carolinas cement co. llc revised application quality/permits/psd... · the proposed barge loading...

October 20, 2008

Dr. Donald R. van der Vaart, Ph.D, P.E.

Chief, Permitting Section

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources

2728 Capital Blvd.

Raleigh, North Carolina 27604

Re: Revised PSD Construction Permit Application

Carolinas Cement Company LLC

Dear Dr. van der Vaart:

Enclosed are revisions to our permit application (6 copies) to construct a Portland cement

manufacturing facility near Castle Hayne, North Carolina. This revision reflects several

requested changes and additions to the application as per the enclosed list.

The following items are highlighted:

Additional testing of onsite raw materials conducted after the original application was

submitted revealed significantly higher sulfur (sulfide) content in the rock. Because

uncontrolled SO2 emissions will be higher than previously estimated, we propose to install a

lime slurry injection system to control SO2 emissions from the kiln system during both raw

mill off and raw mill on operating conditions. We are also requesting that the SO2 emission

limit (30-day average) be increased. A revised Best Available Control Technology (BACT)

analysis and revised SO2 modeling analyses have been prepared in association with these

changes.

The proposed barge loading equipment and associated emission points (cement storage,

transfer, and loading spouts) are being removed, resulting in a decrease in particulate matter

emissions near the Northeast Cape Fear River.

Dr. Donald R. van der Vaart 2 October 20, 2008

We recognize that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently proposed

significant changes to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Portland Cement

Plants (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart F), Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants (Subpart OOO),

and Coal Preparation Plants (Subpart Y) and may likely propose changes to the National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) from the Portland Cement

Manufacturing Industry (40 CFR 63, Subpart LLL) that would potentially affect the proposed

permit. These regulations will not likely be finalized prior to completion of the processing of

our application; however, our facility would still be subject to the final NSPS and NESHAP

requirements. For this reason, Carolinas Cement Company agrees to comply with either the

emission limits in the final NSPS and NESHAP as issued, or the BACT limits proposed in

the application, whichever are more stringent.

Because we understand your office has some additional questions regarding the air quality

dispersion modeling, the revised modeling and reports (Tabs E and F) will be submitted

separately at a later date in order to address those issues.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call at (757) 858-

6523.

Sincerely yours,

Russell A Fink

Vice President/General Counsel

Enclosure

SUMMARY OF PERMIT APPLICATION CHANGES

Increase in estimated uncontrolled SO2 emissions.

Add lime slurry injection system to control SO2; set new SO2 emission limit.

Revise BACT for SO2. Add additional information on consideration of SCR systems for

NOx control and reasons for rejection.

Remove barge loading sources.

Add emissions from drilling and blasting activities in the quarry area.

Change VOC continuous monitoring to periodic testing (note THC will be continuously

monitored under the NESHAP).

Added biomass fuels to the list of fuels that may be burned

Miscellaneous, minor corrections in document text.

INDEX TO REVISED CAROLINAS CEMENT COMPANY

PSD CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION

TAB

A Regulatory Analysis Report - Revised

B Permit Application Forms – Revised pages

C Plantwide Potential Emissions Inventory - Revised

D Control Technology Analysis - Revised

E Class II and Ambient Air Quality Standards Air Dispersion Modeling Report –

Discussion of Revised Modeling for SO2 (to be submitted separately)

F Class I Air Dispersion Modeling Report – Revised pages (to be submitted

separately)

G Plot Plans, Survey Maps, and Process Flow Diagrams – Revised pages

H Zoning Consistency Determination Letter – No change

Enclosures

Class I, Class II, and AAQS Modeling Files (2 CDs) (to be submitted

separately)

TAB A

REGULATORY ANALYSIS REPORT – REVISED

REGULATORY ANALYSIS REPORT

Prepared for:


Castle Hayne, North Carolina Plant

PN 050020.0051

Prepared by:

Environmental Quality Management, Inc.

Cedar Terrace Office Park, Suite 250

3325 Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard

Durham, North Carolina 27707

February 25, 2008

(Revised October 20, 2008)

CONTENTS

Section Page

Tables ............................................................................................................................................ iii

1 Project Description...............................................................................................................1

2 Applicable Regulations........................................................................................................3

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) – 40 CFR Part 60 .............................3

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) -

40 CFR Part 63.............................................................................................5

Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM).............................................................6

New Source Review (NSR) .....................................................................................7

North Carolina’s Emission Limiting Rules..............................................................8

3 Requested Permit Limits....................................................................................................10

Kiln/Raw Mill/Cooler/Coal Mill Emission Limit..................................................10

Finish Mills and Miscellaneous Baghouses...........................................................12

Fugitive Emissions.................................................................................................12

Diesel Emergency Generator Set ...........................................................................12

Throughput Limits .................................................................................................12

Fuel Limitations .....................................................................................................12

Operating Hour Assumptions ................................................................................13

ii

TABLES

Number Page

1-1 Comparison of Potential Annual Emissions Increase from the Project to the

PSD Major Source Emission Rates......................................................................................2

iii

1

SECTION 1

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Carolinas Cement Company LLC (CCC) is proposing to construct a modern Portland

cement manufacturing facility at the site of an existing cement storage terminal operated by

Roanoke Cement Company near Castle Hayne, North Carolina. The plant will include a multi-

stage preheater-precalciner kiln with an in-line raw mill, coal mill, and clinker cooler venting

through the main stack. Production is expected to be 6000 tons per day (tons/day) and 2,190,000

tons per year (tons/yr) of clinker and approximately 2,400,000 tons/yr of cement. Fuels may

include coal, petroleum coke, fuel oil, biomass fuels and natural gas. The raw materials for

clinker production may include limestone/marl, clay, quarry spoils, bauxite, slag, fly ash/bottom

ash, sand, and/or mill scale. Synthetic gypsum or natural gypsum will be milled with the clinker

to produce cement. Associated processes will include mining, crushing, blending, grinding,

material handling, storage for raw materials, fuels, clinker, and finished cement, and cement

packing and bulk loadout. Cement will be shipped by rail and truck. The project will also

include a diesel emergency generator set.

The Castle Hayne area is in attainment with all the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS). The existing Roanoke Cement terminal is considered a minor source under

North Carolina’s Prevention Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules at 15A NCAC 02D.0530 for

all PSD pollutants. A modification to a PSD minor source is subject to PSD if the modification

itself exceeds the major source threshold for any PSD regulated pollutant. In the case of

Portland cement plants, the major source threshold is 100 tons/yr, which includes all quantifiable

fugitive emissions.

Pursuant to current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance, until EPA

issues rules and guidance for addressing PM2.5, PM10 will be used as a surrogate for PM2.5.

Although modeling for PM2.5 will not be required for this project, estimates of PM2.5 emissions

(including condensables, which are highly uncertain) are included in the application.

As shown in Table 1-1, the emissions from the project of particulate matter (PM), PM

less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen

2

oxides (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOC) will exceed the PSD major source

emission rate.

TABLE 1-1. COMPARISON OF POTENTIAL ANNUAL EMISSIONS INCREASE

FROM THE PROJECT TO THE PSD MAJOR SOURCE EMISSION RATES

Pollutant

Future Potential

Emissions (tons/yr)

PSD Major Source

Emission Rate

(tons/year)

Review

Required?

(Yes/No)

NOx 2,138 100 Yes

PM (TSP) 663 100 Yes

PM10 527 100 Yes

PM2.5 348 NA No

SO2 1,456 100 Yes

CO 3,068 100 Yes

VOCs 175 100 Yes

Lead 0.09 100 No

Fluorides 1.0 100 No

Note: PM, PM10, and PM2.5 include condensables.

3

SECTION 2

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

2.1 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) – 40 CFR Part 60

Equipment constructed or modified after August 31, 1983 used for processing of

limestone [crushers, screens, conveyor transfer points (except to a pile), and storage bins] from

the quarry up to the storage facility just prior to the raw mill is subject to NSPS Subpart OOO

(Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants). Truck dumping to a hopper is exempt. Fugitive

emissions from the crushers are limited to 15 percent opacity and 10 percent from other affected

sources (zero percent for transfer points processing saturated materials). The new quarry

crushers will be subject to the 15 percent opacity limit). On April 22, 2008, EPA proposed

changes to Subpart OOO which would lower grain loading and opacity limits for affected

sources commencing construction after April 22, 2008.

The coal handling and crushing equipment is subject to NSPS Subpart Y (Coal

Preparation Plants). On April 28, 2008, EPA proposed changes to Subpart Y which, once

finalized, will apply to these affected facilities. The opacity from affected sources is limited to

20 percent. The coal mill will be vented through the main stack, which is subject to

requirements as specified in Section 2.2.

On June 16, 2008, EPA proposed major changes to the NSPS for Portland cement (PC)

plants (Subpart F) which, when finalized, will apply to this project. Currently, the PC NSPS

regulates only PM. The proposed NSPS changes would reduce the PM emission limits for new

or modified kilns and clinker coolers commencing construction after June 16, 2008. In addition,

new or modified cement kilns would be subject to new limits for NOx and SO2 emissions. CCC

will comply with the final PC NSPS limits as issued.

There will be no new storage tanks that would be subject to NSPS Subpart Kb.

On July 11, 2006, EPA promulgated final NSPS for stationary compression ignition

(diesel) engines constructed or ordered after July 11, 2005 (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart IIII). The

4

rules limit emissions of NOx, PM, SO2, CO, and HC to the same levels required by EPA’s

nonroad diesel engine regulations. The rules take effect in three increasingly stringent stages:

1. Transition period for engines built after July 11, 2005 and before model year 2007.

Generally, owners or operators will purchase a certified nonroad engine for stationary

use.

2. Beginning in model year 2007, owners must purchase certified engines meeting more

stringent emission limits.

3. Beginning with 2011 model year engines, add-on controls will be required to achieve the

emission limits for non-emergency engines.

The requirements vary depending on the size and designated use (e.g., emergency versus non-

emergency engines, fire pump engines, etc.). The main burden for meeting the emission limits

will fall on the manufacturers, but owners/operators have monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements, including use of specified low sulfur fuel. The following table

summarizes the Subpart IIII emission limits for the emergency generator.

NEW EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR EMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Pollutant Units

Emission Standards NSPS Subpart IIII

(New Requirements)*

NOx g/kW-hr -

NMHC g/kW-hr -

NMHC +

NOx

g/kW-hr 6.4

CO g/kW-hr 3.5

PM g/kW-hr 0.20

S (6/1/07) ppm 500

S(6/1/10) ppm 15

Applicable Requirements

1. 40 CFR 60.4200 et al: Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression

Ignition Internal Combustion Engines.

2. 40 CFR 89.112 Oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and

particulate matter exhaust emission standards.

3. 40 CFR 80.510 Standards and marker requirements for NRLM diesel fuel.

*Standards for 2007 model year and later emergency diesel engines with

displacement < 30 liters/cylinder and > 560 kW rated power.

5

2.2 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) – 40 CFR

Part 63

CCC stipulates that it will be a major source as defined under 40 CFR Part 63 and subject

to NESHAP Subpart LLL (Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry). The kiln is subject to

emission limits for particulate matter (PM) (0.3 lb/ton of dry feed) and dioxins and furans (D/F)

(see Section 3.1.7) and an opacity limit of 20 percent. The clinker cooler and coal mill will be

vented through the kiln stack. All other stack and fugitive process sources, except those subject

to the NSPS noted above, are subject to an opacity limit of 10 percent. There is no separate raw

material dryer subject to the total hydrocarbon standard. CCC must be in compliance with these

limits upon startup of the new equipment.

On December 20, 2006, EPA promulgated amendments to Subpart LLL; the most

significant changes involve setting mercury (Hg) and total hydrocarbon (THC) emission limits

for new or reconstructed kilns commencing construction after December 2, 2005.

The requirements applicable to the new kiln at Castle Hayne are:

A ban on the use of fly ash where the fly ash Hg content has been increased through the

use of activated carbon or other sorbent for Hg control at the power plant. A certification

must be obtained from the supplier for each shipment of fly ash received to demonstrate

compliance with this requirement. Alternately, the facility must demonstrate that Hg

emissions will not increase as a result of such fly ash.

Cement kiln dust (CKD) recycle to the kilns must be minimized consistent with

maintaining desired product quality. Records must be kept of the amount of CKD

removed from the kiln system on an annual basis. Records must also be kept of the

amount of CKD recycled on an hourly basis.

Mercury – 41 µg/dscm or, if this limit cannot be met, an alternative limit based on

application of a packed-bed or spray tower wet scrubber.

THC – 20 ppmv or 98 percent reduction.

Initial testing is required for Hg and continuous monitoring for THC. Operating requirements

are specified for certain types of control systems that may be employed. Also on December 20,

2006, EPA announced the reconsideration of the new source standards to allow for additional

public comment, since the emission limits were not specifically included in the earlier proposal.

CCC reserves the right to request deletion or modification of any permit conditions imposed as a

result of the December 20, 2006 EPA amendments that may be changed by EPA at a later date.

6

As required by 40 CFR 63.1350(a) and 63.6(e)(3), CCC must submit to the Department

of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) a written operation and maintenance (O&M)

plan and a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan for the facility prior to commencing

operation. Among other things, these plans provide procedures for: proper O&M of the

emission units and their control devices; corrective actions and measures to be taken to minimize

emissions in cases of startup, shutdown, or malfunction; and procedures used in inspecting and

monitoring the emission units and control equipment.

The new emergency diesel generator set is exempt from Part 63, Subpart ZZZZ

[Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)], except for the initial

notification requirements, pursuant to § 63.6590(b)(1).

2.3 Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM)

The CAM rules at 40 CFR Part 64 apply to air pollution emission units that meet all the

following criteria:

1. The unit is located at a plant that is subject to the Title V operating permit program.

2. The unit is subject to an emission limitation or standard under a State Implementation

Plan (SIP) or EPA rule such as an NSPS.

3. The unit uses a control device to achieve compliance with the emission limitation or

standard. A control device does not include passive control measures such as low-

sulfur fuels, low-NOx burners, or good operating practices.

4. The unit has potential emissions before the control device of the regulated pollutant(s)

that are 100 percent or more of the major source thresholds, as defined under the Title

V program.

There are several exemptions to CAM applicability, including the following types of

emission standards or limitations:

a) Standards proposed by EPA after November 15, 1990 [e.g., all Maximum

Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules are exempt from the CAM

requirements].

b) Standards subject to a continuous compliance determination method (CCDM).

7

All PM emission limits for sources controlled by baghouses are exempt from CAM under

a) above. The gaseous emission limits for the kiln system are not met by a control device except

for NOx and SO2.

Per 40 CFR 64.1, CCDM means a method, specified by the applicable standard or an

applicable permit condition, which:

1. Is used to determine compliance with an emission limitation or standard on a

continuous basis, consistent with the averaging period established for the emission

limitation or standard.

2. Provides data either in units of the standard or correlated directly with the compliance

limit.

As discussed in Section 3, CCC is requesting NOx and SO2 emission limits in lb/ton of

clinker. Emissions will be measured by a continuous emission rate monitor (CERM). The

CERM data will be linked with clinker production data to produce output in lb/ton of clinker,

thus qualifying the NOx and SO2 limits for exemption under the CAM rules.

2.4 New Source Review (NSR)

As noted above, the project will trigger the PSD rules under 15A NCAC 020.0530, which

requires the following:

1. A Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis for each pollutant that

exceeds the PSD major source thresholds (PM, PM10, SO2, CO, NOx, and VOC).

2. An analysis of impacts on Federal Class I areas, including Class I PSD increments

and air quality related values.

3. A demonstration of compliance with the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS)

(Section .0400) and Class II PSD increments, as applicable.

4. An additional impacts analysis (potential impacts on soils, vegetation, visibility,

and secondary growth).

In addition, the project will trigger the toxic air pollutant (TAP) procedures for new

facilities under 15A NCAC 2Q.0700. These procedures require that a new facility which

exceeds certain emission rates specified at 2Q.0711 must demonstrate compliance with the

acceptable ambient levels (AAL’s) set forth at 15A NCAC 02D.1104. Emission factors for most

TAP’s are highly uncertain and site-specific, depending on the raw material mix, kiln, design,

8

and operating conditions. Nonetheless, emission estimates have been made using available

emission factors and AAL compliance demonstrations have made for the applicable TAPs.

These analyses are contained in separate reports attached to the application.

2.5 North Carolina’s Emission Limiting Rules

Several provisions of North Carolina’s air rules are applicable to the proposed CCC plant,

although they are less stringent than the NSPS, NESHAP, or BACT requirements. Applicable

provisions in 15A NCAC 2D include:

Section 0510 – Particulates from Sand, Gravel, or Crushed Stone Operations

Section 0513 – Particulates from Portland Cement Plants

Section 0515 – Particulates from Miscellaneous Industrial Processes

Section 0516 – Sulfur Dioxide from Combustion Sources

Section 0540 – Particulates from Fugitive Dust Emission Sources

Section 0510 requires a) measures to limit PM emissions so as to attain the TSP and PM10

NAAQS beyond the property line, b) fugitive emissions must meet Section 0540, and c) crushers

must be controlled by wet suppression, and conveyors, screens and transfer points must be

controlled so as to meet opacity standards in Sections 0521 or 0524 (NSPS). The NAAQS

modeling demonstration under the PSD rules meets the requirements under Item a; compliance

with Section 0540 is discussed below; materials processed by the crusher will generally be

saturated with moisture; and the sources under Item c) must meet the opacity standards under

NSPS Subpart 000.

Section 0513 requires that PM from the kiln be controlled by at least 99.7 percent and

that the emission rate not exceed 0.327 lb/barrel of cement. The proposed BACT for the kiln is a

baghouse with control efficiency exceeding 99.9 percent and an emission limit of 0.14 lb/ton of

kiln feed (equivalent to 0.0425 lb/barrel of cement). Section 0513 also requires that PM from

other stacks or vents not exceed the process weight limits in Section 0515. The proposed BACT

for other sources is baghouse controls meeting a limit of 0.01 gr/scf, which results in much lower

emissions than the limits in Section 0515.

Section 0516 requires that SO2 from fuel combustion sources not exceed 2.3 lb/million

Btu heat input. The proposed BACT is 1.80 lb/ton of clinker, maximum 24-hour average. This

limit is equivalent to 0.67 lb/million Btu.

9

Section 0540 requires that fugitive dust emissions not cause or contribute to substantive

complaints, excessive fugitive dust emissions at the property boundary, or NAAQS violations.

BACT will be applied for fugitive dust sources and NAAQS compliance, including fugitive dust

sources, is demonstrated as part of this permit application.

10

SECTION 3

REQUESTED PERMIT LIMITS

The permit limits, including the regulatory basis and the associated testing and

monitoring requirements, being requested by CCC are discussed below. Where there are

multiple regulatory bases (e.g., BACT, NESHAPs, PSD increment compliance), the most

restrictive limits that will ensure compliance with other applicable requirements are

recommended. CCC requests elimination of multiple redundant forms of emission limits and

throughput limits. The kiln emission limits below are applicable for all combinations of fuel to

be burned. The emission limits proposed below for PM will ensure the application of BACT for

PM10; thus, CCC requests that separate PM10 emission limits not be established.

CCC recognizes that alternate emission limits may be imposed under the final NSPS and

NESHAP rules and agrees to comply with those limits as required.

Pursuant to current EPA guidance at 79 FR 20652 (April 25, 2007), CCC requests that

the PM emission limits include filterable PM but not condensables. The current estimate of

condensable PM emissions is highly uncertain based on an AP-42 emission factor for inorganic

condensables of questionable reliability. Based on experience with cement kilns, condensable

emissions are site-specific and variable. In addition, EPA has indicated that additional time is

needed to implement a program to assess and improve available test methods for condensable

PM.

3.1 Kiln/Raw Mill/Cooler/Coal Mill Emission Limit

3.1.1 PM

0.14 lb/ton kiln feed as determined by Method 5 test every 5 years (BACT).

3.1.2 Opacity

Ten percent as measured by continuous opacity monitor (COM) on the main stack

(BACT).

11

3.1.3 CO

2.80 lb/ton of clinker, 30-day rolling average, as measured using a CERM meeting

Performance Specification (PS) 4B (BACT).

3.1.4 VOC (non-methane)

0.16 lb/ton of clinker as determined by Methods 25A and 18 every 5 years. Note that

THC will be measured by CEM under the NESHAP (see 3.1.8); thus, continuous monitoring of

VOC should not be required.

3.1.5 SO2

1.33 lb/ton of clinker, 30-day rolling average and 1.80 lb/ton of clinker, maximum 24-

hour average, as measured using a CERM meeting PS 6 (BACT).

3.1.6 NOx

1.95 lb/ton of clinker, 30-day rolling average, as measured using a CERM meeting PS 6

(BACT). This averaging time is appropriate to account for the variability in NOx emissions from

cement kilns and is consistent with EPA’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) call guidance for

cement kilns. Averaging times for NO2 air quality concentrations (NAAQS and PSD

increments) are based on annual concentrations.

As per the BACT analysis, NOx will be controlled by selective non-catalytic reduction

(SNCR). Because of the uncertainty and lack of experience with SNCR on cement kilns, CCC

requests that for the first year of operation, the emission limits be set at 3.0 lb/ton of clinker to

allow shakedown and optimization of the SNCR systems.

3.1.7 Dioxins/Furans

0.4 ng/dscm (TEQ) corrected to 7 percent oxygen as measured by Method 23 initially and

every 30 months (NESHAP). The average temperature during the test may not exceed 204ºC

(400ºF).

3.1.8 THC and Mercury

THC: Twenty ppmv, 1-hour block average, as measured by CEM meeting PS 8A

(NESHAP).

Hg: 41 µg/dscm, as measured by a Method 29 initial compliance test (NESHAP).

Both corrected to 7 percent oxygen. It should be noted that these NESHAP limits are currently

under reconsideration by EPA. CCC reserves the right to revise these emission limits if the

NESHAP limits are modified or recinded.

12

3.1.9 TAP’s

Because CCC has demonstrated compliance with the AAL’s for various TAP’s and the

BACT and NESHAP requirements directly or indirectly (via surrogates such as PM for TAP

metals and THC for TAP organics), CCC requests that no additional emission limits be set for

individual TAPs.

3.2 Finish Mills and Miscellaneous Baghouses

3.2.1 PM

0.01 gr/scf (BACT) determined by implementation of 10 percent opacity limit (see

below).

3.2.2 Opacity

Ten percent as determined by initial and every 5 year Method 9 test and monitoring

scheme under 40 CFR 63.1350.

3.3 Fugitive Emissions

Quarry crushers – 15 percent opacity. All other process fugitive sources (except those

processing fugitive materials) – 10 percent opacity (BACT).

3.4 Diesel Emergency Generator Set

NSPS Subpart IIII limits as described in Section 2.2 above.

3.5 Throughput Limits

Throughput limits are needed to limit the potential to emit (PTE) for sources that are

subject to lb/ton emission limits and for sources that are not effectively limited by the emission

limits outlined above (e.g., fugitive process sources). Throughput limits are not needed for other

miscellaneous sources. For example, the handling of cement is controlled by baghouses

permitted at 0.01 gr/scf and 8760 h/yr. This defines the PTE for these sources and thus a cement

throughput limit would not be necessary or appropriate. CCC requests a throughput limit of

2,190,000 tons/yr clinker, rolling 12-month sum. The clinker throughput limit effectively limits

the throughput of all raw materials required for production.

13

3.6 Fuel Limitations

Emissions of NOx, SO2, and CO will be monitored by CERM, and there is little

relationship between the sulfur and nitrogen content of kiln/calciner fuels and resulting emissions

(see BACT report). The clinker production limit effectively limits the total quantity of fuel

required. Because of these reasons, CCC requests that no limits be set on the amount or quality

of the fuels to be burned.

3.7 Operating Hour Assumptions

The modeling analyses assume that all sources operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per

year except for the following:

Emergency generator – 500 h/yr

Under EPA guidance, States can assume that the potential to emit (PTE) for emergency

generators can be based on 500 h/yr. Thus, CCC requests that no operating hour limits be

included in the permit.

TAB B

PERMIT APPLICATION FORMS – REVISED PAGES

REVISED 11/01/02 A1

Legal Corporate/Owner Name:

Site Name:

Site Address (911 Address) Line 1:

Site Address Line 2:

City: State:

Zip Code: County:

Permit/Technical Contact: Facility/Inspection Contact:

Name/Title: Name/Title:

Mailing Address Line 1: Mailing Address Line 1:


City: Troutville State: Virginia Zip Code: 24175 City: Troutville State: Virginia Zip Code: 24175

Phone No. (area code) 540-966-6534 Fax No. (area code) 540-966-6812 Phone No. ( area code ) 540-966-6534 Fax No. ( area code) 540-966-6812

Email Address: Email Address:

Responsible Official/Authorized Contact: Invoice Contact:

Name/Title: Name/Title:



City: Norfolk State: Virginia Zip Code: 23502 City: Troutville State: Virginia Zip Code: 24175

Phone No. (area code) 757-858-6523 Fax No. ( area code ) 757-288-1339 Phone No. (area code) 540-966-6534 Fax No. (area code ) 540-966-6812

Email Address: Email Address:

General Small

Describe nature of (plant site) operation(s): Facility ID No. : 08/65/00296

Primary SIC/NAICS Code: Current/Previous Air Permit No. 07300R07 Expiration Date 1/1/2012

Facility Coordinates: Latitude: Longitude:

Does this application contain confidential data? YES NO

Person Name: Firm Name:


City: State: Zip Code: County:

Phone No. ( area code ) 919-489-5299 Fax No. ( area code ) 919-489-5552 Email Address:

Name (typed): Title:

X Signature(Blue Ink): Date:

6071 Catawba Road6071 Catawba Road

North Carolina

NOTE- APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROCESSED WITHOUT THE FOLLOWING:

Local Zoning Consistency Determination (if required) Facility Reduction & Recycling Survey Form (Form A4) Application Fee

28429 New Hanover

Castle Hayne


CONTACT INFORMATION

New Non-permitted Facility/Greenfield

[email protected]

[email protected]

James S. Willis / Corporate Environmental Manager

6071 Catawba Road

[email protected]

Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary

Modification of Facility (permitted)

Renewal (TV Only)

Manufacturing of Portland cement

FACILITY CLASSIFICATION AFTER APPLICATION (Check Only One)

Prohibitory Small Synthetic Minor

[email protected]

Title V

27707

James S. Willis / Corporate Environmental Manager James S. Willis / Corporate Environmental Manager

1151 Azalea Garden Road

Russell A. Fink, Vice President/General Counsel

Renewal with Modification

APPLICATION IS BEING MADE FOR

FORM A1FACILITY (General Information)

NCDENR/Division of Air Quality - Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate

PO Box 37

Responsible Official/Authorized Contact Signature Appropriate Number of Copies of Application P.E. Seal (if required)

GENERAL INFORMATION

6411 Ideal Cement Road


[email protected]

Environmental Quality Management, Inc.

Attach Additional Sheets As Necessary

FACILITY (Plant Site) INFORMATION

PERSON OR FIRM THAT PREPARED APPLICATION

SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL/AUTHORIZED CONTACT

34D, 20M, 19S

3241 / 327310

Russell A. Fink

77D, 52M, 00S

D. Kent Berry

North Carolina Durham

3325 Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard, Suite 250

Durham

REVISED 04/10/07 A2

FQ Quarry crushing and handling NARMHS Raw material unloading, handling, and storage NARMKF Raw mill and kiln feed Fabric filtersCOAL Coal/coke handling and storage Fabric filtersKS Kiln system SNCR

Lime injectionFabric filters

CHS Clinker handling and storage Fabric filtersFM Finish mills Fabric filtersCHSL Cement handling, storage, and loadout Fabric filtersGEN Emergency generator NASP Storage piles NAMINE Mining operations NAPLTRD Plant roads NAQURD Quarry roads NA

Is your facility subject to 40 CFR Part 68 "Prevention of Accidental Releases" - Section 112(r) of the Federal Clean Air Act? No

If No, please specify in detail how your facility avoided applicability: Aqueous ammonia less than 20%

If your facility is Subject to 112(r), please complete the following:

A. Have you already submitted a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to EPA Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 68.10 or Part 68.150?

Yes G No G Specify required RMP submittal date: _____________ If submitted, RMP submittal date: _____________

B. Are you using administrative controls to subject your facility to a lesser 112(r) program standard?

Yes G No G If yes, please specify:

NANANA


112(r) APPLICABILITY INFORMATION

Existing Permitted Equipment To Be MODIFIED By This Application

Equipment To Be DELETED By This Application

CD1-4, 14-18

CD22-31, 45-47CD32-34, 40-43

CD5-13

CD44A, BCD44S

CONTROL DEVICE

NA

NA

ID NO.

NA

Equipment To Be ADDED By This Application (New, Previously Unpermitted, or Replacement)

NA

CD44N

CD19-21

DESCRIPTIONID NO. DESCRIPTION

CONTROL DEVICE

FORMs A2, A3


EMISSION SOURCE LISTING: New, Modified, Previously Unpermitted, Replaced, Deleted

EMISSION SOURCE LISTING FOR THIS APPLICATION - A2

112r APPLICABILITY INFORMATION - A3

EMISSION SOURCE EMISSION SOURCE

A 3

FORM A4

SURVEY OF AIR EMISSIONS AND FACILITY - WIDE REDUCTION & RECYCLING ACTIVITIES

DATE:

Facility Name: Carolinas Cement Company LLC Permit Number: 07300R07

Facility ID: 08/65/00296 County: New Hanover Environmental Contact: James S. Willis / Corporate Environmental Manager

Mailing Address Line 1: 6071 Catawba Road Phone No. 540-966-6534 Fax No. 540-966-6812

Zip Code: 24175 County: New Hanover

City: Troutville State: Virginia Email Address: [email protected]

AIR EMISSIONS SOURCE REDUCTIONSEnter Code for Date Reduction Quantity Emitted Quantity Emitted Has reduction activity been

Source Description and ID Air Pollutant Emission Reduction Option Implemented from prior annual from current annual discontinued? If so, when

Option (See Codes) (mo/yr) report to DAQ (lb/yr) report to DAQ (lb/yr) was it discontinued? (mo/yr)

Does facility have an environmental mangement system in place? ( ) YES (X) NO If so, is facility ISO 14000 Certified? ( ) YES (X) NO

Mailing Address Line 2:

Any Air Emissions Source Reductions in the past year? ( ) YES (X) NO

Addition detail about source

Comments:

Pollutant Enter Code for Date Reduction Quantity Emitted Quantity Emitted Has reduction activity been

Source Description or Activity or Emission Reduction Option Implemented from prior annual from current annual discontinued? If so, when

Recycled or Reduced Material Option (See Codes) (mo/yr) report report was it discontinued? (mo/yr)

Comments: None

REVISED 1/07 Attach Additional Sheets As Necessary

FACILITY - WIDE REDUCTIONS & RECYCLING ACTIVITIES Any Reductions or Recycling Activities in the past year? ( ) YES (X) NO

Addition detail about source

The requested information above shall be used for fulfilling the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.108(g). The permit holder shall submit to the

Department a written description of current and projected plans to reduce the emissions of air pollutants by source reduction or recycling. The written description shall

accompany any application for a new permit, modification of an existing permit and for each annual air quality permit fee payment. Source reduction is defined as reducing

the amount of any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant entering any waste stream or otherwise released into the environment (including fugitive emissions) prior

to recycling, treatment, or disposal. If no activity has taken place since the previous report, simply indicate so by checking the no box in that section. Once completed, this

form should be submitted along with your fee payment. Examples are listed on the first line of each section of the form for your benefit.

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: FQ

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): NA

DESCRIBE IN DETAILTHE EMISSION SOURCE PROCESS (ATTACH FLOW DIAGRAM):

Coal,wood,oil, gas, other burner (Form B1) ! Woodworking (Form B4) ! Manufact. of chemicals/coatings/inks (Form B7)

Int.combustion engine/generator (Form B2) ! Coating/finishing/printing (Form! Incineration (Form B8)

Liquid storage tanks (Form B3) ! Storage silos/bins (Form B6) !X Other (Form B9)

START CONSTRUCTION DATE: Feb-09 OPERATION DATE: Oct-11 DATE MANUFACTURED: TBD

MANUFACTURER / MODEL NO. TBD

IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?): OOO NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?):__________

EXPECTED ANNUAL HOURS OF OPERATIO 8760

SOURCE OF

EMISSION

AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED FACTOR lb/hr tons/yr lb/hr tons/yr lb/hr tons/yr

PARTICULATE MATTER (PM) Attached 1.60 6.99 NA NA 1.60 6.99

PARTICULATE MATTER<10 MICRONS (PM10) Attached 0.73 3.20 NA NA 0.73 3.20

PARTICULATE MATTER<2.5 MICRONS (PM2.5) Attached 0.13 0.55 NA NA 0.13 0.55

SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)

NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx)

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO)

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC)

Attached 4.79E-05 2.10E-04 NA NA 4.79E-05 2.10E-04

OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION

HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT AND CAS NO. FACTOR lb/hr tons/yr lb/hr tons/yr lb/hr tons/yr







TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT AND CAS NO. EF SOURCE

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

lb/day

(AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS) (AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)

Mercury

BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS

(AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)

Arsenic

7.66E-05 2.80E-02

EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION:

PLETE THIS FORM AND COMPLETE AND ATTACH APPROPRIATE B1 THROUGH B9 FORM FOR EACH SOU

LEAD

Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury

EXPECTED ACTUAL

INDICATE EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITATIONS

lb/yr

Chromium (VI)

EXPECTED OP. SCHEDULE: 24 HR/DAY 7 DAY/WK 52 WK/YR

VISIBLE STACK EMISSIONS UNDER NORMAL OPERATION: NA % OPACITY

PERCENTAGE ANNUAL THROUGHPUT (%): DEC-FEB 25 MAR-MAY 25 JUN-AUG 25 SEP-NOV 25

CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE

FORM BSPECIFIC EMISSIONS SOURCE INFORMATION (REQUIRED FOR ALL SOURCES)


TYPE OF EMISSION SOURCE (CHECK AND COMPLETE APPROPRIATE FORM B1-B9 ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES):

Primary crushers (2) for marl/limestone and overburden/spoils, secondary crusher, and conveyor transfer points.

OPERATING SCENARIO 1 OF 1



TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE

lb/hr

Arsenic

Beryllium

Manganese

Attachments: (1) emissions calculations and supporting documentation; (2) indicate all requested state and federal enforceable permit limits (e.g. hours of operation,

emission rates) and describe how these are monitored and with what frequency; and (3) describe any monitoring devices, gauges, or test ports for this source.

Chromium (Total)

Quarry crushing and handling

HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION FOR THIS SOURCE

POTENTIAL EMSSIONS

BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS

Cadmium 2.66E-02

3.19E-06

POTENTIAL EMSSIONSEXPECTED ACTUAL

3.02E-04 7.25E-03 2.65E+00

1.76E-08 4.21E-07 1.54E-04

7.66E-05 2.80E-02

Beryllium 3.19E-06

1.60E-07 3.83E-06 1.40E-03

3.04E-06 7.29E-05

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: RMHS









IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?): Y, OOO NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?):__________


SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached


(AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS) BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS (AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)




Raw material unloading, handling, and storage


Unloading, handling, and storage of quarried raw materials, additives, gypsum, and solid fuels (coal, coke) (fugitve transfer points)





EXPECTED ACTUAL POTENTIAL EMSSIONS

LEAD



(AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS) BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS

Beryllium

Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury


Arsenic

Chromium (Total)



lb/hr lb/day lb/yr





Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

2.57E-06 6.16E-05 2.25E-02

Beryllium 1.75E-06 4.20E-05 1.53E-02

2.20E-06 5.28E-05 1.93E-02

4.70E-07 1.13E-05 4.11E-03

2.34E-04 5.62E-03 2.05E+00

6.97E-08 1.67E-06 6.10E-04

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: RMKF

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD5-CD13

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E5 - E13







IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?): ______ NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?): LLL


SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached






Raw mill and kiln feed


Raw mill feed storage and handling; kiln feed storage and handling; kiln dust bins



VISIBLE STACK EMISSIONS UNDER NORMAL OPERATION: 10% OPACITY



LEAD




Beryllium

Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury


Arsenic

Chromium (Total)



lb/hr lb/day lb/yr





Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

1.53E-05 3.66E-04 1.34E-01

Beryllium 8.98E-06 2.16E-04 7.87E-02

1.41E-05 3.38E-04 1.23E-01

1.71E-06 4.11E-05 1.50E-02

1.09E-03 2.62E-02 9.55E+00

3.14E-07 7.53E-06 2.75E-03

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: COAL

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD1-4, CD14-18

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S):E1-E4, E14-E18







IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?): Y NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?):__________


SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached






Coal/coke handling system and mill


Coal/coke unloading, conveying, and storage bins



VISIBLE STACK EMISSIONS UNDER NORMAL OPERATION: ______OPACITY




LEAD




Arsenic

Beryllium

Cadmium

Chromium (Total)

Manganese

Mercury


lb/hr lb/day lb/yr

Arsenic 5.46E-07 1.31E-05 4.78E-03

Beryllium 1.01E-06 2.41E-05 8.81E-03

Cadmium 1.21E-06 2.90E-05 1.06E-02



6.89E-06 2.52E-03



Mercury 2.87E-07

Chromium (VI) 1.44E-07

4.00E-05 1.46E-02Manganese 1.67E-06

3.45E-06 1.26E-03

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: KSCONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD44A, B, N, SEMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E44





START CONSTRUCTION DATE Feb-09 OPERATION DATE: Oct-11 DATE MANUFACTURED: TBD

MANUFACTURER / MODEL NO TBD

IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?):________ NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?): LLL


SOURCE OF

EMISSION





SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2) Attached 303.13 1062.15 NA NA 303.13 1062.15

NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx) Attached 487.50 1708.20 NA NA 487.50 1708.20

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) Attached 700.00 2452.80 NA NA 700.00 2452.80

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC) Attached 40.00 140.16 NA NA 40.00 140.16

Attached 0.02 0.07 NA NA 0.02 0.07

OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION



Attached 7.75E-01 2.72E+00 NA NA 7.75E-01 2.72E+00

Beryllium Attached 1.65E-04 5.78E-04 NA NA 1.65E-04 5.78E-04



Formaldehyde Attached 1.15E-01 4.03E-01 NA NA 1.15E-01 4.03E-01

Hydrogen Chloride Attached 7.18E+00 2.51E+01 NA NA 7.18E+00 2.51E+01

Manganese Attached 2.15E-01 7.53E-01 NA NA 2.15E-01 7.53E-01



Attached

Attached

Attached

Beryllium Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Formaldehyde Attached

Hydrogen Chloride Attached

Manganese Attached

Attached

8.06E+02

5.03E+04

2.76E+00

1.72E+02

2.10E+02

1.75E+04

2.10E+01

5.43E+03

1.16E+00

3.85E+00

7.01E-01

1.58E+03


7.20E-01

2.25E-01

1.15E-01

7.18E+00

2.15E-01

3.00E-02

5.16E+00 1.51E+03

5.40E+00

Kiln system - Raw mill on


Kiln with in-line raw mill, clinker cooler, and coal mill. The raw mill runs approximately 80% of the time that the kiln is operating.


1.32E-02




6.00E+01







(AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS (AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)

LEAD

LETE THIS FORM AND COMPLETE AND ATTACH APPROPRIATE B1 THROUGH B9 FORM FOR EACH SO

Arsenic

Benzene

Cadmium

Chromium (Total)

Mercury


7.20E-02

1.86E+01

3.96E-03

2.40E-03

Benzene

Cadmium



lb/hr lb/day lb/yr


Ammonia

Fluorides

Mercury

Arsenic

Attachments: (1) emissions calculations and supporting documentation; (2) indicate all requested state and federal enforceable permit limits (e.g. hours of

operation, emission rates) and describe how these are monitored and with what frequency; and (3) describe any monitoring devices, gauges, or test ports for this

source

Chromium (VI)

2.50E+00

3.00E-03

7.75E-01

1.65E-04

1.00E-04

5.50E-04

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: KS

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD44A, B, N, SEMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E44









SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached 0.02 0.02 NA NA 0.02 0.02

OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION












Attached

Attached

Attached

Beryllium Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached



Manganese Attached

Attached 3.00E-02 7.20E-01 5.26E+01

7.18E+00 1.72E+02 1.26E+04

2.15E-01 5.16E+00 3.77E+02

1.15E-01 2.76E+00 2.01E+02

Chromium (VI) 1.00E-04 2.40E-03 1.75E-01

1.65E-04 3.96E-03 2.89E-01

2.25E-01 5.40E+00 3.94E+02




Cadmium 5.50E-04 1.32E-02 9.64E-01

1.86E+01 1.36E+03

7.20E-02 5.26E+00





LEAD





Kiln system - Raw mill off


Kiln with in-line raw mill, clinker cooler, and coal mill. The raw mill does not run and is bypassed approximately 20% of the time that the kiln is

operating.




Arsenic

Benzene

Chromium (Total)

Cadmium

Mercury


Arsenic


Ammonia

Fluorides

Mercury

2.50E+00



source

3.00E-03

Benzene 7.75E-01

6.00E+01 4.38E+03


lb/hr lb/day lb/yr

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: KS

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD44A, B, N, SEMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E44









SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached 0.02 0.08 NA NA 0.02 0.08

OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION



Attached 7.75E-01 3.39E+00 NA NA 7.75E-01 3.39E+00









Attached

Attached

Attached

Beryllium Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached



Manganese Attached

Attached



source.

3.00E-03


Arsenic

Benzene

lb/yr

Arsenic

Benzene

Chromium (Total)

Cadmium


Ammonia

Fluorides

Mercury

2.50E+00


Mercury


6.00E+01 2.19E+04


lb/hr lb/day









Kiln system

OPERATING SCENARIO Combined (maximum) operations

7.20E-02 2.63E+01

LEAD

Kiln with in-line raw mill, clinker cooler, and coal mill. The raw mill runs approximately 80% of the time and is off (bypassed) approximately

20% of the time that the kiln is operating.





7.75E-01 1.86E+01 6.79E+03

1.15E-01 2.76E+00

1.65E-04 3.96E-03 1.45E+00

2.25E-01 5.40E+00

5.16E+00

Chromium (VI) 1.00E-04 2.40E-03 8.76E-01

Cadmium 5.50E-04 1.32E-02 4.82E+00

1.88E+03

1.97E+03

1.01E+03

3.00E-02 7.20E-01 2.63E+02

7.18E+00 1.72E+02 6.29E+04

2.15E-01

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: CHS

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD19-21










SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

6.85E-05

4.48E-03

8.74E-04

1.44E-06

6.64E-02

7.02E-06

1.82E-04

1.64E-03 6.00E-01

5.24E-04

2.56E-03

Chromium (Total)

Beryllium

5.12E-07

9.97E-08

2.93E-07

7.58E-06

Clinker discharge from clinker cooler, clinker dome, off-spec clinker bin



5.98E-08

1.23E-05

BEFORE CONTROLS / LIMITS (AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITS)

LEAD




Clinker handling and storage


Arsenic

Beryllium

Cadmium

Manganese









Mercury



lb/hr lb/day lb/yr





Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

2.39E-06

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: FM

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD22-31, CD45-47

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E22-31, E45-47









SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached


Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

Beryllium





lb/hr lb/day lb/yr


Mercury

Chromium (Total)

Beryllium

Arsenic

Cadmium

Manganese




Finish mills







2.27E-04 5.44E-03

LEAD

Finish mills 1 and 2, feed bins, and cement transfer





1.98E+00


1.38E-05 3.32E-04 1.21E-01

2.78E-06 6.68E-05 2.44E-02

7.78E-07 1.87E-05 6.81E-03

1.23E-04 2.95E-03 1.08E+00

3.05E-03 7.31E-02 2.67E+01

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: CHSL

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD32-34, 40-43










SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached


Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

8.21E-05





lb/hr lb/day lb/yr



Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury

Chromium (Total)




Arsenic





Cement handling, storage, and loadout



LEAD

Cement dome; cement transport; truck and rail loadouts; and packing plant.







Beryllium 5.00E-06 1.20E-04 4.38E-02

1.97E-03 7.19E-01

Beryllium

7.95E-07 1.91E-05 6.97E-03

4.48E-05 1.07E-03 3.92E-01

1.10E-03 2.63E-02 9.59E+00

1.65E-07 3.96E-06 1.45E-03

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: GEN


EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): GEN



X Int.combustion engine/generator (Form B2) ! Coating/finishing/printing (Form! Incineration (Form B8)

Liquid storage tanks (Form B3) ! Storage silos/bins (Form B6) ! !Other (Form B9)



IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?): IIII NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?): ZZZZ


SOURCE OF

EMISSION









OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION





Attached

AttachedFormaldehyde





Benzene


lb/hr lb/day lb/yr


Benzene

Formaldehyde

POTENTIAL EMSSIONS





6.18E-04 1.48E-02 3.09E-01





EXPECTED ACTUAL


Emergency generator


6.08E-03 1.46E-01

LEAD

800 kW diesel generator set

3.04E+00

EXPECTED OP. SCHEDULE: ___ HR/DAY ___ DAY/WK ___ WK/YR


VISIBLE STACK EMISSIONS UNDER NORMAL OPERATION: <5% OPACITY

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: SP






Liquid storage tanks (Form B3) ! Storage silos/bins (Form B6) X Other (Form B9)

START CONSTRUCTION DATE: NA OPERATION DATE: Oct-11 DATE MANUFACTURED: NA


IS THIS SOURCE SUBJECT TO? NSPS (SUBPART?):________ NESHAP (SUBPART?):________ MACT (SUBPART?):________


SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached


Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

5.72E-06





lb/hr lb/day lb/yr



Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury

Chromium (Total)




Arsenic





Storage piles



LEAD

Wind erosion from storage piles in quarry and raw material piles in the plant







Beryllium 2.93E-06 7.02E-05 2.56E-02

1.37E-04 5.01E-02

Beryllium

4.56E-06 1.09E-04 3.99E-02

1.07E-06 2.58E-05 9.41E-03

4.54E-04 1.09E-02 3.98E+00

2.22E-07 5.32E-06 1.94E-03

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: MINE











SOURCE OF

EMISSION










OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION









Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached

Attached


Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium (VI)

Manganese

Mercury

7.09E-06





lb/hr lb/day lb/yr



Cadmium

Manganese

Mercury

Chromium (Total)




Arsenic





Mining operations



LEAD

Quarry mining activities including drilling, blasting, marl/limestone and spoils/other ripping and loading, overburden removal and unloading







Beryllium 7.09E-06 1.70E-04 6.21E-02

1.70E-04 6.21E-02

Beryllium

6.91E-06 1.66E-04 6.05E-02

3.54E-07 8.51E-06 3.11E-03

5.06E-04 1.22E-02 4.44E+00

4.60E-08 1.10E-06 4.03E-04

REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: PLTRD







START CONSTRUCTION DATE: Feb-09 OPERATION DATE: Oct-11 DATE MANUFACTURED: NA




SOURCE OF

EMISSION









OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION








lb/hr lb/day lb/yr






LEAD

Vehicle traffic on paved roads






EXPECTED ACTUAL




POTENTIAL EMSSIONS


Plant roads


REVISED 12/01/01 BEMISSION SOURCE ID NO: QURD











SOURCE OF

EMISSION









OTHER

SOURCE OF

EMISSION








lb/hr lb/day lb/yr






LEAD

Vehcle traffic on unpaved roads in quarry






EXPECTED ACTUAL




POTENTIAL EMSSIONS


Quarry roads


REVISED: 12/01/01 B9

EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: FQ

Quarry crushing and handling CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA


DESCRIBE IN DETAIL THE PROCESS (ATTACH FLOW DIAGRAM):

UNITS

tpy

tpy

UNITS

MAXIMUM DESIGN (BATCHES / HOUR):

REQUESTED LIMITATION (BATCHES / HOUR): (BATCHES/YR):

FUEL USED: None TOTAL MAXIMUM FIRING RATE (MILLION BTU/HR):

MAX. CAPACITY HOURLY FUEL USE: REQUESTED CAPACITY ANNUAL FUEL USE:

COMMENTS:

Quantities shown are wet basis. Relative quantities of each material may vary.

