 emissions = Annual PM10 emissions
from C&I fuel oil combustion
(tons/yr)

÷ (days/week × wks/yr) × 2,000 lbs/ton

= 224.14

÷ (6 × 52)

× 2,000

= 1,436.8 lbs/day

Annual and typical daily emissions within the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by
applying the combined ratio of retail, public, office and other employment in the nonattainment
area to county-level emission calculations. (See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the
employment data used).
PM10 NAA emissions from area
source C&I fuel oil combustion

= Annual county PM10 × NAA:County C&I employment ratio
emissions (tons/yr)
= 224.14

× 0.9949

= 223.00 tons PM10/yr

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

26

June 2010

Table 3.2–9.
combustion.

Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source commercial/institutional fuel oil

Geographic area
Maricopa County
PM10 NAA

3.2.5

PM10
224.14
223.00

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
224.14 3,273.40 271.27
223.00 3,256.70 269.88

NH3
8.13
8.09

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
1,436.8 1,436.8 20,983.3 1,738.9 52.1
1,429.5 1,429.5 20,876.3 1,730.0 51.8

Residential natural gas

All natural gas suppliers in Maricopa County were surveyed to gather information on the volume
of natural gas sold, by user category, within the county. Annual emissions from residential
natural gas combustion emissions were calculated by multiplying residential natural gas sales by
emission factors for residential natural gas combustion summarized in the table below (US EPA,
1998a), as follows:
Table 3.2–10. Residential natural gas combustion emission factors.
Emission Factors (lb/MMCF)
PM10 PM2.5
NOx
SOx
7.6
7.6
94
0.6

Annual PM10 emissions
from residential natural
gas combustion

= Annual sales of residential
natural gas (MMCF)

× PM10 emission factor for
÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
residential natural gas (lbs/MMCF)

= 16,251.29

× 7.6

÷ 2,000

= 61.75 tons PM10/yr

Typical daily emissions were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the number of days
(366) that activity occurs for residential natural gas combustion, as follows:
Typical daily PM10 emissions from
residential natural gas combustion

= Annual PM10 emissions × 2,000 lbs/ton

÷ days/yr

= 61.75 tons/yr

÷ 366

× 2, 000

= 337.4 lbs PM10/day

Annual and typical daily residential natural gas emissions in the PM10 nonattainment area were
calculated by multiplying county-level emissions by the percentage of total residential population in the PM10 nonattainment area as follows:
Annual PM10 emissions
= Annual PM10 emissions
from residential natural gas
in Maricopa County
combustion in the NAA
= 61.75

× % of County residential population in the NAA

× 99.96%

= 61.73 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential natural gas combustion.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
61.75
61.75 763.81
4.88
337.5
337.5 4,173.8
26.6
PM10 NAA
61.73
61.73 763.51
4.87
337.3
337.3 4,172.2
26.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

27

June 2010

3.2.6

Residential wood combustion

Area-source emissions from residential wood combustion were calculated based on the amount
of wood burned in fireplaces and woodstoves in Maricopa County, as recommended by EIIP
guidance (US EPA, 2001b). Residential wood combustion in the county is estimated by multiplying data on statewide residential wood combustion usage from the US Department of Energy
(US DOE, 2010c) by the ratio of county to state households that report use of wood for heating
from the US Census Bureau (2010b). The latest available data on residential wood use for
household heating from the US Department of Energy is for the calendar year 2007. Since all
fireplaces in homes constructed since 1999 are required by Arizona statute to be clean-burning, it
is assumed that these new homes have negligible emissions. Thus, year 2007 data is assumed to
be representative of 2008 emissions.
Maricopa County residential = Arizona residential
× Ratio of county:state households
wood usage (cords/yr)
wood usage (cords/yr)
using wood for heat
= 651,000

× 1,457 / 44,330

= 21,397 cords/yr

To calculate emissions, the amount of wood used is converted to tons by multiplying cords by
the number of cubic feet of wood in a cord and by the density of the wood used (US EPA,
2001b). Wood density is determined by weighted average of types of wood used for residential
combustion in Maricopa County, provided by the US Forest Service (USFS, 1993).
County residential
= County wood × avg. ft3 wood/cord × Wood density (lbs/ ft3) ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
wood usage (tons/yr)
usage (cords)
= 21,397

× 79

× 31.57

÷ 2,000

= 26,682 tons

Annual emissions from residential wood combustion were calculated by multiplying the tons of
wood used by the PM10 emission factor for residential woodstoves and fireplaces from Table
2.4 –1 of US EPA (2001b).
Annual PM10 emissions from residential = Residential wood usage × PM10 emission factor ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
wood combustion (tons/yr)
(tons)
(lbs/ton)
= 26,682

× 34.6

÷ 2,000

= 461.59 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–12. Annual wood usage, emission factors, and annual emissions from residential wood combustion.
Residential wood
Emission factors (lbs/ton)
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
usage (tons/yr)
PM10
PM2.5*
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5*
NOx
SOx
26,681.76
34.6
32.2
2.6
0.4
461.59
429.28
34.69
5.34
*PM2.5 is assumed to be 93% of PM10 (Houck and Tiegs, 1998).

Typical daily emissions were calculated by apportioning wood burning activity based on heating
degree days (i.e., the number of degrees per day that the daily average temperature is below
65°F). Data provided by Arizona Department of Commerce (ADOC, 2010) indicated that there
were five months (April, plus June–September, totaling 152 days) in 2008 where no heating
degree days were recorded. Assuming that no wood burning activity took place during those
months, it is assumed that all residential wood burning occurred during the remaining 213 days

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

28

June 2010

of the year. Thus, typical daily emissions were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the
number of days residential wood burning occurred, as follows:
Typical daily PM10 emissions
= Annual PM10 emissions × 2,000 lbs/ton
from residential wood combustion
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
= 461.59

× 2,000

÷ no. days wood burning occurred

÷ 213

= 4,334.2 lbs PM10/day

Annual and typical daily emissions within the PM10 nonattainment area (presented in Table 3.2–
13) were calculated by multiplying county totals by the ratio of residential population in the
nonattainment area to the residential population in the county. See Section 1.5.1 for a further
discussion of the population used.
Annual emissions from residential wood = County annual emissions
combustion in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr)
= 461.59

× NAA:county residential population ratio
× 0.9996

= 461.41 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.2–13. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential wood combustion.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
461.59 429.28
34.69
5.34 4,334.2 4,030.8
325.7
50.1
PM10 NAA
461.41 429.11
34.67
5.33 4,332.5 4,029.2
325.6
50.1

3.2.7

Residential fuel oil

Emissions from residential fuel oil use were calculated using an approach similar to that used for
residential wood combustion described in Section 3.2.6. County-level residential fuel oil use
was derived from statewide totals (US EIA, 2010) using the ratio of county to state households
that report fuel oil use from the US Census Bureau (2010c):
Maricopa County residential = Arizona residential × Ratio of county:state households
fuel oil usage (Mgal/yr)
fuel oil use (Mgal/yr)
reporting fuel oil use
= 91

× 573 / 1,881

= 27.72 Mgal/yr

Annual and daily emissions were calculated using AP-42 emission factors (shown below in
Table 3.2-14) and data on heating degree days and residential housing units described in Section
3.2.6. Annual and daily emissions are shown below in Table 3–2.14.
Table 3.2–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from residential fuel oil combustion.
Emission factors
Annual emissions
Typical daily emissions
(lb/Mgal)
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
Geographic area PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx
Maricopa County
0.4
0.4
18
7.1
0.01 0.01 0.25 0.10
0.1
0.1
2.3
0.9
PM10 NAA
0.4
0.4
18
7.1
0.01 0.01 0.25 0.10
0.1
0.1
2.3
0.9

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

29

June 2010

3.2.8

Summary of all area-source fuel combustion

Tables 3.2–15 and 3.2–16 provide a summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all fuel
combustion, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.
Table 3.2–15. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source fuel combustion in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Fuel combustion type
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Industrial natural gas
30.78
30.78
575.29
2.42 12.70
197.3
197.3
3,687.7
15.5 81.4
Industrial fuel oil
458.79 458.79 6,375.08 609.61 26.25
2,941.0
2,941.0 40,865.9 3,907.8 168.3
Comm./inst. natural gas
66.54
66.54 1,267.11
5.23 4.20
426.5
426.5
8,122.5
33.5 26.9
Comm./inst. fuel oil
224.14 224.14 3,273.40 271.27 8.13
1,436.8
1,436.8 20,983.3 1,738.9 52.1
Residential natural gas
61.75
61.75
763.81
4.88
337.5
337.5
4,173.8
26.6
Residential wood
461.59 429.28
34.69
5.34
4,334.2
4,030.8
325.7
50.1
Residential fuel oil
0.01
0.01
0.25
0.10
0.1
0.1
2.3
0.9
1,303.61 1,271.30 12,289.62 898.83 51.27
9,673.4
9,370.0 78,161.3 5,773.3 328.7
Total:

Table 3.2–16. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source fuel combustion for the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Fuel combustion type
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Industrial natural gas
30.70
30.70
573.79
2.41 12.66
196.8
196.8
3,678.2
15.5 81.2
Industrial fuel oil
457.60 457.60 6,358.50 608.03 26.19
2,933.3
2,933.3 40,759.6 3,897.6 167.9
Comm./inst. natural gas
66.20
66.20 1,260.65
5.20 4.18
424.4
424.4
8,081.1
33.3 26.8
Comm./inst. fuel oil
223.00 223.00 3,256.70 269.88 8.09
1,429.5
1,429.5 20,876.3 1,730.0 51.8
Residential natural gas
61.73
61.73
763.51
4.87
337.3
337.3
4,172.2
26.6
Residential wood
461.41 429.11
34.67
5.33
4,332.5
4,029.2
325.6
50.1
Residential fuel oil
0.01
0.01
0.25
0.10
0.1
0.1
2.3
0.9
1,300.65 1,268.35 12,248.07 895.83 51.11
9,653.8
9,350.6 77,895.2 5,754.1 327.6
Total:

3.3

Industrial processes

3.3.1

Chemical manufacturing

Emissions from area-source chemical manufacturing were calculated by the “scaling up” method
as described in EPA emission inventory guidance (US EPA, 2001a). This method combines
detailed emissions data from a subset of sources, and county-level employment data from the US
Census Bureau (2010a) to develop a per-employee emission factor that is then used to estimate
emissions from all sources in an industry category.
The most recent data from the US Census Bureau’s County Business Patterns (CBP) for 2007
employment were used. Table 3.3–1 shows the NAICS codes and employment data used to
calculate emissions from chemical manufacturing.
Table 3.3–1. NAICS codes and descriptions for chemical manufacturing.
NAICS
US Census
Code
Description
employment data
325 Chemical Manufacturing
3,930
42469 Other Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers
1,093
424910 Farm Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
229
33312 Construction Machinery Manufacturing
212
Total:
5,464

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

30

June 2010

There were no point sources in this category. Area-source employment estimate were used to
“scale up” emissions reported from those facilities surveyed in 2008 as follows:
Area-source PM10 = Emissions from surveyed area sources × Total area-source employment
emissions from
Employment at surveyed area sources
chemical mfg.
=
35.71 tons of PM10/yr
× 5,464 employees
1,041 employees
=

187.43 tons PM10/yr

Typical daily emissions were calculated in the same method as annual emissions, only using
surveyed daily emissions instead of annual totals. Annual and typical daily emissions for the
PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying the Maricopa County emission totals by
the percentage industrial employment within the nonattainment area. (See Section 1.5.1 for a
discussion of the employment data used.)
PM10 emissions from area-source
= Annual Maricopa County emissions × NAA:county ratio of
(tons/yr)
industrial employment
chemical mfg. in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr)
= 187.43

× 0.9974

= 186.94 tons PM10/yr

Table 3.3–2 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from chemical manufacturing in
both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.3–2.

Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source chemical manufacturing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NHx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NHx
Maricopa County 187.43 151.42
0.00
0.34
0.03
1,445.8 1,164.5
0.0
2.6
0.9
PM10 NAA
186.94 151.03
0.00
0.34
0.03
1,442.0 1,161.5
0.0
2.6
0.9

3.3.2

Food and kindred products

3.3.2.1 Commercial cooking
Emissions from commercial cooking were estimated for five types of commercial cooking equipment using EPA methodology (US EPA, 2006a). The equipment types include: chain-driven
charbroilers, under-fired charbroilers, deep-fat fryers, flat griddles, and clamshell griddles.
EPA’s methodology estimates commercial cooking activity rates for restaurants with each type
of cooking equipment (ethnic, family, fast food, seafood, and steak & barbeque) based on an
average number of equipment pieces in each restaurant type, and also the and average quantity of
meat cooked on each type of equipment per week (steak, hamburger, poultry, pork, and seafood).
The estimates number of restaurants in Maricopa County for the five restaurant types was
obtained from a commercial database (www.selectoryonline.com) and is shown in Table 3.3–3.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

31

June 2010

Table 3.3–3. Number of Maricopa County restaurants, by restaurant type.
Restaurant Type
No. of restaurants
Ethnic food
907
Fast food
1,068
Family
253
Seafood
37
Steak and barbecue
75
All restaurants:
2,340

Using EPA’s emissions estimation methodology (US EPA, 2006a), commercial cooking activity
data were estimated by first multiplying the county number of restaurants that use commercial
cooking equipment in each category (ethnic, fast food, family, seafood, and steak and barbeque)
by the percentage of restaurants with each type of cooking equipment (Table 3.3–4).
Number of ethnic food
restaurants with underfired charbroilers

= Number of ethnic food
× % ethnic food restaurants
restaurants in Maricopa County
with underfired charbroilers
= 907

× 47.5%

= 431
Table 3.3–4.

Percentages of restaurants with each type of cooking equipment.
Chain-driven
Underfired
Deep Fat
Restaurant Type
Charbroilers
Charbroilers
Fryers
Flat Griddles
Ethnic
3.5%
47.5%
81.9%
62.7%
Family
10.1%
60.9%
91.4%
82.9%
Fast Food
18.6%
30.8%
96.8%
51.9%
Seafood
0.0%
52.6%
100.0%
36.8%
Steak and Barbeque
6.9%
55.2%
82.8%
89.7%

Clamshell
Griddles
4.0%
1.4%
14.7%
10.5%
0.0%

The resulting product was then multiplied by the average number of equipment pieces by
restaurant type (shown in Table 3.3–5) to derive an estimate of the total number of each cooking
equipment type in Maricopa County restaurants (Table 3.3–6).
Table 3.3–5.

Average number of equipment pieces per restaurant, by type.
Chain-driven
Underfired
Deep Fat
Restaurant Type
Charbroilers
Charbroilers
Fryers
Flat Griddles
Ethnic
1.62
1.54
1.63
1.88
Family
1.71
1.29
2.34
2.03
Fast Food
1.07
1.58
3.10
1.43
Seafood
—
1.10
2.47
1.11
Steak and Barbeque
—
1.63
2.42
1.35

Number of underfired charbroilers = number of ethnic food restaurants
at ethnic food restaurants
with underfired charbroilers
= 431

Clamshell
Griddles
1.80
—
2.09
1.50
—

× average number of underfired charbroilers per ethnic food restaurant
× 1.54

= 664

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

32

June 2010

Table 3.3–6.

Total pieces of cooking equipment, by restaurant type.
Chain-driven
Underfired
Deep Fat
Restaurant Type
Charbroilers
Charbroilers
Fryers
Ethnic
51.43
663.47
1,210.82
Family
43.70
198.76
541.11
Fast Food
212.55
519.73
3204.85
Seafood
—
21.41
91.39
Steak and Barbeque
—
67.48
150.28
Totals:
307.68
1,470.85
5,198.45

Flat Griddles
1,069.14
425.77
792.64
15.11
90.82
2,393.47

Clamshell
Griddles
65.30
—
328.12
5.83
—
399.25

The total number of each type of cooking equipment is then multiplied by average pounds of
meat cooked on each type of equipment per week (Table 3.3–7) to derive the total estimate of the
amount of meat cooked in Maricopa County each week (Table 3.3–8).
Table 3.3–7.

Meat cooked weekly per restaurant (in pounds), by equipment type.
Chain-driven
Underfired
Deep Fat
Type of Meat
Charbroilers
Charbroilers
Fryers
Flat Griddles
Steak
236
180
181
166
Hamburger
798
270
274
362
Poultry, with Skin
147
144
365
88
Poultry, Skinless
266
179
208
111
Pork
57.6
148
58.6
112
Seafood
119
143
159
92.1
Other
0
41.5
274
57.5

Total steak cooked on all underfired charbroilers (tons/wk)

Clamshell
Griddles
94
1314
113
108
118
632
0

= Steak cooked on each under- × Total number of under-fired ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
fired charbroiler (lbs/wk)
charbroilers at all restaurants
= 180 lbs/ week

× 1,470.85

÷ 2,000

= 132.38 tons/week
Table 3.3–8.

Total meat cooked weekly (in tons), by equipment type.
Chain-driven
Underfired
Deep Fat
Type of Meat
Charbroilers
Charbroilers
Fryers
Steak
36.31
132.38
470.46
Hamburger
122.76
198.56
712.19
Poultry, with Skin
22.61
105.90
948.72
Poultry, Skinless
40.92
131.64
540.64
Pork
8.86
108.84
152.31
Seafood
18.31
105.17
413.28
Other
0.00
30.52
712.19
Totals:
249.77
813.01
3,949.78

Flat Griddles
198.66
433.22
105.31
132.84
134.03
110.22
68.81
1,183.09

Clamshell
Griddles
18.76
262.31
22.56
21.56
23.56
126.16
0.00
474.91

The total amount of meat cooked in Maricopa County restaurants weekly (as shown in Table
3.3–8, (Table 3.3–8) was then multiplied by the appropriate emission factor from Table 3.3–9
(US EPA, 2006a). The results were then summed to estimate annual emissions for each type of
cooking equipment, shown in Table 3.3–10. Commercial cooking is assumed to occur uniformly
throughout both the week (i.e., 7 days/week) and year.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

33

June 2010

Table 3.3–9. PM10and PM2.5 emission factors for commercial cooking equipment, by device type.
Equipment type
PM10 (lb/ton)
PM2.5 (lb/ton)
Chain-driven charbroilers
15.996058
15.506208
Underfired charbroilers
32.666124
31.577929
Deep fat fryers
0.00
0.00
Flat griddle fryers
5.922517
4.501113
Clamshell griddles
1.006137
0.852257

Table 3.3–10. Annual and daily emissions from commercial cooking equipment in Maricopa County.
Annual Emissions (tons/yr)
Typical Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Equipment type
Chain-driven charbroilers
103.88
100.70
570.8
553.3
Underfired charbroilers
690.51
667.51
3,794.0
3,667.6
Deep fat fryers
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
Flat griddles
182.18
138.46
1,001.0
760.7
Clamshell griddles
12.42
10.52
68.3
57.8
Totals:
988.99
917.18
5,434.0
5,039.5

Annual and typical daily emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by
multiplying the county totals by the ratio of total population in the nonattainment area to the total
population in the county (100.41%) (See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the population data
used.) Table 3.3–11 summarizes the annual and typical daily emissions from commercial
cooking for the PM10 NAA.
Table 3.3–11. Annual and daily PM emissions from commercial cooking equipment in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Equipment type
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Chain-driven charbroilers
104.31
101.11
573.11
555.55
Underfired charbroilers
693.34
670.24
3,809.55
3,682.65
Deep fat fryers
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Flat griddles
182.93
139.02
1,005.09
763.87
Clamshell griddles
12.47
10.57
68.54
58.06
Totals:
993.04
920.94
5,456.29
5,060.13

3.3.2.2 Grain handling/processing
Annual emissions from area-source grain handling and processing operations were derived from
annual emission reports submitted by permitted sources. It was assumed that there were no
significant unpermitted sources within Maricopa County.
Typical daily emissions were calculated based on reported activity data (days per week) for each
individual process, and then summed. Nearly all processes reported operating on either a 5- or 6day week. Annual and typical daily emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived
based on the location data of the individual facilities. Annual and typical daily emissions for
both the County and the PM10 NAA are shown in Table 3.3–12.
Table 3.3–12. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source grain handling and processing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
20.59
6.71
149.3
49.5
PM10 NAA
16.73
5.68
125.3
43.0

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

34

June 2010

3.3.2.3 Ammonia cold storage
Area-source emissions from ammonia cold storage are estimates of ammonia emissions from
food and kindred products industrial sources that use ammonia for refrigeration of food products.
Emission calculations are based on the number of employees in the food and kindred products
industry classification (NAICS codes 311, 312) as reported by the 2007 County Business
Patterns (US Census Bureau, 2010a). Annual emissions were calculated by multiplying
employment numbers by the emission factor for ammonia cold storage as listed in Table 6-5 of
“Development and Selection of Ammonia Emission Factors” (Battye et al., 1994) as follows:
Annual NH3 emissions = Number of employees
from ammonia cold
in relevant industries
storage (tons/yr)
(from CBP)
= 8,128
= 1,678.43 tons NH3/yr

× NH3 emission
÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
factor (lb/employee-yr)
× 413

÷ 2,000

Typical daily emissions were calculated by dividing annual emissions by the number of days per
year that activity occurred, as follows:
Typical daily = Annual emissions (tons/yr) × 2,000 lbs/ton
NH3 emissions
(lbs/day)
= 1,678.43
× 2,000
= 10,759.2 lbs NH3/day

÷ (weeks/year × days/week)

÷ (52 × 6)

Annual and typical daily emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area (shown in Table 3.3–13
below) were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County emissions by the ratio of County
industrial employment that occurs in the PM10 nonattainment area. (See Section 1.5.1 for a more
detailed discussion of the employment data used).
Annual NH3 emissions from
ammonia cold storage in the
PM10 NAA (tons/yr)

= Annual county emissions (tons/yr)

× NAA:County industrial employment ratio

= 1,678.43
= 1,674.07 tons NH3/yr

× 0.9974

Table 3.3–13. Annual and typical daily ammonia emissions from ammonia cold storage.
Geographic area
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Maricopa County
1,678.43
10,759.2
PM10 NAA
1,674.07
10,731.2

3.3.3

Secondary metal production

Annual emissions from secondary metal production facilities were derived from annual emission
reports from permitted sources. As this category consists primarily of foundries, it was assumed
that there were no significant unpermitted sources within Maricopa County. Since all facilities
considered in this section are located within the PM10 nonattainment area, total emission values
for the county and the PM10 NAA from area-source secondary metal production are equal.
Annual and daily emissions are shown in Table 3.3–14.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

35

June 2010

Table 3.3–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from secondary metal production.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
60.56
52.16
49.73
18.65 0.04
442.7
386.2
358.8
142.7
0.0
PM10 NAA
60.56
52.16
49.73
18.65 0.04
442.7
386.2
358.8
142.7
0.0

3.3.4

Non-metallic mineral processes

The primary contributors to this source category include concrete batch plants, ceramic clay and
tile manufacturing, brick manufacturing, and gypsum mining. Emissions from this source were
derived from annual emission reports from permitted facilities. Since all permitted facilities in
this category were surveyed in 2008, it was assumed that there were no significant unpermitted
sources within Maricopa County. Some portable concrete batch operations which operate within
Maricopa County for only part of the year are issued air quality permits by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). All state-permitted portable sources are
addressed in Section 3.3.11.
Typical daily emissions were calculated based on the operating schedule data reported by
surveyed facilities. Annual and typical daily emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were
derived based on the location data of the individual facilities. County-permitted portable sources
with no location data were assumed to operate within the PM10 nonattainment area as a
conservative estimate.
Table 3.3–15 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from non-metallic mineral
processing activities in both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.3–15. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source non-metallic mineral products.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
195.81
97.28
1,357.4
671.7
PM10 NAA
190.45
93.72
1,320.7
647.9

3.3.5

Mining and quarrying

Annual emissions from area-source mining and quarrying (sand and gravel) operations were
derived from annual emission reports submitted by permitted sources. It was assumed that there
were no significant unpermitted sources within Maricopa County. Some portable mining and
quarrying operations which operate within Maricopa County for only part of the year are issued
air quality permits by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). All statepermitted portable sources are addressed in Section 3.3.11.
Typical daily emissions were calculated based on reported activity data (days per week) for each
individual process, and then summed. Nearly all processes reported operating on either a 5- or 6day week. Emissions within the PM10 nonattainment area were identified using information on
the location of each permitted facility. County-permitted portable sources with no location data
were assumed to operate within the PM10 nonattainment area as a conservative estimate. Annual
and daily emissions are shown in Table 3.3–16.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

36

June 2010

Table 3.3–16. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source mining and quarrying operations.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
210.39
59.56
1,442.1
390.8
PM10 NAA
184.25
50.64
1,266.6
331.9

3.3.6

Wood product manufacturing

Emissions from wood product manufacturing were calculated by the “scaling up” method as
described in EPA emission inventory guidance (US EPA, 2001a). This method combines
detailed emissions data from a subset of sources, and county-level employment data from the US
Census Bureau (2010a) to estimate an annual per-employee emission factor that is then used to
estimate emissions from all sources in an industry category.
The most recent employment estimates (for the year 2007) from the US Census Bureau’s County
Business Patterns (CBP) were used. Table 3.3–17 shows the NAICS codes and employment
estimates used to calculate emissions from wood product manufacturing.
Table 3.3–17. County-level employment estimates for wood product manufacturing, by NAICS code.
NAICS Code
NAICS Code Description
2007 employment estimate
321--Wood products manufacturing
6,917
337--Furniture and related products manufacturing
7,153
Total:
14,070

Since some larger facilities in this category are considered point sources, they have been
included in the point source calculations presented earlier in Chapter 2. To avoid doublecounting, employment at point sources was subtracted from total employment as follows:
Total area-source
employment in
wood products

= Total County employment
for the sector

– Employment reported from facilities
reported as point sources

= 14,070
= 13,140 employees

– 930

Annual emissions for the entire wood product manufacturing sector were calculated by “scaling
up” detailed area-source emissions reported from those facilities surveyed in 2008 as follows:
Total area-source = Emissions from surveyed area sources × Total area-source employment
emissions
Employment at surveyed area sources
Area-source PM10 = 102.99 tons PM10/yr
emissions from
6,229 employees
wood products
= 217.26 tons PM10/yr

×

13,140 employees

Typical daily emissions were calculated in the same method, using surveyed daily emissions
estimates from the subset of surveyed area sources. From these County totals, emissions
estimates for the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying the County totals by
the percentage of industrial employment within the nonattainment area. (See Section 1.5.1 for a
discussion of the employment data used.)

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

37

June 2010

PM10 emissions from area-source
wood product manufacturing
in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr)

= Total County emissions

× NAA:county ratio for
industrial employment

= 217.26 tons/yr

× 0.9974

= 216.69 tons PM10/yr

Table 3.3–18 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from wood products manufacturing
in both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.3–18. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source wood product manufacturing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
217.26
203.25
1,668.6
1,548.3
PM10 NAA
216.69
202.72
1,664.3
1,544.3

3.3.7

Rubber/plastics manufacturing

Emissions from area-source rubber and plastic manufacturing facilities were calculated by the
“scaling up” method as described in EPA emission inventory guidance (US EPA, 2001a). This
method combines detailed emissions data from a subset of sources, and county-level employment data from the US Census Bureau (2010a) to develop a per-employee emission factor that is
then used to estimate emissions from all sources in an industry category. The most recent data
from the US Census Bureau’s County Business Patterns (CBP) for 2007 employment were used.
Where CBP employment estimates were presented as a range, the midpoint values were chosen
for these calculations. Table 3.3–19 lists the NAICS codes and employment data used to
calculate emissions from rubber and plastic manufacturing facilities.
Some facilities in this category are considered point sources, and have been addressed in Chapter
2. To avoid double-counting, employment at point sources is subtracted from total employment
as follows:
Total area-source employment = Total employment (from US
in rubber & plastic product
Census’ County Business Patterns)
manufacturing
= 11,380

– Employment at point sources
(from annual emission reports)
– 896

= 10,484 employees

This area-source employment estimate is used to “scale up” emissions reported from those
facilities surveyed in 2008 as follows:
Total area-source PM10 emissions
from rubber/plastic product mfg.

= Emissions from surveyed area sources
Employment at surveyed area sources

× Area-source employment

=

30.37 tons PM10/yr
2,256 employees

× 10,484 employees

=

140.94 tons PM10/yr

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

38

June 2010

Table 3.3–19. County-level employment estimates for rubber and plastic manufacturing, by NAICS code.
NAICS Code
NAICS Code Description
2007 employment estimate
32614
Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing
351
32619
Other Plastics Product Manufacturing
4,178
32622
Rubber & Plastics Hoses & Belting Manufacturing
60
33992
Sporting & Athletic Goods Manufacturing
1,750
42461
Plastics Materials & Basic Forms & Shapes Merchant
368
Wholesalers
325211
Plastics Material & Resin Manufacturing
10
325520
Adhesive Manufacturing
123
325991
Custom Compounding of Purchased Resins
194
326113
Unlaminated Plastics Film & Sheet (except Packaging) Mfg.
60
326122
Plastics Pipe & Pipe Fitting Manufacturing
144
326140
Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing
351
326160
Plastics Bottle Manufacturing
175
326199
All Other Plastics Product Manufacturing
175
326212
Tire Retreading
42
326299
All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing
71
327991
Cut Stone & Stone Product Manufacturing
583
332913
Plumbing Fixture Fitting & Trim Manufacturing
10
336612
Boat Building
53
337920
Blind & Shade Manufacturing
286
339113
Surgical Appliance & Supplies Manufacturing
88
339115
Ophthalmic Goods Manufacturing
60
441320
Tire Dealers
2,248

Typical daily emissions were calculated in the same method as annual emissions, only using
surveyed daily emissions instead of annual totals. Annual and typical daily emissions for the
PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying the Maricopa County emission totals by
the percentage industrial employment within the nonattainment area. (See Section 1.5.1 for a
discussion of the employment data used.)
PM10 emissions from
area-source plastic/rubber
in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr)

= Annual Maricopa County
emissions

× NAA:county ratio of
industrial employment

= 140.94 tons PM10/yr

× 0.9974

= 140.57 tons PM10/yr

Table 3.3–20 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from rubber/plastic products
manufacturing in both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.3–20. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source rubber/plastic product manufacturing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
140.94
105.96
953.3
698.8
PM10 NAA
140.57
105.68
950.9
697.0

3.3.8

Fabricated metal products manufacturing

Emissions from fabricated metal products manufacturing were calculated by the “scaling up”
method as described in EPA emission inventory guidance (US EPA, 2001a). This method combines detailed emissions data from a subset of sources, and county-level employment data from
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

39

June 2010

the US Census Bureau (2010a) to develop a per-employee emission factor that is then used to
estimate emissions from all sources in an industry category.
The most recent data from the US Census Bureau’s County Business Patterns (CBP) for 2007
employment were used. CBP employment data for NAICS code 332* (fabricated metal products
manufacturing) indicated that there were 16,138 employees in this industry in Maricopa County.
Some facilities in this category are considered point sources, and have been addressed in Chapter
2. To avoid double-counting, employment at point sources is subtracted from total employment
as follows:
Total area-source
employment in
fab. metal products

= Total employment (from US
– Employment at point sources
Census’ County Business Patterns)
(from annual emission reports)
= 16,138
= 12,138 employees

– 4,000

Annual emissions were calculated by “scaling up” area-source emissions reported from those
facilities surveyed in 2007 as follows:
Total area-source = Emissions from surveyed area sources × Total area-source employment
emissions
Employment at surveyed area sources
Area-source PM10 =
emissions from
fab. metal products
=

18.07 tons of PM10/yr
4,261 employees

× 12,138 employees

51.48 tons PM10/yr

Typical daily emissions were calculated in the same method as annual emissions, only using
surveyed daily emissions instead of annual totals. Annual and typical daily emissions for the
PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying the Maricopa County emission totals by
the percentage of industrial employment within the nonattainment area. (See Section 1.5.1 for a
discussion of the employment data used.)
PM10 emissions from area-source fabricated
metal production in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr)

= Annual Maricopa County × NAA:County ratio of
emissions (tons/yr)
industrial employment
= 51.48 tons/yr

× 0.9974

= 51.35 tons PM10/yr

Table 3.3–21 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from fabricated metal products
manufacturing in both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.3–21. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source fabricated metal product manufacturing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
NHx
PM10
PM2.5
NHx
Maricopa County
51.48
42.62
4.50
538.1
460.6
28.9
PM10 NAA
51.35
42.51
4.49
536.7
459.4
28.8

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

40

June 2010

3.3.9

Construction

Maricopa County’s air quality permits database was used to identify all dust control permits
issued during 2008. A total of 4,622 permits were issued, comprising a total of 42,130 acres
(Table 3.3–22). Data requested on each dust control permit application includes the project type
and acreage. It was assumed there is no unpermitted earthmoving activity.
Table 3.3–22. Maricopa County dust control permits issued in 2008, by type.
Total Acreage, by Project Type
Reported Acres
Residential (single- and multi-family)
20,437.0
Commercial
10,850.0
Road construction
4,449.0
Trenching
3,396.1
Demolition
1,970.6
Weed control
687.0
Site prep / land development
218.9
Temp. storage yard
122.4
Totals:
42,130.9

The Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Fugitive Dust Handbook (WRAP, 2006a)
provides different emission factors for residential (single-family houses and apartment
buildings), nonresidential, road, and general construction. MCAQD used the WRAP-suggested
emission factors except for the following activities:
•

The WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook recommended using 0.42 ton PM10/acre-month for road
construction to account for the large amount of dirt moved during the construction of roadways. However, both the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the
Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management have estimated
that a certain percentage of their road construction projects do not involve large-scale earthmoving activities, and thus have developed average emission factors for road construction
projects (0.1895 ton PM10/acre-month and 0.265 ton PM10/acre-month, respectively). Since
Maricopa County and Clark County have similar population growth rates, climatic conditions, and PM10 sources, MCAQD used the Clark County road construction emission factor
of 0.265 tons/acre-month to estimate emissions from road construction projects (Clark
County, 2001).

•

Specific emission factors were not available in the WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook for
trenching, demolition, weed control, and temporary storage yard activities; thus, the general
construction emission factor of 0.11 tons PM10/acre-month was used to estimate emissions
from these activities.

Information was not readily available regarding the breakout of residential construction activity
between single-family and multi-family residential construction; thus, acreage for residential
construction was allocated based on single-family and multi-family household percentages (See
Section 1.5.1 for single-family and multi-family household percentages used).
Estimates for the duration of house and apartment construction were obtained from EIIP
guidance (US EPA, 2002). Estimates for the duration of nonresidential construction and road
construction were obtained from the WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook (WRAP, 2006a). No
estimates for the duration of trenching, demolition, weed control, site prep/land development,
and temporary storage yard activities were available; thus, MCAQD assumed the following:
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

41

June 2010

•
•
•

1-month duration for trenching, demolition, and weed control.
8-month duration for site prep/land development activities (weighted average of residential
and commercial duration) because the duration depends on the project type and size.
12-month duration for temporary storage yard activities because these activities are
frequently associated with road construction.

The average duration of construction activity and emission factors for each project type are
shown below in Table 3.3–23.
Table 3.3–23. Average project duration and emission factor, by project type.
Average Duration
Emission factor
Project Type
(months)
(tons PM10/acre-month)
6
Residential: single-family
0.032
12
Residential: multi-family
0.11
11
Commercial
0.19
12
Road construction
0.265
1
Trenching
0.11
1
Demolition
0.11
1
Weed control
0.11
8
Site prep / land development
0.11
12
Temp. storage yard
0.11

County-wide annual uncontrolled PM10 emissions for each construction category were then
calculated as follows:
Annual uncontrolled
PM10 emissions
Example:
Annual uncontrolled PM10
emissions from single-family
residential construction

= total acres/yr

× no. months

× emission factor

= 15,327.8 acres/yr

× 6 months

× 0.032 tons PM10/acre-month

= 2,942.93 tons PM10/yr

As in prior years, a control efficiency of 90% was applied to the uncontrolled emissions
calculations. This factor is in line with values applied in a number of earlier SIP documents for
Maricopa and Clark Counties, including:
•
Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM10 (Appendices volume two, page
V-9, and vol. four), Feb. 2000.
•
Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM10, (Appendix C, Exhibit 3:
Evaluation for Compliance with 24-Hour PM10 Standard for West Chandler and Gilbert
Microscale Sites, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, June 1999, pp. 3-5 and 39), Feb. 2000.
•
“Evaluation of Fugitive Dust Control in the Maricopa Co. PM10 Nonattainment Area”, report
by ENSR in: Final Plan for Attainment of the 24-hour PM10 Standard, ADEQ, May 1997,
Appendix B.
•
Clark Co. PM10 State Implementation Plan, June 2001, pg. L-5. (An 87% emission reduction
percentage is assumed for watering at construction activities.)
A recent rule effectiveness study by Maricopa County (contained in Appendix 3) indicated an
83% compliance rate with Maricopa County Rule 310 on dust control at construction sites.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

42

June 2010

Thus, an overall control effectiveness of 74.7% (= 90% × 83%) was applied. Controlled PM10
emissions were calculated as follows:
Annual controlled
PM10 emissions

= Uncontrolled PM10 emissions (tons/yr) × [1 – (control efficiency × rule effectiveness)]

Example:
Annual controlled PM10 emissions from
single-family residential construction

= 2,942.93 tons/yr × [1 – (90% control × 83% rule effectiveness)]
= 744.83 tons PM10/yr

PM2.5 emissions were estimated to comprise 10% of PM10 emissions (WRAP, 2006a). Table
3.3–24 summarizes the calculations for each dust control permit category.
Table 3.3–24. Annual emissions from construction in Maricopa County, by project type.
Total acreEmission factor
Uncontrolled
Controlled
Project Type
months
(tons/acre-month)
PM10
PM10
Residential: single-family
91,966.5
0.032
2,942.93
744.83
Residential: multi-unit
61,311.0
0.11
6,744.21
1,706.89
Commercial
119,349.7
0.19
22,676.44
5,739.18
Road construction
53,388.0
0.265
14,147.82
3,580.67
Trenching
3,396.1
0.11
373.57
94.55
Demolition
1,970.6
0.11
216.76
54.86
Weed control
687.0
0.11
75.56
19.12
Site prep/land development
1,750.9
0.11
192.60
48.74
Temporary storage yard
1,468.7
0.11
161.55
40.89
Totals:
47,531.45
12,029.74

Controlled
PM2.5
74.48
170.69
573.92
358.07
9.45
5.49
1.91
4.87
4.09
1,202.97

Dust control permit site location data were used to determine construction activity that occurred
in the Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area. The same average duration of construction
activity and emission factors used to estimate Maricopa County emissions (see Table 3.3–18)
were applied to construction activity in the Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area. Table
3.3–25 summarizes Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area construction activity and
calculations for each project type.
Table 3.3–25. Annual emissions from construction within the Maricopa County portion of the PM10
nonattainment area, by project type.
Total
Total acreEF (tons/
Uncontrolled Controlled
Controlled
Project Type
Acres
months
acre-month)
PM10
PM10
PM2.5
Residential: single-family
13,989.0
83,934.0
0.032
2,685.89
679.77
67.98
Residential: multi-unit
4,663.0
55,956.0
0.11
6,155.16
1,557.81
155.78
Commercial
10,125.2 111,376.9
0.19
21,161.61
5,355.79
535.58
Road construction
3,383.9
40,606.8
0.265
10,760.80
2,723.45
272.35
Trenching
1,938.2
1,938.2
0.11
213.20
53.96
5.40
Demolition
1,949.0
1,949.0
0.11
214.39
54.26
5.43
Weed control
638.5
638.5
0.11
70.23
17.78
1.78
Site prep/land development
218.9
1,750.9
0.11
192.60
48.74
4.87
Temporary storage yard
122.4
1,468.7
0.11
161.55
40.89
4.09
Totals:
37,027.9
41,615.42
10,532.45
1,053.24

In addition, the Pinal County Air Quality Department (PCAQD) provided construction emission
estimates for the Pinal County portion of the PM10 nonattainment. PCAQD estimated that
approximately 0.8 percent of the Pinal County construction activity occurred in the Pinal County
portion of the PM10 nonattainment area, thus, annual and typical daily emission for the Pinal
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

43

June 2010

County portion of the PM10 nonattainment area was calculated by multiplying the Pinal County
emission totals by 0.8 percent. The PCAQD estimates (presented in Table 3.3–26 below) incorporated the same assumptions concerning relevant input variables such as the average duration of
construction activity, emission factors, control efficiency, and rule effectiveness as Maricopa
County's estimates.
Table 3.3–26. Annual emissions from construction in the Pinal County portion of the PM10 NAA, by project
type.
Project Type
PM10
PM2.5
Residential: single-family
7.65
0.77
Residential: multi-family
0.16
0.02
Commercial
25.16
2.52
Road construction
1.42
0.14
Trenching
0.08
0.00
Totals:
34.47
3.45

To calculate average daily emissions from construction activity, It was assumed that construction
activity typically occurs 6 days per week and remains relatively even throughout the year. Thus,
typical daily emissions were calculated by dividing annual emissions for each category were
divided by 312 (= 6 days/wk × 52 wks/yr) to derive the daily emissions estimates shown in Table
3.3–27.
Table 3.3–27. Annual and typical daily emissions from construction in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA.

Construction Type

Residential
Commercial
Road construction
All other*
Total:

Maricopa County
Annual emissions
Typical daily emissions
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5

2,451.72
5,739.18
3,580.67
258.16
12,029.73

245.17
573.92
358.07
25.82
1,202.97

15,716.1
36,789.6
22,953.0
1,654.9
77,113.7

1,571.6
3,679.0
2,295.3
165.5
7,711.4

PM10 NAA
Annual emissions
Typical daily emissions
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5

2,245.39
5,380.95
2,724.87
215.70
10,566.91

224.54
538.10
272.49
21.57
1,056.70

14,465.2
34,382.4
17,471.4
1,385.5
67,704.5

1,446.5
3,438.2
1,747.1
138.6
6,770.5

*Includes: trenching, demolition, weed control, site prep/land development, and temporary storage yard.

3.3.10 Electrical equipment manufacturing
Annual and typical daily emissions from electric equipment manufacturing were derived from
annual emission reports submitted by permitted sources. It was assumed that there were no
significant unpermitted sources within Maricopa County and all electrical equipment manufacturing permitted sources are reported here as area-sources.
As all facilities addressed in this source category are located within the PM10 nonattainment area,
emission totals for both areas are equal. Annual and typical daily emissions are shown in Table
3.3–28.
Table 3.3–28. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source electric equipment manufacturing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
13.94
9.64
20.45
0.18 31.55
76.9
53.2
112.4
1.1
193.7
PM10 NAA
13.94
9.64
20.45
0.18 31.55
76.9
53.2
112.4
1.1
193.7

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

44

June 2010

3.3.11 State-permitted portable sources
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) retains the authority to permit
certain categories of sources within Maricopa County, including portable sources. MCAQD
requested information from ADEQ for all ADEQ-permitted sources that reported any activity in
Maricopa County during 2008. Annual total emissions for most pollutants were provided, along
with information on the facility type, and information on the location of the site(s) during the
year. Permits were classified into four major types: asphalt batch, concrete batch, crushing/
screening, and other (including soil remediation, generators, etc.). From this information,
emissions that occurred within Maricopa County were estimated as in the following example.
Data provided:
Source information:
Permit type:
Operating schedule:

Total annual emissions:
(tons/yr)

McNeil Brothers - Erie Strayer Portable Plant
Concrete batch plant
Operated from 1/1-5/15 in Mesa at SR202 and McKellips (SE Corner);
operated from 10/16-12/31 in Goodyear at Northside I-10 east of Estrella.
PM10
0.923

PM2.5 *
0.461

NOx
8.429

SOx
2.306

* PM2.5 was assumed to be 50% of reported PM10 for crushing/screening operations.

Using this information, calculations were made to determine:
Total operating days in 2008:
136 = 31 (Jan.) + 29 (Feb.) + …16 (Oct.) + 30 (Nov.) + 31 (Dec.)
Total operating days in Maricopa County: 136 = 31 (Jan.) + 29 (Feb.) + …16 (Oct.) + 30 (Nov.) + 31 (Dec.)

All emissions were assumed to be equally distributed among all reported days of operation.
First, emissions attributable to activity within Maricopa County were calculated as follows:
Annual PM10 emissions = Total annual emissions × operating days in Maricopa County
in Maricopa County
(tons/yr)
total operating days in 2008
= 0.923

× 136
136

= 0.923 tons PM10/yr

Typical daily emissions were then calculated as follows:
Typical daily =total emissions attributable to activity in Maricopa County × 2,000 lbs
emissions
number of operating days in Maricopa County
ton
(lbs/day)
= 0.923 tons × 2,000 lbs
136 days
ton
= 13.6 lbs PM10/day

Table 3.3–29 summarizes the annual and typical daily emissions for all ADEQ-permitted
portable sources that operated within Maricopa County at some point during 2008. Since precise
location data was not available for all permits, all emissions are conservatively assumed to have
originated within the PM10 nonattainment area; thus emission estimates for Maricopa County and
the PM10 nonattainment area are equal.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

45

June 2010

Table 3.3–29. Annual and typical daily emissions from ADEQ-permitted portable sources.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
59.00 29.50
282.18
88.93
492.9
246.5
2,275.7
88.9
Total:

3.3.12 Paved/unpaved road travel on industrial sites
This section addresses emissions from travel on paved and unpaved roads within the boundaries
of a permitted facility. Emissions from motor vehicle travel on public and private roads is
addressed in Chapter 5, Mobile Sources, and road travel emissions from facilities considered
point sources are addressed in Chapter 2, Point Sources. PM10 emissions from this source
category were derived from annual emission reports from permitted sources, using AP-42
equations based on vehicle size and average speed (US EPA, 1997; 1998b). It is assumed that
there are no unpermitted sources with significant emissions from on-site road travel.
PM2.5 emissions were calculated from PM10 using a ratio derived from California Air Resources
Board’s (CARB) PM2.5 Fraction Table (CARB, 2006).
Typical daily emissions were calculated using operating schedule information for each reported
process (normally a 5 or 6-day week), which were then summed to provide total daily emissions
for the county. Emissions totals for the PM10 nonattainment area were determined from the site
locations of each facility. Results for each geographic area are shown in Table 3.3–30.
Table 3.3–30. Annual and typical daily emissions from paved and unpaved road travel at industrial facilities.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
608.17
282.95
4,178.8
1,928.8
PM10 NAA
511.29
227.58
3,551.3
1,573.8

3.3.13 Industrial processes not elsewhere classified (NEC)
Annual area-source emissions from other industrial processes NEC were derived from annual
emissions reports from permitted facilities. Other industrial processes include a wide array of
industrial activities that are often specific to the permitted facility that reported the process. For
this reason, it is assumed there are no significant emissions from other industrial processes, other
than those reported by permitted facilities on their annual emissions reports. Typical daily
emissions were calculated based on operating schedule information provided by individual
facilities through MCAQD’s annual emissions reporting program. Emissions estimates for the
PM10 nonattainment area were derived using data on the location of the facilities that report other
industrial processes. Emissions totals are presented in Table 3.3–31.
Table 3.3–31. Annual and typical daily emissions from other industrial processes not elsewhere classified.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
144.60 107.24
10.22
21.49 16.79 953.3
726.4
69.6
137.7 94.6
PM10 NAA
136.00
99.12
8.12
21.47 14.10 906.0
681.7
55.4
137.6 79.8

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

46

June 2010

3.3.14 Summary of all area-source industrial processes
Tables 3.3–32 and 3.3–33 provide a summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all
industrial sources, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.
Table 3.3–32. Annual and daily emissions from all area-source industrial processes in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Source category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Chemical manufacturing
187.43
151.42
0.00
0.34
0.03
Commercial cooking
988.99
917.18
Grain handling/processing
20.59
6.71
Ammonia cold storage
1,678.43
Secondary metal production
60.56
52.16
49.73
18.65
.004
Non-metallic mineral processes
195.81
97.28
Mining and quarrying
210.39
59.56
Wood product manufacturing.
217.26
203.25
Rubber/plastic product manufacturing
140.94
105.96
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
51.48
42.62
Residential construction
2,451.72
245.17
Commercial construction
5,739.18
573.92
Road construction
3,580.67
358.07
Other construction
258.18
25,82
Electrical equipment manufacturing
13.94
9.64
20.45
0.18
31.55
ADEQ-permitted portable sources
59.00
29.50
282.18
88.93
Road travel at industrial sites
608.17
282.95
Industrial processes NEC
144.60
107.24
10.22
21.49
16.79
All industrial processes:
14,928.89
3,268.45
362.58
129.60
1,731.34

Source category
Chemical manufacturing
Commercial cooking
Grain handling/processing
Ammonia cold storage
Secondary metal production
Non-metallic mineral processes
Mining and quarrying
Wood product manufacturing.
Rubber/plastic product manufacturing
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Residential construction
Commercial construction
Road construction
Other construction
Electrical equipment manufacturing
ADEQ-permitted portable sources
Road travel at industrial sites
Industrial processes NEC
All industrial processes:

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
1,164.5
0.0
2.6
5,039.5
49.5

PM10
1,445.8
5,434.0
149.3
442.7
1,357.4
1,442.1
1,668.6
953.3
538.1
15,716.1
36,789.6
22,953.0
1,654.9
76.9
492.9
4,178.8
953.3
96,246.9

386.2
671.7
390.8
1,548.3
698.8
460.6
1,571.6
3,679.0
2,295.3
165.5
53.2
246.5
1,928.8
726.4
21,076.1

47

358.8

142.7

NH3
0.6

10,759.2
0.0

28.9

112.4
2,275.7

1.1
721.7

193.7

69.6
2,816.5

137.7
1,005.8

94.6
11,077.2

June 2010

Table 3.3–33. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source industrial processes in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Source category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Chemical manufacturing
186.94
151.03
0.00
0.34
0.03
Commercial cooking
993.04
920.94
Grain handling/processing
16.73
5.68
Ammonia cold storage
1,674.1
Secondary metal production
60.56
52.16
49.73
18.65
0.04
Non-metallic mineral processes
190.45
93.72
Mining and quarrying
184.25
50.64
Wood product manufacturing.
216.69
202.72
Rubber/plastic product manufacturing
140.57
105.68
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
51.35
42.51
4.49
Residential construction
2,245.39
224.54
Commercial construction
5,380.95
538.10
Road construction
2,724.87
272.49
Other construction
215.70
21.57
Electrical equipment manufacturing
13.94
9.64
20.45
0.18
31.55
ADEQ-permitted portable sources
59.00
29.50
282.18
88.93
Road travel at industrial sites
511.29
227.58
Industrial processes NEC
136.00
99.12
8.12
21.47
14.10
All industrial processes:
13,327.74
3,047.62
360.48
129.58
1,724.27

Source category
Chemical manufacturing
Commercial cooking
Grain handling/processing
Ammonia cold storage
Secondary metal production
Non-metallic mineral processes
Mining and quarrying
Wood product manufacturing.
Rubber/plastic product manufacturing
Fabricated metal product manufacturing
Residential construction
Commercial construction
Road construction
Other construction
Electrical equipment manufacturing
ADEQ-permitted portable sources
Road travel at industrial sites
Industrial processes NEC
All industrial processes:

3.4

Waste treatment and disposal

3.4.1

On-site incineration

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
1,161.5
0.0
2.6
5,060.1
43.0

PM10
1,442.0
5,456.3
125.3
442.7
1,320.7
1,266.6
1,664.3
950.9
536.7
14,465.2
34,382.4
17,471.4
1,385.5
76.9
492.9
3,551.3
906.0
85,937.0

386.2
647.9
331.9
1,544.3
697.0
459.4
1,446.5
3,438.2
1,747.1
138.6
53.2
246.5
1,573.8
681.7
19,656.9

358.8

142.7

NH3
0.9

10,731.2
0.0

28.8

112.4
2,275.7

1.1
721.7

193.7

55.4
2,802.3

137.6
1,005.7

79.8
11,034.4

This section includes emissions from on-site industrial incinerators, primarily burn-off ovens
used to reclaim electric wire or other materials. Emissions from human and animal crematories
are addressed in Section 3.5.4. There were no incinerators at residential (e.g., apartment
complexes) or commercial/institutional facilities (e.g., hospitals, service establishments) in
operation during 2008.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

48

June 2010

Emissions from on-site incineration were determined from annual emission inventory reports. It
is assumed that all incinerator emissions are accounted for, since all permitted incinerators
received surveys in 2008. All surveyed facilities are located within the PM10 nonattainment area,
thus total emissions for the county and NAA are equal.
Table 3.4–1.