Spoils quantity assumes that 50% of the crushed material will be wasted (e.g., remains in the quarry) and not conveyed to the plant.

FORM B9EMISSION SOURCE (OTHER)


LIMITATION(UNIT/HR)

MAX. DESIGN

TYPE CAPACITY (UNIT/HR)

Primary crushers (2) for marl/limestone and overburden/spoils, secondary crusher, and conveyor transfer points.


MATERIALS ENTERING PROCESS - CONTINUOUS PROCESS

Marl/limestone -

Spoils/other -

Attach Additional Sheets as Necessary

TYPE CAPACITY (UNIT/BATCH) LIMITATION (UNIT/BATCH)

3,411,152

434,183

MATERIALS ENTERING PROCESS - BATCH OPERATION MAX. DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY

REQUESTED CAPACITY

1500 tph

500 tph

None

None


EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: RMHS

Raw material unloading, handling, and storage CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA



UNITS

tpy

tpy

tpy

tpy

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:

Additives may consist of fly ash/bottom ash, mill scale, bauxite, sand, and/or other purchased raw materials.

Quarried raw materials may consist of marl, limestone, clay and/or spoils.


CAPACITY (UNIT/HR)




Unloading, handling, and storage of quarried raw materials, additives, gypsum, and solid fuels (coal, coke) (fugitve transfer

points)

MATERIALS ENTERING PROCESS - CONTINUOUS PROCESS MAX. DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY

LIMITATION(UNIT/HR)

NA NoneAdditives - 425,102

TYPE


Gypsum -

Limestone -

283,824

127,549

102,040

None

None

3,628,243Quarried raw materials -


NA

NA

NA

NA None


Coal/coke -

None


EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: RMKF

Raw mill and kiln feed CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD5-CD13



UNITS

tpy

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Raw mill feed storage and handling; kiln feed storage and handling; kiln dust bins


TYPE CAPACITY (UNIT/HR) LIMITATION(UNIT/HR)

Raw mill feed - 3,398,880 485 None

Virgin kiln feed - 3,376,980 386 None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: COAL

Coal/coke handling system and mill CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD1-4, CD14-18

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E1-E4, E14-E18


UNITS

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:

Quantities shown are wet basis as received.




Coal/coke unloading, conveying, and storage bins



Coal/Coke - 283,824 30 None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: KS

Kiln system CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD44A, B, N, S

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E44


UNITS

tpy

UNITS



FUEL USED: Coal, coke, biomass, fuel oil, nat. gas TOTAL MAXIMUM FIRING RATE (MILLION BTU/HR):

MAX. CAPACITY HOURLY FUEL USE: REQUESTED CAPACITY ANNUAL FUEL USE: NoneCOMMENTS:

* Request annual production limit of 2,190,000 tons clinker.



OPERATING SCENARIO Combined (maximum) operations

Kiln with in-line raw mill, clinker cooler, and coal mill. The raw mill runs approximately 80% of the time and is off

(bypassed) approximately 20% of the time that the kiln is operating.



Kiln feed with recycle - 3,677,010 420 None*


675

30 tph




EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: CHS

Clinker handling and storage CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD19-21



UNITS

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Clinker discharge from clinker cooler, clinker dome, off-spec clinker bin



Clinker - 2,190,000 250 None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: FM

Finish mills CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD22-31, CD45-47

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E22-31, E45-47


UNITS

tpy

tpy

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Finish mills 1 and 2, feed bins, and cement transfer



Clinker - 2,190,000 150 tph cement each None

Gypsum - 127,549 NA None

Limestone - 102,040 NA None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: CHSL

Cement handling, storage, and loadout CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): CD32-34, 40-43



UNITS

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Cement dome; cement transport; truck and rail loadouts; and packing plant.



Cement - 2,406,593 170 tph (packhouse) None

350 tph (truck) None

350 tph (rail) None

500 tph (barge) None




REVISED 12/01/01 B2

EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: GEN

Emergency generator CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA

OPERATING SCENARIO 1 OF 1 EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): GEN

CHECK ALL THAT APPLY X EMERGENCY G SPACE HEAT G ELECTRICAL GENERATION

G PEAK SHAVER G OTHER (DESCRIBE): ___________________

GENERATOR OUTPUT (KW): 800 ANTICIPATED ACTUAL HOURS OF OPERATION AS PEAK SHAVER (HRS/YR): NA

ENGINE OUTPUT (HP):

TYPE ICE: G GASOLINE ENGINE G DIESEL ENGINE UP TO 600 H X DIESEL ENGINE GREATER THAN 600 HP G DUAL FUEL ENGINE

G OTHER (DESCRIBE): _________________________________________ (complete below)

ENGINE TYPE G RICH BURN X LEAN BURN

EMISSION REDUCTION MODIFICATIONS G INJECTION TIMING RETAR G PREIGNITION CHAMBER COMBUSTION G OTHER _________

OR G STATIONARY GAS TURBINE (complete below G NATURAL GAS PIPELINE COMPRESSOR OR TURBINE (complete below)

FUEL G NATURAL GAS G OIL ENGINE TYPE: G 2-CYCLE LEAN BURN G 4-CYCLE LEAN G TURBINE

G OTHER (DESCRIBE):____________ G 4-CYCLE RICH BURN G OTHER (DESCRIBE): _______________

CYCLE: G COGENERATION G SIMPLE CONTROLS: G COMBUSTION MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE): __________________

G REGENERATIVE G COMBINED G NONSELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTIONG SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION

CONTROLS: G WATER-STEAM INJECTION G CLEAN BURN AND PRECOMBUSTION CHAMBER G UNCONTROLLED

G UNCONTROLLED G LEAN-PREMIX

DESCRIBE METHODS TO MINIMIZE VISIBLE EMISSIONS DURING IDLING, OR LOW LOAD OPERATIONS:

COMMENTS:

FUEL TYPE

FORM B2EMISSION SOURCE (INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES/GENERATORS)


FUEL USAGE (INCLUDE STARTUP/BACKUP FUEL)

MAXIMUM DESIGN REQUESTED CAPACITY

UNITS CAPACITY (UNIT/HR) LIMITATION (UNIT/HR)

0.05

POLLUTANT NOX CO PM

Diesel 137,200 Btu/gal

UNITS (% BY WEIGHT)

SULFUR CONTENT

FUEL CHARACTERISTICS (COMPLETE ALL THAT ARE APPLICABLE)

FUEL TYPE BTU/UNIT

Diesel 57.2 gal/hr None

UNIT

OTHER

MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFIC EMISSION FACTORS (IF AVAILABLE)

0.2 0.164 0.1

VOC

EMISSION FACTOR LB/UNIT 6.3 3.5

PM10


g/KW*hrg/KW*hrg/KW*hrg/KW*hrg/KW*hr


EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: SP

Storage piles CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA



UNITS

acres

acres

acres

acres

acres

Mill scale (Plant) - acres

Fly ash/Bottom ash (Plant) - acres

Coal/coke (Plant) - acres

Gypsum (Plant) - acres

Limestone (Plant) - acres

UNITS





COMMENTS:

Material types and relative quantities may vary.

NA None

NA None


Marl/limestone (Quarry) -

LIMITATION (UNIT/BATCH)

0.5

0.4

0.10

0.25

0.7




NA None

Wind erosion from storage piles in quarry and raw material piles in the plant


0.5 NA None

Spoils (Quarry) - 1.0 NA None

Spoils/other (Quarry) - 0.5 NA None

Marl/limestone/spoils (Plant) - 2.3 NA None

Overburden (Quarry) - 2.0 NA None


NA None

NA None


TYPE CAPACITY (UNIT/BATCH)


EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: MINE

Mining operations CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA



UNITS

tpy

tpy

tpy

UNITS





COMMENTS:


Overburden quantity assumes that 50% of the crushed material will be wasted (e.g., remains in the quarry) and not conveyed to the plant.




Quarry mining activities including drilling, blasting, marl/limestone and spoils/other ripping and loading, overburden removal

and unloading



Marl/limestone - 3,411,152 NA None

Spoils/other - 434,183 NA None

Overburden - 3,177,255 NA None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: PLTRD

Plant roads CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA



UNITS

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Vehicle traffic on paved roads



NA NA None





EMISSION SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EMISSION SOURCE ID NO: QURD

Quarry roads CONTROL DEVICE ID NO(S): NA



UNITS

UNITS





COMMENTS:




Vehcle traffic on unpaved roads in quarry



NA NA None




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD5 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): RMKF

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E5 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLS NO. 1 OF 1 UNITS

MANUFACTURER: TBD MODEL NO: TBD

DATE MANUFACTURED: TBD PROPOSED OPERATION DATE:

PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE:

Fabric filter

POLLUTANT(S) COLLECTED: PM PM10 PM2.5

BEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): NA NA NA

CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100 % 100 % 100 % %

CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 99.9 % 99.9 % 99+ % %

CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 99.9 % 99.9 % 99+ % %

EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: 4 4 4

TOTAL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): 0.72 0.60 0.32

PRESSURE DROP (IN. H20): MIN: MAX: TBD GAUGE?

BULK PARTICLE DENSITY (LB/FT3): NA INLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN MAX 77

POLLUTANT LOADING RATE: NA G LB/HR G GR/FT3 OUTLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN MAX 77

INLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): 8500 FILTER MAX OPERATING TEMP. (oF): TBD

NO. OF COMPARTMENTS: TBD NO. OF BAGS PER COMPARTMENT: TBD LENGTH OF BAG (IN.): TBD

DIAMETER OF BAG (IN.): TBD DRAFT: X INDUCED/NEG. G FORCED/POS. FILTER SURFACE AREA (FT2): TBD

AIR TO CLOTH RATIO: TBD FILTER MATERIAL: TBD G WOVEN G FELTED

DESCRIBE CLEANING PROCEDURES:

X AIR PULSE G SONIC

G REVERSE FLOW G SIMPLE BAG COLLAPSE

G MECHANICAL/SHAKER G RING BAG COLLAPSE

G OTHER

DESCRIBE INCOMING AIR STREAM:

Raw mill feed bin

METHOD FOR DETERMINING WHEN TO CLEAN:

G AUTOMATIC G TIMED G MANUAL

METHOD FOR DETERMINING WHEN TO REPLACE THE BAGS:

G ALARM G INTERNAL INSPECTION G VISIBLE EMISSION G OTHER

SPECIAL CONDITIONS:

G MOISTURE BLINDING G CHEMICAL RESISTIVITY G OTHER

EXPLAIN:

TOTAL = 100


ON A SEPARATE PAGE, ATTACH A DIAGRAM SHOWING THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

CUMULATIVE

(MICRONS)

50-100

SIZE

OF TOTAL %

DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES: To be included in O&M plan required pursuant to 40 CFR 63.1350(a), including cleaning method and bag

replacement schedule. The only particle size information is PM 10 and PM2.5 fractions per AP-42.

DESCRIBE CONTROL SYSTEM:

25-50

X YES G NO WARNING ALARM? G YES X NO

1-10

WEIGHT %

10-25

0-1

1 OF 1

>100

FORM C1CONTROL DEVICE (FABRIC FILTER)


OPERATING SCENARIO: Feb-09

Oct-11

P.E. SEAL REQUIRED (PER 2Q .0112)? YES

REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw mill feed transport





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11


1 OF 1 P.E. SEAL REQUIRED (PER 2Q .0112)? YES


>100

SIZE WEIGHT % CUMULATIVE

(MICRONS) OF TOTAL %


0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw mill feed





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw mill reject





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Kiln dust bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw meal transport to silo





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw meal silo





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Raw meal silo extraction





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Kiln feed





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD1 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): COAL





Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal rail unloading





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal unloading by truck





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal transport to storage





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal transport from storage





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal mill feed bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Coal mill feed transport





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Fine coal bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD44A, B CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): KS

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S): E44 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROL(Refers to kiln FF) NO. 3 OF 3 UNITS




Fabric filters for kiln system (kiln, in-line raw mill, and clinker cooler) and coal mill all venting through the main kiln stack.

Data below reflect combined outlet flow conditions at main stack.

Emissions include an estimate of condensible PM.









BULK PARTICLE DENSITY (LB/FT3): NA INLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN 193 MAX 435

POLLUTANT LOADING RATE: NA G LB/HR G GR/FT3 OUTLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN 193 MAX 435

INLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): 673804 @ 193 F (Mill On) FILTER MAX OPERATING TEMP. (oF): TBD





X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


1) Kiln with in-line raw mill and clinker cooler (CD44A) (~645,000 acfm @ 194 F)

2) Coal mill exhaust (CD44B) (~30,000 acfm @ 180 F)





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD19 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): CHS





Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Clinker discharge from cooler





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Clinker dome





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Off-spec bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD22 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): FM





Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill feed bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill feed bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement additive bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:


0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




>100









Oct-11


REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement additve intake





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:


0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




>100









Oct-11


REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill feed





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill recirculation bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill reject





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement transport





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill feed





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill recirculation bin





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement mill reject





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement transport





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD45A, B CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): FM





Fabric filters (2 identical units in parallel) venting through a common stack. Data below reflect combined outlet flow conditions.
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Exhaust from Finish mill 1 (CD45A) and Finish mill 2 (CD45B)





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD32 CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): CHSL





Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement dome





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter








PRESSURE DROP (IN. H20): MIN: MAX: TB GAUGE?








X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement dome extraction rail





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement dome extraction truck





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




NOTE

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FOLLOWING C1 FORMS IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION HAVE BEEN DELETED:

E35, E36, E37, E38, E39 (FORMERLY IN CHSL GROUP)

(October 2008)

REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement silo





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement silo extration





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Cement transport





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01 C1






Fabric filter
















X AIR PULSE G SONIC



G OTHER


Packing plant





SPECIAL CONDITIONS:


EXPLAIN:





Oct-11




>100




0-1

1-10

10-25

25-50

50-100

TOTAL = 100




REVISED 12/01/01

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD44N CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): KS

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S)E44 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLSNO. 1 OF 3 UNITS


DATE MANUFACTURED: TBD PROPOSED OPERATION DATE: Oct-11

PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE Feb-09


A selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) system will be installed in the preheater area of the kiln system to control NOx emissions.

The system will inject an ammonia-containing solution into the process where kiln feed and combustion gases mix in countercurrent flow.

The system may be operated at a variable input rate (TBD) to limit NOx emissions to 1.95 lb/ton clinker as BACT.

POLLUTANT(S) COLLECTED: NOxBEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): ~700CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100 % % % %

CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 30+ % % % %

CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 30 % % % %

EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: 4

TOTAL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): 487.50

PRESSURE DROP (IN. H20): MIN NA MAX NA BULK PARTICLE DENSITY (LB/FT3) NA

INLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN MAX

INLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): TBD OUTLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): NA

INLET AIR FLOW VELOCITY (FT/SE TBD OUTLET AIR FLOW VELOCITY (FT/SEC): NA

INLET MOISTURE CONTENT (%): TBD FORCED AIR INDUCED AIR

COLLECTION SURFACE AREA (FT2NA FUEL USAGE RATE: NA

DESCRIBE STARTUP PROCEDURES:

To be included in the O&M plan required pursuant to 40 CFR 63.1350(a).

DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES:


DESCRIBE ANY AUXILIARY MATERIALS INTRODUCED INTO THE CONTROL SYSTEM:

Aqueous ammonia or equivalent

DESCRIBE ANY MONITORING DEVICES, GAUGES, TEST PORTS, ETC:

ATTACH A DIAGRAM OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):

OUTLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN NA MAX NA

SNCR injection rate will be continuously monitored. NOx will be monitored by CERM at the stack.

OPERATING SCENARIO:

FUEL USED: None

The SNCR system is located at the Preheater Tower (E13) on the CCC overall plant process flow diagram.

Attach manufacturer's specifications, schematics, and all other drawings necessary to describe this control.


FORM C9

C9

CONTROL DEVICE (OTHER)


1 OF 1

REVISED 12/01/01

CONTROL DEVICE ID NO: CD44S CONTROLS EMISSIONS FROM WHICH EMISSION SOURCE ID NO(S): KS

EMISSION POINT (STACK) ID NO(S)E44 POSITION IN SERIES OF CONTROLSNO. 2 OF 3 UNITS


DATE MANUFACTURED: TBD PROPOSED OPERATION DATE: Oct-11

PROPOSED START CONSTRUCTION DATE Feb-09


A lime injection system will be installed on the kiln system to control SO2 emissions during both raw mill-on and raw mill-off operating conditions.

The system will inject wet lime (slurry) into the kiln gas stream at 2 different locations: 1) in the raw mill, during mill-on operating condition,

and 2) in the conditioning tower at the preheater exit, during mill-off operating condition.

The system may be operated at a variable input rate (TBD) to limit SO2 emissions to 1.33 & 1.80 lb/ton clinker (30-day & 24-hr averages) as BACT.

POLLUTANT(S) COLLECTED: SO2BEFORE CONTROL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): ~1,075 (at preheater exit)

CAPTURE EFFICIENCY: 100 % % % %

CONTROL DEVICE EFFICIENCY: 65-75* % % % %

CORRESPONDING OVERALL EFFICIENCY: 65-75 % % % %

EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION CODE: 4 *Note 75% control includes inherent scrubbing effect of the raw mill.

TOTAL EMISSION RATE (LB/HR): 332.5 - 450 (30-day & 24-hr averages)

PRESSURE DROP (IN. H20): MIN NA MAX NA BULK PARTICLE DENSITY (LB/FT3) NA

INLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN MAX

INLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): TBD OUTLET AIR FLOW RATE (ACFM): NA

INLET AIR FLOW VELOCITY (FT/SE TBD OUTLET AIR FLOW VELOCITY (FT/SEC): NA

INLET MOISTURE CONTENT (%): TBD FORCED AIR INDUCED AIR

COLLECTION SURFACE AREA (FT2NA FUEL USAGE RATE: NA

DESCRIBE STARTUP PROCEDURES:


DESCRIBE MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES:


DESCRIBE ANY AUXILIARY MATERIALS INTRODUCED INTO THE CONTROL SYSTEM:

Lime slurry

DESCRIBE ANY MONITORING DEVICES, GAUGES, TEST PORTS, ETC:

ATTACH A DIAGRAM OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTROL DEVICE TO ITS EMISSION SOURCE(S):

FORM C9

C9

CONTROL DEVICE (OTHER)


1 OF 1

OUTLET TEMPERATURE (oF): MIN NA MAX NA

Lime injection rate will be continuously monitored. SO2 will be monitored by CERM at the stack.

OPERATING SCENARIO:

FUEL USED: None

Lime injection points are located 1) at the Raw Mill (E7) and 2) at the Preheater Tower exit (E13) on the CCC overall plant process flow diagram.

Attach manufacturer's specifications, schematics, and all other drawings necessary to describe this control.


REVISED 12/01/01 D1

AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED

HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED CAS NO.

ASC

71432

BEC

CDC

CRC

50000

7647010

MNC

HGC

TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMITTED CAS NO. lb/hr lb/day lb/year Yes No

7664417 2.50E+00 6.00E+01 2.19E+04 X

ASC 3.35E-03 8.05E-02 2.94E+01 X

71432 7.81E-01 1.87E+01 6.79E+03 X

BEC 2.09E-04 5.03E-03 1.84E+00 X

CDC 5.86E-04 1.41E-02 5.13E+00 X

NSCR6 2.85E-04 6.83E-03 2.49E+00 X

16984488 2.25E-01 5.40E+00 1.97E+03 X

50000 1.16E-01 2.77E+00 1.01E+03 X

7647010 7.18E+00 1.72E+02 6.29E+04 X

MNC 2.22E-01 5.33E+00 1.94E+03 X

HGC 3.00E-02 7.20E-01 2.63E+02 X

NA

0.086

175.24

1,456.45

2,138.03

POTENTIAL EMISSIONS

BEFORE CONTROLS /

527.44

3068.8

348.05

(AFTER CONTROLS /

LIMITATIONS)

Mercury

(AFTER CONTROLS /

LIMITATIONS)

(AFTER CONTROLS /

LIMITATIONS)

175.24

Beryllium

Cadmium

INDICATE REQUESTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS AFTER CONTROLS / LIMITATIONS. EMISSIONS ABOVE THE TOXIC PERMIT EMISSION RATE

(TPER) IN 15A NCAC 2Q .0711 MAY REQUIRE AIR DISPERSION MODELING. USE NETTING FORM D2 IF NECESSARY.

Hydrogen Chloride

Manganese

Fluorides

Modeling Required ?

Chromium (VI)

Benzene

LIMITATIONS)

NA

NA1.31E-01

1.61E-01


NA

NA

OTHER

Formaldehyde

Hydrogen Chloride

Manganese

Formaldehyde

NA

Mercury



EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONSPOTENTIAL EMISSIONPOTENTIAL EMISSIONS

EXPECTED ACTUAL EMISSIONS

LIMITATIONS)

(AFTER CONTROLS /

LIMITATIONS)

tons/yr

BEFORE CONTROLS /

9.18E-04

PARTICULATE MATTER < 10 MICRONS (PM10)

PARTICULATE MATTER < 2.5 MICRONS (PM2.5)


9.72E-01

3,067.54

LEAD 0.086

tons/yr


FORM D1

tons/yr

662.56

tons/yr tons/yr

NA 662.56

FACILITY-WIDE EMISSIONS SUMMARY

PARTICULATE MATTER (PM)

POTENTIAL EMISSION

527.44

348.05

1.47E-02

NA

NA

NA

NA

HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION - FACILITY-WIDE

tons/yr

1.47E-02

5.04E-01

9.72E-01

3.14E+01

CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION - FACILITY-WIDE

NA

1,456.45

3,067.54

2880.5

2,138.03


9.18E-04

Benzene

Beryllium

Arsenic

2.57E-03

1.61E-01

NA 3.40E+003.40E+00

NA

2.57E-03

Ammonia

5.04E-01

Chromium (Total)

Cadmium

TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS INFORMATION - FACILITY-WIDE

NA

1.31E-01

3.14E+01

COMMENTS:

See attached spreadsheet for additional HAP and TAP emissions (those not requiring modeling).

Arsenic

REVISED: 12/01/0

1. Maintenance activities 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(A)

2. Air conditioning equipment 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(B)

3. Laboratory activities 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(C)

4. Storage tanks 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(D)

5. Space and hot water heaters 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(E)

6. Diesel, kerosene, etc. dispensing equipment 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(H)

7. Motor vehicles, non-road engines, and portable generators 2Q .0102 (c)(1)(L)(i)-(iii)

8. Storage tanks meeting listed criteria 2Q .0102 (c)(2)(A)

9. Emergency and portable generators and other internal 2Q .0102 (c)(2)(B)(v) and (vi)

combustion engines meeting listed criteria

10.

NA

< Applicable thresholds


DESCRIPTION OF EMISSION SOURCEBASIS FOR EXEMPTION OR

INSIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY

SIZE OR

PRODUCTION

RATE

< Applicable thresholds

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

FORM D4

INSIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIES PER 2Q .0503 FOR TITLE V SOURCESACTIVITIES EXEMPTED PER 2Q .0102 OR

EXEMPT AND INSIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIES SUMMARY

NCDENR/Division of Air Quality - Application for Air Permit to Construct/Operate D4

REVISED: 12/01/01 D5 PROVIDE DETAILED TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS TO SUPPORT ALL EMISSION, CONTROL, AND REGULATORY

DEMONSTRATIONS MADE IN THIS APPLICATION. INCLUDE A COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AS

NECESSARY TO SUPPORT AND CLARIFY CALCULATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS. ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC ISSUES ON SEPARATE PAGES:

A

B

C

D

E PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SEAL -

NEW SOURCES AND MODIFICATIONS OF EXISTING SOURCES. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR FURTHER APPLICABILITY).

I, John P. Carroll Jr., attest that this application for Carolinas Cement Company LLC

has been reviewed by me and is accurate, complete and consistent with the information supplied

in the engineering plans, calculations, and all other supporting documentation to the best of my knowledge. I further attest that to the best of my

knowledge the proposed design has been prepared in accordance with the applicable regulations. Although certain portions of this submittal

package may have been developed by other professionals, inclusion of these materials under my seal signifies that I have reviewed this material

and have judged it to be consistent with the proposed design. Note: In accordance with NC General Statutes 143-215.6A and 143-215.6B, any

person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any application shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor which

may include a fine not to exceed $10,000 as well as civil penalties up to $25,000 per violation.

(PLEASE USE BLUE INK TO COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING)

NAME:

DATE:

COMPANY:

ADDRESS:

TELEPHONE:

SIGNATURE:

PAGES CERTIFIED:

PURSUANT TO 15A NCAC 2Q .0112 "APPLICATION REQUIRING A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SEAL,"

A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN NORTH CAROLINA SHALL BE REQUIRED TO SEAL TECHNICAL PORTIONS OF THIS APPLICATION FOR

SPECIFIC EMISSIONS SOURCE (EMISSION INFORMATION) (FORM B) - SHOW CALCULATIONS USED, INCLUDING EMISSION FACTORS, MATERIAL

BALANCES, AND/OR OTHER METHODS FROM WHICH THE POLLUTANT EMISSION RATES IN THIS APPLICATION WERE DERIVED. INCLUDE CALCULATION

OF POTENTIAL BEFORE AND, WHERE APPLICABLE, AFTER CONTROLS. CLEARLY STATE ANY ASSUMPTIONS MADE AND PROVIDE ANY REFERENCES

AS NEEDED TO SUPPORT MATERIAL BALANCE CALCULATIONS.

SPECIFIC EMISSION SOURCE (REGULATORY INFORMATION)(FORM E2 - TITLE V ONLY) - PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF ANY REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO

INDIVIDUAL SOURCES AND THE FACILITY AS A WHOLE. INCLUDE A DISCUSSION OUTING METHODS (e.g. FOR TESTING AND/OR MONITORING

REQUIREMENTS) FOR COMPLYING WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS, PARTICULARLY THOSE REGULATIONS LIMITING EMISSIONS BASED ON PROCESS

RATES OR OTHER OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS. PROVIDE JUSTIFICATION FOR AVOIDANCE OF ANY FEDERAL REGULATIONS (PREVENTION OF

SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION (PSD), NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS), NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR

POLLUTANTS (NESHAPS), TITLE V), INCLUDING EXEMPTIONS FROM THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE APPLICABLE TO THIS

FACILITY. SUBMIT ANY REQUIRED TO DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE WITH ANY REGULATIONS. INCLUDE EMISSION RATES CALCULATED IN ITEM "A"

ABOVE, DATES OF MANUFACTURE, CONTROL EQUIPMENT, ETC. TO SUPPORT THESE CALCULATIONS.

CONTROL DEVICE ANALYSIS (FORM C) - PROVIDE A TECHNICAL EVALUATION WITH SUPPORTING REFERENCES FOR ANY CONTROL EFFICIENCIES

LISTED ON SECTION C FORMS, OR USED TO REDUCE EMISSION RATES IN CALCULATIONS UNDER ITEM "A" ABOVE. INCLUDE PERTINENT OPERATING

PARAMETERS (e.g. OPERATING CONDITIONS, MANUFACTURING RECOMMENDATIONS, AND PARAMETERS AS APPLIED FOR IN THIS APPLICATION)

CRITICAL TO ENSURING PROPER PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTROL DEVICES). INCLUDE AND LIMITATIONS OR MALFUNCTION POTENTIAL FOR THE

PARTICULAR CONTROL DEVICES AS EMPLOYED AT THIS FACILITY. DETAIL PROCEDURES FOR ASSURING PROPER OPERATION OF THE CONTROL

DEVICE INCLUDING MONITORING SYSTEMS AND MAINTENANCE TO BE PERFORMED.


TECHNICAL ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT PERMIT APPLICATION

FORM D


PLACE NORTH CAROLINA SEAL HERE

(IDENTIFY ABOVE EACH PERMIT FORM AND ATTACHMENT

THAT IS BEING CERTIFIED BY THIS SEAL)

PROCESS AND OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS - (FORM E3 - TITLE V ONLY) - SHOWING HOW COMPLIANCE WILL BE ACHIEVED WHEN USING

PROCESS, OPERATIONAL, OR OTHER DATA TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. REFER TO COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN THE REGULATORY

ANALYSIS IN ITEM "B" WHERE APPROPRIATE. LIST ANY CONDITIONS OR PARAMETERS THAT CAN BE MONITORED AND REPORTED TO DEMONSTRATE

COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.

TAB C

PLANTWIDE POTENTIAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY – REVISED

Carolinas Cement PTE Emission Summary

Version 102008

Plantwide Emissions

EU DescriptionPM

tons/yr

PM10

tons/yr

PM2.5

tons/yr

SO2

tons/yr

NOX

tons/yr

CO

tons/yr

VOC

tons/yr

Pb

tons/yr

Fluorides

tons/yr

HCl

tons/yr

Total

HAPs

tons/yrPoint Sources

Kiln System 432.59 391.41 291.03 1456.35 2135.25 3066.00 175.20 0.082 0.99 31.43 41.001

Raw Mill & Kiln Feed 20.90 17.56 9.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.002 0.00 0.00 0.009

Coal/Coke System 12.58 10.57 5.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.001

Clinker Transfer & Storage 2.91 2.45 1.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.001

Finish Mills 57.79 48.55 26.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.021

Cement Transfer & Storage 19.03 15.99 8.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.007

Existing Terminal 2.25 1.89 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.001

Emergency Generator 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.10 2.78 1.54 0.04 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.003

Subtotal Point Sources 548.16 488.48 343.06 1456.45 2138.03 3067.54 175.24 0.085 0.99 31.43 41.044

Fugitive Sources

Quarry Equipment 6.99 3.20 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.002

Plant Process Equipment 4.62 2.18 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.002

Wind Erosion - Storage Piles 8.40 4.20 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.004

Mining Operations 15.53 7.78 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.004

Plant Roads 9.31 1.81 0.44 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Quarry Roads 69.57 19.78 1.98 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Subtotal Fugitive Sources 114.41 38.96 4.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.012

Total Emissions 662.56 527.44 348.05 1,456.45 2,138.03 3,067.54 175.24 0.086 0.99 31.43 41.056

Notes

Kiln system includes the preheater/precalciner kiln with in-line raw mill, coal mill, and clinker cooler venting through the main stack.

Kiln PM emissions include an estimate of condensible particulate matter. See "Kiln System" sheet for details.

W:\5000\050020\050020.0051\PSD Application Revision 10-08 (Final Documents)\Tab C - Plantwide Potential Emissions Inventory\Carolinas Cement PTE Page 1 of 53

Carolinas Cement PTE HAP-TAP Summary

CAS No. Pollutant TAP HAPKiln

System

Raw Mill &

Kiln Feed

Solid Fuel

System

Clinker

Transfer &

Storage

Finish

Mills

Cement

Transfer &

Storage

Existing

Terminal

Emergency

Generator

Quarry

Equip.

Process

Fugitive

Storage

Piles

Mining

Operation

Total

(ton/yr)

Total

(lbs/yr)

83329 Acenaphthene (Component of POM) X 9.17E-06 9.17E-06 0.018

208968 Acenaphthylene (Component of POM) X 1.31E-01 1.81E-05 1.31E-01 262.836

75070 Acetaldehyde X X 4.94E-05 4.94E-05 0.099

107028 Acrolein X X 1.54E-05 1.54E-05 0.031

7664417 Ammonia X 1.10E+01 1.10E+01 21900.000

120127 Anthracene (Component of POM) X 2.41E-06 2.41E-06 0.005

SBC Antimony & Compounds X 7.12E-03 5.39E-05 3.61E-05 6.46E-06 3.01E-05 6.38E-06 7.55E-07 1.80E-05 1.32E-05 5.43E-05 1.21E-04 7.46E-03 14.916

ASC Arsenic & Compounds X X 1.31E-02 6.69E-05 2.39E-06 2.24E-06 9.92E-04 3.60E-04 4.26E-05 1.40E-05 1.12E-05 2.50E-05 3.11E-05 1.47E-02 29.375

56553Benz(a)anthracene (Component of POM &

PAH)X 4.71E-05 1.22E-06 4.83E-05 0.097

71432 Benzene X X 3.39E+00 1.52E-03 3.40E+00 6792.041

50328Benzo(a)pyrene (Component of POMT &

PAH)X X 1.42E-04 5.03E-07 1.43E-04 0.286

205992Benzo(b)fluoranthene (Component of POM

& PAH)X 6.13E-04 2.17E-06 6.15E-04 1.231

191242 Benzo(ghi)perylene (Component of POM) X 8.54E-05 1.09E-06 8.65E-05 0.173

207089Benzo(k)fluoranthene (Component of POM

& PAH)X 1.64E-04 4.27E-07 1.65E-04 0.329

BEC Beryllium & Compounds X X 7.23E-04 3.93E-05 4.40E-06 4.37E-07 6.06E-05 2.19E-05 2.59E-06 1.40E-05 7.67E-06 1.28E-05 3.11E-05 9.18E-04 1.835

92524 Biphenyl (Component of POM) X 6.68E-03 6.68E-03 13.359

CDC Cadmium & Compounds X X 2.41E-03 6.16E-05 5.28E-06 1.28E-06 1.22E-05 3.48E-06 4.12E-07 1.33E-05 9.63E-06 2.00E-05 3.03E-05 2.57E-03 5.133

75150 Carbon disulfide X X 1.20E-01 1.20E-01 240.900

108907 Chlorobenzene X X 1.75E-02 1.75E-02 35.040

CRC Chromium & Compounds (Total Cr) X 1.53E-01 1.01E-03 6.29E-05 2.07E-04 3.39E-03 1.23E-03 1.45E-04 1.31E-04 2.72E-04 7.32E-04 3.62E-04 1.61E-01 321.669

NSCR6Chromium (VI) Non-Specific Compounds, as

Cr(VI)X X 4.38E-04 7.50E-06 6.29E-07 3.32E-05 5.39E-04 1.96E-04 2.32E-05 6.99E-07 2.06E-06 4.70E-06 1.55E-06 1.25E-03 2.494

218019 Chrysene (Component of POM & PAH) X 1.75E-04 3.00E-06 1.78E-04 0.356

COC Cobalt Compounds X 1.75E-02 3.62E-04 2.23E-05 5.56E-06 2.94E-04 1.06E-04 1.25E-05 7.89E-05 8.97E-05 2.78E-04 2.16E-04 1.90E-02 37.970

117817 Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) X 1.04E-01 1.04E-01 208.050

53703Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (Component of

POM & PAH)X 6.90E-04 6.78E-07 6.91E-04 1.381

84742 Dibutylphthalate X 4.49E-02 4.49E-02 89.790

D/F Dioxin/Furan X 2.41E-07 2.41E-07 0.000

100414 Ethyl benzene X 2.08E-02 2.08E-02 41.610

206440 Fluoranthene (Component of POM) X 9.64E-03 7.90E-06 9.64E-03 19.288

86737 Fluorene (Component of POM) X 2.08E-02 2.51E-05 2.08E-02 41.660

16984488 Fluorides (sum of all fluoride compounds) X 9.86E-01 9.86E-01 1971.000

50000 Formaldehyde X X 5.04E-01 1.55E-04 5.04E-01 1007.709

7647010 Hydrogen chloride X X 3.14E+01 3.14E+01 62853.000

193395Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (Component of

POM & PAH)X 9.53E-05 8.11E-07 9.61E-05 0.192

PBC Lead & Compounds X 8.21E-02 1.76E-03 1.27E-05 2.33E-07 6.65E-04 2.36E-04 2.79E-05 2.10E-04 1.81E-04 4.13E-04 4.66E-04 8.61E-02 172.196

MNC Manganese Compounds X X 9.42E-01 4.77E-03 7.30E-06 3.00E-04 1.33E-02 4.80E-03 5.68E-04 1.32E-03 1.02E-03 1.99E-03 2.22E-03 9.72E-01 1944.088

HGC Mercury & Compounds X X 1.31E-01 1.37E-06 1.26E-06 2.62E-07 3.41E-06 7.23E-07 8.56E-08 7.69E-08 3.05E-07 9.71E-07 2.01E-07 1.31E-01 262.817

74873 Methyl chloride X 4.16E-01 4.16E-01 832.200

78933 Methyl ethyl ketone X 3.29E-02 3.29E-02 65.700

74873 Methylene chloride X X 5.37E-01 5.37E-01 1073.100

91203 Naphthalene (Component of POM) X 1.86E+00 2.55E-04 1.86E+00 3723.509

NIC Nickel & Compounds X X 1.53E-02 6.31E-04 7.89E-04 1.83E-05 1.78E-03 6.43E-04 7.61E-05 2.13E-04 1.43E-04 2.17E-04 3.08E-04 2.01E-02 40.291

85018 Phenanthrene (Component of POM) X 4.27E-01 7.99E-05 4.27E-01 854.260

108952 Phenol X X 1.20E-01 1.20E-01 240.900

POM Polycyclic Organic Matter (Total Inc PAH) X 2.46E+00 4.15E-04 2.46E+00 4928.633

129000 Pyrene (Component of POM) X 4.82E-03 7.27E-06 4.83E-03 9.651

SEC Selenium Compounds X 2.19E-01 3.24E-04 8.18E-06 4.95E-07 2.08E-04 6.47E-05 7.66E-06 1.07E-04 5.60E-05 6.35E-05 1.94E-04 2.20E-01 440.067

100425 Styrene X X 1.64E-03 1.64E-03 3.285

108883 Toluene X X 2.08E-01 5.51E-04 2.09E-01 417.201

76131Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2- (CFC-

113)X 5.48E-02 5.48E-02 109.500

1330207 Xylene X X 1.42E-01 3.78E-04 1.43E-01 285.456

Total HAPs Only 4.10E+01 9.08E-03 9.52E-04 5.43E-04 2.08E-02 7.46E-03 8.83E-04 3.08E-03 2.12E-03 1.81E-03 3.81E-03 3.98E-03 4.11E+01 82111.349

HAP & TAP EMISSIONS (Ton/Year))


Carolinas Cement PTE HAP-TAP Summary

CAS No. Pollutant TAP HAPKiln

System

Raw Mill &

Kiln Feed

Solid Fuel

System

Clinker

Transfer &

Storage

Finish

Mills

Cement

Transfer &

Storage

Existing

Terminal

Emergency

Generator

Quarry

Equip.