Annual and typical daily emissions from on-site incineration.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
0.06
0.04
5.01
0.01
0.7
0.4
38.9
0.1
PM10 NAA
0.06
0.04
5.01
0.01
0.7
0.4
38.9
0.1

3.4.2

Open burning

Emissions from controlled open burning are regulated by Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations Rule 314 (Open Outdoor Fires), which requires a burn permit for open burning in
Maricopa County. Burn permits are issued primarily for purposes of agricultural ditch bank and
fence row burning, tumbleweed burning, land clearance, air curtain destructor burning of trees,
and fire fighting training. Maricopa County’s burn permit data base was used to identify all burn
permits issued during 2008. A total of 55 permits were issued during the year; however, not all
permit applications contained the requested information that is needed to calculate emissions.
Where data were missing, activity data for each permit category was grown from those permits
that contained the necessary information, as follows:

Total activity = ∑ activity reported ×

total number of permits issued
number of permits with activity data

Example:

Total ditch 32 burn permits issued
= 787,398 linear ft
bank/fencerows = 541,336 linear ft (reported) ×
22 permits with data
Reported and estimated activity data for each open burning category are summarized in Table
3.4–2. Permits issued for firefighting training are addressed Section 3.5.1.2.
Table 3.4–2.

Summary of 2008 Maricopa County burn permit activity.
Number of
Total reported
permits with
Category
Unit of measure
activity
activity data
Ditchbank/fencerow Linear ft
541,336
22
Land clearance
Acres
564
5
Air curtain
Tons of Material Burned
70*
0
Tumbleweeds
Piles
14
2

Total
permits
issued
32
12
7
4

Estimated total
annual activity
level
787,398
1,354
70
28

* Assumed that air curtain destructors burn 10 tons/day of brush/trees/vegetation.

The above activity data were converted to tons material burned using fuel loading factors from
AP-42, Table 2.5–5 (US EPA, 1992). The emission and loading factors used are shown in Table
3.4–3. As a conservative estimate, all particulate matter is presumed to be PM10 (and PM2.5).

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

49

June 2010

Table 3.4–3.

Emission and fuel loading factors for open burning.
Emission factors (lbs/ton burned)
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Weeds, unspecified
15
15
4
N/A
N/A
Russian Thistle (tumbleweeds)
22
22
4
N/A
N/A
Orchard crops: Citrus
6
6
4
N/A
N/A

Fuel loading factor
(tons/acre)
3.2
0.1
1.0

The following assumptions were made based on previous Maricopa County emission inventory
and information from MCAQD's open burn program staff:
• Ditch banks and fence rows in Maricopa County average 7 feet in width and are burned twice
per year (MCESD, 1999).
• A pile of tumbleweeds 15 feet in diameter and 5 feet high weighs 200 lbs (MCESD, 1993).
This is equivalent to the AP-42 fuel loading factor for tumbleweeds (0.1 tons/acre).
• Air curtain destructors burn between 7–10 tons of material per day (MCAQD, 2006).
To calculate the annual amount of material burned on ditch banks and fence rows in Maricopa
County, MCAQD estimated the area burned and then applied AP-42 fuel loading factor. The
tons of material burned in ditch banks and fence rows in Maricopa County were estimated as
follows:
Material burned from
= 787,398 ft length × 7 ft width × 3.2 tons/acre × 2 times/yr
ditchbanks and fence rows
43,560 ft2/acre
= 809.81 tons/yr

Activity data for the other categories were similarly converted to derive the total mass of
material burned using AP-42 fuel loading factors.
Annual emissions were then calculated by multiplying the amount of material burned by AP-42
emission factors (listed in Table 3.4–3) for each open burning category. To account for unpermitted illegal outdoor burning, all calculated emissions estimates were multiplied by a factor of
2.87, based on complaints received in 2008 reporting suspected open or illegal outside burning in
the County (158 complaints were received in 2008; thus 158 complaints/55 open burn permits =
2.87).
Annual PM10 emissions from
ditchbank and fence row burning

= Total material burned

× emission factor

× unit conversion factor

= 809.81 tons

× 15 lbs/ton

× 1 ton / 2,000 lbs

= 6.07 tons/yr
Total annual PM10 emissions
including unpermitted burning

= Calculated emissions from permit data × unpermitted burning adjustment factor
= 6.07 tons/yr × 2.87
= 17.43 tons PM10/yr

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

50

June 2010

Table 3.4–4 summarizes the 2008 emissions in Maricopa County from each category of open
burning activity.
Table 3.4–4.

Annual and typical daily emissions from open burning in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
NOx
Category
Ton-equivalents
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Ditchbank/fencerow
809.8
17.45
17.45
4.65
179.0
179.0
47.7
Land clearance
4,331.5
93.32
93.32
24.89
717.9
717.9
191.4
Air curtain
70.0
0.60
0.60
0.40
4.6
4.6
3.1
Tumbleweeds
2.8
0.09
0.09
0.02
0.7
0.7
0.1
Totals:
111.46
111.46
29.96
902.2
902.2
242.4

It was assumed that open burning occurs 5 days per week (most burn permits are issued for
weekdays but permits may be issued on weekends depending on circumstances). Open burning
occurs year-round with the exception of ditch bank and fence row burning, which is not allowed
during the CO season (November through January).
PM10 typical daily emissions for Maricopa County were derived as follows:
Typical daily PM10 emissions

=annual PM10 emissions (tons/yr) × 2000 lbs/ton
(burn days/week) × (burn weeks/year)

Typical daily PM10 emissions from = 17.45 tons/yr × 2000 lbs/ton
ditchbank/ fence row burning
5 days/wk × 39 wks/yr
= 179.0 lbs PM10/day

Table 3.4–4 above summarizes the typical daily emissions for Maricopa County from each open
burning category.
Annual and daily emissions for the nonattainment area were calculated by multiplying the
percentage of agricultural and/or vacant land use within the PM10 nonattainment area by the
County wide emissions estimates, results are shown in Table 3.4–5. (See Section 1.5.1 for a
discussion of the land use data used.) Table 3.4–6 summarizes the annual emissions for the PM10
nonattainment area.
Table 3.4–5.

Surrogate land use classes and County:NAA activity ratios for burn permit categories.
Surrogate land
2008 NAA:county
Category
use categories
land use ratio
Ditchbank/fencerow Agriculture
44.14 %
Land clearance
Vacant
21.22 %
Air curtain
Agriculture and vacant
23.91 %
Tumbleweeds
Agriculture and vacant
23.91 %

Table 3.4–6.

Annual and typical daily emissions from open burning in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr) Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
Ditchbank/fencerow
7.70
7.70
2.05
79.0
79.0
21.1
Land clearance
19.81
19.81
5.28
152.4
152.4
40.6
Air curtain
0.14
0.14
0.10
1.1
1.1
0.7
Tumbleweeds
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.2
0.2
0.0
Totals:
27.67
27.67
7.44
232.6
232.6
62.5

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

51

June 2010

3.4.3

Landfills

Emissions from municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills come from uncontrolled landfill gas
emissions as well as from cover operations and combustion from control measures, such as a
flare. Total emissions were calculated from annual emissions inventory reports from all landfills
located within the county; results are shown in Table 3.4–7 below. No landfills were considered
point sources; thus all MSW landfills are reported here as an area-source activity.
Table 3.4–7.

Annual and typical daily emissions from landfills.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
86.21
75.92
24.11
7.57
486.07 425.39
132.93
41.71
PM10 NAA
60.25
50.78
19.47
6.22
342.45 286.57
107.42
34.29

3.4.4

Publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)

Emissions from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) were calculated by multiplying percapita emission factors (Battye et al., 1994) by population estimates and per-capita wastewater
usage estimates of 100 gallons per day per person (Tchobanoglous, 1979), as shown in Table
3.4–8. Typical daily emissions were calculated by dividing annual emissions by 366 days, as
activity is assumed to occur uniformly throughout the year.
Table 3.4–8.

NH3 emissions from publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).
Annual NH3
Typical daily NH3
2008
NH3 emission factor
emissions
emissions
Geographic area Population (lbs/106 gals treated)
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
Maricopa County
4,279,760
19.0
1,488.07
8,131.5
PM10 NAA
4,297,140
19.0
1,494.12
8,164.6

3.4.5

Other industrial waste disposal

Annual area-source emissions from other industrial waste disposal were derived from annual
emissions reports from permitted facilities. Other industrial waste disposal processes include a
wide array of industrial activities that are often specific to the permitted facility that reported the
process. For this reason, it is assumed there are no significant emissions from this category,
other than those reported by permitted facilities on their annual emissions reports. Typical daily
emissions were calculated based on operating schedule information provided by the facilities in
their annual emissions report. Emission estimates are shown in Table 3.4–9 below.
All facilities that reported area-source emissions from other industrial waste disposal are located
inside the PM10 nonattainment area, therefore emissions for Maricopa County and the PM10
NAA are equal.
Table 3.4–9.

Annual and typical daily emissions from other industrial waste disposal.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
32.78
16.93
18.39 50.62
224.1
110.9
101.0
278.2
PM10 NAA
32.78
16.93
18.39 50.62
224.1
110.9
101.0
278.2

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

52

June 2010

3.4.6

Summary of all area-source waste disposal

Tables 3.4–10 and 3.4–11 provide a summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all
waste disposal activity, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.
Table 3.4–10. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source waste disposal for Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10 PM2.5 NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
On-site incineration
0.06
0.04
5.01
0.01
0.7
0.4
38.9
0.1
Open burning
111.46 111.46 29.96
902.2
902.2 242.4
Landfills
86.21 75.92 24.11
7.57
486.1
425.4 132.9
41.7
POTWs
1,488.07
8,131.5
Other
32.78 16.93 18.39 50.62
224.1
110.9 101.0 278.1
Total:
230.52 204.35 77.47 58.20 1,488.07 1,613.0 1,438.8 515.3 320.0 8,131.5

Table 3.4–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from all area-source waste disposal for the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10 PM2.5 NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
On-site incineration
0.06
0.04
5.01
0.01
0.7
0.4
38.9
0.1
Open burning
27.67 27.67
7.44
232.62 232.62 62.46
Landfills
60.25 50.78 19.47
6.22
342.4
286.6 107.4
34.3
POTWs
1,494.12
8,164.6
Other
32.78 16.93 18.39 50.62
224.1
110.9 101.0 278.1
Total:
120.77 95.42 50.30 56.85 1,494.12
799.8
630.5 309.9 312.6 8,164.6

3.5

Miscellaneous area sources

3.5.1

Other combustion

3.5.1.1 Wildfires
Data on wildfires in 2008 within Maricopa County were obtained from the Arizona State Land
Department (ASLD) Forestry Division (ASLD, 2009); the Arizona Department of Fire, Building,
and Life Safety (DFBLS, 2009); and the Federal Fire Occurrence website (FFOW, 2009).
The ASLD Forestry Division provides for the prevention and suppression of wildfires on state
and private lands located outside of incorporated municipalities. The wildfire data provided by
ASLD includes wildfires that occur outside of local fire districts and municipalities on State,
private, and U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land in 2008. The ASLD reported 25
wildfires in 2008 in Maricopa County, encompassing a total of nearly 750 acres. Wildfire data
provided by ASLD were compared to that data reported in the Geospatial Multi-Agency Coordination Group (GeoMAC) Wildland Fire Support database 1 and 2008 Incident Status Summary
reports (ICS-209) to identify wildfires that may have occurred outside of ASLD jurisdiction.
GeoMAC and ICS-209 reports only include large wildfires, generally fires greater than 100
acres. Three Maricopa County wildfires were reported in GeoMAC and on ICS-209 reports in
2008 (USDA, 2008a; USGS, 2008). Two of these fires were included in the ASLD data, one
fire, the Ethan fire, was not captured in the ASLD data because it occurred on tribal lands. The
Ethan fire encompassed 6,660 acres.

1. The GeoMAC, is an internet-based mapping application designed for fire managers to access online maps of current fire locations and
perimeters in the conterminous 48 States and Alaska. Historical fire data is also housed in the GeoMac database http://www.geomac.gov/.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

53

June 2010

The DFBLS coordinates reporting to the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) for
Arizona fire departments. NFIRS is a national reporting system used by fire departments to
report fires and other incidents to which they respond and to maintain records of these incidents
in a uniform manner. Twenty-one of thirty-six fire departments in Maricopa County reported
over 10,000 fires to NFIRS in 2008. This included ten “forest, woods or wildland fires”. The
ten “forest, woods or wildland fires” were analyzed for inclusion in the wildfire emission
estimates. First, the DFBLS fires were culled for duplicates by comparing the incident dates and
locations with wildfires reported by ASLD. One DFBLS fire was excluded from combined dataset because it may have been a duplicate already captured in the ASLD data. Because only four
of the ten DFBLS fires included acreage, an average number of acres burned per fire (= 1.05
acres) were determined from the fires with reported acreage. This average number of acres
burned was then applied to the fires with no reported acreage.
The Federal Fire Occurrence Website is an official government website that provides users with
the ability to query, research and download wildland fire occurrence data. The data available
through this website contains over 548,000 fire records collected by Federal land management
agencies for fires that occurred from 1980 through 2008 in the United States. The 2008 data for
Maricopa County included eighty-one fires. The federal wildland fire occurrence data were
culled for duplicates by comparing the incident names, dates and locations with wildfires
reported by ASLD and DFBLS. Thirteen fires were excluded from the combined dataset as they
appeared to be duplicates already captured in either the ASLD or DFBLS data and seven fires
contained no acreage data. The final 2008 dataset listed 96 fires encompassing over 7,400 acres.
Table 3.5–1 summarizes fire data obtained from each data source.
Table 3.5–1.

Sources and input data used to estimate emissions from fires in Maricopa County.
Number of
Total
Data Source
Fires in 2008
Acreage
Arizona State Land Department (ASLD)
25
747.25
Arizona Department of Fire, Building, and Life Safety (DFBLS)
9
9.45
Federal Fire Occurrence website (FFOW)
61
16.79
ICS-209
1
6,660.00
Total:
96
7,433.49

Estimates for fuel loading rates were assigned using fuel model codes from the National Fire
Danger Rating System (NFDRS) and a table of fuel loading values for NFDRS fuel model
categories (WGA/WRAP, 2005). The department used the NFDRS Fuel Model map in ArcGIS
to identify NFDRS fuel types for fires with latitude and longitude data.
Table 3.5–2.

NFDRS fuel model categories and fuel loading factors for 2008 Maricopa County wildfires.
Fuel Loading Factor
(tons/acre)
NFDRS Model Category
2008 Fires
Total Acreage
Agriculture*
33
744.05
4.5
California chaparral
1
0.01
19.5
Barren*
2
0.4
0.5
Pine-grass savanna
1
0.01
4.7
Intermediate brush
17
2.87
15.0
Sagebrush grass
42
6,686.15
4.5
Total
96
7,433.49
—

* “Agriculture” and “barren” NFDRS model descriptions were not included in WGA/WRAP 2002 fuel loading values for NFDRS fuel model
categories. Therefore, it was assumed that “Agriculture” is similar to "sagebrush grass" and “Barren” is similar to “western grasses (annual) and
fuel loadings were assigned accordingly.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

54

June 2010

Estimates of the material burned were derived by multiplying the number of acres burned for
each category by the applicable fuel loading factor. Table 3.5–3 shows the number of wildfires
and acres burned within both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area during 2008, as
well as estimates of total material burned.
Table 3.5–3.

Summary of data on fire occurrence, total acres burned, and total material burned in 2008.
Total Acres
Material Burned
Geographic Area
No. of Fires
Burned
(tons)
96
7,433
33,479
Maricopa County
55
6,699
30,147
PM10 NAA

The prescribed-fire emission factors listed in Table 3.5–4 were obtained from the Western
Regional Air Partnership's (WRAP) 2002 Fire Emission Inventory (WGA/WRAP, 2005).
Table 3.5–4.

Summary of emission factors for prescribed fire.
PM10
PM2.5
WRAP Emission Factors for Wildfires and
Prescribed Broadcast Burning (lbs/ton)
28.1
24.1

NOx

SOx

NH3

6.2

1.7

1.3

Source: WGA/WRAP, 2005

Annual emissions from wildfires for each geographic area were calculated as follows:
Annual PM10 emissions from
wildfires in Maricopa County

= material burned × emission factor (lbs/ton)
2,000 lbs/ton
= 33,479 tons of material burned × 28.1 lbs PM10/ton
2,000 lbs/ton
= 470.38 tons PM10/yr

The majority of fire data included fire locations in latitude and longitude. For those fires without
longitude and latitude, the fire location address was used to determine latitude and longitude.
This latitude and longitude data was used to determine the number of acres burned inside of the
nonattainment areas. Fifty-five wildfires occurred within the PM10 nonattainment area, resulting
in nearly 6,700 acres burned. The largest fire within the PM10 nonattainment area was the Ethan
fire which occurred in July 2008 and resulted in more than 6,600 acres burned.
Annual emissions from wildfires within the nonattainment area were calculated in the same
method as Maricopa County annual emissions.
Table 3.5–5.

Annual emissions from wildfires in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
470.39
403.43
103.79
28.46
21.76
PM10 NAA
423.56
363.27
93.46
25.62
19.60

Average daily emissions were estimated by dividing annual emissions by the number of burn
days in 2008. There were 150 burn days in Maricopa County and 90 burn days in the PM10
nonattainment area in 2008; thus:
Average daily PM10 emissions from = 470.39 tons PM10/yr × 2,000 lbs/ton
wildfires in Maricopa County
150 days/yr
= 6,271.8 lbs PM10/day
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

55

June 2010

Table 3.5–6.

Average daily emissions from wildfires in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA.
Number of
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
Burn Days
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Maricopa County
150
6,271.8
5,379.0
1,383.8
379.4
290.2
PM10 NAA
90
9,412.5
8,072.7
2,076.8
569.4
435.5

3.5.1.2 Prescribed fires
Prescribed fires data were obtained from the U. S. Forest Service (USFS, 2009). The USFS
reported that six prescribed fires occurred in Maricopa County in 2008. Twenty-nine acres of
piled fuels were burned. Four of six prescribed fires occurred inside the PM10 nonattainment
area. Because all 2008 prescribed fires were piled fuels, material burned was derived by
multiplying the number of acres burned by tons of piles per acre for each fire. The data provided
by the USFS, the resulting material burned for each fire, and whether the fire occurred within the
nonattainment area are shown below in Table 3.5–7.
Table 3.5–7.
Burn Date
01/13/2008
03/13/2008
04/04/2008
04/09/2008
09/25/2008
11/06/2008

Summary of data used to estimate emissions from prescribed fires.
Burn
Burn
Acres
Tons of
Material
Number
Location
Treated Piles/ Acre Burned (tons)
TNF0106
T6N,R7E,S28
3
1
3
TNF0106P
T6N,R7E,S28
3
3
9
TNF0302
T3N,R7E,S34
2
5
10
TNF0302
T3N,R8E,S28
5
5
25
TNF0302
T3N,R8E,S31
10
5
50
TNF0302
T2N,R7E,S18
6
5
30
29
24
127

Within NAA?
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes

Prescribed fire emission factors for “piled fuels” were obtained from the Western Regional Air
Partnership’s (WRAP) 2002 Fire Emission Inventory (WGA/WRAP, 2005). The emission
factors are listed below in Table 3.5–8.
Table 3.5–8.

Emission factors for prescribed fires.
Emission factors (lbs/ton burned)
PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx NH3
Type of fire
Prescribed fire (piled fuels)
8.0
8.0 6.2 1.7 0.5

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

56

June 2010

Annual emissions from prescribed fires in Maricopa County were calculated as follows.
Annual PM10 emissions = material burned (tons/acre) × emission factor (lbs/ton)
from prescribed fires
2,000 lbs/ton
in Maricopa County
= 127 tons/acres× 8.0 lbs/ton
2,000 lbs/ton
= 0.508 tons PM10/yr

It was assumed that each prescribed fire lasted one day. Thus, daily emissions from prescribed
fires were determined by dividing the annual emissions (converted to lbs/yr) by the number of
burn days. Because six prescribed fires occurred in Maricopa County in 2008, it was assumed
that there were 6 burn days in 2008.
Typical daily PM10 emissions = annual PM10 emissions (lbs) from prescribed fires
Number of burn days
= 1,016 lbs PM10
6 burn days
= 169.3 lbs PM10/day

Since the prescribed fire data provided by USFS (2009) included burn location, GIS was used to
determine the fires that burned inside the nonattainment area. Fifty-two of the one-hundred
twenty-seven acres burned were within the nonattainment area. Thus, annual emissions from
prescribed fires for the nonattainment area were determined using the formula shown above with
the material burned within the nonattainment area. Results are shown in Table 3.5–9 below.
Table 3.5–9.

Annual and typical daily emission from prescribed fire in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emission (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10 PM2.5
NOx
SOx NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx NH3
Maricopa County
0.51
0.51
0.39
0.11 0.03
169.3
169.3 131.2 36.0 10.6
PM10 NAA
0.21
0.21
0.16
0.04 0.01
104.0
104.0
80.6
22.1
6.5

3.5.1.3 Structure fires
2008 structure fire data were from the Arizona Department of Fire, Building, and Life Safety
(DFBLS; DFBLS, 2009). The DFBLS coordinates reporting to the National Fire Incident
Reporting System (NFIRS) for Arizona fire departments. The NFIRS is a national reporting
system used by fire departments to report fires and other incidents to which they respond and to
maintain records of these incidents in a uniform manner. Twenty-one of thirty-six fire departments in Maricopa County reported over 10,000 fires to NFIRS in 2008. This included nearly
2,150 reported structure fires. Because the DFBLS data only included data reported by twentyone of thirty-six fire departments in Maricopa County, the number of structure fires reported
were scaled up to the entire inventory area based on population. The most recent population
estimates for Maricopa County were used to scale up the number of structure fires (ADC, 2008).
Seven open burn permits were issued in 2008 for fire training; these were included in the total
number of estimated structure fires for 2008. It was estimated that 2,422 structure fires occurred
in Maricopa County in 2008.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

57

June 2010

Estimates of the material burned in a structure fire were determined by multiplying the number
of structure fires by a fuel loading factor of 1.15 tons of material per fire, which factors in the
estimated percentage of structural loss and content loss (US EPA, 2001c). The amount (tons) of
material burned was estimated as follows:
Material burned in structure fires (tons/yr) = 2,422 fires/yr × 1.15 tons/fire
= 2,785 tons material burned/yr

Table 3.5–10. Material burned, emission and fuel loading factors for structure fires.
Emission factors (lbs/ton)
Estimated number
Fuel loading
Material burned
of structure fires
factor (tons/fire)
(tons)
PM10 PM2.5*
NOx
SOx
2,422
1.15
2,785
10.8
10.8
1.4
n/a

NH3
n/a

* All PM10 is assumed to be PM2.5.

Annual emissions were then calculated by multiplying the amount of material burned by the
emission factors listed in Table 3.5–10 (from US EPA, 2001c), as follows:
Annual PM10 emissions from
structure fires in Maricopa County

= Quantity of material burned × emission factor × unit conversion factor
= 2,785 tons × 10.8 lbs/ton × (1 ton/2,000 lbs)
= 15.04 tons PM10/yr

Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived by multiplying Maricopa
County annual emissions by the percentage of total residential population within the PM10 nonattainment area (100.41%), as shown in the example below. See Section 1.5.2 for a discussion of
the population data used.
Annual PM10 emissions = Annual PM10 emissions × Percentage residential population within the NAA
for Maricopa County
within the PM10 NAA
= 15.04 tons/yr

× 100.41%

= 15.10 tons PM10/yr

Typical daily emissions for both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated by dividing annual emissions by 366, as activity is assumed to take place 7 days a week.
Typical daily emissions for Maricopa County were derived using the following formula:
Typical daily PM10 emissions
from structure fires

= annual PM10 emissions (lbs)
366 days/yr
=

30,080 lbs
366

=

82.2 lbs/day

Table 3.5–11. Annual and typical daily emissions from structure fires in Maricopa County and the NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
Maricopa County
15.04
15.04
1.95
82.2
82.2
10.7
PM10 NAA
15.10
15.10
1.96
82.5
82.5
10.7

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

58

June 2010

3.5.1.4 Vehicle fires
2008 vehicle fire data were from the Arizona Department of Fire, Building, and Life Safety
(DFBLS) (DFBLS, 2009). The DFBLS coordinates reporting to the National Fire Incident
Reporting System (NFIRS) for Arizona fire department. NFIRS is a national reporting system
used by fire departments to report fires and other incidents to which they respond and to maintain
records of these incidents in a uniform manner. Twenty-one of thirty-six fire departments in
Maricopa County reported over 10,000 fires to NFIRS in 2008. This included over 2,100
reported vehicle fires. Because the DFBLS data only included data reported by twenty-one of
thirty-six fire departments in Maricopa County, the number of vehicle fires reported were scaled
up to the entire inventory area based on population. The most recent population estimates for
Maricopa County were used to scale up the number of vehicle fires (ADC, 2008). It was
estimated that 2,403 vehicle fires occurred in Maricopa County in 2008.
Annual emissions from vehicle fires were calculated by first multiplying the number of vehicle
fires by a fuel loading factor of per vehicle fire to estimate the annual amount of material burned
in vehicle fires (US EPA, 2000). The amount of annual material burned in vehicle fires is then
multiplied by emission factors for open burning of automobile components from AP-42 as listed
in table 3.5–12 (US EPA, 1992).
Annual PM10 emissions = annual number × fuel loading factor × emission factor × unit conversion factor
from vehicle fires
of vehicle fires
= 2,403

× 0.25 tons/vehicle

× 100 lbs/ton

× (1 ton / 2,000 lbs)

= 30.04 tons PM10/yr
Table 3.5–12. Estimated material burned, fuel loading factors, and emission factors for vehicle fires.
Emission factors (lbs/ton)
Vehicle fires
Fuel loading
Material
PM10
PM2.5*
NOx
SOx
NH3
reported
factor (tons/fire)
burned (tons)
2,403
0.25
600.75
100
100
4
n/a
n/a
* All PM10 is assumed to be PM2.5.

Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived by multiplying Maricopa
County annual emissions by the percentage of total residential population within the PM10 nonattainment area (100.41%). See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the population data used.
Annual PM10 emissions
from vehicle fires in the
PM10 NAA

= annual PM10 emissions
for Maricopa County

× percentage of total residential population
within the PM10 NAA

= 30.04 tons/yr
= 30.16 tons/yr

× 100.41%

It is assumed that vehicle fires occur evenly throughout the year. Thus, typical daily emissions
were derived by dividing the Maricopa County and nonattainment area annual emissions by 366
days/year. The results are shown in Table 3.5–13 below.
Table 3.5–13. Annual and typical daily emissions from vehicle fires.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
Maricopa County
30.04
30.04
1.20
164.1
164.1
6.6
PM10 NAA
30.16
30.16
1.21
164.8
164.8
6.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

59

June 2010

3.5.1.5 Engine testing
Annual emissions from engine testing facilities were derived from annual emission reports from
permitted sources that were not considered point sources in this inventory. It was assumed that
there were no significant unpermitted sources within Maricopa County. Typical daily emissions
were calculated based on operating schedule information provided in the facilities’ annual emission reports.
Since all facilities considered in this section are located within the PM10 nonattainment area, total
emission values for the county and the PM10 NAA are equal. Results are shown in Table 3.5–14.
Table 3.5–14. Annual and typical daily emissions from engine testing.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
0.18
0.17
6.74
2.49
1.3
1.2
50.5
19.0
PM10 NAA
0.18
0.17
6.74
2.49
1.3
1.2
50.5
19.0

3.5.2

Agricultural activities

3.5.2.1 Tilling
Tillage emissions were estimated using the tillage emission factor equation and Maricopa County
specific soil silt content for agricultural land (URS and ERG, 2001). The majority of planted
acres were obtained from the 2008 Arizona Agricultural Statistics Bulletin (AASS, 2009).
Planted acres for potatoes and sorghum for grain were obtained from the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service for 2008 (USDA, 2008b) and vegetables and citrus acreage were
obtained from the 2007 Census of Agriculture (USDA, 2007a). Crop-specific annual land preparation operations data were obtained from the Technical Support Document for Quantification of
Agricultural Best Management Practices (URS and ERG, 2001). The agricultural tillage emission factor was calculated as follows:
EF = k (4.8) s0.6
where:
EF = Agricultural emission tillage factor (lbs PM10/acre-pass)
k = Particle size multiplier (value of 0.15 for PM10)
s = Silt content of soil (%) = 35.2% (URS and ERG, 2001)
Thus: EF = 0.15 × 4.8 × (35.2)0.6
= 6.10 lbs PM10/acre-pass

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

60

June 2010

Annual PM10 emissions from agricultural tillage were calculated for each crop category using the
following equation (URS and ERG, 2001; Pollack et al., 2003):
TillageCrop = EF × APCrop × ACrop

where:
TillageCrop
EF
APCrop
ACrop

=
=
=
=

Annual PM10 emissions from tilling each crop type (lbs)
Tillage emission factor (lbs PM10/acre-pass)
Number of tillage passes per crop (passes)
Total number of tilled acres for each crop type (acres)

For example, annual PM10 emissions from cotton tilling were calculated using:
EF
APcotton
APcotton

= 6.10 lbs PM10/acre-pass
= 8.8 tillage passes for a cotton crop
= 19,300 acres cotton

Thus:
Tillagecotton = 6.10 × 8.8 × 19,300
= 1,036,024 lbs/yr
= 518.01 tons/yr

Table 3.5–15 lists crop types and acreage; typical number of land preparation operations and
acre-passes; and annual uncontrolled PM10 emissions from agricultural tillage for Maricopa
County.
Table 3.5–15. 2008 crop acreage, activity, and annual uncontrolled PM10 emissions in Maricopa County.
No. of land
Acres
preparation
Annual uncontrolled
Crop
Planted
operations/yr
Acre-passes
PM10 emissions (tons/yr)
Cotton
19,300
8.8
169,978
518.43
Corn
11,500
7.3
84,180
256.75
Wheat
30,500
3.1
93,488
285.14
Barley
10,100
2.1
20,856
63.61
Alfalfa (stand establishment)1
21,875
5.1
110,469
336.93
Potatoes
1,400
10.6
14,805
45.16
Sorghum for grain
16,500
3.1
50,575
154.25
Vegetables2
16,072
14.0
224,888
685.91
Citrus3
425
5.0
2,124
6.48
Totals:
127,672
2,352.66
1.
2.
3.

Alfalfa is a multi-year crop and alfalfa stand establishment is assumed to occur once every 4 years to approximately 25% of the total alfalfa
acreage (URS and ERG, 2001).
Including melons, not including potatoes.
15 to 20% of citrus orchard acreage is non-bearing in a given year (URS and ERG, 2001); therefore, tillage is assumed to occur in 20% of the
reported harvested acreage.

In November 2007, the agricultural PM10 general permit (Arizona Administrative Code R18-2610 and R18-2-611) was expanded to apply to commercial farming practices within the
Maricopa County portion of Area A. Previously this rule only applied to the Maricopa County
PM10 NAA. The agricultural PM10 general permit revisions also resulted in the requirement for
commercial farmers to implement six agricultural best management practices (BMP) (up from 3
BMPs) to control PM10 emissions generated from tillage and harvest, non-cropland, and
cropland. Because no data is available on the additional BMPs being implemented, MCAQD
used the net control efficiencies from the implementation of agricultural BMPs developed by
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

61

June 2010

URS and ERG (2001) in the Technical Support Document for Quantification of Agricultural
BMPs. URS and ERG quantified three BMPs for tillage: 1) combining tractor operations, 2)
limited activity during high-wind events, and 3) multi-year crops. URS and ERG (2001) derived
net control efficiencies by multiplying mid-point BMP control efficiency by a compliance factor
and a relevancy factor for applicable crops. MCAQD has used the same mid-point BMP control
efficiency and relevancy factor with a revised compliance factor of 55% (from 80%). The
revised compliance factor was derived based on latest EPA rule effectiveness guidance (US
EPA, 2005) which eliminates use of the 80% default rule effectiveness value. (Rule effectiveness
calculations for agricultural activities are included as Appendix 3). To estimate controlled tillage
emissions from agricultural operations taking place within the Maricopa County portion of Area
A, the mid-point net control efficiency for each BMP were applied to 63.09% (the percent of
agricultural land in the Maricopa County portion of Area A) of the uncontrolled annual
emissions (MAG, 2009) as follows:
Controlled annual
= Annual uncontrolled
PM10 emissions
tillageCrop emissions

× (100% – mid-point net
control efficiencycrop)

× % agricultural land
in the Area A

Controlled annual
= 518.01 tons PM10/yr
tillageCotton emissions
= 252.30 tons PM10/yr

× (100% – 22.8%)

× 63.09%

The uncontrolled portion of tillage emissions from agricultural operations taking place outside
Area A but within Maricopa County were estimated by multiplying the uncontrolled annual
PM10 emissions by the percentage of agricultural land located within Maricopa County but
outside of Area A (100% – 63.09%) as follows:
Uncontrolled annual = Uncontrolled annual
PM10 emissions
tillageCrop emissions
= 518.01 tons PM10/yr
= 191.20 tons PM10/yr

× 36.91%
× 36.91%

Controlled and uncontrolled emissions were then summed to estimate total annual PM10 emissions from agricultural tillage in Maricopa County. Annual PM2.5 emissions from agricultural
tillage were calculated by multiplying the annual PM10 emissions by a conversion factor of 0.15
(WRAP, 2006b). Annual PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from agricultural tillage in Maricopa
County and Area A are shown in Table 3.5–16.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

62

June 2010

Table 3.5–16. Annual emissions from agricultural tillage in Maricopa County and Area A (tons/yr).
Net
Outside
control
Area A
Area A
Maricopa Co. (Area
efficiency
(controlled)
(uncontrolled) A + outside Area A)
Crop
(%)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM10
PM2.5
Cotton
22.8%
252.36
37.85
191.35
443.72
66.56
Corn
22.8%
124.98
18.75
94.77
219.75
32.96
Wheat
22.8%
138.80
20.82
105.24
244.04
36.61
Barley
22.8%
30.96
4.64
23.48
54.44
8.17
Alfalfa (stand establishment)
13.8%
183.23
27.49
124.36
307.60
46.14
Potatoes
16.8%
21.98
3.30
16.67
38.65
5.80
Sorghum for grain
22.8%
75.09
11.26
56.94
132.02
19.80
Vegetables
16.8%
359.82
53.97
253.17
612.99
91.95
Citrus
16.8%
3.40
0.51
2.39
5.79
0.87
Totals:
1,190.63 178.59
868.37
2,059.00
308.85
*Includes melons, excludes potatoes.

Annual PM10 emissions from agricultural tillage in the PM10 NAA were calculated in the same
manner as the annual PM10 emissions for the Maricopa County portion of Area A; the only difference being the percent of agricultural land located within the Maricopa County PM10 NAA is
44.14% (rather than 63.09% for Area A). Results are shown in Table 3.5–17.
Table 3.5–17. Annual emissions from agricultural tillage in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr).
Net Control
Fraction of
PM10 NAA
Efficiency
Ag Land in
annual emissions
Crop
(%)
PM10 NAA
PM10
PM2.5
Cotton
22.8%
44.14%
176.56
26.48
Corn
22.8%
44.14%
87.44
13.12
Wheat
22.8%
44.14%
97.11
14.57
Barley
22.8%
44.14%
21.66
3.25
Alfalfa (stand establishment)
13.8%
44.14%
128.20
19.23
Potatoes
16.8%
44.14%
16.57
2.49
Sorghum for grain
22.8%
44.14%
52.53
7.88
Vegetables
16.8%
44.14%
251.75
37.76
Citrus
16.8%
44.14%
2.38
0.36
Totals:
834.20
125.13

Typical daily emissions for Maricopa County, Area A, and the PM10 NAA were calculated by
dividing the annual emissions by estimated days per year of tillage operation by crop. The
number of days of tillage operations was estimated using the calendar of tillage operations by
crop in the Technical Support Document for Quantification of Agricultural BMPs (URS and
ERG, 2001) and assuming tillage activities occur 7 days per week during the months of tillage
operations. Results are shown in Table 3.5–18. The calendar of tillage operations did not
include months of tillage operations for citrus, thus, a conservative estimate of three (3) months
per year was assumed.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

63

June 2010

Table 3.5–18. Controlled typical daily emissions from tillage (in lbs/day).
Tillage
Tillage
Maricopa County
Area A
operations1 operations
Crop
(months/yr)
(days/yr)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Cotton
12
364
2,438.0
365.7
1,386.6
208.0
Corn
5
152
2,897.8
434.7
1,648.1
247.2
Wheat
8
243
2,011.3
301.7
1,143.9
171.6
Barley
8
243
448.7
67.3
255.2
38.3
Alfalfa (stand
establishment)
3
91
6,760.3
1,014.1
4,027.1
604.1
Potatoes
6
182
424.7
63.7
241.6
36.2
Sorghum for grain
8
243
1,088.1
163.2
618.9
92.8
Vegetables
6
182
6,736.2
1,010.4
3,954.1
593.1
Citrus
3
91
127.2
19.1
37.3
5.6
Totals:
22,932.4
3,439.9 13,312.8
1,996.9
1

PM10 NAA
PM10
970.1
1,153.1
800.3
178.6

PM2.5
145.5
173.0
120.1
26.8

2,817.5
182.1
433.0
2,766.4
26.1
9,327.3

422.6
27.3
64.9
415.0
3.9
1,399.1

Source: URS and ERG (2001), Table 3-2, p. 3-5.

3.5.2.2 Harvesting
Harvest emissions were estimated using crop-specific emission factors (CARB, 2003). The
majority of harvest acres were obtained from the 2008 Arizona Agricultural Statistics Bulletin
(AASS, 2009). Harvest acres for potatoes were obtained from the USDA National Agricultural
Statistics Service for 2008 (USDA, 2008b) and vegetables and citrus were obtained from the
2007 Census of Agriculture (USDA, 2007a). Table 3.5–19 lists the crop types, acres harvested
and associated PM10 emission factors used to calculate emissions from agricultural harvesting.
Table 3.5–19. Maricopa County harvested acres and emission factors.
PM10 emission
2008
factor (lb/acre-yr)
Acreage
Crop
Cotton
3.4
18,800
Wheat
5.8
30,100
Barley
5.8
9,900
Alfalfa Hay
0.0
83,000
Other Hay
1.68
4,500
Corn
1.68
700
Sorghum for Grain**
5.8
2,200
Potatoes
2.7
1,400
Vegetables*
0.08
16,072
Citrus
0.08
2,124
Total
168,796
*Includes melons, exclude potatoes.
** Assumed same emission factor, control efficiency, and number of harvest days per year as wheat and barley.

Annual PM10 emissions from agricultural harvesting were calculated using the following
equation:
Uncontrolled annual
harvestCrop emissions

= EF×ACrop×ton / 2,000 lb

where:
harvestCrop
EFCrop
ACrop

= harvest emissions for each crop type (tons PM10/yr)
= harvest emission factor (lbs PM10/acre)
= number of harvested acres for each crop type per year

Example:
EFCotton

= 3.4 lbs PM10/acre for cotton

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

64

June 2010

ACotton

= 18,800 acres of cotton

Uncontrolled annual
HarvestCotton Emissions

= 3.4 lbs PM10/acre ×18,800 acres × 1 ton/2,000 lbs
= 31.96 tons PM10/yr

In November 2007, the agricultural PM10 general permit program (Arizona Administrative Code
R18-2-610 and 611) was expanded to apply to commercial farming practices within the
Maricopa County portion of Area A. (Previously this requirement had only applied to the
Maricopa County PM10 NAA.) The agricultural PM10 general permit revisions also resulted in
the requirement for commercial farmers to implement six agricultural best management practices
(BMP) (up from 3 BMPs) to control PM10 emissions generated from tillage and harvest, noncropland, and cropland. Because no data is available on the additional BMPs being
implemented, MCAQD used the net control efficiencies from the implementation of agricultural
BMPs developed by URS and ERG (2001) in the Technical Support Document for
Quantification of Agricultural BMPs. URS and ERG quantified two BMPs for harvesting: 1)
combining tractor operations, and 2) reduced harvest activity. URS and ERG (2001) derived net
control efficiencies by multiplying mid-point BMP control efficiency by a compliance factor and
a relevancy factor for applicable crops. MCAQD has used the same mid-point BMP control
efficiency and relevancy factor with a revised compliance factor of 55% (from 80%). The
revised compliance factor was derived based on latest EPA rule effectiveness guidance (US
EPA, 2005) which eliminates use of the 80% default rule effectiveness value. (Rule effectiveness
calculations for agricultural activities are included as Appendix 3). To estimate controlled
harvest emissions from agricultural operations taking place within the Maricopa County portion
of Area A, the mid-point net control efficiency for each BMP were applied to 63.09% of the
uncontrolled annual emissions (the percent of agricultural land in the Maricopa County portion
of Area A) (MAG, 2009) as follows:
Controlled annual
harvestCrop emissions
Controlled annual
harvestCotton emissions
from within the Maricopa
Co. portion of Area A

= annual uncontrolled
PM10 emissions

× (100% – mid-point net × % agricultural land
control efficiencycrop)
in the Maricopa Co.
portion of Area A

= 31.96 tons PM10/yr

×(100% – 25.6%)

× 63.09%

= 15.01 tons PM10/yr

The uncontrolled portion of harvest emissions from agricultural operations outside the Maricopa
County portion of Area A but within Maricopa County were estimated by multiplying the
uncontrolled annual PM10 emissions by the percent of agricultural land located within Maricopa
County but outside of the Area A (100% – 63.09%) as follows:
Uncontrolled annual
HarvestCotton emission
from outside the Maricopa
Co. portion of Area A

= Uncontrolled PM10
emissions

× 36.91%

= 31.96 tons PM10/yr

× 36.91%

= 11.80 tons PM10/yr

The total controlled and uncontrolled annual emissions were then summed to estimate total
annual PM10 emissions from agricultural harvesting in Maricopa County as follows:

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

65

June 2010

Total annual harvestCotton = Uncontrolled annual
emissions for Maricopa
harvestCotton emissions
County
from outside Area A
= 11.80

+ Controlled annual
harvestCotton emissions
from within the Maricopa Co. portion of Area A
+ 15.01

= 26.81 tons PM10/yr

Annual PM2.5 emissions from agricultural harvesting were calculated by multiplying the annual
PM10 emissions by a conversion factor of 0.15 (WRAP, 2006c). Annual PM10 and PM2.5
emissions from harvesting in Maricopa Co. and Area A are shown in Table 3.5–20.
Table 3.5–20. Annual emissions from harvesting in Maricopa County and Area A (in tons/yr).
Net
Maricopa
Outside Area
control
Co.
Area A
A
Maricopa Co. (Area
Crop
efficiency Uncontrolled
(controlled)
(uncontrolled) A + outside Area A)
(%)
PM10
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM10
PM2.5
25.5%
31.96
15.02
2.25
11.80
26.81
4.02
Cotton
23.5%
87.29
42.15
6.32
32.22
74.37
11.16
Wheat
23.5%
28.71
13.86
2.08
10.60
24.46
3.67
Barley
27.6%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Alfalfa Hay
27.6%
3.78
1.73
0.26
1.40
3.12
0.47
Other Hay
23.5%
0.59
0.28
0.04
0.22
0.50
0.08
Corn
23.5%
6.38
3.08
0.46
2.35
5.44
0.82
Sorghum for Grain**
23.5%
1.89
0.91
0.14
0.70
1.61
0.24
Potatoes
23.5%
0.64
0.31
0.05
0.24
0.55
0.08
Vegetables*
23.5%
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.07
0.01
Citrus
Total
161.33
77.39
11.61
59.54
136.93
20.54
*Includes melons, excludes potatoes.
** Assumed same emission factor, control efficiency, and number of harvest days per year as wheat and barley.

Annual PM10 emissions from agricultural harvesting in the PM10 NAA were calculated in the
same manner as the annual PM10 emissions for the Maricopa County portion of Area A. The
only difference being the percent of agricultural land located within the Maricopa County PM10
NAA is 44.14% (rather than 63.09% for Area A). Results are shown in Table 3.5–21.
Table 3.5–21. Annual emissions from harvesting in the PM10 NAA (tons/yr).
Net control
Fraction of
PM10 NAA
Crop
efficiency
Ag land in
(controlled)
(%)
PM10 NAA
PM10
PM2.5
25.5%
44.1%
10.51
1.58
Cotton
23.5%
44.1%
29.49
4.42
Wheat
23.5%
44.1%
9.70
1.45
Barley
27.6%
44.1%
0.00
0.00
Alfalfa Hay
27.6%
44.1%
1.21
0.18
Other Hay
23.5%
44.1%
0.20
0.03
Corn
23.5%
44.1%
2.16
0.32
Sorghum for Grain**
23.5%
44.1%
0.64
0.10
Potatoes
23.5%
44.1%
0.22
0.03
Vegetables*
23.5%
44.1%
0.03
0.00
Citrus
Total
54.14
8.12
*Includes melons, excludes potatoes.
** Assumed same emission factor, control efficiency, and number of harvest days per year as wheat and barley.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

66

June 2010

Typical daily emissions for Maricopa County, Area A, and the PM10 NAA were calculated by
dividing the annual emissions by the number of harvest days per year and multiplying the result
by 2000 lbs/ton (URS and ERG, 2001). Because acres harvested were not reported for
individual vegetables and citrus fruit, an average number of harvest days per year were used for
vegetables and citrus (116 and 188 harvest days per year, respectively). Results are shown in
Table 3.5–22.
Table 3.5–22. Typical daily emissions from harvesting, by crop (in lbs/day).
Area A
Harvest Maricopa County
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Crop
days/yr
143
375.0
56.2
210.0
31.5
Cotton
60
2,479.0
371.8
1,405.1
210.8
Wheat
60
815.3
122.3
462.2
69.3
Barley
294
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Alfalfa Hay
294
21.2
3.2
11.7
1.8
Other Hay
91
11.0
1.7
6.2
0.9
Corn
60
181.2
27.2
102.7
15.4
Sorghum for Grain**
70
46.0
6.9
26.1
3.9
Potatoes
116
9.4
1.4
5.3
0.8
Vegetables*
188
0.8
0.1
0.4
0.1
Citrus
Total
3,938.9
590.8
2,229.9
334.5

PM10 NAA
PM10
PM2.5
146.9
22.0
983.0
147.5
323.3
48.5
0.0
0.0
8.2
1.2
4.4
0.7
71.8
10.8
18.2
2.7
3.7
0.6
0.3
0.0
1,560.0
234.0

*Includes melons, excludes potatoes.
** Assumed same emission factor, control efficiency, and number of harvest days per year as wheat and barley.