Process

Fugitive

Storage

Piles

Mining

Operation

Total

(lbs/hr)

Total

(lbs/hr)

83329 Acenaphthene (Component of POM) X 3.67E-05 3.67E-05 0.000

208968 Acenaphthylene (Component of POM) X 3.00E-02 7.23E-05 3.01E-02 0.030

75070 Acetaldehyde X X 1.97E-04 1.97E-04 0.000

107028 Acrolein X X 6.18E-05 6.18E-05 0.000

7664417 Ammonia X 2.50E+00 2.50E+00 2.500

120127 Anthracene (Component of POM) X 9.64E-06 9.64E-06 0.000

SBC Antimony & Compounds X 1.63E-03 1.23E-05 8.24E-06 1.48E-06 6.88E-06 1.46E-06 1.72E-07 4.12E-06 3.00E-06 1.24E-05 2.77E-05 1.70E-03 0.002

ASC Arsenic & Compounds X X 3.00E-03 1.53E-05 5.46E-07 5.12E-07 2.27E-04 8.21E-05 9.72E-06 3.19E-06 2.57E-06 5.72E-06 7.09E-06 3.35E-03 0.003

56553Benz(a)anthracene (Component of POM &

PAH)X 1.08E-05 4.87E-06 1.56E-05 0.000

71432 Benzene X X 7.75E-01 6.08E-03 7.81E-01 0.781

50328Benzo(a)pyrene (Component of POMT &

PAH)X X 3.25E-05 2.01E-06 3.45E-05 0.000

205992Benzo(b)fluoranthene (Component of POM

& PAH)X 1.40E-04 8.70E-06 1.49E-04 0.000

191242 Benzo(ghi)perylene (Component of POM) X 1.95E-05 4.36E-06 2.39E-05 0.000

207089Benzo(k)fluoranthene (Component of POM

& PAH)X 3.75E-05 1.71E-06 3.92E-05 0.000

BEC Beryllium & Compounds X X 1.65E-04 8.98E-06 1.01E-06 9.97E-08 1.38E-05 5.00E-06 5.91E-07 3.19E-06 1.75E-06 2.93E-06 7.09E-06 2.09E-04 0.000

92524 Biphenyl (Component of POM) X 1.53E-03 1.53E-03 0.002

CDC Cadmium & Compounds X X 5.50E-04 1.41E-05 1.21E-06 2.93E-07 2.78E-06 7.95E-07 9.41E-08 3.04E-06 2.20E-06 4.56E-06 6.91E-06 5.86E-04 0.001

75150 Carbon disulfide X X 2.75E-02 2.75E-02 0.028

108907 Chlorobenzene X X 4.00E-03 4.00E-03 0.004

CRC Chromium Compounds (Total Cr) X 3.50E-02 2.31E-04 1.44E-05 4.74E-05 7.73E-04 2.80E-04 3.31E-05 2.98E-05 6.22E-05 1.67E-04 8.27E-05 3.67E-02 0.037

NSCR6Chromium (VI) Non-Specific Compounds, as

Cr(VI)X X 1.00E-04 1.71E-06 1.44E-07 7.58E-06 1.23E-04 4.48E-05 5.30E-06 1.60E-07 4.70E-07 1.07E-06 3.54E-07 2.85E-04 0.000

218019 Chrysene (Component of POM & PAH) X 4.00E-05 1.20E-05 5.20E-05 0.000

COC Cobalt Compounds X 4.00E-03 8.26E-05 5.08E-06 1.27E-06 6.72E-05 2.42E-05 2.86E-06 1.80E-05 2.05E-05 6.34E-05 4.93E-05 4.33E-03 0.004

117817 Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) X 2.38E-02 2.38E-02 0.024

53703Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (Component of

POM & PAH)X 1.58E-04 2.71E-06 1.60E-04 0.000

84742 Dibutylphthalate X 1.03E-02 1.03E-02 0.010

D/F Dioxin/Furan X 5.50E-08 5.50E-08 0.000

100414 Ethyl benzene X 4.75E-03 4.75E-03 0.005

206440 Fluoranthene (Component of POM) X 2.20E-03 3.16E-05 2.23E-03 0.002

86737 Fluorene (Component of POM) X 4.75E-03 1.00E-04 4.85E-03 0.005

16984488 Fluorides (sum of all fluoride compounds) X 2.25E-01 2.25E-01 0.225

50000 Formaldehyde X X 1.15E-01 6.18E-04 1.16E-01 0.116

7647010 Hydrogen chloride X X 7.18E+00 7.18E+00 7.175

193395Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (Component of

POM & PAH)X 2.18E-05 3.24E-06 2.50E-05 0.000

PBC Lead & Compounds X 1.88E-02 4.02E-04 2.90E-06 5.32E-08 1.52E-04 5.39E-05 6.38E-06 4.79E-05 4.14E-05 9.42E-05 1.06E-04 1.97E-02 0.020

MNC Manganese Compounds X X 2.15E-01 1.09E-03 1.67E-06 6.85E-05 3.05E-03 1.10E-03 1.30E-04 3.02E-04 2.34E-04 4.54E-04 5.06E-04 2.22E-01 0.222

HGC Mercury & Compounds X X 3.00E-02 3.14E-07 2.87E-07 5.98E-08 7.78E-07 1.65E-07 1.95E-08 1.76E-08 6.97E-08 2.22E-07 4.60E-08 3.00E-02 0.030

74873 Methyl chloride X 9.50E-02 9.50E-02 0.095

78933 Methyl ethyl ketone X 7.50E-03 7.50E-03 0.008

74873 Methylene chloride X X 1.23E-01 1.23E-01 0.123

91203 Naphthalene X 4.25E-01 1.02E-03 4.26E-01 0.426

NIC Nickel & Compounds X X 3.50E-03 1.44E-04 1.80E-04 4.18E-06 4.06E-04 1.47E-04 1.74E-05 4.87E-05 3.27E-05 4.95E-05 7.03E-05 4.60E-03 0.005

85018 Phenanthrene (Component of POM) X 9.75E-02 3.20E-04 9.78E-02 0.098

108952 Phenol X X 2.75E-02 2.75E-02 0.028

POM Polycyclic Organic Matter (Total Inc PAH) X 5.63E-01 1.66E-03 5.64E-01 0.564

129000 Pyrene (Component of POM) X 1.10E-03 2.91E-05 1.13E-03 0.001

SEC Selenium Compounds X 5.00E-02 7.40E-05 1.87E-06 1.13E-07 4.75E-05 1.48E-05 1.75E-06 2.45E-05 1.28E-05 1.45E-05 4.43E-05 5.02E-02 0.050

100425 Styrene X X 3.75E-04 3.75E-04 0.000

108883 Toluene X X 4.75E-02 2.20E-03 4.97E-02 0.050

76131Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2- (CFC-

113)X 1.25E-02 1.25E-02 0.013

1330207 Xylene X X 3.25E-02 1.51E-03 3.40E-02 0.034

Total HAPs Only 9.36E+00 2.07E-03 2.17E-04 1.24E-04 4.74E-03 1.70E-03 2.02E-04 1.23E-02 4.85E-04 4.13E-04 8.69E-04 9.08E-04 9.39E+00 9.385

HAP & TAP EMISSIONS (Lbs/Hr))


Carolinas Cement PTE Air Toxics

NC Toxic Air Pollutants Evaluation

Pollutant (CAS No.) CarcinogensChronic

Toxicants

Acute

Systemic

Toxicants

Acute

IrritantsAnnual PTE Max Daily Max Hourly

Modeling

Required?

lb/yr lb/day lb/hr lb/hr lb/yr lb/day lb/hr

acetaldehyde (75-07-0) 6.8 0.10 0.005 0.0002 No

acrolein (107-02-8) 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.0001 No

* ammonia (7664-41-7) 0.68 21900.00 60.000 2.5000 Yes

* arsenic and compounds 0.016 29.37 0.080 0.0034 Yes

* benzene (71-43-2) 8.1 6792.04 18.746 0.7811 Yes

benzo(a)pyrene (50-32-8) 2.2 0.29 0.001 0.0000 No

* beryllium and compounds 0.28 1.84 0.005 0.0002 Yes

* cadmium and compounds 0.37 5.13 0.014 0.0006 Yes

carbon disulfide (75-15-0) 3.9 240.90 0.660 0.0275 No

chlorobenzene (108-90-7) 46 35.04 0.096 0.0040 No

* chromium (VI) compounds 0.0056 2.49 0.007 0.0003 Yes

di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP)

(117-81-7)0.63 208.05 0.570 0.0238 No

* fluorides 0.34 0.064 1971.00 5.400 0.2250 Yes

* formaldehyde (50-00-0) 0.04 1007.71 2.775 0.1156 Yes

* hydrogen chloride (7647-01-0) 0.18 62853.00 172.200 7.1750 Yes

* manganese and compounds 0.63 1944.09 5.326 0.2219 Yes

*mercury, aryl and inorganic

compounds0.013 262.82 0.720 0.0300 Yes

methyl ethyl ketone (78-93-3) 78 22.4 65.70 0.180 0.0075 No

methylene chloride (75-09-2) 1600 0.39 1073.10 2.940 0.1225 No

nickel and compounds 0.13 40.29 0.110 0.0046 No

phenol (108-95-2) 0.24 240.90 0.660 0.0275 No

styrene (100-42-5) 2.7 3.29 0.009 0.0004 No

toluene (108-88-3) 98 14.4 417.20 1.193 0.0497 No

1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-

trifluoroethane (76-13-1)240 109.50 0.300 0.0125 No

xylene (1330-02-07) 57 16.4 285.46 0.816 0.0340 No

1 From 15A NCAC 2Q Section .0711 Toxic Air Pollutant Guidelines*Compound requires modeling

Emission Rates Requiring A Permit1 Plantwide Emissions


Carolinas Cement PTE Throughput Data

Material

tons/hr tons/yr hrs/yr % Material Status

Clinker Produced (Kiln/Cooler)

Raw Mill on 1,752,000 7,008 80.00

Raw Mill off 438,000 1,752 20.00

Kiln total 250 2,190,000 8,760 100.00 Produced (6000 tons/day)

Raw Mill Feed (Dry) 485 3,398,880 7,008 Produced

Virgin Kiln Feed @ 1.542 386 3,376,980 Produced

Kiln Feed w/recycle @ 1.679 420 3,677,010 8,760 Produced

Kiln Fuels Used

Coal/Coke (as fired) 30 262,800 8,760 As fired

Alternative fuels Up to 50% heat input

Raw Material Throughput (Dry Basis)*

Limestone (62.9-64.4%) 1500 2,149,448 8,760 63.65 Mined onsite

Upper Marl (18.3-24.1%) 715,920 21.20 Mined onsite

Other Onsite Materials** (2.9-7.9%) 182,357 5.40 Mined onsite

Subtotal (Quarry Max.) 3,047,724

Mill Scale (0.9-1.0%) 32,081 0.95 Received by truck

Fly Ash/Bottom Ash (9.3-10.4%) 332,633 9.85 Received by truck

Bauxite (0%) 0 0.00 May be substituted

Subtotal (Purchased Max.) 364,714

Total (Dry) 3,412,438 101.05

Raw Mix Required 3,376,980 100.00

Raw Material Throughput (Wet Basis)*

Limestone @ 16% M 1500 2,558,866 8,760 63.13 Mined onsite

Upper Marl @ 16% M 852,285 21.03 Mined onsite

Other Onsite Materials** @ 16% M 217,092 5.36 Mined onsite

Subtotal (Quarry Max.) 3,628,243

Mill Scale @ 5% M 33,770 0.83 Received by truck

Fly Ash/Bottom Ash @ 15% M 391,332 9.65 Received by truck

Bauxite (0%) 0 0.00 May be substituted

Subtotal (Purchased Max.) 425,102

Total (Wet) 4,053,346 100.00

Average moisture content 15.81

Quarry Overburden removed 3,177,255 Mined onsite

Quarry Spoils to Stacker Pile 217,092 Mined onsite

Cement Production

Clinker Cooler 250 2,190,000 8,760 Produced

Clinker transfer to silos 2,190,000 8,760 Transferred

Clinker Silos (2) 2,190,000 8,760 Stored

Fringe Clinker Silo @ 1.0% 21,900 Stored

Gypsum required (5% of cement) 15 120,330

Gypsum @ 6% M 127,549 Received by truck

Limestone required (4% of cement) 96,264

Limestone @ 6% M 102,040 Onsite material

Finish Mills (Cement)

Throughput Capacity


Carolinas Cement PTE Throughput Data

Material

tons/hr tons/yr hrs/yr % Material Status

Throughput Capacity

Finish Mill #1 150 1,203,297 8,760 Produced

Finish Mill #2 150 1,203,297 8,760 Produced

Total cement 300 2,406,593

Cement Silos 300 2,406,593 8,760 100.00 Stored

Cement Packhouse 170 481,319 8,760 20.00 Packaged

Bulk Cement 1,925,275 8,760 80.00 Loaded, bulk

Cement shipped by truck

Packaged cement 481,319 20.00 Shipped by truck (0-20%)

Bulk cement 350 433,187 18.00 Shipped by truck (18-30%)

Subtotal 914,505 38.00 Total trucked (30-38%)

Cement shipped by rail 350 1,010,769 42.00 Shipped by rail (42-70%)

Cement shipped by barge 500 481,319 20.00 Shipped by barge (0-20%)

Total cement shipped 2,406,593 100.00

Fuel Unloading

Coal/coke @ 8% M 283,824 8,760 100.00 Received by rail (60-100%)

113,530 40.00 Received by truck (0-40%)

Mining Operation

No. of holes drilled 15,200

Ave depth (ft) 5

Total feet of holes drilled 76,000

No. of blasts 76

Ave area of blast (sq ft) 20,000

* Individual quantities of the raw material components will vary.

** Other onsite materials may include spoils, lower marl, brown clay, or green clay.


Carolinas Cement PTE Kiln System

Max. Average

Process Throughput Pollutant RM On RM Off lb/T basis EF Source RM On RM Off tons/yr7 lbs/yr lbs/hr8 lbs/hr9

PM (filterable) 0.1400 0.1400 kiln feed Note 1 205.91 51.48 257.39 58.77 58.77

PM10 (filterable) 0.1176 0.1176 kiln feed Note 2 172.97 43.24 216.21 49.36 49.36

PM2.5 (filterable) 0.0630 0.0630 kiln feed Note 2 92.66 23.17 115.83 26.44 26.44

RM On: 1,752,000 Condensible PM 0.16 0.16 clinker Note 3 140.16 35.04 175.20 40.00 40.00

RM Off: 438,000 Total PM NA NA NA Note 4 346.07 86.52 432.59 98.77 98.77

Total 2,190,000 Total PM10 NA NA NA Note 4 313.13 78.28 391.41 89.36 89.36

Total PM2.5 NA NA NA Note 4 232.82 58.21 291.03 66.44 66.44

SO2 1.21 1.80 clinker Note 1 1062.15 394.20 1456.35 450.00 332.50

NOx 1.95 1.95 clinker Note 1 1708.20 427.05 2135.25 487.50 487.50

RM On: 2,941,608 CO 2.80 2.80 clinker Note 1 2452.80 613.20 3066.00 700.00 700.00

RM Off: 735,402 VOC 0.16 0.16 clinker Note 1 140.16 35.04 175.20 40.00 40.00

Total 3,677,010 Lead 7.5E-05 7.5E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0657 0.0164 0.0821 164 0.0188 0.0188

Fluorides 9.0E-04 9.0E-04 clinker Note 6 0.7884 0.1971 0.9855 1,971 0.2250 0.2250

SO2 Ave = 1.33 HAPs/TAPs

lb/T clkr Ammonia 0.010 0.010 clinker Note 6 8.7600 2.1900 10.9500 21,900 2.5000 2.5000

Antimony 6.5E-06 6.5E-06 clinker Note 12 0.0057 0.0014 0.0071 14 0.0016 0.0016

Arsenic 1.2E-05 1.2E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0105 0.0026 0.0131 26 0.0030 0.0030

Benzene 3.1E-03 3.1E-03 clinker Note 6 2.7156 0.6789 3.3945 6,789 0.7750 0.7750

Beryllium 6.6E-07 6.6E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0006 0.0001 0.0007 1.4 0.0002 0.0002

Cadmium 2.2E-06 2.2E-06 clinker Note 6 0.0019 0.0005 0.0024 4.8 0.0006 0.0006

Carbon disulfide 1.1E-04 1.1E-04 clinker Note 6 0.0964 0.0241 0.1205 240.9 0.0275 0.0275

Chlorobenzene 1.6E-05 1.6E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0140 0.0035 0.0175 35.0 0.0040 0.0040

Chromium (Total) 1.4E-04 1.4E-04 clinker Note 6 0.1226 0.0307 0.1533 306.6 0.0350 0.0350

Chromium (VI) 4.0E-07 4.0E-07 clinker Note 11 0.0004 0.0001 0.0004 0.88 0.0001 0.0001

Cobalt 1.6E-05 1.6E-05 clinker Note 12 0.0140 0.0035 0.0175 35 0.0040 0.0040

Dibutylphthalate 4.1E-05 4.1E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0359 0.0090 0.0449 89.8 0.0103 0.0103

Di(2-ethylhexyl)

phthalate (DEHP)9.5E-05 9.5E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0832 0.0208 0.1040 208 0.0238 0.0238

Dioxin/Furan 2.2E-10 2.2E-10 clinker Note 6, 13 1.93E-07 4.82E-08 2.41E-07 4.82E-04 5.50E-08 5.50E-08

Ethylbenzene 1.9E-05 1.9E-05 clinker Note 6 1.66E-02 4.16E-03 2.08E-02 42 0.0048 0.0048

Formaldehyde 4.6E-04 4.6E-04 clinker Note 6 4.03E-01 1.01E-01 5.04E-01 1007 0.1150 0.1150

420

Kiln System (Main Stack) - Potential Emissions

Emission Factor tons/yr

AnnualThroughput

(tons clinker)

Annual

Throughput

(tons kiln

feed)

HourlyRate

(ton/hr

clinker)

HourlyRate

(ton/hrkiln feed)

250

Total



Max. Average



Emission Factor tons/yr Total

HCl 0.0287 0.0287 clinker Note 5 25.14 6.29 31.43 62,853 7.1750 7.1750

Manganese 8.6E-04 8.6E-04 clinker Note 6 0.7534 0.1883 0.9417 1,883 0.2150 0.2150

Mercury 1.2E-04 1.2E-04 clinker Note 14 0.1051 0.0263 0.1314 263 0.0300 0.0300

Methyl chloride 3.8E-04 3.8E-04 clinker Note 6 0.3329 0.0832 0.4161 832 0.0950 0.0950

Methyl ethyl ketone 3.0E-05 3.0E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0263 0.0066 0.0329 66 0.0075 0.0075

Methylene chloride 4.9E-04 4.9E-04 clinker Note 6 0.4292 0.1073 0.5366 1,073 0.1225 0.1225

Nickel 1.4E-05 1.4E-05 clinker Note 12 0.0123 0.0031 0.0153 31 0.0035 0.0035

Phenol 1.1E-04 1.1E-04 clinker Note 6 0.0964 0.0241 0.1205 241 0.0275 0.0275

Selenium 2.0E-04 2.0E-04 clinker Note 6 0.1752 0.0438 0.2190 438 0.0500 0.0500

Styrene 1.5E-06 1.5E-06 clinker Note 6 0.0013 0.0003 0.0016 3 0.0004 0.0004

Toluene 1.9E-04 1.9E-04 clinker Note 6 0.1664 0.0416 0.2081 416 0.0475 0.0475

1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-

trifluoroethane5.0E-05 5.0E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0438 0.0110 0.0548 110 0.0125 0.0125

Xylenes 1.3E-04 1.3E-04 clinker Note 6 0.1139 0.0285 0.1424 285 0.0325 0.0325

POM

Acenaphthylene 1.2E-04 1.2E-04 clinker Note 6 0.1051 0.0263 0.1314 262.8 0.0300 0.0300

Benz(a)anthracene 4.3E-08 4.3E-08 clinker Note 6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1 0.0000 0.0000

Benzo(a)pyrene 1.3E-07 1.3E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.3 0.0000 0.0000

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5.6E-07 5.6E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0005 0.0001 0.0006 1.2 0.0001 0.0001

Benzo(g,h,l)perylene 7.8E-08 7.8E-08 clinker Note 6 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.2 0.0000 0.0000

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1.5E-07 1.5E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0001 0.0000 0.0002 0.3 0.0000 0.0000

Biphenyl 6.1E-06 6.1E-06 clinker Note 6 0.0053 0.0013 0.0067 13.4 0.0015 0.0015

Chrysene 1.6E-07 1.6E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0001 0.0000 0.0002 0.4 0.0000 0.0000

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 6.3E-07 6.3E-07 clinker Note 6 0.0006 0.0001 0.0007 1.4 0.0002 0.0002

Fluoranthene 8.8E-06 8.8E-06 clinker Note 6 0.0077 0.0019 0.0096 19.3 0.0022 0.0022

Fluorene 1.9E-05 1.9E-05 clinker Note 6 0.0166 0.0042 0.0208 41.6 0.0048 0.0048

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 8.7E-08 8.7E-08 clinker Note 6 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.2 0.0000 0.0000

Naphthalene 1.7E-03 1.7E-03 clinker Note 6 1.4892 0.3723 1.8615 3,723.0 0.4250 0.4250

Phenanthrene 3.9E-04 3.9E-04 clinker Note 6 0.3416 0.0854 0.4271 854.1 0.0975 0.0975

Pyrene 4.4E-06 4.4E-06 clinker Note 6 0.0039 0.0010 0.0048 9.6 0.0011 0.0011

Total POM 1.9711 0.4928 2.4639 4,927.8 0.5625 0.5625



Max. Average



Emission Factor tons/yr Total

Notes

1 Proposed BACT emission limits based on site-specific kiln design and materials.

2 PM10 estimated at 84% of PM emissions, and PM2.5 estimated at 45% of PM emissions, using AP-42 Table 11.6-5

3 Emission factor for condensible PM from AP-42 Table 11.6-2. There is considerable uncertainty with this factor.

4 Total PM is the sum of filterable and condensible PM.

5 HCl emission factor from Portland Cement Manufacturing Reporting Under Section 313 of EPCRA

(Toxic Release Inventory) , Portland Cement Association, 2003

6 Emission factors from EPA's AP-42 Table 11.6-9

7 Total tons/yr = annual throughput x emission factor / 2000 (sum of raw mill on & raw mill off)

8 Max lbs/yr = hourly throughput (see Throughput Data sheet) x max emission factor

9 Average lbs/yr = Total tons/yr x 2000 / 8760 hrs

11 Emission factor for chromium (VI) from June 2005 stack test, CEMEX, Victorville, California

12 Emission factor for nickel from November 1999 stack test, Roanoke Cement Company, Cloverdale, Virginia

13 Emissions for dioxin/furan estimated using emission factor for 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD. Actual emissions will be limited under the

Portland Cement NESHAP.

14 Mercury EF estimated to limit emissions below NESHAP limit.


Carolinas Cement PTE Baghouses-New

Point Sources (Controlled by Baghouses)

Equipment

Group

Emission

Point No.Process Unit

Baghouse

ID

Control

Device IDFlow Rate Temp Flow Rate

Grain

Loading

Operating

Hours

PM

Emissions

PM

Emissions

PM10

Fraction

PM10

Emissions

PM10

Emissions

PM2.5

Fraction

PM2.5

Emissions

acfm deg F scfm gr/scf hrs/yr lb/hr TPY lb/hr TPY lb/hr

Raw Mill & KF E5 Raw mill feed bin 143.BF650 CD5 8,500 77 8,358 0.01 8760 0.72 3.14 0.84 0.60 2.64 0.45 0.32

Raw Mill & KF E6 Raw mill feed transport 311.BF750 CD6 7,750 77 7,620 0.01 8760 0.65 2.86 0.84 0.55 2.40 0.45 0.29

Raw Mill & KF E7 Raw mill feed 321.BF470 CD7 10,800 77 10,619 0.01 8760 0.91 3.99 0.84 0.76 3.35 0.45 0.41

Raw Mill & KF E8 Raw mill reject 321.BF950 CD8 11,700 90 11,232 0.01 8760 0.96 4.22 0.84 0.81 3.54 0.45 0.43

Raw Mill & KF E9 Kiln dust bin 331.BF400 CD9 4,200 302 2,910 0.01 8760 0.25 1.09 0.84 0.21 0.92 0.45 0.11

Raw Mill & KF E10 Raw meal transport to silo 341.BF410 CD10 4,000 150 3,462 0.01 8760 0.30 1.30 0.84 0.25 1.09 0.45 0.13

Raw Mill & KF E11 Raw meal silo 341.BF350 CD11 4,200 150 3,635 0.01 8760 0.31 1.36 0.84 0.26 1.15 0.45 0.14

Raw Mill & KF E12 Raw meal silo extraction 351.BF440 CD12 4,760 150 4,120 0.01 8760 0.35 1.55 0.84 0.30 1.30 0.45 0.16

Raw Mill & KF E13 Kiln feed 351.BF470 CD13 4,300 150 3,722 0.01 8760 0.32 1.40 0.84 0.27 1.17 0.45 0.14

RMKF Subtotal 4.77 20.90 4.01 17.56 2.15

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill On 673,804 193 544,822 0.0126 8760 58.77 257.39 0.84 49.36 216.21 0.45 26.44

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill Off 653,251 435 385,382

Kiln System Kiln/raw mill/cooler baghouse 331.BF200 CD44A

Kiln System Coal mill baghouse 461.BF500 CD44B

KS Subtotal 58.77 257.39 49.36 216.21 26.44

Coal System E1 Coal rail unloading 211.BF320 CD1 5,535 77 5,442 0.01 8760 0.47 2.04 0.84 0.39 1.72 0.45 0.21

Coal System E2 Coal unloading by truck 231.BF310 CD2 5,535 77 5,442 0.01 8760 0.47 2.04 0.84 0.39 1.72 0.45 0.21

Coal System E3 Coal transport to storage 231.BF330 CD3 6,868 77 6,753 0.01 8760 0.58 2.54 0.84 0.49 2.13 0.45 0.26

Coal System E4 Coal transport from storage 241.BF120 CD4 6,868 77 6,753 0.01 8760 0.58 2.54 0.84 0.49 2.13 0.45 0.26

Coal System E14 Coal mill feed bin 461.BF130 CD14 1,540 90 1,478 0.01 8760 0.13 0.56 0.84 0.11 0.47 0.45 0.06

Coal System E15 Coal mill feed bin 461.BF230 CD15 1,540 90 1,478 0.01 8760 0.13 0.56 0.84 0.11 0.47 0.45 0.06

Coal System E16 Coal mill feed transport 461.BF350 CD16 6,100 90 5,856 0.01 8760 0.50 2.20 0.84 0.42 1.85 0.45 0.23

Coal System E17 Fine coal bin 461.BF650 CD17 175 140 154 0.01 8760 0.01 0.06 0.84 0.01 0.05 0.45 0.01

Coal System E18 Fine coal bin 461.BF750 CD18 175 140 154 0.01 8760 0.01 0.06 0.84 0.01 0.05 0.45 0.01

COAL Subtotal 2.87 12.58 2.41 10.57 1.29

Clinker E19 Clinker discharge from cooler 441.BF540 CD19 4,600 257 3,387 0.01 8760 0.29 1.27 0.84 0.24 1.07 0.45 0.13

Clinker E20 Clinker dome 471.BF150 CD20 3,672 257 2,704 0.01 8760 0.23 1.02 0.84 0.19 0.85 0.45 0.10

Clinker E21 Off-spec bin 471.BF240 CD21 2,260 257 1,664 0.01 8760 0.14 0.62 0.84 0.12 0.52 0.45 0.06

CHS Subtotal 0.66 2.91 0.56 2.45 0.30

Finish Mills E22 Cement mill feed bin 511.BF090 CD22 9,820 156 8,417 0.01 8760 0.72 3.16 0.84 0.61 2.65 0.45 0.32

Finish Mills E23 Cement mill feed bin 512.BF050 CD23 8,830 156 7,569 0.01 8760 0.65 2.84 0.84 0.54 2.39 0.45 0.29

Finish Mills E46 Cement additive bin 511.BF300 CD46 4,810 156 4,123 0.01 8760 0.35 1.55 0.84 0.30 1.30 0.45 0.16

Finish Mills E47 Cement additve intake 232.BF150 CD47 10,587 77 10,410 0.01 8760 0.89 3.91 0.84 0.75 3.28 0.45 0.40

Finish Mills E24 Cement mill feed 531.BF290 CD24 4,697 156 4,026 0.01 8760 0.35 1.51 0.84 0.29 1.27 0.45 0.16

Finish Mills E25 Cement mill recirculation bin 531.BF020 CD25 2,719 212 2,136 0.01 8760 0.18 0.80 0.84 0.15 0.67 0.45 0.08

Finish Mills E26 Cement mill reject 531.BF215 CD26 5,262 212 4,134 0.01 8760 0.35 1.55 0.84 0.30 1.30 0.45 0.16

Finish Mills E27 Cement transport 531.BF615 CD27 2,154 212 1,692 0.01 8760 0.15 0.64 0.84 0.12 0.53 0.45 0.07

Finish Mills E28 Cement mill feed 532.BF290 CD28 5,580 178 4,618 0.01 8760 0.40 1.73 0.84 0.33 1.46 0.45 0.18

Finish Mills E29 Cement mill recirculation bin 532.BF020 CD29 2,719 212 2,136 0.01 8760 0.18 0.80 0.84 0.15 0.67 0.45 0.08

Finish Mills E30 Cement mill reject 532.BF215 CD30 5,262 212 4,134 0.01 8760 0.35 1.55 0.84 0.30 1.30 0.45 0.16

Finish Mills E31 Cement transport 532.BF615 CD31 2,154 212 1,692 0.01 8760 0.15 0.64 0.84 0.12 0.53 0.45 0.07




Equipment

Group

Emission


Baghouse

ID

Control


Grain

Loading

Operating

Hours

PM

Emissions

PM

Emissions

PM10

Fraction

PM10

Emissions

PM10

Emissions

PM2.5

Fraction

PM2.5

Emissions

acfm deg F scfm gr/scf hrs/yr lb/hr TPY lb/hr TPY lb/hr

Finish Mills Cement mill 1 baghouse 531.BF500 CD45A

Finish Mills Cement mill 2 baghouse 532.BF500 CD45B

Finish Mills E45 Cement mill stack 125,438 210 98,853 0.01 8760 8.47 37.11 0.84 7.12 31.17 0.45 3.81

FM Subtotal 13.19 57.79 11.08 48.55 5.94

Cement E32 Cement dome 611.BF600 CD32 26,910 212 21,144 0.01 8760 1.81 7.94 0.84 1.52 6.67 0.45 0.82

Cement E33 Cement dome extraction rail 621.BF305 CD33 1,800 212 1,414 0.01 8760 0.12 0.53 0.84 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.05

Cement E34 Cement dome extraction truck 621.BF315 CD34 1,800 212 1,414 0.01 8760 0.12 0.53 0.84 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.05

Cement E40 Cement silo 612.BF600 CD40 22,750 212 17,875 0.01 8760 1.53 6.71 0.84 1.29 5.64 0.45 0.69

Cement E41 Cement silo extration 612.BF620 CD41 1,271 212 999 0.01 8760 0.09 0.37 0.84 0.07 0.31 0.45 0.04

Cement E42 Cement transport 622.BF410 CD42 2,578 212 2,026 0.01 8760 0.17 0.76 0.84 0.15 0.64 0.45 0.08

Cement E43 Packing plant 641.BF150 CD43 7,416 212 5,827 0.01 8760 0.50 2.19 0.84 0.42 1.84 0.45 0.22

CHSL Subtotal 4.35 19.03 3.65 15.99 1.96

Grand Total 84.62 370.61 71.08 311.32 38.08

NotesPM10 and PM2.5 fractions for Kiln and other baghouse emissions derived from AP-42 Table 11.6-5

Kiln PM emissions shown above are filterable only

Average ground elevation at plant site = 7 m (23 ft).




Equipment

Group

Emission


Baghouse

ID

Raw Mill & KF E5 Raw mill feed bin 143.BF650

Raw Mill & KF E6 Raw mill feed transport 311.BF750

Raw Mill & KF E7 Raw mill feed 321.BF470

Raw Mill & KF E8 Raw mill reject 321.BF950

Raw Mill & KF E9 Kiln dust bin 331.BF400

Raw Mill & KF E10 Raw meal transport to silo 341.BF410

Raw Mill & KF E11 Raw meal silo 341.BF350

Raw Mill & KF E12 Raw meal silo extraction 351.BF440

Raw Mill & KF E13 Kiln feed 351.BF470

RMKF Subtotal

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill On

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill Off

Kiln System Kiln/raw mill/cooler baghouse 331.BF200

Kiln System Coal mill baghouse 461.BF500

KS Subtotal

Coal System E1 Coal rail unloading 211.BF320

Coal System E2 Coal unloading by truck 231.BF310

Coal System E3 Coal transport to storage 231.BF330

Coal System E4 Coal transport from storage 241.BF120

Coal System E14 Coal mill feed bin 461.BF130


Coal System E16 Coal mill feed transport 461.BF350

Coal System E17 Fine coal bin 461.BF650


COAL Subtotal

Clinker E19 Clinker discharge from cooler 441.BF540

Clinker E20 Clinker dome 471.BF150

Clinker E21 Off-spec bin 471.BF240

CHS Subtotal

Finish Mills E22 Cement mill feed bin 511.BF090


Finish Mills E46 Cement additive bin 511.BF300

Finish Mills E47 Cement additve intake 232.BF150

Finish Mills E24 Cement mill feed 531.BF290

Finish Mills E25 Cement mill recirculation bin 531.BF020

Finish Mills E26 Cement mill reject 531.BF215

Finish Mills E27 Cement transport 531.BF615





PM2.5

Emissions

TPY

1.41

1.29

1.79

1.90

0.49

0.58

0.61

0.70

0.63

9.41

115.83

115.83

0.92

0.92

1.14

1.14

0.25

0.25

0.99

0.03

0.03

5.66

0.57

0.46

0.28

1.31

1.42

1.28

0.70

1.76

0.68

0.36

0.70

0.29

0.78

0.36

0.70

0.29




Equipment

Group

Emission


Baghouse

ID

Finish Mills Cement mill 1 baghouse 531.BF500


Finish Mills E45 Cement mill stack

FM Subtotal

Cement E32 Cement dome 611.BF600

Cement E33 Cement dome extraction rail 621.BF305

Cement E34 Cement dome extraction truck 621.BF315

Cement E40 Cement silo 612.BF600

Cement E41 Cement silo extration 612.BF620

Cement E42 Cement transport 622.BF410

Cement E43 Packing plant 641.BF150

CHSL Subtotal

Grand Total

PM2.5

Emissions

TPY

16.70

26.01

3.57

0.24

0.24

3.02

0.17

0.34

0.98

8.57

166.78




Equipment

Group

Emission


Baghouse

ID

Raw Mill & KF E5 Raw mill feed bin 143.BF650

Raw Mill & KF E6 Raw mill feed transport 311.BF750

Raw Mill & KF E7 Raw mill feed 321.BF470

Raw Mill & KF E8 Raw mill reject 321.BF950

Raw Mill & KF E9 Kiln dust bin 331.BF400

Raw Mill & KF E10 Raw meal transport to silo 341.BF410

Raw Mill & KF E11 Raw meal silo 341.BF350

Raw Mill & KF E12 Raw meal silo extraction 351.BF440

Raw Mill & KF E13 Kiln feed 351.BF470

RMKF Subtotal

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill On

Kiln System E44 Main stack - Raw mill Off

Kiln System Kiln/raw mill/cooler baghouse 331.BF200

Kiln System Coal mill baghouse 461.BF500

KS Subtotal

Coal System E1 Coal rail unloading 211.BF320

Coal System E2 Coal unloading by truck 231.BF310

Coal System E3 Coal transport to storage 231.BF330

Coal System E4 Coal transport from storage 241.BF120



Coal System E16 Coal mill feed transport 461.BF350



COAL Subtotal

Clinker E19 Clinker discharge from cooler 441.BF540

Clinker E20 Clinker dome 471.BF150

Clinker E21 Off-spec bin 471.BF240

CHS Subtotal



Finish Mills E46 Cement additive bin 511.BF300

Finish Mills E47 Cement additve intake 232.BF150









Stack

Height

Stack

Height

Exit

Diameter

Exit

Velocity

m ft ft ft/s

35.0 114.8

35.0 114.835.0 114.823.0 75.538.0 124.718.0 59.174.0 242.815.0 49.2

115.0 377.3

125.0 410.1 14.76 65.60

7.5 24.69.7 31.88.5 27.99.5 31.2

41.0 134.541.0 134.523.0 75.520.0 65.620.0 65.6

16.0 52.556.0 183.751.0 167.3

19.0 62.3 2.00 52.1016.0 52.5 2.00 46.8418.0 59.1 1.50 45.3718.0 59.1 2.00 56.1732.0 105.0 1.50 44.3020.0 65.6 1.00 57.7013.0 42.7 1.50 49.6314.0 45.9 1.00 45.7132.0 105.0 1.50 52.6320.0 65.6 1.00 57.7032.0 105.0 1.50 49.6314.0 45.9 1.00 45.71




Equipment

Group

Emission


Baghouse

ID



Finish Mills E45 Cement mill stack

FM Subtotal

Cement E32 Cement dome 611.BF600

Cement E33 Cement dome extraction rail 621.BF305

Cement E34 Cement dome extraction truck 621.BF315

Cement E40 Cement silo 612.BF600

Cement E41 Cement silo extration 612.BF620

Cement E42 Cement transport 622.BF410

Cement E43 Packing plant 641.BF150

CHSL Subtotal

Grand Total

Stack

Height

Stack

Height

Exit

Diameter

Exit

Velocity

m ft ft ft/s

41.1 135.0 6.56 61.83

44.0 144.4 3.00 63.458.5 27.98.5 27.9

68.0 223.019.0 62.310.0 32.8

17.0 55.8


Carolinas Cement PTE Baghouses-Existing


Equipment

Group

Emission


Control


Grain

Loading

Operating

Hours

PM

Emissions

PM

Emissions

PM10

Fraction

PM10

Emissions

PM10

Emissions

PM2.5

Fraction

PM2.5

Emissions

PM2.5

Emissions

acfm deg F scfm gr/scf hrs/yr lb/hr TPY lb/hr TPY lb/hr TPY

Cement ES-4 Cement silo CD-P43 1,500 68 1,500 0.02 8,760 0.26 1.13 0.84 0.22 0.95 0.45 0.12 0.51

Cement ES-R33 Screw conv/truck loadout CD-P30 1,500 68 1,500 0.02 8,760 0.26 1.13 0.84 0.22 0.95 0.45 0.12 0.51

ECT Subtotal 0.51 2.25 0.43 1.89 0.23 1.01

Grand Total 0.51 2.25 0.43 1.89 0.23 1.01

NotesPM10 and PM2.5 fractions for baghouse emissions derived from AP-42 Table 11.6-5


Carolinas Cement PTE Baghouses-Existing


Equipment

Group

Emission


Control

Device ID

Cement ES-4 Cement silo CD-P43

Cement ES-R33 Screw conv/truck loadout CD-P30

ECT Subtotal

Grand Total

Stack

Height

Exit

DiameterOrientation

ft ft

80 1.25 Horizontal

20 1.0 Horizontal


Carolinas Cement PTE Metals Data

Material Sb As Be Cd Cr Cr(VI) Co Pb Mn Hg Ni Seppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm

Additives 5.4 6.2 1.3 4.1 309 2.5 72 116 540 0.22 40 3.6Bauxite 0.2 16.6 0.4 1 112 1.12 35 24 46 0.10 3 6Bottom ash 4.44 4.64 1.41 4 113 0.5 72 77 413 0.24 10.8 3.98Cement 0.335 18.9 1.15 0.183 64.4 10.3 5.57 12.4 252 0.038 33.8 3.4CKD 0.658 16.4 0.794 16.49 56.8 0.57 4.80 899 180 0.628 21.9 34.48Clinker 2.22 0.77 0.15 0.44 71.3 11.4 1.91 0.08 103 0.09 6.29 0.17Coal/Coke 2.87 0.19 0.35 0.42 5.0 0.05 1.77 1.01 0.58 0.10 62.7 0.65Gypsum 2.31 0.56 0.08 0.48 3.3 0.033 0.53 2.92 28.0 0.26 1.42 5.51Limestone/Marl 2 2 2 2 16 0.1 11 30 196 0.011 28 16Mill Scale 14.0 20.6 0.09 5 2,073 20.7 75 462 1,680 0.08 304 0.15Overburden 16 2 2 2 31 0.1 18 30 70 0.016 4 8Quarry Blend 2.36 2 2 1.94 18 0.1 11.2 30 192 0.011 30 15.6Raw Meal 2.68 2.47 1.94 2.20 47.8 0.35 18.0 39.3 231 0.035 30.6 14.4Sand 2.46 0.43 0.08 0.41 50 0.5 5.24 22.0 199 0.029 5.26 0.14Spoils/Other 8 2 2 1 44 0.1 14 30 127 0.011 54 9

Coal 2.5 0.19 0.35 0.42 5 0.05 0.98 1.01 0.48 0.06 1.25 0.65Coke 2.87 0.16 0.08 0.39 0.79 0.0079 1.77 0.08 0.58 0.10 62.7 0.17

Material Sb As Be Cd Cr Cr(VI) Co Pb Mn Hg Ni Se

Additives 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8Bauxite 1 1 1 12 12 9 12 12 12 12 1 1Bottom ash 3 3 3 12 12 11 12 12 12 2A 3 3Cement 4 4 4 4 13 13 3 4 3 4 4 4CKD 4 4 4 4 4 9 3 4 3 4 4 4Clinker 3 3 3 3 13 13 3 3 3 3 3 3Coal/Coke 6 6 6 6 6 9 6 6 6 6 6 6Gypsum 3 7 3 7 11 9 7 7 3 7 7 7Limestone/Marl 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10Mill Scale 3 3 3 12 12 9 12 12 12 12 3 3Overburden 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10Quarry Blend 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8Raw Meal 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8Sand 3 3 3 3 11 9 3 3 3 2 3 3Spoils/Other 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Coal 3 3 3 3 11 9 3 3 3 5 3 3Coke 3 3 3 3 3 9 3 3 3 3 3 3

Metals Concentration References1 Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Alumina Refining , Environment Australia, March 1999.2 Mercury and Lead Content in Raw Materials , Portland Cement Association, R&D Serial No. 2888, 2006.

2A Estimated mercury concentration in ash consistent with NESHAP emission limit.

Metals Concentration Data

References


Carolinas Cement PTE Metals Data

3 Laboratory Analyses for Roanoke Cement Co., ETS Analytical Services, Inc., December 9, 1992 and June 11, 1993. 4 Trace Metals in Cement and Kiln Dust From North American Cement Plants, Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc., 1991.5 Typical Analysis, West Virginia Coal, January 25, 2006. 6 Highest concentration for either coal or coke. 7 Gypsum for Agricultural Use in Ohio - Sources and Quality of Available Products, Ohio State University Extension Fact Sheet, 2005.8 Calculated concentrations using a typical mixture of component materials. 9 Assumes hexavalent chromium content is no more than 1 percent of total chromium for these materials.

10 Chemical analysis of Starfish quarry raw materials, September 2007. 11 Hexavalent Chromium in Cement Manufacturing: Literature Review , Portland Cement Association, R&D Serial No. 2983, 2007.12 Typical metals content for site-specific raw materials, January 2008. 13 Predicted chromium content for site-specific products, January 2008.


Carolinas Cement PTE Baghouses-HAP-TAPs

Point Sources - HAP & TAP Emissions

Equipment

Group

Emission


Material

Processed

PM

Emissions

PM

EmissionsSb As Be Cd Cr Cr(VI) Co Pb Mn Hg Ni Se

lb/hr TPY lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr lb/hr

Raw Mill & KF E5 Raw mill feed bin Raw meal 0.7164 3.14 1.92E-06 1.77E-06 1.39E-06 1.58E-06 3.43E-05 2.49E-07 1.29E-05 2.82E-05 1.66E-04 2.49E-08 2.19E-05 1.04E-05

Raw Mill & KF E6 Raw mill feed transport Raw meal 0.6532 2.86 1.75E-06 1.61E-06 1.27E-06 1.44E-06 3.12E-05 2.27E-07 1.18E-05 2.57E-05 1.51E-04 2.27E-08 2.00E-05 9.44E-06

Raw Mill & KF E7 Raw mill feed Raw meal 0.9102 3.99 2.44E-06 2.25E-06 1.77E-06 2.00E-06 4.35E-05 3.16E-07 1.64E-05 3.58E-05 2.10E-04 3.16E-08 2.79E-05 1.32E-05

Raw Mill & KF E8 Raw mill reject Raw meal 0.9627 4.22 2.58E-06 2.38E-06 1.87E-06 2.12E-06 4.60E-05 3.34E-07 1.73E-05 3.79E-05 2.22E-04 3.34E-08 2.95E-05 1.39E-05

Raw Mill & KF E9 Kiln dust bin CKD 0.2494 1.09 1.64E-07 4.09E-06 1.98E-07 4.11E-06 1.42E-05 1.42E-07 1.20E-06 2.24E-04 4.49E-05 1.57E-07 5.46E-06 8.60E-06

Raw Mill & KF E10 Raw meal transport to silo Raw meal 0.2968 1.30 7.97E-07 7.33E-07 5.76E-07 6.53E-07 1.42E-05 1.03E-07 5.34E-06 1.17E-05 6.86E-05 1.03E-08 9.09E-06 4.29E-06

Raw Mill & KF E11 Raw meal silo Raw meal 0.3116 1.36 8.36E-07 7.70E-07 6.05E-07 6.86E-07 1.49E-05 1.08E-07 5.61E-06 1.23E-05 7.20E-05 1.08E-08 9.54E-06 4.50E-06

Raw Mill & KF E12 Raw meal silo extraction Raw meal 0.3532 1.55 9.48E-07 8.72E-07 6.86E-07 7.77E-07 1.69E-05 1.23E-07 6.36E-06 1.39E-05 8.16E-05 1.23E-08 1.08E-05 5.10E-06

Raw Mill & KF E13 Kiln feed Raw meal 0.3190 1.40 8.56E-07 7.88E-07 6.20E-07 7.02E-07 1.53E-05 1.11E-07 5.74E-06 1.25E-05 7.37E-05 1.11E-08 9.77E-06 4.61E-06

RMKF Subtotal 4.7725 20.90 1.23E-05 1.53E-05 8.98E-06 1.41E-05 2.31E-04 1.71E-06 8.26E-05 4.02E-04 1.09E-03 3.14E-07 1.44E-04 7.40E-05

Coal System E1 Coal rail unloading Coal/Coke 0.4665 2.04 1.34E-06 8.86E-08 1.63E-07 1.96E-07 2.33E-06 2.33E-08 8.26E-07 4.71E-07 2.71E-07 4.66E-08 2.92E-05 3.03E-07

Coal System E2 Coal unloading by truck Coal/Coke 0.4665 2.04 1.34E-06 8.86E-08 1.63E-07 1.96E-07 2.33E-06 2.33E-08 8.26E-07 4.71E-07 2.71E-07 4.66E-08 2.92E-05 3.03E-07

Coal System E3 Coal transport to storage Coal/Coke 0.5788 2.54 1.66E-06 1.10E-07 2.03E-07 2.43E-07 2.89E-06 2.89E-08 1.02E-06 5.85E-07 3.36E-07 5.79E-08 3.63E-05 3.76E-07

Coal System E4 Coal transport from storage Coal/Coke 0.5788 2.54 1.66E-06 1.10E-07 2.03E-07 2.43E-07 2.89E-06 2.89E-08 1.02E-06 5.85E-07 3.36E-07 5.79E-08 3.63E-05 3.76E-07

Coal System E14 Coal mill feed bin Coal/Coke 0.1267 0.56 3.64E-07 2.41E-08 4.44E-08 5.32E-08 6.34E-07 6.34E-09 2.24E-07 1.28E-07 7.35E-08 1.27E-08 7.95E-06 8.24E-08

Coal System E15 Coal mill feed bin Coal/Coke 0.1267 0.56 3.64E-07 2.41E-08 4.44E-08 5.32E-08 6.34E-07 6.34E-09 2.24E-07 1.28E-07 7.35E-08 1.27E-08 7.95E-06 8.24E-08

Coal System E16 Coal mill feed transport Coal/Coke 0.5019 2.20 1.44E-06 9.54E-08 1.76E-07 2.11E-07 2.51E-06 2.51E-08 8.88E-07 5.07E-07 2.91E-07 5.02E-08 3.15E-05 3.26E-07

Coal System E17 Fine coal bin Coal/Coke 0.0132 0.06 3.79E-08 2.51E-09 4.62E-09 5.54E-09 6.60E-08 6.60E-10 2.34E-08 1.33E-08 7.66E-09 1.32E-09 8.28E-07 8.58E-09

Coal System E18 Fine coal bin Coal/Coke 0.0132 0.06 3.79E-08 2.51E-09 4.62E-09 5.54E-09 6.60E-08 6.60E-10 2.34E-08 1.33E-08 7.66E-09 1.32E-09 8.28E-07 8.58E-09

COAL Subtotal 2.8724 12.58 8.24E-06 5.46E-07 1.01E-06 1.21E-06 1.44E-05 1.44E-07 5.08E-06 2.90E-06 1.67E-06 2.87E-07 1.80E-04 1.87E-06

Clinker E19 Clinker discharge from cooler Clinker 0.2904 1.27 6.45E-07 2.24E-07 4.36E-08 1.28E-07 2.07E-05 3.31E-06 5.55E-07 2.32E-08 2.99E-05 2.61E-08 1.83E-06 4.94E-08

Clinker E20 Clinker dome Clinker 0.2318 1.02 5.15E-07 1.78E-07 3.48E-08 1.02E-07 1.65E-05 2.64E-06 4.43E-07 1.85E-08 2.39E-05 2.09E-08 1.46E-06 3.94E-08

Clinker E21 Off-Spec Clinker 0.1427 0.62 3.17E-07 1.10E-07 2.14E-08 6.28E-08 1.02E-05 1.63E-06 2.72E-07 1.14E-08 1.47E-05 1.28E-08 8.97E-07 2.43E-08

CHS Subtotal 0.6648 2.91 1.48E-06 5.12E-07 9.97E-08 2.93E-07 4.74E-05 7.58E-06 1.27E-06 5.32E-08 6.85E-05 5.98E-08 4.18E-06 1.13E-07

Finish Mills E22 Cement mill feed bin Cement 0.7215 3.16 2.42E-07 1.36E-05 8.30E-07 1.32E-07 4.64E-05 7.43E-06 4.02E-06 8.95E-06 1.82E-04 2.74E-08 2.44E-05 2.45E-06

Finish Mills E23 Cement mill feed bin Cement 0.6487 2.84 2.17E-07 1.23E-05 7.46E-07 1.19E-07 4.18E-05 6.68E-06 3.61E-06 8.04E-06 1.63E-04 2.47E-08 2.19E-05 2.21E-06

Finish Mills E46 Cement additive bin Limestone 0.3534 1.55 8.16E-07 1.98E-07 2.83E-08 1.70E-07 1.17E-06 1.17E-08 1.87E-07 1.03E-06 9.89E-06 9.19E-08 5.02E-07 1.95E-06

Finish Mills E47 Cement additve intake Limestone 0.8922 3.91 2.06E-06 5.00E-07 7.14E-08 4.28E-07 2.94E-06 2.94E-08 4.73E-07 2.61E-06 2.50E-05 2.32E-07 1.27E-06 4.92E-06

Finish Mills E24 Cement mill feed Cement 0.3451 1.51 1.16E-07 6.52E-06 3.97E-07 6.32E-08 2.22E-05 3.55E-06 1.92E-06 4.28E-06 8.70E-05 1.31E-08 1.17E-05 1.17E-06

Finish Mills E25 Cement mill recirculation bin Cement 0.1831 0.80 6.13E-08 3.46E-06 2.11E-07 3.35E-08 1.18E-05 1.89E-06 1.02E-06 2.27E-06 4.61E-05 6.96E-09 6.19E-06 6.23E-07

Finish Mills E26 Cement mill reject Cement 0.3544 1.55 1.19E-07 6.70E-06 4.08E-07 6.49E-08 2.28E-05 3.65E-06 1.97E-06 4.39E-06 8.93E-05 1.35E-08 1.20E-05 1.20E-06

Finish Mills E27 Cement transport Cement 0.1451 0.64 4.86E-08 2.74E-06 1.67E-07 2.65E-08 9.34E-06 1.49E-06 8.08E-07 1.80E-06 3.66E-05 5.51E-09 4.90E-06 4.93E-07

Finish Mills E28 Cement mill feed Cement 0.3958 1.73 1.33E-07 7.48E-06 4.55E-07 7.24E-08 2.55E-05 4.08E-06 2.20E-06 4.91E-06 9.97E-05 1.50E-08 1.34E-05 1.35E-06

Finish Mills E29 Cement mill recirculation bin Cement 0.1831 0.80 6.13E-08 3.46E-06 2.11E-07 3.35E-08 1.18E-05 1.89E-06 1.02E-06 2.27E-06 4.61E-05 6.96E-09 6.19E-06 6.23E-07

Finish Mills E30 Cement mill reject Cement 0.3544 1.55 1.19E-07 6.70E-06 4.08E-07 6.49E-08 2.28E-05 3.65E-06 1.97E-06 4.39E-06 8.93E-05 1.35E-08 1.20E-05 1.20E-06

Finish Mills E31 Cement transport Cement 0.1451 0.64 4.86E-08 2.74E-06 1.67E-07 2.65E-08 9.34E-06 1.49E-06 8.08E-07 1.80E-06 3.66E-05 5.51E-09 4.90E-06 4.93E-07

Finish Mills E45 Cement mill stack Cement 8.4731 37.11 2.84E-06 1.60E-04 9.74E-06 1.55E-06 5.45E-04 8.73E-05 4.72E-05 1.05E-04 2.14E-03 3.22E-07 2.86E-04 2.88E-05

FM Subtotal 13.1950 57.79 6.88E-06 2.27E-04 1.38E-05 2.78E-06 7.73E-04 1.23E-04 6.72E-05 1.52E-04 3.05E-03 7.78E-07 4.06E-04 4.75E-05

Cement E32 Cement dome Cement 1.8123 7.94 6.07E-07 3.43E-05 2.08E-06 3.32E-07 1.17E-04 1.87E-05 1.01E-05 2.25E-05 4.57E-04 6.89E-08 6.13E-05 6.16E-06

Cement E33 Cement dome extraction rail Cement 0.1212 0.53 4.06E-08 2.29E-06 1.39E-07 2.22E-08 7.80E-06 1.25E-06 6.75E-07 1.50E-06 3.05E-05 4.61E-09 4.10E-06 4.12E-07

Cement E34 Cement dome extraction truck Cement 0.1212 0.53 4.06E-08 2.29E-06 1.39E-07 2.22E-08 7.80E-06 1.25E-06 6.75E-07 1.50E-06 3.05E-05 4.61E-09 4.10E-06 4.12E-07

Cement E35 Cement bin for barge loading Cement DELETED

Cement E36 Cement transport to barge Cement DELETED




Equipment

Group

Emission


Material

Processed

PM

Emissions

PM



Cement E37 Cement transport to barge Cement DELETED

Cement E38 Loading spout Cement DELETED

Cement E39 Loading spout Cement DELETED

Cement E40 Cement silo Cement 1.5321 6.71 5.13E-07 2.90E-05 1.76E-06 2.80E-07 9.86E-05 1.58E-05 8.53E-06 1.90E-05 3.86E-04 5.82E-08 5.18E-05 5.21E-06

Cement E41 Cement silo extration Cement 0.0856 0.37 2.87E-08 1.62E-06 9.84E-08 1.57E-08 5.51E-06 8.82E-07 4.77E-07 1.06E-06 2.16E-05 3.25E-09 2.89E-06 2.91E-07

Cement E42 Cement transport Cement 0.1736 0.76 5.82E-08 3.28E-06 2.00E-07 3.18E-08 1.12E-05 1.79E-06 9.67E-07 2.15E-06 4.38E-05 6.60E-09 5.87E-06 5.90E-07

Cement E43 Packing plant Cement 0.4994 2.19 1.67E-07 9.44E-06 5.74E-07 9.14E-08 3.22E-05 5.14E-06 2.78E-06 6.19E-06 1.26E-04 1.90E-08 1.69E-05 1.70E-06

CHSL Subtotal 4.3456 19.03 1.46E-06 8.21E-05 5.00E-06 7.95E-07 2.80E-04 4.48E-05 2.42E-05 5.39E-05 1.10E-03 1.65E-07 1.47E-04 1.48E-05

Grand Total, New Baghouses 25.8501 113.22 3.04E-05 3.25E-04 2.89E-05 1.91E-05 1.35E-03 1.77E-04 1.80E-04 6.11E-04 5.30E-03 1.60E-06 8.81E-04 1.38E-04

Cement ES-4 Cement silo Cement 0.2571 1.13 8.61E-08 4.86E-06 2.96E-07 4.71E-08 1.66E-05 2.65E-06 1.43E-06 3.19E-06 6.48E-05 9.77E-09 8.69E-06 8.74E-07

Cement ES-R33 Screw conv/truck loadout Cement 0.2571 1.13 8.61E-08 4.86E-06 2.96E-07 4.71E-08 1.66E-05 2.65E-06 1.43E-06 3.19E-06 6.48E-05 9.77E-09 8.69E-06 8.74E-07

Cement Total, Existing Baghouses 0.5143 2.25 1.72E-07 9.72E-06 5.91E-07 9.41E-08 3.31E-05 5.30E-06 2.86E-06 6.38E-06 1.30E-04 1.95E-08 1.74E-05 1.75E-06




Equipment

Group

Emission


Material

Processed

Raw Mill & KF E5 Raw mill feed bin Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E6 Raw mill feed transport Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E7 Raw mill feed Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E8 Raw mill reject Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E9 Kiln dust bin CKD

Raw Mill & KF E10 Raw meal transport to silo Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E11 Raw meal silo Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E12 Raw meal silo extraction Raw meal

Raw Mill & KF E13 Kiln feed Raw meal

RMKF Subtotal

Coal System E1 Coal rail unloading Coal/Coke

Coal System E2 Coal unloading by truck Coal/Coke

Coal System E3 Coal transport to storage Coal/Coke

Coal System E4 Coal transport from storage Coal/Coke

Coal System E14 Coal mill feed bin Coal/Coke

Coal System E15 Coal mill feed bin Coal/Coke

Coal System E16 Coal mill feed transport Coal/Coke

Coal System E17 Fine coal bin Coal/Coke

Coal System E18 Fine coal bin Coal/Coke

COAL Subtotal

Clinker E19 Clinker discharge from cooler Clinker

Clinker E20 Clinker dome Clinker

Clinker E21 Off-Spec Clinker

CHS Subtotal

Finish Mills E22 Cement mill feed bin Cement

Finish Mills E23 Cement mill feed bin Cement

Finish Mills E46 Cement additive bin Limestone

Finish Mills E47 Cement additve intake Limestone

Finish Mills E24 Cement mill feed Cement

Finish Mills E25 Cement mill recirculation bin Cement

Finish Mills E26 Cement mill reject Cement

Finish Mills E27 Cement transport Cement

Finish Mills E28 Cement mill feed Cement

Finish Mills E29 Cement mill recirculation bin Cement

Finish Mills E30 Cement mill reject Cement

Finish Mills E31 Cement transport Cement

Finish Mills E45 Cement mill stack Cement

FM Subtotal

Cement E32 Cement dome Cement

Cement E33 Cement dome extraction rail Cement

Cement E34 Cement dome extraction truck Cement

Cement E35 Cement bin for barge loading Cement

Cement E36 Cement transport to barge Cement

Sb As Be Cd Cr Cr(VI) Co Pb Mn Hg Ni Se

TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY TPY

8.42E-06 7.75E-06 6.09E-06 6.90E-06 1.50E-04 1.09E-06 5.65E-05 1.23E-04 7.25E-04 1.09E-07 9.61E-05 4.53E-05

7.68E-06 7.07E-06 5.56E-06 6.29E-06 1.37E-04 9.94E-07 5.15E-05 1.12E-04 6.61E-04 9.93E-08 8.76E-05 4.13E-05

1.07E-05 9.85E-06 7.74E-06 8.77E-06 1.91E-04 1.38E-06 7.18E-05 1.57E-04 9.21E-04 1.38E-07 1.22E-04 5.76E-05

1.13E-05 1.04E-05 8.19E-06 9.28E-06 2.02E-04 1.46E-06 7.59E-05 1.66E-04 9.74E-04 1.46E-07 1.29E-04 6.09E-05

7.19E-07 1.79E-05 8.68E-07 1.80E-05 6.21E-05 6.21E-07 5.24E-06 9.82E-04 1.97E-04 6.86E-07 2.39E-05 3.77E-05

3.49E-06 3.21E-06 2.52E-06 2.86E-06 6.22E-05 4.51E-07 2.34E-05 5.11E-05 3.00E-04 4.51E-08 3.98E-05 1.88E-05

3.66E-06 3.37E-06 2.65E-06 3.00E-06 6.53E-05 4.74E-07 2.46E-05 5.37E-05 3.15E-04 4.74E-08 4.18E-05 1.97E-05

4.15E-06 3.82E-06 3.00E-06 3.40E-06 7.40E-05 5.37E-07 2.78E-05 6.08E-05 3.57E-04 5.37E-08 4.74E-05 2.24E-05

3.75E-06 3.45E-06 2.71E-06 3.07E-06 6.68E-05 4.85E-07 2.52E-05 5.49E-05 3.23E-04 4.85E-08 4.28E-05 2.02E-05

5.39E-05 6.69E-05 3.93E-05 6.16E-05 1.01E-03 7.50E-06 3.62E-04 1.76E-03 4.77E-03 1.37E-06 6.31E-04 3.24E-04

5.86E-06 3.88E-07 7.15E-07 8.58E-07 1.02E-05 1.02E-07 3.62E-06 2.06E-06 1.19E-06 2.04E-07 1.28E-04 1.33E-06

5.86E-06 3.88E-07 7.15E-07 8.58E-07 1.02E-05 1.02E-07 3.62E-06 2.06E-06 1.19E-06 2.04E-07 1.28E-04 1.33E-06

7.28E-06 4.82E-07 8.87E-07 1.06E-06 1.27E-05 1.27E-07 4.49E-06 2.56E-06 1.47E-06 2.54E-07 1.59E-04 1.65E-06

7.28E-06 4.82E-07 8.87E-07 1.06E-06 1.27E-05 1.27E-07 4.49E-06 2.56E-06 1.47E-06 2.54E-07 1.59E-04 1.65E-06

1.59E-06 1.05E-07 1.94E-07 2.33E-07 2.78E-06 2.78E-08 9.82E-07 5.61E-07 3.22E-07 5.55E-08 3.48E-05 3.61E-07

1.59E-06 1.05E-07 1.94E-07 2.33E-07 2.78E-06 2.78E-08 9.82E-07 5.61E-07 3.22E-07 5.55E-08 3.48E-05 3.61E-07

6.31E-06 4.18E-07 7.69E-07 9.23E-07 1.10E-05 1.10E-07 3.89E-06 2.22E-06 1.28E-06 2.20E-07 1.38E-04 1.43E-06

1.66E-07 1.10E-08 2.02E-08 2.43E-08 2.89E-07 2.89E-09 1.02E-07 5.84E-08 3.35E-08 5.78E-09 3.63E-06 3.76E-08

1.66E-07 1.10E-08 2.02E-08 2.43E-08 2.89E-07 2.89E-09 1.02E-07 5.84E-08 3.35E-08 5.78E-09 3.63E-06 3.76E-08

3.61E-05 2.39E-06 4.40E-06 5.28E-06 6.29E-05 6.29E-07 2.23E-05 1.27E-05 7.30E-06 1.26E-06 7.89E-04 8.18E-06

2.82E-06 9.79E-07 1.91E-07 5.60E-07 9.06E-05 1.45E-05 2.43E-06 1.02E-07 1.31E-04 1.14E-07 8.00E-06 2.16E-07

2.25E-06 7.82E-07 1.52E-07 4.47E-07 7.23E-05 1.16E-05 1.94E-06 8.12E-08 1.05E-04 9.14E-08 6.39E-06 1.73E-07

1.39E-06 4.81E-07 9.37E-08 2.75E-07 4.45E-05 7.12E-06 1.19E-06 5.00E-08 6.44E-05 5.62E-08 3.93E-06 1.06E-07

6.46E-06 2.24E-06 4.37E-07 1.28E-06 2.07E-04 3.32E-05 5.56E-06 2.33E-07 3.00E-04 2.62E-07 1.83E-05 4.95E-07

1.06E-06 5.97E-05 3.63E-06 5.78E-07 2.03E-04 3.25E-05 1.76E-05 3.92E-05 7.96E-04 1.20E-07 1.07E-04 1.07E-05

9.52E-07 5.37E-05 3.27E-06 5.20E-07 1.83E-04 2.93E-05 1.58E-05 3.52E-05 7.16E-04 1.08E-07 9.60E-05 9.66E-06

3.58E-06 8.67E-07 1.24E-07 7.43E-07 5.11E-06 5.11E-08 8.20E-07 4.52E-06 4.33E-05 4.02E-07 2.20E-06 8.53E-06

9.03E-06 2.19E-06 3.13E-07 1.88E-06 1.29E-05 1.29E-07 2.07E-06 1.14E-05 1.09E-04 1.02E-06 5.55E-06 2.15E-05

5.06E-07 2.86E-05 1.74E-06 2.77E-07 9.73E-05 1.56E-05 8.42E-06 1.87E-05 3.81E-04 5.74E-08 5.11E-05 5.14E-06

2.69E-07 1.52E-05 9.22E-07 1.47E-07 5.16E-05 8.26E-06 4.47E-06 9.95E-06 2.02E-04 3.05E-08 2.71E-05 2.73E-06

5.20E-07 2.93E-05 1.79E-06 2.84E-07 9.99E-05 1.60E-05 8.65E-06 1.92E-05 3.91E-04 5.90E-08 5.25E-05 5.28E-06

2.13E-07 1.20E-05 7.31E-07 1.16E-07 4.09E-05 6.54E-06 3.54E-06 7.88E-06 1.60E-04 2.41E-08 2.15E-05 2.16E-06

5.81E-07 3.28E-05 1.99E-06 3.17E-07 1.12E-04 1.79E-05 9.66E-06 2.15E-05 4.37E-04 6.59E-08 5.86E-05 5.89E-06

2.69E-07 1.52E-05 9.22E-07 1.47E-07 5.16E-05 8.26E-06 4.47E-06 9.95E-06 2.02E-04 3.05E-08 2.71E-05 2.73E-06

5.20E-07 2.93E-05 1.79E-06 2.84E-07 9.99E-05 1.60E-05 8.65E-06 1.92E-05 3.91E-04 5.90E-08 5.25E-05 5.28E-06

2.13E-07 1.20E-05 7.31E-07 1.16E-07 4.09E-05 6.54E-06 3.54E-06 7.88E-06 1.60E-04 2.41E-08 2.15E-05 2.16E-06

1.24E-05 7.01E-04 4.27E-05 6.79E-06 2.39E-03 3.82E-04 2.07E-04 4.60E-04 9.35E-03 1.41E-06 1.25E-03 1.26E-04

3.01E-05 9.92E-04 6.06E-05 1.22E-05 3.39E-03 5.39E-04 2.94E-04 6.65E-04 1.33E-02 3.41E-06 1.78E-03 2.08E-04

2.66E-06 1.50E-04 9.13E-06 1.45E-06 5.11E-04 8.18E-05 4.42E-05 9.84E-05 2.00E-03 3.02E-07 2.68E-04 2.70E-05

1.78E-07 1.00E-05 6.11E-07 9.72E-08 3.42E-05 5.47E-06 2.96E-06 6.58E-06 1.34E-04 2.02E-08 1.79E-05 1.81E-06

1.78E-07 1.00E-05 6.11E-07 9.72E-08 3.42E-05 5.47E-06 2.96E-06 6.58E-06 1.34E-04 2.02E-08 1.79E-05 1.81E-06




Equipment

Group

Emission


Material

Processed

Cement E37 Cement transport to barge Cement

Cement E38 Loading spout Cement

Cement E39 Loading spout Cement

Cement E40 Cement silo Cement

Cement E41 Cement silo extration Cement

Cement E42 Cement transport Cement

Cement E43 Packing plant Cement

CHSL Subtotal

Grand Total, New Baghouses

Cement ES-4 Cement silo Cement

Cement ES-R33 Screw conv/truck loadout Cement

Cement Total, Existing Baghouses



2.25E-06 1.27E-04 7.72E-06 1.23E-06 4.32E-04 6.91E-05 3.74E-05 8.32E-05 1.69E-03 2.55E-07 2.27E-04 2.28E-05

1.26E-07 7.09E-06 4.31E-07 6.86E-08 2.41E-05 3.86E-06 2.09E-06 4.65E-06 9.45E-05 1.42E-08 1.27E-05 1.27E-06

2.55E-07 1.44E-05 8.75E-07 1.39E-07 4.90E-05 7.83E-06 4.24E-06 9.43E-06 1.92E-04 2.89E-08 2.57E-05 2.59E-06

7.33E-07 4.13E-05 2.52E-06 4.00E-07 1.41E-04 2.25E-05 1.22E-05 2.71E-05 5.51E-04 8.31E-08 7.39E-05 7.44E-06

6.38E-06 3.60E-04 2.19E-05 3.48E-06 1.23E-03 1.96E-04 1.06E-04 2.36E-04 4.80E-03 7.23E-07 6.43E-04 6.47E-05

1.33E-04 1.42E-03 1.27E-04 8.38E-05 5.89E-03 7.77E-04 7.90E-04 2.68E-03 2.32E-02 7.02E-06 3.86E-03 6.05E-04

3.77E-07 2.13E-05 1.30E-06 2.06E-07 7.25E-05 1.16E-05 6.27E-06 1.40E-05 2.84E-04 4.28E-08 3.81E-05 3.83E-06

3.77E-07 2.13E-05 1.30E-06 2.06E-07 7.25E-05 1.16E-05 6.27E-06 1.40E-05 2.84E-04 4.28E-08 3.81E-05 3.83E-06

7.55E-07 4.26E-05 2.59E-06 4.12E-07 1.45E-04 2.32E-05 1.25E-05 2.79E-05 5.68E-04 8.56E-08 7.61E-05 7.66E-06


Carolinas Cement PTE Generator

Emergency Generator Emissions

Maximum Hourly Emissions:

Unit ID EU Description Size

Fuel Rate

gal/hr

Heat Input

MMBtu/hr

Output

kW-hr

PM

lbs/hr

PM10

lbs/hr

PM2.5

lbs/hr

SO2

lbs/hr

NOX

lbs/hr

CO

lbs/hr

VOC

lbs/hrGEN Generator 800 kW 57.2 7.84 800 0.3527 0.2892 0.2822 0.3957 11.1111 6.1728 0.1764

Annual Average Hourly Emissions:

Unit ID EU Description Size

Fuel Rate

gal/hr

Heat Input

MMBtu/hr

Output

kW-hr

PM

lbs/hr

PM10

lbs/hr

PM2.5

lbs/hr

SO2

lbs/hr

NOX

lbs/hr

CO

lbs/hr

VOC

lbs/hrGEN Generator 800 kW NA NA NA 0.0201 0.0165 0.0161 0.0226 0.6342 0.3523 0.0101

Annual Emissions:

Unit ID EU Description

Operating

Hours

Fuel Rate

gal/yr

Heat Input

MMBtu/yr

Output

kW-hr/yr

PM

tons/yr

PM10

tons/yr

PM2.5

tons/yr

SO2

tons/yr

NOX

tons/yr

CO

tons/yr

VOC

tons/yrGEN Generator 500 28,600 3,918 400,000 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.10 2.78 1.54 0.04

Notes: The emergency generator operates during testing and power outages. Potential emissions based on maximum of 500 hrs/yr of operation.Generator is diesel fuel-fired. Assume 137,000 Btu/gal heat value of fuel. Sulfur limit is 0.05 percent.Emission factors from NSPS Subpart IIII Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Enginesand AP-42 Chapter 3.4.

Emissions Basis: Pollutant

Emission

Factor EF UnitsPM 0.20 g/kW-hr Exhaust flow rate 6046 acfm

PM100.164 g/kW-hr Exhaust temperature 955 deg F

PM2.50.16 g/kW-hr Exhaust vent diameter 8 in.

SO2 0.0505 lb/MMBtu

NOX 6.3 g/kW-hr

CO 3.5 g/kW-hr

VOC 0.1 g/kW-hr

Source of EF

NSPS Limit

Emission LimitLimit: NOx + HC = 6.4

82% of PM: Table 3.4-2

80% of PM: Table 3.4-2

AP-42 Table 3.4-1

Limit: NOx + HC = 6.4


Carolinas Cement PTE Generator

Generator HAP & TAP Emissions

Pollutant TAP HAP

EF (lb/

MMBtu)

AP-42

Table lbs/hr tons/yrAcetaldehyde X X 2.52E-05 3.4-3 1.97E-04 4.94E-05Acrolein X X 7.88E-06 3.4-3 6.18E-05 1.54E-05Benzene X X 7.76E-04 3.4-3 6.08E-03 1.52E-03Formaldehyde X X 7.89E-05 3.4-3 6.18E-04 1.55E-04Toluene X X 2.81E-04 3.4-3 2.20E-03 5.51E-04Xylenes X X 1.93E-04 3.4-3 1.51E-03 3.78E-04PAH'sAcenaphthene X 4.68E-06 3.4-4 3.67E-05 9.17E-06Acenaphthylene X 9.23E-06 3.4-4 7.23E-05 1.81E-05Anthracene X 1.23E-06 3.4-4 9.64E-06 2.41E-06Benz(a)anthracene X 6.22E-07 3.4-4 4.87E-06 1.22E-06Benzo(a)pyrene X X 2.57E-07 3.4-4 2.01E-06 5.03E-07Benzo(b)fluoranthene X 1.11E-06 3.4-4 8.70E-06 2.17E-06Benzo(g,h,l)perylene X 5.56E-07 3.4-4 4.36E-06 1.09E-06Benzo(k)fluoranthene X 2.18E-07 3.4-4 1.71E-06 4.27E-07Chrysene X 1.53E-06 3.4-4 1.20E-05 3.00E-06Dibenz(a,h)anthracene X 3.46E-07 3.4-4 2.71E-06 6.78E-07Fluoranthene X 4.03E-06 3.4-4 3.16E-05 7.90E-06Fluorene X 1.28E-05 3.4-4 1.00E-04 2.51E-05Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene X 4.14E-07 3.4-4 3.24E-06 8.11E-07Naphthalene X 1.30E-04 3.4-4 1.02E-03 2.55E-04Phenanthrene X 4.08E-05 3.4-4 3.20E-04 7.99E-05Pyrene X 3.71E-06 3.4-4 2.91E-05 7.27E-06POM (Total PAH) X 2.12E-04 3.4-4 1.66E-03 4.15E-04


Carolinas Cement PTE Fugitive EF's

Emission Factor Calculation Sheet (Fugitives)

Material Transfer Operations PM PM-10 PM-2.5

k (particle size multiplier) 0.74 0.35 0.053

Mean Wind Speed (mph) Wilmington, NC 8.6 PM EF PM-10 EF PM-2.5 EF

(Source: EPA TANKS2 MET DATA) (lb/ton handled) (lb/ton handled) (lb/ton handled)

Marl Average Moisture Content (%) 16 2.61E-04 1.23E-04 1.87E-05

Bauxite Average Moisture Content (%) 5 1.33E-03 6.28E-04 9.52E-05

Coal/Coke Average Moisture Content (%) 8 6.88E-04 3.25E-04 4.93E-05

Dried Material Avg. Moisture Content (%) 1 1.26E-02 5.98E-03 9.06E-04

Sand Average Moisture Content (%) 5 1.33E-03 6.28E-04 9.52E-05

Ash Average Moisture Content (%) 15 2.85E-04 1.35E-04 2.04E-05

Gypsum Average Moisture Content (%) 6 1.03E-03 4.87E-04 7.37E-05

Mill Scale Average Moisture Content (%) 5 1.33E-03 6.28E-04 9.52E-05

Clinker Average Moisture Content (%) 0.1 3.18E-01 1.50E-01 2.28E-02

Additives Average Moisture Content (%) 12 3.90E-04 1.84E-04 2.79E-05

Raw Mix Average Moisture Content (%) 15.81 2.65E-04 1.25E-04 1.90E-05

Material transfer factors from AP-42 Section 13.2.4.3 (Aggregate Handling and Storage Piles, 11/06)

E = k * 0.0032 * (U/5)^1.3 / (M/2)^1.4

E = transfer emission factor (lb/ton)

k = particle size multiplier

U = mean wind speed (mph)

M = material moisture content (%)

Miscellaneous Operations Reference PM EF PM-10 EF PM-2.5 EF

(lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/ton)

Primary & secondary crushers 1 0.0012 0.00054 0.00010

Cement transfer (uncontrolled) 2 0.72 0.46 0.11

1) AP-42 Table 11.19.2-2 (Crushed Stone Processing, 8/04) (wet crushing = controlled)

2) AP-42 Table 11.12.2-2 (PM & PM10). Assume PM2.5 = 15% of PM.


Carolinas Cement PTE Material Transfer

Fugitive Emissions From Material Transfer Points

TSP PM10

Area Equipment Description Material

Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr

Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr

Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr lbs/hr lbs/hr

Quarry Hopper/Feeder 1 Limestone/Marl FQ1 None 8,760 3,411,152 NA 2.61E-04 0.44 1.23E-04 0.21 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1015 0.0480

Quarry Primary Crusher 1 Limestone/Marl FQ1 None 8,760 3,411,152 NA 0.0012 2.05 0.00054 0.92 0.0001 0.17 0.4673 0.2103

Quarry Mining Conveyor 2 Transfer Limestone/Marl FQ1 None 8,760 3,411,152 NA 2.61E-04 0.44 1.23E-04 0.21 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1015 0.0480

Subtotal FQ1 2.94 1.34 0.23 0.6704 0.3063

Quarry Mining Conveyor 1 Transfer Limestone/Marl FQ2 None 8,760 3,411,152 NA 2.61E-04 0.44 1.23E-04 0.21 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1015 0.0480

Quarry Hopper/Feeder 2 Spoils/Other FQ3 None 8,760 434,183 NA 2.61E-04 0.06 1.23E-04 0.03 1.87E-05 0.00 0.0129 0.0061

Quarry Primary Crusher 2 Spoils/Other FQ3 None 8,760 434,183 NA 0.0012 0.26 0.00054 0.12 0.0001 0.02 0.0595 0.0268

Quarry Spoils Conveyor 2 Transfer Spoils/Other FQ3 None 8,760 434,183 NA 2.61E-04 0.06 1.23E-04 0.03 1.87E-05 0.00 0.0129 0.0061

Subtotal FQ3 0.37 0.17 0.03 0.0853 0.0390


Quarry Radial Stacker Transfer Spoils/Other FQ5 None 8,760 217,092 NA 2.61E-04 0.03 1.23E-04 0.01 1.87E-05 0.00 0.0065 0.0031

Quarry Stacker to Pile Spoils/Other FQ6 None 8,760 217,092 NA 2.61E-04 0.03 1.23E-04 0.01 1.87E-05 0.00 0.0065 0.0031


Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher Feeder Quarry Blend FQ8 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher Quarry Blend FQ8 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 0.0012 2.18 0.00054 0.98 0.0001 0.18 0.4970 0.2237

Quarry/Plant Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend FQ8 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Subtotal FQ8 3.12 1.43 0.25 0.7130 0.3258

Quarry Total FQ 6.99 3.20 0.55 1.5961 0.7314

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 1 Additives F1 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Unloading Hopper Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F1 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 2 Coal/Coke F1 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Plant-Unloading Hopper Belt Conveyor Transfer Coal/Coke F1 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Subtotal F1 0.24 0.12 0.02 0.0557 0.0263

Plant-Rail Unloading Enclosed Hopper w/Dust

Suppression

Coal/Coke F2 None 8,760 283,824 50 6.88E-04 0.05 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0111 0.0053

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Quarry Blend F3 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Quarry Blend F3 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Quarry Blend F3 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Quarry Blend F3 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Location

Control

Efficiency

%

Control

Device

ID

Operating

Hours

Annual

Throughput

(tons)

Hourly Emission

TSP PM10 PM2.5




TSP PM10


Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr

Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr

Factor

lbs/ton tons/yr lbs/hr lbs/hrLocation

Control

Efficiency

%

Control

Device

ID

Operating

Hours

Annual

Throughput

(tons)

Hourly Emission

TSP PM10 PM2.5

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Additives F3 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Additives F3 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Additives F3 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Additives F3 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Coal/Coke F3 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Coal/Coke F3 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Coal/Coke F3 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Coal/Coke F3 None 8,760 113,530 NA 6.88E-04 0.04 3.25E-04 0.02 4.93E-05 0.00 0.0089 0.0042

Subtotal F3 2.38 1.13 0.17 0.5434 0.2570

Plant-Marl Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend F4 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Plant-Additives Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F5 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Plant-Marl Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend F6 None 8,760 3,628,243 NA 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 0.22 1.87E-05 0.03 0.1080 0.0511

Plant-Additives Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F7 None 8,760 425,102 NA 3.90E-04 0.08 1.84E-04 0.04 2.79E-05 0.01 0.0189 0.0090

Subtotal 0.56 0.26 0.04 0.1269 0.0600

Plant-Marl Transfer Conveyor to Silo Quarry Blend F7A None 8,760 3,628,243 50 2.61E-04 0.24 1.23E-04 0.11 1.87E-05 0.02 0.0540 0.0255

Plant-Marl Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Quarry Blend F7B None 8,760 3,628,243 50 2.61E-04 0.24 1.23E-04 0.11 1.87E-05 0.02 0.0540 0.0255

Plant-Additives Transfer Conveyor to Silo Bottom Ash F7C None 8,760 391,332 50 2.85E-04 0.03 1.35E-04 0.01 2.04E-05 0.00 0.0064 0.0030

Plant-Additives Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Bottom Ash F7D None 8,760 391,332 50 2.85E-04 0.03 1.35E-04 0.01 2.04E-05 0.00 0.0064 0.0030

Subtotal 0.53 0.25 0.04 0.1208 0.0571

Plant-Cement Additives Truck Unloading Gypsum F8 None 8,760 127,549 NA 1.03E-03 0.07 4.87E-04 0.03 7.37E-05 0.00 0.0150 0.0071

Plant-Cement Additives Hopper/Feeder Gypsum F8 None 8,760 127,549 NA 1.03E-03 0.07 4.87E-04 0.03 7.37E-05 0.00 0.0150 0.0071

Plant-Cement Additives Belt Conveyor Transfer Gypsum F8 None 8,760 127,549 NA 1.03E-03 0.07 4.87E-04 0.03 7.37E-05 0.00 0.0150 0.0071

Plant-Cement Additives Truck Unloading Limestone F8 None 8,760 102,040 NA 1.03E-03 0.05 4.87E-04 0.02 7.37E-05 0.00 0.0120 0.0057

Plant-Cement Additives Hopper/Feeder Limestone F8 None 8,760 102,040 NA 1.03E-03 0.05 4.87E-04 0.02 7.37E-05 0.00 0.0120 0.0057

Subtotal F8 0.30 0.14 0.02 0.0689 0.0326

Plant Subtotal RMHS 4.62 2.18 0.33 1.0538 0.4984

Notes:





Quarry Hopper/Feeder 1 Limestone/Marl FQ1

Quarry Primary Crusher 1 Limestone/Marl FQ1

Quarry Mining Conveyor 2 Transfer Limestone/Marl FQ1

Subtotal FQ1


Quarry Hopper/Feeder 2 Spoils/Other FQ3

Quarry Primary Crusher 2 Spoils/Other FQ3

Quarry Spoils Conveyor 2 Transfer Spoils/Other FQ3

Subtotal FQ3


Quarry Radial Stacker Transfer Spoils/Other FQ5

Quarry Stacker to Pile Spoils/Other FQ6


Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher Feeder Quarry Blend FQ8

Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher Quarry Blend FQ8

Quarry/Plant Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend FQ8

Subtotal FQ8

Quarry Total FQ

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 1 Additives F1

Plant-Unloading Hopper Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F1

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 2 Coal/Coke F1

Plant-Unloading Hopper Belt Conveyor Transfer Coal/Coke F1

Subtotal F1

Plant-Rail Unloading Enclosed Hopper w/Dust

Suppression

Coal/Coke F2

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Quarry Blend F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Quarry Blend F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Quarry Blend F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Quarry Blend F3

Location

PM2.5

lbs/hr

0.0073

0.0389

0.0073

0.0535

0.0073

0.0009

0.0050

0.0009

0.0068

0.0005

0.0005

0.0005

0.0005

0.0077

0.0414

0.0077

0.0569

0.1263

0.0014

0.0014

0.0006

0.0006

0.0040

0.0008

0.0077

0.0077

0.0077

0.0077

Rates




Area Equipment Description Material Location

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Additives F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Additives F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Additives F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Additives F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Belt to Tripper Belt Coal/Coke F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Tripper Belt to Piles Coal/Coke F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Pile Reclaimer Coal/Coke F3

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Reclaimer to Belt Coal/Coke F3

Subtotal F3

Plant-Marl Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend F4

Plant-Additives Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F5



Subtotal

Plant-Marl Transfer Conveyor to Silo Quarry Blend F7A

Plant-Marl Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Quarry Blend F7B

Plant-Additives Transfer Conveyor to Silo Bottom Ash F7C

Plant-Additives Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Bottom Ash F7D

Subtotal

Plant-Cement Additives Truck Unloading Gypsum F8

Plant-Cement Additives Hopper/Feeder Gypsum F8

Plant-Cement Additives Belt Conveyor Transfer Gypsum F8

Plant-Cement Additives Truck Unloading Limestone F8

Plant-Cement Additives Hopper/Feeder Limestone F8

Subtotal F8

Plant Subtotal RMHS

Notes:

PM2.5

lbs/hr

Rates

0.0014

0.0014

0.0014

0.0014

0.0006

0.0006

0.0006

0.0006

0.0389

0.0077

0.0014

0.0077

0.0014

0.0091

0.0039

0.0039

0.0005

0.0005

0.0086

0.0011

0.0011

0.0011

0.0009

0.0009

0.0049

0.0755


Carolinas Cement PTE Fugitives-HAP-TAPs

Fugitive HAP & TAP Emissions

Area Equipment Description Material LocationPM

Emissions

PM



Quarry Primary Crusher 1 & Equip. Limestone/Marl FQ1 0.6704 2.94 1.34E-06 1.34E-06 1.34E-06 1.34E-06 1.07E-05 6.70E-08 7.37E-06 2.01E-05 1.31E-04 7.37E-09 1.88E-05 1.07E-05

Quarry Mining Conveyor 1 Transfer Limestone/Marl FQ2 0.1015 0.44 2.03E-07 2.03E-07 2.03E-07 2.03E-07 1.62E-06 1.02E-08 1.12E-06 3.05E-06 1.99E-05 1.12E-09 2.84E-06 1.62E-06

Quarry Primary Crusher 2 & Equip. Spoils/Other FQ3 0.0853 0.37 6.83E-07 1.71E-07 1.71E-07 8.53E-08 3.75E-06 8.53E-09 1.19E-06 2.56E-06 1.08E-05 9.39E-10 4.61E-06 7.68E-07

Quarry Spoils Conveyor 3 Transfer Spoils/Other FQ4 0.0065 0.03 5.17E-08 1.29E-08 1.29E-08 6.46E-09 2.84E-07 6.46E-10 9.05E-08 1.94E-07 8.21E-07 7.11E-11 3.49E-07 5.82E-08

Quarry Radial Stacker Transfer Spoils/Other FQ5 0.0065 0.03 5.17E-08 1.29E-08 1.29E-08 6.46E-09 2.84E-07 6.46E-10 9.05E-08 1.94E-07 8.21E-07 7.11E-11 3.49E-07 5.82E-08

Quarry Stacker to Pile Spoils/Other FQ6 0.0065 0.03 5.17E-08 1.29E-08 1.29E-08 6.46E-09 2.84E-07 6.46E-10 9.05E-08 1.94E-07 8.21E-07 7.11E-11 3.49E-07 5.82E-08

Quarry Spoils Conveyor 1 Transfer Spoils/Other FQ7 0.0065 0.03 5.17E-08 1.29E-08 1.29E-08 6.46E-09 2.84E-07 6.46E-10 9.05E-08 1.94E-07 8.21E-07 7.11E-11 3.49E-07 5.82E-08

Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher & Equip. Quarry Blend FQ8 0.7130 3.12 1.68E-06 1.43E-06 1.43E-06 1.38E-06 1.26E-05 7.13E-08 7.97E-06 2.14E-05 1.37E-04 7.84E-09 2.11E-05 1.11E-05

Quarry Subtotal FQ 1.5961 6.99 4.12E-06 3.19E-06 3.19E-06 3.04E-06 2.98E-05 1.60E-07 1.80E-05 4.79E-05 3.02E-04 1.76E-08 4.87E-05 2.45E-05

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 1 Additives F1a 0.0379 0.17 2.04E-07 2.36E-07 4.84E-08 1.55E-07 1.17E-05 9.55E-08 2.74E-06 4.37E-06 2.04E-05 8.48E-09 1.52E-06 1.36E-07

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 2 Coal/Coke F1b 0.0178 0.08 5.12E-08 3.39E-09 6.24E-09 7.49E-09 8.92E-08 8.92E-10 3.16E-08 1.80E-08 1.03E-08 1.78E-09 1.12E-06 1.16E-08

Plant-Rail Unloading Enclosed Hopper Coal/Coke F2 0.0111 0.05 3.20E-08 2.12E-09 3.90E-09 4.68E-09 5.57E-08 5.57E-10 1.97E-08 1.13E-08 6.47E-09 1.11E-09 6.99E-07 7.25E-09

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Quarry Blend F3a 0.4320 1.89 1.02E-06 8.64E-07 8.64E-07 8.38E-07 7.64E-06 4.32E-08 4.83E-06 1.30E-05 8.29E-05 4.75E-09 1.28E-05 6.73E-06

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Additives F3b 0.0757 0.33 4.09E-07 4.72E-07 9.68E-08 3.10E-07 2.34E-05 1.91E-07 5.47E-06 8.75E-06 4.09E-05 1.70E-08 3.04E-06 2.72E-07

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Coal/Coke F3c 0.0357 0.16 1.02E-07 6.78E-09 1.25E-08 1.50E-08 1.78E-07 1.78E-09 6.31E-08 3.60E-08 2.07E-08 3.57E-09 2.24E-06 2.32E-08

Plant-Marl Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend F4 0.1080 0.47 2.55E-07 2.16E-07 2.16E-07 2.10E-07 1.91E-06 1.08E-08 1.21E-06 3.24E-06 2.07E-05 1.19E-09 3.19E-06 1.68E-06

Plant-Additives Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F5 0.0189 0.08 1.02E-07 1.18E-07 2.42E-08 7.76E-08 5.85E-06 4.78E-08 1.37E-06 2.19E-06 1.02E-05 4.24E-09 7.59E-07 6.81E-08

Plant-Marl Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Quarry Blend F6 0.1080 0.47 2.55E-07 2.16E-07 2.16E-07 2.10E-07 1.91E-06 1.08E-08 1.21E-06 3.24E-06 2.07E-05 1.19E-09 3.19E-06 1.68E-06

Plant-Additives Transfer Belt Conveyor Transfer Additives F7 0.0189 0.08 1.02E-07 1.18E-07 2.42E-08 7.76E-08 5.85E-06 4.78E-08 1.37E-06 2.19E-06 1.02E-05 4.24E-09 7.59E-07 6.81E-08

Plant-Marl Transfer Conveyor to Silo Quarry Blend F7A 0.0540 0.24 1.27E-07 1.08E-07 1.08E-07 1.05E-07 9.55E-07 5.40E-09 6.04E-07 1.62E-06 1.04E-05 5.94E-10 1.60E-06 8.41E-07

Plant-Marl Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Quarry Blend F7B 0.0540 0.24 1.27E-07 1.08E-07 1.08E-07 1.05E-07 9.55E-07 5.40E-09 6.04E-07 1.62E-06 1.04E-05 5.94E-10 1.60E-06 8.41E-07

Plant-Additives Transfer Conveyor to Silo Bottom Ash F7C 0.0064 0.03 2.83E-08 2.96E-08 8.99E-09 2.55E-08 7.20E-07 3.19E-09 4.59E-07 4.91E-07 2.63E-06 1.53E-09 6.89E-08 2.54E-08

Plant-Additives Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Bottom Ash F7D 0.0064 0.03 2.83E-08 2.96E-08 8.99E-09 2.55E-08 7.20E-07 3.19E-09 4.59E-07 4.91E-07 2.63E-06 1.53E-09 6.89E-08 2.54E-08

Plant-Cement Additives Gypsum/LS Handling Gypsum/LS F8 0.0689 0.30 1.59E-07 3.86E-08 5.52E-09 3.31E-08 2.28E-07 2.28E-09 3.65E-08 2.01E-07 1.93E-06 1.79E-08 9.79E-08 3.80E-07

Plant Subtotal RMHS 1.0538 4.62 3.00E-06 2.57E-06 1.75E-06 2.20E-06 6.22E-05 4.70E-07 2.05E-05 4.14E-05 2.34E-04 6.97E-08 3.27E-05 1.28E-05

Quarry-Storage Piles Limestone/Marl Limestone/Marl PQ1 0.0858 0.38 1.72E-07 1.72E-07 1.72E-07 1.72E-07 1.37E-06 8.58E-09 9.44E-07 2.57E-06 1.68E-05 9.44E-10 2.40E-06 1.37E-06

Quarry-Storage Piles Spoils/Other Spoils/Other PQ2 0.0858 0.38 6.87E-07 1.72E-07 1.72E-07 8.58E-08 3.78E-06 8.58E-09 1.20E-06 2.57E-06 1.09E-05 9.44E-10 4.63E-06 7.72E-07

Quarry-Storage Piles Spoils Spoils/Other PQ3 0.1716 0.75 1.37E-06 3.43E-07 3.43E-07 1.72E-07 7.55E-06 1.72E-08 2.40E-06 5.15E-06 2.18E-05 1.89E-09 9.27E-06 1.54E-06

Quarry-Storage Piles Overburden Overburden PQ4 0.3433 1.50 5.49E-06 6.87E-07 6.87E-07 6.87E-07 1.06E-05 3.43E-08 6.18E-06 1.03E-05 2.40E-05 5.49E-09 1.37E-06 2.75E-06

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Quarry Blend PB1 0.2917 1.28 6.88E-07 5.83E-07 5.83E-07 5.66E-07 5.16E-06 2.92E-08 3.26E-06 8.75E-06 5.60E-05 3.21E-09 8.62E-06 4.54E-06

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Bauxite PB1 0.0000 0.00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Mill Scale PB1 0.0309 0.14 4.32E-07 6.36E-07 2.78E-09 1.54E-07 6.40E-05 6.40E-07 2.32E-06 1.43E-05 5.19E-05 2.47E-09 9.39E-06 4.63E-09

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Bottom Ash PB1 0.6503 2.85 2.89E-06 3.02E-06 9.17E-07 2.60E-06 7.35E-05 3.25E-07 4.68E-05 5.01E-05 2.69E-04 1.56E-07 7.02E-06 2.59E-06

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Coal/Coke PB1 0.1047 0.46 3.00E-07 1.99E-08 3.66E-08 4.40E-08 5.24E-07 5.24E-09 1.85E-07 1.06E-07 6.07E-08 1.05E-08 6.56E-06 6.81E-08

Plant-Storage Piles Gypsum Gypsum PB2 0.0858 0.38 1.98E-07 4.81E-08 6.87E-09 4.12E-08 2.83E-07 2.83E-09 4.55E-08 2.51E-07 2.40E-06 2.23E-08 1.22E-07 4.73E-07

Plant-Storage Piles Limestone Limestone PB3 0.0687 0.30 1.59E-07 3.84E-08 5.49E-09 3.30E-08 2.27E-07 2.27E-09 3.64E-08 2.00E-07 1.92E-06 1.78E-08 9.75E-08 3.78E-07

Storage Piles Subtotal SP 1.9186 8.40 1.24E-05 5.72E-06 2.93E-06 4.56E-06 1.67E-04 1.07E-06 6.34E-05 9.42E-05 4.54E-04 2.22E-07 4.95E-05 1.45E-05

Mining Operation Drilling Limestone/Marl M1 0.2256 0.99 4.51E-07 4.51E-07 4.51E-07 4.51E-07 3.61E-06 2.26E-08 2.48E-06 6.77E-06 4.42E-05 2.48E-09 6.32E-06 3.61E-06

Mining Operation Blasting Limestone/Marl M1 0.3435 1.50 6.87E-07 6.87E-07 6.87E-07 6.87E-07 5.50E-06 3.44E-08 3.78E-06 1.03E-05 6.73E-05 3.78E-09 9.62E-06 5.50E-06

Mining Operation LS/Marl Ripping/Loading Limestone/Marl M1 1.3995 6.13 2.80E-06 2.80E-06 2.80E-06 2.80E-06 2.24E-05 1.40E-07 1.54E-05 4.20E-05 2.74E-04 1.54E-08 3.92E-05 2.24E-05

Mining Operation Spoils Removal/Loading Spoils/Other M2 0.1781 0.78 1.43E-06 3.56E-07 3.56E-07 1.78E-07 7.84E-06 1.78E-08 2.49E-06 5.34E-06 2.26E-05 1.96E-09 9.62E-06 1.60E-06

Mining Operation Overburden Removal/Loading Overburden M3 1.3036 5.71 2.09E-05 2.61E-06 2.61E-06 2.61E-06 4.04E-05 1.30E-07 2.35E-05 3.91E-05 9.13E-05 2.09E-08 5.21E-06 1.04E-05

Mining Operation Overburden Unoading Overburden M4 0.0946 0.41 1.51E-06 1.89E-07 1.89E-07 1.89E-07 2.93E-06 9.46E-09 1.70E-06 2.84E-06 6.62E-06 1.51E-09 3.78E-07 7.57E-07

Mining Operation Subtotal MINE 3.5450 15.53 2.77E-05 7.09E-06 7.09E-06 6.91E-06 8.27E-05 3.54E-07 4.93E-05 1.06E-04 5.06E-04 4.60E-08 7.03E-05 4.43E-05

Grand Total 8.1135 35.54 4.72E-05 1.86E-05 1.50E-05 1.67E-05 3.42E-04 2.06E-06 1.51E-04 2.90E-04 1.50E-03 3.55E-07 2.01E-04 9.60E-05