3.5.2.3 Travel on unpaved agricultural roads
Resuspended PM10 emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads were estimated using an
unpaved road emission factor derived from AP-42 13.2.2 (US EPA, 2006b). The unpaved road
emission factor equation is shown below:
Unpaved road emission factor (EF) (lb/VMT) = k (s/12)a (W/3)b

where:
s
W
k
a
b

=
=
=
=
=

surface material silt content
mean vehicle weight (tons)
1.5 (PM10 constant; US EPA, 2006b)
0.9 (PM10 constant; US EPA, 2006b)
0.45 (PM10 constant; US EPA, 2006b)

= 11.90% (MAG, 2000)
= 2.80 (URS and ERG, 2001)

Unpaved road emission factor (lb/VMT)

= 1.5 (11.9/12)0.9 (2.8/3)0.45
= 1.444 lb/VMT

Emissions were estimated using farm vehicle activity data obtained from the Technical Support
Document for Quantification of Agricultural Best Management Practices (URS and ERG, 2001).
URS and ERG (2001) estimated average daily vehicle miles traveled per 1,000 acres to be 49.5
VMT.
Daily emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads were then estimated as follows:
Daily uncontrolled PM10

= unpaved road EF × VMT/1000 acres × 2008 harvested acres

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

67

June 2010

emissions from ag roads

= 1.444 lbs/VMT ×49.5 VMT/1000 acres × 168,796 acres
= 12,065 lbs/day

In November 2007, the agricultural PM10 general permit (Arizona Administrative Codes R18-2610 and 611) was expanded to apply to commercial farming practices within the Maricopa
County portion of Area A. Previously this rule only applied to the Maricopa County PM10 NAA.
The agricultural PM10 general permit revisions also resulted in the requirement for commercial
farmers to implement six agricultural best management practices (BMP) (up from 3 BMPs) to
control PM10 emissions generated from tillage and harvest, non-cropland, and cropland. Because
no data is available on the additional BMPs being implemented, MCAQD used the net control
efficiencies from the implementation of agricultural BMPs developed by URS and ERG (2001)
in the Technical Support Document for quantification of Agricultural BMPs.
Two BMPs were quantified for unpaved road travel: 1) access restriction and 2) reduced vehicle
speed. A 2001 study (URS and ERG, 2001) estimated net control efficiencies by multiplying a
midpoint BMP control efficiency by a compliance factor and a relevancy factor for applicable
crops. MCAQD has used the same mid-point BMP control efficiency and relevancy factor with
a revised compliance factor of 55% (from 80%). The revised compliance factor was derived
based on latest EPA rule effectiveness guidance (US EPA, 2005) which eliminates use of the
80% default rule effectiveness value. (Rule effectiveness calculations for agricultural activities
are included as Appendix 3).
To estimate controlled daily emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads within Area A,
the mid-point net control efficiency for each BMP (0.4% and 11.6 %, respectively) were applied
to 63.09 % (the percent of agricultural land in Area A) of the uncontrolled daily PM10 emissions
as follows:
Controlled daily
unpaved ag road
emissions within
Area A

= Daily uncontrolled
PM10 emissions

× (100%-mid-point net
control efficiency)

× % agricultural land
in Area A

= 12,065 lbs/day

× (100% – 12.0%)

× 63.09%

= 6,698.4 lbs/day

The uncontrolled portion of unpaved agricultural road daily emissions outside the Maricopa
County portion of Area A but within Maricopa County were estimated by multiplying uncontrolled daily PM10 emissions by the percent of agricultural land located within Maricopa County
but outside of Area A (100% – 63.09%) as follows:
Uncontrolled daily unpaved ag
road emissions from outside
of Area A

= Uncontrolled PM10 emissions × (100% - 63.09%)
= 12,065 lbs/day × 36.91%
= 4,453 lbs/day

Total controlled and uncontrolled daily emissions were then summed to estimate total daily PM10
emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads in Maricopa County as follows:
Total daily unpaved
= Uncontrolled daily
ag road emissions for
unpaved ag road emissions
Maricopa County from outside Area A

+

Controlled daily
unpaved ag road emissions
from within Area A

= 4,453
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

+
68

6,698
June 2010

= 11,151 lbs PM10/day

Daily PM10 emissions from unpaved agricultural roads in the PM10 NAA were calculated in the
same manner as the daily PM10 emissions for the Maricopa County portion of Area A. The only
difference being the percent of agricultural land located within the Maricopa County PM10 NAA
is 44.14% (rather than 63.09% for Area A). Results are shown in Table 3.5–21.
Annual emissions for Maricopa County, Area A and the PM10 NAA were calculated by multiplying daily emission estimates by 312 (=6 days per week × 52 weeks per year).
Annual and daily PM2.5 emission from travel on unpaved agricultural roads were calculated by
multiplying the annual and daily PM10 emissions by a conversion factor of 0.10 (WRAP, 2006c).
Annual and daily PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from unpaved agricultural roads are shown in Table
3.5–23.
Table 3.5–23. Annual and typical daily emissions from travel on unpaved agricultural roads.
Annual emissions
Typical daily emissions
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Geographic area
Maricopa County (Area A + outside Area A)
1,739.52
173.95
11,150.8
1,115.1
Area A (controlled)
1,044.92
104.49
6,698.2
669.8
PM10 NAA (controlled)
731.03
73.10
4,686.1
468.6

3.5.2.4 Cotton ginning
Annual emissions from cotton ginning were derived from annual emission reports from all
permitted cotton gins in the county. Typical daily emissions were calculated based on the
operating schedule data reported by surveyed facilities. Annual and typical daily emissions for
the PM10 nonattainment area were derived based on the location data of the individual facilities.
Table 3.5–24 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from cotton gins in both Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.5–24. Annual and typical daily emissions from area-source cotton ginning.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
17.90
5.11
103.8
29.7
PM10 NAA
4.86
1.39
26.7
7.6

3.5.2.5 Fertilizer application
Annual NH3 emissions from synthetic nitrogen fertilizers for 2008 were obtained from the US
EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory (US EPA, 2010).
In 2005, MCAQD used the CMU Ammonia Model v.3.6 to calculate NH3 emissions from
synthetic nitrogen fertilizers (MCAQD, 2007). The CMU Ammonia Model used semiannual
sales data for 2002 from the Association of American Plant Food Control Officials and crop
calendar information from National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) to estimate monthly
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

69

June 2010

fertilizer application rates for each county. The activity data in the CMU Ammonia Model v.3.6
has not been updated and therefore, MCAQD was unable to use the model to calculated 2008
NH3 emissions. EPA, however, obtained county-level fertilizer consumption data for 2002 and
2007 from the Fertilizer Institute’s Commercial Fertilizer 2002 and 2007 reports and calculated
the percent change in county-level fertilizer quantities applied between 2002 and 2007. EPA
used the percent change in applied fertilizer quantity to grow the fertilizer activity files provided
with the CMU Ammonia Model v.3.6. EPA then ran the CMU Ammonia Model with the
updated county-level fertilizer quantities to calculate NH3 emissions. Typical daily NH3
emissions were derived by dividing annual emissions by 366 days/year. Annual and typical
daily emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived by multiplying the county annual
and typical daily emissions by the percentage of agricultural land located in the PM10 NAA
(44.1%). See Section 1.5.2 for a discussion of the land use data used. Annual and typical daily
NH3 emissions from fertilizer application are shown in Table 3.5–25.
Table 3.5–25. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from fertilizer application.
Maricopa County
PM10 NAA

Fertilizer Category
Anhydrous ammonia
Aqueous ammonia
Ammonium nitrate
Ammonium sulfate
Ammonium thiosulfate
N-P-K (multi-grade nutrient
fertilizers)
Calcium ammonium nitrate
Nitrogen solutions
Urea
Diammonium phosphate
Monoammonium phosphate
Liquid ammonium
polyphosphate
Potassium nitrate
Miscellaneous
Total

3.5.3

Annual
Emissions
(tons/year)
70.64
3.75
0.00
74.40
0.00

Daily NH3
Emissions
(lbs/day)
386.0
20.5
0.0
406.5
0.0

Annual NH3
Emissions
(tons/year)
31.18
1.65
0.00
32.84
0.00

Daily NH3
Emissions
(lbs/day)
170.4
9.0
0.0
179.5
0.0

0.00
0.00
1,397.66
496.42
2.66
71.77

0.0
0.0
7637.5
2712.7
14.6
392.2

0.00
0.00
616.93
219.12
1.18
31.68

0.0
0.0
3371.2
1197.4
6.4
173.1

38.94
0.95
119.24
2,276.43

212.8
5.2
651.6
12,439.5

17.19
0.42
52.63
1,004.82

93.9
2.3
287.6
5,490.8

Livestock

PM10 and PM2.5 emissions estimates were derived using Maricopa County cattle inventory
estimates for 2008 from Arizona Agricultural Statistics Bulletin (AASS, 2009) and emission
factor for PM10 for dairy cattle, and feedlot cattle from the California Air Resources Board
(CARB, 2004). PM2.5 was presumed to be 11% of PM10 per WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook
(WRAP, 2006d).
The number of “cattle on feed” was not available from the Arizona Agricultural Statistics
Bulletin (AASS, 2009) for 2005 through 2008; therefore, 2004 numbers were used. Beef cows
were excluded from the inventory as information provided by Arizona Agricultural Statistics
staff (Koong, 2004) indicated that the majority of beef cows that are not on feed are grazed on
range and pastures. Cattle on feed, milk cows, and other cattle (heifers, steers, bulls, and calves
on dairies and ranches) were included in the PM10 and PM2.5 emission estimates for livestock.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

70

June 2010

The 2008 Maricopa County cattle inventory and applicable PM emission factors are contained in
Table 3.5–26.
Table 3.5–26. Maricopa County cattle populations and PM emission factors.
Animal type
Cattle on feed
Milk cows
Other cattle
Total:

No. of
Head
5,000
100,000
58,000
170,000

PM10 Emission Factor
(lb/1000 head/day )
28.9
6.7
28.9

PM2.5:PM10 Ratio
0.11
0.11
0.11

Typical daily PM10 emissions from livestock in Maricopa County were calculated using the
following formula:
Typical daily emissions
(lbs/day) from dairy cattle

= milk cow inventory (1,000 head) × emission factor (lbs PM10/1,000 head/day)
= 100 × 6.7
= 670.0 lbs PM10/day

It was assumed that livestock emissions occur evenly throughout the year. Annual PM10 and
PM2.5 emissions were derived by multiplying typical daily emissions by 366 days/year.
NH3 emissions from livestock in Maricopa County were estimated by growing the 2005 NH3
emissions by the percentage change in Maricopa County cattle and calve numbers from 2002 to
2008 (AASS, 2003; AASS, 2009) 2. The cattle and calf populations declined 8.11% from 2002 to
2008; as shown in Table 3.5–27 below. The estimated 2005 and 2008 NH3 emissions from
livestock emissions are shown in Table 3.5–28.
Table 3.5–27. Maricopa County cattle inventory for 2002 and 2008.
Maricopa Co.
Percentage
2002
2008
Change
All cattle & calves
185,000
170,000
-8.1%

Table 3.5–28. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from livestock in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions
Typical daily
(tons/year)
emissions (lbs/day)
2005 Emissions
10,429.53
57,148.1
% Change in cattle and calves, 2002 to 2008
–8.11%
-8.11%
2008 Emissions
9,583.89
52,514.5

MCAQD determined through GIS analysis of confined animal feeding operation (CAFO) locations and animal numbers in Maricopa County that 57.3% of CAFO animals are located within
the nonattainment area. Therefore, annual and typical daily emissions for the nonattainment area
were calculated by multiplying the Maricopa County emission totals by 57.3%.
Table 3.5–29 summarizes the annual and typical daily emissions from livestock for Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area.

2. The 2005 NH3 emissions were calculated using the CMU Ammonia Model (CMU, 2004). The activity levels in the CMU model are based on
the 2002 Census of Agriculture; therefore, emissions were grown using the percentage change in cattle and calve numbers from 2002 to 2008.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

71

June 2010

Table 3.5–29. Annual and typical daily emissions from livestock.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NH3
Maricopa County
455.80
50.14
9,583.89
2,490.7
274.0
52,514.5
PM10 NAA
260.95
28.70
5,486.90
1,426.0
156.9
30,065.2

3.5.4

Health services: crematories

Emissions from human and animal crematories were calculated from annual emissions inventory
reports from all crematories located within the county. Typical daily emissions were calculated
based on the operating schedule data reported by surveyed facilities. Annual and typical daily
emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived based on the location data of the individual facilities.
Table 3.5–30 summarizes annual and typical daily emissions from crematories in both Maricopa
County and the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 3.5–30. Annual and typical daily emissions from crematories.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Maricopa County
0.93
0.62
12.39
1.58
7.0
4.7
93.1
11.9
PM10 NAA
0.93
0.62
12.36
1.58
7.0
4.6
92.6
11.8

3.5.5

Accidental releases

As part of its air quality permit compliance program, MCAQD keeps an “upset log”, for each
calendar year that records excess emissions and accidental releases at permitted facilities.
Annual emissions inventory reports also provide for recording of accidental releases. Data from
these two sources documented the release of 0.01 tons of PM10 and 0.06 tons of NOx for the year
2008. To be conservative, PM2.5 amounts are assumed to be equal to PM10 amounts. (No
accidental releases of SOx or NH3 were reported).
Typical daily emissions were calculated by summing reported releases and dividing the total by
366 days. Emissions in the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated based on locations of
facilities that reported releases. The resulting estimates are shown in Table 3-5–31 below.
Table 3.5–31. Annual and typical daily emissions from accidental releases.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5*
NOx
PM10
PM2.5*
NOx
Maricopa County
0.01
0.01
0.06
0.1
0.1
0.3
PM10 NAA
0.01
0.01
0.06
0.1
0.1
0.3
* As a conservative estimate, all PM10 emissions are assumed to be PM2.5.

3.5.6

Humans

A literature review by Battye et al. (1994) recommended using a per-capita emission factor
developed for the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) inventory in 1985.
This factor was applied to MAG population estimates for the county and PM10 nonattainment
areas (see section 1.5 for population information). Daily emissions were calculated by dividing
annual values by 366. The resulting estimates are shown in Table 3-5–32.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

72

June 2010

Table 3.5–32. Annual and typical daily NH3 emissions from human activity.
Emission factor
Annual NH3
Typical daily NH3
Geographic Area
Population
(lbs/ person-yr) emissions (tons/yr) emissions (lbs/day)
Maricopa County
4,279,760
0.55
1,176.93
6,431.3
PM10 NAA
4,297,140
0.55
1,181.71
6,457.5

3.5.7

Leaf blower fugitive dust

Fugitive dust emissions from leaf blowers are the result of blowing loose material from the area
being cleared by the leaf blowers. Exhaust emissions from gasoline-powered leaf blowers are
covered under the Nonroad Mobile Sources section of this report (Chapter 4). Fugitive dust
emission estimates are developed with the use of three sources: EPA’s NONROAD model,
California Air Resources Board report to legislature on leaf blowers (CARB, 2000), and a recent
research effort done by the University of Riverside (Fitz et al., 2005).
EPA’s 2008NONROAD model was used to estimate the number of gasoline-powered leaf
blowers in Maricopa County (n = 109,787), along with the average activity figures for those leaf
blowers. Total leaf blower population estimates were derived from CARB (2000), which
estimated that 60% of all leaf blowers sold are electric. Thus assuming the remaining 40% are
gasoline-powered, the total population was estimated as:
Total leaf blower population

= Gas-powered leaf blower population

÷ 40%

= 109,787

÷ 0.4

= 274,468 units

The remaining 164,681 units [= 274,468 – 109,787] are thus assumed to be electric-powered.
Fitz et al. (2005) developed emission factors for PM10 and PM2.5 fugitive dust emissions from
leaf blowers. For this report, the most conservative (highest) emission factors were chosen to
estimate emissions. Given these two data sources, Table 3.5–33 lists the equipment population
numbers, activity estimates and emission factors for leaf blowers in Maricopa County.
Table 3.5–33. Leaf blower equipment populations, activity levels and emission factors for Maricopa County.
Annual activity
PM10 emission
PM2.5 Emission
Leaf blower description
Population
(hrs/yr)
factors (mg/m2)
factors (mg/m2)
Commercial 2-stroke gasoline
3,345
626
70
30
Commercial 4-stroke gasoline
1,639
626
70
30
Residential 2-stroke gasoline
99,624
10
70
30
Residential 4-stroke gasoline
5,179
10
70
30
Electric
164,681
10
130
40
n/a
n/a
n/a
Total:
274,468

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

73

June 2010

CARB (2000) estimates that approximately 1600m2 of surface can be cleared in one hour of leaf
blower operation. Therefore, annual emission estimates were calculated by using the following
formula, as in this example for electric leaf blowers:
Annual PM10 emissions
= population × activity
from electric leaf blowers
(hrs/yr)
= 164,681

× 10 hrs/yr

× emission factor
(mg/m2)

× area covered
(m2/hr)

× 130 mg/m2

× 1600 m2/hr

= 342,536,480,000 mg/yr
= 377.24 tons PM10/yr

The activity hours associated with leaf blowers can occur at any time during the year in Maricopa County due to the temperate climate, with no substantial seasonal variation. Therefore,
typical daily emissions were estimated by dividing annual totals by 366 days per year. Emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area are allocated based on the ratio of population in the
County to the nonattainment area (see Section 1.5 for information on population). Table 3.5–34
lists annual and daily fugitive emissions from leaf blowers for Maricopa County and the PM10
nonattainment area.
Table 3.5–34. Annual and typical daily emissions from leaf blower fugitive dust.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
891.36
336.41
4,870.8
1,838.3
PM10 NAA
894.98
337.78
4,890.6
1,845.8

3.5.8

Offroad recreation vehicles fugitive dust

The EPA NONROAD2008 model estimates exhaust emissions for offroad recreational vehicles.
These emissions are included in the nonroad emissions category of the 2008 particulate emissions inventory. Particulate emissions are also generated by recreational vehicles traveling on
unpaved surfaces. For the 2008 periodic inventory, these emissions were estimated by MAG
using mileage and activity data for offroad recreational vehicles in Maricopa County from the
NONROAD2008 model. The methodology and assumptions for calculating fugitive dust emissions from offroad recreational vehicles traveling are described in this section.
The EPA NONROAD2008 model provides annual mileage and number of vehicles by county for
all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), offroad motorcycles (ORMs), and specialty vehicles/carts (SVCs).
The NONROAD2008 default values for annual mileage and number of vehicles by type for
Maricopa County in 2008 are shown in Table 3.5–35.
To be consistent with the 2005 Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 (MCAQD, 2007), it was
assumed that 75 percent of the annual travel by offroad recreational vehicles occurs on unpaved
surfaces inside Maricopa County, with the remaining 25 percent occurring on paved surfaces
within Maricopa County and paved and unpaved surfaces outside of Maricopa County. The
product of the mileage, number of vehicles, and 75 percent produces the annual vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) on unpaved surfaces, shown in Table 3.5–35. Dividing annual VMT totals by
366 produces a daily estimated offroad recreational vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces in
Maricopa County in 2008.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

74

June 2010

Table 3.5–35. 2008 offroad recreational vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces in Maricopa County.
Annual
Number of
2008 Annual
2008 Daily
Vehicle Type
Mileage
Vehicles
VMT
VMT
ATV
1,608
30,424
36,691,344
100,250
ORM
1,600
7,359
8,830,800
24,128
SVC (Non-Diesel)
65
1,718
83,753
229
SVC (Diesel)
435
150
48,938
134

The VMTs above were multiplied by emission factors for unpaved industrial roads from AP-42
(US EPA, 2006b), assuming a silt content of 11.9 percent and an average vehicle weight of onehalf of a ton. The resultant PM10 emission factor for ATVs and SVCs is 0.594 pounds per vehicle mile traveled. This emission factor was reduced by 50 percent for ORMs (i.e., 0.297 pounds
per mile) to account for two wheels generating dust instead of four. Applying the AP-42 equation results in a PM2.5 emission factor for ATVs and SVCs of 0.059 pounds per mile, while the
comparable PM2.5 emission factor for ORMs is 0.0295 pounds per mile.
The AP-42 emission rates were multiplied by the annual and daily VMTs in Table 3.5–36 to
obtain uncontrolled fugitive dust emissions in pounds per day and tons per year. The results for
Maricopa County are shown in Table 3.5–37.
The emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were derived by applying geographic information
systems (GIS) to MAG 2009 land use data 1 to obtain the acreage of passive open space in the
PM10 nonattainment area and Maricopa County. Passive open space includes open desert, mountains and washes. The detailed calculations for deriving the PM10 nonattainment area emissions
are shown below:
Passive Open Space in the PM10 nonattainment area (NAA) = 262,662 acres
Passive Open Space in Maricopa County = 1,476,922 acres
Ratio of Passive Open Space in PM10 NAA vs. Maricopa County = 17.8%
PM10 NAA Emissions = 0.178 × Maricopa County Emissions

Application of the ratio above to Maricopa County emissions produces the uncontrolled annual
and typical daily PM10 NAA emissions shown in Table 3.5–36. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions
for all offroad recreational vehicle types (i.e., ATVs, ORMs and SVCs) are summed in this table.
These uncontrolled emissions do not include the 2008 emission reductions attributed to the committed measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan.
Table 3.5–36. 2008 uncontrolled emissions from offroad recreational vehicles.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
12,248.11
1,216.56
66,929.6
6,647.9
PM10 NAA
2,180.16
216.55
11,913.5
1,183.3

Two committed measures that reduce emissions from offroad recreational vehicles were quantified in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan for PM10 (MAG, 2007). The benefit taken in 2008 for
these measures in the Five Percent Plan is shown in Table 3.5–37.

1. Draft, as of March 24, 2010.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

75

June 2010

Table 3.5–37. Benefits of measures that reduce offroad recreational vehicle emissions.
2008 PM10 Emission Reductions
Committed Measures in Five Percent Plan
tons/yr
lbs/day
1. Reduce offroad vehicle use in areas with high
offroad vehicle activity (Measure 19)
140.3
766.5
2. Ban ATV use on high pollution days (Measure 23)
25.7
140.6
Total 2008 PM10 emission reductions for offroad recreational vehicles
166.0
907.0

The emission benefits in Table 3.5–37 were subtracted from the uncontrolled PM10 emissions in
Table 3.5–36. The 2008 PM-10 emission reduction of 166.0 tons per year represents 7.6% of the
uncontrolled emissions in the PM-10 NAA of 2,180.16 tons per year. This percent reduction was
applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in the PM10 NAA; then the absolute reduction in
PM2.5 emissions due to the control measures was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in
Maricopa County. The annual and daily controlled emission estimates are shown in Table 3.5-38
below.
Table 3.5–38. 2008 controlled emissions from offroad recreational vehicles.
Annual Emissions (tons/yr)
Typical Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
12,082.12
1,200.11
66,022.5
6,558.0
PM10 NAA
2,014.17
200.09
11,006.4
1,093.4

3.5.9

Unpaved parking lots fugitive dust

Fugitive dust emissions from vehicles traveling on unpaved parking lots were developed by
MAG based on land area devoted to unpaved parking lots, vehicle activity on unpaved parking
lots, and emission rates from AP-42 (US EPA, 2006b). The methodology, assumptions and
calculations involved in estimating fugitive dust from vehicles traveling on unpaved parking lots
are described in this section.
The vehicle miles traveled on unpaved parking lots in the PM10 nonattainment area (NAA) were
derived using assumptions from the Phase I windblown dust modeling for the Western Regional
Air Partnership (ENVIRON, 2004). This study estimated that eight percent of the vacant land in
core urban areas is disturbed and thirty percent of the land under development is disturbed. For
the 2008 periodic emissions inventory, the core urban area is defined as the carbon monoxide
maintenance area. In addition, the thirty percent of disturbed land under development has been
reduced by two-thirds (i.e., from thirty percent to ten percent) to mirror a 67 percent decline in
total permitted construction acreage in the PM10 NAA between 2005 and 2008. GIS was applied
to 2009 MAG land use data 2 to estimate that there are 171,785 acres of vacant land in the core
urbanized area and 64,519 acres of land under development in the PM10 NAA. Multiplying the
vacant disturbed percentages by these land areas produces:
171,785 acres × 0.08 = 13,743 acres of vacant disturbed land in the urbanized core
64,519 acres × 0.10 = 6,452 acres of vacant disturbed land under development

Summing the vacant disturbed acres in the urbanized core and areas under development produces
a total of 20,195 acres of vacant disturbed land in the PM10 NAA. In estimating fugitive dust
emissions from unpaved parking lots, the MAG Serious Area PM10 Plan assumed that 24 percent
2. Ibid.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

76

June 2010

of the disturbed vacant non-agricultural land is devoted to unpaved parking areas (MAG, 2000).
Applying this percentage to the acres of vacant disturbed land results in 4,847 acres of unpaved
parking lots in the PM10 NAA.
The MAG Serious Area PM10 Plan also assumed that the average size of an unpaved parking lot
is 625 square meters (i.e., 0.154 acres), an average of ten vehicles travel on each lot per day, and
each vehicle travels an average distance of 0.031 miles on a lot. Multiplying 10 vehicles per day
times 0.031 miles per vehicle and dividing by 0.154 acres produces 2.0 vehicle miles of travel
(VMT) per acre per day. Multiplying 2.0 by 4,847 acres yields 9,694 VMT per day on unpaved
parking lots in the PM10 NAA.
The emission factors for unpaved parking lots were derived from the AP-42 equation for
unpaved industrial roads (US EPA, 2006b), assuming a silt content of 11.9 percent and an
average vehicle weight of 3.18 tons. The resultant AP-42 emission factors are 1.365 pounds per
mile for PM10 and 0.137 pounds per mile for PM2.5.
These AP-42 emission factors were applied to the unpaved parking lot VMT of 9,694 to obtain
uncontrolled emissions in pounds per day. The pounds per day were converted to tons per year,
assuming 366 days in 2008. The results for the PM10 NAA are shown in Table 3.5–40.
To estimate emissions for Maricopa County, GIS was applied to 2009 MAG land use data 3 to
obtain 2,227,981 acres of vacant land in Maricopa County. Removing the vacant land in the
Maricopa County portion of the PM10 NAA (i.e., 466,553 acres) results in 1,761,428 vacant acres
located inside Maricopa County, but outside the PM10 NAA.
Assuming one percent of the vacant land outside the PM10 NAA is disturbed (Clark County,
2006) and 24 percent of the disturbed vacant land is unpaved parking areas (MAG, 2000), results
in 4,227 acres of unpaved parking areas inside Maricopa County, but outside the PM10 NAA.
Multiplying by 2.0 VMT per acre per day results in 8,454 VMT per day. Applying the AP-42
emission rates produces the unpaved parking lot emissions inside Maricopa County, but outside
the PM10 NAA of 11,539.7 pounds per day of PM10 and 1,158.2 pounds per day of PM2.5.
The final step in estimating Maricopa County emissions requires removing the Pinal County
portion of the PM10 NAA. The unpaved parking lot emissions in the Pinal County portion of the
PM10 NAA are assumed to be proportional to the acres of vacant land. These were derived using
GIS and 2009 MAG land use data 4, with the results shown below:
Vacant land in the Pinal County portion of the PM10 NAA = 6,278 acres
Vacant land in the PM10 NAA = 472,831 acres
Ratio = 6,278/472,831 = 1.3%; Pinal County portion = 1.3% × PM10 NAA emissions
Pinal County portion of PM10 emissions = 1.3% × 13,232.3 = 172.0 pounds per day
Pinal County portion of PM2.5 emissions = 1.3% × 1,158.2 = 17.3 pounds/day

Adding the emissions inside and outside the PM10 NAA and subtracting the Pinal County portion
produces total Maricopa County emissions attributable to vehicles traveling on unpaved parking
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

77

June 2010

lots in pounds per day. Pounds per day were multiplied by 366 [= no. days in 2008] to derive
annual totals. The resultant 2008 uncontrolled emissions for Maricopa County are shown in
Table 3.5–39. Uncontrolled emissions do not include the 2008 emission reductions attributed to
the committed measure in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan.
Table 3.5–39. 2008 uncontrolled emissions from vehicles traveling on unpaved parking lots.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
4,501.80
451.83
24,600.0
2,469.0
PM10 NAA
2,421.51
243.04
13,232.3
1,328.1

One committed measure that reduces emissions from unpaved parking lots was quantified in the
MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan for PM10 (MAG, 2007). The benefit taken in 2008 for this
measure in the Five Percent Plan is shown in Table 3.5–40.
Table 3.2–40. Benefits of measure that reduces unpaved parking lot emissions.

Committed Measure in Five Percent Plan
1. Pave or stabilize existing unpaved parking lots (Measure 25)

2008 PM10 emission
reduction
tons/yr
lbs/day
56.4
308.4

The emission benefit in Table 3.5-40 was subtracted from the uncontrolled PM10 emissions in
Table 3.5-39. The 2008 PM10 emission reduction of 56.4 tons per year represents 2.3% of the
uncontrolled emissions in the PM10 NAA of 2,421.51 tons per year. This percent reduction was
applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in the PM10 NAA; then the absolute reduction in
PM2.5 emissions due to the control measure was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in
Maricopa County. The annual and daily controlled emission estimates are shown in Table 3.5-41
below.
Table 3.5–41. Annual and typical daily controlled emissions from unpaved parking lots.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Geographic area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Maricopa County
4,445.36
446.24
24,291.6
2,438.5
PM10 NAA
2,365.07
237.45
12,923.9
1,297.5

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

78

June 2010

3.5.10 Windblown dust
Windblown dust emissions were calculated using a combination of local meteorology conditions,
land use and vertical flux emission rates. A full description of the methodology is included as
Appendix 4. Tables 3.5–42 and 3.5–43 summarize annual and typical daily emissions from
windblown dust by major land use category for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment
area.
Table 3.5–42. Annual and typical daily emissions from fugitive windblown dust for Maricopa County.
Annual Emissions (tons/yr) Avg. Daily Emissions (lb/day)
Land Use Category
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Agriculture, harvested
1,711.76
171.18
9,353.9
935.4
Agriculture, unharvested
1,349.51
134.95
7,374.4
737.4
Developing
3,334.78
333.48
18,222.8
1,822.3
Landfill, Sand & Gravel, Automotive Test Tracks
1,646.51
164.65
8,997.3
899.7
Passive/Restricted Open Space
44,174.80
4,417.48
241,392.4
24,139.2
Vacant
60,570.87
6,057.09
330,988.4
33,098.8
Total
112,788.23
11,278.82
616,329.1
61,632.9
Table 3.5–43. Annual and typical daily emissions from fugitive windblown dust for the PM10 NAA.
Annual Emissions (tons/yr) Avg. Daily Emissions (lb/day)
Land Use Category
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Agriculture, harvested
755.57
75.56
4,128.8
412.9
Agriculture, unharvested
327.69
32.77
1,790.7
179.1
Developing
2,664.48
266.45
14,560.0
1,456.0
Landfill, Sand & Gravel, Automotive Test Tracks
1,435.81
143.58
7,845.9
784.6
Passive/Restricted Open Space
3,762.38
376.24
20,559.5
2,056.0
Vacant
9,522.43
952.24
52,035.2
5,203.5
Total
18,468.36
1,846.84
100,920.0
10,092.0

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

79

June 2010

3.5.11 Summary of all miscellaneous area sources
Tables 3.5–44 and 3.5–45 provide a summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all
miscellaneous area sources, for Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, respectively.
Table 3.5–44. Annual and typical daily emissions from all miscellaneous area sources for Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Source Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Wildfires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved ag roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers dust
Offroad rec. veh. dust
Unpaved parking lots
Windblown dust
Total:

470.39
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.18
2,059.00
136.93
1,739.52
17.90

403.43
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.17
308.85
20.54
173.95
5.11

455.80
0.93
0.01

50.14
0.62
0.01

891.36
12,082.12
4,445.36
112,788.23
135,133.31

336.41
1,200.11
446.24
11,278.82
14,269.99

103.79
0.39
1.95
1.20
6.74

28.46
0.11

21.76
0.03

2.49

2,276.43
9,583.89
12.39
0.06

1.58

6,271.8
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.3
22,932.4
3,938.9
11,150.8
103.8

5,379.0
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.2
3,439.9
590.8
1,115.1
29.7

2,490.7
7.0
0.1

274.0
4.7
0.1

4,870.8
66,022.5
24,291.6
616,329.1
758,826.5

1,838.3
6,558.0
2,438.5
61,632.9
83,717.8

1,383.8
131.2
10.7
6.6
50.5

379.4
36.0

19.0

12,439.5
52,514.5
93.1
0.3

11.9

1,176.93

126.52

32.64 13,059.05

290.2
10.6

6,431.3

1,676.1

446.4

71,686.1

Table 3.5–45. Annual and typical daily emissions from all miscellaneous area sources for the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Source Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Wildfires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved ag roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers dust
Offroad rec. veh. dust
Unpaved parking lots
Windblown dust
Total:

423.56
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.18
834.20
54.14
731.03
4.86

363.27
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.17
125.13
8.12
73.10
1.39

260.95
0.93
0.01

28.70
0.62
0.01

894.98
2,014.17
2,365.07
18,468.36
26,097.92

337.78
200.09
237.45
1,846.84
3,268.14

93.46
0.16
1.96
1.21
6.74

25.62
0.04

19.60
0.01

2.49

1,004.82
5,486.90
12.36
0.06

1.58

9,412.5
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.3
9,327.3
1,560.0
4,686.1
26.7

8,072.7
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.2
1,399.1
234.0
468.6
7.6

1,426.0
7.0
0.1

156.9
4.6
0.1

4,890.6
11,006.4
12,923.9
100,920.0
156,539.2

1,845.8
1,093.4
1,297.5
10,092.0
25,024.8

2,076.8
80.6
10.7
6.59
50.5

569.4
22.1

19.0

5,490.8
30,065.2
92.6
0.3

11.8

1,181.71

115.94

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

29.74

7,693.04

80

435.5
6.5

6,457.5

2,318.0

622.4

61,982.0

June 2010

3.6

Summary of all area sources

Tables 3.6–1 and 3.6–2 summarize the total annual and typical daily emissions from all area
sources addressed in this chapter, for both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area,
respectively.
Table 3.6–1.

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Source Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Fuel Combustion
Industrial natural gas
Industrial fuel oil
Comm./inst. natural gas
Comm./inst. fuel oil
Residential natural gas
Residential wood
Residential fuel oil
All fuel combustion
Industrial Processes
Chemical manufacturing
Commercial cooking
Grain processing
Cold storage
Secondary metal prod.
Mineral processes
Mining & quarrying
Wood product mfg.
Rubber/plastic mfg.
Fabricated metal mfg.
Residential construction
Commercial construction
Road construction
Other construction
Electrical equip mfg.
ADEQ-permitted
portable sources
Road travel at
industrial sites
Industrial processes NEC
All Industrial Processes
Waste Treatment/disposal
On-site incineration
Open burning
Landfills
POTWs
Other waste
All Waste Treatment/
Disposal

30.78
458.79
66.54
224.14
61.75
461.59
0.01
1,303.61

30.78
575.29
458.79 6,375.08
66.54 1,267.11
224.14 3,273.40
61.75
763.81
429.28
34.69
0.01
0.25
1,271.30 12,289.62

2.42
609.61
5.23
271.27
4.88
5.34
0.10
898.83

12.70
26.25
4.20
8.13

51.27

187.43
988.99
20.59

151.42
917.18
6.71

0.00

0.34

0.03

60.56
195.81
210.39
217.26
140.94
51.48
2,259.80
5,364.98
2,725.90
216.23
13.94

52.16
97.28
59.56
203.25
105.96
42.62
225.98
536.50
272.59
21.62
9.64

49.73

18.65

1,678.43
.004

20.45

0.18

59.00

29.50

282.18

88.93

608.17
144.60
14,928.89

282.95
107.24
3,268.45

10.22
362.58

21.49
129.60

0.06
111.46
86.21

0.04
111.46
75.92

5.01
29.96
24.11

0.01

31.55

16.79
1,731.34

7.57

197.3
2,941.0
426.5
1,436.8
337.5
4,334.2
0.1
9,673.4

197.3
2,941.0
426.5
1,436.8
337.5
4,030.8
0.1
9,370.0

3,687.7
40,865.9
8,122.5
20,983.3
4,173.8
325.7
2.3
78,161.3

15.5
3,907.8
33.5
1,738.9
26.6
50.1
0.9
5,773.3

81.4
168.3
26.9
52.1

1,445.8
5,434.0
149.3

1,164.5
5,039.5
49.5

0.0

2.6

0.6

442.7
1,357.4
1,442.1
1,668.6
953.3
538.1
14,343.5
34,332.0
17,458.0
1,382.2
76.9

386.2
671.7
390.8
1,548.3
698.8
460.6
1,434.3
3,433.2
1,745.8
138.2
53.2

358.8

142.7

10.759.2
0.0

112.4

1.1

492.9

246.5

2.275.7

721.7

4,178.8
953.3
96,246.9

1,928.8
726.4
21,076.1

69.6
2,816.5

137.7
1,005.8

0.7
902.2
486.1

0.4
902.2
425.4

38.9
242.4
132.9

0.1
41.7

224.1

110.9

101.0

278.1

1,613.0

1,438.8

515.3

320.0

28.9

1,484.01
32.78

16.93

18.39

50.62

230.52

204.35

77.47

58.20

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

81

1,484.01

328.7

193.7

94.6
11,077.2

8,131.5

8,131.5

June 2010

Table 3.6–1.
Category

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Misc. Area Sources
Wildfires fires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved ag roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer application
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers dust
Offroad rec. veh. dust
Unpaved parking lots
Windblown dust
All Misc. Sources
TOTAL, ALL AREA
SOURCES

Table 3.6–2.
Category

470.39
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.18
2,059.00
136.93
1,739.52
17.90

403.43
0.51
15.04
30.04
0.17
308.85
20.54
173.95
5.11

103.79
0.39
1.95
1.20
6.74

28.46
0.11

455.80
0.93
0.01

50.14
0.62
0.01

891.36
12,082.12
4,445.36
112,788.23
135,133.31

336.41
1,200.11
446.24
11,278.82
14,269.99

32.64

151,596.33

19,014.09 12,856.18 1,119.27

21.76
0.03

6,271.8
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.3
22,932.4
3,938.9
11,150.8
103.8

5,379.0
169.3
82.2
164.1
1.2
3,439.9
590.8
1,115.1
29.7

2,490.7
7.0
0.1

274.0
4.7
0.1

13,059.05

4,870.8
66,022.5
24,291.6
616,329.1
758,826.5

1,838.3
6,558.0
2,438.5
61,632.9
83,717.8

1,676.1

446.4

71,686.1

16,329.74

866,359.8 115,602.7

83,169.2

7,545.5

91,223.5

2.49

2,276.43
9,583.89
12.39
0.06

1.58

1,383.8
131.2
10.7
6.6
50.5

379.4
36.0

19.0

12,439.5
52,514.5
93.1
0.3

11.9

1,176.93

126.52

290.2
10.6

6,431.3

Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Fuel Combustion
Industrial natural gas
Industrial fuel oil
Comm./inst. natural gas
Comm./inst. fuel oil
Residential natural gas
Residential wood
Residential fuel oil
All fuel combustion
Industrial Processes
Chemical manufacturing
Commercial cooking
Grain processing
Cold storage
Secondary metal prod.
Mineral processes
Mining & quarrying
Wood product mfg.
Rubber/plastic mfg.
Fabricated metal mfg.
Residential construction
Commercial construction
Road construction
Other construction
Electrical equip mfg
ADEQ-permitted
portable sources
Road travel at
industrial sites
Industrial processes NEC
All Industrial Processes

30.70
457.60
66.20
223.00
61.73
461.41
0.01
1,300.65

30.70
573.79
457.60 6,358.50
66.20 1,260.65
223.00 3,256.70
61.73
763.51
429.11
34.67
0.01
0.25
1,268.35 12,248.07

2.41
608.03
5.20
269.88
4.87
5.33
0.10
895.83

12.66
26.19
4.18
8.09

51.11

186.94
993.04
16.73

151.03
920.94
5.68

0.00

0.34

0.03

60.56
190.45
184.25
216.69
140.57
51.35
2,245.39
5,380.95
2,724.87
215.70
13.94

52.16
93.72
50.64
202.72
105.68
42.51
224.54
538.10
272.49
21.57
9.64

49.73

18.65

1,674.1
0.04

20.45

0.18

59.00

29.50

282.18

88.93

511.29
136.00
13,327.74

227.58
99.12
3,047.62

8.12
360.48

21.47
129.58

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

4.49

82

31.55

14.10
1,724.27

196.8
2,933.3
424.4
1,429.5
337.3
4,332.5
0.1
9,653.8

196.8
2,933.3
424.4
1,429.5
337.3
4,029.2
0.1
9,350.6

3,678.2
40,759.6
8,081.1
20,876.3
4,172.2
325.6
2.3
77,895.2

15.5
3,897.6
33.3
1,730.0
26.6
50.1
0.9
5,754.1

81.2
167.9
26.8
51.8

1,442.0
5,456.3
125.3

1161.5
5,060.1
43.0

0.0

2.6

0.9

442.7
1,320.7
1,266.6
1,664.3
950.9
536.7
14,465.2
34,382.4
17,471.4
1,385.5
76.9

386.2
647.9
331.9
1,544.3
697.0
459.4
1,446.5
3,438.2
1,747.1
138.6
53.2

358.8

142.7

10,731.2
0.0

112.4

1.1

492.9

246.5

2,275.7

721.7

3,551.3
906.0
85,937.0

1,573.8
681.7
19,656.9

55.4
2,802.3

137.6
1,005.7

327.6

28.8

193.7

79.8
11,034.4

June 2010

Table 3.6–2 (cont’d). Summary of annual and typical daily emissions from all area sources in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Fuel Combustion
Waste Treatment/disposal
On-site incineration
Open burning
Landfills
POTWs
Other waste
All Waste Treatment/
Disposal
Misc. Area Sources
Wildfires
Prescribed fires
Structure fires
Vehicle fires
Engine testing
Tilling
Harvesting
Unpaved ag roads
Cotton ginning
Fertilizer application
Livestock
Crematories
Accidental releases
Humans
Leaf blowers dust
Offroad rec. veh. dust
Unpaved parking lots
Windblown dust
All Misc. Sources
TOTAL, ALL AREA
SOURCES:

3.7

0.06
27.67
60.25

0.04
27.67
50.78

5.01
7.44
19.47

0.01
6.22

0.7
232.6
342.4

0.4
232.6
286.6

38.9
62.5
107.4

0.1
34.3

224.1

110.9

101.0

278.1

1,494.12

8,164.6

32.78

16.93

18.39

50.62

120.77

95.42

50.30

56.85

1,494.12

799.8

630.5

309.9

312.6

8,164.6

423.56
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.18
834.20
54.14
731.03
4.86

363.27
0.21
15.10
30.16
0.17
125.13
8.12
73.10
1.39

93.46
0.16
1.96
1.21
6.74

25.62
0.04

19.60
0.01

9,412.5
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.3
9,327.3
1,560.0
4,686.1
26.7

8,072.7
104.0
82.5
164.81
1.2
1,399.1
234.0
468.6
7.6

2,076.8
80.6
10.7
6.59
50.5

569.4
22.1

435.5
6.5

260.95
0.93
0.01

28.70
0.62
0.01

1,426.0
7.0
0.1

156.9
4.6
0.1

894.98
2,014.17
2,365.07
18,468.36
26,097.92

337.78
200.09
237.45
1,846.84
3,268.14

115.94

29.74

7,693.04

4,890.6
11,006.4
12,923.9
100,920.0
156,539.2

1,845.8
1,093.4
1,297.5
10,092.0
25,024.8

2,318.0

622.4

42,455.4

40,847.07

7,679.53 12,774.79

1,112.00

10,962.54

252,929.8

54,662.7

83,325.3

7,694.7

61,982.0

2.49

1,004.82
5,486.90
12.36
0.06

1.58

19.0

5,490.8
30,065.2
92.6
0.3

11.8

1,181.71

6,457.5

Quality assurance/quality control procedures

Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) activities for the area source emissions inventory
were driven by the goal of creating a comprehensive, accurate, representative and comparable
inventory of area source emissions for Maricopa County and the nonattainment area. During
each step of creating, building and reviewing the area source emissions inventory, quality checks
and assurances were performed to establish confidence in the inventory structure and data.
Area source categories were selected for inclusion in the inventory based on the latest Emission
Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) guidance available. EPA’s guidance for area source
categories included in the draft 2002 National Emission Inventory (NEI) was also evaluated, as
area source emissions from this inventory will be submitted to EPA for the 2008 NEI. The list of
area source categories developed based on these guidance documents was modified to fit the
characteristics of Maricopa County, with some area source categories determined to be insignificant (such as industrial coal combustion and oil and gas production). The 1999 Maricopa
County Periodic Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Emission Inventories and other regional emission
inventories were also consulted to confirm the completeness of the area source categories chosen
for inclusion.
Data for area source emission calculations were gathered from a wide universe of resources.
Whenever applicable, local surveyed data (such as annual emissions report) was used as this data
best reflects activity in the county and the nonattainment area. When local data was not
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

83

June 2010

available, state data from Arizona State agencies (such as the Arizona Department of
Transportation) and regional bodies (such as the Western Regional Air Partnership, WRAP)
were used. National level data (such as the US Census Bureau) was used when no local, state or
regional data was available. In addition, the most recent EIIP guidance for area sources was
consulted for direction in determining the most relevant data source for use in emissions
calculations.
Emissions calculations for area sources were performed by three air quality planners and one unit
manager. All area source emission estimates were calculated in spreadsheets to ensure the
calculations could be verified and reproduced. Whenever possible or available, the “preferred
method” described in the most recent EIIP guidance documents for area sources was used to
calculate emissions. Emissions were estimated using emission factors from EIIP guidance, AP42, and local source testing. Local seasonal and activity data were used when available, with
EPA and EIIP guidance used when no local seasonal or activity data existed. All calculations
were evaluated to ensure that emissions from point sources were not being double-counted and to
determine if rule effectiveness applied.
Once area source emission estimates had been produced, several quality control checks were
performed to substantiate the calculations. Most area source calculations were peer-reviewed by
two other planners, with all area sources being reviewed by at least one other planner. Peer
review ensured that all emission calculations were reasonable and could be reproduced.
Sensitivity analyses and computational method checks were performed on area sources when
emissions seemed to be outside the expected ranges. When errors were found, the appropriate
changes were made by the author of the calculations to ensure consistency of the emissions
calculations. The peer-reviewed emissions estimates were combined into a draft area source
chapter. This draft chapter was read through in its entirety by the unit manager and the three air
quality planners for final review, with any identified errors corrected by the author of the section.
The draft version of the area source chapter was sent to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, the Arizona Department of Transportation, and the Maricopa
Association of Governments for a quality assurance review. These agencies provided comments
which were addressed and incorporated into the final area source chapter. Further quality
analysis was performed by inputting the emission estimates into EPA’s “QA/QC basic format
and content checker”, prior to submitting the data to the 2008 NEI.
The QA/QC activities described here have produced high levels of confidence in the area source
emissions estimates detailed in this chapter, and represent the best efforts of the inventory
preparers.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

84

June 2010

3.8

References

AASS, 2003. 2002 Arizona Agricultural Statistics Bulletin, Arizona Agricultural Statistics
Service, September 2003.
AASS, 2009. 2008 Arizona Agricultural Statistics Bulletin, Arizona Agricultural Statistics
Service, September 2009.
ADC, 2008. July 1, 2008 Population Estimates for Arizona’s Counties, Incorporated Places and
Balance of County, Population Statistics Unit, Research Administration, Arizona Department
of Commerce, December 12, 2008. Internet address: http://www.azcommerce.com/doclib/
econinfo/FILES/2008AZestimates.pdf
ADOC, 2010. Arizona Department of Commerce. Heating Degree Days: Phoenix. Internet
address: http://www.azcommerce.com/doclib/ENERGY/Degreedays.pdf
ASLD, 2009. Glen Buettner [glenbuettner@azstatefire.org], Forestry Division, Arizona State
Land Department, Re: 2008 wildland fire data for Maricopa County, e-mail message, April
20, 2009.
Battye, R., W. Battye, C. Overcash and S. Fudge, 1994. Development and Selection of
Ammonia Emission Factors, p. 6-3. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory by EC/R Inc., Durham, NC,
Internet address: http://www.sraproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/
developmentandselectionofammoniaemissionfactors.pdf
CARB, 2000. A report to the California legislature on the potential health and environmental
impacts of leaf blowers. February, 2000
CARB, 2003. Area-wide Source Methodologies, Section 7.5 Agricultural Harvest Operations,
revised January 2003. Internet address: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/index7.htm.
CARB, 2004. Area Source Methodologies – Section 7.6 (Cattle Feedlot Dust). California Air
Resources Board, Sacramento, CA. Revised May 2004. Internet address:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/fullpdf/FULL7-6.PDF.
CARB, 2006 Speciation Profiles and Size Fractions. California Air Resources Board,
Sacramento, CA. Internet address: http://www.arb.ca.gov/emisinv/speciate/speciate.htm.
Clark County, 2001. PM10 State Implementation Plan for Clark County (Nevada), Appendix B:
Emissions Inventory Methodology, Emission Factors, and Emission Estimates, June 2001, p.
B-59. Internet address: http://www.co.clark.nv.us/daqem/aq/plans/pm10sip2001.html.
Clark County, 2006. Inventory of Vacant Land Soil Stability and Unpaved Private Roads in the
Las Vegas Valley Using Remote Sensing Imagery. Prepared by Environmental Quality
Management, Inc. and Midwest Research Institute for the Clark County (Nevada)
Department of Finance. December 2006.
CMU, 2004. Carnegie Mellon University Ammonia Model Version 3. Internet address:
http://www.cmu.edu/ammonia/.
DFBLS, 2009. Frank Fisher [frank.fisher@dfbls.az.gov] , Arizona Department of Fire, Building,
and Life Safety (DFBLS), Re: data request - 2008 fire data for Maricopa County, e-mail
message, May 4, 2009.
ENVIRON, 2004. Final Report, Determining Fugitive Dust Emissions From Wind Erosion.
Prepared by ENVIRON for the Western Governors’ Association. March 12, 2004.
FFOW, 2009. Federal Fire Occurrence website, http://wildfire.cr.usgs.gov/firehistory/data.html,
federal wildland fire occurrence data downloaded on Aug. 18, 2009.
Fitz, Dennis, D. Pankrath, S. Pederson, J. Bristow, and G. Arcemont, 2005. Determination [of]
Particulate Emission Rates from Leaf Blowers. Center for Environmental Research and
Technology, University of California Riverside. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
chief/conference/ei15/ session5/fitz.pdf

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

85

June 2010

Koong, 2004. Dennis Koong, Arizona Agricultural Statistical Service, pers. commun. February
3, 2004.
MAG, 2000. Draft Final Report 1994 Regional PM10 Emission Inventory for the Maricopa
County Nonattainment Area, Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM10 for
the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area, Appendices Volume One. Maricopa Association
of Governments, Phoenix, AZ, Feb. 2000.
MAG, 2000a. Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM10 for the Maricopa
County Nonattainment Area. Prepared by the Maricopa Association of Governments.
February 2000.
MAG, 2007. MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan for PM10 for the Maricopa County Nonattainment
Area. Prepared by the Maricopa Association of Governments. December 2007.
MAG, 2009. Maricopa Association of Governments, Anubhav Bagley
(abagley@mag.maricopa.gov), “Agricultural Land in Area A”, e-mail message, December
11, 2009.
MCAQD, 2007. 2005 Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 for the Maricopa County, Arizona,
Nonattainment Area. Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department. May 2007.
MCESD, 1993. 1990 Base Year Ozone Emission Inventory for Maricopa County, Arizona,
Nonattainment Area, Draft Submittal, Maricopa County Environmental Quality &
Community Services Agency, Phoenix, AZ, March 1993.
MCESD, 1999. 1999 Periodic Ozone Emissions Inventory for the Maricopa County, Arizona
Nonattainment Area, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, Phoenix AZ,
Rev. Aug. 2002.
MCESD, 2009. Hans Moesbergen, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department,
“Permit Average 2008”, e-mail message, February13, 2009.
MCAQD, 2006. Personal communications with George Mills, Dust Compliance Division,
MCAQD, and Dena Konopka, MCAQD, November 2006.
MCAQD, 2007. Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 2005 Periodic Emissions Inventory
for PM10 for the Maricopa County, Arizona, Nonattainment Area, May 2007, Available at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/reports/Defaul
t.aspx
Tchobanoglous, G., 1979. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse. McGrawHill Science/Engineering/Math, New York.
URS and ERG, 2001. Technical Support Document of Quantification of Agricultural Best
Management Practices, Final, URS Corporation and Eastern Research Group, Inc., June 8,
2001
US Census Bureau, 2010a. 2007 County Business Patterns (NAICS). Internet address:
http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/cbpnaic/cbpsect.pl.
US Census Bureau, 2010b. Selected Housing Characteristics: 2008, 2008 American Community
Survey 1-Year Estimates, House Heating Fuel for Maricopa County and Arizona State.
Internet address: http://factfinder.census.gov
US Census Bureau, 2010c. B25117. Tenure by House Heating Fuel – Universe: Occupied
Housing Units. 2008 American Community 1-Year Estimates, Fuel oil, kerosene, etc. for
Maricopa County and Arizona State [Owner occupied and renter occupied]. Internet address:
http://factfinder.census.gov
USDA, 2007a. United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics
Service, 2007 Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data. Table 32.
Fruits and Nuts: 2007 and 2002, and Table 28. Other Crops: 2007 and 2002. Available at:
http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_Count
y_Level/Arizona/index.asp.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

86

June 2010

USDA, 2007b. United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics
Service, 2007 Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data. Table 42.
Fertilizers and Chemicals Applied: 2007 and 2002, Available at:
http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_Count
y_Level/Arizona/index.asp.
USDA, 2008a. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fire and Aviation Management
Web Applications (FAMWEB), Previous Years ICS-209s. Internet address:
http://fam.nwcg.gov/fam-web/.
USDA, 2008b. United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service,
Quick Stats, U.S. & All States County Data – Crops, Potatoes, 2008. Available at:
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Data_and_Statistics/Quick_Stats/index.asp.
US DOE, 2010a. US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. Adjusted
Sales for Industrial Use: Distillate Fuel Oil, Residual Fuel Oil, and Kerosene, 2008 (Table
21)
US DOE, 2010b. US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. Adjusted
Sales for Commercial Use: Distillate Fuel Oil, Residual Fuel Oil, and Kerosene, 2008 (Table
20)
US DOE, 2010c. US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. State Energy
Data 2007: Consumption, Table 8–Residential Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 1960–
2007, Arizona. Internet address:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_use/notes/use_print2007.pdf
US EIA, 2010. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Arizona Total Distillate
Sales/Deliveries to Residential Consumers. Internet address:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=KD0VRSSAZ1&f=A.
US EPA, 1992. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42). Fifth Ed. Vol. I:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. Section 2.5: Open Burning. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC.
US EPA, 1997. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42). Fifth Ed. Vol. I:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. Section 13.2.1: Paved Roads. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC.
US EPA, 1998a. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42). Fifth Ed. Vol. I:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. Section 1.4: Natural Gas Combustion. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/final/
c01s04.pdf.
US EPA, 1998b. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42). Fifth Ed. Vol. I:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. Section 13.2.2: Unpaved Roads. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC.
US EPA, 2000. Area Source Category Method Abstract: Vehicle Fires. Emission Inventory
Improvement Program (EIIP), May 2000. Internet address:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/volume03/vehclf13.pdf
US EPA, 2001a. Introduction to Area Source Emission Inventory Development. Emission
Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Vol. III, Chap. 1. Prepared by Eastern Research
Group, Revised Final, Jan. 2001. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/
techreport/volume03/iii01_apr2001.pdf.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

87

June 2010

US EPA, 2001b. Residential Wood Combustion. Emission Inventory Improvement Program
(EIIP) Vol. III, Chap. 2. Revised Final, Jan. 2001. Prepared by Eastern Research Group, Inc.
for the Area Source Committee, EIIP. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/
techreport/volume03/iii02_apr2001.pdf.
US EPA, 2001c. Structure Fires. Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Vol. III,
Chap. 18. Revised Final, Jan. 2001. Prepared by Eastern Research Group, Inc. for the Area
Source Committee, EIIP. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/
volume03/iii18_apr2001.pdf.
US EPA, 2002. Residential Construction – Fugitive Dust. Emission Inventory Improvement
Program (EIIP) Vol. IX: Particulate Emissions. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
chief/eiip/techreport/volume09/residn3.pdf.
US EPA, 2005. Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations.
USEPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. August
2005, updated Nov. 2005. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eidocs/eiguid/.
US EPA, 2006a. Documentation for the 2002 Preliminary Nonpoint Source National Emission
Inventory for Criteria and Hazardous Air Pollutants (Feb. 2006 Version). Appendix A:
Criteria and HAP Emissions Estimation Methodology, Commercial Cooking, pp. A-16.
Prepared by E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. for Emission Factor and Inventory Group.
Internet address:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2002finalnei/documentation/nonpoint/2002nei_final_nonpoi
nt_documentation0206version.pdf
US EPA, 2006b. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42). Fifth Ed. Vol. I:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. Section 13.2.2: Unpaved Roads. November 2006.
Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13/final/c13s0202.pdf
USGS, 2008. United States Geological Survey, GeoMAC (Geospatial Multi-Agency
Coordination) Wildland Fire Support database. Internet address: http://www.geomac.gov/
USFS, 1993. Cliff Dills, US Forest Service, Payson Ranger Station, Payson AZ, pers. comm.
USFS, 2009. Ronald Sherron [Sherron.Ronald@azdeq.gov], US Forest Service , Re: Data
Request - 2008 Maricopa County Prescribed Fire Data and Tonto Natl Forest Wildfire Data
Needed, e-mail message, July 28, 2009.
WGA/WRAP, 2005. 2002 Fire Emission Inventory for the WRAP Region – Phase II. Project
No. 178-6. Western Governors Association/Western Regional Air Partnership. July 22, 2005.
Tables 5 and 6. Internet address:
http://www.wrapair.org/forums/fejf/documents/WRAP_2002_PhII_EI_Report_20050722.pdf
WRAP 2006a. Fugitive Dust Handbook. Chapter 3.0 Construction and Demolition, September
2006. Internet address: http://wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.
WRAP 2006b. Fugitive Dust Handbook. Chapter 2.0 Agricultural Tilling, September 2006.
Internet address: http://wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.
WRAP 2006c. Fugitive Dust Handbook. Chapter 10.0 Agricultural Harvesting, September 2006.
Internet address: http://wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.
WRAP 2006c. Fugitive Dust Handbook. Chapter 6.0 Unpaved Roads, September 2006. Internet
address: http://wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.
WRAP 2006d. Fugitive Dust Handbook. Chapter 13.0 Livestock Husbandry, September 2006.
Internet address: http://wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

88

June 2010

4.