Carolinas Cement PTE Fugitives-HAP-TAPs

Fugitive HAP & TAP Emissions

Area Equipment Description Material Location

Quarry Primary Crusher 1 & Equip. Limestone/Marl FQ1


Quarry Primary Crusher 2 & Equip. Spoils/Other FQ3


Quarry Radial Stacker Transfer Spoils/Other FQ5

Quarry Stacker to Pile Spoils/Other FQ6


Quarry/Plant Secondary Crusher & Equip. Quarry Blend FQ8

Quarry Subtotal FQ

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 1 Additives F1a

Plant-Unloading Hopper Hopper/Feeder 2 Coal/Coke F1b

Plant-Rail Unloading Enclosed Hopper Coal/Coke F2

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Quarry Blend F3a

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Additives F3b

Plant-Raw Storage Bldg Raw Storage Bldg Coal/Coke F3c





Plant-Marl Transfer Conveyor to Silo Quarry Blend F7A

Plant-Marl Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Quarry Blend F7B

Plant-Additives Transfer Conveyor to Silo Bottom Ash F7C

Plant-Additives Transfer Silo to Enclosed Belt Bottom Ash F7D

Plant-Cement Additives Gypsum/LS Handling Gypsum/LS F8

Plant Subtotal RMHS

Quarry-Storage Piles Limestone/Marl Limestone/Marl PQ1

Quarry-Storage Piles Spoils/Other Spoils/Other PQ2

Quarry-Storage Piles Spoils Spoils/Other PQ3

Quarry-Storage Piles Overburden Overburden PQ4

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Quarry Blend PB1

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Bauxite PB1

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Mill Scale PB1

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Bottom Ash PB1

Plant-Storage Piles Raw Storage Bldg Coal/Coke PB1

Plant-Storage Piles Gypsum Gypsum PB2

Plant-Storage Piles Limestone Limestone PB3

Storage Piles Subtotal SP

Mining Operation Drilling Limestone/Marl M1

Mining Operation Blasting Limestone/Marl M1

Mining Operation LS/Marl Ripping/Loading Limestone/Marl M1

Mining Operation Spoils Removal/Loading Spoils/Other M2

Mining Operation Overburden Removal/Loading Overburden M3

Mining Operation Overburden Unoading Overburden M4

Mining Operation Subtotal MINE

Grand Total



5.87E-06 5.87E-06 5.87E-06 5.87E-06 4.70E-05 2.94E-07 3.23E-05 8.81E-05 5.75E-04 3.23E-08 8.22E-05 4.70E-05

8.89E-07 8.89E-07 8.89E-07 8.89E-07 7.12E-06 4.45E-08 4.89E-06 1.33E-05 8.72E-05 4.89E-09 1.25E-05 7.12E-06

2.99E-06 7.47E-07 7.47E-07 3.74E-07 1.64E-05 3.74E-08 5.23E-06 1.12E-05 4.75E-05 4.11E-09 2.02E-05 3.36E-06

2.26E-07 5.66E-08 5.66E-08 2.83E-08 1.25E-06 2.83E-09 3.96E-07 8.49E-07 3.59E-06 3.11E-10 1.53E-06 2.55E-07

2.26E-07 5.66E-08 5.66E-08 2.83E-08 1.25E-06 2.83E-09 3.96E-07 8.49E-07 3.59E-06 3.11E-10 1.53E-06 2.55E-07

2.26E-07 5.66E-08 5.66E-08 2.83E-08 1.25E-06 2.83E-09 3.96E-07 8.49E-07 3.59E-06 3.11E-10 1.53E-06 2.55E-07

2.26E-07 5.66E-08 5.66E-08 2.83E-08 1.25E-06 2.83E-09 3.96E-07 8.49E-07 3.59E-06 3.11E-10 1.53E-06 2.55E-07

7.37E-06 6.25E-06 6.25E-06 6.06E-06 5.52E-05 3.12E-07 3.49E-05 9.37E-05 5.99E-04 3.44E-08 9.23E-05 4.87E-05

1.80E-05 1.40E-05 1.40E-05 1.33E-05 1.31E-04 6.99E-07 7.89E-05 2.10E-04 1.32E-03 7.69E-08 2.13E-04 1.07E-04

8.95E-07 1.03E-06 2.12E-07 6.80E-07 5.12E-05 4.18E-07 1.20E-05 1.92E-05 8.95E-05 3.71E-08 6.65E-06 5.96E-07

2.24E-07 1.48E-08 2.73E-08 3.28E-08 3.91E-07 3.91E-09 1.38E-07 7.89E-08 4.53E-08 7.81E-09 4.90E-06 5.08E-08

1.40E-07 9.28E-09 1.71E-08 2.05E-08 2.44E-07 2.44E-09 8.64E-08 4.93E-08 2.83E-08 4.88E-09 3.06E-06 3.17E-08

4.47E-06 3.78E-06 3.78E-06 3.67E-06 3.35E-05 1.89E-07 2.12E-05 5.68E-05 3.63E-04 2.08E-08 5.59E-05 2.95E-05

1.79E-06 2.07E-06 4.24E-07 1.36E-06 1.02E-04 8.37E-07 2.40E-05 3.83E-05 1.79E-04 7.43E-08 1.33E-05 1.19E-06

4.48E-07 2.97E-08 5.47E-08 6.56E-08 7.81E-07 7.81E-09 2.77E-07 1.58E-07 9.06E-08 1.56E-08 9.80E-06 1.02E-07

1.12E-06 9.46E-07 9.46E-07 9.18E-07 8.36E-06 4.73E-08 5.29E-06 1.42E-05 9.08E-05 5.20E-09 1.40E-05 7.37E-06

4.47E-07 5.17E-07 1.06E-07 3.40E-07 2.56E-05 2.09E-07 5.99E-06 9.58E-06 4.47E-05 1.86E-08 3.33E-06 2.98E-07

1.12E-06 9.46E-07 9.46E-07 9.18E-07 8.36E-06 4.73E-08 5.29E-06 1.42E-05 9.08E-05 5.20E-09 1.40E-05 7.37E-06

4.47E-07 5.17E-07 1.06E-07 3.40E-07 2.56E-05 2.09E-07 5.99E-06 9.58E-06 4.47E-05 1.86E-08 3.33E-06 2.98E-07

5.58E-07 4.73E-07 4.73E-07 4.59E-07 4.18E-06 2.37E-08 2.64E-06 7.10E-06 4.54E-05 2.60E-09 6.99E-06 3.69E-06

5.58E-07 4.73E-07 4.73E-07 4.59E-07 4.18E-06 2.37E-08 2.64E-06 7.10E-06 4.54E-05 2.60E-09 6.99E-06 3.69E-06

1.24E-07 1.30E-07 3.94E-08 1.12E-07 3.16E-06 1.40E-08 2.01E-06 2.15E-06 1.15E-05 6.70E-09 3.02E-07 1.11E-07

1.24E-07 1.30E-07 3.94E-08 1.12E-07 3.16E-06 1.40E-08 2.01E-06 2.15E-06 1.15E-05 6.70E-09 3.02E-07 1.11E-07

6.98E-07 1.69E-07 2.42E-08 1.45E-07 9.97E-07 9.97E-09 1.60E-07 8.82E-07 8.46E-06 7.85E-08 4.29E-07 1.66E-06

1.32E-05 1.12E-05 7.67E-06 9.63E-06 2.72E-04 2.06E-06 8.97E-05 1.81E-04 1.02E-03 3.05E-07 1.43E-04 5.60E-05

7.52E-07 7.52E-07 7.52E-07 7.52E-07 6.01E-06 3.76E-08 4.13E-06 1.13E-05 7.37E-05 4.13E-09 1.05E-05 6.01E-06

3.01E-06 7.52E-07 7.52E-07 3.76E-07 1.65E-05 3.76E-08 5.26E-06 1.13E-05 4.77E-05 4.13E-09 2.03E-05 3.38E-06

6.01E-06 1.50E-06 1.50E-06 7.52E-07 3.31E-05 7.52E-08 1.05E-05 2.26E-05 9.55E-05 8.27E-09 4.06E-05 6.77E-06

2.41E-05 3.01E-06 3.01E-06 3.01E-06 4.66E-05 1.50E-07 2.71E-05 4.51E-05 1.05E-04 2.41E-08 6.01E-06 1.20E-05

3.01E-06 2.56E-06 2.56E-06 2.48E-06 2.26E-05 1.28E-07 1.43E-05 3.83E-05 2.45E-04 1.41E-08 3.78E-05 1.99E-05

0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

1.89E-06 2.79E-06 1.22E-08 6.77E-07 2.80E-04 2.80E-06 1.01E-05 6.25E-05 2.27E-04 1.08E-08 4.11E-05 2.03E-08

1.26E-05 1.32E-05 4.02E-06 1.14E-05 3.22E-04 1.42E-06 2.05E-04 2.19E-04 1.18E-03 6.84E-07 3.08E-05 1.13E-05

1.32E-06 8.71E-08 1.61E-07 1.93E-07 2.29E-06 2.29E-08 8.12E-07 4.63E-07 2.66E-07 4.59E-08 2.88E-05 2.98E-07

8.68E-07 2.10E-07 3.01E-08 1.80E-07 1.24E-06 1.24E-08 1.99E-07 1.10E-06 1.05E-05 9.77E-08 5.34E-07 2.07E-06

6.95E-07 1.68E-07 2.41E-08 1.44E-07 9.92E-07 9.92E-09 1.59E-07 8.78E-07 8.42E-06 7.82E-08 4.27E-07 1.66E-06

5.43E-05 2.50E-05 1.28E-05 2.00E-05 7.32E-04 4.70E-06 2.78E-04 4.13E-04 1.99E-03 9.71E-07 2.17E-04 6.35E-05

1.98E-06 1.98E-06 1.98E-06 1.98E-06 1.58E-05 9.88E-08 1.09E-05 2.96E-05 1.94E-04 1.09E-08 2.77E-05 1.58E-05

3.01E-06 3.01E-06 3.01E-06 3.01E-06 2.41E-05 1.50E-07 1.66E-05 4.51E-05 2.95E-04 1.66E-08 4.21E-05 2.41E-05

1.23E-05 1.23E-05 1.23E-05 1.23E-05 9.81E-05 6.13E-07 6.74E-05 1.84E-04 1.20E-03 6.74E-08 1.72E-04 9.81E-05

6.24E-06 1.56E-06 1.56E-06 7.80E-07 3.43E-05 7.80E-08 1.09E-05 2.34E-05 9.91E-05 8.58E-09 4.21E-05 7.02E-06

9.14E-05 1.14E-05 1.14E-05 1.14E-05 1.77E-04 5.71E-07 1.03E-04 1.71E-04 4.00E-04 9.14E-08 2.28E-05 4.57E-05

6.63E-06 8.29E-07 8.29E-07 8.29E-07 1.28E-05 4.14E-08 7.46E-06 1.24E-05 2.90E-05 6.63E-09 1.66E-06 3.31E-06

1.21E-04 3.11E-05 3.11E-05 3.03E-05 3.62E-04 1.55E-06 2.16E-04 4.66E-04 2.22E-03 2.01E-07 3.08E-04 1.94E-04

2.07E-04 8.13E-05 6.55E-05 7.32E-05 1.50E-03 9.01E-06 6.62E-04 1.27E-03 6.56E-03 1.55E-06 8.81E-04 4.21E-04


Carolinas Cement PTE Storage Piles

AREA PILE PILE ID Active Silt Material AVG Wind Speed Rain Control TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5

MATERIAL AREA No. Days Content Throughput WIND > 12 mph Days Efficiency Wind Wind Wind Hourly Hourly Hourly

(n) (s) SPEED (f) (p) Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions

(Acres) (days/yr) percent (T/yr) (mph) percent (days/yr) (%) (T/yr) (T/yr) (T/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

Quarry Limestone/Marl (Crusher Feed) 0.5 PQ1 365 3.9 3,411,152 8.6 13.3 118 0 0.38 0.19 0.03 0.0858 0.0429 0.0064

Quarry Spoils/other (Crusher Feed) 0.5 PQ2 365 3.9 434,183 8.6 13.3 118 0 0.38 0.19 0.03 0.0858 0.0429 0.0064

Quarry Spoils (Stacker Pile) 1.0 PQ3 365 3.9 217,092 8.6 13.3 118 0 0.75 0.38 0.06 0.1716 0.0858 0.0129

Quarry Overburden (Active Pile) 2.0 PQ4 365 3.9 3,177,255 8.6 13.3 118 0 1.50 0.75 0.11 0.3433 0.1716 0.0257

Plant Limestone/Marl/Spoils (Bldg) 2.3 PB1 365 3.9 3,628,243 8.6 13.3 0 50 1.28 0.64 0.10 0.2917 0.1458 0.0219

Plant Bauxite 0.0 PB1 365 6.0 0 8.6 13.3 0 50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Plant Mill Scale 0.10 PB1 365 9.5 33,770 8.6 13.3 0 50 0.14 0.07 0.01 0.0309 0.0154 0.0023

Plant Bottom Ash 0.25 PB1 365 80 391,332 8.6 13.3 0 50 2.85 1.42 0.21 0.6503 0.3252 0.0488

Plant Coal/Coke 0.7 PB1 365 4.6 283,824 8.6 13.3 0 50 0.46 0.23 0.03 0.1047 0.0524 0.0079

Subtotal (Raw Storage Bldg) 4.72 2.36 0.35 1.0776 0.5388 0.0808

Plant Gypsum 0.5 PB2 365 3.9 127,549 8.6 13.3 118 0 0.38 0.19 0.03 0.0858 0.0429 0.0064

Plant Limestone 0.4 PB3 365 3.9 102,040 8.6 13.3 118 0 0.30 0.15 0.02 0.0687 0.0343 0.0051

SP Total All Piles 8.40 4.20 0.63 1.9186 0.9593 0.1439

Equation for Wind Erosion:

References: Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008, p. 4-17

Ef = 1.7*(s/1.5)*(f/15)*((365-p)/235)*(1-(C/100)) TSP (lbs/acre/day) PM10 fraction = 0.5

E = A*n*Ef/2000 TSP (tons/yr) PM2.5 fraction (AP-42 0.075

s = Silt content of the aggregate (%) Typical silt contents of materials from AP-42 Table 13.2.4-1

f = Percent of time that the unobstructed wind speed exceeds 12 mph at the mean pile height

p = Number of days with >= 0.01 in. of precipitation per year

C = Overall control efficiency (%) Estimated 50% control efficiency for piles in raw material storage building due to wind reduction

A = Size of the pile (acres)

n = Number of days per year the pile is continuously active


Carolinas Cement PTE Mining

Quarry Drilling

Source AREA Drill Average Number TSP PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 Control TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10

Location Footage Depth of Holes Emission Fraction Factor Fraction Factor Efficiency Emissions Emissions Emissions Hourly Hourly

Factor Emissions Emissions

(ft/yr) (ft/hole) (holes/yr) (lb/hole) (lb/hole) (lb/hole) (%) (T/yr) (T/yr) (T/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

M1 Quarry 76,000 5 15,200 1.3 0.52 0.68 0.03 0.04 90 0.99 0.51 0.03 0.2256 0.1173

Notes

TSP emission factor from AP-42 Table 11.9-4

Assume PM10 and PM2.5 fractions are similar to blasting, from Table 11.9-1

Control efficiency based on drill rigs using either fabric filters or wet suppression

Quarry Blasting

Source AREA Number Average TSP PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 Control TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10

Location of Blasts Blast Emission Fraction Factor Fraction Factor Efficiency Emissions Emissions Emissions Hourly Hourly

Area, A Factor Emissions Emissions

(blasts/yr) (sq ft) (lb/blast) (lb/hole) (lb/hole) (%) (T/yr) (T/yr) (T/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

M1 Quarry 76 20,000 39.60 0.52 20.59 0.03 1.19 0 1.50 0.78 0.05 0.3435 0.1786

Notes

TSP emission factor (lb/blast) from AP-42 Table 11.9-1

0.000014 x (A)^1.5

PM10 and PM2.5 fractions from AP-42 Table 11.9-1

Quarry Ripping/Loading/Unloading

Source AREA OPERATION MATERIAL Volume TSP PM10 PM10 Units PM2.5 PM2.5 Note Control TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10

Location Throughput Basis Factor Fraction Factor Fraction Factor Efficiency Emissions Emissions Emissions Hourly Hourly

Emissions Emissions

(T/yr) (CY/yr) (lb/Unit) (lb/Unit) (lb/Unit) (%) (T/yr) (T/yr) (T/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

M1 Quarry LS/Marl Ripping 3,411,152 2,526,779 1.80E-02 0.50 9.00E-03 CY 0.075 1.35E-03 1 75% 5.69 2.84 0.43 1.2980 0.6490

M1 Quarry LS/Marl Loading 3,411,152 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 ton 0.072 1.87E-05 2 0.44 0.21 0.03 0.1015 0.0480

Subtotal 6.13 3.05 0.46 1.3995 0.6970

M2 Quarry Spoils/Other Removal 434,183 321,617 1.80E-02 0.50 9.00E-03 CY 0.075 1.35E-03 1 75% 0.72 0.36 0.05 0.1652 0.0826

M2 Quarry Spoils/Other Loading 434,183 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 ton 0.072 1.87E-05 2 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.0129 0.0061

Subtotal 0.78 0.39 0.06 0.1781 0.0887

M3 Quarry Overburden Removal 3,177,255 2,353,522 1.80E-02 0.50 9.00E-03 CY 0.075 1.35E-03 1 75% 5.30 2.65 0.40 1.2090 0.6045

M3 Quarry Overburden Loading 3,177,255 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 ton 0.072 1.87E-05 2 0.41 0.20 0.03 0.0946 0.0447

Subtotal 5.71 2.84 0.43 1.3036 0.6492

M4 Quarry Overburden Unloading 3,177,255 2.61E-04 0.47 1.23E-04 ton 0.072 1.87E-05 2 0.41 0.20 0.03 0.0946 0.0447

Subtotal Group 13.03 6.48 0.97 2.9758 1.4797



MINE (All Operations) GRAND TOTAL 15.53 7.78 1.05 3.5450 1.7757

Notes

1 PM-10 emission factor for ripping/removal from FIRE database SCC 30501036

1 cubic yard marl or overburden = 1.35 tons as excavated

Assume TSP = 2 x PM-10 (PM-10 fraction = 0.5)

Assume PM2.5 fraction of TSP = 0.075

Control efficiency for material mining operations estimated at a minimum of 75% due to high moisture content.

2 Controlled emission factors are used for material loading operations (include moisture).



Quarry Drilling

Source AREA Drill

Location Footage

(ft/yr)

M1 Quarry 76,000

Notes

TSP emission factor from AP-42 T

Assume PM10 and PM2.5 fraction

Control efficiency based on drill rig

Quarry Blasting

Source AREA Number

Location of Blasts

(blasts/yr)

M1 Quarry 76

Notes

TSP emission factor (lb/blast) from

0.000014 x (A)^1.5

PM10 and PM2.5 fractions from A

Quarry Ripping/Loading/Unloading

Source AREA OPERATION

Location

M1 Quarry LS/Marl Ripping

M1 Quarry LS/Marl Loading

M2 Quarry Spoils/Other Removal

M2 Quarry Spoils/Other Loading

M3 Quarry Overburden Removal

M3 Quarry Overburden Loading

M4 Quarry Overburden Unloading

PM2.5

Hourly

Emissions

(lb/hr)

0.0068

PM2.5

Hourly

Emissions

(lb/hr)

0.0103

PM2.5

Hourly

Emissions

(lb/hr)

0.0974

0.0073

0.1046

0.0124

0.0009

0.0133

0.0907

0.0068

0.0974

0.0068

0.2222



MINE (All Operations)

Notes

1 PM-10 emission factor for

1 cubic yard marl or overb

Assume TSP = 2 x PM-10

Assume PM2.5 fraction of

Control efficiency for mate

2 Controlled emission facto

0.2392


Carolinas Cement PTE Traffic Inputs

Bauxite Plant 0 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 0

Bottom Ash Plant 391,332 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 15,653

Mill Scale Plant 33,770 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 1,351

Coal/Coke/Fuels Plant 113,530 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 4,541

Gypsum Plant 127,549 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 5,102

Cement bulk Plant 433,187 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 17,327

Cement bags Plant 481,319 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 19,253

Limestone Plant 102,040 tons/year Truck 15 tons 25 tons 4,082

Employees Plant 100 employees/day Auto/Pickup 1.75 tons 1 employee 36,500

Marl/Limestone Quarry 3,411,152 tons/year Truck 77.9 tons 100 tons 34,112

Spoils/Other Quarry 434,183 tons/year Truck 77.9 tons 100 tons 4,342

Overburden Quarry 3,177,255 tons/year Truck 77.9 tons 100 tons 31,773

Total TripsMaterial Quantity TransportedVehicle Weight

(Empty)Load CapacityVehicle TypeLocation


Carolinas Cement PTE All Roads

Unit Road Type Vehicle Total Total TSP PM10 PM2.5ID Type Length Mileage Emissions Emissions Emissions

(mi) (Mi/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr)

PLTRD Paved Trucks/Autos 1.06 43,533 9.31 1.81 0.44QURD Unpaved Trucks 1.45 40,141 69.57 19.78 1.98

Total 78.87 21.59 2.42

Annual Emissions

All Roads Emission Summary


Carolinas Cement PTE Paved Summary

Paved Road Emission Summary

Segment Segment Segment Description Direction Silt Material Total TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5

No. Length Length -Way Loading Trips Mileage E Factor E Factor E Factor Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions

(ft) (mi) (g/m2) (#/yr) (Mi/yr) lb/VMT lb/VMT lb/VMT (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

PR1 635 0.120 South entrance 1 0.20 43,975 5,289 0.54 0.10 0.03 1.420 0.276 0.068 0.3243 0.0631 0.0156

PR2 2127 0.403 Additives truck route 2 0.20 25,627 20,647 0.47 0.09 0.02 4.830 0.939 0.231 1.1028 0.2144 0.0528

PR3 114 0.022 Entrance connector 1 0.20 30,729 752 0.33 0.06 0.02 0.122 0.024 0.006 0.0279 0.0054 0.0013

PR4 603 0.114 Gyp truck route 2 0.20 9,184 2,098 0.47 0.09 0.02 0.491 0.095 0.024 0.1120 0.0218 0.0054

PR5 305 0.058 Internal connector 1 0.20 26,647 1,539 0.19 0.04 0.01 0.145 0.028 0.007 0.0331 0.0064 0.0015

PR6 95 0.018 Exit connector 1 0.20 26,647 479 0.19 0.04 0.01 0.045 0.009 0.002 0.0103 0.0020 0.0005

PR7 95 0.018 Cement silo entrance 1 0.20 17,327 312 0.19 0.04 0.01 0.029 0.006 0.001 0.0067 0.0013 0.0003

PR8 76 0.014 Cement silo exit 1 0.20 17,327 249 0.82 0.16 0.04 0.102 0.020 0.005 0.0234 0.0046 0.0011

PR9 502 0.095 South exit 1 0.20 43,975 4,181 0.40 0.08 0.02 0.840 0.163 0.040 0.1918 0.0373 0.0092

PR10 225 0.043 Employee parking 2 0.20 36,500 3,111 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.011 0.002 0.000 0.0025 0.0004 0.0000

PR11 420 0.080 Packing entrance 1 0.20 17,327 1,378 0.82 0.16 0.04 0.566 0.110 0.027 0.1292 0.0252 0.0062

PR12 420 0.080 Packing exit 1 0.20 43,975 3,498 0.40 0.08 0.02 0.703 0.137 0.034 0.1605 0.0312 0.0077

TOTAL 1.064 43,533 9.305 1.808 0.445 2.1244 0.4128 0.1016

Annual Emissions Hourly Emissions


Carolinas Cement PTE Paved Roads

Paved Roads Truck Trips

Segment Segment Material Silt Empty Capacity Loaded Avg Empty Loaded Truck Material Material Material Empty Loaded Total Weight x

No. Length Loading Weight Net Thruput Trips Mileage Mileage Mileage Mileage

(mi) (g/m2) (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) (T/yr) (#/yr) (Mi/yr) (Mi/yr) (Mi/yr)

PR1 0.120 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 425,102 17,004 0 2,045 2,045 81,800

PR1 0.120 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 113,530 4,541 0 546 546 21,846

PR1 0.120 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 127,549 5,102 0 614 614 24,544

PR1 0.120 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 433,187 17,327 2,084 0 2,084 31,258

PR1 0.120 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR1 0.120 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR1 0.120 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR1 0.120 SUBTOTAL 0.20 30.1 43,975 2,084 3,205 5,289 159,448

Truck Trips




PR2 0.403 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 425,102 17,004 6,850 6,850 13,700 376,747

PR2 0.403 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 113,530 4,541 1,829 1,829 3,659 100,616

PR2 0.403 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 127,549 0 0 0 0

PR2 0.403 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR2 0.403 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR2 0.403 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 102,040 4,082 1,644 1,644 3,288 90,433

PR2 0.403 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR2 0.403 SUBTOTAL 0.20 27.5 25,627 10,324 10,324 20,647 567,795

Truck Trips




PR3 0.022 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 425,102 17,004 367 0 367 5,507

PR3 0.022 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 113,530 4,541 98 0 98 1,471

PR3 0.022 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 127,549 5,102 0 110 110 4,406

PR3 0.022 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR3 0.022 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR3 0.022 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 102,040 4,082 88 88 176 4,847

PR3 0.022 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR3 0.022 SUBTOTAL 0.20 21.6 30,729 553 198 752 16,231

Truck Weights

Truck Weights

Truck Weights



Truck Trips




PR4 0.114 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 425,102 0 0 0 0

PR4 0.114 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 113,530 0 0 0 0

PR4 0.114 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 127,549 5,102 583 583 1,165 32,047

PR4 0.114 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR4 0.114 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR4 0.114 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X X 27.5 25 102,040 4,082 466 466 932 25,637

PR4 0.114 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR4 0.114 SUBTOTAL 0.20 27.5 9,184 1,049 1,049 2,098 57,684

Truck Trips





PR5 0.058 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 113,530 4,541 262 0 262 3,935

PR5 0.058 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 127,549 5,102 295 0 295 4,421

PR5 0.058 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR5 0.058 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR5 0.058 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR5 0.058 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR5 0.058 SUBTOTAL 0.20 15.0 26,647 1,539 0 1,539 23,089

Truck Trips





PR6 0.018 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 113,530 4,541 82 0 82 1,226

PR6 0.018 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 127,549 5,102 92 0 92 1,377

PR6 0.018 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR6 0.018 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR6 0.018 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR6 0.018 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

Truck Weights

Truck Weights

Truck Weights



PR6 0.018 SUBTOTAL 0.20 15.0 26,647 479 0 479 7,192

Truck Trips




PR7 0.018 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 425,102 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 113,530 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 127,549 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 433,187 17,327 312 0 312 4,676

PR7 0.018 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR7 0.018 SUBTOTAL 0.20 15.0 17,327 312 0 312 4,676

Truck Trips




PR8 0.014 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 425,102 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 113,530 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 127,549 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 433,187 17,327 0 249 249 9,976

PR8 0.014 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR8 0.014 SUBTOTAL 0.20 40.0 17,327 0 249 249 9,976

Truck Trips




PR9 0.095 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 425,102 17,004 1,617 0 1,617 24,250

PR9 0.095 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 113,530 4,541 432 0 432 6,476

PR9 0.095 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 127,549 5,102 485 0 485 7,276

PR9 0.095 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 433,187 17,327 0 1,647 1,647 65,897

PR9 0.095 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR9 0.095 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

Truck Weights

Truck Weights

Truck Weights



PR9 0.095 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR9 0.095 SUBTOTAL 0.20 24.9 43,975 2,534 1,647 4,181 103,900

Truck Trips




PR10 0.043 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 425,102 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 113,530 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 127,549 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 433,187 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR10 0.043 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 X X 1.8 0 100 36,500 1,555 1,555 3,111 5,444

PR10 0.043 SUBTOTAL 0.20 1.8 36,500 1,555 1,555 3,111 5,444

Truck Trips




PR11 0.080 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 425,102 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 113,530 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 127,549 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 433,187 17,327 0 1,378 1,378 55,133

PR11 0.080 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR11 0.080 SUBTOTAL 0.20 40.0 17,327 0 1,378 1,378 55,133

Truck Trips




PR12 0.080 Raw Additives 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 425,102 17,004 1,353 0 1,353 20,289

PR12 0.080 Coal/coke 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 113,530 4,541 361 0 361 5,418

PR12 0.080 Gypsum 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 15.0 25 127,549 5,102 406 0 406 6,088

PR12 0.080 Cement bulk 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 X 40.0 25 433,187 17,327 0 1,378 1,378 55,133

PR12 0.080 Cement bags 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 481,319 0 0 0 0

Truck Weights

Truck Weights

Truck Weights



PR12 0.080 Limestone 0.20 15 25 40 27.5 102,040 0 0 0 0

PR12 0.080 Employees 0.20 1.75 0 1.75 1.75 100 0 0 0 0

PR12 0.080 SUBTOTAL 0.20 24.9 43,975 2,120 1,378 3,498 86,928

GRAND TOTAL 43,533

Notes: Emissions based on AP-42 Section 13.2.1 (11/06), Equation (2).

E = [k * (sL/2)^0.65 * (W/3)^1.5 - C] * (1 - P/4N)

where E = emission factor, lb/VMT k (PM-30) = 0.082 lb/VMT

k = particle size multiplier k (PM-10) = 0.016 lb/VMT

sL = road surface silt loading, g/m^2 k (PM-2.5) = 0.0024 lb/VMT

W = average vehicle weight, tons C (PM-30) = 0.00047 lb/VMT

C = 1980's vehicle exhaust, brake & tire wear, lb/VMT C (PM-10) = 0.00047 lb/VMT

P = number of days with >= 0.01 in precipitation C (PM-2.5) = 0.00036 lb/VMT

N = number of days in the averaging period (365) P = 118 days (Wilmington average)

Silt loading will be minimized by use of vacuum sweeping and/or water flushing



Paved Roads

Segment Segment Material

No. Length

(mi)

PR1 0.120 Raw Additives

PR1 0.120 Coal/coke

PR1 0.120 Gypsum

PR1 0.120 Cement bulk

PR1 0.120 Cement bags

PR1 0.120 Limestone

PR1 0.120 Employees

PR1 0.120 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR2 0.403 Coal/coke

PR2 0.403 Gypsum



PR2 0.403 Limestone

PR2 0.403 Employees

PR2 0.403 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR3 0.022 Coal/coke

PR3 0.022 Gypsum



PR3 0.022 Limestone

PR3 0.022 Employees

PR3 0.022 SUBTOTAL

TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5

E Factor E Factor E Factor Emissions Emissions Emissions

lb/VMT lb/VMT lb/VMT (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr)

0.54 0.10 0.03 1.420 0.276 0.068




0.47 0.09 0.02 4.830 0.939 0.231




0.33 0.06 0.02 0.122 0.024 0.006




No. Length

(mi)


PR4 0.114 Coal/coke

PR4 0.114 Gypsum



PR4 0.114 Limestone

PR4 0.114 Employees

PR4 0.114 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR5 0.058 Coal/coke

PR5 0.058 Gypsum



PR5 0.058 Limestone

PR5 0.058 Employees

PR5 0.058 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR6 0.018 Coal/coke

PR6 0.018 Gypsum



PR6 0.018 Limestone

PR6 0.018 Employees




0.47 0.09 0.02 0.491 0.095 0.024




0.19 0.04 0.01 0.145 0.028 0.007






PR6 0.018 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR7 0.018 Coal/coke

PR7 0.018 Gypsum



PR7 0.018 Limestone

PR7 0.018 Employees

PR7 0.018 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR8 0.014 Coal/coke

PR8 0.014 Gypsum



PR8 0.014 Limestone

PR8 0.014 Employees

PR8 0.014 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR9 0.095 Coal/coke

PR9 0.095 Gypsum



PR9 0.095 Limestone

0.19 0.04 0.01 0.045 0.009 0.002




0.19 0.04 0.01 0.029 0.006 0.001




0.82 0.16 0.04 0.102 0.020 0.005






PR9 0.095 Employees

PR9 0.095 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


PR10 0.043 Coal/coke

PR10 0.043 Gypsum



PR10 0.043 Limestone

PR10 0.043 Employees

PR10 0.043 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)



PR11 0.080 Gypsum





PR11 0.080 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)



PR12 0.080 Gypsum



0.40 0.08 0.02 0.840 0.163 0.040




0.01 0.00 0.00 0.011 0.002 0.000




0.82 0.16 0.04 0.566 0.110 0.027








PR12 0.080 SUBTOTAL

GRAND TOTAL

Notes:

0.40 0.08 0.02 0.703 0.137 0.034

9.305 1.808 0.445


Carolinas Cement PTE Unpaved Summary

Unpaved Road Emission Summary

Segment Segment Segment Description Direction Silt Material Total TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5 TSP PM10 PM2.5

No. Length Length -Way Content Trips Mileage E Factor E Factor E Factor Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions

(ft) (mi) (%) (#/yr) (Mi/yr) lb/VMT lb/VMT lb/VMT (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr)

UR1 1500 0.284 Limestone/Marl haul 2 8.3 34,112 19,382 13.86 3.94 0.39 33.589 9.552 0.955 7.6688 2.1807 0.2181

UR2 3750 0.710 Spoils/Other haul 2 8.3 4,342 6,167 13.86 3.94 0.39 10.688 3.039 0.304 2.4403 0.6939 0.0694

UR3 2425 0.459 Overburden loop 1 8.3 31,773 14,593 13.86 3.94 0.39 25.290 7.191 0.719 5.7739 1.6419 0.1642

TOTAL 1.454 40,141 69.568 19.782 1.978 15.883 4.517 0.452

Annual Emissions Hourly Emissions


Carolinas Cement PTE Unpaved Roads

Unpaved RoadsSurface


No. Length Content Weight Net Thruput Trips Mileage Mileage Mileage Mileage

(mi) (%) (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) (T/yr) (#/yr) (Mi/yr) (Mi/yr) (Mi/yr)

UR1 0.284 Marl/limestone 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 X X 127.9 100 3,411,152 34,112 9,691 9,691 19,382 2,478,754

UR1 0.284 Spoils 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 434,183 0 0 0 0

UR1 0.284 Overburden 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 3,177,255 0 0 0 0

UR1 0.284 SUBTOTAL 8.3 127.9 34,112 9,691 9,691 19,382 2,478,754

Surface




UR2 0.710 Marl/limestone 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 3,411,152 0 0 0 0

UR2 0.710 Spoils 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 X X 127.9 100 434,183 4,342 3,084 3,084 6,167 788,761

UR2 0.710 Overburden 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 3,177,255 0 0 0 0

UR2 0.710 SUBTOTAL 8.3 127.9 4,342 3,084 3,084 6,167 788,761

Surface




UR3 0.459 Marl/limestone 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 3,411,152 0 0 0 0

UR3 0.459 Spoils 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 434,183 0 0 0 0

UR3 0.459 Overburden 8.3 78 100 178 127.893 X X 127.9 100 3,177,255 31,773 7,296 7,296 14,593 1,866,272

UR3 0.459 SUBTOTAL 8.3 127.9 31,773 7,296 7,296 14,593 1,866,272

GRAND TOTAL 40,141

Notes: E = k * (s/12)^a * (W/3)^b * (365 - P)/365 for industrial unpaved roads

where E = emission factor, lb/VMT Constant PM-30 PM-10 PM-2.5

k = particle size multiplier k 4.9 1.5 0.15

s = surface material silt content, % a 0.7 0.9 0.9

W = average vehicle weight, tons b 0.45 0.45 0.45

P = number of days with >= 0.01 in precipitation

a, b = constants for specific partical size P = 118 days (Wilmington average)

Emission factors from AP-42 Section 13.2.2 (11/06), Equations (1a) & (2). Silt content based on stone quarrying haul road (Table 13.2.2-1).

A control efficiency of 75% was used to account for natural surface moisure or watering as needed at an equivalent surface moisture ratio of 2

(Figure 13.2.2-2).

Truck Weights Truck Trips




Carolinas Cement PTE Unpaved Roads

Unpaved Roads


No. Length

(mi)

UR1 0.284 Marl/limestone

UR1 0.284 Spoils

UR1 0.284 Overburden

UR1 0.284 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


UR2 0.710 Spoils


UR2 0.710 SUBTOTAL


No. Length

(mi)


UR3 0.459 Spoils


UR3 0.459 SUBTOTAL

GRAND TOTAL

Notes:

where

TSP PM10 PM2.5 Control TSP PM10 PM2.5

E Factor E Factor E Factor Efficiency Emissions Emissions Emissions

lb/VMT lb/VMT lb/VMT (%) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr) (Ton/yr)

13.86 3.94 0.39 75% 33.589 9.552 0.955




13.86 3.94 0.39 75% 10.688 3.039 0.304




13.86 3.94 0.39 75% 25.290 7.191 0.719

69.57 19.78 1.98


Carolinas Cement PM10-SO2-NOX Emissions Summary

Version 102008

Plantwide Emissions

EU DescriptionPM10

tons/yr

SO2

tons/yr

NOX

tons/yr

PM10

lb/hr

SO2

lb/hr

NOX

lb/hr

PM10

lb/hr

SO2

lb/hr

NOX

lb/hrPoint Sources

Kiln System 391.41 1456.35 2135.25 89.36 450.00 487.50 89.36 332.50 487.50

Raw Mill & Kiln Feed 17.56 0.00 0.00 4.01 0.00 0.00 4.01 0.00 0.00

Coal/Coke System 10.57 0.00 0.00 2.41 0.00 0.00 2.41 0.00 0.00

Clinker Transfer & Storage 2.45 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00

Finish Mills 48.55 0.00 0.00 11.08 0.00 0.00 11.08 0.00 0.00

Cement Transfer & Storage 15.99 0.00 0.00 3.65 0.00 0.00 3.65 0.00 0.00

Existing Terminal 1.89 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00

Emergency Generator 0.07 0.10 2.78 0.29 0.40 11.11 0.02 0.02 0.63

Subtotal Point Sources 488.48 1456.45 2138.03 111.80 450.40 498.61 111.53 332.52 488.13

Fugitive Sources

Quarry Equipment 3.20 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00

Plant Process Equipment 2.18 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00

Wind Erosion - Storage Piles 4.20 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.00

Mining Operations 7.78 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.00 0.00

Plant Roads 1.81 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00

Quarry Roads 19.78 0.00 0.00 4.52 0.00 0.00 4.52 0.00 0.00

Subtotal Fugitive Sources 38.96 0.00 0.00 8.89 0.00 0.00 8.89 0.00 0.00

Total Emissions 527.44 1,456.45 2,138.03 120.69 450.40 498.61 120.42 332.52 488.13

Notes

Kiln PM10 emissions include an estimate of condensible particulate matter.

Normal Operation (Mill On & Long-term) Mill Off Condition (Short-term SO2)

Kiln Stack Parameters: Flow 673,804 acfm Flow 653,251 acfm

Temp 193 deg F Temp 435 deg F

Height 410.1 ft Height 410.1 ft

Diameter 14.76 ft Diameter 14.76 ft

Maximum Annual Maximum Hourly Average Hourly

W:\5000\050020\050020.0051\PSD Application Revision 10-08 (Final Documents)\Tab C - Plantwide Potential Emissions Inventory\Carolinas Cement PM10-SO2-NOX Page 1 of 3

Carolinas Cement PM10-SO2-NOX PM Emissions

Plantwide Emissions

EU Description

PM

Filterable

lb/hr

PM

Condensible

lb/hr

PM Total

lb/hr

PM10

Filterable

lb/hr

PM10

Condensible

lb/hr

PM10

Total

lb/hr

PM2.5

Filterable

lb/hr

PM2.5

Condensible

lb/hr

PM2.5

Total

lb/hr

Point Sources

Kiln System 49.36 40.00 89.36 49.36 40.00 89.36 26.44 40.00 66.44

Raw Mill & Kiln Feed 4.77 0.00 4.77 4.01 0.00 4.01 2.15 0.00 2.15

Coal/Coke System 2.87 0.00 2.87 2.41 0.00 2.41 1.29 0.00 1.29

Clinker Transfer & Storage 0.66 0.00 0.66 0.56 0.00 0.56 0.30 0.00 0.30

Finish Mills 13.19 0.00 13.19 11.08 0.00 11.08 5.94 0.00 5.94

Cement Transfer & Storage 4.35 0.00 4.35 3.65 0.00 3.65 1.96 0.00 1.96

Existing Terminal 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.23 0.00 0.23

Emergency Generator 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.28 0.00 0.28

Subtotal Point Sources 76.08 40.00 116.08 71.80 40.00 111.80 38.59 40.00 78.59

Fugitive Sources

Quarry Equipment 1.60 0.00 1.60 0.73 0.00 0.73 0.13 0.00 0.13

Plant Process Equipment 1.05 0.00 1.05 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.08 0.00 0.08

Wind Erosion - Storage Piles 1.92 0.00 1.92 0.96 0.00 0.96 0.14 0.00 0.14

Mining Operations 3.54 0.00 3.54 1.78 0.00 1.78 0.24 0.00 0.24

Plant Roads 2.12 0.00 2.12 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.10 0.00 0.10

Quarry Roads 15.88 0.00 15.88 4.52 0.00 4.52 0.45 0.00 0.45

Subtotal Fugitive Sources 26.12 0.00 26.12 8.89 0.00 8.89 1.14 0.00 1.14

Total Emissions 102.20 40.00 142.20 80.69 40.00 120.69 39.73 40.00 79.73

Notes

Maximum hourly emissions are shown

PM2.5 HourlyPM Hourly PM10 Hourly


Carolinas Cement PM10-SO2-NOX PM Size Distribution

PM, fraction

Plantwide

emissions,

lb/hr

Percent

less than

or equal to

AP-42 Table

11.6-5

(reference only)

PM, range

Plantwide

emissions,

lb/hr

Percent in

range

PM10

Only, lb/hr

Percent in

range

PM

CondensiblePM10 Total

Percent in

range

PM(TSP) 102.20 100

PM20 102.20 100 100 PM15-PM20 14.79 14.5

PM15 87.41 85.5 89 PM10-PM15 6.72 6.6

PM10 80.69 79.0 84 PM5-PM10 7.35 7.2 7.35 9.1 7.35 6.1

PM5 73.34 71.8 77 PM2.5-PM5 33.61 32.9 33.61 41.7 33.61 27.8

PM2.5 39.73 38.9 45 PM0.5-PM2.5 39.73 38.9 39.73 49.2 40.00 79.73 66.1

Total 102.20 100.0 80.69 100.0 40.00 120.69 100.0

Notes

PM, PM10, and PM2.5 are calculated plantwide hourly emissions from Carolinas Cement potential emission inventory

PM15 and PM5 emissions are interpolated values adjusted using data in AP-42 Table 11.6-5 (Average Particle Size Distribution for

Portland Cement Kilns)

Filterable Emissions Filterable Emissions Filterable + Condensible


TAB D

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS – REVISED

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS

Prepared for

Carolinas Cement Company LLC Castle Hayne, North Carolina Plant

PN 050020.0051

Prepared by

Environmental Quality Management, Inc. Cedar Terrace Office Park, Suite 250 3325 Durham-Chapel Hill Boulevard

Durham, North Carolina 27707

February 25, 2008 (Revised April 8, 2008)

(Revised October 20, 2008)

ii

CONTENTS Section Page Tables............................................................................................................................................. iv

1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Project Description ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Cement Manufacturing and Control Technology Requirements ................................ 1 1.3 Control Technology Requirements ..............................................................................2

2 BACT Analysis for PM and PM10 ........................................................................................... 4

2.1 Sources of PM/PM10.................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Identification of Control Options for PM.................................................................... 4 2.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible Options for PM ............................................... 8 2.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible PM Control Options ............................................. 10 2.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible PM Control Options ......................................... 13 2.6 Review of Recent Permit Limits ............................................................................... 14 2.7 Selection of BACT for PM........................................................................................ 14

3 BACT Analysis for SO2......................................................................................................... 18

3.1 Description of SO2 Reaction Processes..................................................................... 18 3.2 Identification of SO2 Control Options ...................................................................... 19 3.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible SO2 Control Options..................................... 30 3.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible SO2 Control Options............................................. 32 3.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible SO2 Control Options......................................... 33 3.6 Review of Recent Permit Limits ............................................................................... 33 3.7 Selection of BACT for SO2 ....................................................................................... 35

4 BACT Analysis for NOx ........................................................................................................ 36

4.1 NOx Formation and Control Mechanisms ................................................................. 36 4.2 Identification of NOx Control Options ...................................................................... 39 4.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible NOx Control Options .................................... 49 4.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible NOx Control Options............................................ 50 4.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible NOx Control Options ........................................ 51 4.6 Review of Recent Permit Limits ............................................................................... 51 4.7 Selection of BACT for NOx ...................................................................................... 53

iii

CONTENTS (continued) Section Page 5 BACT Analysis for CO and VOC ......................................................................................... 54

5.1 CO and VOC Formation Processes ........................................................................... 54 5.2 Identification of CO/VOC Control Options .............................................................. 56 5.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible CO/VOC Control Options ............................ 58 5.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible CO/VOC Control Options.................................... 60 5.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible CO/VOC Control Options ................................ 60 5.6 Review of Kiln Permit Limits ................................................................................... 60 5.7 Selection of BACT for CO and VOC........................................................................ 63

6 Summary of Proposed BACT Emission Limits..................................................................... 64

Appendices A SO2 Emissions Diagram

B Cost Calculations for SO2

C Cost Calculations for NOx

iv

TABLES

Number Page

1 Ranking of Technically Feasible Control Options Non-Fugitive Process Sources - PM... 10

2 Ranking of Technically Feasible Control Options Paved Roads - PM10 ............................ 12

3 Ranking of Technically Feasible Control Options Unpaved Roads - PM10 ....................... 13

4 Summary of PM BACT Determinations for Cement Kilns and Coolers Since 2000......... 15

5 SO2 Reaction Processes ...................................................................................................... 18

6 Ranking of Technically Feasible Control Options Preheater/Precalciner Kiln

System - SO2 .................................................................................................................... 333

7 Summary of Impact Analysis for SO2 ................................................................................ 33

8 Summary of Recent SO2 Permit Determinations for Cement Kilns (2000-Present) .......... 34

9 Ranking of Technically Feasible Control Options Preheater/Precalciner Kiln

Systems - NOx .................................................................................................................... 51

10 Summary of Impact Analysis for NOx................................................................................ 51

11 Summary of Recent NOx Permit Determinations for Cement Kilns (2000-Present).......... 52

12 Summary of Recent CO Permit Determinations for Cement Kilns (2000-Present) ........... 61

13 Summary of Recent VOC Permit Determinations for Cement Kilns (2000-Present) ........ 62

14 Proposed BACT Limits....................................................................................................... 64

1

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

Carolinas Cement Company LLC (CCC) is proposing to construct a modern Portland

cement manufacturing facility at the site of an existing cement storage terminal operated by

Roanoke Cement Company near Castle Hayne, North Carolina. The plant will include a multi-

stage preheater-precalciner kiln with an in-line raw mill, coal mill, and clinker cooler venting

through the main stack. Production is expected to be 6000 tons per day (tons/day) and 2,190,000

tons per year (tons/yr) of clinker and approximately 2,400,000 tons/yr of cement. Fuels may

include coal, petroleum coke, fuel oil, biomass fuels, and natural gas. The raw materials for

clinker production may include limestone/marl, clay, quarry spoils, bauxite, slag, fly ash/bottom

ash, sand, and/or mill scale. Synthetic gypsum or natural gypsum will be milled with the clinker

to produce cement. Associated processes will include mining, crushing, blending, grinding,

material handling and storage for raw materials, fuels, clinker, and finished cement. Cement will

be shipped by rail and truck. The project will also include a diesel emergency generator set.

1.2 Cement Manufacturing

Portland cement is used in almost all construction applications including homes, public

buildings, roads, industrial plants, dams, bridges, and many other structures. Therefore, the

quality of Portland cement must meet very demanding standards. The manufacture of a high

quality Portland cement begins with the use of a high quality calcium carbonate material (i.e.,

marl or limestone) and the production of a high quality cement clinker.

In the Portland cement manufacturing process, raw materials such as limestone, marl,

clay, sand, and iron ore are heated to their fusion temperature, typically 1,400º to 1,500ºC

(2,550º to 2,750ºF), in a refractory lined kiln by burning various fuels such as coal, coke, and

other fuels mentioned above. Burning an appropriately proportioned mixture of raw materials at

a suitable temperature produces hard fused nodules called "clinker," which are cooled and then

2

mixed with calcium sulfate (gypsum) and ground to a desired fineness. Different types of

cements are produced by using appropriate kiln feed composition, blending the clinker with the

desired amount of gypsum, and grinding the product mixture to appropriate fineness.

Manufacture of cements of all types involves the same basic high temperature fusion, clinkering

and fine grinding process.

There are four primary types of refractory lined kilns used in the Portland cement

industry: long wet kilns, long dry kilns, preheater kilns, and preheater/precalciner kilns. The long

wet, long dry, and most preheater kilns have only one fuel combustion zone, whereas the newer

preheater kilns with a riser duct and the preheater/precalciner kilns have two or more fuel

combustion zones. These newer designs of dry pyroprocessing systems increase the overall

energy efficiency of the cement plant. The energy efficiency of the cement making process is

important as it determines the amount of heat input needed to produce a unit quantity of cement

clinker. A high thermal efficiency leads to less consumption of heat and fuel, with

correspondingly lower emissions.

1.3 Control Technology Requirements

As discussed in Section 2.4 of the Regulatory Analysis Report, under the Prevention of

Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules applicable to this project, Best Available Control

Technology (BACT) must be used to control emissions of the following pollutants: particulate

matter (PM); PM less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10); sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides

(NOx); carbon monoxide (CO); and volatile organic compounds (VOC).

BACT is defined as an emission limitation, including a visible emission standard, based

on the maximum degree of reduction of each pollutant subject to Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) review which the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural

Resources (DENR) on a case-by-case basis, taking into account energy, environmental, and

economic impacts, and other costs, determines is achievable through application of production

processes and available methods, systems, and techniques (including fuel cleaning or treatment

or innovative fuel combustion techniques) for control of such pollutant. If the DENR determines

that technological or economic limitations on the application of measurement methodology to a

particular part of a source or facility would make the imposition of an emission standard

infeasible, a design, equipment, work practice, operational standard or combination thereof, may

3

be prescribed instead to satisfy the requirement for the application of BACT. Such standard

shall, to the degree possible, set forth the emissions reductions achievable by implementation of

such design, equipment, work practice or operation. Each BACT determination shall include

applicable test methods or shall provide for determining compliance with the standard(s) by

means that achieve equivalent results.

The EPA has consistently interpreted the statutory and regulatory BACT definitions as

containing two core requirements that the agency believes must be met by any BACT

determination. First, the BACT analysis must include consideration of the most stringent

available technologies, i.e., those which provide the "maximum degree of emissions reduction."

Second, any decision to require a lesser degree of emissions reduction must be justified by an

objective analysis of "energy, environmental, and economic impacts" contained in the record of

the permit decision.

The minimum control efficiency to be considered in a BACT analysis must result in an

emission rate less than or equal to any applicable new source performance standards (NSPS)

emission rate or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The

applicable NSPS/NESHAP represents the maximum allowable emission limits from the source.

On June 16, 2008, EPA proposed major changes to the NSPS for Portland Cement (PC)

plants (Subpart F) which, when finalized, will apply to this project. Currently, the PC NSPS

regulates only PM. The proposed NSPS changes would reduce the PM emission limits for new

or modified kilns and clinker coolers commencing construction after June 16, 2008. In addition,

new or modified cement kilns would be subject to new limits for NOx and SO2 emissions. CCC

will comply with the emission limits resulting from final revised NSPS or NESHAP rules, if

those emission limits are more stringent than the proposed BACT limits proposed herein.

In this BACT analysis, the most effective technically feasible controls were evaluated

based on an analysis of energy, environmental, and economic impacts. As part of the analysis,

several control options for potential reductions in criteria pollutant emissions were identified.

The control options were identified by:

(1) Researching the RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (2) Drawing from previous engineering experience

(3) Surveying available literature (4) Review of PSD permits for Portland cement plants.

4

SECTION 2

BACT ANALYSIS FOR PM AND PM10

2.1 Sources of PM/PM10

PM and PM10 (hereafter referred to as PM but also applies to the PM10 fraction) at a

cement plant is emitted from process sources (i.e., kilns, coolers, mills, transfer points) and

fugitive dust sources (i.e., paved roads, unpaved roads, and quarrying operations).

Process sources of PM from the proposed project include: (1) Raw material handling and storage (2) Solid fuel handling and storage (3) Raw material milling and blending (4) Pyroprocessing (kiln and clinker cooler) (5) Clinker and gypsum handling and storage (6) Cement finish grinding (7) Cement handling and loadout.

Fugitive sources of PM from the proposed project include:

(1) Quarrying operations (drilling, blasting, marl ripping, and truck loading) (2) Truck and loader traffic on unpaved roads (3) Truck traffic on paved roads (4) Material transfer points (5) Wind erosion from storage piles.

2.2 Identification of Control Options for PM

The first step in the BACT determination for PM is the identification of available control

technologies. This section reviews the available PM control technologies that apply to the

proposed project. In preparing this section, a review of EPA's emission standard determination

methods for the Portland cement industry was made. EPA evaluated several types of control

technologies in developing the particulate matter NSPS and NESHAP for Portland cement

plants. In establishing and promulgating the particulate matter NSPS and NESHAP emission

limits, EPA focused on fabric filter and electrostatic precipitator (ESP) technologies as a basis

for control of PM from kilns and clinker coolers. EPA's evaluation on raw material processing

5

(including crushers, mills, and transfer points) was limited to measures needed to ensure opacity

levels of 10 percent or less. No specific control technologies were evaluated for these processes.

Furthermore, no evaluation was made for fugitive dust PM emissions.

This BACT determination will focus its evaluation on fabric filter and ESP control

technologies for the kilns and clinker coolers. A larger range of control options will be reviewed

for material handling and fugitive emission activities.

2.2.1 Fabric Filter Systems

Fabric filter (baghouse) systems consist of a structure containing tubular bags made of a

woven fabric. A baghouse removes PM from the flue gas by drawing the dust laden air through

a bank of filter tubes suspended in a housing. PM is collected on the upstream side of the fabric.

Dust on the bags is periodically removed, collected in a hopper, and reintroduced to the process.

PM removal efficiencies of 99 to greater than 99.9 percent are typical for baghouses at

varying operational conditions. The typical air-to-cloth ratio of a standard baghouse ranges from

approximately 1.2:1 to 2:1 for reverse air, and from 3:1 to 4:1 for pulse-jet systems. The bags in

baghouses used in the Portland cement industry are made from a variety of materials including

Nomex®, Gore-tex®, polyester, Teflon®, and fiberglass.

The technical feasibility of using baghouses is primarily dependent on exhaust gas

temperatures and moisture content. Gas temperatures must be less than 260°C (500°F) to

preclude damage to the bags. For the application of baghouse systems on cement kilns, this

condition is usually achieved by cooling exhaust gases prior to passing them through the

baghouse. Moisture contents must also be minimized to avoid condensation and possible

blinding of the bags.

Cooling gases from cement kilns can be accomplished in a variety of ways. At plants

using preheater/precalciner systems, kiln exhaust gases are often ducted to an in-line raw mill (or

raw material dryer) to dry the raw feed material, and used to preheat combustion air for the kiln.

When exhaust gases are not ducted to the raw mill (either by design or when the in-line raw mill

is offline), water sprays and/or bleed-in air is needed. These procedures increase the moisture

content of exhaust gases entering the baghouse. When either approach is used, the temperature

of gases entering the baghouse must be maintained above the dew point of the gas to prevent

condensation, which leads to blinding of the filter bags.

6

The primary advantages of baghouses include: high removal efficiencies, simplicity in

their operation, reliability, and the ease of maintenance, as compartments within the baghouse

system can be isolated for repairs without shutting down the entire system.

The primary disadvantages of baghouses include the need for relatively high pressure

drops (necessitating high energy consumption), limitation of temperatures to less than 260ºC

(500ºF), and the relatively high maintenance requirements (frequent replacement of bags).

2.2.2 Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) Systems

Cleaning of exhaust gases using ESPs involves three steps: (a) passing the suspended

particles through a direct current corona to charge them electrically, (b) collecting the charged

particles on a grounded plate, and (c) removing the collected particulate from the plate by a

mechanical process (i.e., rapping).

The specific collection area (SCA) is the parameter used to ensure proper design control

efficiency of an ESP. The SCA is defined as the ratio of the total plate area to the gas flow rate.

As the SCA of an ESP increases, collection efficiency improves. The high resistivity of particles

in exhaust gases from preheater/precalciner kilns requires that they be conditioned prior to

entering the ESP.

The primary advantages of using an ESP for PM control are the high PM collection

efficiency, low pressure drop, relatively low operating costs, and its ability to operate effectively

at relatively high temperature and flow rates.

The primary disadvantages to using an ESP are the high resistivity of the PM in cement

process exhaust gases (especially from preheater/precalciner kilns), its sensitivity to fluctuations

in exhaust gas conditions, and the high initial capital cost. The relatively large space

requirements make using ESPs infeasible for sources other than kilns and clinker coolers.

2.2.3 Wet Scrubbing Systems

Wet scrubbers remove PM from exhaust gases by capturing the particles in/on liquid

droplets and separating the droplets from the gas stream. Wet scrubbers can be grouped into the

following major categories:

(1) Venturi scrubbers (2) Mechanically aided scrubbers (3) Pump aided scrubbers (4) Wetted filter-type scrubbers

7

(5) Tray or sieve-type scrubbers.

The differences between these scrubbers are the manner in which the liquid is introduced

to the gas stream, the methods which the particles are captured by the liquid droplets, and the

manner in which the liquid droplets are removed. Wet scrubbers are capable of removing 80 to

99 percent of the PM from exhaust gas streams when properly designed and operated.

The primary advantages of a wet scrubber include its ease of maintenance and known

technology with specific design parameters for specific applications. The primary disadvantages

of a wet scrubber are their lower PM control efficiencies, a requirement to treat and/or dispose of

effluent, and the possibility of solids buildup at the wet-dry interface. An additional

disadvantage for this project is the water supply requirement to operate these systems.

2.2.4 Cyclone Collectors and Inertial Separator Systems

Cyclone collectors and inertial separators provide a low cost, low maintenance method of

removing larger diameter PM (> 30 µm) from gas streams. On their own, they are not usually

sufficient to meet BACT or NSPS emission standards, but they serve well as precleaners for

other more efficient control devices and as dry product recovery devices.

Cyclone systems consist of one or more conically shaped vessels in which the gas stream

follows a circular motion prior to outlet (typically near the top of the cone). Particles enter the

cyclone suspended in the gas stream, which is forced into a vortex by the shape of the cyclone.

The inertia of the particles resists the change in direction of the gas and they move outward

under the influence of centrifugal force until they strike the walls of the cyclone. At this point,

the particles are caught in a thin laminar layer of air next to the cyclone wall and are carried

downward by gravity where they are collected in hoppers. Cyclones are capable of removing in

excess of 90 percent of the larger diameter (> 30 µm) PM. However, their efficiency decreases

significantly for small diameter (< 30 µm) PM. The overall average control efficiency ranges

from 50 to 95 percent based on a range of particle sizes in the gas stream.

Cyclones vary in dimensions and inlet and outlet conditions. Collection efficiency is a

function of (a) size of particles in the gas stream, (b) particle density, (c) inlet gas velocity, (d)

dimensions of the cyclone, and (e) smoothness of the cyclone wall. In the cement industry

cyclone type collection systems are typically used for product recovery or as pre-collection

systems in combination with baghouses or ESPs.

8

2.2.5 Water Sprays, Enclosures and Other PM Control Systems

PM controls in use for a variety of material handling processes and fugitive dust sources

at Portland cement plants and quarries include water sprays and enclosures for crushers and

conveyor transfer points, wind screens and enclosures for storage piles, watering and chemical

stabilizers (emulsions) used on unpaved roads, and flushing and vacuum sweeping on paved

roads. The efficiencies for these controls range from 50 to 97 percent individually, but in some

instances, combining controls can achieve higher overall control levels.

Many of the efficiencies assigned to these types of control measures are based on

empirical models that take into account the quantity of water used, the frequency of application,

the time between applications, and the meteorological conditions present at the time of

application. In addition, the natural high moisture content of certain raw materials may make the

use of water sprays or other control measures unnecessary.

2.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible Options for PM

The second step in the BACT determination for PM is to eliminate any technically

infeasible control technologies. Each available control technology is considered, and those that

are infeasible based on physical, chemical, and engineering principles are eliminated.

2.3.1 Fabric Filter Systems

Fabric filter (baghouse) systems have been proven to be technically feasible control

technologies for preheater/precalciner kilns, clinker coolers, and other process sources.

Therefore, this technology must be considered further for these types of sources.

2.3.2 ESP Systems

ESP control systems have been proven to be technically feasible control technologies for

preheater/precalciner kilns and clinker coolers. Therefore, this technology must be considered

further for these types of sources.

Because of the large space requirements necessary for ESP systems, they are technically

infeasible for other process sources (finish mills, transfer points, etc.). Further, ducting

emissions from other process sources to a single ESP system would also be technically infeasible

due to the area of coverage and variation of gas stream conditions that would result.

9

2.3.3 Wet Scrubbing Systems

Wet scrubbing systems are not considered technically feasible PM control technologies

for preheater/precalciner kilns and clinker coolers because wet scrubbing systems are not capable

of reducing PM emissions from these sources to levels that meet the NSPS emission levels.

Wet scrubbers have been proven to be a technically feasible control option for process

sources in other industries. Therefore, this technology must be considered further for these types

of sources.

2.3.4 Cyclone Collector and Inertial Separator Systems

Cyclone collector and inertial separator systems can be used to control PM emitted from

preheater/precalciner kiln systems and clinker coolers. However, because these systems are not

capable of reducing particulate matter emissions from these sources to levels that meet the NSPS

emission levels, these control options are considered technically infeasible for

preheater/precalciner kilns and clinker coolers, unless combined with another control technology.

Cyclone collector and inertial separator systems have been proven to be technically

feasible control options for process sources. Therefore, these technologies must be considered

further for these types of sources.

2.3.5 Water Sprays, Enclosures, and Other PM Control Options

Water sprays, enclosures, and other PM control systems cannot be used to control PM

emitted from preheater/precalciner kiln systems and clinker coolers because these systems are

not capable of reducing PM emissions from these sources to levels that meet the NSPS emission

levels. Therefore, they are considered a technically infeasible option for preheater/precalciner

kilns and clinker coolers. In addition, water sprays cannot be used on sources handling hot

clinker or cement due to obvious problems with product damage/solidification and equipment

pluggage.

Water sprays, enclosures, and other PM control systems have been proven to be

technically feasible control options for other process and fugitive dust sources. Therefore, these

technologies must be considered further for these types of sources.

10

2.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible PM Control Options

The third step in the BACT determination for PM is to rank the technically feasible

control technologies by control effectiveness. The control efficiencies listed are typical values

for the indicated technology.

2.4.1 Preheater/Precalciner Kiln and Clinker Cooler System

Two technologies are considered to be technically feasible for controlling PM emissions

from the preheater/precalciner kiln and clinker cooler system to levels below the NSPS or

NESHAP standards. The maximum control efficiency for a fabric filter baghouse system on a

PH/PC kiln system is in excess of 99.9 percent. The maximum control efficiency for an ESP

system on a PH/PC kiln system is also in excess of 99.9 percent. Because the two technologies

have similar control efficiencies and because they are both the maximum control technology

options available, CCC has the option to choose either technology as BACT. Because CCC has

selected a fabric filter, representing the maximum control level possible for this system, a fabric

filter is the only control option considered for these sources.

2.4.2 Other Process Sources

The control technologies that are technically feasible for controlling PM emissions from

other process sources are ranked in Table 1 (in order of descending efficiency). The control

efficiencies listed are typical values for the indicated technology.

TABLE 1. RANKING OF TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE CONTROL OPTIONS NON-

FUGITIVE PROCESS SOURCES - PM

Control Technology Control Efficiency

Fabric Filter Baghouses 99-99.9+%

Wet Scrubbers 80-99%

Cyclones and Inertial Separators 50-95%

Water Sprays, Partial Enclosures, and Other PM Control Methods

50-90+%

No Control 0%

11

2.4.3 Fugitive Dust Sources


fugitive dust sources are discussed in the following subsections:

2.4.3.1 Quarrying Operations

Quarrying operations include drilling, blasting, ripping, and loading of limestone rock

and marl into loaders for transport to the primary crusher hopper. The control technologies that

are technically feasible for controlling PM emissions from quarrying operations include

baghouses or water applications to drilling equipment, and best management practices for

blasting and material loading. It should be noted that the quarry materials at the CCC plant are

naturally wet (typically > 15% moisture) and as such additional controls may not be very

effective or necessary.

2.4.3.2 Paved Roads


paved roads include watering (flushing with water), vacuum sweeping, or a combination of these

methods. Primary roadways into and throughout the cement plant will be paved. All paved

roadways will remain paved throughout the life of the project.

The use of water flushing followed by vacuum sweeping provides an estimated control

efficiency of between 46 to 96 percent. Individually, water flushing and vacuum sweeping have

control efficiencies of less than 70 percent. Because of the volume of traffic on most paved plant

roads, the efficiency of water flushing in addition to sweeping is essentially the same as

sweeping alone, as determined by the formulas in Table 2.

Table 2 summarizes the rankings for control options for paved roads.

12

TABLE 2. RANKING OF TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE CONTROL OPTIONS PAVED

ROADS - PM10

Operation Control Technology Control Efficiency Source/Notes

Paved Roads Water Flushing & Vacuum Sweeping

96-0.2363V* Air Pollution Engineering Manual Chpt. 4, p 146, Paved Surface Cleaning

Water Flushing 69-0.231V* Air Pollution Engineering Manual- Chpt. 4, p 146, Paved Surface Cleaning

Vacuum Sweeping 46-58 Air Pollution Engineering Manual- Chpt. 4, p 146, Paved Surface Cleaning

No Control 0% Assumes all Federal and State regulations could be met.

*Where V = number of vehicle passes since application.

2.4.3.3 Unpaved Roads


unpaved roads include paving, watering, and application of chemical dust suppressants. Due to

the constant changes in quarrying activities, travel routes in a quarry are routinely changing.

Therefore, paving roads in an active quarry is technically infeasible. The roads within the quarry

area will remain unpaved. Vehicle traffic on these roads will be limited to haul trucks and

loaders carrying limestone to the primary crusher and vehicles transporting overburden.

PM emissions from unpaved roads can be controlled by watering or chemical dust

suppression methods. Studies have shown that on heavily traveled unpaved roads, chemical

suppression methods are as effective as watering at regular intervals.

The use of chemical suppression (such as an emulsion) is expected to provide a 62-90+

percent control efficiency for the unpaved roads. Watering (or natural surface moisture)

provides control efficiencies ranging from 0 to 90+ percent, depending on the ability to maintain

soil moisture content in the range of 2 to 8 percent. As noted above, soil conditions in the quarry

are naturally wet, therefore eliminating the need to water these roads under normal conditions.

Table 3 summarizes the rankings for control options for unpaved roads:

13

TABLE 3. RANKING OF TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE CONTROL OPTIONS

UNPAVED ROADS - PM10

Operation Control Technology Control Efficiency Source/Notes

Unpaved Roads

Chemical stabilization

62-90+%* Air Pollution Engineering Manual- Chpt. 4, Fig. 6, Chemical Stabilization of Unpaved Surfaces

Watering/natural moisture

0-90+%* Air Pollution Engineering Manual - Chpt. 4, Fig. 5, Watering of Unpaved Roads

No Control 0% Assumes all Federal and State regulations could be met.

*Depends on frequency of application. 2.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible PM Control Options

The fourth step in a BACT determination for PM is to complete the analysis of the

feasible control technologies and document the results. The control technologies are evaluated

on the basis of the most effective technology taking into account economic, energy, and

environmental considerations. The evaluation of the most effective control technologies for PM

emissions for the proposed modification is presented below.

2.5.1 Preheater/Precalciner Kilns and Clinker Coolers

Baghouses are the most effective control technology available for PM emissions from

preheater/precalciner kilns and clinker coolers. Because CCC has selected the maximum

available technology to control PM10 emissions from the preheater/precalciner kiln and cooler,

no further evaluation is necessary.

2.5.2 Other Process Sources

Baghouses are the most effective PM control technology for the other process sources.

Except for the quarry, raw material handling, and raw coal handling sources, CCC is proposing

to use fabric filter baghouses on all process sources associated with the proposed project (e.g.,

closed conveying systems; clinker and cement silos; coal mill; finish mill; and cement loadout).

Because CCC is choosing the most effective technology, no further evaluation is necessary.

14

2.5.3 Fugitive Dust Sources

CCC will incorporate best management practices to minimize fugitive dust emissions

from drilling, blasting, stone removal, and loading operations. Best management practices

include wet suppression or fabric filters for drills and limiting drop heights between loaders and

truck beds. No other methods are available to control these sources.

Vacuum sweeping and/or water flushing for paved roadways, and watering/natural

surface moisture or chemical emulsions for unpaved roadways are the maximum feasible control

methods for PM emissions from fugitive dust sources. CCC has selected the maximum feasible

methods available to control PM emissions from its fugitive dust sources. Therefore, no further

evaluations are necessary.

Materials from the quarry are naturally wet and no additional measures would reduce

emissions from material handling and storage operations. Emissions from crushers will be

minimized by partial enclosure and natural or added moisture. Other raw materials and fuels will

be stored in bins or under roof to minimize surface drying and wind erosion. These represent the

top control option and no further evaluation is necessary.

2.6 Review of Recent Permit Limits

Table 4 summarizes the PM permit determinations made for cement kilns and coolers

since 2000.

2.7 Selection of BACT for PM

The BACT determination for PM emissions considers a comprehensive list of control

options available for the criteria pollutant. Energy, environmental, and economic factors are

used, as necessary to support the various BACT determinations.

2.7.1 Process Sources

CCC has selected the top option of baghouses designed to achieve at least 99.9 percent

control efficiency for all process sources. These will be used on the kiln, clinker cooler, and

other sources as specified in Section 2.5.2.

15

TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF PM BACT DETERMINATIONS FOR CEMENT KILNS AND COOLERS SINCE 2000

Company Location

New/

Mod

Permit

Date

Technology

Applied

In

Operation Kiln Limit Units

Cooler

Limit Units Test Method

American Cement

Sumter Co., FL

N 2/06 FF N PM/PM10 – 0.09

Lb/ton KF

Included in kiln limit

M5

GCC Dacotah Rapid City, SD

N 4/10/03 FF Y PM – 0.01 gr/dscf PM-0.01 gr/dscf M5

Florida Rock Industries – Kiln 2

Newberry, FL N 7/22/05 ESP’s N PM – 0.136 PM10 – 0.118

Lb/ton KF lb/ton KF

PM – 0.06 PM10 – 0.05

lb/ton KF lb/ton KF

M5 M5, PM = PM10

GCC Rio Grande

Pueblo, CO N 3/5/04 FF’s N PM – 0.01 gr/dscf PM – 0.01 gr/dscf Not specified

Giant Cement Harleyville, SC

N 5/29/03 No PSD BACT Limit

Y PM – 0.3 lb/ton KF

PM – 0.1 lb/ton KF

M5

Holcim Holly Hill, SC

N 12/22/99 No PSD BACT Limit

Y PM – 0.3 lb/ton KF

PM – 0.1 lb/ton KF

M5

Holcim Lee Island, MO

N 6/8/04 FF’s N PM10 – 0.28 lb/ton clinker

PM10 – 0.07 lb/ton clinker

Not specified

Lafarge – Kiln 1

Harleyville, SC

M 8/18/06 FF Y PM – 0.15 lb/ton KF

0.06 lb/ton KF

M5

Lafarge – Kiln 2

Harleyville, SC

N 8/18/06 FF N PM – 0.2 lb/ton KF

Included in kiln limit – cooler not separately vented

M5

Lehigh Portland Cement

Mason City, IA

M 12/1/03 ESP’s Y PM – 0.516 lb/ton clinker

PM – 0.015 gr/dscf M5 (incl. condensibles)

Sumter Cement Sumter Co., FL

N 2/6/06 FF N PM/PM10 – 0.09

lb/ton KF


M5

16

Suwannee American Cement – Kiln 1

Branford, FL N 6/1/00 FF’s Y PM – 0.13 PM10 – 0.11

lb/ton KF lb/ton KF

PM – 0.07 PM10 – 0.06

lb/ton KF lb/ton KF

M5 None specified


Branford, FL N 2/15/06 FF N PM – 0.1 PM10 – 0.1

lb/ton KF lb/ton KF


M5

Rinker/Florida Crushed Stone – Kiln 2

Brooksville, FL

N 5/29/03 FF N PM – 0.136 PM10 – 0.118

lb/ton KF lb/ton KF


M5 M5, PM = PM10

Continental Cement

Hannibal, MO

N 7/24/07 FF N(?) PM10-0.516 lb/ton clinker

PM10 - 0.01 gr/dscf Not specified

17

The emission limits proposed as BACT are summarized in Section 6 and discussed in

more detail in Regulatory Analysis Report.

2.7.2 Fugitive Emissions from Unpaved Roads

For new high-traffic roads at the cement plant, the top option (paving) was selected. For

other unpaved roads, CCC proposes to use watering, natural surface moisture, or chemical

suppression as necessary to minimize fugitive emissions. It is not practical to pave roads in the

quarry due to the broad and changing area on which the trucks and front end loaders move.

Also, watering in the quarry is not necessary under normal conditions because of natural surface

moisture.

2.7.3 Fugitive Dust from Paved Roads

CCC proposes as BACT vacuum sweeping and/or water flushing at a frequency as

necessary to minimize silt loading on paved road surfaces.

2.7.4 Fugitive Dust from Quarrying Operations

CCC proposes as BACT utilizing best management practices for drilling, blasting, stone

removal and truck loading operations.

2.7.5 Fugitive Dust from Storage Piles

All clinker storage will be fully enclosed. Emissions from storage of limestone, marl,

and other high moisture quarried raw materials are very low and do not need additional control

measures. Fugitive emissions from lower moisture raw materials and solid fuels will be

minimized by storage under roof, in a partial enclosure, or behind wind screens.

18

SECTION 3

BACT ANALYSIS FOR SO2

3.1 Description of SO2 Reaction Processes

The only sources of sulfur oxides (SOx) associated with the proposed project are the

preheater/precalciner kiln system, and the emergency diesel generator. Sulfur oxides, mainly

SO2, are generated from the sulfur compounds in the raw materials and, to a lesser extent, from

sulfur in fuels used to fire the preheater/precalciner kiln system. The sulfur content of the raw

materials and fuels is expected to vary over time. SO2 emissions from the emergency generator

are very minor and are directly related to the diesel sulfur content.

SO2 is both liberated and absorbed throughout the pyroprocessing system, starting at the

raw mill, continuing through the preheating/precalcining and burning zones, and ending with

clinker production according to the reactions listed in Table 5. Sulfides from the raw material

(limestone rock) are the predominant source of SO2. A smaller quantity of SO2 is liberated from

sulfates in fuel, and this SO2 is more readily absorbed into the kiln feed material and product

(clinker) matrix.

TABLE 5. SO2 REACTION PROCESSES

Process SO2 Formation SO2 Absorption

Raw Mill Sulfides + O2 Oxides + SO2 CaCO3 + SO2 CaSO3 + CO2 Organic S + O2 SO2

Preheating zone Sulfides + O2 Oxides + SO2 CaCO3 + SO2 CaSO3 + CO2 Organic S + O2 SO2

Calcining zone Fuel S + O2 SO2 CaO + SO2 CaSO3 CaSO4 + C CaO + SO2 + CO CaSO3 + ½ O2 CaSO4

Burning zone Fuel S + O2 SO2 NaO + SO2 + ½ O2 NaSO4 Sulfates Oxides + SO2 + ½ O2 K2O + SO2 + ½ O2 K2SO4 CaO + SO2 + ½ O2 CaSO4

The raw mill and preheater/precalciner use kiln exhaust gases to heat and calcine the raw

feed before it enters the kiln. The counter flow of raw materials and exhaust gases in the raw

19

mill and preheater and precalciner, in effect, act as an inherent dry scrubber to control SO2

emissions creating CaSO3 and CaSO4, which either pass directly with the raw materials to the

burning zone or are collected by the main baghouse and recirculated back into the raw material

stream. Depending on the process and the source and concentration of sulfur, SO2 absorption in

preheater/precalciner kiln systems has been estimated to range from approximately 70 percent to

more than 95 percent.

3.2 Identification of SO2 Control Options

This section reviews the available SOx control technologies that were considered for the

proposed project.

A nationwide SO2 plant survey sponsored by the Portland Cement Association (PCA)

reported that dry process kilns (including preheater/precalciner systems) emit approximately half

as much SO2 per ton of clinker as wet process kilns. In a dry process plant, much less heat input

is needed to manufacture one ton of clinker versus a wet process kiln. The increased energy

efficiency of the dry process results in substantially lower fuel costs. Because of this energy cost

savings, the dry production process has become the predominant process in the Portland cement

industry for new plants.

SO2 emissions from preheater/precalciner kiln systems with in-line raw mills are

controlled within the process itself (inherent dry scrubbing) by absorbing SO2 primarily with

calcium carbonate (CaCO3) in the raw feed material. The absorption takes place in the kiln,

precalciner, preheater, and raw mill. Additional methods of reducing SO2 include process

modifications and add-on flue gas desulfurization systems. The degree to which each of these

methods affect SO2 reduction can vary considerably depending on several process parameters

that will be discussed in the following sections.

3.2.1 Inherent Dry Scrubbing

Total potential SO2 emissions from a cement kiln include oxidization of sulfur during

fuel combustion and raw feed preheating and calcination. The emissions and projected control

efficiency achieved by the inherent dry scrubbing of the preheater/precalciner kiln system can be

roughly estimated using sulfur content and projected operating data.

20

Sulfur liberation and absorption processes take place in the rotary kiln, in the precalciner,

and in the lower sections of the preheater tower. Using raw material sulfur sampling and mix

design data, CCC estimates that the worst-case uncontrolled SO2 emissions from the raw

materials, prior to the preheater, will be 10.75 lb/ton clinker. A portion of the SO2 from the kiln

gases is absorbed into the kiln feed in the preheater tower. The SO2 removal efficiency of the

preheater has been estimated at 60 percent. Therefore the SO2 emissions at the preheater exit are

approximately 4.30 lb/ton clinker. Appendix A contains a diagram illustrating the path of gas

flow and uncontrolled SO2 emissions from the preheater to the main stack.

A small portion of the preheater gases (approximately 7.8 percent) are diverted to the

coal mill to aid in the coal drying process. Subtracting the SO2 that is vented to the coal mill

leaves 3.96 lb/ton clinker. When the raw mill is not running (up to 20 percent of the time), these

emissions are vented through the main stack to the atmosphere. A small amount of SO2

absorption occurs in the coal mill system. The coal mill exhaust, containing an estimated 0.25 lb

SO2/ton clinker is also vented to the main stack. Therefore the total SO2 emissions when the raw

mill is not running will be 3.96 + 0.25 = 4.22 lb/ton clinker.

Kiln gases pass through the raw grinding mill when it is running, where additional SO2 is

absorbed into the raw material. The SO2 removal efficiency of the raw mill has been estimated

at 50 percent. Therefore the SO2 emissions at the raw mill exit will be approximately 1.98 lb/ton

clinker. The SO2 emissions at the stack will be 1.98 + 0.25 = 2.23 lb/ton clinker when the raw

mill is on. The raw mill is expected to run at least 80 percent of the time. Factoring in 20

percent mill-off time, the average long-term SO2 emissions are estimated at 2.63 lb/ton clinker.

It should be noted that fuel sulfur is neglected in the above estimates because the

uncontrolled contribution is smaller, and more than 99 percent of the SO2 from fuels is typically

absorbed into the process based on cement industry experience. To evaluate total SO2 removal

by the system, however, fuel sulfur inputs must be included. The average sulfur input from fuels

(as SO2) is estimated to be 3.84 lb/ton clinker. Therefore the total uncontrolled SO2 from raw

materials and fuels is 10.75 + 3.84 = 14.59 lb/ton clinker. The average system removal

efficiency based on the SO2 emission estimate is (14.59 – 2.63) / 14.59 x 100 = 82.0 percent.

The controlled SO2 is absorbed into the clinker matrix and kiln dust as calcium or alkali

sulfates and eventually becomes part of the finished cement product. The overall predicted SO2

removal efficiency of this system is lower than some other preheater-precalciner kilns because of

21

the higher levels of sulfur found in the onsite raw materials in combination with the conservative

assumptions used.

The above uncontrolled emissions and inherent SO2 removal efficiencies are best

estimates based on the expected raw material chemistry, modern kiln design, and site specific

conditions. There are uncertainties associated with these estimates because variability in the raw

materials is expected and because every kiln is different. The 60 percent SO2 capture in the

preheater and 50 percent SO2 capture in the raw mill are estimates based on manufacturers

experience and existing data. However, no specific guarantees of performance will be provided

by the equipment vendors for inherent dry scrubbing. In addition to inherent dry scrubbing,

CCC recognizes the need for additional controls to ensure that SO2 emissions are reduced

consistent with the BACT analysis and proposed emission limits presented herein.

3.2.2 Process Modifications

Process modifications that can affect SO2 emission levels include:

1. A reduction of the sulfur content in the raw feed material

2. Increasing the oxygen level in the kiln.

3.2.2.1 Raw Feed Sulfur Reduction

Switching from raw feed materials with high sulfur contents to those with low sulfur

contents could reduce potential SO2 emissions. Limestone always contains sulfates, and often

contains sulfur-rich pyrite (FeS2). Pyrite has been identified as the cause of high SO2 emissions

at several plants throughout the US. High pyrite limestone could be replaced either by pyrite-

free limestone or other calcium-rich products. However, because of the huge volume of

limestone used, it is not feasible to ship lower sulfur, cement-quality limestone from other

locations.

Sulfur is also present in other raw materials and fuels used in the cement making process.

Limiting the sulfur contents in these materials would have little effect on the reduction of

potential SO2 emissions.

22

3.2.2.2 Increased Oxygen Levels

Several studies have shown that increased oxygen levels at certain locations in the kiln

system will reduce SO2 emissions. It is theorized that the SO2 reacts with the increased oxygen

to form SO3, which reacts better with the alkali dust from the raw materials, and is absorbed by

the clinker or the dust cake on a fabric filter. Advantages are the ease of implementing the

technology. Disadvantages include the impact on clinker formation, kiln stability, and increased

NOx and PM10 emissions.

3.2.3 Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems

Five types of Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) systems are available that could provide

control of SO2 emissions from Portland cement kilns:

1. Wet scrubbing 2. Wet absorbent addition 3. Dry absorbent addition 4. D-SOX cyclone 5. Lime hydrator.

3.2.3.1 Wet Scrubbing

Wet scrubbing can be an effective add-on control technology for SO2 removal using an

aqueous alkaline solution. SO2 is removed from the exhaust gases by scrubbing because it can

be readily neutralized by alkaline solution and is highly soluble in aqueous solutions. Wet

scrubbers have been shown to provide SO2 control in the range of 20 to 95 percent under various

operating conditions. Cyclonic spray towers generally achieve control efficiencies at the higher

end of the range. Wet scrubbing can also remove some particulate matter, VOCs, and acid gases.

As applied to cement plants, the scrubber is located after the primary PM control device and

minimal additional particulate is removed. The solids in mist carryover from the scrubber can in

some cases be greater than the inlet particulate loading from the fabric filter. In theory, wet

scrubbing produces a calcium sulfate (CaSO4) byproduct, typically referred to as synthetic

gypsum. However, in practice, not all cement plants that have used wet scrubbing have been

successful in obtaining useable synthetic gypsum. If the cement plant can reclaim the scrubber

sludge as synthetic gypsum and reincorporate it in the finish grinding process as synthetic

gypsum, the overall environmental benefits associated with a wet scrubber can be considerable.

23

Wet scrubbing increases the water demand for the plant and introduces a new water

pollution source. Wastewater generated by the scrubber must be properly treated and disposed.

Application of a wet scrubber requires passing the exhaust gases through a particulate

control device to reduce the dust load and recover product. Next, the exhaust gas is cooled by

spraying quench water or a slurried reagent (such as slaked lime or finely ground limestone) in

an absorption chamber. SO2 is scrubbed from the exhaust gas by the reaction with the slurried

lime [Ca(OH)2] or limestone (calcium carbonate). The Ca(OH)2 or calcium carbonate reacts

with the SO2 to form synthetic gypsum (CaSO4 – 2H2O). In theory, the synthetic gypsum

precipitates into small crystals that are dewatered. The dewatered synthetic gypsum can then be

used to supplement purchased gypsum in the production of cement and represents a potential

beneficial reuse of byproduct materials. However, if the gypsum cannot be effectively

crystallized, as has been the experienced by some cement plants utilizing wet scrubbing systems,

the scrubber sludge must be disposed of at considerable cost.

At the present time there have been only a small number of cement kilns in North

America that have employed wet scrubbing technology for abatement of SO2. There are,

however, several kilns, which have permits to install wet scrubbers. The following describes the

operations of four of these plants.

ESSROC, Nazareth, Pennsylvania – A wet scrubber was installed on a preheater kiln to

reduce SO2 by 20 to 25 percent to comply with a State SO2 emission limit. The scrubber was an

early design with two units in parallel, and only had an availability of 65 percent of kiln

operating hours. Chronic fouling of demisters, piping, and nozzles occurred and the scrubbers

were discontinued with conversion of the kiln to a precalciner design during an expansion

project.

Holcim, Midlothian, Texas – Scrubbers were installed on two kiln lines in an effort to

increase production and avoid PSD permitting. The units are a more advanced design and have

removal efficiencies of between 70 to 90 percent. Recent SO2 emissions are in the range of 2 to

3 lb/ton clinker.

TXI, Midlothian, Texas – A scrubber was installed as part of an upgrade of the plant from

wet kiln operation (4 units) to a new precalciner line. The kiln system has high uncontrolled SO2

and controlled emissions are limited to approximately 0.95 lb/ton clinker. This scrubber is

24

located between the kiln fabric filter and a regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO) used for

CO/VOC control.

Holcim, Dundee, Michigan – Two scrubbers were installed on the two wet kilns for

removal of SO2 prior to control of hydrocarbon emissions using an RTO. The SO2 is converted

to sulfur trioxide (SO3) in the RTO, causing corrosion and a visible condensing aerosol in the

combustion process. The plant installed the RTO to meet stack opacity and odor limitations and

the scrubbers were required for the RTO to function properly.

There are two other wet scrubbers that have been permitted at cement plants in the US as

part of recent expansion projects. These are at Lehigh Cement, Mason City, Iowa, and North

Texas Cement, Whitewright, Texas. Controlled SO2 emissions at the Lehigh plant are limited to

approximately 1.0 lb/ton clinker. The Texas Cement plant has not been constructed.

Environmental Impacts

The use of wet scrubbers can have an adverse environmental impact by generating solid

waste requiring landfill disposal (if a usable synthetic gypsum cannot be produced), and require

treatment and disposal of liquid blowdown containing dissolved solids (alkali salts).

In addition, saturation of the gas stream results in evaporation of large quantities of fresh

water that can have an impact on the water supply in the area.

Wet scrubbers produce an exhaust gas stream that is lower in temperature than otherwise

would be the case. Reheating of the gas stream may be necessary in some situations to reduce

ambient impacts of other pollutants. If the gas is reheated, additional NOx and CO would be

generated by the additional fuel combustion.

Energy Impacts

The static pressure drop through the wet scrubber and demister increases the electrical

energy demand for the project and has an adverse impact on energy usage at the site. In addition

the need to reheat stack gases for dispersion and corrosion prevention has a significant energy

impact.

Product Impacts

The wet scrubber does not have an adverse process impact if the waste is landfilled, but

can have an impact if synthetic gypsum is returned to the process. Changes in process quality

cannot be predicted until after scrubber startup in that the quality of synthetic gypsum is site

specific.

25

3.2.3.2 Wet Absorbent Addition

Wet absorbent addition (WAA) to the process gas stream can reduce high levels of SO2

emissions in dry cement kiln systems. Lime and hydrated lime can be used for this purpose.

Various types of wet absorbent systems have been used on dry kilns, with lime slurry addition

being the most effective.

Wet absorbent addition is limited to kiln systems where the lime slurry droplet can

evaporate to dryness before entering the particulate control device. This eliminates use on wet

kilns where flue gas temperatures are too low for rapid evaporation and flue gas moisture is near

moisture saturation levels.

It should be noted that the limestone in the kiln feed and calcium oxide in kiln dust act as

natural absorbents of some of the SO2 emissions produced from fuel combustion and pyritic

sulfur in the feed. Further, good burner design and proper operation of the kiln will chemically

absorb sulfur into the clinker. Additional SO2 reduction can be achieved by absorbent addition

into the process gas stream.

With wet absorbent addition, calcium oxide (CaO) or calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2]

slurry is injected into the process gas stream. Solid particles of calcium sulfite (CaSO3) or

calcium sulfate (CaSO4) are produced, which are removed from the gas stream along with excess

reagent by a particulate matter control device. The SO2 removal efficiency varies widely

depending on the point of introduction into the process according to the temperature, degree of

mixing, properties of the absorbent (size, surface area, etc.), and retention time.

In a dry process cement kiln system, the gases contain a low concentration of water vapor

at an elevated temperature and must be cooled and humidified prior to entering the baghouse or

ESP. Lime or calcium hydrate slurry can be introduced with the spray cooling water. Flue gas

temperatures are reduced through the heat absorbed as sensible heat from evaporation of water.

These temperatures are defined by the system design, kiln heat balance, amount of air inleakage,

and radiant and convective heat losses. The conditions present are optimal for proper operation

of the kiln.

For lime slurry injection to succeed as an SO2 absorption control method several

conditions must occur. These include:

1. Generation of spray droplets of sufficient surface area to adsorb SO2 (typically

150 to 250 m).

26

2. Droplets exist for sufficient duration to allow absorption and reaction (typically 3 to 5 s).

3. Sufficient reagent present in the droplet to maintain excess absorbent during droplet life.

4. Activity of hydrate particle in the droplet sufficient to replenish dissolved solids in the liquid as SO2 consumes reagent (i.e., particle size, reactivity, etc.).

5. When used in conjunction with a dry particulate collection device, the droplet must evaporate to dryness prior to entering the device.

An analysis of the heat balance for the dry process kiln determines if there is sufficient

sensible heat available in the gas streams to allow evaporation of injected water containing

hydrate slurry.

Hydrate solids may be introduced in the conditioning water as suspended/dissolved

solids. Normal solids content in the water can be as high as 5 percent solids by weight using air

atomizing spray nozzles. The generation of small droplets and fine hydrate particle size allows

effective absorption of SO2 and reaction to form sulfates. SO2 removal effectiveness can vary

between 50 and 70 percent depending on residence time and hydrate surface area.

The lower SO2 removal estimates have been documented in applications where the

conditioning towers, duct arrangement, and particulate control devices are not adequate for

injection of lime slurry. The constraints of the system result in wet bottoms in the conditioning

towers and build up on ducts and baghouse walls. These conditions limit the hydrate slurry

injection rates and the removal efficiency.

The higher SO2 removal estimates have been documented at new greenfield installations

in which optimum designs can be implemented. In these designs larger conditioning towers and

longer straight runs of ductwork are used along with control device gas distribution systems.

The major issues in applying this type of control system to preheater/precalciner kiln

system are the impacts on the thermal efficiency of the system and the effects moisture will have

on the PM10 control system.

The heat exchange processes that take place in the precalciner, preheater, and raw mill

are critical to the overall thermal efficiency of the process. Gases from the preheater are routed

to the raw mill to aid in the grinding and drying process. If the WAA system is installed prior to

the raw mill, the reduction in gas temperatures from the spray drying process would decrease the

ability of the gases to dry the materials in the raw mill. To adjust for the temperature decrease,

additional heat energy would be necessary in the raw mill. The additional heat input requirement

27

at CCC would be 73.5 MMbtu/hr. The cost to provide additional heat for drying material in the

raw mill using natural gas would be approximately $7,200,000 per year (see Appendix B). The

additional air flow would require a larger baghouse and additional fan horsepower. This would

be cost-prohibitive as well as imposing additional energy and environmental impacts.

If the WAA system were installed after the raw mill, it is unlikely that the system could

sufficiently dry the gases prior to exhausting them to the baghouse. Therefore, additional heat

energy would again be necessary to ensure that the added moisture in the exhaust gases did not

condense in the baghouse.