Nonroad Mobile Sources

4.1

Introduction

Nonroad mobile sources are defined as those that move or are moved within a 12-month period
and are not licensed or certified as highway vehicles. Nonroad mobile sources are vehicles and
engines that fall under the following categories:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Agricultural equipment, such as tractors, combines and balers;
Airport ground support equipment, such as baggage tugs and terminal tractors;
Commercial equipment, such as generators and pumps;
Industrial equipment, such as forklifts and sweepers;
Construction and mining equipment, such as graders, back hoes and trenchers;
Lawn and garden equipment, such as leaf blowers and lawn mowers;
Logging equipment (not present in Maricopa County);
Pleasure craft, such as power boats and personal watercraft;
Railway maintenance equipment, such as rail straighteners;
Recreational equipment, such as all-terrain vehicles and off-road motorcycles;
Underground mining and oil field equipment (not present in Maricopa County);
Aircraft, such as jet and piston engines; and
Locomotives, such as switching and line haul trains.

Emission calculations for most nonroad mobile source categories except aircraft, airport ground
support equipment (GSE) and locomotives were derived using EPA’s NONROAD model, ver.
2008.1.0 (Core version 2008, April 2009). Aircraft and airport GSE emission estimates were
made using the Federal Aviation Administration’s EDMS (Emissions Dispersion Modeling
System) model, ver. 5.1.1. Locomotive emission calculations were derived from surveys of the
three railroad companies that have operations in the county (Burlington Northern Santa Fe,
Union Pacific and Amtrak).
County specific temperature and fuel-related inputs are required for the operation of the NONROAD model. Monthly temperature and fuel data were provided by the Arizona Department of
Weights and Measures. The following table lists the local county inputs used:

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

89

June 2010

Table 4.1–1.

Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

NONROAD model county temperature- and fuel-related inputs.
Fuel
Diesel
Gasoline
Temperatures (°F)
ETOH
RVP
Sulfur
Sulfur
Max.
Min. Average
(psi)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(Vol%)
64
45
54.90
8.8
6
35
9.47
69
48
58.45
8.4
6
23
9.24
79
54
66.84
8.4
7
49
9.18
87
61
74.23
7.8
7
23
5.57
91
66
78.74
6.8*
6*
27*
0.00*
107
80
93.40
6.6
6
25
0.00
106
84
95.16
7.0
4
19
0.00
104
82
93.16
6.8
6
29
0.00
101
79
90.07
6.5
6
35
0.00
91
65
78.13
7.9
7†
25
6.79
81
56
68.67
8.4
7†
15
8.78
65
46
56.03
8.3†
7
28†
8.17†

Ethanol Blend
Market
Total Oxygen
Share (%)
(wt%)
100
3.49
100
3.42
100
3.41
100
2.06
0*
0.00*
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
0
0.00
100
2.52
100
3.27
100†
3.03†

* Since measurements were not available, the average of June, July, August and September data was used.
† Since measurements were not available, the average of October, November, January, February, March and April data was used.

EPA recommends adjusting default NONROAD model values (such as equipment population,
activity levels of equipment, growth factors, etc.) where local data is available, as the default
values in the model are derived from national averages. The NONROAD model defaults were
adjusted in the following manner:
•

Equipment population numbers and activity levels for commercial lawn and garden
equipment were adjusted based on 2003 survey results of the commercial lawn and
garden industry performed by ENVIRON as part of an inventory developed to study the
impact of visibility impairing pollutants (ENVIRON et al., 2003). Survey results show
that for most categories of lawn and garden equipment, the equipment populations for
Maricopa County are significantly lower than EPA default values, while the average
annual hours of operation for most equipment types are slightly higher than EPA's values.
Using these new local data results is a considerable decrease in emissions from this
category, compared with earlier results using EPA default data.

The NONROAD model does not calculate emission values for NH3. Ammonia emission calculations for the NONROAD model were derived by using a multiplier of NOx emissions
developed by ENVIRON (2003).
Spatial allocation factors were developed (based on EPA guidance documents) to apportion nonroad emissions to the PM10 nonattainment area. The approaches used are described in each
section of this chapter.
Temporal allocations (used to calculate PM10 average-day emissions) for nonroad equipment
categories modeled in the NONROAD model come from EPA recommendations on weekday
and weekend day activity levels for each nonroad equipment category (US EPA, 1999). Table
4.1–2 lists the weighted activity level allocation fractions for each equipment class for weekdays
and weekend days. For this report, the most conservative (highest) allocation fraction in each
nonroad equipment class was used to calculate average-day emissions.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

90

June 2010

Table 4.1–2. Default weekday and weekend day activity allocation fractions.
Equipment category
Weekday
Weekend day
Agricultural
0.1666667
0.0833334
Airport ground support
0.1428571
0.1428571
Commercial
0.1666667
0.0833334
Construction and mining
0.1666667
0.0833334
Industrial
0.1666667
0.0833334
Lawn and garden (residential)
0.1111111
0.2222222
Lawn and garden (commercial)
0.1600000
0.1000000
Logging
0.1666667
0.0833334
Pleasure craft
0.0600000
0.3500000
Railway maintenance
0.1800000
0.0500000
Recreational
0.1111111
0.2222222

4.2

Agricultural equipment

Annual emissions from agricultural equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using EPA’s
NONROAD model as discussed above. County-wide results are shown in Table 4.2–1.
Table 4.2–1.
PM10
34.27

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from agricultural equipment in Maricopa County.
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
33.24
365.55
0.14
0.67

Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area were calculated based on EIIP guidance (US
EPA, 2002) which recommends using the ratio of agricultural land inside the nonattainment area
to agricultural land inside the county. See Section 1.5.2 for a discussion of land use data used.
PM10 NAA emissions from = Total County PM10 emissions
agricultural equipment
from agricultural equipment
= 34.27 tons

× Agricultural land use allocation factor
× 44.14%

= 15.13 tons PM10 /yr
Table 4.2–2.
PM10
15.13

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from agricultural equipment in the PM10 NAA.
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
14.67
161.35
0.06
0.30

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying annual emissions (generated by
the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day activity allocation factor for agricultural equipment listed in Table 4.1–2, and dividing the product by the number of
weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999), as follows:
Average County PM10 = Annual PM10
daily emissions
emissions
(lbs/day)
(tons/yr)
= 34.27

× daily activity allocation factor
for agricultural equipment
(week/day)

× 2000
÷ 52
(lbs/ton)
(wks/yr)

× 0.166667

× 2000

÷ 52

= 219.7 lbs/day
Table 4.2–3.
PM10
219.7

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from agricultural equipment in Maricopa County.
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
213.1
2,343.3
0.9
4.3

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

91

June 2010

PM10 nonattainment area average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying County averageday emissions by the agricultural land use allocation factor:
PM10 NAA average- = Maricopa County PM10 × Agricultural land use allocation factor
day emissions
average-day emissions
= 219.7 lbs/day

× 44.14%

= 100.4 lbs/day
Table 4.2–4.
PM10
97.0

4.3

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from agricultural equipment in the PM10 nonattainment area.
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
94.0
1,034.3
0.4
1.9

Airport ground support equipment and auxiliary power units

Annual emissions from airport ground support equipment (GSE) and auxiliary power units
(APUs) at most airports in the county were estimated using the Emissions Dispersion Modeling
System (EDMS, v. 5.1.1) from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The model can
estimate emissions from affiliated ground support equipment (GSE) and auxiliary power units
(APUs), by using either default equipment profiles, or user-specified data on equipment populations and activity patterns. In most cases, activity data on 2008 aircraft operations and GSE /
APU usage was obtained from individual airport surveys issued by MAG and/or MCAQD.
Where survey responses were incomplete or information was otherwise unavailable, activity data
was estimated using commercially available data, and EDMS default assumptions where appropriate. Further details concerning the modeling input data and results are presented in Section
4.11 of this report.
For Luke Air Force Base (AFB), emissions estimates for ground support equipment were obtained from a recent base-wide mobile source emissions inventory for calendar year 2008 that
had recently been completed for the US Air Force (Weston, 2010). Using data on the frequency
and intensity of usage for each type of equipment, annual emissions were calculated as in the
following example for a light card equipped with a diesel engine:
Epol = ELHP × OT × LF × EF / CF
where:
Epol = Annual emissions of a particular pollutant (lb/yr)
ELHP = Maximum horsepower rating of engine (hp)
OT = Operating time (hr/yr)
LF = Typical load factor that the engine operates (% of max)
EF = Emission factor (g/hp-hr)
CF = Conversion factor to convert grams to pounds

e.g. 10.7 hp
e.g. 52,560 hr/yr
e.g. 51%
e.g. 7.8 g/hp-hr
(453.59 g/lb)

Thus, total annual NOx emissions all similar pieces of this type of GSE was calculated as:
ENOx = 10.7 (hp) × 52,560 (hrs/yr) × 51% × 7.8 (g/hp-hr) / 453.59 (g/lb)
= 4,932 (lb/yr) / 2,000 (lb/ton)
= 2.47 tpy

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

92

June 2010

GSE emissions from the Luke AFB study were added to the EDMS-estimated emissions from
the other airports in the County. (The Luke study assumed APU usage, and thus emissions, to be
negligible.) A simplifying assumption was made for all airports; i.e., that activity is spread fairly
evenly throughout the week and year; thus daily emissions were estimated by dividing annual
totals by 366 (= days/yr in 2008). Tables 4.3–1 and 4.3–2 below present the totals for all airport
GSE and APU usage within both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, on an
annual and typical daily basis, respectively.

Table 4.3–1. Annual emissions (tons/yr) from all airport ground support equipment (GSE) and auxiliary
power units (APUs).
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
14.92
14.39
497.97
13.62
*
14.72
14.21
490.28
13.42
*
GSE
12.29
12.29
88.76
12.82
*
12.27
12.27
88.68
12.80
*
APUs
Total:
27.21
26.68
586.73
26.43
26.99
26.48
578.95
26.22
* At present, EDMS does not include calculation of ammonia emissions from aircraft operations.

Table 4.3–2.

Typical daily emissions (lb) from airport GSE and APU usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
81.5
78.7
2,721.1
74.4
*
80.4
77.7
2,679.1
73.3
67.1
67.1
485.0
70.0
*
67.1
67.1
484.6
70.0
148.7
145.8
3,206.1 144.4
147.5
144.7
3,163.7
143.3

GSE
APUs
Total:

NH3
*
*

* At present, EDMS does not include calculation of ammonia emissions from aircraft operations.

4.4

Commercial equipment

Annual emissions from commercial equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using EPA’s
NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment
area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of industrial employment in the nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals, as data on the number of wholesale establishments recommended by EIIP guidance (US EPA, 2002) was not available. See Section 1.5.1 for
a discussion of the industrial employment data used.
Table 4.4–1.
PM10
117.97

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from commercial equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
112.98
1,395.23
2.40
21.12
117.66
112.69
1,391.61
2.39

NH3
21.06

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for commercial equipment (0.1666667) listed in Table 4.1–2, and
dividing the product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area average-day emissions were calculated based on industrial employment ratios as
described above.
Table 4.4–2.
PM10
756.2

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from commercial equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
724.2
8,943.8
15.4
135.4
754.2
722.4
8,920.6
15.3

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

93

NH3
135.0

June 2010

4.5

Construction and mining equipment

Annual emissions from construction and mining equipment in Maricopa County were calculated
using EPA’s NONROAD model as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10
nonattainment area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of construction employment in the nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals as a conservative estimate, as the
EIIP-recommended allocation factor of total dollar value of construction was unavailable (US
EPA, 2002). See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the employment data used.
Table 4.5–1.

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from construction and mining equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
1,260.98 1,220.75 14,796.63
6.60
28.10
1,249.88
1,210.00 14,666.42 6.55

NH3
27.85

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for construction/mining equipment (0.1666667) listed in Table 4.1–2,
and dividing the product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10
nonattainment area average-day emissions were calculated based on population ratios as
described above.
Table 4.5–2.
PM10
8,083.2

4.6

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from construction and mining equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
7,825.3 94.850.2
42.3
180.1
8,012.1
7,756.4 94,015.6 42.0
178.5

Industrial equipment

Annual emissions from industrial equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using EPA’s
NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment
area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of industrial employment in the nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals as a conservative estimate, as the number of
employees in manufacturing recommended by EIIP guidance (US EPA, 2002) was unavailable.
See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the industrial employment data used.
Table 4.6–1.
PM10
101.69

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from industrial equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
98.96
2,593.13
3.22
56.23
101.42
98.71
2,586.39
3.21

NH3
56.09

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for industrial equipment (0.1666667) listed in Table 4.1–2, and dividing
the product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area
average-day emissions were calculated based on industrial employment ratios as described
above.
Table 4.6–2.
PM10
651.8

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from industrial equipment usage.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
634.4
16,622.7
20.6
360.5
650.1
632.7
16,579.4
20.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

94

NH3
359.5

June 2010

4.7

Lawn and garden equipment

Annual emissions from lawn and garden equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using
EPA’s NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. These results reflect revised equipment
population and usage estimates from survey work done in early 2003 for the Arizona Department
of Environmental Quality (discussed in further detail in Section 4.1). Annual emissions for the
PM10 nonattainment area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of population in the
nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals (since data on housing units was unavailable,
it was not possible to implement the EIIP-recommended calculation approach (US EPA, 2002).
See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the population data used.
Table 4.7–1.
PM10
182.28

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from lawn and garden equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
168.79
798.14
3.16
19.63
183.02
169.48
801.41
3.17

NH3
19.71

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for lawn and garden equipment (0.1600000 for the commercial segment, 0.2222222 for residential) listed in Table 4.1–2, and dividing the product by 52 (the
number of weeks in a year; US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area average-day emissions
were calculated by applying a population-based ratio as described in Section 4.7 above.
Table 4.7–2.
PM10
1,250.1

4.8

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from lawn and garden equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
1,156.9 5,571.5
23.1
144.6
1,255.3 1,161.6 5,594.4
23.2

NH3
145.2

Pleasure craft

Annual emissions from pleasure craft equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using
EPA’s NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of water surface area in the
nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals, as recommended by EIIP guidance (US
EPA, 2002). See Section 1.5.2 for a discussion of the land use data used.
Table 4.8–1.
PM10
9.25

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from pleasure craft equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
8.54
77.74
0.85
1.73
7.02
6.48
59.03
0.64

NH3
1.32

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for pleasure craft (0.3500000) listed in Table 4.1–2, and dividing the
product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area
average-day emissions were calculated based on water surface area as described above.
Table 4.8–2.
PM10
124.5

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from pleasure craft equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
114.9
1,046.5
11.4
23.3
94.5
87.3
794.6
8.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

95

NH3
17.7

June 2010

4.9

Railway maintenance equipment

Annual emissions from railway maintenance equipment in Maricopa County were calculated
using EPA’s NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10
nonattainment area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of population in the
nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals, as recommended by EIIP guidance (US
EPA, 2002). See Section 1.5.1 for a discussion of the population data used.
Table 4.9–1.
PM10
1.13

Annual emissions (tons/yr) from railway maintenance equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
1.09
9.23
0.00
0.02
1.13
1.10
9.26
0.00

NH3
0.02

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for railway maintenance equipment (0.1800000) listed in Table 4.1–2,
and dividing the product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area average-day emissions were calculated based on the population ratio as described
above.
Table 4.9–2.
PM10
7.8

4.10

Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from railway maintenance equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
7.6
63.9
0.0
0.1
7.8
7.6
64.1
0.0

NH3
0.1

Recreational equipment

Annual emissions from recreational equipment in Maricopa County were calculated using EPA’s
NONROAD model, as described in Section 4.1. Annual emissions for the PM10 nonattainment
area for this category were derived by applying the ratio of passive open space and vacant land
use in the nonattainment area to Maricopa County-level totals as recommended by EIIP guidance
(US EPA, 2002). See Section 1.5.2 for a discussion of the land use data used.
Table 4.10–1. Annual emissions (tons/yr) from recreational equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
45.58
41.98
63.80
0.42
2.10
7.68
7.08
10.76
0.07

NH3
0.35

County average-day emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County annual emissions (generated by the NONROAD model) by the most conservative weekday/weekend day
activity allocation factor for recreational equipment (0.2222222) listed in Table 4.1–2, and
dividing the product by the number of weeks (52) in the year (US EPA, 1999). PM10 nonattainment area average-day emissions were calculated based on land use as described above.
Table 4.10–2. Typical daily emissions (lbs/day) from recreational equipment.
Maricopa County
PM10 nonattainment area
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
389.6
358.8
545.3
3.6
18.0
65.7
60.5
91.9
0.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

96

NH3
3.0

June 2010

4.11

Aircraft

Emissions from aircraft operations at the largest civilian airports in Maricopa County were estimated using the Federal Aviation Administration’s Emissions and Dispersion Model (EDMS,
v. 5.1.1). The EDMS model combines specified aircraft and activity levels with default emission
factors in order to estimate annual emissions inventories for a specific airport. The model calculates emissions of sulfur oxides (SOx), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and
volatile organic compounds (VOC), and (for a small subset of aircraft and engine types), PM10
and PM2.5 as well. The model also estimates emissions from affiliated ground support equipment (GSE) and auxiliary power units (APUs); these emissions are reported separately and are
summarized in Section 4.3.)
MCAQD surveyed all medium-size and large airports in Maricopa County to gather data on the
types and levels of aircraft activity (specifically the number of landing and takeoff cycles, or
LTO’s) or touch and go operations (TGOs) where applicable, along with information on the
types of aircraft that comprise the airport’s typical fleet mix, and other operational data, such as
typical usage patterns of ground support equipment (GSE) and auxiliary power units (APUs),
average taxi/idle times, etc. Where survey responses were unavailable or incomplete, aircraft
activity data from publicly accessible databases, such as the FAA’s Air Traffic Activity System
(ATADS) and Enhanced Traffic Management System Counts (ETMSC), were used.
All emission estimates in this section have been developed using the EDMS model, with the
exception of Luke Air Force Base (AFB), whose emissions calculations have been prepared as
part of a base-wide 2008 mobile source emissions inventory that has recently been completed
(Weston, 2010). Luke AFB’s emissions reported here as ‘aircraft activity’ actually comprise
three distinct, though related, types of activity: (1) the operation of aircraft stationed at the base,
(2) a much smaller level of “transient” aircraft traffic within Luke’s airspace, and (3) emissions
produced during on-wing engine testing – considered a “mobile source” emission category.
As with all other airports included in this inventory, emissions from ground support equipment
(GSE) at Luke AFB are addressed in Section 4.3, Airport ground support equipment and
auxiliary power units.
In addition to the LTOs (and occasional TGO activity) reported by other airports in the area,
Luke reported two additional, types of aircraft operations: aircraft low fly bys (LFB), and aircraft
low fly patterns (LFP). Each of these types of operations can be characterized by a distinctive
combination of the times in mode (TIM); (e.g., approach, taxi in/out, takeoff and climb out.)
For F-16 activity, Luke’s emissions are based not on the number of LTOs, but rather the
aggregate annual operational time in modes (TIMs) for all aircraft of this type. For the F-16, an
LTO cycle includes five modes of operation: idle (taxi in/out), intermediate, approach, military
and afterburner. The F-16 emissions were estimated using the annual TIMs provided by Luke
AFB and emission factors from military guidance documents.
Table 4.11–1 lists the data sources for each airport’s activity level, as well as fleet mix. The total
number of aircraft operations in 2008 is also listed. For all airports other than Luke AFB,
aircraft emissions were estimated for four aircraft categories:
• Air carriers (abbreviated “AC”): Larger commercial aircraft with at least 60 seats or
18,000 lbs payload capacity, used for scheduled service to transport passengers and/or
freight;
• Air taxis (“AT”): Smaller commercial turbine- or piston-powered aircraft with less than
60 seats or 18,000 lbs payload capacity;
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

97

June 2010

•
•

General aviation (“GA”): Aircraft used on an unscheduled basis for recreational flying,
personal transportation, and other activities, including business travel; and
Military (“ML”): Aircraft used to support military operations.

Table 4.11–1. Annual airport operations (by aircraft category), and related data sources.
Airport
Operations Data
Fleet Mix Data
Aircraft
2008
Airport
Code
Source1
Source2
Type
Operations
Buckeye Municipal
BXK
airnav.com
Generic GA profile
GA
26,535
Chandler Municipal
CHD
FAA/ATADS
FAA/ETMSC
AT
2,882
GA
233,713
ML
247
Falcon Field
FFZ
FAA/ATADS
FAA/ETMSC
AC
6
AT
3,813
GA
313,448
ML
2,152
Gila Bend Municipal
E63
airnav.com
Generic GA profile
GA
1,768
Glendale Municipal
GEU
FAA/ATADS,
FAA/ETMSC
AT
1,873
Survey response
GA
134,282
ML
57
Luke Air Force Base
LUF
[ Emission totals provided by Luke AFB are based on times-in-mode. ]
Phoenix Deer Valley
DVT
Survey response
Survey response,
AC
284
FAA/ETMSC
AT
6,217
GA
370,003 *
ML
130
Phoenix Goodyear
GYR
Survey response
Survey response,
AC
140
FAA/ETMSC
AT
1962
GA
169,177 *
ML
6,747
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway
IWA
FAA/ATADS,
FAA/ETMSC
AC
3,876
(formerly Williams
Survey response
AT
5,937
Gateway)
GA
211,674
ML
5,939
Phoenix Sky Harbor
PHX
Survey response
Survey response,
AC
391,518
FAA/ETMSC
AT
77,354
GA
30,868
ML
2,759
Pleasant Valley
P48
airnav.com
Generic GA profile
GA
23,535
Scottsdale
SDL
FAA/ATADS
FAA/ETMSC
AT
11,232
GA
179,619
ML
560
Sky Ranch at Carefree
18AZ
Survey response
Generic GA profile
GA
1,515
Stellar Airpark
P19
airnav.com
Generic GA profile
GA
19,528
Wickenburg Municipal
E25
Survey responses
Generic GA profile
GA
6,000
1. FAA/ATADS: Federal Aviation Administration’s Air Traffic Activity Data System (database); http://aspm.faa.gov.
2. FAA/ETMSC: Federal Aviation Administration’s Enhanced Traffic Management System Counts (database); http://aspm.faa.gov.
* includes touch-and-go (TGO) operations levels reported by the airport.

The following section describes how activity and emissions were estimated for a representative
airport, Chandler Municipal (CHD). Data from FAA’s Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS,
http://www.aspm.faa.gov) provided data on 2008 activity by aircraft type; these results are
contained in Table 4.11–1. While ATADS reported a total of 233,713 general aviation operations at this airport in 2008, further information on the aircraft types comprising this activity was
needed. The FAA’s Enhanced Traffic Management System Counts (ETMSC) database was used
to “grow” available aircraft-specific operational data as described below.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

98

June 2010

The ETMSC database on general aviation activity at CHD in 2008 comprises 152 different aircraft types, totaling 3,589 operations, (See Table 4.11–2). To simplify modeling input requirements, this aircraft-specific activity data was ranked in order of decreasing frequency and
activity data for the most frequently reported aircraft was then grown to represent all general
aviation (“GA”) activity, as shown in Table 4.11–2 below.
Table 4.11–2. Example showing how most common aircraft-specific activity was grown for EDMS modeling.
ETMSC% of total
“Grown”
reported
reported
Cumulative
operations for
Rank Aircraft Type
operations operations
Percent
EDMS modeling
1
BE20 - Beech 200 Super King
240
6.7%
21,919
2
BE58 - Beech 58
233
6.5%
21,280
3
PA28 - Piper Cherokee
233
6.5%
21,280
4
C525 - Cessna CitationJet/CJ1
232
6.5%
21,189
5
C182 - Cessna Skylane 182
203
5.7%
31.8%
18,540
6
C172 - Cessna Skyhawk 172/Cutlass
194
5.4%
17,718
7
TBM7 - Socata TBM-7
166
4.6%
15,161
8
R22 - Robinson R-22 Mariner
138
3.8%
12,604
9
BE9L - Beech King Air 90
106
3.0%
9,681
10
BE36 - Beech Bonanza 36
97
2.7%
51.3%
8,859
11
BE55 - Beech Baron 55
90
2.5%
8,220
12
BE35 - Beech Bonanza 35
87
2.4%
7,946
13
C210 - Cessna 210 Centurion
75
2.1%
6,850
14
PA32 - Piper Cherokee Six
73
2.0%
6,667
15
P28R - Cherokee Arrow/Turbo
71
2.0%
62.4%
6,484
16
P46T - Piper Malibu Meridian
67
1.9%
6,119
17
SR22 - Cirrus SR 22
67
1.9%
6,119
18
BE30 - Raytheon 300 Super King Air
65
1.8%
5,936
19
MO20 - Mooney M-20
62
1.7%
5,662
20
C560 - Cessna Citation V/Ultra/Encore
60
1.7%
71.3%
5,480





152
XL2 - Liberty XL-2
1
< 0.1%
100.0%
(n/a)
Totals:
3,589
233,713

This approach of ranking reported activity, and then growing the most frequently occurring
subset of aircraft typically resulted in a set comprised of 10 to 30 aircraft types being modeled
for each airport/aircraft class combination, representing 60 to 100% of all reported activity.
Since the EDMS model includes estimates of PM10 emissions only for a relatively small number
of aircraft/engine types, all model output files were reviewed for missing data. For those
aircraft/engine combinations for which the EDMS model indicated zero PM10 emissions, the
default EPA emission factors listed in Table 4.11–3 (US EPA, 2003) were incorporated into the
EDMS output data files, and total PM emissions recalculated.
Table 4.11–3. EPA’s default PM10 emission factors for aircraft, by activity type.
Activity type
PM10 Emission Factor (lb/LTO)
Air Carrier, Air Taxi, Military
0.60333
General Aviation
0.2367

Following EPA guidance (US EPA, 2003), PM2.5 emissions were estimated to be 92% of PM10
levels. For ease in modeling computation and the assessment of emissions, all activity was
assumed to occur evenly throughout the year. Thus, average daily emissions were calculated by
dividing annual totals by 366 (= days per year in 2008). Tables 4.11–4 and 4.11–5 list the total
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

99

June 2010

annual emissions and average daily emissions, for each airport and aircraft type, for airports
within and outside the PM10 NAA, respectively.
Table 4.11–4. Annual and average daily emissions, by airport and aircraft type, from airports within the
PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
CateAirport
gory
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Chandler Municipal
AT
0.27
0.27
0.94
0.24
1.5
1.5
5.1
1.3
GA
12.68
11.79
18.51
6.43
69.3
64.4
101.1
35.1
ML
0.04
0.04
0.12
0.02
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.1
Total
12.99
12.10
19.56
6.68
71.0
66.1
106.9
36.5
Falcon Field
AC
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
AT
0.23
0.23
2.94
0.49
1.3
1.2
16.0
2.7
GA
18.49
17.07
14.34
6.16
101.0
93.3
78.3
33.7
ML
0.31
0.29
0.40
0.13
1.7
1.6
2.2
0.7
Total
19.03
17.59
17.67
6.78
104.0
96.1
96.6
37.0
Glendale Municipal
AT
1.06
1.05
9.70
2.43
5.8
5.7
53.0
13.3
GA
6.90
6.41
5.51
2.20
37.7
35.0
30.1
12.0
ML
0.01
0.01
0.12
0.02
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.1
Total
8.17
7.66
15.51
4.71
44.6
41.8
84.8
25.7
Luke Air Force Base† ML
62.82
62.82
382.40
31.81
343.3
343.3 2,089.6
173.8
Phoenix Deer Valley
AC
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.01
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.1
AT
0.41
0.41
3.97
0.76
2.2
2.2
21.7
4.2
GA
10.10
9.43
62.81
14.61
55.2
51.5
343.2
79.8
ML
0.02
0.02
0.07
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.1
Total
10.57
9.90
66.91
15.40
57.8
54.1
365.6
84.1
Phoenix Goodyear
AC
0.02
0.01
0.36
0.05
0.1
0.1
1.9
0.3
AT
0.19
0.19
1.61
0.28
1.1
1.0
8.8
1.5
GA
0.66
0.66
18.86
5.25
3.6
3.6
103.0
28.7
ML
0.96
0.89
3.66
1.07
5.2
4.8
20.0
5.8
Total
1.83
1.74
24.48
6.64
10.0
9.5
133.8
36.3
Phoenix Sky Harbor
AC
22.38
22.38 1,751.85
185.77
122.3
122.3 9,573.0 1,015.2
Intl.
AT
4.24
4.02
116.92
17.51
23.2
22.0
638.9
95.7
GA
3.37
3.21
12.81
2.83
18.4
17.6
70.0
15.4
ML
0.45
0.43
23.48
2.34
2.5
2.4
128.3
12.8
30.45
30.05 1,905.06
208.45
166.4
164.2 10,410.2 1,139.1
Phoenix-Mesa
AC
0.16
0.15
13.25
1.72
0.9
0.8
72.4
9.4
Gateway Airport
AT
0.63
0.62
3.02
0.64
3.4
3.4
16.5
3.5
GA
12.99
12.04
17.41
5.48
71.0
65.8
95.2
29.9
ML
0.58
0.55
26.56
3.14
3.2
3.0
145.1
17.1
14.35
13.36
60.24
10.98
78.4
73.0
329.2
60.0
Pleasant Valley
GA
0.36
0.33
1.65
0.34
1.9
1.8
9.0
1.8
Scottsdale
AT
1.03
1.02
7.84
1.37
5.7
5.6
42.8
7.5
GA
19.83
18.86
116.13
21.79
108.4
103.1
634.6
119.1
ML
0.08
0.08
0.24
0.06
0.5
0.4
1.3
0.3
20.95
19.96
124.21
23.22
114.5
109.1
678.8
126.9
Skyranch at Carefree
GA
0.18
0.17
0.39
0.10
1.0
0.9
2.1
0.5
Stellar Airpark
GA
2.31
2.13
2.42
0.97
12.6
11.6
13.2
5.3
PM10 NAA totals:
183.80
177.61 2,620.31
316.00 1,004.3
970.5 14,318.6 1,726.8
† Sum of emissions from the following categories, as reported in Weston (2010): (1) aircraft stationed at Luke AFB, (2) transient aircraft, and (3)
on-wing aircraft engine testing.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

100

June 2010

Table 4.11–5. Annual and average daily emissions, by aircraft type, from airports outside the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
CateFacility
gory
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Buckeye Municipal
GA
3.14
2.89
2.70
0.97
17.2
15.8
14.8
5.3
Gila Bend Municipal
GA
0.21
0.19
0.18
0.06
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.3
Wickenburg Municipal
GA
0.77
0.73
2.75
0.61
4.2
4.0
15.0
3.3
Maricopa County totals:
187.91
181.42 2,625.94 317.64 1,026.8
991.4 14,349.4 1,735.8

4.12

Locomotives

Annual emissions from locomotives were calculated based on diesel fuel usage data provided by
Burlington Northern/Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), Union Pacific Railway (UP) and Amtrak.
Railway operations from these companies fall into two categories: Class I haul lines and yard/
switching operations. Annual emissions from these two activity categories were calculated by
multiplying diesel fuel usage by the emission factors listed in Table 4.12–1 (US EPA, 2009).
Table 4.12–1. Emission factors for locomotives.
Emission factors (lbs/gal diesel)
Activity type
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
Class I haul line
0.015
0.014
0.394
0.004
Yard/switch operations
0.015
0.014
0.421
0.004

NH3
0.0001
0.0001

The example below illustrates how emissions were calculated for each locomotive activity type.
Fuel use reported by railroads, and emission totals are summarized in Table 4.12–2.
PM10 emissions from = Diesel use (gals/yr)
UP Class I haul lines
= 7,780,284 gals/yr

× PM10 emission factor (lbs/gal) ÷ 2,000 lbs/ton
× 0.015 lbs/gal

÷ 2,000 lbs/ton

= 58.35 tons PM10/yr
Table 4.12–2. Total diesel use and annual emissions from locomotives in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Diesel use
Locomotive type
(gals/yr)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
BNSF Class I haul line
750,094
5.63
5.25
147.77
1.50
0.36
UP Class I haul line
7,780,284
58.35
54.46
1,532.72
15.56
3.70
BNSF yard/switch operations
400,000
3.00
2.80
84.20
0.80
0.19
UP yard/switch operations
378,199
2.84
2.65
79.61
0.76
0.18
Amtrak
52,416
0.39
0.37
10.33
0.10
0.02
Totals:
9,360,993
70.21
65.53
1,854.62
18.72
4.45

PM10 nonattainment area emissions were calculated by multiplying Maricopa County emissions
by the percentage of track miles within the PM10 nonattainment area, determined by GIS
mapping. Results are shown in Table 4.12–3.
PM10 nonattainment area emissions = County PM10 emissions
from UP Class I haul lines (tons/yr)
(tons/yr)
= 56.99 tons PM10/yr

× Percentage of track miles within
the PM10 nonattainment area
× 44.27%

= 25.83 tons PM10/yr

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

101

June 2010

Table 4.12–3. Annual emissions (in tons/yr) from locomotives in the PM10 NAA.
Track in
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
nonattainment
Locomotive type
area (%)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
BNSF Class I haul line
44.27
2.49
2.32
65.42
0.66
UP Class I haul line
44.27
25.83
24.11
678.53
6.89
BNSF yard/switch operations
100.00
3.00
2.80
84.20
0.80
UP yard/switch operations
100.00
2.84
2.65
79.61
0.76
Amtrak
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Totals:
34.16
31.88
907.76
9.11

NH3
0.16
1.64
0.19
0.18
0.00
2.16

PM10 typical daily emissions for both the county (shown in Table 4.12–4) and the PM10 nonattainment area (Table 4.12–5) were calculated by dividing annual totals by 366 days (since 2008
was a leap year), as locomotive activity is assumed to be uniform throughout the year.
PM10 typical daily
= Annual PM10 emissions (tons) × 2000 lbs/ton
emissions from haul lines
× 2000 lbs/ton
= 58.35 tons PM10/yr
= 312.3 lbs PM10/day

÷ 366 days
÷ 366 days

Table 4.12–4. Typical daily emissions (in lbs/day) from locomotives in Maricopa County.
Locomotive type
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
BNSF Class I haul line
30.7
28.7
807.5
8.2
1.9
UP Class I haul line
318.9
297.6
8,375.5
85.0
20.2
BNSF yard/switch operations
16.4
15.3
460.1
4.4
1.0
UP yard/switch operations
15.5
14.5
435.0
4.1
1.0
Amtrak
2.1
2.0
56.4
0.6
0.1
Totals:
383.6
358.1
10,134.5
102.3
24.3
Table 4.12–5. Typical daily emissions (in lbs/day) from locomotives in the PM10 nonattainment area.
Locomotive type
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
BNSF Class I haul line
13.6
12.7
357.5
3.6
0.9
UP Class I haul line
141.2
131.8
3,707.8
37.6
8.9
BNSF yard/switch operations
16.4
15.3
460.1
4.4
1.0
UP yard/switch operations
15.5
14.5
435.0
4.1
1.0
Amtrak
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Totals:
186.7
174.2
4,960.4
49.8
11.8

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

102

June 2010

4.13

Summary of all nonroad mobile source emissions

Table 4.13–1 summarizes annual and daily emissions of PM10, PM2.5, NOx, SOx and NH3 from
nonroad mobile sources in Maricopa County. Table 4.13–2 shows annual and typical daily
emissions for these pollutants for the PM10 nonattainment area.
Table 4.13–1. Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in Maricopa County.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Agricultural
Airport GSE
Commercial
Construction & mining
Industrial
Lawn & garden
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance
Recreational
Aircraft
Locomotives
Totals:

34.27
27.21
117.97
1,260.98
101.69
182.28
9.25
1.13
45.58
187.91
70.21
2,038.46

33.24
365.55
26.68
586.73
112.98 1,395.23
1,220.75 14,796.63
98.96 2,593.13
168.79
798.14
8.54
77.74
1.10
9.23
41.98
63.80
181.41 2,625.94
65.53 1,854.62
1,959.95 25,166.75

0.14
26.43
2.40
6.60
3.22
3.16
0.85
0.00
0.42
317.64
18.72
379.58

0.67
21.12
28.10
56.23
19.63
1.73
0.02
2.10
4.45
134.06

219.7
148.7
756.2
8,083.2
651.8
1,250.1
124.5
7.8
389.6
1,026.8
383.6
13,042.0

213.1
145.8
724.2
7,825.3
634.4
1,156.9
114.9
7.6
358.8
991.3
358.1
12,530.3

2,343.3
3,206.1
8,943.8
94,850.2
16,622.7
5,571.5
1,046.5
63.9
545.3
14,349.4
10,134.5
157,677.4

0.9
144.4
15.4
42.3
20.6
23.1
11.4
0.0
3.6
1,735.8
102.3
2,099.8

4.3
135.4
180.1
360.5
144.6
23.3
0.1
18.0
24.3
890.6

Table 4.13–2. Annual and typical daily emissions from nonroad mobile sources in the PM10 NAA.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Typical daily emissions (lbs/day)
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Agricultural
Airport GSE
Commercial
Construction & mining
Industrial
Lawn & garden
Pleasure craft
Railway maintenance
Recreational
Aircraft
Locomotives
Totals:

4.14

15.13
26.99
117.66
1,249.88
101.42
183.02
7.02
1.13
7.68
183.80
34.16
1,927.89

14.67
161.35
26.48
578.95
112.69 1,391.61
1,210.00 14,666.42
98.71 2,586.39
169.48
801.41
6.48
59.03
1.10
9.26
7.08
10.76
177.60 2,620.31
31.88
907.76
1,856.17 23,793.26

0.06
26.22
2.39
6.55
3.21
3.17
0.64
0.00
0.07
316.00
9.11
367.42

0.30
21.06
27.85
56.09
19.71
1.32
0.02
0.35
2.16
128.87

97.0
147.5
754.2
8,012.1
650.1
1,255.3
94.5
7.8
65.7
1,004.3
186.7
12,275.2

94.0
144.7
722.4
7,756.4
632.7
1,161.6
87.3
7.6
60.5
970.5
174.2
11,811.9

1,034.3
3,163.7
8,920.6
94,015.6
16,579.4
5,594.4
794.6
64.1
91.9
14,318.6
4,960.4
149,537.7

0.4
143.3
15.3
42.0
20.6
23.2
8.6
0.0
0.6
1,726.8
49.8
2,030.5

1.9
135.0
178.5
359.5
145.2
17.7
0.1
3.0
11.8
852.9

Quality assurance procedures

Established procedures were used to check, and correct when necessary, the nonroad mobile
sources emissions estimates. All NONROAD model input and output files, and Excel spreadsheets used to calculate the emissions, were checked by personnel not involved in developing the
modeling inputs/outputs and spreadsheets being reviewed. In addition, the emissions estimates
were reviewed for reasonableness by external agency staff.

4.15

References

ENVIRON et al., 2003. Maricopa County 2002 Comprehensive Emission Inventory for the Cap
and Trade Oversight Committee, Final Rep. prepared for Arizona Dept. of Environmental
Quality, Oct. 9, 2003.
ERG, 2001. Documentation for the Draft 1999 Base Year Aircraft, Commercial Marine Vessels,
and Locomotive National Emissions Inventory for Criteria and Hazardous Air Pollutants.
Prepared by Eastern Research Group, Morrisville, NC for the US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, Oct. 29,
2001. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eidocs/partllsec4.pdf.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

103

June 2010

US EPA, 1992. Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation – Vol. IV: Mobile Sources.
Office of Air and Radiation, EPA Rep. EPA420-R-92-009, December.
US EPA, 1998. National Air Pollutant Emission Trends Procedures Document, 1900-1996.
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Rep. EPA-454/R-98-008, Research Triangle
Park, NC. May.
US EPA, 1999. Weekday and Weekend Day Temporal Allocation of Activity in the NONROAD
Model. EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Rep. EPA420-P-99-033, March.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/p99033.pdf.
US EPA, 2002. Geographic Allocation of State Level Nonroad Engine Population Data to the
County Level. EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Rep. EPA420-P-02-009, July.
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/nonrdmdl/p02009.pdf.
US EPA, 2003. Documentation for the NONROAD Model Criteria Air Pollutant Component of
the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for Base Years 1970–2001. Rept. prepared by E.H.
Pechan & Associates for US EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sept. 2003.
Available at: ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/finalnei99ver3/criteria/documentation/nonroad/
nonroad_neimethods.pdf.
US EPA, 2010. 2008 National Emissions Inventory, Nonpoint: Fertilizer Application, May
2010. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html.
US EPA, 2009. Emission Factors for Locomotives. Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
Rep. EPA420-F-09-025, April 2009. Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/
nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf.
Weston Solutions Inc., 2010. 2008 Mobile Source Air Emissions Inventory for Luke Air Force
Base. Rept. prepared for Air Education and Training Command (AETC), US Air Force,
Randolph AFB, TX. June 2010.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

104

June 2010

5.

Onroad Mobile Sources

5.1

Introduction

Onroad mobile source emissions have been calculated for particulate matter for the 2008
Periodic Emissions Inventory (PEI) for the Maricopa County area. For the purposes of this
particulate matter inventory, the following pollutants were included: PM10, PM2.5, nitrogen
oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and ammonia (NH3). PM10 refers to all particles less than or
equal to 10 micrometers in diameter and PM2.5 refers to particles less than or equal to 2.5
micrometers in diameter.
Onroad mobile source emissions were estimated for the PM10 nonattainment area (NAA)
(approximately 3,000 square miles), as well as for Maricopa County (approximately 9,000
square miles). Emission factors were calculated using MOBILE6.2, which is the latest version in
a series of models developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the
purpose of estimating motor vehicle emission factors, and AP-42, which is the EPA Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. AP-42 emission factors were used to calculate fugitive dust
emissions, while MOBILE6.2 was used to estimate exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear emissions.
The MOBILE6.2 modeling accounted for the oxygenated fuel and the Arizona Vehicle
Inspection/ Maintenance (I/M) programs applied in Maricopa County in 2008. The fuel use
assumptions, including oxygen content and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), were derived from the
2008 testing results provided by the Arizona Department of Weight and Measures.
In order to develop the onroad mobile source emissions, the 2008 vehicle miles of travel (VMT)
estimates were derived from the 2008 Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data
provided by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The distribution of VMT by
vehicle type is based on the July 2008 vehicle registration data for Maricopa County provided by
ADOT. The VMT by vehicle class was multiplied by the appropriate MOBILE6.2 emission
factors to produce 2008 onroad exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear emissions.
Paved road fugitive dust emissions estimates were derived from the AP-42 emission factors and
the 2008 traffic assignment produced by the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG)
travel demand model. The 2008 VMTs for freeways, high-traffic arterials, and low-traffic
arterials were derived from the 2008 traffic assignment. Low-traffic arterials carry less than
10,000 vehicles on an average weekday, while high-traffic arterials carry 10,000 or more
vehicles on an average weekday. These traffic assignment VMTs were normalized to 2008
HPMS VMTs and multiplied by the appropriate particulate emission factors derived from the
AP-42 equation for paved roads. The 2008 benefits of the committed measures in the MAG
2007 Five Percent Plan for the Maricopa County PM10 Nonattainment Area (MAG, 2007) were
applied to estimate 2008 paved road particulate emissions for the PEI.
Unpaved road VMT for 2008 was derived from the MAG 2009 Unpaved Road Inventory (MAG,
2010). Unpaved alley VMT for 2008 was derived from a GIS analysis of 2009 aerial
photographs conducted by MAG. The unpaved road and alley VMTs were multiplied by the
appropriate AP-42 emission factors for unpaved roads and alleys, respectively. The 2008
benefits of the committed measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan were applied to estimate
2008 unpaved road and alley particulate emissions for the PEI.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

105

June 2010

The main references for preparing the onroad mobile source portion of the 2008 emissions
inventory were:
• Emission Inventory Requirements for Ozone State Implementation Plans (US EPA, 1991);
• Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation Volume IV: Mobile Sources (US EPA,
1992a);
• Technical Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory Preparation (US
EPA, 2002);
• User's Guide to MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2 (Mobile Source Emission Factor Model),
(US EPA, 2003); and
• Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors, AP-42 (US EPA, 2006).

5.2

VMT estimation

MAG prepared the 2008 VMT estimates for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County. The VMTs
used to develop vehicle exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road fugitive dust emissions
were derived from 2008 HPMS data provided by ADOT. The 2008 HPMS VMTs for the PM10
NAA and Maricopa County are 87,153,000 miles per day and 91,257,000 miles per day,
respectively.
The 2008 VMTs by facility type were used to estimate onroad exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear
emissions. The VMT distribution by facility type for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County was
obtained from the 2007 Maricopa County Estimates of Daily Vehicle Travel by Highway
Functional Classification derived from 2007 HPMS data by ADOT. The 2007 VMT
distributions were multiplied by the estimated 2008 VMT for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa
County. The resultant VMT estimates by facility type for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County
are shown in Table 5.2–1.
The 2008 VMTs by silt loading category were used to estimate paved road fugitive dust
emissions. Daily VMTs by silt loading category for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County are
shown in Table 5.2–2. The VMTs were derived by applying geographic information systems
(GIS) to a 2008 traffic assignment output by the MAG travel demand model, TransCAD. The
2008 weekday traffic volumes output by TransCAD was normalized to 2008 HPMS VMTs for
the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County to produce the VMTs by silt loading category shown in
Table 5.2–2.
The 2008 VMTs for unpaved roads and alleys were used to estimate unpaved road fugitive dust
emissions. The 2008 daily VMTs on unpaved roads and alleys in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa
County are shown in Table 5.2–3. The 2008 VMT for unpaved roads in the PM10 NAA was
derived from the MAG 2009 Unpaved Road Inventory (MAG, 2010). The 2008 VMT for
unpaved alleys in the PM10 NAA was derived by multiplying a MAG GIS-derived estimate of
650 miles of dirt alleys by an annual average daily traffic estimate of 9.1 vehicles per day. The
2008 Maricopa County VMTs were obtained by applying a ratio of 1.047 to the PM10 NAA
VMTs in Table 5.2–3. This ratio represents 2008 VMT on all roads in Maricopa County to 2008
VMT on all roads in the PM10 NAA, as shown in Table 5.2–4. The VMTs in Table 5.2–4
represent 2008 HPMS data submitted to the Federal Highway Administration by ADOT in
August 2009.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

106

June 2010

2008 daily VMT by facility type (annual average daily traffic).
PM10 NAA
Maricopa County
Facility Type
(thousand miles/day)
(thousand miles/day)
Interstate
2,458
3,163
Other Principal Arterial
937
1,205
Minor Arterial
391
503
Major Collector
1,149
1,478
Minor Collector
163
210
Local
1,188
1,529
Interstate
11,208
11,527
Other Freeway/Expressway
19,079
19,622
Other Principal Arterial
22,074
22,703
Minor Arterial
14,472
14,884
Collector
4,781
4,917
Local
9,253
9,516
Totals:
87,153
91,257
Urban

Rural

Table 5.2–1.

Table 5.2–2.

2008 VMT by silt loading category for paved roads.
Daily VMT
Maricopa County
Silt Loading Category
PM10 NAA
Freeways
30,835,329
32,526,693
High-Traffic Arterials
42,498,543
43,586,568
Low-Traffic Arterials
15,143,740
13,819,127
Totals:
87,153,000
91,257,000

Table 5.2–3.

2008 VMT on unpaved roads in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County.
2008 Annual Average Daily VMT
Area
Unpaved Roads
Unpaved Alleys
PM10 NAA
47,984
5,915
Maricopa County
50,239
6,193

Table 5.2–4.

2008 VMT on all roads in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County.
2008 Annual Average Daily VMT
Ratio to 2008 Annual Average
(in thousands)
Daily VMT in the PM10 NAA
Area
PM10 NAA
87,153
1.000
Maricopa County
91,257
1.047

5.3

Speed estimation

Vehicle speeds have no effect on the emission factors for exhaust particulate matter, re-entrained
dust from paved roads, brake wear, tire wear, or exhaust NH3, but they have a significant impact
on exhaust NOx emissions and re-entrained dust from unpaved roads, and a slight impact on SO2
and SO4. For onroad mobile source exhaust emissions, the 2008 traffic assignment data provided
by the MAG Transportation Group in June 2008 were applied to develop the speed estimates for
all facility types, except local roadways. To develop the speed estimates, VMTs and vehicle
hours of travel (VHTs) were accumulated separately for three facility type groups (i.e., freeway,
arterial, and collector) and two area types (i.e., urban and rural) across all four time periods (i.e.,
AM peak, midday, PM peak, and nighttime) in Maricopa County. Then, average daily speeds for
the three facility type groups and two area types were calculated by dividing VMTs by VHTs.
The same methodology was applied to develop the speed estimates for the PM10 NAA. For local
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

107

June 2010

roadways, a default speed of 12.9 miles per hour was assumed by MOBILE6.2. Table 5.3–1
presents average daily speeds applied for the MOBILE6.2 runs. An average speed of 25 miles
per hour was assumed on all unpaved roads.

Urban

Rural

Table 5.3–1.

5.4

Average daily speeds for the 2008 periodic emissions inventory.
PM10 NAA
HPMS Facility Type
(mph)
Principal Arterial - Interstate
46.8
Principal Arterial - Other
36.0
Minor Arterial
36.0
Major Collector
30.0
Minor Collector
30.0
Local
12.9
Principal Arterial - Interstate
44.1
Freeway and Expressway
44.1
Principal Arterial - Other
29.5
Minor Arterial
29.5
Collector
24.3
Local
12.9

Maricopa County
(mph)
51.5
38.1
38.1
30.3
30.3
12.9
44.4
44.4
30.1
30.1
24.2
12.9

Monthly VMT factors

For exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear emissions, annual emissions were calculated by
aggregating estimated monthly emissions, which were derived by applying monthly emission
factors to monthly VMTs. The monthly VMTs were calculated as the product of annual average
daily VMT, monthly VMT adjustment factors, and the number of days for a given month.
Since VMT varies by month, annual average daily VMT was adjusted by the monthly VMT
adjustment factors to derive daily VMT for each month. The monthly VMT adjustment factors
were developed from data recorded by continuous traffic counters on freeways (ADOT Freeway
Management System) and arterials (Phoenix Automatic Traffic Recorders) during the year 2007.
These monthly factors are shown in Table 5.4–1.
These factors indicate, as an example, that an average day in February has four percent more
traffic on arterials than an annual average day, while an average day in July has two percent less
traffic on freeways than an annual average day.
Table 5.4–1.
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

Average daily VMT adjustment factors by month.
Arterials
Freeways
0.99
1.00
1.04
1.03
1.03
1.03
1.04
1.02
1.02
1.01
0.97
1.01
0.91
0.98
0.97
0.97
1.01
0.97
1.01
0.99
1.02
1.00
1.00
1.00

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

108

June 2010

5.5

Emission factor estimation

Vehicle exhaust emission factors for PM10, PM2.5, NOx, SOx, and NH3 were calculated using
MOBILE6.2, as well as tire wear and brake wear emission factors for PM10 and PM2.5. The
exhaust PM10 and PM2.5 estimates include the components of lead, sulfate, and carbon (organic,
elemental, and total). The MOBILE6.2 emission factors were combined with VMT estimates to
produce total emission estimates for onroad vehicle exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear emissions.
The MOBILE6.2 runs were executed by MAG. The contact person for the MOBILE6.2
emission estimates is Ieesuck Jung (602-254-6300).
In order to calculate vehicle emission factors for the 2008 annual average day, two MOBILE6.2
runs reflecting vehicles registered locally (subject to the I/M program) and those not registered
locally (not participating in the I/M program) were executed using fuel and temperature data for
each month of the year.
Fugitive dust emission factors were derived from AP-42 by MAG. The derivation of paved and
unpaved road emission factors is discussed in Section 5.5.2. The contact person for the fugitive
dust emission estimates is Cathy Arthur (602-254-6300).

5.5.1

MOBILE6.2 emission factor model

The emission factors not related to fugitive dust were calculated using MOBILE6.2. The
emission factors estimated with these runs were combined to reflect the actual proportions of
vehicles subject to the specified levels of inspection. The term “I/M vehicles” denotes vehicles
which are required to undergo an emission test and/or inspection under the Arizona Vehicle
Inspection/ Maintenance Program. It is important to note that participation in the I/M program is
required for all vehicles registered in the PM10 NAA, with the exception of certain model years
and vehicle classes. However, it is assumed that only 91.6 percent of the vehicles operating
within the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County participate in the I/M program and the remaining
8.4 percent do not participate in the program. These percentages reflect the control measures
“Tougher Enforcement of Vehicle Registration and Emissions Test Compliance” and “Expansion
of Area A Boundaries”, described in the MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (MAG, 2009). In the absence of any
additional data, this percentage split is assumed to apply directly to VMT as well.

5.5.1.1 MOBILE6.2 inputs
In order to accurately reflect the state of the I/M program in the PM10 NAA, several MOBILE6.2
runs were performed and the emission factors from those runs weighted together. The specific
model run inputs to the MOBILE6.2 model are described in Appendix 5.

5.5.1.2 MOBILE6.2 outputs
MOBILE6.2 was executed with the inputs described in Appendix 5 to obtain composite emission
factors in grams per mile (g/mi) for PM10, PM2.5, NOx, SOx, and NH3. These values were
obtained for the following eight vehicle classes: light-duty gas vehicles (LDGV), light-duty gas
trucks of gross vehicle weight under 6000 pounds (LDGT1/LDGT2; LDGT12) and 6000 pounds
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

109

June 2010

or more (LDGT3/LDGT4; LDGT34), heavy-duty gas vehicles (HDGV), light-duty diesel
vehicles (LDDV), light-duty diesel trucks (LDDT), heavy-duty diesel vehicles (HDDV), and
motorcycles (MC); by the following twelve facility types: rural interstate, rural other principal
arterial, rural minor arterial, rural major collector, rural minor collector, rural local, urban
interstate, urban other freeway/expressway, urban other principal arterial, urban minor arterial,
urban collector, and urban local. The emission factors generated for each month of the year in
2008 are presented in Appendix 5. These values were subsequently used in developing emission
estimates.

5.5.1.3 MOBILE6.2 emission estimates
MOBILE6.2 was used to generate onroad emission factors and VMT mix by vehicle class and
facility type. Daily VMTs for an annual average day (Table 5.2–1) were then multiplied by the
VMT mix by vehicle class and the appropriate emission factor (Appendix 5) to estimate
emissions. VMT mix refers to the fraction of total onroad vehicle miles of travel from a
particular vehicle type. The 2008 vehicle registration data for Maricopa County was input to
MOBILE6.2 to obtain the VMT mix.
Tables 5.5–1 and 5.5–2 show the calculated annual and average daily PM10, PM2.5, NOx, SOx,
and NH3 emissions by facility type and vehicle class in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County,
respectively. Emission estimates for PM10 and PM2.5 in these tables represent exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear emissions.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

110

June 2010

Table 5.5–1. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and vehicle class in
the PM10 NAA.

Rural
Interstate

Rural
Other
Principal
Arterial

Rural
Minor
Arterial

Rural
Major
Collector

Rural
Minor
Collector

Rural
Local

Vehicle
Class
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

SCC
2201001110
2201020110
2201040110
2201070110
2201080110
2230001110
2230060110
2230070110

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001130
2201020130
2201040130
2201070130
2201080130
2230001130
2230060130
2230070130
2201001150
2201020150
2201040150
2201070150
2201080150
2230001150
2230060150
2230070150

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001170
2201020170
2201040170
2201070170
2201080170
2230001170
2230060170
2230070170
2201001190
2201020190
2201040190
2201070190
2201080190
2230001190
2230060190
2230070190

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001210
2201020210
2201040210
2201070210
2201080210
2230001210
2230060210
2230070210

PM10

Annual emissions (tons/yr)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

9.04
8.52
3.56
2.49
0.17
0.05
0.17
19.12
3.45
3.25
1.36
0.95
0.07
0.02
0.06
7.29
1.44
1.35
0.57
0.40
0.03
0.01
0.03
3.04
4.23
3.99
1.67
1.16
0.08
0.02
0.08
8.94
0.60
0.57
0.24
0.16
0.01
0.00
0.01
1.27
4.39
4.13
1.72
1.20
0.08
0.02
0.08
9.24

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

4.14
3.96
1.65
1.80
0.10
0.04
0.13
15.09
1.58
1.51
0.63
0.68
0.04
0.01
0.05
5.75
0.66
0.63
0.26
0.29
0.02
0.01
0.02
2.40
1.93
1.86
0.77
0.84
0.05
0.02
0.06
7.05
0.27
0.26
0.11
0.12
0.01
0.00
0.01
1.00
2.02
1.92
0.80
0.86
0.05
0.02
0.06
7.29

214.04
301.17
135.02
91.03
6.95
0.29
1.45
740.19
77.74
109.22
49.26
31.95
2.47
0.10
0.49
227.12
32.44
45.58
20.56
13.33
1.03
0.04
0.20
94.77
97.56
135.78
61.24
37.34
2.90
0.12
0.60
279.39
13.84
19.26
8.69
5.30
0.41
0.02
0.08
39.63
100.79
137.58
62.38
33.26
2.52
0.17
0.83
361.90

111

2.47
2.96
1.62
0.64
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.64
0.94
1.13
0.62
0.24
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.39
0.47
0.26
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
1.15
1.38
0.76
0.30
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.16
0.20
0.11
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.04
1.18
1.42
0.77
0.31
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.31

NH3

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

36.93
33.96
14.17
1.74
0.05
0.00
0.01
2.84
14.08
12.94
5.40
0.66
0.02
0.00
0.01
1.08
5.87
5.40
2.25
0.28
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.45
17.26
15.87
6.62
0.81
0.02
0.00
0.01
1.33
2.45
2.25
0.94
0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.19
17.85
16.41
6.85
0.84
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.37

49.4
46.6
19.4
13.6
1.0
0.2
0.9
104.5
18.8
17.7
7.4
5.2
0.4
0.1
0.4
39.8
7.9
7.4
3.1
2.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
16.6
23.1
21.8
9.1
6.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
48.8
3.3
3.1
1.3
0.9
0.1
0.0
0.1
6.9
24.0
22.6
9.4
6.5
0.5
0.1
0.4
50.5

22.6
21.6
9.0
9.8
0.5
0.2
0.7
82.5
8.6
8.2
3.4
3.7
0.2
0.1
0.3
31.4
3.6
3.4
1.4
1.6
0.1
0.0
0.1
13.1
10.6
10.1
4.2
4.6
0.2
0.1
0.3
38.5
1.5
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.5
11.0
10.5
4.4
4.7
0.3
0.1
0.3
39.9

1,169.6
1,645.7
737.8
497.4
38.0
1.6
7.9
4,044.7
424.8
596.8
269.2
174.6
13.5
0.5
2.7
1,241.1
177.3
249.1
112.3
72.9
5.6
0.2
1.1
517.9
533.1
742.0
334.7
204.0
15.9
0.7
3.3
1,526.7
75.6
105.3
47.5
28.9
2.2
0.1
0.5
216.6
550.8
751.8
340.8
181.8
13.8
0.9
4.5
1,977.6

13.5
16.2
8.8
3.5
0.1
0.0
0.0
3.5
5.1
6.2
3.4
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
2.1
2.6
1.4
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
6.3
7.6
4.1
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.9
1.1
0.6
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
6.4
7.7
4.2
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7

201.8
185.6
77.5
9.5
0.3
0.0
0.1
15.5
76.9
70.7
29.5
3.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
5.9
32.1
29.5
12.3
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.5
94.3
86.7
36.2
4.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
7.3
13.4
12.3
5.1
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
97.5
89.7
37.4
4.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
7.5

June 2010

Table 5.5–1. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and vehicle class in the
PM10 NAA (continued).
Facility
Type

Urban
Interstate

Urban
Other
Freeway
And
Expressway

Urban
Other
Principal
Arterial

Urban
Minor
Arterial

Urban
Collector

Urban
Local

Vehicle
Class
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

SCC
2201001230
2201020230
2201040230
2201070230
2201080230
2230001230
2230060230
2230070230

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001250
2201020250
2201040250
2201070250
2201080250
2230001250
2230060250
2230070250
2201001270
2201020270
2201040270
2201070270
2201080270
2230001270
2230060270
2230070270

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001290
2201020290
2201040290
2201070290
2201080290
2230001290
2230060290
2230070290
2201001310
2201020310
2201040310
2201070310
2201080310
2230001310
2230060310
2230070310

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001330
2201020330
2201040330
2201070330
2201080330
2230001330
2230060330
2230070330

PM10
41.23
38.85
16.23
11.34
0.80
0.21
0.77
87.19
70.18
66.13
27.63
19.31
1.36
0.35
1.32
148.41
81.19
76.65
32.02
22.28
1.57
0.41
1.52
171.73
53.23
50.25
20.99
14.61
1.03
0.27
1.00
112.59
17.66
16.63
6.94
4.82
0.34
0.09
0.33
37.20
34.17
32.19
13.42
9.31
0.66
0.17
0.64
71.99

Annual emissions (tons/year)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
18.88
18.04
7.54
8.19
0.44
0.17
0.60
68.80
32.13
30.71
12.83
13.94
0.75
0.29
1.02
117.12
37.17
35.68
14.84
16.08
0.87
0.33
1.18
135.53
24.37
23.39
9.73
10.54
0.57
0.22
0.77
88.86
8.09
7.73
3.21
3.47
0.19
0.07
0.26
29.35
15.72
14.95
6.25
6.71
0.37
0.14
0.50
56.81

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

966.38
1,359.1
0
610.22
406.42
30.63
1.27
6.27
3,208.5
1,645.00
2,313.54
1,038.75
6
691.83
52.15
2.16
10.67
5,461.7
1,882.33
7
2,616.8
1,180.21
9
714.80
55.62
2.33
11.53
5,386.8
1,234.16
1,715.61
1
773.81
468.63
36.46
1.53
7.56
3,531.6
9
429.01
590.53
266.16
148.35
11.40
0.53
2.62
1,223.6
0
785.04
1,071.5
4
485.82
259.07
19.64
1.30
6.43
2,818.7
2

112

11.26
13.51
7.38
2.92
0.07
0.00
0.02
2.94
19.17
23.00
12.56
4.98
0.12
0.00
0.04
5.00
22.17
26.61
14.53
5.76
0.14
0.00
0.05
5.79
14.54
17.44
9.52
3.77
0.09
0.00
0.03
3.80
4.80
5.70
3.15
1.25
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.25
9.16
11.03
6.04
2.43
0.06
0.00
0.02
2.43

168.40
154.84
64.63
7.94
0.24
0.01
0.07
12.94
286.65
263.59
110.02
13.52
0.41
0.02
0.11
22.04
331.62
304.91
127.26
15.64
0.48
0.02
0.13
25.49
217.41
199.90
83.43
10.25
0.31
0.02
0.09
16.71
71.83
66.04
27.56
3.39
0.10
0.01
0.03
5.52
139.01
127.81
53.34
6.56
0.20
0.01
0.05
10.68

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
225.3
212.3
88.7
62.0
4.4
1.1
4.2
476.4
383.5
361.3
151.0
105.5
7.4
1.9
7.2
811.0
443.7
418.8
175.0
121.8
8.6
2.2
8.3
938.4
290.9
274.6
114.7
79.8
5.6
1.5
5.5
615.2
96.5
90.9
37.9
26.3
1.9
0.5
1.8
203.3
186.7
175.9
73.3
50.9
3.6
0.9
3.5
393.4

103.1
98.6
41.2
44.7
2.4
0.9
3.3
376.0
175.6
167.8
70.1
76.2
4.1
1.6
5.6
640.0
203.1
195.0
81.1
87.9
4.8
1.8
6.5
740.6
133.2
127.8
53.2
57.6
3.1
1.2
4.2
485.5
44.2
42.2
17.6
19.0
1.0
0.4
1.4
160.4
85.9
81.7
34.1
36.7
2.0
0.8
2.7
310.4

5,280.8
7,426.8
3,334.5
2,220.9
167.4
6.9
34.3
17,532.
8
8,989.3
12,642.
3
5,676.3
3,780.5
285.0
11.8
58.3
29,845.
5
10,286.
2
14,299.
5
6,449.7
3,906.0
303.9
12.8
63.0
29,436.
4
6,743.8
9,374.9
4,228.5
2,560.8
199.3
8.4
41.3
19,298.
9
2,344.3
3,227.0
1,454.4
810.6
62.3
2.9
14.3
6,686.3
4,289.8
5,855.4
2,654.8
1,415.7
107.3
7.1
35.1
15,402.
9

61.5
73.8
40.3
16.0
0.4
0.0
0.1
16.0
104.7
125.7
68.6
27.2
0.7
0.0
0.2
27.3
121.2
145.4
79.4
31.5
0.8
0.0
0.3
31.6
79.4
95.3
52.0
20.6
0.5
0.0
0.2
20.7
26.2
31.1
17.2
6.9
0.2
0.0
0.1
6.9
50.0
60.3
33.0
13.3
0.3
0.0
0.1
13.3

920.2
846.1
353.2
43.4
1.3
0.1
0.4
70.7
1,566.4
1,440.4
601.2
73.9
2.3
0.1
0.6
120.4
1,812.1
1,666.2
695.4
85.5
2.6
0.1
0.7
139.3
1,188.1
1,092.4
455.9
56.0
1.7
0.1
0.5
91.3
392.5
360.9
150.6
18.5
0.6
0.0
0.2
30.2
759.6
698.4
291.5
35.8
1.1
0.1
0.3
58.4

June 2010

Table 5.5–2. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and vehicle class in
Maricopa County.
Facility
Type

Rural
Interstate

Rural
Other
Principal
Arterial

Rural
Minor
Arterial

Rural
Major
Collector

Rural
Minor
Collector

Rural
Local

Vehicle
Class
LDGV
LDGT12

SCC
2201001110
2201020110

LDGT34

2201040110

HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201070110
2201080110
2230001110
2230060110
2230070110

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001130
2201020130
2201040130
2201070130
2201080130
2230001130
2230060130
2230070130
2201001150
2201020150
2201040150
2201070150
2201080150
2230001150
2230060150
2230070150

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001170
2201020170
2201040170
2201070170
2201080170
2230001170
2230060170
2230070170
2201001190
2201020190
2201040190
2201070190
2201080190
2230001190
2230060190
2230070190

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001210
2201020210
2201040210
2201070210
2201080210
2230001210
2230060210
2230070210

PM10

Annual emissions (tons/year)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

11.64
10.96

5.33
5.09

280.13
394.47

3.18
3.81

47.52
43.70

63.6
59.9

29.1
27.8

1,530.8
2,155.6

17.4
20.8

259.7
238.8

4.58
3.20
0.22
0.06
0.22
24.60
4.43
4.18
1.74
1.22
0.09
0.02
0.08
9.37
1.85
1.74
0.73
0.51
0.04
0.01
0.03
3.91
5.44
5.13
2.14
1.49
0.11
0.03
0.10
11.50
0.77
0.73
0.30
0.21
0.01
0.00
0.01
1.63
5.65
5.32
2.22
1.54
0.11
0.03
0.11
11.90

2.13
2.31
0.12
0.05
0.17
19.42
2.03
1.94
0.81
0.88
0.05
0.02
0.06
7.40
0.85
0.81
0.34
0.37
0.02
0.01
0.03
3.09
2.49
2.39
0.99
1.08
0.06
0.02
0.08
9.07
0.35
0.34
0.14
0.15
0.01
0.00
0.01
1.29
2.60
2.47
1.03
1.11
0.06
0.02
0.08
9.39

176.49
121.33
9.77
0.43
2.11
1,063.5
1
100.45
141.23
63.64
41.77
3.22
0.13
0.63
295.20
41.93
58.95
26.56
17.43
1.34
0.05
0.26
123.22
125.26
174.46
78.69
48.16
3.75
0.16
0.77
359.17
17.80
24.79
11.18
6.84
0.53
0.02
0.11
51.03
129.72
177.06
80.28
42.81
3.25
0.21
1.06
465.78

2.08
0.82
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.83
1.21
1.45
0.79
0.31
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.32
0.51
0.61
0.33
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.13
1.48
1.78
0.97
0.39
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.39
0.21
0.25
0.14
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
1.51
1.82
1.00
0.40
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.40

18.24
2.24
0.07
0.00
0.02
3.65
18.10
16.64
6.95
0.85
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.39
7.56
6.95
2.90
0.36
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.58
22.20
20.42
8.52
1.05
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.71
3.15
2.90
1.21
0.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.24
22.97
21.12
8.81
1.08
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.77

25.0
17.5
1.2
0.3
1.2
134.5
24.2
22.8
9.5
6.7
0.5
0.1
0.5
51.2
10.1
9.5
4.0
2.8
0.2
0.1
0.2
21.4
29.7
28.0
11.7
8.2
0.6
0.1
0.6
62.8
4.2
4.0
1.7
1.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
8.9
30.9
29.1
12.1
8.4
0.6
0.2
0.6
65.0

11.6
12.6
0.7
0.3
0.9
106.1
11.1
10.6
4.4
4.8
0.3
0.1
0.4
40.4
4.6
4.4
1.8
2.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
16.9
13.6
13.1
5.4
5.9
0.3
0.1
0.4
49.6
1.9
1.9
0.8
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.1
7.0
14.2
13.5
5.6
6.1
0.3
0.1
0.4
51.3

964.4
663.0
53.4
2.3
11.5
5,811.5
548.9
771.7
347.8
228.2
17.6
0.7
3.5
1,613.1
229.1
322.1
145.2
95.3
7.3
0.3
1.4
673.4
684.5
953.3
430.0
263.2
20.5
0.9
4.2
1,962.7
97.3
135.5
61.1
37.4
2.9
0.1
0.6
278.9
708.9
967.6
438.7
233.9
17.7
1.2
5.8
2,545.2

11.4
4.5
0.1
0.0
0.0
4.5
6.6
7.9
4.3
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
2.8
3.3
1.8
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
8.1
9.7
5.3
2.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.1
1.2
1.4
0.8
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
8.3
10.0
5.5
2.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.2

99.7
12.2
0.4
0.0
0.1
20.0
98.9
91.0
38.0
4.7
0.1
0.0
0.0
7.6
41.3
38.0
15.8
1.9
0.1
0.0
0.0
3.2
121.3
111.6
46.6
5.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
9.3
17.2
15.9
6.6
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
125.5
115.4
48.2
5.9
0.2
0.0
0.0
9.6

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

113

June 2010

Table 5.5–2. Annual and average daily onroad mobile source emissions by facility type and vehicle class in
Maricopa County (continued).
Facility
Type

Urban
Interstate

Urban
Other
Freeway
And
Expressway

Urban
Other
Principal
Arterial

Urban
Minor
Arterial

Urban
Collector

Urban
Local

Vehicle
Class
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

SCC
2201001230
2201020230
2201040230
2201070230
2201080230
2230001230
2230060230
2230070230

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001250
2201020250
2201040250
2201070250
2201080250
2230001250
2230060250
2230070250
2201001270
2201020270
2201040270
2201070270
2201080270
2230001270
2230060270
2230070270

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001290
2201020290
2201040290
2201070290
2201080290
2230001290
2230060290
2230070290
2201001310
2201020310
2201040310
2201070310
2201080310
2230001310
2230060310
2230070310

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
HDGV
MC
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV

2201001330
2201020330
2201040330
2201070330
2201080330
2230001330
2230060330
2230070330

PM10
42.40
39.95
16.69
11.66
0.82
0.21
0.80
89.67
72.18
68.01
28.41
19.86
1.39
0.36
1.36
152.64
83.51
78.83
32.93
22.94
1.61
0.42
1.57
176.62
54.75
51.68
21.59
15.04
1.06
0.27
1.03
115.79
18.16
17.11
7.13
4.96
0.35
0.09
0.34
38.25
35.14
33.11
13.80
9.58
0.68
0.18
0.66
74.03

Annual emissions (tons/year)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
19.41
18.55
7.75
8.42
0.45
0.17
0.62
70.76
33.05
31.59
13.20
14.34
0.77
0.30
1.05
120.45
38.23
36.69
15.26
16.54
0.90
0.34
1.21
139.39
25.06
24.06
10.01
10.84
0.59
0.22
0.80
91.38
8.32
7.95
3.31
3.57
0.19
0.07
0.26
30.19
16.17
15.38
6.43
6.90
0.38
0.14
0.51
58.43

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

995.06
1,399.3
6
628.29
419.01
31.64
1.31
6.50
3,319.7
1,693.89
2,382.05
1,069.58
2
713.27
53.85
2.24
11.06
5,651.1
1,926.37
2,681.93
1,209.60
7
738.38
57.42
2.39
11.81
5,518.9
1,262.89
1,758.29
5
793.05
484.08
37.65
1.57
7.74
3,618.2
3
441.76
607.95
273.97
152.46
11.71
0.55
2.70
1,260.0
8
807.35
1,101.9
9
499.63
266.44
20.20
1.33
6.61
2,898.8
4

114

11.58
13.90
7.59
3.01
0.07
0.00
0.03
3.02
19.71
23.65
12.92
5.12
0.12
0.00
0.04
5.14
22.81
27.36
14.94
5.92
0.14
0.01
0.05
5.95
14.95
17.94
9.79
3.88
0.09
0.00
0.03
3.90
4.94
5.86
3.24
1.29
0.03
0.00
0.01
1.29
9.42
11.34
6.21
2.50
0.06
0.00
0.02
2.50

173.19
159.25
66.47
8.17
0.25
0.01
0.07
13.31
294.81
271.09
113.15
13.90
0.42
0.02
0.12
22.66
341.07
313.60
130.88
16.08
0.49
0.02
0.13
26.22
223.60
205.59
85.81
10.54
0.32
0.02
0.09
17.19
73.87
67.92
28.35
3.48
0.11
0.01
0.03
5.68
142.96
131.45
54.86
6.74
0.21
0.01
0.06
10.99

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
231.7
218.3
91.2
63.7
4.5
1.2
4.4
490.0
394.4
371.6
155.3
108.5
7.6
2.0
7.4
834.1
456.3
430.8
180.0
125.3
8.8
2.3
8.6
965.2
299.2
282.4
118.0
82.2
5.8
1.5
5.6
632.8
99.2
93.5
39.0
27.1
1.9
0.5
1.9
209.0
192.0
180.9
75.4
52.3
3.7
1.0
3.6
404.5

106.1
101.4
42.4
46.0
2.5
1.0
3.4
386.7
180.6
172.6
72.1
78.3
4.2
1.6
5.7
658.2
208.9
200.5
83.4
90.4
4.9
1.9
6.6
761.7
137.0
131.5
54.7
59.2
3.2
1.2
4.4
499.4
45.5
43.4
18.1
19.5
1.1
0.4
1.4
165.0
88.3
84.0
35.1
37.7
2.1
0.8
2.8
319.3

5,437.5
7,646.8
3,433.3
2,289.7
172.9
7.2
35.5
18,140.
9
9,256.0
13,016.
8
5,844.4
3,897.7
294.3
12.2
60.4
30,880.
7
10,526.
4
14,655.
2
6,610.2
4,034.9
313.8
13.1
64.6
30,158.
4
6,901.1
9,607.9
4,333.6
2,645.3
205.7
8.6
42.3
19,771.
7
2,414.0
3,322.1
1,497.1
833.1
64.0
3.0
14.7
6,885.7
4,411.8
6,021.8
2,730.2
1,455.9
110.4
7.3
36.1
15,840.
7

63.3
75.9
41.5
16.4
0.4
0.0
0.1
16.5
107.7
129.3
70.6
28.0
0.7
0.0
0.2
28.1
124.6
149.5
81.6
32.3
0.8
0.0
0.3
32.5
81.7
98.0
53.5
21.2
0.5
0.0
0.2
21.3
27.0
32.0
17.7
7.0
0.2
0.0
0.1
7.0
51.5
62.0
33.9
13.6
0.3
0.0
0.1
13.6

946.4
870.2
363.2
44.6
1.4
0.1
0.4
72.8
1,611.0
1,481.3
618.3
76.0
2.3
0.1
0.6
123.8
1,863.8
1,713.7
715.2
87.9
2.7
0.1
0.7
143.3
1,221.9
1,123.5
468.9
57.6
1.8
0.1
0.5
93.9
403.7
371.1
154.9
19.0
0.6
0.0
0.2
31.0
781.2
718.3
299.8
36.8
1.1
0.1
0.3
60.0

June 2010

5.5.2

Fugitive dust emissions

While exhaust, tire wear, and brake wear emissions were calculated using the EPA MOBILE6.2
model, fugitive dust emissions from paved and unpaved roads were calculated using the
equations found in sections 13.2.1 and 13.2.2 of the EPA Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, AP-42 (US EPA, 2006).

5.5.2.1 Paved road fugitive dust emissions
In the AP-42 equations, paved road fugitive dust emissions are a function of silt loading values
on road surfaces. Paved roads have been classified as freeways, high-traffic arterials, and lowtraffic arterials to reflect different silt loading assumptions. An arterial carrying a traffic volume
of less than 10,000 vehicles per average weekday is classified as low-traffic; all other roads that
are not freeways are classified as high-traffic arterials. The silt loading levels, in grams per
square meter, are 0.02 for freeways, 0.067 for high-traffic arterials, and 0.23 for low-traffic
arterials. These silt loadings and the average vehicle weight are consistent with assumptions in
the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan. The fugitive dust emission factors for paved roads were
derived by applying the following AP-42 equation:
  sL 
E = k  
  2 

0 . 65

W 
× 
 3

1 .5


P 
− C  1 −

4N 


where: E = annual average particulate emission factor (g/mile),
k = particle size multiplier for particle size range (7.3 g/mile for PM10 and 1.1 g/mile
for PM2.5),
sL = road surface silt loading (0.02 g/m2 for freeways, 0.067 g/m2 for high-traffic
arterials, and 0.23 g/m2 for low-traffic arterials),
W = average weight of the vehicles traveling on the roads (3.18 tons),
C = emission factor for 1980's vehicle fleet exhaust, brake wear and tire wear (0.2119
g/mile for PM10 and 0.1617 g/mile for PM2.5),
P = annual number of “wet” days with at least 0.254 mm (0.01 in) of precipitation (39
days 3 in 2008), and
N = annual number of days (366 days in 2008).
The annual average PM10 and PM2.5 emission factors for paved roads derived from the AP-42
equation are presented in Table 5.5–3. Applying the emission factors in Table 5.5–3 to the
VMTs in Table 5.2–2 and converting to pounds per day produces the 2008 uncontrolled
particulate emissions from paved roads for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County, shown in Table
5.5–4. These uncontrolled emissions do not include the 2008 emission reductions attributed to
the committed measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan.

3. Precipitation data for 2008 were obtained from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in
the form of local climatological data at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

115

June 2010

Table 5.5–3.

Fugitive dust emission factors for paved roads.

Silt Loading Category
Freeways
High-Traffic Arterials
Low-Traffic Arterials

Emission factors (g/mi)
PM10
PM2.5
0.18
0.00
0.65
0.00
1.69
0.13

Table 5.5–4.

Daily uncontrolled fugitive dust emissions from paved roads.
PM10 NAA (lbs/day)
Maricopa County (lbs/day)
Silt Loading Category
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Freeways
12,236.3
0.0
12,907.5
0.0
High-Traffic Arterials
60,900.0
0.0
62,459.1
0.0
Low-Traffic Arterials
51,486.9
3,960.5
56,422.2
4,340.2
Totals:
124,623.3
3,960.5
131,788.8
4,340.2

The MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan contains a number of committed measures that reduce paved
road fugitive dust emissions in the PM10 NAA. Five committed measures that reduce paved road
particulate emissions were quantified in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan. Table 5.5–5 shows
the emission reductions attributed to these committed measures based on their implementation
status in 2008. In addition, Table 5.5–5 includes emission reduction credit for 97 PM10 certified
street sweepers purchased by December 31, 2007 with FY 2001-2006 MAG Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) funds. Reductions for the sweepers that were
purchased with FY 2001-2006 CMAQ funds were also applied to base case uncontrolled paved
road emissions in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan.
Table 5.5–5.

2008 benefits of measures that reduce paved road fugitive dust in the PM10 NAA.
PM10 emission reduction
Annual
Average daily
Committed Measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day) 4
5
1. Public education and outreach program (Measure 1)
19.80
108.2
2. Reduce trackout onto paved roads (Measures 14/15/17)
1,487.0
8,125.7
3. Sweep streets with PM10-certified sweepers (Measure 24)
427.9
2,338.1
4. Pave or stabilize existing unpaved shoulders (Measure 28)
598.1
3,268.2
5. Additional $5M in FY07 MAG TIP for paving roads/shoulders (Measure 43) 6
21.0
115.0
3,007.1
16,432.4
97 PM10-certified sweepers purchased with FY 2001-2006 CMAQ funds:
Total 2008 PM10 emission reductions for paved roads:
5,560.9
30,387.6

The emission benefits in Table 5.5-5 were subtracted from the uncontrolled PM10 emissions in
Table 5.5-4. The total 2008 PM10 emission reduction of 30,387.6 pounds per day in the PM10
NAA represents 24.4 percent of the uncontrolled PM10 emissions of 124,623.3 pounds per day.
This percent reduction was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in the PM10 NAA; then
the absolute reduction in PM2.5 emissions due to the control measures was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in Maricopa County. The controlled emissions in tons per year and
pounds per day are shown in Table 5.5-6.

4. 366 days were used to convert tons per year to pounds per day in 2008.
5. Measure benefit reflects a 0.1% reduction in 2008 uncontrolled paved road emissions in the MAG 2007 Five
Percent Plan.
6. Measure benefit includes only the projects that paved unpaved shoulders in 2008.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

116

June 2010

Table 5.5–6.

Annual controlled fugitive dust emissions from paved roads.
Annual emissions
Average daily emissions
(tons/year)
(lbs/day)
Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
PM10 NAA
17,245.1
547.9
94,235.7
2,994.2
Maricopa County
18,556.4
617.4
101,401.2
3,373.8

5.5.2.2 Unpaved road and alley fugitive dust emissions
AP-42 emission factors were applied to unpaved road and alley VMTs to estimate fugitive dust
emissions (US EPA, 2006). The unpaved road particulate emission factors were derived from
the following AP-42 equation for publicly accessible unpaved roads, assuming a silt content of
11.9%, a soil moisture content of 0.5%, and an average speed of 25 miles per hour:
𝑠 1 𝑆 0.5
𝑘 �12� � �
𝑃
30
𝐸=�
− 𝐶� �1 − �
0.2
𝑁
𝑀
� �
0.5

where:
E = annual average particulate emission factor extrapolated for natural mitigation
(lb/mile),
k = particle size multiplier for particle size range (1.8 lb/mile for PM10 and 0.18
lb/mile for PM2.5),
s = surface material silt content (11.9%),
S = mean vehicle speed (25 mph),
M = surface material moisture content (0.5%),
C = emission factor for 1980's vehicle fleet exhaust, brake wear and tire wear
(0.00047 lb/mile for PM10 and 0.00036 lb/mile for PM2.5),
P = annual number of “wet” days with at least 0.254 mm (0.01 in) of precipitation (39
days in 2008), and
N = number of days/year (366 days in 2008).
The unpaved road emission factors resulting from the above equation are 1.4554 pounds per mile
for PM10 and 0.1453 pounds per mile for PM2.5. The same equation was applied to estimate unpaved alley emission factors, substituting a mean vehicle speed of 10 mph. The resultant
unpaved alley emission factors are 0.9203 pounds per mile for PM10 and 0.0918 pounds per mile
for PM2.5. Multiplying these emission factors by the VMTs in Table 5.2–3 results in the uncontrolled emissions shown in Table 5.5–7. These uncontrolled emissions do not include the 2008
emission reductions attributed to the committed measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan
for PM10.
Table 5.5–7.

Daily uncontrolled unpaved road and alley fugitive dust emissions.
PM10 (lbs/day)
PM2.5 (lbs/day)
Area
Unpaved Roads
Unpaved Alleys
Unpaved Roads
Unpaved Alleys
PM10 NAA
69,835.9
5,443.6
6,972.1
543.0
Maricopa County
73,117.8
5,699.4
7,299.7
568.5

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

117

June 2010

The MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan contains a number of committed measures that reduce
unpaved road and alley fugitive dust emissions in the PM10 NAA (MAG, 2007). Four committed
measures that reduce unpaved road and alley PM10 emissions were quantified in the MAG 2007
Five Percent Plan. The 2008 emission reductions attributed to these measures are shown in
Table 5.5–8.
Table 5.5–8.

2008 benefits of measures that reduce unpaved road and alley fugitive dust in the PM10 NAA.
PM10 emission reductions
Annual
Average daily
Committed Measures in the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan
(tons/yr)
(lbs/day) 7
8
1. Public education and outreach program (Measure 1)
17.5
95.6
2. Pave or stabilize existing public dirt roads and alleys (Measure 26)
1,488.0
8,131.2
3. Limit speeds to 15 mph on high-traffic dirt roads (Measure 27)
390.4
2,133.4
4. Additional $5M in FY07 MAG TIP for paving roads/shoulders (Measure 43) 9
169.5
926.2
Total 2008 PM10 emission reductions for unpaved roads:
2,065.4
11,286.4

The reductions in Table 5.5-8 were subtracted from the uncontrolled PM10 emissions in Table
5.5-7. The total 2008 PM10 emission reduction of 11,286.4 pounds per day represents 15.0
percent of the total uncontrolled unpaved road and alley PM10 emissions of 75,279.5 pounds per
day in the PM10 NAA. This percent reduction was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions
in the PM10 NAA; then the absolute reduction in PM2.5 emissions due to the control measures
was applied to the uncontrolled PM2.5 emissions in Maricopa County. The controlled emissions
in tons per year and pounds per day are shown in Table 5.5-9.
Table 5.5–9.

Annual and average daily controlled fugitive dust emissions from unpaved roads.
Annual emissions
Average daily emissions
(tons/year)
(lbs/day)
Area
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
PM10 NAA
11,710.70
1,169.00
63,993.1
6,387.8
Maricopa County
12,358.20
1,233.60
67,530.9
6,741.0

7. 366 days were used to convert tons per year to pounds per day in 2008.
8. Measure benefit reflects a 0.1% reduction in 2008 uncontrolled paved road emissions in the MAG 2007 Five
Percent Plan.
9. Measure benefit includes only the projects that paved unpaved roads in 2008.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

118

June 2010

5.6

Summary of particulate emissions from onroad mobile sources

Table 5.6–1 summarizes the annual emissions and the average daily emissions for PM10, PM2.5,
NOx, SOx, and NH3 from all onroad mobile sources in Maricopa County in 2008. Similar data
for the PM10 NAA are presented in Table 5.6–2.
Table 5.6–1.

Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in Maricopa County.

Emission
Category
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
Paved road
fugitive dust
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust
Totals:

Table 5.6–2.

PM10
1,601.53
18,556.4
12,358.2
32,516.13

Annual emissions (tons/year)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

NH3

999.17 51,609.08 309.83 3,330.43
617.4

—

—

—

1,233.6
—
—
—
2,850.17 51,609.08 309.83 3,330.43

PM10

Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM2.5
NOx
SOx

NH3

8,752.0

5,459.7

282,017.2

1,692.6

18,199.0

101,401.2

3,373.8

—

—

—

—
282,017.2

—
1,692.6

—
18,199.0

67,530.9 6,741.0
177,684.1 15,574.5

Annual and average daily emissions from all onroad mobile sources in the PM10 NAA.

Annual emissions (tons/year)
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
Emission
Category
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
Exhaust, tire wear,
and brake wear
1,529.54
954.23 49,142.49 295.90 3,180.66 8,357.7
5,213.8
268,538.4 1,616.4 17,380.4
Paved road
fugitive dust
17,245.1
547.9
—
—
—
94,235.7 2,994.2
—
—
—
Unpaved road and
alley fugitive dust 11,710.7 1,169.0
—
—
—
63,993.1 6,387.8
—
—
—
Totals:
30,485.34 2,671.13 49,142.49 295.90 3,180.66 166,586.5 14,595.8 268,538.4 1,616.4 17,380.4

5.7

Quality assurance process

5.7.1

VMT estimates

Normal quality assurance procedures, including automated and manual consistency checks, were
conducted by MAG in developing the 2008 TransCAD traffic assignment network used to
generate the VMT data. The VMT estimates using the MAG travel demand model have been
validated against approximately 2,200 traffic counts collected in 2006–2008.

5.7.2

Emission factor estimates

The quality assurance process performed on the MOBILE6.2 analyses included accuracy,
completeness, and reasonableness checks. For accuracy and completeness, all calculations were
checked by an independent reviewer. Any errors found were corrected and the changes were
then rechecked by the reviewer.

5.7.3

Draft particulate matter emissions inventory

The draft onroad mobile source portion of the 2008 periodic ozone precursor emissions
inventory was reviewed using published EPA quality review guidelines for base year emission
inventories (US EPA, 1992b). The procedure review (Levels I, II, and III) included checks for
completeness, consistency, and the correct use of appropriate procedures.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

119

June 2010

5.8

References

MAG, 2007. MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan for PM10 for the Maricopa County Nonattainment
Area, December 2007.
MAG, 2009. MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the
Maricopa Nonattainment Area, February 2009.
MAG, 2010. VMT Estimation for the 2009 MAG Unpaved Road Inventory. Memorandum
prepared by Cathy Arthur, MAG Air Quality Policy Manager. January 26, 2010.
US EPA, 1991. Emission Inventory Requirements for Ozone State Implementation Plans, EPA450/4-91-010, March 1991.
US EPA, 1992a. Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation Volume IV: Mobile Sources,
EPA-450/4-81-026d (Revised), 1992.
US EPA, 1992b. Quality Review Guidelines for 1990 Base Year Emission Inventories, EPA454/R-92-007, July 1992.
US EPA, 2002. Technical Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for Emission Inventory
Preparation, January 2002.
US EPA, 2003. User's Guide to MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2 (Mobile Source Emission Factor
Model), EPA420-R-03-010, August 2003.
US EPA, 2006. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, Fifth Edition, Vol. I:
Stationary, Point and Area Sources. Section 13.2.1: Paved Roads and Section 13.2.2:
Unpaved Roads. November 2006 (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13/index.html).

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

120

June 2010

6.
6.1

Biogenic Sources
Introduction

Biogenic emissions have been estimated for the 2008 Periodic Emissions Inventory for particulate matter in Maricopa County (9,223 square miles) and the PM10 Nonattainment Area (NAA)
(2,887 square miles). The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN)
has been used to estimate the biogenic emissions. MEGAN is a state-of-the-art biogenic emissions model developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Some important corrections and improvements were made in the latest version of MEGAN2.04 (Guenther,
2007) compared to previous versions (Guenther, 2006, 2006a and 2006b). MEGAN2.04 was
applied to compute biogenic emissions in Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA. Among the
chemical species included in MEGAN, only nitric oxide (NO) is attributable to particulate matter
formation. Therefore, only NOx emissions are included in the inventory. The MEGAN runs
were executed by the Maricopa Association of Governments. The contact person for the
MEGAN emission estimates is Feng Liu (602-254-6300).

6.2

Modeling domain

As a numerical model, the MEGAN inputs and outputs are given in user-defined two-dimensional grid cells. To develop biogenic emissions for the 2008 Periodic Emission Inventory for
particulate matter, the 4-km and 12-km modeling domains developed for the MAG eight-hour
ozone plans for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (MAG, 2007 and 2009), were employed for
the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County, respectively. The definitions of these two domains in the
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system are presented in Table 6.2–1. Since
MEGAN estimates biogenic emissions for entire modeling domains rather than specific areas,
additional input files, masking areas covered by the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County, were
developed by applying Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to calculate emissions for those
two target areas. In order to represent the target area, the masking file assigns 1.0 for the grid
cells fully covered by the target area, a fractional value for grid cells partially covered by the
target area, and 0.0 for grid cells outside the target area. As shown in Figure 6.3–1, biogenic
emissions for the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County were extracted from MEGAN runs for the
masked grid cells in the 4-km and 12-km modeling domains, respectively.
Table 6.2–1. Two modeling domains defined in the UTM coordinate system.
Grid Horizontal
Resolution
Grid Size
Domain Range (km)
Target Area
4-km
50 × 29
(297,3652) to (497,3768)
PM10 NAA
12-km
111 × 84
(-275, 3188) to (1057,4196)
Maricopa County

6.3

Input data

To calculate biogenic emissions using MEGAN, the following gridded input files for land cover
and meteorological data were prepared:
1. EFMAP_LAI file: This file provides emission factors (EF) for 20 MEGAN species
including NO, and monthly average leaf index (LAI) for 12 months for each grid cell.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

121

June 2010

2. PFTF file: This input file gives percentage of four plant function types (PFT) including
broadleaf trees (BT), needle leaf trees (NT), grass and crops (HB) and shrubs (SB) for
each model domain grid location.
3. METCRO2D file: This file contains meteorological parameters including temperature,
short wave radiation, wind speed, humidity and soil moisture for each grid.
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

81
76
71
66
61
56
51
46
41
36
31
26
21
16
11
6
1

1

6

11

16

21

26

31

36

41

46

51

56

61

66

71

76

81

86

91

96

101

106

111

Figure 6.3–1. Mask of the PM10 NAA in the 4-km modeling domain (top) and mask of Maricopa County in
the 12-km modeling domain (bottom).

6.3.1

Land cover data

The land cover data, including the monthly LAI, PFT, and EF, are provided by the EFMAP_LAI
and PFTF files. These input data were derived from the MEGAN land cover database available
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

122

June 2010

at a base resolution of 30 seconds latitude by 30 seconds longitude (~1×km2) in ArcGIS format
(http://acd.ucar.edu/~guenther/MEGAN/MEGAN.htm). For the MEGAN runs, however, the
default land cover data during the summer season (June to August) were replaced by local datasets, which were developed by a field study conducted by Dr. Guenther in June 2006
(ENVIRON, 2006). The substitution was made because the default database systematically
underestimated the LAIs in Maricopa County.

6.3.2

Weather data

The weather data used by MEGAN are temperature, downward short wave radiation, wind
speed, humidity and soil moisture. The Measurement and Instrumentation Data Center (MIDC)
collects irradiance and meteorological data from nation-wide stations, one of which is located in
northern Phoenix (33.83° N, 112.17° W, denoted by red star in Figure 6.3–2), and is operated by
the Phoenix Federal Correction Institution (PFCI). The archived hourly temperature, wind
speed, humidity and radiation data from this site are available to the public. Monthly mean
diurnal cycles of the weather parameters were calculated based on hourly data for the year 2008,
and a netCDF file representing 24-hour data for each month was prepared for MEGAN inputs.