A hybrid system is also possible to optimize the SO2 reduction effects of a WAA system.

In this hybrid system, wet lime slurry is injected into the conditioning/spray tower to reduce SO2

emissions when the raw mill is not operating. When the raw mill is operating, wet lime is

introduced into the raw mill, enhancing SO2 adsorption as this material is ground with the raw

material while kiln gases pass through the mill. CCC proposes to use this type of hybrid system

for SO2 control.


No adverse environmental impacts are expected from the use of wet absorption (hybrid

system) at this location. However, if gas reheating is used for a continuous spray tower system,

additional products of combustion would be emitted through fuel burning.

Energy Impacts

The change in energy required to implement wet slurry injection (hybrid system) is

minimal and does not result in an adverse energy impact. However, if gas reheating is used for a

continuous spray tower system, additional energy would be required in the form of fuel burning

and additional fan horsepower.

Process Impacts

The injection of wet slurry is not expected to have significant process impacts except in

applications with high uncontrolled SO2 emissions and high dosage rates, when excess sulfate

could affect product quality. The addition of Ca(OH)2 at the expected rates should not adversely

affect cement quality.

28

3.2.3.3 Dry Absorbent Addition

Dry absorbent addition to the process gas stream or in an add-on control device (dry

scrubber) can reduce high levels of SO2 emissions. Lime, calcium hydrate, limestone, or soda

ash could be used for this purpose. Various types of dry absorbent systems have been used on

wet and dry cement kilns, and one end-of-pipe dry scrubber has been installed on a kiln in

Switzerland.

It should be noted that the calcium oxide and limestone in the kiln feed acts as a natural

absorbent of some of the SO2 emissions produced from fuel combustion and pyrite

decomposition. Further, good burner design and proper operations of the kiln will chemically

bond sulfur into the clinker. Additional SO2 reduction can be achieved by dry absorbent addition

into the process gas stream.

With absorbent addition, dry CaO or Ca(OH)2 is injected into the process gas stream.

Solid particles of CaSO3 or CaSO4 are produced, which are removed from the gas stream along

with excess reagent by a particulate matter control device in the process flow. The SO2 removal

efficiency varies widely depending on the point of introduction into the process according to the

temperature, degree of mixing, and retention time.

The single known application of an add-on dry scrubber uses a venturi reactor column to

produce a fluidized bed of dry slaked lime and raw meal. As a result of contact between the

exhaust gas and the absorbent, as well as the long residence time and low temperature

characteristic of the system, SO2 is efficiently absorbed by this system. An additional

application injects Ca(OH)2 in the gas stream after the preheater first stage cyclone.

The addition of dry absorbent to flue gas streams has been used at Roanoke Cement in

Troutville, Virginia and at several other new cement plants. Effectiveness and cost are specific

to each application and depend on the gas stream conditions and residence time available for

reaction.

Typically the molar ratio (Ca/S) for absorption is on the order of 3.0 to 15 and requires

approximately 2 seconds for completion. Initial surface reactions occur in the first 0.1 s and the

coating retards reaction with the bulk of the particle. For increased effectiveness a very fine

particle is required or a high Ca/S ratio. Typical removal efficiency is between 20 and 50

percent depending on gas stream conditions.

29

For the process to be implemented, hydrate would be received by truck, pneumatically

conveyed to a storage silo, and then injected through nozzles into the gas stream. Complete and

uniform distribution and mixing in the gas stream are necessary. The best location for injection

is at the preheater exhaust, which allows adequate residence time for reaction.


No adverse environmental impacts are expected from the use of dry absorption at this

location.

Energy Impacts

The change in energy required to implement dry adsorption is minimal and does not

result in adverse energy impact.

Process Impacts

The injection of dry absorbent is not generally expected to have a significant process

impact. However, high injection rates of Ca(OH)2 can impact the calcium to silica ratio and

upset the kiln chemistry.

3.2.3.4 D-SOx Cyclone

The D-SOx cyclone system is designed to use some of the free lime (CaO) that is created

in the calciner to reduce SO2 emissions. A portion of the calciner exit gas (about 5% for plants

with significant pyritic sulfur) is taken off of the calciner exit duct and goes up to a collection

cyclone at the top of the preheater tower which separates most of the entrained dust from the gas.

The captured dust is then fed to the cyclone exit duct where the pyritic sulfur is converted to

SO2. The free lime in the calciner dust absorbs some of the SO2 to give a 25 to 30 percent

reduction. This has been proven in two plants in the U.S. according to FLSmidth. The exit gas

from the D-SOx cyclone is returned to the outlet of the second stage preheater cyclone. A natural

draft is created in the system thereby eliminating the need for an extra fan. Since no outside

reagent is required, the system has much lower operating costs than the control systems based on

purchased lime addition.

3.2.3.5 Lime Hydrator

An on-line lime hydrator system has been developed at a pilot test plant in Denmark.

The system extracts calcined raw material from the bottom stage cyclone, hydrates the surface of

30

the lime particles in a separate vessel, and returns the material to the top of the preheater where it

is mixed with preheater feed to absorb SO2. FLSmidth indicates that a 44 percent SO2 reduction

could be expected with this system. A relatively small amount of additional heat and energy are

required for the system. This system has advantages over wet lime injection systems in that the

hydrated lime is made on-line, thus saving the costs of added lime, transportation, and storage.

However, there have not yet been any full-scale commercial applications of this system.

3.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible SO2 Control Options

The second step in the BACT analysis is to eliminate any technically infeasible control

technologies. Each control technology is considered and those that are infeasible based on

physical, chemical, and engineering principles are eliminated.

3.3.1 Inherent Dry Scrubbing

This technology has been demonstrated as technically feasible and is estimated to result

in a potential SO2 absorption efficiency of 82 percent based on a sulfur balance (see Section

3.2.1). As an inherent process technology, the underlying reduction efficiency is not comparable

to other add-on SO2 control options.

3.3.2 Process Modifications

The technical feasibility of process modifications is dependent on several factors that

cannot be directly quantified, and factors that impact the emissions of other pollutants. The

following subsections discuss the relative feasibility of the identified process modifications.

3.3.2.1 Raw Material Sulfur Reduction

The raw materials to be used by CCC have a medium sulfur content. As noted above, a

high percentage of the sulfur winds up in the clinker. In order to produce cement with good

rheological properties (workability and plastic shrinkage) and strength development, it is

necessary to produce clinker with an acceptable SO3/alkali molar ratio. The raw materials and

coal to be used by CCC are adequate for this purpose; reducing sulfur content below current

levels may be detrimental to clinker product quality.

Absorption of fuel sulfur throughout the calciner, preheater, and raw mill is expected to

be very high (exceeding 99%). This has been demonstrated at another precalciner kiln (Roanoke

31

Cement Company in Troutville, Virginia) where increasing the fuel sulfur content by 39 percent

produced no increase in SO2 emissions. Based on the foregoing discussion, lowering fuel sulfur

content would have little effect on emissions and may adversely affect product quality. Because

most of the raw materials are mined onsite and are required for cement clinker production, the

sulfur content of these materials cannot effectively be reduced. Consequently, this control

technique is not considered a feasible option and is not considered further in this BACT analysis.

3.3.2.2 Increased O2 Levels

Cement kiln operators strive for an oxygen level in the kiln exhaust gases of

approximately 3 percent (approximately 10 to 15% excess air) to guarantee the desired oxidizing

conditions in the kiln burning zone. Increasing oxygen levels in the kiln through the use of

excess air alters the flame characteristics and adversely affects clinker quality. Testing has

shown that increasing or decreasing the oxygen level even one percent can result in a clinker

product that does not meet industry standards.

Because of the potential adverse impact to clinker quality resulting from increasing O2

levels to reduce SOx emissions, this technology is not considered a feasible option and is not

considered further in this BACT analysis.

3.3.3 Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems

Five different FGD systems were evaluated for technical feasibility. The additional

control efficiency of a FGD system may be difficult to quantify because of the inherent

scrubbing efficiency of the preheater/precalciner kiln system.

3.3.3.1 Wet Scrubbing

There are several disadvantages to a wet lime scrubbing system. A wet scrubber would

require up to 500 gallons of water per minute. A large amount of the water would be vaporized

and emitted as a steam plume from the stack. The steam plume that would occur may be visually

unappealing to neighbors in the area. The sludge byproduct from the wet scrubber would require

treatment and disposal if it does not meet quality standards for use as a cement additive.

Because a scrubber would be located downstream of the PM10 control device, aerosols

from the scrubber could be emitted from the kiln stack. These aerosols would increase the PM10

loading from the source, and would tend to build up on equipment used in the exhaust gas

32

processing system (ID fans, etc.). Nonetheless, this technology may be technically feasible and

will be reviewed further.

3.3.3.2 Dry Absorbent Addition (DAA)

Because this has been employed in other cement plants, this technology is considered

technically feasible and will be reviewed further.

3.3.3.3 Wet Absorbent Addition (WAA)

Because WAA has been employed at several cement plants, this technology is considered

technically feasible and will be reviewed further.

3.3.3.4 D-SOX Cyclone

This technology has been employed at two cement plants in the U.S., is considered

technically feasible, and will be reviewed further.

3.3.3.4 Lime Hydrator

This technology has been proposed by FLSmidth but a full-scale commercial system has

not yet been employed at a cement plant. However, the technology is considered technically

feasible and will be reviewed further.

3.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible SO2 Control Options

The third step in the BACT analysis is to rank remaining SO2 control technologies by

control effectiveness. All of the technologies determined to be technically feasible are added to

the base case condition of inherent dry scrubbing. The SO2 control technologies determined to

be technically feasible are a wet scrubbing system, WAA, and DAA.

Because the coal mill will use preheater gases for coal grinding and drying, a portion of

the gases would not be treated by a WAA system.

For WAA, a hybrid system is being evaluated that would add wet lime to the raw mill

during mill-on operating conditions and to the conditioning tower during mill-off conditions

(approximately 20% of the time).

Table 6 shows the ranking and the estimated control efficiency of each control option.

33


PREHEATER/PRECALCINER KILN SYSTEM - SO2

Control Technology Control Efficiency1

Wet Scrubbing System (Post-baghouse) 90

DAA (Preheater Gases) 50

WAA (Conditioning Tower/Raw Mill) 55

D-SOX Cyclone (Preheater Gases) 30

Lime Hydrator (Preheater Gases) 44

Inherent Dry Scrubbing (Base Case) NA 1The optimum control efficiency listed is at the control point only; this is in addition to the control provided by inherent dry scrubbing.

3.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible SO2 Control Options

The fourth step in a BACT analysis for SO2 is to complete the analysis of the applicable

control technologies and document the results. The control technologies are evaluated on the

basis of economic, energy, and environmental considerations.

The D-SOX cyclone and the lime hydrator can be eliminated from further consideration at

this point because their SO2 removal efficiencies are lower than the top three available options.

Table 7 presents a summary of the impact analysis for each of the above control options. The

detailed cost calculations for all options are presented in Appendix B.

TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR SO2

Impacts

Method

System

removal,

%

SO2

Removed,

tons/yr

Capital

Costs,

MM$

Annualized

Cost, 1000

$

Cost

Effectiveness

$/ton SO2 Environmental Product Energy

Wet Scrubbing1

90 2,592 35.8 8,793 3,392 Yes No Yes

Dry Absorbent

50 1,440 1.8 3,803 2,641 No No No

Wet Absorbent2

50 1,435 3.0 1,965 1,371 No No No

1Costs are shown for wet scrubbing alone. Reheating of stack gases if necessary would result in significant additional cost. 2System removal is lower than in Table 6 because coal mill gases are not controlled by WAA.


Table 8 summarizes the SO2 permit determinations made for cement kilns since 2000.

34

TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF RECENT SO2 PERMIT DETERMINATIONS FOR CEMENT KILNS (2000-PRESENT)

Company Location Kiln Type PermitDate

Technology Applied Removal

(%)

InOperation (Yes/No)

Limit(lb/ton clinker)

Rejected Technology and $/Ton

Lafarge – Kiln 1 Harleyville, SC PC (mod) 8/18/06 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)94 Yes

0.90 – 30 day 1.6 – 24 h

WS – 27,300 DAA – 8.480

WAA – 42.600

Lafarge – Kiln 2 Harleyville, SC PC (new) 8/18/06 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)94 No

0.90 – 30 day 1.6 – 24 h

WS – 25,900 DAA – 7,340

WAA – 33,400


Branford, FL PC (new) 2/15/06 Process & hydrated lime

injection for mill off 4 No 0.27 – 24 h

WS - $86,900 DAA - $7,271

Sumter Cement Sumter Co., Fl PC (new) 2/6/06 Low S materials No 0.2 – 24 h

American Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/06 Low S. materials No 0.20 – 24 h WS

Florida Rock Industries – Kiln 2

Newberry, FL PC (new) 7/22/05 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)NA No 0.28 – 24 h WS - $20,453


Brooksville, FL PC (new) 7/6/05 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)NA No 0.23 – 24 h

Holcim Lee Island, MO PC (new) 06/08/04 Lime spray drying - mill off 93 No 1.26 WS - $13,225

GCC Rio Grande Pueblo, CO PC (new) 3/5/04 Process; low S coal NA No 1.99

Lehigh Portland Cement Mason City, IA PC (mod) 12/11/03 Wet Scrubbing 90 Yes 1.01

GCC Dacotah Rapid City, SD PC (mod) 04/10/03 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)NA Yes 2.16 Fuel or raw mix S limits

Holcim Theodore, AL PC (mod) 02/04/03 Limit not based on BACT NA Yes 0.13

CEMEX Demopolis, AL PC (mod) 09/13/02 Low S coal NA Yes 1.14 WS - $10,327


Branford, FL PC (new) 06/01/00 Process (inherent dry

scrubbing)NA Yes 0.27 – 24 h

WS - $29,700 DAA - $7,400

Monarch Cement Humboldt, KS 2PC

(mod)01/27/00

Process (inherent dry scrubbing)

NA Yes 1.10 WS - $10,345

Lo S Fuel, WAA, DAA

Lafarge Davenport, IA PC

(mod)11/09/99

Process (inherent dry scrubbing)

NA Yes 7.62

North Texas Cement Whitewright, TX PC (new) 03/04/99 Wet Scrubbing 85 No2 2.75

Continental Cement Hannibla, MO PC (New) 7/24/07 Lime spray drying-mill off 50-90 No(?) 1.93 WS - > $6,800

Notes: 2. May never be built

PC = Precalciner NA = Not applicable WS = Wet scrubber S = Sulfur DAA = Dry absorbent addition WAA = Wet absorbent addition

35

3.7 Selection of BACT for SO2

CCC proposes as BACT for SO2 from the kiln system the inherently low-emitting

process coupled with wet adsorbent addition. The requested BACT emission limits are 1.33

lb/ton of clinker, 30-day rolling average and 1.80 lb/ton of clinker, maximum 24-hour rolling

average) as measured by Continuous Emission Monitor (CEM).

For the emergency diesel generator set, CCC proposes a fuel sulfur limit consistent with

the NSPS Subpart IIII Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal

Combustion Engines.

36

SECTION 4

BACT ANALYSIS FOR NOX

The only sources of NOx emissions associated with the proposed project are the

preheater/precalciner kiln system and the new emergency diesel generator set.

4.1 NOx Formation and Control Mechanisms

NOx is formed as a result of reactions occurring during combustion of fuels in the main

kiln and precalciner vessel of a traditional preheater/precalciner cement kiln. NOx is produced

through three mechanisms during combustion 1) fuel NOx, 2) thermal NOx, and 3) “prompt”

NOx.

Fuel NOx is the NOx that is formed by the oxidation of nitrogen and nitrogen complexes

in fuel. In general, approximately 60 percent of fuel nitrogen is converted to NOx. The resulting

emissions are primarily affected by the nitrogen content of fuel and excess O2 in the flame.

Nitrogen in the kiln feed may also contribute to NOx formation although to a much smaller

extent.

Thermal NOx is the most significant NOx mechanism in kiln combustion. The rate of

conversion is controlled by both excess O2 in the flame and the temperature of the flame. In

general, NOx levels increase with higher flame temperatures that are typical in the kiln burning

zone.

“Prompt NOx” is a term applied to the formation of NOx in the flame surface during

luminous oxidation. The formation is instantaneous and does not depend on flame temperature

or excess air. This formation may be considered the baseline NOx level that is present during

combustion and is relatively small compared to the other two mechanisms.

Thermal NOx formation can be expressed by two important reactions of the extended

Zeldovich mechanism:

)(2 slowNNONO !"!

37

)(2 fastONOON !"!

At high temperature and excess O2, a higher concentration of O radicals (or H radicals) is

present and therefore NOx forms more rapidly. At lower temperatures, an equilibrium reaction

of NO with O2 further results in NO2 formation. Fuel NOx is formed by the reaction of nitrogen

in the fuel with available oxygen.

In a precalciner kiln, fuel combustion occurs at two locations and each follows a separate

mechanism in the formation of NOx (i.e., thermal NOx dominates in the kiln burning zone and

fuel NOx dominates in the precalciner). For this reason, the effects of process operation on final

NOx levels are complex and do not necessarily conform to conventional understanding of

combustion as defined through steam generation technology. Experience with various cement

kilns also has shown that actual NOx emissions are highly site specific.

4.1.1 Fuel Effects

Fuel type has an effect on NOx emissions. For example, data from combustion

simulations and field trials indicate combustion of coal produces significantly lower NOx than

natural gas combustion in a main kiln burner. In general, substituting fuels with higher Btu

content will reduce NOx emissions in part because fuel efficiency is increased and less total fuel

is consumed.

The use of alternative fuels such as tires and plastics can reduce NOx emissions when

fired at intermediate locations within the kiln system. This concept is further discussed in

Sections 4.2.6 (Mid-Kiln Firing) and 4.2.7 (Staged Combustion).

4.1.2 Main Kiln Firing

In the rotary kiln section, the purpose of combustion is to increase material temperature

to a level that will allow calcined meal to become viscous (liquid) and form calcium silicates.

The temperature required for “burning” depends on cement type and meal properties and is in

excess of 1400ºC (2550#F). Some meal types require a higher flame temperature than others to

achieve the material temperature required to initiate fusion.

Cement kilns are distinct from conventional combustion sources such as steam generation

in that the combustion chamber is a confined space that is refractory lined. This radiates energy

38

back into the flame, thereby increasing the flame temperature. At given excess air levels, a

confined flame will usually produce higher NOx emissions than an open flame such as a boiler

fire box.

NOx levels from kiln firing are also strongly related to fuel type, flame shape, and peak

flame temperature. At higher peak flame temperatures, more thermal NOx is formed. Flame

shape is also related to the percentage of primary air used in combustion in the kiln. High levels

of primary air increase NOx formation by providing excess O2 in the hottest portion of the flame.

Experience has indicated that a long flame and low primary air volume can minimize NOx

formation in the main kiln. However, in order to obtain high quality clinker with the best

microstructure, a relatively short, strong, and steady flame is necessary. In addition, too long of

a flame may also cause kiln rings and lead to incomplete fuel combustion.

4.1.3 Precalciner Firing

A secondary firing zone is the precalciner vessel. Fuel is introduced and burned in situ

with the preheated raw meal. Under these conditions, heat released by fuel oxidation is extracted

by meal decarbonization. The efficient use and transfer of energy reduces the peak temperature

in the vessel. Normal temperatures are between 900º and 980ºC (1650# and 1800#F). This lower

temperature and operation at reduced excess air levels reduces the formation of NOx. Thermal

NOx is small and fuel NOx predominates.

NOx formed in the main kiln combustion passes through the precalciner and the gases are

cooled slowly in the preheater cyclones. NOx formation is an endothermic process and as gases

cool, NOx tends to revert to N2 and O2. This decomposition process is rapid at elevated

temperatures but decreases at temperatures below approximately 700ºC (1300#F). In effect, if

the flue gases can be slowly cooled to 700#C over an extended period, a progressive decrease in

NOx concentration occurs. This process occurs in the preheater after other combustion radicals

(OH-, H+, O-, etc.) have been eliminated.

39

4.2 Identification of NOx Control Options

4.2.1 Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction

Selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) involves the injection of an ammonia-

containing solution into the preheater tower to reduce NOx within the optimum temperature

range of 870# to 1090#C (1600º to 2000ºF). Because the optimum temperature range must be

present for a sufficient time period to allow the reaction to occur, SNCR is only a viable

technology on some preheater or precalciner kiln designs. The ammonia-containing solution

may be supplied in the form of anhydrous ammonia, aqueous ammonia, or urea.

SNCR involves the following primary reactions:

OHNHOHNH 223 !"!

2 23

2

2 2NH O NH H O! " !$

NH H NH H3 2 2! " !!

Following NH2 formation by any of the above mechanisms, reduction of NO occurs:

NH NO N H O2 2 2! " !

At temperatures lower than 870#C, reaction rates are slow, and there is potential for

significant amounts of ammonia to exit or “slip” through the system. This ammonia slip may

result in a detached visible plume at the main stack, as the ammonia will combine with sulfates

and chlorides in the exhaust gases to form inorganic condensable salts. The condensable salts

can become a significant source of condensable PM emissions that cannot be controlled with a

baghouse or ESP. Ammonium sulfate aerosols would be a concern under upcoming programs to

deal with PM2.5 and regional haze. In addition, there may be health and safety issues with on-site

ammonia generation.

At temperatures within the optimal temperature range, the above reactions proceed at

normal rates. However, as noted in the literature as well as by vendors, a minimum of 5 ppm

ammonia slip may still occur as a side effect of the SNCR process.

At temperatures above 1090#C, the necessary reactions do not occur. In this case, the

ammonia or urea reagent will oxidize and result in even greater NOx emissions. In addition,

SNCR secondary reactions can form a precipitate, resulting in preheater fouling and kiln upset.

40

Ammonia reagent may react with sulfur in kiln gases to form ammonium sulfate. Ammonium

sulfate in the preheater can create a solids buildup. Ammonium sulfate in the kiln dust recycle

stream may adversely affect the kiln operation.

The optimal temperature window for application of the SNCR process occurs somewhere

in the preheater system. Fluctuations in the temperature at various points in the preheater are

common during normal cement kiln operation. Therefore, selecting one zone for SNCR

application in the preheater cannot reliably assure consistent results. Alternatively, selecting

multiple zones of injection creates significantly increased complexity to an already complex

chemical process.

SNCR has been employed at a significant number of European cement plants for NOx

reduction and recently at several new cement plants in the U.S. The European systems include

two precalciner plants (Sweden) and at least 17 preheater plants primarily in Germany. The

principal vendor has been Polysius. In Europe the chemical of choice for ammonia reagent is

photowater. Photowater is a waste produced during development of film, which contains

approximately 5.0 percent ammonia and is classified as a hazardous waste in the U.S. The

availability and classification of the waste make it a low cost alternative to other ammonia or

urea reagents for NOx control in Europe.

Full-scale SNCR systems have now been installed on at least 6 preheater-precalciner

plants in the U.S. The reagent used in these systems is ammonia water or urea solution.

The requirements for SNCR include an optimum temperature range (i.e., 870# to 1090#C)

and the presence of an oxidizing atmosphere. At the low flue gas temperature the reaction rate is

slow and ineffective. Ammonia introduced will not react and will be lost as gas. Some of the

ammonia will react with SO2 in the conditioning tower forming ammonium sulfate (NH4)2SO4

which is a submicron aerosol. This aerosol may form a visible emission at the stack.

Because the raw materials at the plant site contain naturally occurring carbon (i.e.,

bitumen and kerogens), pyrolysis of organics occurs in the preheater tower producing CO. This

results in a reducing atmosphere. The current control practice is to limit oxygen at the calciner

exit to reduce NOx. SNCR requires an oxidizing atmosphere and the two conditions are opposed

in theory. CO is expected to increase as NOx is reduced.

In addition, ammonia emitted as gas in the plume will react with SO2 or HCl in the

condensed water vapor plume forming a highly visible plume under certain weather conditions.

41

A similar plume has been noted at Glens Falls, New York; Permanente, California; Redding,

California; Ravena, New York; Midlothian, Texas; Mississauga, Ontario; Edmonton, Alberta;

and Exshaw, Alberta as result of naturally occurring ammonia in the kiln feed.

Direct mixing of urea with feed would not be effective in system designs where the feed

is injected into the gas stream at the inlet of the first stage preheater for meal preheating. At this

location flue gas temperatures are too low for the reaction to affect NOx but sufficiently high to

decompose the urea to ammonia, CO2, and water vapor.

SNCR will be investigated as an additional NOx control option. The kiln will also

employ indirect firing and low NOx burners and staged combustion calciner design.

4.2.2 Selective Catalytic Reduction

Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) is a process that uses ammonia in the presence of a

catalyst to reduce NOx. The catalyst is typically vanadium pentoxide, zeolite, or titanium

dioxide. The SCR process has been proven to reduce NOx emissions from combustion sources

such as incinerators and boilers used in electric power generation plants. No full-scale

application of SCR on a Portland cement plant exists anywhere in North America but there has

been one long-term pilot project (Kirchdorf, Austria) and three industrial applications

(Solnhofen, Germany, Monselice, Italy, and Sarche di Calavino, Italy) in Europe. The Solnhofen

and Monselice kilns are small preheater kilns with relatively high uncontrolled NOx levels (up to

1800 mg/Nm3 at Monselice). The Sarche di Calavino kiln is a small semi-dry type kiln (no

operating experience is yet available). The Monselice kiln has high ammonia and low sulfur in

the feed and has experienced very high ammonia slip (120 mg/Nm3). The Kirchdorf system

operated in 1996-1998 on only a slipstream (approximately 10%) of the kiln gases.

In the SCR process, the NOx-containing exhaust gas is injected with anhydrous ammonia

and passed through a catalyst bed to initiate the catalytic reaction. As the catalytic reaction is

completed, NOx is reduced to nitrogen and water. The critical temperature range required for the

completion of this reaction is 300# to 450#C, which is higher than the typical cement kiln ESP or

fabric filter inlet gas temperature.

Technical application of SCR requires the catalyst to be placed either 1) after the

preheater tower and before the PM control device (dirty side) or 2) after the particulate control

device (clean side). Placement at the preheater tower satisfies the temperature requirements, but

42

subjects the catalyst to the recirculating dust load and potential fouling. Location at the fabric

filter exit requires reheating of the gases to the required temperature for catalyst activation.

Dirty Side

The most prohibitive disadvantage of the SCR process in this location is fouling of the

SCR catalyst. The high dust loading and recirculating sulfate and ammonium species in cement

kiln gases are likely to plug the catalyst and render it ineffective. Minor impurities in the gas

stream, such as compounds or salts of sulfur, arsenic, calcium, and alkalis, may deactivate the

catalyst very rapidly, strongly affecting the efficiency and system availability as well as

increasing the waste catalyst disposal volume.

Continual fouling of the SCR catalyst would render it inoperative as a NOx control

option. Ammonia injected to an SCR system with a fouled catalyst would pass unreacted

through the system (i.e., ammonia slip). The unreacted ammonia would combine with sulfates

and chlorides in the exit gases, forming inorganic condensable salts, which result in a detached

visible plume and a significant increase in condensable PM10 emissions. In addition, SCR on

power plants has been shown to convert SO2 to SO3 as a secondary reaction. SO3 will react with

CaO between preheater stages forming gypsum (CaSO4), which can plug the tower and cause

kiln shutdown.

Two options for dirty side application exist: 1) after the preheater tower and before the

raw mill; or 2) after the raw mill and before the particulate control device. Gases exiting the

preheater tower are within the optimal temperature range for SCR catalyst activation. However,

the dust loading along with the recirculating feed in this region is very high and would render the

catalyst useless in a very short timeframe. Gases exiting the raw mill system are much cooler

(100º to 120ºC) and would require supplemental reheat prior to the SCR catalyst followed by gas

cooling to protect the baghouse. The reheat of gases from the raw mill system would be cost

prohibitive (see discussion on Clean Side applications).

Clean Side

Installation of the catalyst after the pollution control device reduces the potential for

fouling from meal/recirculating dust load, but requires significant reheating of the gas stream to

obtain the required catalyst temperature. This can be more significant if combined with wet

scrubbing prior to the NOx control. SO2 removal may be required to prevent conversion of SO2

to SO3 in the catalyst bed which would increase SO3 emissions if the NOx control were the last

43

system in the gas train. In addition, reheating of the gas stream results in increased emissions of

CO, VOC, and other pollutants and significant additional cost.

It should be noted that no full-scale clean side SCR systems exist on a cement kiln. The

three full-scale SCR systems that have been operated in Europe are dirty side applications. The

SCR system at Solnhofen is not currently operating.

An additional concern to clean side applications is the formation of SO3 (H2SO4). SCR

catalysts have been shown to convert SO2 to SO3. SO3 readily combines with water vapor to

form H2SO4 (sulfuric acid mist), or with ammonia or chlorides to form aerosol particulates.

These pollutants are highly visible and would not meet opacity limits. Installation of a wet gas

scrubbing system would not be effective in removing H2SO4 aerosols (i.e., 0.5 micron) and the

cost would be prohibitive.

The optimum temperature for reaction is 300# to 450#C. In the presence of the catalyst,

the NOx is reduced to N2 by reaction with ammonia. For the reaction to occur the ammonia must

be present in excess molar ratio. Typical usage in utility applications is 1.05 - 1.10 to 1.0

(NH3/NOx). The excess ammonia required produces “ammonia slip” of between 10 and 15 ppm

in the flue gases.

Recent studies of the use of SCR at major utilities have indicated that some SO2 present

in the flue gases is oxidized to SO3 during the process. The rate of conversion can increase SO3

by 15 to 100 ppm depending on catalyst composition, temperature, and SO2 concentration. It has

also been noted that the catalyst life is greatly reduced by the presence of SO3 in the gas stream.

The slippage of ammonia and formation of SO3 has resulted in an intense visible plume as

ammonia reacts with SO2 in the flue gases and when SO3 condenses forming acid aerosols

(H2SO4 % 2H2O).

Using technology transfer, it has been suggested that heat recovery could be used to

reduce the high cost of reheating the gas stream for a clean side SCR application on a cement

kiln (additional heating would still be required to raise the exhaust temperature to an optimum

level for SCR performance). Both regenerative and recuperative systems could be available for

this purpose. These systems have been proposed for applications such as industrial boilers in

which the residual PM passing the final control device is fly ash. In these cases the deposits

which may occur on the heat exchange surface can be removed by air on steam blowers.

44

In a cement kiln, the CaCO3 and CaO in the PM react with the SO3 formed in the SCR

bed producing CaSO4 · 2H2O which is a hard crystalline deposit. Allowing the deposits to build

up would reduce the heat recovery, increase the fuel burning requirement, and reduce the

efficiency of the system. The PM which would be deposited on the heat exchanger surfaces in a

cement kiln application could not be removed without outage of the equipment and

hydroblasting. This would be a serious recurring, if not continuous, maintenance problem.

An RTO with multiple heat exchanger units has been installed at TXI in Middlothian,

Texas, for CO and VOC control. This unit has experienced, severe heat exchanger fouling

requiring continuous cleaning (off-line), which resulted in the Texas agency allowing the unit to

be repermitted for use only during ozone season due to high maintenance costs and down time.

Thus, SCR with heat recovery is not considered technically feasible and will not be evaluated

further.

EPA’s Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document Update NOx Emissions from

New Cement Kilns dated November 2007, while acknowledging that there are no installations of

SCR technology in cement plants in the United States, concludes that SCR technology is

technically feasible based on technology transfer from utility boiler and gas turbine applications.

The ACT document indicates a NOx conversion rate of 80 to 90 percent for SCR is possible,

however, this removal efficiency is unproven in preheater-precalciner cement kilns.

The application of SCR on cement kilns is fundamentally different than utility boilers due

to their differences in gas composition, dust loading, and chemistry, which accounts for the

preference for SNCR rather than SCR in cement kilns in both the US and abroad. Because of

operational problems and the ability of SNCR to achieve the target NOx level of 500 mg/Nm3,

the SCR system at the Solnhofen plant has been replaced by SNCR. The most serious issues yet

to be resolved with SCR in cement kilns are catalyst life, poisoning of the catalyst, fouling of the

bed, system resistance, ability to correctly inject ammonia at proper molar ratio under non-steady

state conditions, and creation of detached plume.

4.2.3 Indirect Firing and Low NOx Burners

Indirect firing systems (a low NOx technology) can be used on the precalciner and rotary

kiln burner systems. This technology functions by grinding the fuel and collecting the

pulverized fuel with a fabric filter and receiving bin. The fuel is then fired using a dense phase

45

conveying system that limits the volume of air necessary to transport fuel to the burner. This

design reduces primary air injected with fuel.

The indirect-firing process allows the flame to be fuel rich, which reduces the oxygen

available for NOx formation. In some cases it can also result in higher flame temperatures

because the heat release occurs with less combustion gases (i.e., excess air).

Low NOx burners in general are not as effective when used on the rotary kiln section of a

preheater-precalciner kiln system because gases containing the thermal NOx formed in the main

kiln section are gradually cooled as they move through the system resulting in NOx reduction (as

previously discussed), and subsequently the gases pass through the precalciner burning zone and

preheater cyclones where they are further reduced. NOx contained in the alkali bypass gases,

however, would not be subject to this reduction.

The indirect-firing process allows the flame to be fuel rich, which reduces the oxygen

available for NOx formation. In some cases it can also result in higher flame temperatures

because the heat release occurs with less combustion gases (i.e., excess air).

Indirect firing with a low NOx burner attempts to create two combustion zones, primary

and secondary, at the end of the main burner pipe. In the high-temperature primary zone,

combustion is initiated in a fuel-rich environment in the presence of a less than stoichiometric

oxygen level. The submolar level of oxygen at the primary combustion site minimizes NOx

formation. The presence of CO in this portion of the flame also chemically reduces some of the

NOx that is formed.

In the secondary zone, combustion is completed in an oxygen-rich environment. The

temperature in the secondary zone is much lower than in the first; therefore, lower NOx

formation is achieved as combustion is completed.

Indirect-firing and a low-NOx main kiln burner will be used on the CCC kiln. The

emission levels achieved with indirect firing are defined by the burnability of the mix, amount of

conveying air required, and design of the burner. In kiln systems where the mix is difficult to

burn (crystalline silica, quartz, high lime/silica ratio, etc.) or where high excess air is required,

the NOx levels are generally higher and this technology is more effective in such situations. In

general, the expected NOx reduction ranges from 0 to 30 percent from baseline levels at the same

mix design and excess air levels.

46

4.2.4 Semi-Direct Firing and Low NOx Burners

Semi-direct firing practice involves the separation of pulverized fuel from the mill sweep

air using a cyclone separator. The fuel is placed in a small feeder bin from which it is metered to

the kiln burner pipe. The exhaust gases of the cyclone are used to transport the fuel from the bin

discharge. Advantages in the design are that a portion of the sweep air can be returned to the

mill or exhausted to the atmosphere and that minor variations in fuel delivery rate are eliminated.

The major advantage for NOx abatement is that the volume of primary air can be marginally

reduced (i.e., 20 to 25% of combustion air). The system is similar to mill recirculation but can

include partial sweep air discharge. The level of NOx reduction would be less than that provided

by indirect firing and low NOx burners.

4.2.5 Mill Air Recirculation

A method to reduce primary air usage involves returning a portion of the coal mill sweep

air (30 to 50%) to the coal mill inlet. By returning sweep air, the volume of air used to convey

pulverized fuel to the burner pipe is reduced. The amount of the return air possible depends on

the mill grinding rate (i.e., percent of utilization), volatile content of fuel, moisture in the fuel,

grindability of the fuel, and the final conveying air temperature achieved. The reduction in

primary air allows the use of low NOx burner technology that further reduces NOx formation.

The use of mill air recirculation can achieve primary combustion air between 15 and 25

percent but is highly variable. Kilns operating with a hard burning mix do not typically achieve

high NOx reductions. Also, recirculation is not possible for fuels containing high free moisture

(i.e., fuels stored outdoors exposed to weather). The level of NOx reduction would be less than

that provided by indirect firing and low NOx burners.

4.2.6 Mid-Kiln Firing

Mid-kiln firing (MKF) is a potential NOx reduction technology that involves injecting

solid fuel into the calcining zone of a rotating long kiln using a specially designed feed injection

mechanism. The technology is applicable to conventional wet process and long dry kilns. The

fuel used is generally whole tires, although containerized waste fuels have also been used at

some plants. Fuel is injected near the mid-point of the kiln, once per kiln revolution, using a

system consisting of a “feed fork,” pivoting doors, and a drop tube extending through the kiln

wall.

47

Another form of mid-kiln firing has been used for certain preheater and

preheater/precalciner kiln systems. Whole tires are introduced into the riser duct using a

specially designed feed mechanism (drop chute with air lock). This creates an additional

secondary firing zone in which the solid fuel is burned in contact with the partially calcined

meal. Combustion is initiated in the riser duct (located midway between the calciner and rotary

kiln sections of the kiln system) and is completed within the rotary kiln section in a reducing

atmosphere away from the elevated temperatures of the main kiln burner. NOx formation is

inherently lower in this area, and NOx formation may be further reduced due to improvements in

fuel efficiency and the shifting of fuel burning requirements (e.g., less fuel must be burned at the

main kiln burner).

MKF is a staged combustion technology that allows part of the fuel to be burned at a

material calcination temperature of 600# to 900#C, which is much lower than the clinker burning

temperature of 1200# to 1480#C, thus reducing the potential for thermal NOx formation. By

adding fuel in the main flame at mid-kiln, MKF changes both the flame temperature and flame

length. These changes may reduce thermal NOx formation by burning part of the fuel at a lower

temperature and by creating reducing conditions at the solid waste injection point that may

destroy some of the NOx formed upstream in the kiln burning zone. MKF may also produce

additional fuel NOx depending upon the nitrogen content of the fuel. The additional fuel NOx,

however, is typically insignificant relative to thermal NOx formation. The discontinuous fuel

feed from MKF can also result in increased CO. To control CO emissions, the kiln may require

an increase in combustion air, which can decrease production capacity.

Test data showing NOx reduction levels for long dry and wet kilns were compiled for the

EPA in the report “NOx Control Technology for the Cement Industry” (EC/R Inc., 2000). Tests

conducted on three wet process kilns using MKF technology showed an average reduction in

NOx emissions of 40 percent, with a range from 28 to 59 percent.

MKF in the form of riser duct firing is applicable at CCC. The general concerns in

applying this combustion practice include community acceptance of tire burning; reduced sulfur

retention in the clinker, and potential product quality impacts. These issues have been

successfully managed at many cement plants such that they pose no significant adverse impacts

on current or future operations. Because an adequate supply of tires is uncertain in the area,

MKF is not planned at the current time.

48

4.2.7 Staged Combustion (SC)/Calciner Modification

SC is a combustion technology that is currently used with preheater/precalciner kilns to

reduce NOx generation by all major kiln vendors. Multi-staged combustion (MSC) which

includes the use of two or more low NOx burning zones, is supplied by two or more vendors as

NOx control technology on modern preheater/precalciner cement kilns. MSC is also considered

a common technology as it has been used for many years throughout the cement industry.

Another form of SC combines high temperature combustion and reburning without staging air or

fuel in the calciner. This technology creates one high temperature reducing zone by injection of

all of the calciner fuel into one reducing zone at the bottom of the calciner. The reducing zone is

followed immediately by an oxidizing zone where all the tertiary air is introduced into the

calciner. Splitting of feed or staged feed is used to control the temperatures and help in creating

and controlling the high temperature reducing zone. However, this form of staged combustion

does not utilize splitting of tertiary air to stage air flow.

Staged combustion takes place in and around the precalciner and is accomplished in

several ways depending on the system design. The purpose of staged combustion is to burn fuel

in two stages, i.e., primary and secondary. Staged air combustion suppresses the formation of

NOx by operating under fuel-rich, reducing conditions (less than stoichiometric oxygen) in the

flame or primary zone where most of the NOx is potentially formed. This zone is followed by

oxygen-rich conditions in a downstream, secondary zone where CO is oxidized at a lower

temperature with minimal NOx formation.

To delineate the NOx control mechanisms of SC, the combustion chemistry of NOx

formation by virtue of fuel nitrogen should be examined. Fuels introduced to the primary

combustion zone undergo a pyrolysis that liberates nitrogen originally bound in the fuel.

Nitrogen-bearing products that are gaseous will again pyrolize to form HCN and NHi radicals.

With NO and oxygen radicals (OX) already present in the gas stream, the NHi will react as such:

NHi + OX " NO + …

NHi + NO " N2 + …

Because the primary stage of SC is a high-temperature (1150# to 1200#C) reducing environment

where CO is prevalent and oxygen radicals are relatively scarce, NHi radicals can scavenge

49

oxygen from NO as shown in the second equation. This phenomenon is the basis for successful

NOx reduction in SC kilns.

Research and actual emission monitoring on preheater/precalciner cement kilns have

shown that SC technology applied to the area of the precalciner works to effectively lower NOx

emissions per unit clinker produced. Although potential disadvantages to SC may exist,

experience has shown that when included as part of the kiln system design, it will produce a

reduction in NOx emissions with minimal process problems. The SC control option is capable of

reducing NOx emissions by 10 to 50 percent, depending on the site-specific kiln operating

parameters (i.e., kiln feed burnability).

SC can have limitations under specific conditions which affect the potential NOx control

effectiveness. In kiln systems employing a mix that has a high sulfur to alkali molar ratio, the

volatility of sulfur is increased due to the strong reducing conditions in SC and the relatively low

O2 content in the system. This causes severe preheater plugging. The required conditions for

optimum SC operation (low excess oxygen), conflict with preventing sulfur deposition. In order

to operate the preheater a higher oxygen content at the calciner exit can be required. These

problems have been documented in Europe and U.S. facilities. A high S/alkali molar feed ratio

prevents the achievement of maximum NOx reduction using SC.

4.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible NOx Control Options

The second step in the BACT analysis for NOx is to eliminate any technically infeasible

or undemonstrated control technologies. Each control technology was considered and those that

were infeasible based on physical, chemical, and engineering principles or undemonstrated in the

Portland cement industry were eliminated.

Indirect firing, a low-NOx main kiln burner, a SC calciner, and SNCR will be used.

These are technically feasible options for NOx control. The feasibility of the other NOx control

options are discussed below.

4.3.1 SCR

Because of the serious operational problems concerning catalyst plugging and

deactivation and the fact that no cement kilns anywhere in the world that have applied SCR in a

dirty side application have been successful in operating SCR on a sustained long-term basis, the

50

application of SCR to dirty side kiln gases is not considered technically feasible. The applicable

of SCR to clean side kiln gases with heat recovery is also not considered technically feasible due

to heat exchanger pluggage problems as discussed in Section 4.2.2. Although clean side

applications without heat recovery have not been installed in cement kilns in either the US or

Europe, SCR is theoretically applicable for this case and will be evaluated further in this report.

4.3.2 Semi-Direct Firing and Low NOx Burners

Semi-direct firing would not reduce NOx emissions below the base-case design.

Therefore it is not applicable and will not be evaluated further.

4.3.3 Mill Air Recirculation

This technology applies to coal/coke direct-fired kilns not currently using a fuel-rich

primary combustion technology. Because the CCC kiln will be indirect-fired, this technology is

not applicable.

4.3.4 Mid-Kiln (Riser Duct) Firing

The CCC kiln system will be designed to employ this technology as an option, however,

MKF is not expected to reduce emissions below the levels achieved by other selected NOx

control technologies. Therefore, no further evaluation of MKF will be conducted.

4.3.5 Staged Combustion (SC)/Calciner Modification

SC will be employed on the CCC kiln. No further evaluation is needed for the new kiln.

4.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible NOx Control Options

The third step in the BACT analysis is to rank remaining NOx control technologies by

control effectiveness. The remaining NOx control technologies evaluated are SNCR, SCR (clean

side) and a combination of indirect firing, low-NOx main kiln burner, and SC. Table 9 shows the

ranking and the estimated control efficiency.

51


PREHEATER/PRECALCINER KILN SYSTEMS – NOX

Control Technology Control Efficiency Notes

SCR (clean side) 60% 1.16 lb/ton clinker

SNCR 30% 1.95 lb/ton clinker

Indirect firing, low-NOx main burner, SC

NA Base Case = 2.8 lb/ton clinker

4.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible NOx Control Options

The fourth step in a BACT analysis for NOx is to complete the analysis of the applicable

control technologies and to document the results. The feasible control technologies are evaluated

on the basis of economic, energy, and environmental considerations.

CCC is proposing to employ indirect firing, low NOx burners, SC, and SNCR. Therefore,

the evaluation was limited to the incremental effectiveness of installing SCR rather than SNCR.

Table 10 presents a summary of the impact of the technically feasible control options. The

detailed cost calculations are presented in Appendix C.

TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR NOx

Impacts

Method

%

removal

NOx,

removed

tons/yr

Capital

Costs,

MM$

Annualized

Cost MM$

Cost

Effectiveness

$/ton NOx Environmental Product Energy

SNCR 30 931 2.71 2.04 2,191 Yes No No

SCR* 60 1,840 4.60 29.7 16,139 Yes No Yes

*Clean side without heat recovery.


Table 11 summarizes the NOx BACT determinations made for cement kilns since 2000.