Figure 6.3–2. Boundaries of the PM10 NAA (red line), the 4-km eight-hour ozone modeling domain (pink
line), Maricopa County (blue line), and the meteorological observation site (red star).

Biogenic NO is mainly emitted from wetted soil. The emission rate is dependent not only upon
temperature and downward short wave radiation but also on soil moisture. Due to dry conditions
year round in Maricopa County, the NO flux from the surface is very low compared to other
states with higher precipitation. Only moisture delivery by Arizona monsoons leads to precipitation during the summer. This precipitation, in turn, increases soil moisture and humidity.
According to weather records at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, the precipitation
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

123

June 2010

in the Phoenix area was 0.0 and 2.15 inches in June and July 2008, respectively. Therefore,
maximum monthly NO emissions occurred in July 2008. In general, however, NO emissions in
the Maricopa County area are temperature and radiation dominated during the year. Figure 6.3–
3 shows annual mean diurnal cycles of temperature and radiation. The peak temperature around
4:00-5:00 pm lags three hours behind the peak radiation. The delay is due to the fact that heating
of the air occurs not from the sun’s rays, but from heating of the earth and infrared radiation
leaving the ground in the form of heat. As a result, maximum hourly emission rates take place in
the afternoon because the emission rates are positively related to both temperature and short
wave radiation (Guenther, 2006).
85

Temperature (F)

80

75

70

65

60
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour of the day

800

Downward short wave radiation (W/m2)

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

-100
Hour of the day

Figure 6.3–3. Annual mean diurnal cycles of measured temperature (top panel) and downward short wave
radiation (bottom panel) in 2008.

6.4

Emissions estimation

MEGAN runs for the two modeling domains provide hourly emission outputs for the year 2008.
Daily mean emissions for each month in 2008 were derived by using the hourly outputs for each
month. In addition, monthly total emissions were obtained by multiplying the daily mean emissions for each month by the number of days in the month. The daily mean emissions for the 12
months of 2008 are shown in Table 6.4–1.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

124

June 2010

Table 6.4–1.
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

Daily mean biogenic emissions of NOx in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County, by month.
PM10 NAA
Maricopa County
kg/day
lbs/day
kg/day
lbs/day
127.2
280.4
355.2
783.1
168.0
370.4
480.9
1,060.2
413.3
911.2
1,131.0
2,493.4
601.7
1,326.5
1,658.8
3,657.0
721.0
1,589.5
1,923.1
4,239.7
1,818.8
4,009.8
4,729.4
10,426.5
1,878.7
4,141.8
4,930.0
10,868.8
1,702.0
3,752.3
4,485.1
9,888.0
1,331.9
2,936.3
3,784.7
8,343.8
651.1
1,435.4
1,839.9
4,056.3
328.5
724.2
910.8
2,008.0
138.6
305.6
388.0
855.4

Monthly mean emissions for Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA are illustrated in Figure 6.4–
1. Monthly emission values are presented in Table 6.4–2. It can be seen that the monthly NOx
emissions reached the highest values in July. This is because biogenic emissions of nitric oxide
(NO) are mainly from wetted soil. Thus, the NO emission rate depends not only on temperature
and radiation, but also on soil moisture, which is related to precipitation. As discussed in Section
6.3, there were 2.15 inches of precipitation in July, but no precipitation in June, 2008. There is
also one more day in July than June; therefore, the total NOx monthly emissions in July are
higher than in June.
180.0
NA_NOx
MC_NOx

Total NOx emissions (tonnes/month)

160.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Month, 2008

Figure 6.4–1. Monthly emissions of NOx in Maricopa County (pink solid line, abbreviated as “MC”) and the
PM10 NAA (blue solid line, abbreviated as “NA”).

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

125

June 2010

Table 6.4–2.
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals:

6.5

Monthly biogenic emissions of NOx in the PM10 NAA and Maricopa County.
PM10 NAA
Maricopa County
Metric tons/mo
Tons/mo
Metric tons/mo
Tons/mo
3.94
4.35
11.01
12.14
4.87
5.37
13.95
15.37
12.81
14.12
35.06
38.65
18.05
19.90
49.76
54.85
22.35
24.64
59.62
65.72
54.56
60.15
141.88
156.40
58.24
64.20
152.83
168.46
52.76
58.16
139.04
153.27
39.96
44.05
113.54
125.16
20.18
22.26
57.04
62.87
9.86
10.86
27.32
30.12
4.30
4.74
12.03
13.26
301.88
332.77
813.08
896.27

Summary of biogenic source emissions

Daily mean and annual total biogenic NOx emissions for Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA in
2008 are summarized in Table 6.5–1. Due to the incorporation of land cover data that are more
characteristic of plants located in the desert southwest, as well as improvements to the MEGAN
model, the 2008 data shown in Table 6.5–1 represent a substantial improvement over previous
biogenic emission estimates for Maricopa County and the PM10 NAA.
Table 6.5–1.

Daily mean and annual total NOx emissions from biogenic sources.
Daily mean
Annual total
Geographic Area
kg/day
lbs/day
Metric tons/yr
Tons/yr
Maricopa County
2,218.1
4,890.0
813.08
896.27
PM10 NAA
823.4
1,815.3
301.88
332.77

6.6

References

ENVIRON International Corp., 2006. Final Report, Maricopa Association of Governments 2006
Biogenics Study.
Guenther, A., T. Karl, P. Harley, C. Wiedinmyer, P. I. Palmer, and C. Geron, 2006. Estimates of
global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and
Aerosols from Nature), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1-30.
Guenther, A., 2006a. User’s Guide to Processing Driving Variables for Model of Emissions of
Gases and Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN).
Guenther, A., 2006b. User’s Guide to the Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from
Nature (MEGAN) Version MEGAN-VBA-2.0.
Guenther, 2007. Corrigendum to "Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using
MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature)" Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6,
3181–3210, 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, p. 4327.
MAG, 2007. Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area. Maricopa
Association of Governments, Phoenix AZ
MAG, 2009. MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the
Maricopa Nonattainment Area. Maricopa Association of Governments, Phoenix AZ.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

126

June 2010

Appendix 1. Public Comment Period Documentation

Maricopa County Air Quality Department
NEWS RELEASE

Public Information Officer
Maricopa County Air Quality
1001 N. Central Avenue
Suite 900
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
(602) 506-6713, desk
(602) 526-7307, cell

April 26, 2010
Contact: Holly Ward: 602-506-6713/desk * 602-526-7307/cell
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Emissions Inventory Public Review Draft Released
Document details sources of air pollution emissions within Maricopa
County; public workshop to be held May 14
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department announced today the release of its
draft 2008 Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 for the Maricopa County PM10
Nonattainment Area. The document is now available for an informal 30-day public
review period. The PM10 emissions inventory includes emissions estimates for PM10
and PM2.5 as well as three particulate matter precursors: nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur
oxides (SOx) and ammonia (NH3).
The inventory provides emission estimates from point, area, nonroad mobile, onroad
mobile and biogenic sources. The report is divided into six chapters, as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: (Stationary) point sources (large manufacturing facilities, power
plants)
Chapter 3: Area (non-point) sources (widespread, similar sources, such as fuel
combustion, fires, etc.)
Chapter 4: Nonroad mobile sources (aircraft, locomotives, lawn movers, tractors,
etc.)
Chapter 5: Onroad mobile sources (cars, trucks, other vehicles)
Chapter 6: Biogenic sources (crops, indigenous vegetation, landscaping, etc.)
The latter two chapters were prepared by the Maricopa Association of Governments
(MAG).
The document is available in electronic format (PDF files) on the department’s
website at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Defau
lt.aspx
The Air Quality Department will hold a public workshop to discuss the draft 2008
Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10. The workshop will be held at 9 AM at the
department’s offices at 1001 N. Central Ave., Suite 560, on Friday, May 14, 2010.
(continued on next page)
A1-1

NEWS RELEASE: Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Emissions Inventory Public Review Draft Released

April 26, 2010

The department is also accepting written comments on the draft inventory through
Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 5:00 PM. Comments may be submitted to:
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Emissions Inventory Unit
1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 595
Phoenix, AZ 85004
E-mail: EmisInv@mail.maricopa.gov
Questions may be addressed to Bob Downing at bdowning@mail.maricopa.gov.
####

About Maricopa County Air Quality Department
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department is a regulatory agency whose goal is to ensure
federal clean air standards are achieved and maintained for the residents and visitors of
Maricopa County. The department is governed by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
and follows air quality standards set forth by the federal Clean Air Act.

Calendar - Maricopa County Air Quality Department

Page 1 of 1

Site Map | Search | Phone Directory | Departments | Services | Email Alerts
text sizer

Calendar

News
Calendar

<

M-info
Search Air Quality Web Site
Go

May 2010

S

M

T

W

25

26

27

2

3

4

5

9

10

11

12

T

>
F

S

30

1

6

7

8

13

14

15

28 29

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

1

2

3

4

5

Emissions Inventory Public Review Draft Workshop

Air Quality
Public Review 30-day Period Now Open
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department announces the release of its draft 2008
Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 for the Maricopa County PM10 Nonattainment Area.
The document is now available for an informal 30-day public review period.
The PM10 emissions inventory includes emissions estimates for PM10 and PM2.5 as well as
three particulate matter precursors: nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and ammonia
(NH3). The document is available in electronic format (PDF files) on the department’s
website at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx
The Air Quality Department will hold a public workshop to discuss the draft 2008 Periodic
Emissions Inventory for PM10. The workshop will be held at 9 AM at the department’s offices
at 1001 N. Central Ave., Suite 560, on Friday, May 14, 2010. (continued on next page) The
department is also accepting written comments on the draft inventory through Wednesday,
May 26, 2010, 5:00 PM. Comments may be submitted to: Maricopa County Air Quality
Department Emissions Inventory Unit 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 595 Phoenix, AZ 85004
E-mail: EmisInv@mail.maricopa.gov Questions may be addressed to Bob Downing at
bdowning@mail.maricopa.gov.
Date: 5/14/2010
Time: 9:00 AM
Registration Required: No
Fee: None
More Info: http://www.maricopa.gov/pr_detail.aspx?releaseID=1424
Contact: Bob Downing
bdowning@mail.maricopa.gov
Location: Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Address:
1001 North Central Ave, suite 595
Phoenix, AZ 85004

Maricopa County Air Quality Department 1001 North Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix AZ 85004 (602) 506-6010

©2010 Maricopa County
Maricopa Home

Site Map

Legal Information

Privacy/Security Policies
Maricopa County || 301 W. Jefferson St. || Phoenix, AZ 85003
602-506-3011

http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/EventsDetailPublishers.aspx?date=5/14/2010

06/28/2010

This page intentionally blank.

Appendix 2. Instructions for Reporting 2008 Annual Air Pollution Emissions

INSTRUCTIONS
FOR REPORTING 2008
ANNUAL AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS

January 2009

Emissions Inventory Unit
1001 North Central Avenue, Suite 595
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
(602) 506-6790
(602) 506-6179 (Fax)

Copies of this document, related forms
and other reference materials are available online at our web site:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx

A2-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
WHAT’S NEW FOR 2008? .............................................................................................................. 1
I.

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 2
Steps to Complete Your 2008 Maricopa County Emissions Inventory

II. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................... 3
- Pollutants to be Reported
- Emission Calculation Method Hierarchy
III. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA SUBMITTED ............................................................................ 5
- Arizona State Statue and Maricopa County Rule
IV. HELPFUL HINTS AND INFORMATION ..................................................................................... 6
- What is a Process?
- Processes and Materials That Do Not Have to be Reported
- Grouping Materials and/or Equipment Under One Process ID
- Assigning Identification Numbers (IDs)
- Industry-Specific Instructions
- Commonly Used Conversion Factors
- Additional Resources and Assistance
V.

INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES FOR EMISSIONS REPORTING FORMS
Business Form ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Stack Form ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Control Device Form ....................................................................................................................... 10
General Process Form ....................................................................................................................... 11
Evaporative Process Form ................................................................................................................ 15
Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form.................................................................................................... 19
Documentation of Emission Factor Calculations ............................................................................. 20
Data Certification Form (for NON-Title V sources) ........................................................................ 21
How to Calculate an Emission Fee (for Title V sources ONLY)...................................................... 22
Data Certification/Fee Calculation Form (for Title V sources ONLY) ............................................ 23

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

ii

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

WHAT'S NEW FOR 2008?
Reporting forms:


Some preprinted information on your report may be different from last year’s version. Please
review the enclosed forms carefully, and verify all preprinted information.



Many of our reporting forms have changed in past years. If you use your own forms, or a
computerized reproduction of our forms, the forms used MUST conform to the current information
requirements and FORMAT as supplied on our preprinted forms. “Homemade” reporting forms that
vary significantly from the preprinted forms sent to you will not be accepted.



Please VERIFY that your reporting forms match the preprinted forms.

Miscellaneous:


If this is the first emissions inventory for your permit and your business did not operate in 2008,
you must still submit a completed Business Form and a signed Data Certification Form stating
that there were no operations at your facility during 2008.



In accordance with Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Rule 280 (Fees), the 2008 annual emission
fee for Title V sources only is $38.25/ton. NOTE: Only Title V sources (those whose air quality
permit numbers have a “V” prefix) are subject to this annual emissions fee.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

1

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

I. INTRODUCTION
An annual emissions inventory is a document submitted by a business that: (1) lists all processes emitting
reportable air pollutants and (2) provides details about each of those processes. Submitting the emissions
inventory report is required as a condition of your Maricopa County Air Quality Permit. A separate
emissions report is required for each business location with its own air quality permit.
Follow these steps to complete your 2008 Maricopa County emissions inventory:
STEP 1: Determine which forms are needed for your business. There are eight different forms available,
but not all are required for every type of business. For most permitted sources, the packet you received from
us contains the necessary preprinted forms based on your site’s most recent emissions inventory.
1.
2.

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Business Form: Contains general contact information about the permitted site. This form is required
for all businesses.
Stack Form: Only required if your business location annually emits over 10 tons of a single pollutant
(CO, VOC, NOx, PM10, or SOx). A “stack” is defined as a stack, pipe, vent or opening through which a
significant percentage of emissions (from one or more processes) are released into the atmosphere. See
the “Stack Form Instructions” on page 9 for specific requirements.
Control Device Form: Required only if there is one or more emission control devices used at the
business location.
General Process Form and
Either or both will be required for all businesses.
Evaporative Process Form:
Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form: Required if you want to claim off-site recycling or disposal.
Emission Factor Calculations: Required as attachment for each process for which you calculated
your own emission factors.
Data Certification Form or Data Certification/Fee Calculation Form: Only sources with a Title V
(permit number would start with “V”) permit are required to pay a fee for their emissions and need to
use the Data Certification/Fee Calculation Form. All other sources use the Data Certification Form.

}

STEP 2: Complete the applicable forms. Verify all preprinted information, and make corrections where
necessary. When making corrections, strike out the preprinted data and write in corrections beside it. Please
make all changes readily noticeable. Detailed information on how to complete the most common forms is
included in this document. The packet you received also contains information about other resources
(workshops, one-on-one assistance, etc.) available to help you in completing the necessary forms.
STEP 3: Make a copy of your completed emissions inventory report. Make sure to KEEP COPIES of all
forms submitted and copies of all records and calculations used in completing the forms. Air pollution
control regulations require that you keep all documentation for at least FIVE YEARS at the location where
pollution is being emitted.
STEP 4: Make sure the Data Certification Form (or Data Certification/Fee Calculation Form for Title V
sources) is signed by a company representative. Include your air quality permit number on all correspondence and applicable checks submitted with your report. Return the original, signed copy of your
annual emission report, with payment for any applicable emission fees to:
MCAQD One Stop Shop
Emissions Inventory Intake
501 N. 44th St. Suite 200
Phoenix AZ 85008-6538
Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

2

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

II. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
POLLUTANTS TO BE REPORTED:
Your emissions inventory must include your business’s emissions of the following air pollutants:
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
VOC
HAP&NON
NHx
Pb

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxides
Particulate matter less than 10 microns
Sulfur oxides
Volatile organic compounds *
Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) that is also NOT a volatile organic compound (VOC)**
Ammonia and ammonium compounds
Lead

* A volatile organic compound (VOC) is defined as any compound of carbon that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. This definition excludes: carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, acetone,
carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, as well as certain other organic
compounds. (See Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Rule 100, Sections 200.69 and 200.110 for a full
definition.)
EPA has re-designated the chemical t-butyl acetate (CAS Number 540-88-5) as a VOC for record-keeping
requirements and emissions reporting, but not for emission limitations or content requirements. County Rule
100, Section 200.69b states:
“The following compound(s) are VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical
dispersion modeling and inventory requirements which apply to VOC and shall be uniquely identified in
emission reports, but are not VOC for purposes of VOC emissions limitations or VOC content requirements:
t-butyl acetate (540-88-5).”
Therefore, if your facility uses t-butyl acetate, it is necessary to report t-butyl acetate as a separate material
on the evaporative process form, not as part of a grouped material (e.g., solvents, thinners, activators, etc.).
T-butyl acetate will continue to be identified as a VOC on your emission report and count towards any
applicable emission fees.
** HAP&NON: Usage of certain materials that are: (1) a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) and (2) not also a
VOC (that is, not also an ozone precursor) should also be reported if:
(a) your site is subject to a Federal MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standard or
(b) your air quality permit contains specific quantitative limits for HAP emissions.
The most common materials categorized as “HAP&NON” include:
 methylene chloride (dichloromethane)
 perchloroethylene
 111-trichloroethane (111-TCA or methyl chloroform)
 hydrochloric acid
 hydrofluoric acid
NOTE: HAPs that are also considered volatile organic compounds are reported as VOC.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

3

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EMISSION CALCULATION METHOD HIERARCHY:
When preparing emission information for your report, the most accurate method for calculating actual
emissions must be used. The hierarchy listed below outlines the preferred methods for calculating emission
estimates (taken from County Rule 280, Section 305.1).
(1)

Whenever available, emissions estimates should be calculated from continuous emissions
monitors certified under 40 CFR Part 75, Subpart C, or data quality assured pursuant to Appendix
F of 40 CFR, Part 60.

(2)

When sufficient data obtained using the methods described in paragraph 1 is not available,
emissions estimates should be calculated from source performance tests conducted pursuant to
Rule 270 in Maricopa County’s Air Pollution Control Rules and Regulations.

(3)

When sufficient data obtained using the methods described in paragraphs 1 or 2 is not available,
emissions estimates should be calculated from material balance using engineering knowledge of
the process.

(4)

When sufficient data obtained using the methods described in paragraphs 1 through 3 is not
available, emissions estimates shall be calculated using emissions factors from EPA Publication
No. AP-42 "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors," Volume I: Stationary Point and Area
Sources.

(5)

When sufficient data obtained using the methods described in paragraphs 1 through 4 is not
available, emissions estimates should be calculated by equivalent methods supported by back-up
documentation that will substantiate the chosen method.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

4

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

III. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DATA SUBMITTED
Information submitted in your annual emissions reports must be made available to the public unless it meets
certain criteria of Arizona State Statutes and Maricopa County Rules. Applicable excerpts concerning
confidentiality of data are reproduced below.
ARS § 49-487 D. ...the following information shall be available to the public:…
2. The chemical constituents, concentrations and amounts of any emission of any air contaminant. ...
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL RULES AND REGULATIONS, Rule 100:
§ 200.107 TRADE SECRETS - Information to which all of the following apply:
a.
A person has taken reasonable measures to protect from disclosure and the person intends to continue to
take such measures.
b.
The information is not, and has not been, reasonably obtainable without the person’s consent by other
persons, other than governmental bodies, by use of legitimate means, other than discovery based on a
showing of special need in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding.
c.
No statute, including ARS §49-487, specifically requires disclosure of the information to the public.
d.
The person has satisfactorily shown that disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to
the business’s competitive position.
§ 402
CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION:
402.2
Any records, reports or information obtained from any person under these rules shall be available to the
public ... unless a person:
a.
Precisely identifies the information in the permit(s), records, or reports which is considered confidential.
b.
Provides sufficient supporting information to allow the Control Officer to evaluate whether such information
satisfies the requirements related to trade secrets as defined in Section 200.107 of this rule.

For emissions inventory information to be deemed confidential, the following steps must be followed:
 Specific data which you request be held confidential must be identified by marking an “X” in the
corresponding gray confidentiality box(es) on the relevant report forms.
 Provide a written explanation which gives factual information satisfactorily describing why releasing this
information could cause substantial harm to the business’s competitive position.
 Use the gray-shaded boxes on the reporting forms to indicate which data are to be held confidential. Do
NOT stamp “Confidential”, highlight data, or otherwise mark the page.
No data can be held confidential without proper justification.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

5

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

IV. HELPFUL HINTS AND INFORMATION
Be sure to verify all preprinted information on forms. If any information is incorrect or blank, please
provide correct information. Making a change on the Business Form will NOT transfer the permit
ownership or location. You must contact the Department's One Stop Shop at (602) 506-6464 to accomplish
this.
WHAT IS A PROCESS? A process is a business activity at your location that emits one or more of the
pollutants listed on page 3, and has only one material type as input and one operating schedule. For each
applicable process at your business, you must assign a unique Process ID number to differentiate each
process.
PROCESSES AND MATERIALS THAT DO NOT HAVE TO BE REPORTED:
 Welding.
 Acetone usage.
 Fuel use for forklifts or other vehicles. (NOTE: Fuel use in non-vehicle engines is reportable.)
 Soil remediation activities. (Note: Other periodic reporting requirements may exist; consult your permit.)
 Storage emissions from fuels or organic chemicals in any tank with a capacity of 250 gallons or less.
 Storage emissions of diesel and Jet A fuel in underground tanks of any size.
 Storage emissions of diesel and Jet A fuel in aboveground tanks, with throughput < 4,000,000 gal/yr.
 Routine pesticide usage, housekeeping cleaners, and routine maintenance painting at your facility.
Please group all similar equipment and materials together before applying the following limitations:
 Internal combustion engines (e.g., emergency generators) or external combustion equipment (e.g., boilers
and heaters) that operated less than 100 hrs. and burned less than 200 gals. diesel or gas, or less than
100,000 cubic feet of natural gas.
 Materials with usage of less than 15 gallons or 100 pounds per year.
GROUPING MATERIALS AND/OR EQUIPMENT UNDER ONE PROCESS ID:
You can group together under one process ID:
 All internal combustion engines less than 600 hp if they burn the same fuel and have similar operating
schedules.
 All external combustion equipment (boilers, heaters) with a capacity of less than 10,000,000 Btu per
hour if they burn the same fuel and have similar operating schedules.
 All similar evaporative materials with similar emission factors that have similar operating schedules and
process descriptions. For example, group low-VOC red paint, green paint and white paint together as
one material: “Paint: Low-VOC.” Do not group dissimilar materials together, such as thinners and
paints. Attach documentation (see example, p. 20) showing how the grouped emission factor was
determined.
 All underground tanks with the same fuel and same type of vapor recovery system.
ASSIGNING IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS (IDs):
Unique IDs are required for the following report elements: Stacks, Control Devices and Processes. For
processes, that means a process ID number may be used only once on each General Process form and for
each material reported on the Evaporative Process Forms.
These numbers are usually assigned by the person who prepares the original report. If you are adding a new
item to a preprinted report, assign a number not already in use. Once an ID number is assigned, continue
Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

6

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

using the same number for that item each year. If that item is no longer reportable, mark it with ‘DELETE’
and return the preprinted form with a brief explanation. Do not use that ID number again.

INDUSTRY-SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS: Additional help sheets, detailed examples, and special
instructions are available for a number of specific processes or industries listed below. To get copies of any
of these documents, please visit our web site at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx
or call (602) 506-6790.






Bakeries
Concrete Batch Plants
Fuel Storage and Handling
Incinerators and Crematories
Lg. Aboveground Storage Tanks







Natural Gas Boilers/Heaters
Polyester Resin
Printing Plants
Roofing Asphalt
Sand and Gravel Plants






Using EPA's TANKS 4.09d Program
Vehicle Refinishing
Vehicle Travel on Unpaved Roads
Woodworking

COMMONLY USED CONVERSION FACTORS:
1 gram/liter = 0.00834 lbs/gal
1 foot
= 0.0001894 mile
1 liter
= 0.2642 gallon (US)
1 square foot
= 0.000022957 acre
1 therm
= 0.0000952 MMCF
1 pound
= 0.0005 ton
NOTE:
MM = 1,000,000
Example: MMCF = 1,000,000 cubic feet
M = 1,000
Example: MGAL = 1,000 gallons
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND ASSISTANCE:
The Maricopa County Emissions Inventory web site at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx
contains additional reference materials, such as:
 blank copies of most emissions reporting forms.
 an updated list of emission factors for a large number of industrial processes, including SCC codes.
 a list of Tier Codes for industrial processes.
 detailed help sheets for a number of specific industries or processes.
To receive any of the above materials by fax or mail, or for additional information or assistance in how to
calculate and report your emissions, please call us at (602) 506-6790.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

7

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

V. INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES FOR COMPLETING EMISSIONS REPORTING FORMS

Business Form

Instructions

Verify all preprinted information, and make corrections where necessary. When making corrections, strike
out the preprinted data and write in corrections beside it. Please make all changes readily noticeable.

NOTE:

Indicating a change in ownership or business location on the Business Form will not serve to
transfer the permit ownership or location. You must contact the MCAQD One Stop Shop at (602) 506-6464
to accomplish this.

Data fields:
6 Number of employees: This should be the annual average number of full-time equivalent (FTE)
employee positions at this business location.
9 NAICS Code: This 5- or 6-digit North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code has
been introduced to replace the 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes. Please list the
primary and secondary NAICS codes for your business, if known. (Consult our website, at:
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx, for a link to
a full list of NAICS codes.)
10 Preparer of the Inventory (primary contact for technical questions concerning this report): This should
be the person who knows the most about the data in the report. If this person has an e-mail address used
for business purposes, please provide it.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

8

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

Stack Form

Instructions

A “stack” is defined as a stationary stack, pipe, vent or opening through which a significant percentage of
emissions (from one or more processes) are released into the atmosphere (with or without a control device).

NOTE:

Stack information is required only if your business location annually emits over 10 tons of any
one individual pollutant. If so, you must complete a Stack Form for:
 each stack connected to a control device.
 any stack that discharges annually more than 5 tons of combined pollutant emissions (such as a paint
booth exhaust).
EXAMPLE Stack Form Information:
1

2

Stack
ID

Stack
Type
Code*

3

1

W

30 ft

2

V

14 ft

4

5a OR

5b

6a

OR

6b & 6c

7

Stack
Exit Gas
Velocity Flow Rate Diameter Length / Width
Height** Temperature feet/sec
acfm
inside inch
inside inch

* Stack Type Codes:

90
200

o

F

o

F

Stack Name/Description. Include lat/long
coordinates of stack (in decimal degrees)

20,000

36

paint booth Lat: N33.5276

19,186

40

thermal oxidizer, Bldg. 2

Long: W112.2626

Lat:N33.5259 Long:W112.2611

V = Vertical unobstructed
D = Downward unobstructed
W = Obstructed vertical (e.g. weather cap)

H = Horizontal unobstructed
G = Gooseneck

** Stack height is calculated relative to the surrounding terrain. For instance, the stack height of a 10-foot
stack on top of a 20-foot tall building is 30 feet.
Data fields:
1

Stack ID: (See “Assigning Identification Numbers” on page 6.) A number (up to three digits, numeric
only) which identifies a specific stack. It is suggested you start with 1, then 2, etc.

4

Exit Gas Temperature: Should represent average operating conditions, in degrees Fahrenheit.
DO NOT report “ambient”.

5a Exit Gas Velocity: OR 5b Gas Flow Rate:
Provide EITHER the exit velocity (in feet per second) OR the flow rate of gas (in actual cubic feet per
minute) exiting the stack during normal operations. Preprinted information provides both.
6a Inside Stack Diameter: For round stacks, provide Inside Stack Diameter in inches.
OR
6b & 6c Inside Stack Length and Width: For square or rectangular stacks, provide inside Length and inside
Width in inches.
7

Stack Name/Description and Lat/Long Coordinates: Provide a brief text description of the stack along
with the latitude and longitude coordinates of the stack (in decimal degrees).

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

9

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

Control Device Form

Instructions
EXAMPLE Control Device Form Information

1

2

3

4

Control
ID

Installation/
Reconstruction*
Date

Size or Rated Capacity**

Control
Type Code

5
Control Device
Name/Description

1

05/09/98

25,000.0 cfm

021

Thermal oxidizer

4

03/10/97

cfm

153

Watering with water trucks

6
Stack ID

2

Data fields:
1

Control ID: (See “Assigning Identification Numbers” on page 6.) A unique number (up to three digits)
that you assign to identify a specific control device.

2

Installation/Reconstruction Date: The completion date (given in mm/dd/yy format) of installation or the
most recent reconstruction of the identified control device. This is not a date on which routine repair or
maintenance was done. “Reconstruction” means any component of the control device was replaced and
the cost (fixed capital) of the new component(s) was more than half of what it would have cost to
purchase or construct a new control device.

3

Size or Rated Capacity: Report the air or water flow rate in cubic feet per minute. Some devices (e.g.,
water trucks for dust control) will not include a value in this field.

4

Control Type Code: A 3-digit code designating the type of control device. A complete list of all EPA
control device codes can be found on the Web at: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/
planning_analysis/emissions inventory/Default.aspx or call (602) 506-6790 for assistance.

6

Stack ID: Not all businesses require a Stack ID. This is required if the Stack Form is used for your site
(see page 9) and the control device is vented through that identified stack. This is the ID number shown
in column 1 of the Stack Form. The Stack ID can be entered on this form after the Stack Form has been
filled out.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

10

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

General Process Form

Instructions

The General Process Form is used to record data on all emissions-producing processes except evaporative
processes. A “general process” is normally characterized by the burning or handling of a material. One
form reports all the pollutants for one process. For example, several pollutants are produced by burning fuel,
and PM10 is emitted by processing rock products, processing materials such as wood or cotton, and driving
on unpaved areas.
Data fields: (See sample forms on pages 13 and 14.)
1 Process ID: A number (up to three digits) that is preprinted or you assign. (See “Assigning
Identification Numbers” on page 6.) This Process ID number can not be used for any other process at
this location.
2

Process Type/Description: Brief details on the type of activity that is occurring.

3

Stack ID(s): The stack ID number(s) shown in column 1 of the Stack Form that identify the stack(s)
which vent pollution created by this process. Not all businesses are required to report stacks. This is only
required if the Stack Form is required for your site (see page 9) and the process has a stack.

4 Process Tier Code and
5 SCC Code:
6

If these codes are not preprinted on your form, please consult the
section “Other Resources” on our web site, or call (602) 506-6790.

Seasonal Throughput Percent: Enter the percent of total annual operating time that occurred per season,
rounded to the nearest percent. For example, “Dec-Feb 30% ” means 30% of total annual activity
occurred in January, February and December 2008. The total for all four seasons must equal 100%.

7 Normal Operating Schedule and
8 Typical Hours of Operation:
9

These reflect the normal daily, weekly, and annual operating
parameters of this process during 2008.

Emissions Based on: Provide the name of the material used, fuel used, product produced, or whatever
was measured for the purpose of calculating emissions, such as “natural gas”, “hours of operation,”
“vehicle miles traveled,” or “acres.”

10 Used, Produced or Existing: Indicate whether calculated emissions are based on a material type or fuel
used (an input, such as “paint” or “natural gas”), or an output (such as “sawdust produced” or “finished
product”). Use “Existing” if the parameter reported on line 9 is not directly used or produced in the
process (such as “vehicle miles traveled” or “acres”).
11 Annual Amount: The annual amount (a number) of material that was used, fuel combusted, product
produced, hours of operation, vehicle miles traveled, or acres.
12 Fuel Sulfur Content (in percent): For processes that involve the combustion of oil or diesel fuels, report
the sulfur content of the fuel as a decimal value. Example:
0.05 % (= 500 ppm)
13 Unit of Measure: Units of the material used, fuel used or product produced shown on line 9.
For example: gallons, pounds, tons, therms, acres, vehicle miles traveled, units produced.
14 Unit Conversion Factor: You must provide this if you use an emission factor with an emission factor unit
(see item 17 below) that is not the same as the unit of measure (from line 13). This is the standard
number you would multiply your amount (line 11) by to convert it to the units of the emission factor. See
page 7 for a list of commonly used conversion factors.
Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

11

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

General Process Form Instructions (continued)
15 Pollutant: See page 3 for a list of pollutants that need to be reported.
16 Emission Factor (EF): The number to be multiplied by the annual amount (line 11) to determine how
much of the pollutant was emitted. If you calculate your own emission factor or change the preprinted
emission factor, you must provide details of your calculations in an attachment.
17 Emission Factor (EF) Units: Enter the appropriate Emission Factor Units in pounds (lb) per unit; e.g.,
lb/ton, lb/MMCF, lb/gal.
18 Controlled Emission Factor (EF)? YES or NO: Indicate “YES” if: 1) you have your own emission factor
from testing and included the control device efficiency within the factor, or 2) the emission factor used is
clearly identified as a controlled emission factor. A “YES” response requires the use of Formula A (see
#25 below). Indicate “NO” if: 1) there is no emission control device, or 2) the emission factor represents
emission rates before controls. A “NO” response requires the use of Formula B (see #25 below).
19 Calculation Method: Enter the number code (listed at the bottom of the General Process Form) which
best describes the method you used to obtain this emission factor. Code 5, “AP-42/FIRE Method or
Emission Factor” means that the factor comes from EPA documents or software. NOTE: If you have
continuous emissions monitors (CEM) data or conducted a source test that was required and approved by
the County for a specific process or piece of equipment, you must use the emission data from the CEM
or the test results. Report “1” in this column for CEM data or “4” for performance test data.
20 through 24: Leave blank if there is no control device.
20 Capture % Efficiency: The percent of the pollutant that is captured and sent to the primary control
device in this process. Be sure to list capture efficiency separately for each pollutant affected.
21 Primary Control Device ID: If this pollutant is being controlled in this process, enter the Control
Device ID number which represents the first control device affecting the pollutant.
22 Secondary Control Device ID: If this pollutant is being controlled sequentially by 2 devices, enter
the Control Device ID number which represents the second control device; otherwise leave this field
blank.
23 Control Device(s) % Efficiency: Enter the total control efficiency of the control device(s). Be sure
to list control device efficiency separately for each pollutant affected. If you report control device
efficiency, you must also show capture efficiency in column 20.
24 Efficiency Reference Code: Enter the code (1 through 6) that best describes how you determined the
control device efficiency. A list of possible codes is included at the bottom of the form.
25 Estimated Actual Emissions (in pounds/year): You may round the calculated emissions values to the
nearest pound. Calculate as follows:
A. Emissions with no controls or controls are reflected in the emission factor:
Column 25 = line 11  line 14  column 16
B. Emissions after control:
Column 25 = line 11  line 14  column 16  (1 – [column 20  column 23])
Use the decimal equivalent for columns 20 and 23. Example: 96.123% = 0.96123
Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

12

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

General Process Form 2008

Permit number(s)

EXAMPLE: Internal Combustion

V99999

Place an X in any gray cell to mark data requested to be held confidential. See page 5 for requirements for information to be deemed confidential.
1- Process ID
80
2- Process Type/Description:

3 ENGINES FOR CRUSHING (EACH LESS THAN 600 HP)

3- Stack ID(s) (only if required on Stack Form)

________

020599

4- Process TIER Code:
5- SCC Code

_______

20200102

________

IND:DIESEL-RECIPROCATING

(8 digit number)

25

Dec-Feb

7- Normal Operating Schedule:

Hours/Day
(military time)

%

8

Days/Week

0700

Start

25

Mar-May

%

5

Jun-Aug
Hours/Year

 Used (input)

11- Annual Amount:

or

Produced (output)

or

CO

NOx
PM-10
SOx
VOC

Emission Factor (EF) Information
16
17
18
Emission
Factor (EF)
(number)

130
604
42.5
39.7
49.3

Emission
Factor
Unit (lb per)

M
M
M
M
M

19

20

Controlled
EF?
Yes or No

Calculation
Method
Code*

Capture %
Efficiency

N
N
N
N
N

5
5
5
5
5

GALS
GALS
GALS
GALS
GALS

* Calculation Method Codes:
1 = Continuous Emissions Monitoring Measurements
2 = Best Guess / Engineering Judgment
3 = Material Balance
4 = Source Test Measurements (Stack Test)
5 = AP-42 / FIRE Method or Emission Factor

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

25

Sep-Nov
Weeks/Year

%

52 x

DIESEL

__0.05_______%

GALLONS

14- Unit Conversion Factor (if needed to convert Unit of Measure to correlate with emission factor units)

15

2080

12- Fuel Sulfur Content (in percent)

13- Unit of Measure: (for example: tons, gallons, million cu ft, acres, units produced, etc.)

Pollutant

%

Existing (e.g. VMT, acres)

16,250

(a number)

25

1530

End

9- Emissions based on (name of material or other parameter, e.g. “rock”, “diesel”, “vehicle miles traveled”)
10-

________

FUEL COMB. INDUSTRIAL: INTERNAL COMBUSTION

6- Seasonal Throughput Percent:

8- Typical Hours of Operation:

________

0.001

Control Device Information
21
22
23
Primary
Control
Device ID

Secondary
Control
Device ID

Control
Device(s) %
Efficiency

24

25

Efficiency
Reference
Code**

Estimated Actual
Emissions

2,113
9,815
691
645
801

6 = State or Local Agency Emission Factor
7 = Manufacturer Specifications
8 = Site-Specific Emission Factor
9 = Vendor Emission Factor
10 = Trade Group Emission Factor

13

lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs

** Control Efficiency Reference Codes:
1 = Tested efficiency / EPA reference method
2 = Tested efficiency / other source test method
3 = Design value from manufacturer
4 = Best guess / engineering estimate
5 = Calculated based on material balance
6 = Estimated, based on a published value

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

General Process Form 2008

Permit number(s)

EXAMPLE: Unpaved Road Travel

V99999

Place an X in any gray cell to mark data requested to be held confidential. See page 5 for requirements for information to be deemed confidential.
1- Process ID
28
2- Process Type/Description: UNPAVED ROAD TRAVEL: HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS @ 15 MPH
_______

3- Stack ID(s) (only if required on Stack Form)
4- Process TIER Code:
5- SCC Code

________

140799

30502504

6- Seasonal Throughput Percent:

8- Typical Hours of Operation:

________

SAND/GRAVEL: HAULING
25

Dec-Feb

8

Hours/Day
(military time)

%

%

Used (input)

11- Annual Amount:

or

Produced (output)

Hours/Year

Sep-Nov
Weeks/Year

25

%

52 x

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)

 Existing (e.g. VMT, acres)

7,500

(a number)

2080

%

1530

End

or

25

Jun-Aug

5

Days/Week

0700

Start

25

Mar-May

9- Emissions based on (name of material or other parameter, e.g. “rock”, “diesel”, “vehicle miles traveled”)
10-

________

MISCELLANEOUS: FUGITIVE DUST
(8 digit number)

7- Normal Operating Schedule:

________

12- Fuel Sulfur Content (in percent)

______________%

VMT

13- Unit of Measure: (for example: tons, gallons, million cu ft, acres, units produced, etc.)

14- Unit Conversion Factor (if needed to convert Unit of Measure to correlate with emission factor units)

15
Pollutant

PM-10

Emission Factor (EF) Information
16
17
18
Emission
Factor (EF)
(number)

3.2

Emission
Factor
Unit (lb per)

Control Device Information
21
22
23

19

20

Controlled
EF?
Yes or No

Calculation
Method
Code*

Capture %
Efficiency

Primary
Control
Device ID

N

6

100

4

VMT

Secondary
Control
Device ID

24

25

Control
Device(s) %
Efficiency

Efficiency
Reference
Code**

Estimated Actual
Emissions

70

6

7200

lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs

NOTE: Emissions in col. 25 are calculated as follows:
* Calculation Method Codes:
1 = Continuous Emissions Monitoring Measurements
2 = Best Guess / Engineering Judgment
3 = Material Balance
4 = Source Test Measurements (Stack Test)
5 = AP-42 / FIRE Method or Emission Factor

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

(line 11  col. 16)  (1 – [col. 20  col. 23])

6 = State or Local Agency Emission Factor
7 = Manufacturer Specifications
8 = Site-Specific Emission Factor
9 = Vendor Emission Factor
10 = Trade Group Emission Factor

14

** Control Efficiency Reference Codes
1 = Tested efficiency / EPA reference method
2 = Tested efficiency / other source test method
3 = Design value from manufacturer
4 = Best guess / engineering estimate
5 = Calculated based on material balance
6 = Estimated, based on a published value

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

Evaporative Process Form

Instructions

The Evaporative Process Form is used to report all emissions produced by evaporation. Examples include:
cleaning with solvents, painting and other coatings, printing, using resin, evaporation of fuels from storage
tanks, ammonia use, etc. All other processes should be shown on the General Process Form.
One Evaporative Process Form may be used to report numerous materials, with each material given a
separate process ID number, as long as the information on lines 1–5 apply to all items on that form. Use a
separate form for each group of materials that has a different Process Type/Description (shown on line 1),
different Tier Code (line 2) or different operating schedule (lines 3, 4, or 5).
Data fields: (See sample forms on pages 17 and 18.)
1 Process Type/Description: Brief details of the activity in which the listed materials were used.
2

Process Tier Code: If this 6-digit code is not preprinted on your form, please refer to the Tier Code list
at: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx
or call (602) 506-6790.

3

Seasonal Throughput Percent: Enter the percent of total annual operating time that occurred per season
(rounded to the nearest percent). For example, “Dec-Feb 30% ” means 30% of the total annual activity
occurred during January, February and December 2008. The total for all four seasons must equal 100%.

4
5

Normal Operating Schedule and
Typical Hours of Operation:

6

Process ID: A number (up to three digits) that represents this specific material (process). Each process
on one form must have the same tier code and operating schedule as that shown in the top portion of the
form. This Process ID number can not be used for any other process at this business location. See page
6 of these instructions for more explanation of ID numbers and for exclusions and guidance on grouping
materials.

7

Stack ID(s): The stack ID number(s) shown in column 1 of the Stack Form that identify the stack(s)
which vent pollution created by this process. Not all businesses are required to report stacks. This is only
required if the Stack Form is required for your site (see page 9) and the process has a stack.

8

Material Type: Provide the name of the material used in this process. Give the chemical name for pure
chemicals or a name that reflects its use (paint, ink, etc.), rather than just a brand name or code number.
Examples of materials include: paint, thinner, degreasing solvent (plus its common name), ink, fountain
solution, ammonia, alcohol, ETO (ethylene oxide), gasoline (in a storage tank).

9

Annual Material Usage/Input: Amount of this material used during the year. In most cases, the amount
purchased is suitable. Write in “lbs” or “gal” (pounds or gallons).

These represent the usual number of hours, time of day and weeks
per year when this process occurred during the calendar year.

10 Pollutant: The only pollutants reported on this form are VOC, HAP&NON and NHX (see definitions on
page 3). When one process (or material) has more than one of these pollutants, list each pollutant on a
separate line, using the same process ID number.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

15

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

Evaporative Process Form (continued)
11 Emission Factor (EF): An emission factor is a number used to calculate the pounds of pollutant emitted
based on the quantity of material used in a process. Emission factors can be obtained from your supplier
(usually provided on a Material Safety Data Sheet or environmental data sheet), and must correspond
with the material units reported in column 9. If the material unit is “gal,” then the emission factor must
be in pounds of pollutant per gallon. If the material unit is “lb,” then the emission factor must be in
pounds of pollutant per pound of material.
Verify (and correct, where necessary) all preprinted emission factors, as the composition of materials
used may have changed since your last report. A “lb/gal” emission factor is almost always less than 8 and
never greater than 14. A “lb/lb” emission factor is never larger than 1.0.
12 Pounds of pollutant sent off-site: Required only if you wish to take credit for reduced emissions because
waste of this material is sent off-site for recycling or disposal. Only waste generated during the report
year may be claimed. The Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form must be completed if you wish to claim a
credit. The number of pounds reported in column 12 must equal the number of pounds reported on the
Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form(s) for the same Process ID number.
13 and 14: Leave these fields blank if there is no control device present.
13 Capture % Efficiency: The percent of the pollutant from this process that is captured and sent to the
control device.
14 Control ID: If this pollutant is being controlled in this process, enter the Control Device ID number
from column 1 of the Control Device Form.
Control % Efficiency: Enter the percent of this pollutant that is controlled by this control device.
Code: Select the Control Efficiency Reference Code from the list at the bottom of the form.
15 Estimated Emissions (lbs/yr): Estimated pounds of the pollutant emitted during the year, after off-site
recycling/disposal and controls if applicable. Credit will not be given for off-site recycling/disposal
unless it is shown on the Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form. Round to the nearest pound. If the
answer is 0, give a decimal answer to the first significant digit. Column 15 is calculated as follows:
Emissions without off-site recycling/disposal or controls:
Column 15 = column 9  column 11
Emissions with off-site recycling/disposal:
Column 15 = (column 9  column 11) – column 12
Emissions with off-site recycling/disposal and controls:
Column 15 = ([column 9  column 11] – column 12)  (1 – [column 13  column 14])
Use the decimal equivalent for columns 13 and 14. Example: 96.123% = 0.96123

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

16

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE: Coating and Painting
Evaporative Process Form 2008

Permit number(s)

V99999

Place an X in any gray cell to mark data requested to be held confidential. See page 5 for requirements for information to be deemed confidential.
1- Process Type/Description:
2- Process TIER Code:

Coating metal parts

080415

3- Seasonal Throughput Percent:
4- Normal Operating Schedule:
5- Typical Hours of Operation

SOLVENT USE: SURFACE COATING - MISC METAL PARTS
Dec-Feb

Hours/Day

25

%

8

Days/Week

(military time)

6

7

8

Process
ID

Stack
ID(s)

Material Type

800

1

801

1

802

1

803

1

804

1

Start

9

%

25

5

Hours/Year
End

0800

Jun-Aug
2080

25

%

Sep-Nov

25

%

Weeks/Year 52__

1700

10

11
Emission
Factor

EF
Units
(lbs per)

12

13

Pounds of
pollutant*
sent
off site

Capture
Efficiency
%

14
Control
ID

15

Control
Efficiency
%

Control
Efficiency
Code**

Estimated
Emissions
(lbs/yr)

lb
or
gal

VOC,
HAP&NON
or
NHx

95

gl

VOC

4.7

gal

%

%

447

120

gl

VOC

7.1

gal

%

%

852

940

gl

VOC

4.2

gal

%

%

3,948

707

gl

VOC

7.0

gal

%

%

4,949

20,200

lb

VOC

0.001

lb

%

%

%

%

Annual
Usage
Input

Lacquer
6455-06
lacq thinner
Paint red
4039-03
paint thinner
powder paint
8730-11

Mar-May

20

Note: Do NOT change preprinted Process ID numbers. See page 6 of these instructions for information on how to delete materials that are no longer used, or to assign Process
ID numbers for new materials.

* If you have off-site recycling/disposal of any of the materials listed above, you must complete an Off-site Recycling/Disposal Form to receive
credit for reduced emissions.
NOTE: Emissions in col. 15 are calculated as follows:
** Control Efficiency Reference Codes
1 = Tested efficiency / EPA reference method
4 = Best guess / engineering estimate

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

([col. 9  col. 11] – col. 12)  (1 – [col. 13  col. 14])

2 = Tested efficiency / other source test method
5 = Calculated based on material balance

17

3 = Design value from manufacturer
6 = Estimated, based on a published value.

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE: Cleaning solvent (with recycling)
Evaporative Process Form 2008

Permit number(s)

V99999

Place an X in any gray cell to mark data requested to be held confidential. See page 5 for requirements for information to be deemed confidential.
1- Process Type/Description:
2- Process TIER Code:

CLEANING METAL PARTS

080103

3- Seasonal Throughput Percent:

Dec-Feb

4- Normal Operating Schedule:
5- Typical Hours of Operation

SOLVENT USE: DEGREASING - COLD CLEANING

Hours/Day

25

%

8

Days/Week

(military time)

6

7

8

Process
ID

Stack
ID(s)

Material Type

3

2

Mar-May

Start

9

%

25

Hours/Year

5

End

1300

Jun-Aug

25

%

2080

Sep-Nov

%

25

Weeks/Year 52__

1700

10

11
Emission
Factor

EF
Units
(lbs per)

12

13

Pounds of
pollutant*
sent
off site

Capture
Efficiency
%

14
Control
ID

15

Control
Efficienc
y
%

Control
Efficiency
Code**

Estimated
Emissions
(lbs/yr)

Annual Usage
Input

lb
or
gal

VOC,
HAP&NON
or
NHx

SANITIZER

716

lb

VOC

1.0

lb

6

GUN CLEANER

180

gl

VOC

7.2

gl

569

%

%

727

7

XYZ STRIPPER

1300

gl

VOC

3.3

gl

1,884

%

%

2,406

8

CLEANING
SOLVENTS
MEGASOLVE

358

gl

VOC

6.4

gl

1,006

%

%

1,285

2258

gl

VOC

6.8

gl

6,741

%

%

8,613

%

%

9

95 %

1

80 %

3

172

Note: Do NOT change preprinted Process ID numbers. See page 6 of these instructions for information on how to delete materials that are no longer used, or to assign Process
ID numbers for new materials.

* If you have off-site recycling/disposal of any of the materials listed above, you must complete an Off-site Recycling/Disposal Form to receive
credit for reduced emissions.
NOTE:

This example shows the case where 2,400 of the original 4,096 gallons of materials #6 through 9 were captured
for off-site recycling, and the pollutant content of the waste material was estimated to be 75% of the
original. The pounds of pollutant sent off-site shown in column 12 is calculated on the example Off-Site
Recycling/Disposal Form on the next page.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

18

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE
Off-Site Recycling/Disposal Form 2008

Permit number(s)

V99999

NOTE: If you need blank copies of this form, call the Emissions Inventory Unit at
(602) 506-6790 or consult our web page at
http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/planning_analysis/emissions_inventory/Default.aspx
Provide one off-site recycling/disposal form for each waste stream at your business location. A waste stream is the waste from
one or more processes mixed together to make one waste product before it is taken off site for recycling, disposal or combustion.
1) Assign a unique two-digit ID number to identify the waste stream that will be described below.
01
(Start with ID# 01 for first waste stream. Make copies of a blank Off-Site Recycling/Disposal form and use 02 for second,
etc.)
Check one:

pounds
gallons

2,400
2) What was the quantity of this waste stream in 2008?
Indicate whether this quantity is reported in pounds or gallons. Keep waste disposal company manifests as proof that this
amount of waste was taken off-site.
3) What was the average pollutant content of the waste stream? NOTE: Report in the same units (pounds or gallons) as used
in line 2.
VOC

4.25

lbs/unit

HAP&NON

lbs/ unit NHx

lbs/ unit

NOTE: Waste normally has less pollutant content than the new product. Some of the
pollutant evaporates during the use of the product, and there is usually dirt, water or
other contaminants in the waste stream. The estimated pollutant content of the waste is
usually between 50% and 95% of the new product. This example estimates an average VOC
content (on line 3) to be 75% of the original VOC content of 5.67 lbs/gal., to account
for evaporation and contaminants. See page 20 to calculate a weighted average.
4) Calculate the total annual pollutant content of the waste in this waste stream.
(volume of waste, from Line 2)  (pollutant content, from Line 3) = Total pollutants in waste stream, in lbs/yr.
VOC

10,200

lbs/yr HAP&NON

lbs/yr

NHx

lbs/yr

5) List the process ID numbers of the processes contributing to this waste stream. Also estimate the pounds of pollutant
that each process contributed to this waste stream.
NOTE: In this example, the amount each process material contributed to total pollutants
in the waste stream (Line 4) is based on the percentage, by weight, of each material
that contributed to the waste stream (e.g., Process ID #6 contributed 5.6%, therefore
5.6% × 10,200 lbs/yr = 569 lbs. See example on page 20).
NOTE: Column totals in the table below must equal the total for each pollutant type reported on line 4. The quantities
you report below for each pollutant and process must also be reported in column 12 on the Evaporative Process Form.
Process ID
6 Contributed about
7 Contributed about
8 Contributed about
9 Contributed about

Annual VOC (lbs)
569
1,884
1,006
6,741

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

Annual
HAP&NON (lbs)
lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs

19

Annual NHx (lbs)
lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs

lbs
lbs
lbs
lbs

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE: Documentation of Emission Factor Calculations
Identify the process ID number(s) and pollutant(s). Show calculations made to obtain the emission factors used
for the process(es). Include references to data sources used, including the document name, date published, page
numbers, etc.

Emission Factor Calculation
Process ID

Permit number

201

V99999

Emission factors derived from source test performed 12/2/00 by XYZ Engineering
Company (copy of summary tables also attached).
Outlet (after controls):
CO
= 0.43 lb/hr  1 hr/60 min  1 min/77.9 cu. ft  1,000,000 cu. ft/MMCF
= 92.0 lb/MMCF
= 0.09 lb/hr  1 hr/60 min  1 min/77.9 cu. ft  1,000,000 cu. ft/MMCF
= 19.3 lb/MMCF

NOx

Weighted average sample calculation
NOTE: The example below shows how the weighted average of the materials going into the
waste stream is calculated. A weighted-average emission factor has been calculated
by listing usage amounts and emission factors for each material, summing each
column, and then dividing the total emissions by the total gallons used.
In this example: 23,231 lbs  4,096 gal = 5.67 lb/gal average VOC content. This
emission factor is then used to calculate the average pollutant content in the Offsite Recycling / Disposal Form example.
This process can also be used to find the weighted average emission factor for
similar materials if you are reporting them together as a single line item on the
Evaporative Process form. Refer to the explanation of “grouping” on page 6.

Process
ID #
6
7
8
9

Material Type
gun cleaner
xyz stripper
cleaning solvent
MEGASOLVE
Totals:
Average
VOC content:

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

2008
Usage

Units

180
1,300
358
2,258
4,096

gal
gal
gal
gal
gal

VOC
(lbs/unit)
7.2
3.3
6.4
6.8

23,231 lbs.
4,096 gals

20

VOC Emissions
(= Usage  VOC
content)
1,296 lbs.
4,290 lbs.
2,291 lbs.
15,354 lbs.
23,231 lbs.
=

Percent contributed
to waste stream

5.6 %
18.5
9.9
66.1
100.0

%
%
%
%

5.67
lb/gal

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE (for all sources except Title V sources)
Data Certification Form 2008

Permit number

999999

For EACH pollutant listed, total up all emissions recorded on your General Process and Evaporative Process Forms. Enter these
numbers in column 1, “Totals from Process Forms.” Report any emissions from accidental releases in column 2.
Add the figures in each row across, and enter the result in column 3, “Total Emissions”.
NOTE: “Accidental Releases” reported in column 2 should include all excess emissions
reported to the Department under Rule 140, Section 500.
(1)
Totals from
Process Forms

Summary of 2008 Annual Emissions:

2,113
0
0
0
24,220
9,815
645
7,891

CO
NHx
Lead
HAP&NON
VOC
NOx
SOx
PM10

(2)
+ Accidental
Releases

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

(3)
= TOTAL
2008 Emissions

2,113
0
0
0
24,220
9,815
645
7,891

NOTE: Review specific requirements for data confidentiality on page 5. We cannot hold
any data confidential without the required documentation.

TO COMPLETE YOUR EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT:
-

Complete the Confidentiality Statement below.
Sign and date this form below where indicated.
Send the original copy of your completed forms to: Maricopa County Air Quality Department, One Stop Shop,
Emissions Inventory Intake, 501 N. 44th Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, AZ 85008-6538. Keep a copy of all forms for your records.

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:
This annual emissions report contains requests to keep some data confidential.
YES
NO
If you check “YES”, you must submit documentation and meet certain requirements before your data can be deemed confidential.
See enclosed instructions for further details.
NOTE: The Data Certification form must be signed by a responsible company official.
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT:
I declare under penalty of perjury that the data (e.g. inputs, emission factors, controls, and annual emissions) presented herein
represents the best available information and is true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of owner/business officer
Date of signature
Telephone number
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Type or print full name of owner/business officer
Type or print full title

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

21

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

How to calculate an emission fee (for Title V sources only):
1. For each pollutant listed on the “Data Certification/Fee Calculation” form, total up all emissions
recorded on your General Process and Evaporative Process Forms. Enter these numbers in column 1,
“Totals from Process Forms.”
NOTE: While most processes that generate PM10 should be reported on line 5 of the Data Certification/Fee
Calculation form, “[f]ugitive emissions of PM10 from activities other than crushing, belt transfers,
screening, or stacking” (County Rule 280, § 305.2d) are NOT subject to annual emission fees. The most
common occurrences of these PM10-producing activities that are NON-billable are listed below:
SCC codes and description of PM10-producing processes that are NOT subject to emission fees
SCC
30200814
30400737
30500120
30500121
30500134
30500135
30500141
30500143
30500203
30500212
30500213
30500290
30500303
30500608
30500708
30501710
30502007
30502011
30502504
30502507
30502760
30531090
30532007
30704002
31100199
31100299
50100401
50100402
50100403
50100404
50100405

Major Category Subcategory

Facility / Process Type

Process Description

Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal
Waste Disposal
Waste Disposal
Waste Disposal
Waste Disposal

Feed Manufacture
Steel Foundries
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Asphalt Concrete
Asphalt Concrete
Asphalt Concrete
Asphalt Concrete
Brick Manufacture
Cement Manufacturing (Dry Process)
Cement Manufacturing (Wet Process)
Mineral Wool
Stone Quarrying - Processing
Stone Quarrying - Processing
Construction Sand and Gravel
Construction Sand and Gravel
Industrial Sand and Gravel
Coal Mining, Cleaning, Material Handling
Stone Quarrying - Processing
Bulk Handling and Storage - Wood/Bark
Construction: Building Contractors
Demolitions/Special Trade Contracts
Landfill Dump
Landfill Dump
Landfill Dump
Landfill Dump
Landfill Dump

Storage
Raw Material Silo
Storage Bins: Ferric Chloride
Storage Bins: Mineral Stabilizer
Blown Saturant Storage
Blown Coating Storage
Granules Storage
Mineral Dust Storage
Storage Piles
Heated Asphalt Storage Tanks
Storage Silo
Haul Roads: General
Storage of Raw Materials
Raw Material Piles
Raw Material Piles
Storage of Oils and Binders
Open Storage
Hauling
Hauling
Storage Piles
Sand Handling, Transfer, & Storage
Haul Roads: General
Open Storage
Stockpiles
Other Not Classified
Other Construction/Demolition
Unpaved Road Traffic
Fugitive Emissions
Area Method
Trench Method
Ramp Method

Food and Agriculture
Secondary Metal Production
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Mineral Products
Pulp and Paper & Wood Pdts.
Building Construction
Building Construction
Solid Waste Disposal
Solid Waste Disposal
Solid Waste Disposal
Solid Waste Disposal
Solid Waste Disposal

2. Report any accidental releases in column 2. Add columns 1 and 2 together for each pollutant, and enter
the sum in column 3. Sum lines 1 through 5 together, and enter the total on line 6.
3. Divide your facility's total billable emissions (on line 6) by 2000 to convert pounds into tons. Round to
the nearest ton. Enter this value on line 7. Multiply this number by $38.25, and enter the result on line
8. This is your 2008 emission fee.

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

22

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

EXAMPLE (for Title V sources only)
Data Certification/Fee Calculation Form 2008

Permit number

V99999

For EACH pollutant listed, total up all emissions recorded on your General Process and Evaporative Process Forms. Enter these
numbers in column 1, “Totals from Process Forms.” Report any emissions from accidental releases in column 2.
Add the figures in each row across, and enter the result in column 3, “Total Emissions”.
Carefully follow the instructions on lines 6 through 8 to calculate any emission fee owed.
NOTE: “Accidental Releases” reported in column 2 should include all excess emissions
reported to the Department under Rule 140, Section 500.
(1)
Totals from
Process Forms

Summary of 2008 Annual Emissions:

2,113
0
0
7,200

CO
NHx
Lead
PM10 (non-billable; see page 22)

(2)
+ Accidental
Releases

(3)
= TOTAL
2008 Emissions

0
0
0
0

2,113
0
0
7,200

Emissions fees are based on your emissions of the following pollutants ONLY:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

0
24,220
9,815
645
691

HAP&NON
VOC
NOx
SOx
PM10 (billable; see page 22)

0
0
0
0
0

0
24,220
9,815
645
691
35,371

Add “TOTAL” column from lines 1 through 5 ONLY:
Divide the total on line 6 by 2000 (pounds per ton) to get tons, and round the number to the
nearest ton. (Drop any decimal of .499 or less. Increase to the next whole number any
decimal of .500 or more.) Enter the resulting WHOLE NUMBER here.
Multiply line 7 (a WHOLE number) by $ 38.25.
This is your 2008 ANNUAL EMISSION FEE.

18

$

lbs.

TONS

688.50

NOTE: Review specific requirements for data confidentiality on page 5. We cannot hold
any data confidential without the required documentation.

TO COMPLETE YOUR EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT:
-

Include a check (made payable to Maricopa County Air Quality Department) for the amount calculated on line 8 above.
Complete the Confidentiality Statement below.
Sign and date this form below where indicated.
Send the original copy of your completed forms, along with any emission fee due to: Maricopa County Air Quality Department,
One Stop Shop, Emissions Inventory Intake, 501 N. 44th Street, Suite 200, Phoenix, AZ 85008-6538. Keep a copy of all forms
for your records.

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:
This annual emissions report contains requests to keep some data confidential.
YES
NO
If you check “YES”, you must submit documentation and meet certain requirements before your data can be deemed confidential.
See enclosed instructions for further details.
NOTE: The Data Certification form must be signed by a responsible company official.
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT:
I declare under penalty of perjury that the data (e.g. inputs, emission factors, controls, and annual emissions) presented herein
represents the best available information and is true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of owner/business officer
Date of signature
Telephone number
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Type or print full name of owner/business officer
Type or print full title

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory Unit

23

Instructions for Reporting 2008 Emissions

This page intentionally blank.

Appendix 3. Rule Effectiveness (RE) Studies
Executive Summary
Rule effectiveness (RE) studies are methods designed to assess the success of regulatory rules at
controlling their targeted emissions. It is acknowledged that facilities and source categories
subject to control techniques and devices mandated by rules do not always achieve 100% compliance with those requirements. Given this reality, the US EPA recommends the use of rule
effectiveness studies to improve the quality of emission estimates presented in emission inventories. Rule effectiveness studies adjust the emissions from subject facilities and source categories to account for times of non-compliance and control device equipment failure. Of particular
importance to Maricopa County are those rules that control particulate matter release and ozone
formation, since parts of the county have been designated as nonattainment areas in regards to
US EPA PM10 and 8-hour ozone standards. Consequently, the rule effectiveness studies
presented here deal with the control of criteria pollutants PM10, PM2.5, and the precursors to
ozone formation (VOC, NOx and CO).
In general, rule effectiveness studies incorporate compliance history at regulated facilities and
sources, along with agency programs and policies (i.e., inspection frequencies, enforcement
penalties, public outreach efforts, etc.), to ascribe a percentage rate (RE rate) at which the subject
rule(s) attains the intended emissions reductions. For these studies, data from inspections conducted from July 2008 through June 2009 was used to determine the rate of compliance of subject facilities and source categories with the rules. The resulting compliance rate was then combined with data on the effectiveness of Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD)
programs and policies to derive a final rule effectiveness rate, which has then been used to adjust
the emissions inventory estimates.
Both source-specific and multi-source rule effectiveness studies were undertaken as part of this
project. Source-specific studies address Rule 310 (fugitive dust from dust-generating operations), Rule 310.01 (fugitive dust from non-traditional sources of fugitive dust), Rule 316
(nonmetallic mineral processing), and agricultural activities (best management practices). For all
other regulated processes that control particulates and the formation of ozone, multi-source RE
rates were calculated separately for Title V and non-Title V permitted facilities. Final compliance rates and RE rates are listed in Table A3–1 below.
Table A3–1. Compliance and rule effectiveness rates, by rule or source category.
Rule/Source Category
Compliance Rate
Rule Effectiveness (RE) Rate
Rule 310
87.01%
82.99%
Rule 310.01
95.15%
80.87%
Rule 316
35.29%
49.62%
Agricultural Activities
Unknown
55.33%
Title V Facilities
89.14% *
90.94%
Non-Title V Facilities
81.00% *
84.27%
* Compliance rates for both Title V and Non-Title V facilities are based upon 2008-2009 inspection data, and
reflect compliance self-monitoring recordkeeping practice, in addition to violation data.

The resulting RE rates shown above have been applied to relevant point and area source inventory categories and are reflected in the emission estimates presented in applicable sections of
Chapters 2 and 3.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–1

June 2010

Background
The US EPA has provided a number of guidance documents that detail the use and formulation
of rule effectiveness studies (US EPA, 2005; 1994; 1992). The most recent of these documents
states, “First and foremost, an agency responsible for emissions inventory preparation should
attempt to obtain facility specific data from as many sources as possible, and use the collected
information to make a refined source or source category RE determination” (US EPA, 2005).
Given this directive, MCAQD developed a rule effectiveness study methodology that utilizes all
available compliance and department programmatic data to produce a RE rate that best reflects
the field effectiveness of the rule. By using the entire population of data for the prescribed time
period, (July 2008 – June 2009) the statistical validity of the RE rate greatly improves. This
approach deviates from previous rule effectiveness studies conducted by MCAQD that were
based upon a small sample pool of targeted inspections (MCAQD, 2007).
The RE rates presented here are developed from statistical examination of recorded inspection
data, supplemented with data on department programs and policies that impact the enforcement
and creation of the rules under study. Assessment of inspection records provides the major component of the RE rate known as a compliance rate. This is the rate at which inspection staff is
observing facility and source category compliance in the field. While this provides the most
direct measure of rule effectiveness, it is still an incomplete picture of overall rule effectiveness.
In actuality, the observed compliance rate is better described as a rate at which inspection staff
issue violations. Inspection staff has a range of experience and training which influences their
proficiency in issuing appropriate violations. There may be instances when a rule violation goes
unnoticed by staff, or conversely a violation may be issued in error. Even with a compliance rate
that has a high statistical measure of accuracy, it fails to reflect a number of programmatic measures that affect overall rule effectiveness; measures like the strength of rule language, departmental enforcement and penalty actions, inspector training programs, educational and public
outreach efforts, etc. This reality is reflected in earlier US EPA guidance:
A percentage effectiveness rating is not enough to describe the compliance effectiveness of a rule
for a source category. An SSCD [Stationary Source Compliance Division] study should attempt to
link the rating to a regulatory agency’s overall effort. The study should address the factors that
affect the percentage effectiveness rating such as the compliance rate of the sources in a category,
inspection frequency and thoroughness, the language of the rule (i.e., whether or not it has
loopholes), and the reporting and recordkeeping by the regulatory agency. Evaluating these
factors will provide a more complete evaluation of the effectiveness of a rule. (US EPA, 1994)

In order to incorporate all the salient factors described above, a matrix was created to produce a
final RE rate. US EPA’s latest guidance (2005) provides a listing of factors that can impact rule
effectiveness rates (e.g., inspector training, frequency of inspections, media outreach, enforcement policies, recordkeeping requirements, etc.), grouped into major categories such as most
important factors, important factors and other factors. MCAQD used these suggested factors as
the base structure for creating the RE matrices contained in Appendices 3A through 3F.
In brief, the compliance rate developed from inspection data (labeled “Compliance History” in
the matrix) accounts for 70% of the overall RE rate, while all other factors account for the remaining 30%. (An exception to these values applies in the case of agricultural activities.) Each
factor is scored individually, based upon the department’s success in implementing that factor.
As an example, the score for the factor “Compliance History” is the compliance rate developed
from the study period inspection data, while the score for “Enforcement Penalties” is based upon
the department’s timely response to, and settlement of, observed violations associated with the
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–2

June 2010

subject rule or source category. The complete matrices for each rule or source category for
which rule effectiveness was addressed, are contained in Appendices 3A through 3F.
Once an RE rate has been calculated, its value is applied to relevant sources at an individual process level, thus adjusting (i.e., increasing) emission estimates to reflect a lower degree of control
efficiency. The formulas below illustrate how inclusion of rule effectiveness can significantly
affect the resulting emission estimates:
Emissions before the application of rule effectiveness:
Uncontrolled Emissions × [1 – (Control Efficiency)] = Emissions with Control
100 tons

×

[ 1 – (0.90) ]

= 10.0 tons

Emissions after the application of rule effectiveness:
Uncontrolled Emissions × [1 – (Control Efficiency × RE)]
100 tons

×

[ 1 – (0.90 × 0.83) ]

= Emissions with Control
= 25.3 tons

In general, the RE rate is applied to all processes where a control device or control technique is
in use. There are however some limitations to this blanket rule, as expressed in US EPA’s most
recent guidance:
…not all emission estimates involving use of a control device or technique need to be adjusted to
account for RE…For example, a state or local agency may conclude that a control device that
operates in conjunction with a continuous emissions monitor, or is equipped with an automatic
shutdown device, may provide a sufficient level of assurance that intended emission reductions
will be achieved, and therefore an adjustment for rule effectiveness is not necessary. Another
example would be in instances where a direct determination of emissions, such as via a mass
balance calculation, can be made. (US EPA, 2005)

Another hindrance to the application of a blanket RE percentage rate occurs when the control
device efficiency reported is high. Control device efficiencies are routinely reported at efficiencies of 99% or greater (e.g., baghouses, thermal oxidizers). For these activities, even small
adjustments through the application of RE can cause a dramatic increase in reported emissions.
As an example, a process with a control device of 99.9% efficiency may report controlled emissions of 10 tons. If an RE rate of 85% were applied to this process, the adjusted emissions would
total 1,508.5 tons (an increase of nearly 15,000%). In these types of instances, MCAQD evaluated the affected processes on a case-by-case basis to determine the appropriateness of applying
an RE adjustment.
A total of six distinct rule effectiveness rates were calculated for use in this emissions inventory:
four source-specific rule effectiveness determinations (Rule 310, Rule 310.01, Rule 316 and
agricultural activities) along with two multi-rule determinations (Title V and non-Title V permitted facilities). The following sections describe in further detail the data and methods used in
the development of each of these RE factors.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–3

June 2010

Calculation of Rule Effectiveness (RE) Rates

A. Rule 310 RE Rate:
Sources subject to MCAQD Rule 310 (Fugitive Dust from Dust-Generating Operations) are most
often those construction sites where the disturbance of earth is occurring. The RE rate for Rule
310 sources is developed as a weighted average between the observed compliance rate of permitted sites and the effectiveness of department programs and policies related to Rule 310 implementation. The complete RE matrix for Rule 310 is shown in Appendix 3A.
The compliance rate for Rule 310 sources uses inspection data of issued dust permits between
July 2008 and June 2009. Only inspections that result in a finding of compliance or noncompliance (i.e., “in violation”) are considered in the compliance rate. Inspections conducted
solely to confirm the closing of a permit, or inspections where a compliance determination could
not be made, were not including in the development of the compliance rate. Using these criteria,
a total of 12,290 inspections were conducted on 5,458 issued permits, out of a possible pool of
7,974 issued permits. Dust Control Permits are only valid for 12 months, and expire on the
anniversary of their issue date; for instance a permit issued on July 22, 2007 expired on July 22,
2008. This permit would therefore only have “operated” 22 days in the inspection period on
which this compliance data is based. Some issued permits also experience limited operations,
perhaps only a month or two, but in most cases these permits are left open by the permit holder
for the entire 12 months. Given these realities, it is not unexpected that 2,516 out of the pool of
7,974 permits received no compliance determination inspection during the 12-month period of
July 2008–June 2009. Conversely, over 58% of all issued permits were inspected two or more
times, with some sites receiving as many as 13 compliance determination inspections during the
time period.
Of the inspected sources listed above, individual compliance rates are determined on a permit by
permit basis. Any permit that received at least one violation during any conducted inspection in
July 2008 through June 2009 received a compliance rate of 0%. Permitted sites that had no
recorded violations during the study period received a compliance rate of 100%. Of the violations noted, 42% of the violations were emissions-related (track-out, visible emissions, silt
content, etc.), with the remaining 58% of the violations being procedural (recordkeeping, inadequate dust control plan, etc.). The permit-specific compliance rates were summed and averaged
to produce an overall grouped compliance rate of 87.01%. Applying this 87.01% compliance
rate into the matrix shown in Appendix 3A yields an overall RE rate of 82.99% for this category
of sources.

B. Rule 310.01 RE Rate:
The majority of sources subject to Rule 310.01 (Fugitive Dust from Non-Traditional Sources of
Fugitive Dust) are vacant lots. It is estimated that there are presently more than 100,000 vacant
lots in Maricopa County. Rule 310.01 sources generally do not require a permit, unlike Rule 310
and Rule 316 sources. The RE rate for Rule 310.01 sources is calculated based upon vacant lot
inspection compliance rates, as well as the effectiveness of department policies and programs
that address Rule 310.01 implementation. The complete matrix for Rule 310.01 is contained in
Appendix 3B.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–4

June 2010

During the study period (July 2008 – June 2009), MCAQD inspectors performed a total of
12,370 inspections of vacant lots in Maricopa County. The primary purpose of a Rule 310.01
inspection is to verify whether or not the vacant lot in question has a stabilized surface. If the
surface is determined to be stable (through a variety of tests), the lot is deemed to be in compliance. Conversely, if the lot’s surface is deemed to be unstable, then a violation of Rule 310.01
has occurred. As with Rule 310, a compliance rate is determined individually for each vacant
lot, and then summed and averaged to produce a group compliance rate. The overall compliance
rate for Rule 310.01 sites is 95.15%. All the violations noted by inspectors were emissionsrelated violations, as all the violations are for unstable soil conditions. Factoring this compliance
rate into the matrix shown in Appendix 3B, yield an overall RE rate for this category of sources
of 80.87%.

C. Rule 316 RE Rate:
Facilities subject to Rule 316 (Nonmetallic Mineral Processing) include industries involved in
the mining of sand and gravel and the production of concrete products. All Rule 316 sites are
required to have either a Title V or non-Title V permit issued by MCAQD. At present, all facilities that are subject to Rule 316 have only non-Title V permits. (One class of sources that is an
exception to this has long been made for portable sources that may operate in more than one
county during the life of the permit; thus these sources are issued permits by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. The RE rate for Rule 316 sites is determined in a similar
fashion as for Rules 310 and 310.01 – developing a weighted average between the observed
compliance rate of permitted sites and the effectiveness of departmental programs and policies
related to Rule 316 implementation. The completed matrix for Rule 316 is contained in Appendix 3C.
Inspection data for the period July 2008 through June 2009 reveal that there were 136 issued
permits for Rule 316 facilities. All of these facilities were inspected at least once during this
study period, with a compliance determination made for each facility. Overall, 525 inspections
that resulted in a compliance determination were performed during the study period. As with
Rules 310 and 310.01, a compliance rate is computed for each facility, and then summed and
averaged for the group, resulting in an overall compliance rate of 35.29%. Of the violations
noted, 44% were emissions-related, with the remaining 56% primarily procedural in nature. This
compliance rate is factored into the RE matrix contained in Appendix 3C to yield an overall RE
rate of 49.62%.

D. Agricultural Activities RE Rate:
Agricultural activities in most parts of Maricopa County are subject to the Best Management
Practices program administered by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).
This program is largely a self-monitoring program, in which participants indicate which management practices were chosen to be used during various operations (e.g., harvesting, tilling). No
compliance rate estimates for this program were noted during the study period. ADEQ does
indicate that after a site has been visited, 100% of the sources return to compliance. Since compliance with this program is verified only on a complaint-driven basis, the weight given to compliance history was lowered, from 70% to 25%, in the matrix contained in Appendix 3D, which
indicates an overall RE rate of 55.30% for agricultural activities.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–5

June 2010

E. Title V and Non-Title V RE Rates:
For the remaining emission processes (not regulated by Rules 310, 310.01 and/or 316) that
include a control device or technique that limits particulate matter or ozone formation, a separate
multi-rule RE rate has been developed for permitted Title V and non-Title V facilities. Factorbased matrices similar to those developed for Rules 310, 310.01 and 316 have been utilized to
develop RE rates for Title V and non-Title V facilities. Compliance rates for these sources is
based upon two full years of data (2008 through 2009), as compliance information for these
sources tends to be more detailed (as reflected in the matrix). The compliance rate for these
facilities also includes data on self-monitoring recordkeeping practices in addition to inspection
data. The combination of monitoring data and inspection data comprise the ‘compliance rate’
section of the RE calculation matrix, and still account for 70% of the overall RE rate. The combined compliance rate for Title V facilities is 89.14% and 81.00% for non-Title V facilities.
Appendices 3E and 3F indicate RE rates of 90.94% and 84.27% for Title V and non-Title V
facilities, respectively.

References
MCAQD, 2007. 2005 Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 for the Maricopa County, Arizona,
Nonattainment Area.
US EPA, 1992. Guidelines for Estimating and Applying Rule Effectiveness for Ozone/CO State
Implementation Plan Base Year Inventories. EPA Rep. 452/R-92-010, November 1992.
US EPA, 1994. Rule Effectiveness Guidance: Integration of Inventory, Compliance and
Assessment Applications. EPA Rep. 452/R-94-001, January 1994.
US EPA, 2005. Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations.
EPA Rep. 454/R-05-001, November 2005.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–6

June 2010

APPENDIX 3A. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 310
A. Most important factor (1 criterion, assigned weighting of 70% of total):
Factor

Compliance
History

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Over 90% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.
Over 75% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.
Over 60% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

70%

87%

60.91%

4%

0%

0.00%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

93%

3.72%

4%

93%

3.72%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

78%

3.12%

B. Other important factors (6 criteria, each assigned weighting of 4% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Type of
Inspection

Inspection
Frequency/
Percentage

Unannounced
Inspections

Enforcement
Penalties

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

Compliance
Assistance

Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification.
Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification.
Source is not subject to any type of compliance
certification.
Inspections are thorough and detailed, and include
close examination of control equipment, and a
detailed records review.
Inspections consist of a records review, and
sometimes inspection of control equipment.
Inspections generally consist of a records review
only.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 25% or greater.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 15% or greater.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is less than 15%.
Unannounced inspections are sometimes done.
Unannounced inspections are done, but
infrequently.
Unannounced inspections are never done.
Agency takes prompt enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators.
Agency usually takes enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators.
Agency usually does not take enforcement action
against violators.
A compliance assistance program exists and is
adequately staffed, and includes such things as
workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials, etc.
A compliance assistance program exists and is
minimally staffed. The program occasionally
makes workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials,
etc., available.
A compliance assistance program does not exist.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–7

June 2010

C. Other factors (3 criteria, each assigned weighting of 2% of total):
Factor
Monitoring
Requirements

Follow-up
Inspections

Media
Publicity

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Monitoring requirements exist and must be
reported to regulatory agency at least once a year.
Monitoring requirements exist but records don’t
have to be filed with regulatory agency.
Monitoring requirements do not exist.
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted most (>75%) of the time.
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted some of the time.
Follow-up inspections are not routinely done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
routinely conducted.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
sometimes done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is rarely
done.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

2%

78%

1.56%

2%

93%

1.86%

2%

93%

1.86%

Overall rule effectiveness score for Rule 310 sites:

82.99%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–8

APPENDIX 3B. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 310.01
A. Most important factor (1 criterion, assigned weighting of 70% of total):
Factor

Compliance
History

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Over 90% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.
Over 75% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.
Over 60% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

70%

95%

66.61%

4%

0%

0.00%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

35%

1.40%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

35%

1.40%

4%

35%

1.40%

B. Other important factors (6 criteria, each assigned weighting of 4% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Type of
Inspection

Inspection
Frequency/
Percentage

Unannounced
Inspections

Enforcement
Penalties

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification.
Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification.
Source is not subject to any type of compliance
certification.
Inspections are thorough and detailed, and include
close examination of control equipment, and a
detailed records review.
Inspections consist of a records review, and
sometimes inspection of control equipment.
Inspections generally consist of a records review
only.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 25% or greater.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 15% or greater.
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is less than 15%.
Unannounced inspections are sometimes done.
Unannounced inspections are done, but
infrequently.
Unannounced inspections are never done.
Agency takes prompt enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators.
Agency usually takes enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators.
Agency usually does not take enforcement action
against violators.

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

A compliance assistance program exists and is
adequately staffed, and includes such things as
workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials, etc.
A compliance assistance program exists and is
minimally staffed. The program occasionally
makes workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials,
etc., available.

< 70%

35%

A compliance assistance program does not exist.

Compliance
Assistance

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–9

June 2010

C. Other factors (3 criteria, each assigned weighting of 2% of total):
Factor
Monitoring
Requirements

Follow-up
Inspections

Media
Publicity

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Monitoring requirements exist and must be
reported to regulatory agency at least once a year.
Monitoring requirements exist but records don’t
have to be filed with regulatory agency.
Monitoring requirements do not exist.

Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted most (>75%) of the time.
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted some of the time.
Follow-up inspections are not routinely done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
routinely conducted.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
sometimes done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is rarely
done.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

2%

78%

1.56%

2%

78%

1.56%

2%

35%

0.70%

Overall rule effectiveness score for Rule 310.01 sites:

80.87%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–10

APPENDIX 3C. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Rule 316
A. Most important factor (1 criterion, assigned weighting of 70% of total):
Factor

Compliance
History

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Over 90% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance
Over 75% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance
Over 60% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

70%

35%

24.70%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

86%

3.44%

4%

93%

3.72%

4%

78%

3.12%

4%

78%

3.12%

B. Other important factors (6 criteria, each assigned weighting of 4% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Type of
Inspection

Inspection
Frequency/
Percentage

Unannounced
Inspections

Enforcement
Penalties

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification;
Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification;
Source is not subject to any type of compliance
certification;
Inspections are thorough and detailed, and include
close examination of control equipment, and a
detailed records review
Inspections consist of a records review, and
sometimes inspection of control equipment;
Inspections generally consist of a records review
only;
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 25% or greater;
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 15% or greater;
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is less than 15%
Unannounced inspections are sometimes done;
Unannounced inspections are done, but
infrequently;
Unannounced inspections are never done;
Agency takes prompt enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators;
Agency usually takes enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators;
Agency usually does not take enforcement action
against violators;

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

A compliance assistance program exists and is
adequately staffed, and includes such things as
workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials, etc.
A compliance assistance program exists and is
minimally staffed. The program occasionally
makes workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials,
etc., available.

< 70%

35%

A compliance assistance program does not exist

Compliance
Assistance

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–11

June 2010

C. Other factors (3 criteria, each assigned weighting of 2% of total):
Factor
Monitoring
Requirements

Follow-up
Inspections

Media
Publicity

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Monitoring requirements exist and must be
reported to regulatory agency at least once a year;
Monitoring requirements exist but records don’t
have to be filed with regulatory agency;
Monitoring requirements do not exist;
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted most (>75%) of the time;
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted some of the time;
Follow-up inspections are not routinely done;
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
routinely conducted.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
sometimes done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is rarely
done.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

2%

78%

1.56%

2%

93%

1.86%

2%

93%

1.86%

Overall rule effectiveness score for Rule 316 sites:

49.62%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–12

APPENDIX 3D. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Agricultural Activities
A. Most important factor (1 criterion, assigned weighting of 25% of total):
Factor

Compliance
History

Type of
Inspection

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Over 90% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance
Over 75% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance
Over 60% of facilities inspected in the source
category are in compliance
Inspections are thorough and detailed, and include
close examination of control equipment, and a
detailed records review
Inspections consist of a records review, and
sometimes inspection of control equipment;
Inspections generally consist of a records review
only;

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

25%

93%

23.25%

10%

35%

3.5%

B. Other important factors (6 criteria, each assigned weighting of 10% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Inspection
Frequency/
Percentage

Unannounced
Inspections

Enforcement
Penalties

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

Compliance
Assistance

Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification;
Source is subject to some type of compliance
certification;
Source is not subject to any type of compliance
certification;

10%

35%

3.5%

Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 25% or greater;
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is 15% or greater;
Percent of facilities inspected in the sector in a
given year is less than 15%

10%

35%

3.5%

Unannounced inspections are sometimes done;
Unannounced inspections are done, but
infrequently;
Unannounced inspections are never done;

10%

35%

3.5%

Agency takes prompt enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators;
Agency usually takes enforcement action,
including monetary fines, against violators;
Agency usually does not take enforcement action
against violators;

10%

35%

3.5%

10%

93%

9.3%

A compliance assistance program exists and is
adequately staffed, and includes such things as
workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials, etc.
A compliance assistance program exists and is
minimally staffed. The program occasionally
makes workshops, mailings, web-based tutorials,
etc., available.
A compliance assistance program does not exist

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–13

June 2010

C. Other factors (3 criteria, each assigned weighting of 5% of total):
Factor
Monitoring
Requirements

Follow-up
Inspections

Media
Publicity

Range

Midpt.
value

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%
< 70%

78%
35%

86%

100%

93%

70%

85%

78%

< 70%

35%

Description
Monitoring requirements exist and must be
reported to regulatory agency at least once a year;
Monitoring requirements exist but records don’t
have to be filed with regulatory agency;
Monitoring requirements do not exist;

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

5%

35%

1.75%

Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted most (>75%) of the time;
Follow-up inspections are done when violations
are noted some of the time;
Follow-up inspections are not routinely done;

5%

35%

1.75%

Media publicity of enforcement actions is routinely
conducted.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is
sometimes done.
Media publicity of enforcement actions is rarely
done.

5%

35%

1.75%

Overall rule effectiveness score for agricultural activities:

55.30%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–14

APPENDIX 3E. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Title V Facilities
A. Most important factors (2 criteria, each assigned weighting of 35% of total):
Factor

Range

Midpt.
value

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%
< 70%

75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Monitoring

Compliance
History

Description
Source specific monitoring used for compliance
purposes, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency at least every 4 months.
Source specific monitoring used as an indicator of
compliance, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency every 6 to 9 months.
Source specific monitoring used as an indicator of
compliance, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency each year.
General guidance exists for source specific
enhanced monitoring, and monitoring records
required but aren’t submitted to regulatory agency.
No requirements for any type of monitoring.
The facility has been in compliance for the past
eight quarters.
The facility is believed to have been in compliance
for the past eight quarters, although inspection
frequency is such that this can’t be positively
confirmed.
On schedule; the facility is meeting its compliance
schedule.
In Violation; facility is in violation of emissions
and/or procedural requirements.
High Priority Violator (HPV): the facility is in
significant violation of one or more applicable
requirement of the CAA.

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

35%

90%

31.5%

10 of 19
facilities

17.9%

8 of 19
facilities

12.4%

1 of 19
facilities
Sum:

0.6%
30.9%

35%

B. Other important factors (4 criteria, each assigned weighting of 3% of total):

Type of
Inspection

Operation &
Maintenance

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%
< 70%

75%
35%

Inspections involve compliance test methods with
a high degree of accuracy, such as stack testing or
other types of precise emissions measurement.
Inspections involve detailed review of process
parameters & inspection of control equipment.
Inspections involve review of process and
inspection of control equipment.
Inspections generally consist of only a records
review.
Inspections most likely consist of visual inspection
(e.g., opacity), or drive by.
Control equipment operators follow and sign daily
O&M instructions.
Control equipment operators follow daily O&M
instructions.
Control equipment operators follow daily or
weekly O&M instructions.
O&M requirements exist, but on no specific
schedule.
No specific O&M requirements.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–15

3%

97%

2.9%

3%

90%

2.7%

June 2010

Factor

Unannounced
Inspections

Range
94%
100%
87%
93%
81%
86%
70%
80%
< 70%

Midpt.
value
97%
90%
84%
75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Enforcement
Penalties

Description
Routinely conducted.
Sometimes done.
Done, but infrequently.
Rarely done.
Never done.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency does not have sufficient authority to
impose punitive measures towards violators.

Weight
3%

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)
97%
2.9%

3%

97%

2.91%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

C. Other factors (9 criteria, each assigned weighting of 2% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Inspection
Frequency

EPA HPV
Enforcement

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%
70%

86%
80%
< 70%

84%
75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Source subject to Title V or other type of compliance certification.
Source subject to Title V or other type of compliance certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance certification.
Source(s) are inspected once every 2 years or more
frequently.
Source(s) are inspected once every 3 years or more
frequently.
Source(s) are inspected once every 5 years or more
frequently.
Inspection of source(s) infrequent; > every 5 years.
Inspections rarely, if ever, performed.
Agency has sufficient resources to implement
EPA’s 12/22/98 HPV policy.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy in most instances.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy in most instances.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy more often than not.
Resource constraints prohibit agency from
implementing EPA’s 12/22/98 HPV policy in most
instances.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–16

June 2010

Factor

Operator
Training

Media
Publicity

Range

Midpt.
value

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

0.8

75%

< 70%

35%

Description
Control equipment operators complete a formal
training program on use of the equipment, and
such program is kept up to date and has been
reviewed by the regulatory agency.
Control equipment operators complete formal
training program, and such program is kept up to
date and available for review by the regulatory
agency upon request.
Control equipment operators complete some
amount of formal training.
Control equipment operators receive only on the
job training.
Control equipment operators receive no specific
training.

100%
93%
86%
80%
< 70%

97%
90%
84%
75%
35%

Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
No media publicity of enforcement actions.

94%
87%
81%
70%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Regulatory
Workshops

94%

Inspector
Training

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Regulatory workshops are available annually,
and/or the implementing agency mails regulatory
information packages each year.
Regulatory workshops are available every 1-2
years, and/or the implementing agency mails
regulatory information packages every 1-2 years.
Regulatory workshops are available every 2-3
years, and/or the implementing agency mails
regulatory information packages once every 2-3
years.
Regulatory workshop not routinely available, but
implementing agency mails regulatory information
packages out about once every 2-3 years.
Regulatory workshops not routinely available.
Implementing agency mails regulatory information
packages infrequently, if ever.
Inspectors must undergo 2 weeks of
comprehensive basic training, and 1 to 2 weeks of
source specific training, and such training is
updated each year.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 1 week of source specific training and
such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 3 to 5 days of source specific training,
and such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 1 to 3 days of source specific training,
and such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo less than 5 days of basic
training less than 3 days of source specific
training, and such training is updated only every 2
years or less frequently.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–17

Weight

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)

2%

84%

1.68%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

90%

1.80%

June 2010

Factor

Range
94%

Testing
Guidelines

Follow-up
Inspections

Midpt.
value

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Description
Specific guidelines and schedule for testing and
test methods exist.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods
exist, but no schedule for testing.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods
exist, but no schedule for testing.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods,
but no schedule for testing.
Only general guidance on testing, or no mention of
testing requirements.
Follow-up inspections always or almost always
conducted (90 % of the time or more).
Follow-up inspections usually conducted
(approximately 75% of the time).
Follow-up inspections sometimes conducted
(approximately 50% of the time).
Follow-up inspections infrequently conducted
(approximately 25% of the time).
Follow-up inspections rarely or never conducted
(10% of the time or less)

Weight
2%

2%

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight ×
MCAQD
value)
97%

97%

1.94%

1.94%

Overall rule effectiveness score for Title V facilities:

90.94%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–18

APPENDIX 3F. Rule Effectiveness Matrix for Non-Title V Facilities
A. Most important factors (2 criteria, each assigned weighting of 35% of total):
Factor

Range

Midpt.
value

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%
< 70%

75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Monitoring

Compliance
History

B.

Description
Source specific monitoring used for compliance
purposes, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency at least every 4 months.
Source specific monitoring used as an indicator of
compliance, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency every 6 to 9 months.
Source specific monitoring used as an indicator of
compliance, and monitoring records filed with
regulatory agency each year.
General guidance exists for source specific
enhanced monitoring, and monitoring records required but aren’t submitted to regulatory agency.
No requirements for any type of monitoring.
The facility has been in compliance for the past
eight quarters.
The facility is believed to have been in compliance
for the past eight quarters, although inspection
frequency is such that this can’t be positively
confirmed.
On schedule; the facility is meeting its compliance
schedule.
In Violation; facility is in violation of emissions
and/or procedural requirements.
High Priority Violator (HPV): the facility is in
significant violation of one or more applicable
requirement of the CAA.

Weight

35%

35%

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight
MCAQD
× value)

75%

26.3%

156 of 298
facilities

17.8%

10 of 298
facilities

1.1%

130 of 298
facilities

11.5%

2 of 298
facilities
Sum:

0.1%
30.4%

Other important factors (4 criteria, each assigned weighting of 3% of total):

Type of
Inspection

Operation &
Maintenance

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%
< 70%

75%
35%

Inspections involve compliance test methods with
a high degree of accuracy, such as stack testing or
other types of precise emissions measurement.
Inspections involve detailed review of process
parameters & inspection of control equipment.
Inspections involve review of process and
inspection of control equipment.
Inspections generally consist of only a records
review.
Inspections most likely consist of visual inspection
(e.g., opacity), or drive by.
Control equipment operators follow and sign daily
O&M instructions.
Control equipment operators follow daily O&M
instructions.
Control equipment operators follow daily or
weekly O&M instructions.
O&M requirements exist, but on no specific
schedule.
No specific O&M requirements.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–19

3%

90%

2.7%

3%

90%

2.7%

June 2010

Factor
Unannounced
Inspections

Range
94%
100%
87%
93%
81%
86%
70%
80%
< 70%

Midpt.
value
97%
90%
84%
75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Enforcement
Penalties

Description
Routinely conducted.
Sometimes done.
Done, but infrequently.
Rarely done.
Never done.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency has the authority to impose punitive
measures, including monetary fines, towards
violators such as in delegated Title V Operating
Permit programs.
Agency does not have sufficient authority to
impose punitive measures towards violators.

Weight
3%

Value
Score
assigned to (= weight
MCAQD
× value)
97%
2.91%

3%

97%

2.91%

2%

75%

1.5%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

C. Other factors (9 criteria, each assigned weighting of 2% of total):

Compliance
Certifications

Inspection
Frequency

EPA HPV
Enforcement

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%
70%

86%
80%
< 70%

84%
75%
35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Source subject to Title V or other type of
compliance certification.
Source subject to Title V or other type of
compliance certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance
certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance
certification.
Source not subject to any type of compliance
certification.
Source(s) are inspected once every 2 years or more
frequently.
Source(s) inspected every 3 years or more
frequently.
Source(s) inspected every 5 years or more
frequently.
Inspection of source(s) infrequent; > every 5 years.
Inspections rarely, if ever, performed.
Agency has sufficient resources to implement
EPA’s 12/22/98 HPV policy.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy in most instances.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy in most instances.
Agency’s resources allow it to implement EPA’s
12/22/98 HPV policy more often than not.
Resource constraints prohibit agency from
implementing EPA’s 12/22/98 HPV policy in most
instances.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–20

June 2010

Factor

Operator
Training

Media
Publicity

Midpt.
value

Range

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

0.8

75%

< 70%

35%

Description
Control equipment operators complete a formal
training program on use of the equipment; the
program is kept up to date and has been reviewed
by the regulatory agency.
Control equipment operators complete formal
training program, and such program is kept up to
date and available for review by the regulatory
agency upon request.
Control equipment operators complete some
amount of formal training.
Control equipment operators receive only on the
job training.
Control equipment operators receive no specific
training.

100%
93%
86%
80%
< 70%

97%
90%
84%
75%
35%

Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
Media publicity of enforcement actions.
No media publicity of enforcement actions.

94%
87%
81%
70%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Regulatory
Workshops

Inspector
Training

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Regulatory workshops are available annually,
and/or the implementing agency mails regulatory
information packages each year.
Regulatory workshops are available every 1-2
years, and/or the implementing agency mails
regulatory information packages every 1-2 years.
Regulatory workshops are available every 2-3
years, and/or the implementing agency mails
regulatory information packages once every 2-3
years.
Regulatory workshop not routinely available, but
implementing agency mails regulatory information
packages out about once every 2-3 years.
Regulatory workshops not routinely available. The
implementing agency mails regulatory information
packages infrequently, if ever.
Inspectors must undergo 2 weeks of comprehensive basic training, and 1 to 2 weeks of source
specific training, and such training is updated each
year.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 1 week of source specific training and
such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 3 to 5 days of source specific training,
and such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo 1 to 2 weeks of basic
training and 1 to 3 days of source specific training,
and such training is updated every 1-2 years.
Inspectors must undergo less than 5 days of basic
training less than 3 days of source specific
training, and such training is updated only every 2
years or less frequently.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A3–21

Weight

Value
assigned to
MCAQD

Score(=
weight ×
value)

2%

75%

1.5%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

90%

1.80%

June 2010

Factor

Testing
Guidelines

Follow-up
Inspections

Midpt.
value

Range
94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

94%

100%

97%

87%

93%

90%

81%

86%

84%

70%

80%

75%

< 70%

35%

Description
Specific guidelines and schedule for testing and
test methods exist.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods
exist, but no schedule for testing.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods
exist, but no schedule for testing.
Specific guidelines on testing and test methods,
but no schedule for testing.
Only general guidance on testing, or no mention of
testing requirements.
Follow-up inspections always or almost always
conducted (90 % of the time or more).
Follow-up inspections usually conducted
(approximately 75% of the time).
Follow-up inspections sometimes conducted
(approximately 50% of the time).
Follow-up inspections infrequently conducted
(approximately 25% of the time).
Follow-up inspections rarely or never conducted
(10% of the time or less)

Weight

Value
assigned to
MCAQD

Score(=
weight ×
value)

2%

97%

1.94%

2%

97%

1.94%

Overall rule effectiveness score for non-Title V facilities:

84.27%

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

June 2010

A3–22

Appendix 4. Windblown Dust Emission Estimation Methodology
Introduction
Emissions from windblown dust occur through an intricate relationship between wind speeds and
the physical characteristics of the subject soils. Several methodologies for estimating windblown
dust emissions have been developed to try and express these complex relationships (WGA,
2006). For this analysis, a GIS-based approach was developed that utilizes location-specific data
on wind speed, precipitation, land use and locally developed emission factors. GIS was chosen
as the driver of the methodology to help reflect the wide range of wind speeds, soil types and
land uses that occur in an area as large as Maricopa County. A GIS-based method also allows
for the mapping of PM10 emissions from windblown dust, as opposed to simply “smearing” a
single emission value across the entire county (or nonattainment area).
Emissions mapping can assist in the development of microscale emission inventories, modeling
exercises, and can focus rule development and compliance activities in known problem areas.
As an example, Figure A4–1 depicts the estimated annual PM10 emissions across the PM10 nonattainment area that result by applying the methods described herein.
Figure A4–1. PM10 emissions rates (tons/acre-year) from windblown dust in the PM10 nonattainment area.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–1

June 2010

The following sections describe the meteorological, land use, and emission rate (vertical fluxes)
data used to develop PM10 emissions from windblown dust in Maricopa County and the PM10
nonattainment area. A summary of PM10 emissions is included in the section “Summary of
Windblown Dust Emissions Estimates”.

Meteorological Data
A total of 34 meteorological stations encompass the source of calendar year 2008 wind speed
and precipitation data used in this inventory of windblown dust. This includes 11 stations operated by the Arizona Meteorological Network (AZMET), 22 stations operated by the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department (MCAQD), and 1 station operated by the Pinal County Air
Quality Control District (PCAQCD). Stations operated by the National Weather Service (NWS)
in and around Maricopa County were not chosen for inclusion in this analysis due to differences
in wind speed data collection methods that preclude “apples-to-apples” comparisons with data
from those meteorological stations included in this work 1. Figure A4–2 displays the location of
the included meteorological stations.
Figure A4–2. Location of meteorological stations.

1. National Weather Service (NWS) stations report wind speeds in 2-minute averages at the time of posting, while
AZMET, MCAQD and PCAQCD all report wind speed in hourly averages at the top of each hour.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–2

June 2010

Wind Speed Data
For this analysis, 5-minute average wind speeds form the basis of the wind data used in calculating windblown dust emissions. Data recorded as a 5-minute average was chosen over hourly
average data because the finer time resolution allows a better representation of potential emissions caused by wind gusts that can create significant emissions, yet be overshadowed in hourly
data. This approach also allows for the computation of emissions by wind speed bin classes: 15–
20 mph, 20–25 mph, 25–30 mph and 30–35 mph. As compared to hourly data, the 5-minute bin
classes better reflect the change in emission rates (vertical fluxes) as a function of increasing
wind speeds. Outlined below are the steps necessary to prepare the wind speed data for inclusion
in windblown dust emission calculations.
As an initial step wind speeds were uniformly adjusted to speeds at 10 meters (to account for the
difference in anemometer heights) through use of a standard wind profile power-law equation:
𝑈𝑧 = 𝑈𝑟 (𝑍/𝑍𝑟 )𝑝

where Uz is wind speed (in mph) at 10 meters, Ur is wind speed (in mph) at referenced anemometer height, Z is 10 meters, Zr is the height (in meters) of the reference anemometer, and p is the
power-law exponent. Determination of p was made by comparing wind speeds at neighboring
stations with different anemometer heights (e.g., AZMET’s Buckeye station at 3 meters
compared with MCAQD’s Buckeye station at 10 meters) through a simple adaptation of the
power-law equation:
𝑝=

ln(𝑈) − ln(𝑈𝑟 )
ln(𝑍) − ln(𝑍𝑟 )

Comparison of hourly average wind speeds greater than 9 mph yielded an average value for p of
0.06 for urban stations and 0.12 for rural stations. (Only those hours with average winds speeds
greater than 9 mph were chosen, as applying the approach described above for hours with calm
winds tends to over-inflate the value of p.) Table A4–1 lists the frequency of hourly average
wind speeds over 15 mph (after adjustment to 10 meters) for all meteorological stations.
In addition to correcting for height, adjustments to wind speed were performed to gap-fill
missing data and interpolate 5-minute average values as necessary. All of the meteorological
stations report hourly average wind speeds at the top of each hour. In addition, 13 of the
MCAQD stations also report 5-minute average wind speeds, with data completion rates of 75%
or better. The data from these stations were (1) counted and assigned to one of four wind speed
“bin classes” of 15–20 mph, 20–25 mph, 25–30 mph, and 30–35 mph; and (2) “grown” to compensate for missing data, based upon the data completion rate of each station. Thus (e.g.) a
station that reported 124 hourly periods that were assigned to a bin with a data completion rate of
90.63%, would result in a “grown” bin value of 137 [124 periods divided by 90.63%]). Table
A4–2 presents the 5-minute values and the resulting bin class assignments, for each of the 13
MCAQD meteorological stations that were considered.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–3

June 2010

Table A4–1. Number of hours in 2008 with average wind speeds greater than 15 mph (at uniform height of
10 meters), by site.
Number of hourly average
Anemometer
Station Name
wind speeds > 15 mph
height (m)
AZMET Aguila
284
3
AZMET Buckeye
149
3
AZMET Desert Ridge
70
3
AZMET Harquahala
274
3
AZMET Maricopa
118
3
AZMET Mesa
5
3
AZMET Paloma
224
3
AZMET Phoenix Encanto
1
3
AZMET Phoenix Greenway
6
3
AZMET Queen Creek
161
3
AZMET Waddell
4
3
MCAQD Blue Point
60
10
MCAQD Buckeye
146
10
MCAQD Cave Creek
69
10
MCAQD Central Phoenix
43
15
MCAQD Coyote Lakes
54
10
MCAQD Durango Complex
50
10
MCAQD Dysart
64
10
MCAQD Falcon Field
58
13
MCAQD Fountain Hills
1
10
MCAQD Glendale
19
13
MCAQD Greenwood
1
10
MCAQD Higley
42
10
MCAQD Mesa
42
10
MCAQD North Phoenix
4
10
MCAQD Pinnacle Peak
51
16
MCAQD South Phoenix
6
10
MCAQD South Scottsdale
3
10
MCAQD Tempe
0
10
MCAQD West 43rd Ave
65
10
MCAQD West Chandler
23
10
MCAQD West Indian School
19
10
MCAQD West Phoenix
5
10
PCAQCD Apache Junction
134
10

For the stations that do not record 5-minute average wind speeds 2, regression equations were
developed (based upon those MCAQD stations that do report 5-minute average wind speeds) to
interpolate 5-minute average values. The equations were derived by regressing each bin class
(dependent [y]) against hourly average wind speeds over 15 mph (independent [x]). All of the
regression equations proved to be statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. The
results of the regression equations for each bin class are shown in Table A4–3. The resulting 5minute average wind speeds (by bin class) for all meteorological stations in this study are shown
in Table A4–4.

2. AZMET and PCAQCD stations report average wind speed only on an hourly basis, and another nine MCAQD
stations that measure wind speed on a 5-minute average had data completion rates less than 75% for 2008.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–4

June 2010

Table A4–2. Number of recorded and grown 5-minute average wind speeds, by bin category and station.
Recorded 5-minute averages
Grown 5-minute averages
15–20 20–25 25–30 30–35
Data
15–20 20–25 25–30 30–35
MCAQD Station
mph
mph
mph
mph
completeness
mph
mph
mph
mph
Buckeye
1679
296
54
12
99.62%
1685
297
54
12
Coyote Lakes
840
77
1
0
98.71%
851
78
1
0
Durango Complex
618
33
10
1
96.39%
641
34
10
1
Dysart
784
92
6
0
78.16%
1003
118
8
0
Falcon Field
758
95
2
1
76.77%
987
124
3
1
Greenwood
124
11
1
0
90.63%
137
12
1
0
Higley
766
50
8
1
91.02%
842
55
9
1
North Phoenix
80
8
2
0
77.59%
103
10
3
0
South Phoenix
169
9
0
1
99.19%
170
9
0
1
Tempe
5
0
0
0
86.38%
6
0
0
0
West Chandler
515
42
3
1
99.09%
520
42
3
1
West Forty-third
1042
83
13
6
98.44%
1059
84
13
6
West Phoenix
111
8
1
0
92.47%
120
9
1
0

Table A4–3. Regression equation, p-value, and R2 for interpolating 5-minute average wind speeds, by bin.
5-minute average
wind speed bin
Regression equation
p-value
R2
15–20 mph
y = 150.05 + 11.92x
0.00000006
93.77%
20–25 mph
y = –8.34 + 1.39x
0.00000021
92.09%
25–30 mph
y = –4.20 + 0.31x
0.00009300
76.42%
30–35 mph
y = –0.99 + 0.07x
0.00047000
68.57%

Table A4–4. Number of interpolated 5-minute average wind speeds, by station and wind speed bin. (Shaded
cells denote interpolated values.)
Number of hourly
Number of 5-minute average values between:
average values
Station Name
> 15 mph
15–20 mph
20–25 mph
25–30 mph
30–35 mph
AZMET Aguila
284
3535
386
84
19
AZMET Buckeye
149
1926
199
42
9
AZMET Desert Ridge
70
984
89
18
4
AZMET Harquahala
274
3416
373
81
18
AZMET Maricopa
118
1557
156
32
7
AZMET Mesa
5
210
0
0
0
AZMET Paloma
224
2820
303
65
15
AZMET Phoenix Encanto
1
162
0
0
0
AZMET Phoenix Greenway
6
222
0
0
0
AZMET Queen Creek
161
2069
215
46
10
AZMET Waddell
4
198
0
0
0
MCAQD Blue Point
60
865
75
14
3
MCAQD Buckeye
146
1685
297
54
12
MCAQD Cave Creek
69
973
88
17
4
MCAQD Central Phoenix
43
663
51
9
2
MCAQD Coyote Lakes
54
851
78
1
0
MCAQD Durango Complex
50
641
34
10
1
MCAQD Dysart
64
1003
118
8
0
MCAQD Falcon Field
58
987
124
3
1
MCAQD Fountain Hills
1
162
0
0
0
MCAQD Glendale
19
377
18
2
0
MCAQD Greenwood
1
137
12
1
0
MCAQD Higley
42
842
55
9
1
MCAQD Mesa
42
651
50
9
2
MCAQD North Phoenix
4
103
10
3
0
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–5

June 2010

Table A4–4 (continued). Number of interpolated 5-minute average wind speeds, by meteorological station
and wind speed bin. (Shaded cells denote interpolated values.)
Number of hourly
Number of 5-minute average values between:
average values
Station Name
> 15 mph
15–20 mph
20–25 mph
25–30 mph
30–35 mph
MCAQD Pinnacle Peak
51
758
63
12
3
MCAQD South Phoenix
6
170
9
0
1
MCAQD South Scottsdale
3
186
0
0
0
MCAQD Tempe
0
6
0
0
0
MCAQD West 43rd Ave
65
1059
84
13
6
MCAQD West Chandler
23
520
42
3
1
MCAQD West Indian School
19
377
18
2
0
MCAQD West Phoenix
5
120
9
1
0
PCAQCD Apache Junction
134
1747
178
37
8

Lastly, in order to assign the bin class wind speeds to the underlying land use acreages, Thiessen
polygons 3 were created for each bin class (after Pulugurtha and James, 2006). Figure A4–3
shows the resulting Thiessen polygon for the 5-minute average 15–20 mph wind speed bin class.
Figure A4–3. Thiessen polygon depiction of the number of values for the 15–20 mph wind speed bin class.

3. A “Thiessen polygon” depicts an area whose boundaries define the region that is closest to a given point, relative
to all other given points.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–6

June 2010

Precipitation Data
AZMET meteorological station report hourly rain totals when precipitation occurs. For those
MCAQD and PCAQCD stations that do not report precipitation, rain totals from the closest
AZMET station was used as a surrogate. Table A4–5 lists the number of hours during which
precipitation was recorded at each station.
Table A4–5. Number of hours in 2008 during which any precipitation was recorded at each station.
Hours in 2008 with
Station Name
Recorded Precipitation
Aguila
140
Buckeye
91
Desert Ridge
155
Harquahala
110
Maricopa
134
Mesa
154
Paloma
90
Phx. Encanto
139
Phx. Greenway
146
Queen Creek
150
Waddell
113
Blue Point
154
Buckeye
91
Cave Creek
155
Central Phoenix
139
Coyote Lakes
113
Durango Complex
139
Dysart
113
Falcon Field
154
Fountain Hills
155
Glendale
146
Greenwood
139
Higley
150
Mesa
154
North Phoenix
146
Pinnacle Peak
155
South Phoenix
139
South Scottsdale
154
Tempe
154
West Chandler
154
West Forty Third
139
West Indian School Road
139
West Phoenix
139
Apache Junction
150
Average:
138

The resulting average value of 138 hours/year shown above was then used to estimate the
percentage of the time during calendar year 2008 for which no windblown dust emissions are
assumed to occur. (1.57%; =138 hrs ÷ 8,784 total hours in 2008).

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–7

June 2010

Land Use Data
The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) provided draft 2009 GIS data on land use
coverage for use in determining the location and extent of land capable of producing windblown
dust. A total of 18 land use categories were provided, six of which were deemed to have the
potential to emit windblown dust. Table A4–6 lists the 18 land use categories considered, their
acreages within both Maricopa County and the PM10 nonattainment area, and the assessment of
each category’s potential to produce windblown dust, considering a variety of typical characteristics for each category. Figure A4–4 depicts the extent and distribution of the six land use
categories determined to have the potential to emit windblown dust.
Table A4–6. Land use categories, 2009 acreages, and factors determining potential to emit windblown dust.
Maricopa
PM10
Potential to
MAG Land Use
County
NAA
emit windCategory
acreage
acreage blown dust?
Rationale for Determination
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Residential
353,610 334,413
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Commercial
36,742
35,791
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Industrial
25,933
26,028
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Office
8,289
8,284
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Tourist and Visitor
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Accommodations
2,679
2,512
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Educational
18,216
18,099
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Institutional
12,210
12,045
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Public Facilities,
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Military, Special Events
35,308
22,931
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Multiple Use/Business
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Park
423
13,273
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Transportation and
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Parking
158,500 141,025
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
Built environment, limited presence of natural soils,
Airports
11,302
9,558
No
limited opportunity for disturbance of soils.
General/Active Open
Acreage largely parks and golf courses, limited
Space/Golf Courses
228,295 223,290
No
opportunity for disturbance of natural soils.
Passive/Restricted Open
Acreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
Space, Water
2,373,545 302,999
sporadic disturbance. Water coverage removed.
Yes
Landfill, Sand & Gravel,
Acreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
Automotive Test Tracks
43,924
29,011
frequent disturbance.
Yes
Acreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
Agriculture
295,509 130,445
sporadic disturbance.
Yes
Acreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
Vacant
2,227,981 472,831
sporadic disturbance.
Yes
Acreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
Developing Residential
55,152
50,082
frequent disturbance.
Yes
Developing NonAcreage uncovered, unbuilt. Soils subject to
residential
15,142
14,437
frequent disturbance.
Yes

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–8

June 2010

Figure A4–4. Distribution of land use categories capable of producing windblown dust emissions.

To facilitate the calculation of windblown dust emissions from these land use categories, GIS
tools were used to subdivide the land use polygons into smaller, 40-acre cells. This technique
allows for the land use acreage in each category to be accurately joined with the wind speed data
as represented using Thiessen polygons. Each 40-acre cell is assigned the wind speed bin value
of the Thiessen polygon that overlays it. Ultimately, the eligible land use acreage in each cell,
combined with the overlaid wind speed values and land use-specific vertical fluxes (emission
rates as explained next) produce the windblown dust emissions in each 40-acre cell.

Determination of Emission Rates
The rate at which soil produces windblown dust emissions can be described as a vertical flux.
The two primary components of this vertical flux are: (1) the threshold friction velocity (i.e., the
wind speed at which dust emissions are initiated) and (2) the physical characteristics of soils that
allow or impede the production of windblown dust (usually termed surface roughness). The
equations used to determine vertical flux for the present study have been derived from wind
tunnel studies (Nickling and Gillies 1986, 1989) conducted in Maricopa County as well as other
parts of Arizona, and that address specific land use categories.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–9

June 2010

These wind tunnel studies resulted in land use-specific vertical flux estimates for a total of five
separate land use categories: natural and disturbed desert, fluvial sites, construction sites, mine
tailings, and agricultural sites. Table A4–7 below lists the vertical fluxes and the land use categories they are associated with in this analysis. For agriculture land use categories, the vertical
flux values used have been applied only to those lands assumed to have been fallow for the entire
year. Conversely, emissions generated from activities related to agricultural harvesting are estimated using techniques developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and discussed
later in the text.

Table A4–7. Vertical flux rates, by land use category (cf. Nickling and Gillies 1986, 1989).
Vertical Flux (in g/cm2-sec)†
MAG Land Use Category
Landfill, Sand and gravel,
Fluvial sites = 1.59 × 10-13u*3.32
Automotive test track facilities
Natural desert = 7.99 × 10-13u*2.99
Natural desert = 7.99 × 10-13u*2.99

Passive/restricted open space

Agriculture = 3.36 × 10-30U 6.92

Unharvested, fallow agriculture††

Natural desert = 7.99 × 10-13u*2.99

Vacant
Developing, residential

Construction sites = 5.82 × 10-15u*4.24

Developing, non-residential

Construction sites = 5.82 × 10-15u*4.24

† Where u* = threshold friction velocity (in cm/sec).
†† Applies only to unharvested agricultural lands; here U is assumed to be equal to that at 10 meters.

Category-specific estimates of threshold friction velocity (u*) were developed based on earlier
area wind tunnel studies described above (Nickling and Gillies; 1986, 1989). From these
studies’ descriptions of the local soil conditions, it became apparent that estimates for some land
use categories were apparently based on disturbed soils, while similar estimates for certain other
land use categories were clearly values recorded using stabilized soils.
In ENVIRON’s work designed to developing a windblown dust model, ENVIRON developed a
comparison of threshold friction velocities between disturbed and undisturbed land use categories (WGA, 2006). The resulting ratios have been used to determine threshold friction velocities for both disturbed and undisturbed land use categories for the present study. Table A4–8
below lists the averaged threshold friction velocity values from Nickling and Gillies for each
land use category, at a height of 10 meters.

Table A4–8. Threshold friction velocities, by land use category and disturbance class.
Threshold friction velocity
Threshold friction velocity
for undisturbed areas
for disturbed areas
Land Use Category
(at 10-m. height, in mph)
(at 10-m. height, in mph)
Landfill, Sand and Gravel, Automotive Test Tracks
22 *
13
Passive/Restricted Open Space
46 *
22
Unharvested, Fallow Agriculture
40 *
17
Vacant
46 *
22
Developing, Residential
25
12 *
Developing, Non-residential
25
12 *
*These values have been developed based on the ratio of disturbed vs. undisturbed land use categories as developed
by ENVIRON (in WGA, 2006).

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–10

June 2010

To determine the percentage of land that was ‘disturbed’ vs. ‘undisturbed’, the appropriate rule
effectiveness (RE) rate was applied to the total acreage value. (Appendix 3 provides further
details about the rule effectiveness studies conducted for use in developing 2008 emission estimates.) For example, the RE value of 80.87% for sites subject to County Rule 310.01 was then
used to determine the ratio of disturbed vs. undisturbed areas for land use categories ‘vacant’ and
‘passive/restricted open space’ 4. Similarly, the Rule 310 RE value (82.99%) was used to apportion disturbed vs. undisturbed acreage for the “Developing” land use categories. To apportion
“Landfill, sand and gravel, and test tracks”, either the Rule 316 RE rate of 49.62% (for sand and
gravel), or the Rule 310.01 RE rate of 80.87% (for landfills and test tracks) was used.
The assignment of disturbed vs. undisturbed acreage for unharvested agriculture acreage is a
two-step process: first, the percentage of unharvested acreage is determined (42.88%). This
value is then adjusted by the Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMP) RE value (55.33%)
to produce a percentage of 19.15% for unharvested, disturbed agricultural acreage. Using the RE
values to apportion disturbed and undisturbed lands maximizes the amount of disturbed acreage,
as this method assumes that any non-compliant activity at these sites results in disturbed soils.
Thus the estimates presented here reflect quite conservative estimates of windblown dust
emissions.
By applying the vertical flux equations, threshold velocities, and recorded surface roughness
values 5, PM10 emission factors for each land use category were developed for each wind speed
bin. The midpoint of each wind speed bin (17.5, 22.5, 27.5, and 32.5 mph) was used to develop
each bin-specific emission factor 6. Table A4–9 lists the resulting emission factors for each wind
speed bin and land use category.
Table A4–9. PM10 emission factors by land use type, disturbance status, and wind speed bin category.
% of Land
PM10 emission factors (in tons/acre-5-minute)
Disturbed (“D”) or
Land Use Category(ies)
15–20 mph
20–25 mph
25–30 mph
30–35 mph
Undisturbed (“U”)
Sand and gravel
49.62% (D)
n/a*
3.20×10-4
6.23×10-4
1.09×10-3
-4
-4
-4
Sand and gravel
50.38% (U)
1.39×10
3.20×10
6.23×10
1.09×10-3
Passive/restricted open space,
Vacant, Landfill and
80.87% (U)
n/a*
n/a*
n/a*
n/a*
Automotive test tracks
Passive/restricted open space,
Vacant, Landfill and
19.13% (D)
n/a*
7.77×10-4
1.41×10-3
2.33×10-3
Automotive test tracks
All other agriculture
80.85% † (U)
n/a*
n/a*
n/a*
n/a*
Unharvested, fallow agriculture
19.15% (D)
4.73×10-6
2.69×10-5
1.08×10-4
3.43×10-4
All developing
82.99% (U)
n/a*
n/a*
8.94×10-4
1.82×10-3
All developing
17.01% (D)
1.32×10-4
3.82×10-4
8.94×10-4
1.82×10-3
* “n/a” = Category’s emissions are not generated, as wind speeds are less than threshold friction velocity. See Table A4–8.
† Value includes those harvested acres for which emissions have been calculated using a different methodology.

4. The RE rate of 80.87% was used for ‘Vacant’ and ‘Passive/restricted open space’ in the PM10 NAA only. When
applied to the county as a whole, the nominal RE rate (90.43%) was halved, since large areas outside the PM10
NAA include areas to which access is quite restricted (e.g., Goldwater Bombing Range, Tonto National Forest);
thus the potential to disturb the soil is also limited.
5. Recorded by Nickling and Gillies (1986, 1989) during wind tunnel tests.
6. The fluid dynamics Prandtl equation: 𝑈 =
speeds by solving for u*: (𝑢∗ = 𝑈

𝑘

𝑙𝑛

𝑧
𝑧𝑜

𝑢∗
𝑘

𝑙𝑛

𝑧

𝑧𝑜

allows for the calculation of u* at various 10-meter wind

), where U is wind speed at 10 meters, k is Von Karman’s constant (0.4), z

is 10 meters, and zo is measured surface roughness value.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–11

June 2010

By combining the emission rates listed in Table A4–9, information on the land use type(s) and
acreage(s) within each 40-acre grid cell, the associated wind speed bin values, and after incorporation of a correction factor for precipitation (as described earlier), emissions of windblown dust
have been estimated for each land use category, with the exception of harvested agricultural
fields (discussed in further detail below).

Estimating Emissions from Harvested Agricultural Areas
Windblown dust from harvested agricultural fields has been calculated using a soil erodibility
formula developed by the US Department of Agriculture (in EPA, 1974):
Es = a I C K L’ V’
where Es equals suspended PM in tons/acre-year, a is a constant (0.0125) representing the portion
of PM as PM10, I is soil erodibility, C is a climatic factor, K is surface roughness, L' is unsheltered field width and V' is vegetative cover. Table A4–10 lists the crop-specific values for each
variable, and is taken from the 1999 Serious Area PM-10 Plan (MAG, 2000).
Table A4–10. Harvested agricultural acreage and default values for USDA equation variables, by crop type.
2008
Crop
Acreage
a
I
C
K
L'
V'
Es
Cotton
18,800
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.5
0.74
0.7
0.065
Alfalfa
83,000
0.0125
63.6
0.318
1
0.76
0
0
Other hay
4,500
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.8
0.83
0
0
Wheat
30,100
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.77
0
0
Barley
9,900
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.77
0
0
Corn
700
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.77
0.44
0.051
Potatoes
1,400
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.8
0.70
0.6
0.085
Sorghum
2,200
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.77
0
0
Other vegetables
16,072
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.48
0.77
0.056
Citrus
2,124
0.0125
63.6
0.318
0.6
0.48
0.77
0.056

In addition to applying the USDA formula, a control factor of 72.28% was applied to harvested
agricultural emission estimates to reflect the effectiveness of the agricultural BMP program.
This control factor is a combination of the rule effectiveness of the BMP program (55.33%; see
Appendix 3) and the estimated control effectiveness of the BMP program (50.10%) 7, for an overall effectiveness of 27.72%.

Summary of Windblown Dust Emissions Estimates
Using the emission methodologies listed above, annual PM10 emissions for Maricopa County and
the PM10 nonattainment area can be calculated. PM2.5 emissions are assumed to be 10% of PM10
emissions. Daily emissions are obtained by dividing annual emissions by the number of days in
calendar year 2008 (i.e., 366). Annual and daily emissions for Maricopa County and the PM10
nonattainment area are shown in Tables A4–11 and A4–12, respectively.

7. Derived from Table 4-2 of the Technical Support Document for Quantification of Agricultural Best Management
Practices, prepared for ADEQ by URS and ERG, June 2001.
2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–12

June 2010

Table A4–11. Annual and daily PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from windblown dust in Maricopa County, by land
use category.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Land use category
Agriculture, harvested
1,711.76
171.18
9,353.9
935.4
Agriculture, unharvested
1,349.51
134.95
7,374.4
737.4
Developing
3,334.78
333.48
18,222.8
1,822.3
Landfill, sand and gravel, auto. test tracks
1,646.51
164.65
8,997.3
899.7
Passive/restricted open space
44,174.80
4,417.48
241,392.4
24,139.2
Vacant
60,570.87
6,057.09
330,988.4
33,098.8
Totals:
112,788.23
11,278.82
616,329.1
61,632.9

Table A4–12. Annual and daily PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from windblown dust in the PM10 NAA, by land
use category.
Annual emissions (tons/yr)
Average daily emissions (lbs/day)
Land use category
PM10
PM2.5
PM10
PM2.5
Agriculture, harvested
755.57
75.56
4,128.8
412.9
Agriculture, unharvested
327.69
32.77
1,790.7
179.1
Developing
2,664.48
266.45
14,560.0
1,456.0
Landfill, sand and gravel, auto. test tracks
1,435.81
143.58
7,845.9
784.6
Passive/restricted open space
3,762.38
376.24
20,559.5
2,056.0
Vacant
9,522.43
952.24
52,035.2
5,203.5
Totals:
18,468.36
1,846.84
100,920.0
10,092.0

References
MAG, 2000. Revised MAG 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-10 for the Maricopa
County Nonattainment Area. Maricopa Association of Governments, Phoenix AZ. February,
2000.
Nickling, W. G. and J. A. Gillies, 1986. Table 2.5. Threshold Data for Test Sites. In:
Engineering-Science, Refinement of PM10 Emissions Inventory Data for the Maricopa and
Pima Planning Areas. EPA Contract 68-02-3888, Work Assignment 69, October, 1987.
Nickling, W. G. and J. A. Gillies, 1989. Emissions of Fine-Grained Particulates from Desert
Soils. In: Leinen, M. and M. Sarntheim (eds.), Paleoclimatology and Paleometeorology:
Modern and Past Patterns of Global Atmospheric Transport. Kluwer Academic Publishing,
Dordrecht, 1989.
Pulugurtha, S. S. and D. E. James, 2006. Estimating windblown PM-10 emissions from vacant
urban land using GIS. Journal of Hazardous Materials, April 2006, 132:1, pp. 47–57.
US EPA, 1974. Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA450/3-74-037,
U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC, June. Updated in September 1988 in Control of
Open Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008.
WGA (Western Governors’ Association), 2006. Open Area Wind Erosion. Chap. 8 In: WRAP
Fugitive Dust Handbook, prepared by Countess Environmental, WGA Contract No. 30204–
111, September, 2006. Available at: http://www.wrapair.org/forums/dejf/fdh/index.html.

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A4–13

June 2010

This page intentionally blank.

Appendix 5.

MOBILE6.2 Inputs, Outputs, and Emission Factors

In order to calculate vehicle emission factors for the 2008 annual average day for the PM10 NAA
and Maricopa County, two MOBILE6.2 runs were performed for each month as follows:
•

I/M program in place

•

No I/M program in place

A portion of the MOBILE6.2 input and output files for Maricopa County are provided in this
appendix as examples. Scenarios for each facility type were distinguished by average speed and
the roadway scenario in the input file. The MOBILE6.2 emission factors (in g/mi) produced by
the runs were subsequently weighted together using the appropriate proportions as described in
Section 5.5 “Emission factor estimation” in the main report.

Table A5–1. Sample of MOBILE6.2 input files.
MOBILE6 INPUT FILE :
PARTICULATES
:
RUN DATA
STAGE II REFUELING :
94 1 46. 46.
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M
I/M

PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
STRINGENCY
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
STRINGENCY
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
CUTPOINTS
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
STRINGENCY
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
STRINGENCY
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD
PROGRAM
MODEL YEARS
VEHICLES
COMPLIANCE
WAIVER RATES
GRACE PERIOD

: 1 1995 2050 1 T/O LOADED/IDLE
: 1 1967 1980
: 1 22222 22222222 2
: 1 37.5
: 1 62.9
: 1 0.709 0.781
: 1 5
: 2 1995 2050 2 T/O IM240
: 2 1981 1995
: 2 22222 11111111 1
: 2 37.5
: 2 70.
: 2 0.709 0.781
: 2 5
: 2 CUTPNT08.d
: 3 1995 2050 2 T/O FP & GC
: 3 1981 1995
: 3 22222 11111111 1
: 3 70.
: 3 0.709 0.781
: 3 5
: 4 2002 2050 2 T/O OBD I/M
: 4 1996 2050
: 4 22222 11111111 1
: 4 37.5
: 4 91.5
: 4 0.709 0.781
: 4 5
: 5 2002 2050 2 T/O EVAP OBD & GC
: 5 1996 2050
: 5 22222 11111111 1
: 5 98.3
: 5 0.709 0.781
: 5 5
: 6 1989 2050 1 T/O LOADED/IDLE
: 6 1981 2050
: 6 11111 22222222 2
: 6 37.5
: 6 95.2
: 6 0.709 0.781
: 6 5
: 7 1992 2050 1 T/O GC
: 7 1981 2050
: 7 11111 22222222 2
: 7 94.2
: 7 0.709 0.781
: 7 5

ANTI-TAMP PROG
:
87 75 80 22222 22222222 2 11 80.7 22111222
ANTI-TAMP PROG
:
87 81 03 11111 22222222 2 11 90.7 22111222
REG DIST
: 087Reg08.d
DIESEL FRACTIONS
:
0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009
0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0006 0.0001 0.0003 0.0006 0.0013 0.0004 0.0004
0.0001 0.0027 0.0032 0.0097 0.0162

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–1

June 2010

0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0126
0.0126
0.0072
0.0126
0.0126
0.0072
0.1998
0.1998
0.1756
0.6774
0.6774
0.7488
0.8606
0.8606
0.5647
0.4647
0.4647
0.1043
0.6300
0.6300
0.4216
0.8563
0.8563
0.7184
0.9992
0.9992
0.9969
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9585
0.9585
0.7502

0.0000
0.0000
0.0007
0.0000
0.0000
0.0007
0.0126
0.0126
0.0082
0.0126
0.0126
0.0082
0.1998
0.1998
0.1958
0.6774
0.6774
0.7789
0.8606
0.8606
0.3178
0.4647
0.4647
0.0610
0.6300
0.6300
0.4734
0.8563
0.8563
0.7588
0.9992
0.9992
0.9978
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9585
0.9585
0.7345

0.0000
0.0000
0.0033
0.0000
0.0000
0.0033
0.0126
0.0126
0.0124
0.0126
0.0126
0.0124
0.1998
0.1998
0.2726
0.6774
0.6774
0.7842
0.8606
0.8606
0.2207
0.4647
0.4647
0.0383
0.6300
0.6300
0.4705
0.8563
0.8563
0.7567
0.9992
0.9992
0.9980
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9585
0.9585
0.6733

0.0000
0.0000
0.0048
0.0000
0.0000
0.0048
0.0126
0.0110
0.0135
0.0126
0.0110
0.0135
0.1998
0.2578
0.2743
0.6774
0.7710
0.6145
0.8606
0.8473
0.1968
0.4647
0.4384
0.0333
0.6300
0.6078
0.4525
0.8563
0.8443
0.7431
0.9992
0.9989
0.9979
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9585
0.8857
0.5105

0.0000
0.0000
0.0120
0.0000
0.0000
0.0120
0.0126
0.0111
0.0169
0.0126
0.0111
0.0169
0.1998
0.2510
0.3004
0.6774
0.7910
0.5139
0.8606
0.8048
0.1070
0.4647
0.3670
0.0255
0.6300
0.5246
0.4310
0.8563
0.7943
0.7261
0.9992
0.9987
0.9976
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.9585
0.8525
0.3845

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0126 0.0126 0.0126 0.0126 0.0126
0.0145 0.0110 0.0129 0.0096 0.0083
0.0126 0.0126 0.0126 0.0126 0.0126
0.0145 0.0110 0.0129 0.0096 0.0083
0.1998 0.1998 0.1998 0.1998 0.1998
0.3263 0.2784 0.2963 0.2384 0.2058
0.6774 0.6774 0.6774 0.6774 0.6774
0.8105 0.8068 0.8280 0.8477 0.7940
0.8606 0.8606 0.8606 0.8606 0.8606
0.8331 0.7901 0.7316 0.7275 0.7108
0.4647 0.4647 0.4647 0.4647 0.4647
0.4125 0.3462 0.2771 0.2730 0.2616
0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300
0.5767 0.5289 0.5788 0.5617 0.4537
0.8563 0.8563 0.8563 0.8563 0.8563
0.8266 0.7972 0.8279 0.8177 0.7440
0.9992 0.9992 0.9992 0.9992 0.9992
0.9989 0.9977 0.9984 0.9982 0.9979
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
0.9585 0.9585 0.9585 0.9585 0.9585
0.8795 0.9900 0.9105 0.8760 0.7710

********************** PM10 ************************
** Rural: Principal Arterial - Interstate
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 51.5 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Principal Arterial - Other
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Other (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 38.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Minor Arterial
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Minor Arterial (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 38.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
: 2 S
FUEL PROGRAM
** Rural: Major Collector
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Major Collector (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.3 Arterial

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–2

June 2010

VMT BY FACILITY
FUEL PROGRAM

: allart.def
: 2 S

** Rural: Minor Collector
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Minor Collector (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.3 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Local
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Local (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
VMT BY FACILITY
: allloc.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Principal Arterial - Interstate
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 44.4 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Freeways & Expressways
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Freeways & Expressways (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 44.4 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Principal Arterial - Other
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Other (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Minor Arterial
: I/M Urban Minor Arterial (PM10), July 2008
SCENARIO RECORD
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–3

June 2010

** Urban: Collector
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Collector (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 24.2 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Local
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Local (PM10), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 10.0
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
VMT BY FACILITY
: allloc.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
********************** PM2.5 ************************
** Rural: Principal Arterial - Interstate
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 51.5 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Principal Arterial - Other
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Other (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 38.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Minor Arterial
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Minor Arterial (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 38.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Major Collector
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Major Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
: 2.5
PARTICLE SIZE
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.3 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Minor Collector

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–4

June 2010

SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Minor Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.3 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Rural: Local
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Rural Local (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
VMT BY FACILITY
: allloc.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Principal Arterial - Interstate
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 44.4 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Freeways & Expressways
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Freeways & Expressways (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 44.4 Freeway
VMT BY FACILITY
: allfwy.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Principal Arterial - Other
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Other (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Minor Arterial
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Minor Arterial (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
: 4.20
DIESEL SULFUR
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 30.1 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Collector
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–5

June 2010

DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
AVERAGE SPEED
: 24.2 Arterial
VMT BY FACILITY
: allart.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
** Urban: Local
SCENARIO RECORD
: I/M Urban Local (PM2.5), July 2008
PARTICULATE EF
: PMGZML.CSV PMGDR1.CSV PMGDR2.CSV PMDZML.CSV PMDDR1.CSV PMDDR2.CSV
PARTICLE SIZE
: 2.5
DIESEL SULFUR
: 4.20
CALENDAR YEAR
: 2008
EVALUATION MONTH
: 7
ALTITUDE
: 1
HOURLY TEMPERATURES: 87.0 89.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 99.0 100.0 102.0 103.0 104.0 103.0 103.0
101.0 99.0 97.0 95.0 93.0 91.0 90.0 89.0 88.0 88.0 87.0 86.0
RELATIVE HUMIDITY : 45.0 41.0 37.0 34.0 30.0 27.0 25.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 23.0 23.0
24.0 26.0 30.0 32.0 35.0 38.0 39.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 46.0
BAROMETRIC PRES
: 28.63
FUEL RVP
: 7.1
VMT BY FACILITY
: allloc.def
FUEL PROGRAM
: 2 S
END OF RUN

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–6

June 2010

Table A5–2. Sample of MOBILE6.2 output files.
*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 1.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0043
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0043
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0410
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0622
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

LDGV

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Other (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 2.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0043
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0043
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0410
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0622
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Minor
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Arterial (PM10), July 2008
Scenario 3.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0043
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0043
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0410
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0622
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Major
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Collector (PM10), July 2008
Scenario 4.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:

LDGV

LDGT12

LDGT34

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT

HDGV

LDDV

A5–7

LDDT

HDDV

MC

All Veh

June 2010

GVWR:
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0042
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0044
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0409
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0621
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Minor
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Collector (PM10), July 2008
Scenario 5.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0042
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0044
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0409
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0621
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Local
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

LDGV

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
(PM10), July 2008
Scenario 6.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0040
0.0042
0.0042
0.0042
0.0394
---------------0.0205
0.0051
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0005
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0012
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0002
0.0006
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0045
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
0.0406
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0207
0.0201
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0250
0.0254
0.0253
0.0254
0.0619
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0372
0.0426
SO2:
0.0067
0.0087
0.0114
0.0095
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 7.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0043
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0043
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0410
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0622
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–8

June 2010

*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Freeways & Expressways (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 8.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0043
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0043
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0410
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0622
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

LDGV

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Other (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 9.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0042
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0044
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0409
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0621
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Minor
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Arterial (PM10), July 2008
Scenario 10.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0041
0.0043
0.0042
0.0043
0.0392
---------------0.0205
0.0052
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0044
0.0048
0.0047
0.0048
0.0409
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0249
0.0253
0.0253
0.0253
0.0621
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0371
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Collector (PM10), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 11.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

HDGV

LDDV

LDDT

HDDV

MC

All Veh

------------------------------0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000

A5–9

June 2010

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0040
0.0043
0.0042
0.0042
0.0393
---------------0.0205
0.0051
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0004
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0014
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0044
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
0.0407
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0206
0.0200
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0250
0.0254
0.0253
0.0254
0.0620
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0372
0.0425
SO2:
0.0068
0.0087
0.0115
0.0096
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Local
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
(PM10), July 2008
Scenario 12.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 10.00 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0040
0.0042
0.0042
0.0042
0.0394
---------------0.0205
0.0051
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0716
0.0230
0.0882
-----0.0095
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0202
0.0330
0.0448
-----0.0049
SO4:
0.0005
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0012
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0002
0.0006
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0045
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
0.0406
0.0918
0.0561
0.1332
0.0207
0.0201
Brake:
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Tire:
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0087
0.0080
0.0080
0.0263
0.0040
0.0100
Total PM:
0.0250
0.0254
0.0253
0.0254
0.0619
0.1123
0.0766
0.1721
0.0372
0.0426
SO2:
0.0067
0.0087
0.0114
0.0095
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 13.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0038
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0352
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0040
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0370
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0117
0.0117
0.0117
0.0445
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Principal Arterial - Other (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 14.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0038
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0352
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0040
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0370
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0117
0.0117
0.0117
0.0445
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------* # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
* I/M Rural Minor Arterial (PM2.5), July 2008

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–10

June 2010

* File 13, Run 1, Scenario 15.
* # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0038
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0352
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0040
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0370
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0117
0.0117
0.0117
0.0445
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Major
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
Scenario 16.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0037
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0353
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0041
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0369
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0118
0.0117
0.0117
0.0444
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Minor
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
Scenario 17.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0037
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0353
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0041
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0369
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0118
0.0117
0.0117
0.0444
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Rural Local
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
(PM2.5), July 2008
Scenario 18.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–11

June 2010

GASPM:
0.0036
0.0039
0.0038
0.0039
0.0354
---------------0.0142
0.0046
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0005
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0012
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0002
0.0006
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0042
0.0045
0.0044
0.0045
0.0367
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0144
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0115
0.0118
0.0118
0.0118
0.0442
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0207
0.0263
SO2:
0.0067
0.0087
0.0114
0.0095
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Interstate (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 19.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0038
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0352
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0040
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0370
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0117
0.0117
0.0117
0.0445
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Freeways & Expressways (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 20.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0038
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0352
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0018
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0004
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0040
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0370
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0117
0.0117
0.0117
0.0445
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Principal Arterial - Other (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 21.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0037
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0353
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0041
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0369
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0118
0.0117
0.0117
0.0444
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Minor
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

LDGV

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Arterial (PM2.5), July 2008
Scenario 22.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–12

June 2010

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0037
0.0039
0.0039
0.0039
0.0353
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0003
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0016
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0041
0.0044
0.0044
0.0044
0.0369
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0118
0.0117
0.0117
0.0444
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0206
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0088
0.0115
0.0096
0.0166
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0082
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Collector (PM2.5), July 2008
File 13, Run 1, Scenario 23.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV
LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0037
0.0039
0.0038
0.0039
0.0354
---------------0.0142
0.0047
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0004
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0014
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
0.0005
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0041
0.0045
0.0044
0.0044
0.0368
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0143
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0114
0.0118
0.0117
0.0118
0.0443
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0207
0.0262
SO2:
0.0068
0.0087
0.0115
0.0096
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*
*
*

# # # # # # # #
I/M Urban Local
File 13, Run 1,
# # # # # # # #

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
(PM2.5), July 2008
Scenario 24.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

Calendar Year: 2008
Month: July
Gasoline Fuel Sulfur Content:
30. ppm
Diesel Fuel Sulfur Content:
4. ppm
Particle Size Cutoff: 2.50 Microns
Reformulated Gas: Yes
Vehicle Type:
GVWR:

LDGV

LDGT12
LDGT34
LDGT
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
All Veh
<6000
>6000
(All)
--------------------------------------------------VMT Distribution:
0.3626
0.3400
0.1439
0.0392
0.0004
0.0022
0.1069
0.0048
1.0000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Composite Emission Factors (g/mi):
Lead:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
---------------0.0000
0.0000
GASPM:
0.0036
0.0039
0.0038
0.0039
0.0354
---------------0.0142
0.0046
ECARBON:
-------------------------0.0658
0.0211
0.0812
-----0.0087
OCARBON:
-------------------------0.0186
0.0304
0.0412
-----0.0045
SO4:
0.0005
0.0006
0.0006
0.0006
0.0012
0.0000
0.0001
0.0003
0.0002
0.0006
Total Exhaust PM:
0.0042
0.0045
0.0044
0.0045
0.0367
0.0845
0.0516
0.1226
0.0144
0.0184
Brake:
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
0.0053
Tire:
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0022
0.0020
0.0020
0.0066
0.0010
0.0025
Total PM:
0.0115
0.0118
0.0118
0.0118
0.0442
0.0918
0.0589
0.1345
0.0207
0.0263
SO2:
0.0067
0.0087
0.0114
0.0095
0.0167
0.0008
0.0016
0.0037
0.0033
0.0081
NH3:
0.1017
0.1009
0.1008
0.1009
0.0451
0.0068
0.0068
0.0270
0.0113
0.0904
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

A5–13

June 2010

Table A5–3.

MOBILE6.2 Emission Factors for Maricopa County (by month, in g/mi)

January 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.635
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.586
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.586
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.588
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.588
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.561
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.614
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.614
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.588
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.588
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.616
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.561
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.978
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.915
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.915
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.918
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.918
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.888
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.919
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.919
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.959
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.888
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.092
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.029
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.029
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.033
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.033
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.005
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.064
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.064
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.034
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.034
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.077
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.005
0.011
0.101

A5–14

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.588
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.338
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.338
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.198
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.198
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.889
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.452
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.452
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.194
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.194
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.092
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.889
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.003
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.003
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.006
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.006
0.007

HDDV
0.192
0.153
8.196
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.959
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.959
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.911
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.911
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
7.391
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
7.025
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
7.025
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.913
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
5.913
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
6.233
0.014
0.027
0.192
0.153
7.391
0.014
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.930
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.660
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.660
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.580
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.580
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.320
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.710
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.710
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.580
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.580
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.480
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.320
0.003
0.011

June 2010

February 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.610
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.563
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.563
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.564
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.564
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.538
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.565
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.565
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.538
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.939
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.850
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.911
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.911
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.918
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.850
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.048
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.986
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.986
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.990
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.990
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.962
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.021
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.021
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.991
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.991
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.032
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.962
0.011
0.101

A5–15

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.581
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.332
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.332
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.193
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.193
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.884
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.446
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.446
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.189
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.189
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.086
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.884
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.191
0.152
8.196
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
6.233
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.860
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.600
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.600
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.520
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.520
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.270
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.650
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.650
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.520
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.520
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.430
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.270
0.003
0.011

June 2010

March 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.609
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.567
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.567
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.555
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.591
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.591
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.572
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.572
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.600
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.555
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.926
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.868
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.868
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.873
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.873
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.849
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.901
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.901
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.873
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.873
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.911
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.849
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.033
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.976
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.976
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.961
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.008
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.008
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.025
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.961
0.011
0.101

A5–16

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.543
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.298
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.298
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.160
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.160
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.856
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.410
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.410
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.156
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.156
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.056
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.856
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.003
0.007

HDDV
0.191
0.152
8.196
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
6.233
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.820
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.570
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.570
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.490
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.490
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.250
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.620
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.620
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.490
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.490
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.400
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.250
0.003
0.011

June 2010

April 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.608
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.573
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.573
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.580
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.593
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.593
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.614
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.580
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.945
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.892
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.892
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.897
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.897
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.882
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.922
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.922
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.898
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.898
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.939
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.882
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.969
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.920
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.920
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.927
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.927
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.915
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.948
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.948
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.928
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.928
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.968
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.915
0.011
0.101

A5–17

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.316
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.093
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.093
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.968
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.968
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.691
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.195
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.195
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.964
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.964
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.872
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.691
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.740
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.500
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.500
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.420
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.420
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.190
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.540
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.540
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.420
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.420
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.340
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.190
0.003
0.011

June 2010

May 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.584
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.553
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.553
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.564
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.564
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.570
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.565
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.565
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.599
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.570
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.903
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.851
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.851
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.858
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.858
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.845
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.880
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.858
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.858
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.898
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.845
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.925
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.885
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.885
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.876
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.904
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.904
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.885
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.885
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.927
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.876
0.011
0.101

A5–18

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.344
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.118
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.118
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.991
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.991
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.711
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.221
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.221
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.987
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.987
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.895
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.711
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.005
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.610
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.390
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.390
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.320
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.320
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.100
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.430
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.430
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.310
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.310
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.240
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.100
0.003
0.011

June 2010

June 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.636
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.612
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.612
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.631
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.631
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.663
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.625
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.625
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.632
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.632
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.677
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.663
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.953
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.902
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.902
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.912
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.912
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.911
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.931
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.931
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.913
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.913
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.959
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.911
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.976
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.930
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.930
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.942
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.942
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.945
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.957
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.957
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.943
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.943
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.989
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.945
0.011
0.101

A5–19

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.309
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.086
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.086
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.961
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.961
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.685
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.188
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.188
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.866
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.685
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.005
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.005
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.400
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.210
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.210
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.150
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.150
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.240
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.240
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.140
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.140
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.080
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011

June 2010

July 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.560
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.539
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.539
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.557
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.557
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.551
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.551
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.558
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.558
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.602
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.590
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.832
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.784
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.784
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.793
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.793
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.791
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.811
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.811
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.794
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.794
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.836
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.791
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.852
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.809
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.809
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.819
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.819
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.821
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.834
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.834
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.820
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.820
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.863
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.821
0.011
0.101

A5–20

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.309
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.086
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.086
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.961
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.961
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.685
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.188
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.188
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.866
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.685
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.004
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.004
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.180
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.020
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.020
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.970
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.970
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.820
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.050
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.050
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.970
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.970
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.910
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.820
0.003
0.011

June 2010

August 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.547
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.525
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.525
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.543
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.543
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.574
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.538
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.538
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.544
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.544
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.587
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.574
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.813
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.764
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.764
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.774
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.774
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.771
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.792
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.792
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.775
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.775
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.816
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.771
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.833
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.789
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.789
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.799
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.799
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.801
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.814
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.814
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.800
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.800
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.842
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.801
0.011
0.101

A5–21

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.307
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.084
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.084
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.959
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.959
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.684
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.186
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.186
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.956
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.956
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.864
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.684
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.170
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.020
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.020
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.810
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.050
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.050
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.960
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.910
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.810
0.003
0.011

June 2010

September 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.558
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.558
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.575
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.575
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.600
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.576
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.576
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.617
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.600
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.874
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.824
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.824
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.833
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.833
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.828
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.852
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.852
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.834
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.834
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.828
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
0.895
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.850
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.850
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.860
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.860
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.859
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.876
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.876
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.860
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.860
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.903
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.859
0.011
0.101

A5–22

HDGV
0.062
0.045
2.304
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.082
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.082
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.957
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.682
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.183
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.045
2.183
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.953
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.953
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.862
0.017
0.045
0.062
0.044
1.682
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.112
0.092
0.820
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.646
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.693
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.641
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.676
0.001
0.007
0.112
0.092
0.852
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.077
0.059
0.736
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.578
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.621
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.573
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.605
0.002
0.007
0.077
0.059
0.765
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.172
0.135
7.524
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.494
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.450
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.440
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.452
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
5.748
0.006
0.027
0.172
0.135
6.851
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.340
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.150
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.150
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.100
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.100
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.920
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.190
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.190
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.090
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.090
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.030
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
0.920
0.003
0.011

June 2010

October 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.605
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.571
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.586
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.582
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.617
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.586
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.900
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.847
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.847
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.854
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.854
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.839
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.877
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.854
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.854
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.895
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.839
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.005
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.953
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.953
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.961
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.961
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.983
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.962
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.962
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.007
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.011
0.101

A5–23

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.556
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.309
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.309
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.171
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.171
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.866
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.422
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.422
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.167
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.167
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.066
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.866
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.191
0.152
8.196
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
6.233
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.630
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.410
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.410
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.330
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.330
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.120
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.330
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.330
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.250
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.120
0.003
0.011

June 2010

November 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.590
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.548
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.548
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.552
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.552
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.534
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.572
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.572
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.552
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.552
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.579
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.534
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.898
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.840
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.840
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.844
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.844
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.819
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.872
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.872
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.845
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.845
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.882
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.819
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.002
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.945
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.945
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.950
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.928
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.978
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.978
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.951
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.951
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.993
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.928
0.011
0.101

A5–24

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.542
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.297
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.297
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.159
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.159
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.855
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.409
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.409
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.155
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.155
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.055
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.855
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.002
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.002
0.007

HDDV
0.191
0.152
8.196
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
6.233
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.770
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.530
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.530
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.210
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.570
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.570
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.360
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.210
0.003
0.011

June 2010

December 2008 (Weighted by 91.6% of I/M and 8.4% of Non-I/M)
Facility Type
Rural Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Rural Principal
Arterial – Other

Rural Minor
Arterial

Rural Major
Collector

Rural Minor
Collector

Rural Local

Urban Principal
Arterial – Interstate

Urban Freeway &
Expressway

Urban Principal
Arterial – Other

Urban Minor
Arterial

Urban Collector

Urban Local

Pollutant
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3
PM10
PM2.5
NOx
SOx
NH3

LDGV
0.025
0.011
0.623
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.575
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.575
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.576
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.576
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.550
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.602
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.602
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.577
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.011
0.577
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.603
0.007
0.102
0.025
0.012
0.550
0.007
0.102

LDGT12
0.025
0.012
0.959
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.897
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.897
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.899
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.899
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.869
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.931
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.931
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.900
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.900
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.938
0.009
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.869
0.009
0.101

2008 Maricopa Co. PM10 Emission Inventory

LDGT34
0.025
0.012
1.070
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.008
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.008
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.012
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.012
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.984
0.011
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.043
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.043
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.013
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.013
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
1.055
0.012
0.101
0.025
0.012
0.984
0.011
0.101

A5–25

HDGV
0.067
0.049
2.592
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.342
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.342
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.202
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.202
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.892
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.457
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.049
2.457
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.198
0.017
0.045
0.067
0.048
2.198
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
2.095
0.017
0.045
0.066
0.048
1.892
0.017
0.045

LDDV
0.116
0.096
0.850
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.670
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.719
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.665
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.701
0.001
0.007
0.116
0.096
0.883
0.001
0.007

LDDT
0.083
0.065
0.806
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.633
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.627
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.680
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.628
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.662
0.003
0.007
0.083
0.065
0.838
0.003
0.007

HDDV
0.191
0.152
8.196
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.959
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.911
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.025
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
5.913
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
6.233
0.006
0.027
0.191
0.152
7.391
0.006
0.027

MC
0.037
0.021
1.890
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.630
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.630
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.550
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.550
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.300
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.680
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.680
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.550
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.550
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.450
0.003
0.011
0.037
0.021
1.300
0.003
0.011

June 2010