52

TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF RECENT NOX PERMIT DETERMINATIONS FOR CEMENT KILNS (2000-PRESENT)

Company Location

Kiln

Type Permit Date Technology Applied Removal

In

OperationLimit Rejected Technology

and $/Ton (%) (Yes/No) (lb/ton clinker) and $/Ton

Drake Cement Drake, AZ PC (new) Draft Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR NA No 2.3 first 6 months, 1.95 thereafter2 (1.2 beyond

BACT)

Lafarge – Kiln 1 Harleyville, SC PC (mod) 8/18/06 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR 29%

(SNCR) Yes

2.652 (3.5 for 1st year)

Lafarge – Kiln 2 Harleyville, SC PC (new) 8/18/06 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR 29%

(SNCR) No

1.952 (3.0 for 1st year)

Suwannee American Cement - Kiln 2

Branford, FL PC (new) 2/15/06 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR 20%

(SNCR) No

1.952 2.4 for first 6 months

SCR - $21,600

Sumter Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/6/06 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR No 1.952

(3.0 for 1st year) SCR – 10,200

American Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/06 Lo-NOx, MSC, SNCR No 1.952

(3.0 for 1st year)

Florida Rock Industries – Kiln 2 Newberry, FL PC(new) 7/22/05 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR No 1.952

2.4 for first 6 months SCR

Rinker/Florida Crushed Stone - Kiln 2

Brooksville, FL PC(new) 7/6/05 Lo NOx, MSC, SNCR 28%

(SNCR) No

1.952 2.4 for first 6 months

SCR - $16,712

Holcim Lee Island, MO PC (new) 06/08/04 Lo NOx, MSC 1 30 No 3.00 (year 1 & 2) 2.80

(after year 2) SCR

GCC Rio Grande Pueblo, CO PC (new) 3/5/04 Low NOx, MSC NA Yes 2.32

Lehigh Portland Cement Mason City, IA PC (mod) 12/11/03 Lo NOx, SNCR NA Yes 2.85

GCC Dacotah Rapid City, SD PC (mod) 04/10/03 Lo NOx, MSC NA Yes 5.52 (not BACT) FGR, MKF, Lo NOx,

TDF, SCR, SNCR

Holcim Theodore, AL PC (mod) 02/04/03 Limit not based on BACT NA Yes 3.33 (not BACT)

Holcim (Devil's Slide) Morgan, UT PC (mod) 11/20/02 Lo NOx, MSC NA Yes 4.55 (not BACT) FGR, Lo NOx, staged

combustion, SNCR, SCR


Branford, FL PC (mod) 4/01 MSC, SNCR NA Yes 2.9 – 24 h

2.42

Monarch Cement Humboldt, KS 2PC

(mod) 01/27/00 Good combustion practices NA Yes 4.21

FGR, Lo NOx, staged combustion, SNCR, SCR

Holcim Holly Hill, SC PC (new) 12/22/99 Lo NOx, MSC NA Yes 4.33

Lafarge Davenport, IA PC (mod) 11/09/99 Yes 4.00

North Texas Cement Whitewright, TX PC (new) 03/04/99 Lo NOx, MSC NA No 3.87 SNCR

Continental Cement Hannibal, MO PC (new) 7/24/07 Lo NOx, MSC NA No(?) Not specified (not

BACT)

Notes: 1. SNCR required as Innovative Control Technology after year 2 – 1.8 lb/ton summer season limit. 2. Rolling 30-day average.

53

4.7 Selection of BACT for NOx

CCC proposes as BACT the use of indirect firing, low-NOx burners, SC, and SNCR. Use

of SCR can be rejected on a cost basis, which exceeds $16,000 per ton of NOx removed. It

should be noted that EPA also rejected SCR as the basis for its recent NOx NSPS proposal

stating:

“Considering these potential technical operating difficulties with SCR in this industry, somewhat high cost effectiveness, the uncertainty of the costs estimates, and adverse non-air and energy implications, EPA is not proposing SCR as BDT for Portland cement kilns.” The requested emission limit is 1.95 lb/ton of clinker, 30-day rolling average, as

measured by CEM. This averaging time is appropriate to account for the variability in NOx

emissions from cement kilns and is consistent with EPA’s NOx State Implementation Plan (SIP)

call guidance for cement kilns. This emission limit is equivalent to the lowest emission level

currently established as BACT in the U.S. for cement kilns.

For the new diesel emergency generator set, CCC proposes to install a unit that complies

with the NOx emission standards given in NSPS Subpart IIII.

54

SECTION 5

BACT ANALYSIS FOR CO AND VOC

The only sources of CO and VOC associated with the project are the

preheater/precalciner kiln system and the new emergency diesel generator set.

5.1 CO and VOC Formation Processes

CO and VOC emissions from cement kiln pyroprocessing systems generally occur from

two separate and distinct processes in the system: 1) products of incomplete combustion of fuel

and 2) decomposition of organic material in the kiln feed. Each CO and VOC formation process

occurs under uniquely different conditions and is defined by the process technology and feed

materials.

5.1.1 CO and VOC from Kiln Feed

For the purpose of this discussion, the pyroprocessing technology is confined to the

preheater/precalciner design. In this design, raw meal is introduced to the exhaust gas stream

from the preheater and preheated through a series of cyclones (stages) in a countercurrent flow

design. In the process of heating, organic materials naturally occurring in the feed (kerogen and

bitumin) are progressively heated and they begin to thermally degrade. The heating at relatively

low temperature and at a low oxygen atmosphere results in complex organic molecules to be

cracked, recombined, and re-ordered until the species are reduced to short-chain VOC’s, CO,

and/or carbon dioxide (CO2). During the pyrolytic process, a significant fraction of the organic

carbon is fully oxidized to CO2.

Depending on the nature of the organics present in the feed materials, the location of the

thermal decomposition in the preheater varies along with the degree of complete oxidation. The

presence of light hydrocarbon species in the meal typically results in VOC and condensible

hydrocarbons in the kiln preheater gases, but the CO concentrations are low. Conversely,

55

complex hydrocarbons generally produce CO during decomposition, but low concentrations of

VOC.

Depending on the geological deposit of the feed materials, the composition and

concentration of organic materials in the kiln feed (meal) may vary significantly. The spatial

distribution within the deposit is both lateral and vertical, and cannot be mitigated by selective

mining or material substitution. The level of contaminants in the kiln feed is unique to each site

and results in site-specific CO and VOC emission rates.

The rate of conversion of meal carbon to CO2 is influenced by the temperature profile of

the preheater, the organic content of the kiln feed, and the composition of the organics in the kiln

feed. Recent studies do not indicate that the oxygen content of the flue gases influences the CO

emission rate. Papers published in Zement-Kalk-Gips also support the same conclusion. The

temperature of the preheater stages is defined by the kiln and mix designs (C3S, silica, etc.) and

cannot be modified sufficiently to complete oxidation of CO and VOC in the preheater.

5.1.2 CO and VOC from Incomplete Combustion

CO and VOC may also be produced as a product of incomplete combustion of fuel in the

precalciner vessel. Modern precalciners burn fuel in suspension with meal. The precalciner

vessel is designed to decarbonize (or calcine) the raw feed simultaneously with the combustion

of fuel in suspension. This design allows use of liquid, gaseous, and solid fuels over a range of

heat values and qualities (ash, moisture, etc.). Because of the continuous generation of thermal

energy (combustion) and consumption of thermal energy due to the decarbonization, the

temperatures are stabilized and the thermal variation is minimized. This process results in

reduced thermal NOx and promotes de-NOx of kiln gases entering the precalciner. With this

design, however, it is impossible to eliminate all CO that is normally associated with fuel

combustion in a conventional combustion device such as a boiler. Typical CO concentrations

after the precalciner and lowest preheater cyclone exit are between 250 and 1500 ppm and VOC

is low (i.e., 5 to 10 ppm).

The MSC design for NOx control generates a reducing atmosphere zone to enhance NOx

reduction. CO generation will also be increased in this zone. The design functions in a similar

manner to SC in boilers. Theoretically, CO is not directly involved in the chemical reactions to

56

reduce NOx. An oxygen deficiency zone is needed to create more NHi radicals to reduce NOx.

CO is the result of this reducing atmosphere.

5.2 Identification of CO/VOC Control Options

This section reviews the available CO/VOC control technologies that were considered for

the CCC Cement Plant.

5.2.1 Thermal Oxidation

Thermal oxidation is performed with devices that use a flame, sometimes combined

within an enclosed chamber, to convert CO and VOC to carbon dioxide (CO2). Thermal

oxidizers operate most effectively at temperatures between 1,200º to 2,000ºF, with a residence

time of 0.2 to 2.0 seconds. By raising the temperature, the residence time for complete

combustion can be reduced and vice versa. However, temperature is the more important process

variable.

Two types of thermal oxidizers are commonly used in industrial plants. The most

common thermal oxidizer is an afterburner. Afterburners can be either direct-fired with no heat

recovery, or with recuperative heat recovery. A second type of thermal oxidizer is a regenerative

thermal oxidizer (RTO). A regenerative thermal oxidizer operates in an enclosed chamber and

recovers up to 85 percent of the heat energy input. For the purposes of this analysis, a

regenerative thermal oxidizer was evaluated.

There are no cement plants currently operating using direct-fired afterburner or a

recuperative type afterburner. Afterburners are not desirable for cement kiln applications

because of limited residence time resulting in poor CO combustion efficiency, an increase in

NOx emissions, and significant additional fuel burning requirements. There are, however, two

plants which have employed an RTO. These are at TXI, Midlothian, Texas and Holcim, Inc.,

Dundee, Michigan. The TXI operation is a precalciner and the Dundee operation involves two

wet process kilns.

TXI, Midlothian, Texas

The system was installed during a plant expansion and was used to reduce CO and VOC

emissions below a de minimus increase and therefore avoid PSD review. No BACT analysis

was conducted and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) does not consider

57

the use of an RTO as BACT under State or Federal requirements. The unit has experienced

significant operational difficulties including higher than anticipated heat exchanger fouling and

pressure drop. This has increased afterburner fuel costs and decreased kiln capacity. It is also

important that the plant operates a fabric filter for primary particulate control and a sulfur

dioxide (SO2) scrubber for SO2 removal prior to the RTO.

Holcim, Dundee, Michigan

Historically the Dundee kilns have emitted condensable hydrocarbons, which formed

visible plumes and an objectionable odor. In an effort to control these problems, the plant

installed an RTO. The design was modified from the TXI configuration to include an open type

(checker) heat exchanger that was expected to have less potential for fouling. The unit has been

effective in control of visible emissions (VE) and odor but has experienced poor heat recovery,

high fuel costs, and significant maintenance problems. In some cases under high hydrocarbon

loads, the unit has experienced over temperature due to uncontrolled self-fueling. The units were

installed to replace existing carbon injection systems for hydrocarbons and did not go through

PSD or a BACT analysis. As a result of the failure of the mechanical system, they have been

decommissioned.

5.2.2 Catalytic Oxidation

Catalytic oxidation is performed with devices that use a flame within an enclosed

chamber to convert CO and VOC to CO2. Catalytic oxidizers operate effectively at lower

temperatures than thermal oxidizers (between 600º to 900ºF) because of the use of catalysts to

drive the reaction. The catalysts (typically platinum based) are placed on an alumina pellet or

honeycomb support and the exhaust gases pass over or through the catalyst within the enclosed

chamber. The temperature in the oxidizer is maintained either by the exothermic reaction or with

supplemental fuel firing.

The presence of particulate matter in an exhaust gas stream inhibits the operation of the

unit and creates problems with catalyst poisoning.

Advantages of a catalytic oxidizer over a thermal oxidizer include:

1. Lower fuel requirements 2. Lower operating temperatures 3. Little or no insulation required 4. Reduced fire hazards 5. Reduced flashback problems.

58

Disadvantages of this system include: 1. Initial capital cost is higher 2. Catalyst poisoning (fouling) is possible 3. PM10 must be removed first 4. Disposal of spent catalyst, which may be hazardous. No catalytic oxidation units are currently being used on any cement kilns in the U.S. or

abroad.

5.2.3 Excess Air

Excess air introduced into the combustion zones tends to reduce the amount of CO and

VOC formed by oxidizing them to CO2. This reaction is limited to areas in the combustion zone

where the CO concentration is greater than 50 ppm. The advantages of the use of excess air are

the ease of implementing the technology and the potential for lower SO2 emissions. The major

disadvantage is that increasing excess air in the combustion zone increases NOx formation and

can adversely affect clinker quality.

5.2.4 Good Combustion Practices

Because CO and VOC formation can result from incomplete combustion of fuels and the

oxidation of uncombusted carbon in those fuels, the better the combustion practices, the lower

the CO and VOC formation. Good combustion practices require the following elements:

1. Proper mixing

2. High temperature.

Good combustion practice is the inherently lowest emitting method of controlling CO and VOC

emissions from combustion sources.

5.3 Elimination of Technically Infeasible CO/VOC Control Options

The second step in the BACT analysis for CO and VOC is to eliminate any technically

infeasible or undemonstrated control technologies. Each control technology is considered and

those that are infeasible based on physical, chemical, and engineering principles or are

undemonstrated in the Portland cement industry were eliminated.

59

5.3.1 Thermal Oxidation

Because PM present in the uncleaned flue gases would routinely plug and foul thermal

oxidation equipment, a thermal oxidation unit would have to be placed downstream of the

baghouse to be technically feasible. Placing the oxidizer at this location would require

supplemental fuel firing to maintain the optimal operating temperature range of 1,200º to

2,000ºF. The additional fuel firing would result in an undesirable increase in NOx emissions,

thus negating the NOx control technology employed upstream. Although it appears to be

technically feasible to install a regenerative thermal oxidization unit downstream of the

preheater/precalciner system baghouse from a theoretical standpoint, in practice these systems

have failed to perform successfully. Therefore, the use of thermal oxidation (RTO) is considered

to be infeasible from a practical standpoint and will not be considered further in this BACT

analysis.

5.3.2 Catalytic Oxidation

PM present in Portland cement kiln flue gases poisons the catalysts used in catalytic

oxidation units and would routinely plug and foul catalytic oxidation equipment. The presence

of PM in the catalytic oxidation unit will result in poor CO/CO2 conversion and an increase in

operational interruptions. Therefore, the use of a catalytic oxidation unit is an infeasible option

and is not considered further in this BACT analysis.

In addition to the technical issues, two environmental issues result from the catalytic

oxidation control option. Spent catalyst is often classified as a “hazardous waste.” Disposal of a

hazardous waste represents a significant environmental concern.

5.3.3 Excess Air

As outlined in the NOx BACT determination (Section 4), excess air results in an

alteration of the flame characteristics in the kiln and precalciner. This change in the flame will

have a detrimental affect on the clinker quality. Therefore, the use of excess air is not a

technically feasible control alternative and will not be considered further in this BACT analysis.

In addition to the technical argument, the effectiveness of this control method is limited

by the carbonation process equilibrium and the CO and VOC concentration. Adding excess air

to either the kiln or precalciner combustion zones would result in an increase in NOx and PM10

60

emissions from the system. Creating more NOx and PM10 to reduce CO and VOC emissions

does not represent a viable environmental benefit.

5.3.4 Good Combustion Practices

This is a technically feasible option and will be further considered in the BACT analysis.

5.4 Ranking of Technically Feasible CO/VOC Control Options

The third step in the BACT analysis for CO/VOC is to rank remaining control

technologies by control effectiveness. The only control technology option that is considered

technically feasible is good combustion practices.

5.5 Evaluation of Technically Feasible CO/VOC Control Options

The fourth step in a BACT analysis for CO and VOC is to complete the analysis of the

feasible control technologies and document the results. The feasible control technologies are

evaluated on the basis of economic, environmental, and energy considerations. The only

technically and practically feasible option appears to be good combustion practices. There are

no significant negative environmental, product, or energy impacts associated with this

technology.

5.6 Review of Kiln Permit Limits

A review of plants identified in the BACT/LAER Clearinghouse indicated that the

documentation is incomplete and that several facilities have been constructed under the Federal

PSD program or State-only BACT requirements. Considering the incompleteness of the data, a

State-by-State review of recently permitted precalciner facilities was conducted. Tables 12 and

13 summarize recent permit determinations for CO and VOC.

The range of CO emissions for good combustion practice is site-specific and is between

1.56 and 10.6 lb/ton of clinker. The range of VOC emissions for good combustion practices is

also site-specific and ranges between 0.12 and 5.31 lb/ton of clinker.

The one plant identified as using post-control technology is TXI Operations, Midlothian,

Texas, which listed an RTO for CO and VOC abatement. Post-control was voluntarily

implemented to avoid PSD review during plant expansion. The uncontrolled CO emission rate

61

TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF RECENT CO PERMIT DETERMINATIONS FOR CEMENT KILNS (2000-PRESENT)

Company Location Kiln Type Permit Date Technology Applied Removal

In



Lafarge – Kiln 1 Harleyville, SC PC (mod) 8/18/06 GC NA Yes 10.51

Lafarge – Kiln 2 Harleyville, SC PC (new) 8/18/06 GC NA No 6.81


Branford, FL PC (new) 2/15/06 GC No 2.901 RTO

Sumter Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/6/06 GC No

2.91 RTO

American Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/06 GC No 2.91 RTO

Florida Rock Industries – Kiln 2 Newberry, FL PC (new) 7/22/05 GC No 3.6 – 24 h RTO


Brooksville, FL PC (new) 7/6/05 GC No 3.6 – 24 h RTO

Holcim Lee Island, MO PC (new) 06/08/04 GC NA No 6.01

GCC Rio Grande Pueblo, CO PC (new) 3/5/04 GC NA Yes 2.11

Lehigh Portland Cement Mason City, IA PC (mod) 12/11/03 GC NA Yes 3.7 – 3 h RTO - $5900

Roanoke Cement Co. Troutville, VA PC (mod) 6/12/03 GC NA Yes 3.0 – 24 h RTO

GCC Dacotah Rapid City, SD PC (mod) 04/10/03 GC NA Yes 4.88

Holcim Theodore, AL PC (mod) 02/04/03 GC NA Yes 10.6 – annual

Holcim (Devil's Slide) Morgan, UT PC (mod) 11/20/02 GC NA Yes 4.56


Branford, FL PC (new) 06/01/00 GC NA Yes 3.60 – 3 h RTO

Monarch Cement Humboldt, KS 2PC (mod) 01/27/00 GC NA Yes 3.7 – annual RTO - $2713

Holcim Holly Hill, SC PC (new) 12/22/99 GC NA Yes 6.8

Lafarge Davenport, IA PC (mod) 11/09/99 GC Yes 1.64

North Texas Cement Whitewright, TX PC (new) 03/04/99 GC NA No 2.91 RTO

TXI Midlothian, TX PC (mod) 11/98 RTO (Based on PSD

avoidance, not BACT) 75 Yes 1.56

Titan America Medley, FL PC (new) 12/02/05 GC NA Yes 2.0 RTO

Continental Cement Hannibal, MO PC (new) 7/24/07 GC NA No(?) 3.6 RTO > $5600

Notes: GC – Good combustion RTO – Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer 130-day rolling average

62

TABLE 13. SUMMARY OF RECENT VOC PERMIT DETERMINATIONS FOR CEMENT KILNS (2000-PRESENT)

Company Location Kiln Type Permit Date Technology Applied Removal

In



Lafarge – Kiln 1 Harleyville, SC PC (mod) 8/18/06 GC Yes 0.55 – 3 h

Lafarge – Kiln 2 Harleyville, SC PC (new) 8/18/06 GC No 0.55 – 3 h


Branford, FL PC (new) 2/15/06 GC No 0.121 RTO

Sumter Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/6/06 GC No 0.1151 RTO

American Cement Sumter Co., FL PC (new) 2/06 GC No 0.121 RTO

Florida Rock Industries – Kiln 2 Newberry, FL PC (new) 7/22/05 GC No 0.121 RTO

Rinker/Florida Crushed Stone - Kiln 2

Brooksville, FL PC (new) 7/6/05 GC No 0.121

Holcim Lee Island, MO PC (new) 06/08/04 GC No 0.332

GCC Rio Grande Pueblo, CO PC (new) 3/5/04 GC Yes No limit

Lehigh Portland Cement Mason City, IA PC (mod) 12/11/03 GC Yes No limit

GCC Dacotah Rapid City, SD PC (mod) 04/10/03 GC Yes No limit

Holcim Theodore, AL PC (mod) 02/04/03 GC Yes 2.35 (not BACT)

Holcim (Devil's Slide) Morgan, UT PC (mod) 11/20/02 GC Yes 0.33


Branford, FL PC (new) 06/01/00 GC Yes 0.191

Monarch Cement Humboldt, KS 2PC (mod) 01/27/00 GC Yes

Holcim Holly Hill, SC PC (new) 12/22/99 GC Yes 0.27 – 3 h

Lafarge Davenport, IA PC (mod) 11/09/99 GC Yes

North Texas Cement Whitewright, TX PC (new) 03/04/99 GC No 5.31

TXI Midlothian, TX PC (mod) 11/98 RTO (Based on PSD

avoidance, not BACT) 85 Yes 0.34

Continental Cement Hannibal, MO PC (new) 7/24/07 GC No(?) 0.12 RTO >$58,000

Notes: 130-day block average. 230-day rolling average.

63

was estimated to be 6.8 lb/ton. No estimate of the uncontrolled VOC emission rate is available. This

unit has experienced significant technical difficulties in maintaining continuous operation of the RTO.

An RTO was installed at Holcim Dundee, Michigan for odor and visible emission (con-

(condensable hydrocarbon) control but has been discontinued due to high maintenance and system

failure. This system was installed on two wet cement kilns.

5.7 Selection of BACT for CO and VOC

The addition of an RTO to reduce CO and VOC can be rejected on the basis of practical

applicability. CCC proposes as BACT the use of good combustion practices for these pollutants. The

requested BACT emission limits are: CO – 2.80 lb/ton clinker and VOC – 0.16 lb/ton clinker.

Compliance with both emission limits will be determined by CEMS on a 30-day rolling average basis.

For the new diesel emergency generator set, CCC proposes to install a unit that complies with

the emission standards for CO and hydrocarbons (HC) given in NSPS Subpart IIII.

64

SECTION 6

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED BACT EMISSION LIMITS

The proposed BACT controls and limits are summarized in Table 14.

TABLE 14. PROPOSED BACT LIMITS

Pollutant Operation Emission Limit VE, % Control Kiln/raw mill/clinker cooler/coal mill

0.14 lb/ton dry preheater feed* 10 Baghouse Particulate Matter

Finish mills and other process sources

0.01 gr/scf 10 Baghouse

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Kiln/raw mill (main stack)

1.33 lb/ton clinker, 30-day rolling average and 1.80 lb/ton clinker, 24-h rolling average

NA

Lime injection

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Kiln/raw mill (main stack)

1.95 lb/ton clinker, 30-day rolling average

NA

Low-NOx burner, indirect firing, SC, SNCR

Carbon Monoxide (CO)



NA

Good combustion

Volatile Organic Compounds



NA Good combustion

*Filterable PM only – see discussion in Regulatory Analysis Report, Section 3.

APPENDIX A

SO2 EMISSIONS DIAGRAMS

APPENDIX B

COST CALCULATIONS FOR SO2

10/20/2008

Parameter Inherent Control Dry Lime Wet Lime Wet Lime CT D-SOx Cyclone Lime Hydrator Wet Scrubber Wet Scrubber Units

Base Case (1) Injection (2) Hybrid (3) & Reheat (3a) (4) (5) No Reheat (6) With Reheat (7)

SO2 Emis Factor, Mill On 2.23 1.12 1.20 1.02 1.56 1.25 0.22 0.22 lb/ton clinker

SO2 Emis Factor, Mill Off 4.22 2.11 1.80 1.80 2.95 2.36 0.42 0.42 lb/ton clinker

Average SO2 Emis Factor 2.63 1.32 1.32 1.18 1.84 1.47 0.26 0.26 lb/ton clinker

Meets 1.33 lb/ton Limit? No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes

SO2 Base Case 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 2880.4 tons/yr

SO2 Removed 0.0 1440.2 1435.0 1591.4 864.1 1267.4 2592.4 2592.4 tons/yr

SO2 Final Emissions 2880.4 1440.2 1445.4 1289.0 2016.3 1613.0 288.0 288.0 tons/yr

Average Control Efficiency 0% 50% 50% 55% 30% 44% 90% 90% %

Capital Cost N/A $1,833,600 $2,979,600 $5,730,000 $1,100,000 $4,500,000 $35,755,631 $40,255,631 $

Direct Operating Cost N/A $3,512,259 $1,509,465 $9,426,082 $602,209 $297,710 $3,591,139 $11,265,290 $/yr

Indirect Operating Cost N/A $290,729 $455,746 $851,789 $185,094 $674,676 $5,202,019 $5,849,994 $/yr

Total Annualized Cost N/A $3,802,988 $1,965,211 $10,277,871 $787,303 $972,386 $8,793,157 $17,115,284 $/yr

Control Cost Effectiveness N/A $2,641 $1,370 $6,458 $911 $767 $3,392 $6,602 $/ton SO2

Cost, Product Basis N/A $1.74 $0.90 $4.69 $0.36 $0.44 $4.02 $7.82 $/ton clinker

Clinker Production = 2,190,000 ton/yr

Notes: 1 Base case SO2 emissions without add-on controls

2 Dry lime injection used in preheater tower. Assume 4:1 molar ratio. Equipment cost from Envirocare.

3 Wet lime injection used in conditioning tower when the raw mill is off and in the raw mill when it is on. Equipment cost from Envirocare.

3a Wet lime injection used in conditioning tower (continuous) with gas reheat when the raw mill is on.

4 Costs for D-Sox system from FLS.

5 Costs for Lime Hydrator system from FLS.

6 Cost for wet scrubber with no reheating of exhaust gases (EPA cost estimate scaled up for CCC production).

7 Cost for wet scrubber with stack gas reheat if needed for ambient compliance.

8 Indirect operating costs include 7% interest & 15-year equipment life assumptions.

Control Technology

CASTLE HAYNE PLANT

SUMMARY OF SO2 CONTROL OPTIONS

CCC-SO2-BACT OPTIONS 1 OF 38

10/20/2008

PRODUCTION 5,443 MT/D 6,000 ST/D

250 ST/HR

365.0 Days/yr 365.0 Days/yr

1,986,755 Tonnes/yr 2,190,000 ST/YR

PLANT CAPACITY 100.0 %

SO2 FACTOR MILL-ON 1.01 Kg/Tonne 2.23 LB/TON

SO2 FACTOR MILL-OFF 1.91 Kg/Tonne 4.22 LB/TON

AVERAGE SO2 1.19 Kg/Tonne 2.63 LB/TON

RAW MILL SO2 REMOVAL 50.0 % 50.0 %

ADD-ON CONTROL FACTOR 0 % 0 %

SO2 EMISSIONS UNCONTROLLED

RAW MILL-ON 1775.50 Tonnes/yr 1957.14 TON/YR

202.68 Kg/HR 446.83 LB/HR

RAW MILL-OFF 837.58 Tonnes/yr 923.27 TON/YR

478.07 Kg/HR 1053.96 LB/HR

ANNUAL SO2 2613.08 Tonnes/yr 2880.40 TON/YR

OPERATING HOURS 8,760 HRS/YR At Potential Capacity

MILL-ON 7,008 HRS/YR 80%

MILL-OFF 1,752 HRS/YR 20%

100%

CASTLE HAYNE PLANT

KILN DESIGN DATA

CCC-SO2-BACT CURRENT 2 OF 38

10/20/2008

SO2 EMISSION ESTIMATES (lb/ton clinker)

Notes

Uncontrolled

so2 lb/ston 10.75 100% Uncontrolled SO2 before preheater

preheater exit 4.30 0.60 60% preheater capture

stack % 40 40% SO2 passing preheater

coal mill diversion 0.34 7.83% gases to coal mill

coal mill exit 0.25 0.25 25% coal mill circuit capture

so2 passing (mill off) 3.96

mill on 1.98 0.50 50% raw mill capture

50% SO2 passing mill

total so2, mill on 2.23 raw mill + coal mill

total so2, mill off 4.22 mill off + coal mill

stack % 24.47 24% of raw material SO2 goes to stack

30-day average 2.63 0.8 mill-on 80% raw mill in operation

0.2 mill-off 20% raw mill down

CONTROL OPTIONS

Dry lime injection 0.50 loss 50% Control

Location: Preheater

so2 mill down 2.11

so2 mill-in 1.12

30-day average 1.32

Wet lime injection (Hybrid) 0.50 loss 50% Control

so2 mill down 1.80 Location: Conditoning Tower

so2 mill-in 1.20 Location: Raw Mill

30-day average 1.32

Wet lime injection (CT only) 0.45 loss 55% Control

so2 mill down 1.80 Location: Conditoning Tower

so2 mill-in 1.02 Location: Conditoning Tower

30-day average 1.18

CCC-SO2-BACT Control Options 3 OF 38

10/20/2008

D-SOx cyclone 0.70 loss 30% Control

Location: Preheater

so2 mill down 2.95

so2 mill-in 1.56

30-day average 1.84

Lime hydrator 0.56 loss 44% Control

Location: Preheater

so2 mill down 2.36

so2 mill-in 1.25

30-day average 1.47

Wet scrubber 0.10 loss 90% Control

Location: Stack

so2 mill down 0.42

so2 mill-in 0.22

30-day average 0.26

CCC-SO2-BACT Control Options 4 OF 38

10/20/2008

OPERATION 8760 HR/YR

PRODUCTION 5,443 TONNES/DAY

226.80 TONNES/HR

SO2 UNCONTROLLED 2.15 KG/TONNE

PREHEATER EXIT 487.62 KG/HR

PREHEATER EXIT 1075.0 LB/HR 4.30 LB/TON

16.8 MOLES SO2

ANNUAL (AVE) 4708.50 T/YR

TEMP

SO2 REMOVED 50.0 % AVE 315.6 C

100 % LOW CONCENTRATION ADJUSTMENT

50.0 % ANNUAL

ANNUAL (AVE) 2354.25 T/YR

NET SO2 2354.25 T/YR 2.15 LB/TON

COAL MILL 184.34 T/YR 7.83% 0.17 LB/TON

NET SO2 2169.91 T/YR 1.98 LB/TON

495.41 LB/HR

CONTROLLED SO2 MILL-IN 224.7 KG/HR PRE-MILL UNCONTROLLED 2880.4 T/YR495.4 LB/HR PRE-MILL CONTROLLED 1440.2 T/YR

247.7 LB/HR POST-MILL REMOVED 1440.2 T/YR

868.0 T/YR POST-MILL

CONTROLLED SO2 MILL-OUT 495.4 LB/HR POST-MILL

434.0 T/YR POST-MILL

ANNUAL CONTROLLED SO2 1301.9 T/YR POST-MILL

COAL MILL 138.3 T/YR

TOTAL 1440.2 T/YR STACK

LIME INJECTION RATE 4 Ca(OH)2 / SO2 molar ratio

67 MOLES Ca(OH)2

4972 LB/HR Ca(OH)2

GYPSUM FORMATION 527 LB/HR

LIME REACTED 290 LB/HR

UNREACTED LIME -222 LB/HR

LOADING TO CYCLONE 304 LB/HR

CYCLONE REMOVAL 100 %

COLLECTED DUST 304.3 LB/HR

WASTE DUST 0 T/YR RETURNED TO PROCESS

LIME USED 21777 T/YR

946.8 LOADS/YR

TRUCKS 0.39 DAYS

DRY LIME INJECTION SYSTEM

(DRY SCRUBBING)

CCC-SO2-BACT DRYCa(OH)2 5 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATEDRY LIME INJECTION (DRY SCRUBBING)

PLANT SIZE CAPACITY 2,190,000 TON/YR

FACTOR COSTCAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COSTDRY SYSTEM SILO/FILTER

BLOWERSDUCTWORKCYCLONE,BINSELECTRICALPIPINGMISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT

EQUIPMENT TOTAL 800,000OTHER INSTRUMENTS 0.10 80,000

TAXES 0.05 40,000FREIGHT 0.05 40,000

PEC TOTAL 960,000

INSTALLATION FOUNDATIONS 0.10 96,000ERECTION 0.20 192,000ELECTRICAL 0.05 48,000DUCTING 0.10 96,000INSULATION 0.05 48,000SITE PREPARATION 0.10 96,000TOTAL 576,000

DIRECT COSTS TOTAL 1,536,000

INDIRECT COSTS ENGINEERING/DESIGN 0.10 96,000CONST/FIELD EXPENSE 0.05 48,000CONTR.FEE 0.10 96,000START-UP 0.02 19,200PERFORMANCE TEST 0.01 9,600CONTINGENCIES 0.03 28,800TOTAL 297,600

RETROFIT PREMIUM (20% OF DIRECT & INDIRECT COST) 0.0

TOTAL CAPITAL COST 1,833,600

CCC-SO2-BACT COST-DRYLIME 6 OF 38

10/20/2008


OPERATING COST(DIRECT)

UTILITIES BH FAN STATIC PRESSURE 8.00 IN H2OFAN VOLUME 1000 ACFMFAN POWER 15.00 BHPFK PUMP STATIC PRESSURE 40.00 IN H2OBLOWER VOLUME 500 ACFMFAN POWER 50.00 BHPCONNECTED LOAD 65.00 BHPPOWER 48.47 KWHrHOURS OPERATED 8760 HRSELECTRICAL COST 0.0550 $/KWHrANNUAL COST 23,353 $/YR

REAGENT REAGENT USAGE 21,777 TON/YRCOST 155.00 $/TONANNUAL COST 3,375,406 $/YR

WASTE DISPOSAL CKD 0 TON/YR8.00 $/TON

COST 0 $/YR

MAINTENANCE LABOR & MATERIALSREPLACEMENT PARTS 5% OF PEC 48,000 $/YRMATERIALS 21000 $/YR

MAINTENANCE LABOR HR/YR 1000

COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000

LABOR LABOR HR/YR 1000COST $/HR 19.00COST $/YR 19,000

SUPERVISOR LABOR HR/YR 150COST $/HR 30.00COST $/YR 4,500

FUEL SAVINGS $/YR $0

TOTAL DIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR $3,512,259


10/20/2008


OPERATING COST(INDIRECT) OVERHEAD % 60.00$/YR 26,700

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42$/YR 7,701

INSURANCE % 1.00$/YR 18,336

ADMINISTRATION % 2.00$/YR 36,672

CAPITAL RECOVERY %-INTEREST 7.00LIFE-YEARS 15.00FACTOR 0.109795$/YR 201,319

TOTAL INDIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR 290,729

TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST $/YR 3,802,988

ANNUAL EMISSIONS REDUCTION TON/YR 1440.20% 50.00

COST BENEFIT $/TON 2,641


10/20/2008


MILL ON 7008 HR/YR

MILL OFF 1752 HR/YR


226.80 TONNES/HR




COAL MILL GASES

CM INLET 82.9 LB/HR 0.33 LB/TON

SO2 REMOVED 25.0 %

20.71 LB/HR

SO2 COAL MILL EXHAUST 62.14 LB/HR 0.25 LB/TON

CONDITIONING TOWER (MILL-OFF)

CT INLET 992.1 LB/HR 3.97 LB/TON

15.50 MOLES SO2

SO2 REMOVED 61.0 % AVE

274.51 KG/HR

605.18 LB/HR

SO2 MILL MILL-OFF 386.92 LB/HR 1.55 LB/TON

LIME INJECTION RATE 2.5 Ca(OH)2 / SO2 molar ratio

38.8 MOLES Ca(OH)2

2868 LB/HR Ca(OH)2 2512 T/YR








WATER RATE 117.07 GPM

976.37 LB/MIN

443.21 L/MIN

58,582 LB/HR

12,306,494 GAL/YR

WET LIME INJECTION SYSTEM

LIME SLURRY TO CT (MILL-OFF) & RAW MILL (MILL-ON)

CCC-SO2-BACT WETCa(OH)2 (Hybrid) 9 OF 38

10/20/2008

TOTAL SLURRY 61,450 LB/HR

SLURRY SOLIDS 4.67 %

PARTICLE SIZE 25 um

RAW MILL (MILL-ON)

MILL INLET 992.1 LB/HR 3.97 LB/TON

15.50 MOLES SO2


342.01 KG/HR

754.00 LB/HR

SO2 MILL MILL-ON 238.11 LB/HR 0.95 LB/TON


23 MOLES Ca(OH)2

1721 LB/HR Ca(OH)2 6029 T/YR

TOTAL LIME USED 8541 T/YR

LOADS 342

TRUCKS/DAY 0.9

SO2 ANNUAL EMISSIONS


STACK MILL-ON 834.3 T/YR

STACK MILL-OFF 338.9 T/YR

TOTAL 1445.4 T/YR 1.32 LB/TON

UNCONTROLLED 2880.4 T/YR 2.63 LB/TON

SO2 REMOVED 1435.0 T/YR 49.8 %

CCC-SO2-BACT WETCa(OH)2 (Hybrid) 10 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

SPRAY DRYING IN CT & RAW MILL ADDITION (LIME SLURRY ABSORBENT)


FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

REAGENT SYSTEM LANCES,NOZZLES

VALVES,PUMPS

DUCTWORK

CYCLONE,BINS

ELECTRICAL

PIPING

MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT

1,300,000

EQUIPMENT TOTAL 1,300,000

OTHER INSTRUMENTS 0.10 130,000

TAXES 0.05 65,000

FREIGHT 0.05 65,000

PEC TOTAL 1,560,000

INSTALLATION FOUNDATIONS 0.10 156,000

ERECTION 0.20 312,000

ELECTRICAL 0.05 78,000

DUCTING 0.10 156,000

INSULATION 0.05 78,000

SITE PREPARATION 0.10 156,000

TOTAL 936,000


INDIRECT COSTS ENGINEERING/DESIGN 0.10 156,000

CONST/FIELD EXPENSE 0.05 78,000

CONTR.FEE 0.10 156,000

START-UP 0.02 31,200

PERFORMANCE TEST 0.01 15,600

CONTINGENCIES 0.03 46,800

TOTAL 483,600



CCC-SO2-BACT COST-WETLIME (Hybrid) 11 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



UTILITIES

TRANSFER PUMP 5.00 BHP

REAGENT PUMP 2.00 BHP

AGGITATOR MOTOR 10.00 BHP

BLOWER COMPRESSOR 100.00 BHP

CONNECTED LOAD 117.00 BHP

POWER 87.25 KWHr

HOURS OPERATED 8760 HRS

ELECTRICAL COST 0.0550 $/KWHr

ANNUAL COST 42,036 $/YR

REAGENT REAGENT USAGE 8,541 T/YR

COST 155.00 $/TON

ANNUAL COST 1,323,929 $/YR

WASTE DISPOSAL CKD 0 TON/YR

8.00 $/TON

COST 0 $/YR

WATER USAGE SUPPLY 12,306,494 GAL/YR

COST 0.00 $/MMGAL

ANNUAL COST 0 $/YR

MAINTENANCE LABOR & MATERIALS

REPLACEMENT PARTS 5% OF PEC 78,000 $/YR

MATERIALS 21000 $/YRMAINTENANCE LABOR HR/YR 1000

COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000

LABOR LABOR HR/YR 1000

COST $/HR 19.00

COST $/YR 19,000

SUPERVISOR LABOR HR/YR 150

COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 4,500




10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE


OPERATING COST(INDIRECT) OVERHEAD % 60.00

$/YR 26,700

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42

$/YR 12,514

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 29,796

ADMINISTRATION % 2.00

$/YR 59,592

CAPITAL RECOVERY %-INTEREST 7.00

LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.109795

$/YR 327,144



ANNUAL EMISSIONS REDUCTION TON/YR 1434.96

% 49.82



10/20/2008


MILL ON 7008 HR/YR

MILL OFF 1752 HR/YR


226.80 TONNES/HR




COAL MILL GASES

CM INLET 82.9 LB/HR 0.33 LB/TON

SO2 REMOVED 25.0 %

20.71 LB/HR

SO2 COAL MILL EXHAUST 62.14 LB/HR 0.25 LB/TON

CONDITIONING TOWER (MILL-OFF & MILL-ON)

CT INLET 992.1 LB/HR 3.97 LB/TON

15.50 MOLES SO2


274.51 KG/HR

605.18 LB/HR

SO2 MILL MILL-OFF 386.92 LB/HR 1.55 LB/TON


39 MOLES Ca(OH)2

2868 LB/HR Ca(OH)2 12,561 T/YR








WATER RATE 117.07 GPM

976.37 LB/MIN

443.21 L/MIN

58,582 LB/HR

61,532,472 GAL/YR

WET LIME INJECTION SYSTEM

LIME SLURRY TO CT WITH MILL GAS REHEAT

CCC-SO2-BACT WETCa(OH)2 (CT) 14 OF 38

10/20/2008

TOTAL SLURRY 61,450 LB/HR

SLURRY SOLIDS 4.67 %

PARTICLE SIZE 25 um

RAW MILL (MILL-ON)

MILL INLET 386.9 LB/HR 1.55 LB/TON

6.05 MOLES SO2


87.75 KG/HR

193.46 LB/HR

SO2 MILL MILL-ON 193.46 LB/HR 0.77 LB/TON

LIME INJECTION RATE 0 Ca(OH)2 / SO2 molar ratio

0 MOLES Ca(OH)2

0 LB/HR Ca(OH)2 0 T/YR

TOTAL LIME USED 12,561 T/YR

LOADS 502

TRUCKS/DAY 1.4

SO2 ANNUAL EMISSIONS


STACK MILL-ON 677.9 T/YR

STACK MILL-OFF 338.9 T/YR

TOTAL 1289.0 T/YR 1.18 LB/TON

UNCONTROLLED 2880.4 T/YR 2.63 LB/TON

SO2 REMOVED 1591.4 T/YR 55.2 %

CCC-SO2-BACT WETCa(OH)2 (CT) 15 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

SPRAY DRYING IN CT ONLY (LIME SLURRY ABSORBENT) WITH MILL GAS REHEAT


FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

REAGENT SYSTEM LANCES,NOZZLES

VALVES,PUMPS

DUCTWORK

CYCLONE,BINS

ELECTRICAL

PIPING & MISCELLANEOUS

SUBBOTAL 1,300,000

INCREASE KILN BAGHOUSE & ID FAN SIZE 1,200,000



TAXES 0.05 125,000

FREIGHT 0.05 125,000

PEC TOTAL 3,000,000


ERECTION 0.20 600,000


DUCTING 0.10 300,000



TOTAL 1,800,000




CONTR.FEE 0.10 300,000

START-UP 0.02 60,000



TOTAL 930,000



CCC-SO2-BACT COST-WETLIME (CT) 16 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



UTILITIES

TRANSFER PUMP 5.00 BHP





POWER 87.25 KWHr




REAGENT REAGENT USAGE 12,561 T/YR

COST 155.00 $/TON


NATURAL GAS REHEAT RATE 73.5 MMBTU/HR

COST 14.02 $/MMBTU


WATER USAGE SUPPLY 61,532,472 GAL/YR

COST 0.00 $/MMGAL

ANNUAL COST 0 $/YR




COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000


COST $/HR 19.00

COST $/YR 19,000


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 4,500




10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



$/YR 26,700

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42

$/YR 24,066

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 57,300


$/YR 114,600


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.109795

$/YR 629,123




% 55.25



10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATED-SOX CYCLONE


FACTOR COSTCAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COSTEQUIPMENT D-SOX CYCLONE SYSTEM (FLS QUOTE) 1,100,000



UTILITIES BH FAN STATIC PRESSUREFAN VOLUMEFAN POWERFK PUMP STATIC PRESSUREBLOWER VOLUMEFAN POWERCONNECTED LOADPOWER (TOTAL) 794702 KWHrHOURS OPERATED HRSELECTRICAL COST 0.0550 $/KWHrANNUAL COST 43,709 $/YR

REAGENT REAGENT USAGE TON/YRCOST 155.00 $/TONANNUAL COST 0 $/YR

WASTE DISPOSAL CKD 0 TON/YR8.00 $/TON

COST 0 $/YR

MAINTENANCE LABOR & MATERIALSREPLACEMENT PARTS 5% OF PEC $/YR 55,000MATERIALS $/YR 21000


COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000

LABOR LABOR HR/YR 1000COST $/HR 19.00COST $/YR 19,000

SUPERVISOR LABOR HR/YR 150COST $/HR 30.00COST $/YR 4,500

ADDITIONAL FUEL COST 0.20 $/TON CLINKER $/YR $438,000

TOTAL DIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR $602,209

CCC-SO2-BACT COST-D-SOx Cyclone 19 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATED-SOX CYCLONE

OPERATING COST(INDIRECT) OVERHEAD % 60.00$/YR 26,700

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42$/YR 4,620

INSURANCE % 1.00$/YR 11,000

ADMINISTRATION % 2.00$/YR 22,000

CAPITAL RECOVERY %-INTEREST 7.00LIFE-YEARS 15.00FACTOR 0.109795$/YR 120,774


TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST $/YR 787,303

ANNUAL EMISSIONS REDUCTION TON/YR 864.12% 30.00

COST BENEFIT $/TON 911

CCC-SO2-BACT COST-D-SOx Cyclone 20 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

LIME HYDRATOR

PLANT SIZE CURRENT CAPACITY 2,190,000 TON/YR

FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

E-String, lime hydrator, ductwork, ID fan (FLS QUOTE) 4,500,000



ADDITIONAL FUEL COST EST 0.17 $/TON CLINKER $/YR $372,300

ADDITIONAL POWER COST EST 0.02 $/TON CLINKER $/YR $43,800


REPLACEMENT PARTS 5% OF PEC $/YR 225,000

MATERIALS $/YR 21000MAINTENANCE LABOR HR/YR 1000

COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000


COST $/HR 19.00

COST $/YR 19,000


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 4,500

TOTAL DIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR $706,600


$/YR 26,700

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42

$/YR 18,900

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 45,000


$/YR 90,000


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.109795

$/YR 494,076




% 44.00


CCC-SO2-BACT COST-Lime Hydrator 21 OF 38

10/20/2008

DESIGN BASIS FOR WET SCRUBBER SYSTEM

INLET GASES FROM KILN (MILL-IN)

861,328 NM3/HR 544053 SCFM

1,139,443 M3/HR 670651 ACFM

H2O 141,488 NM3/HR 89370 WSCFM

DRY GAS 719,840 NM3/HR 454683 DSCFM

TEMPERATURE 88.3 C 191 F MILL IN WORST CASE

SPECIES % NM3/HR SCFM LB/MIN KG/MIN Cp BTU/LB-F Cp KJ/Kg-K h BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN

H2O 16.43 141487.7 88943.1 4154.3 1888.3 1094.7 524.4 4,547,567 4315

CO2 10.94 94223.7 59231.6 6769.3 3077.0 0.2031 0.0540 77,330 73

O2 11.65 100326.8 63068.2 5233.9 2379.0 0.2149 0.0572 63,271 60

N2 60.93 524795.1 329900.7 23975.3 10897.9 0.2470 0.0657 333,110 316

SO2 0.01 88.6658 56.1 9.3 4.229 0.2031 0.0540 106 0

NO 0.02 151.6 95.3 7.7 3.5 0.2031 0.0540 88 0CO 0.03 254.0 159.7 11.6 5.3 0.2031 0.0540 132 0

TOTAL 100 861328 541454 40161 18255 5,021,604 4764

SATURATION 0.109 LB/LB-DA

TEMPERATURE 123.9 F

51.0 C

524.2 K

SO2 REMOVAL 90 % AVERAGE

100 % AVAILABILITY

90 % ANNUAL

SPECIES % NM3/HR SCFM LB/MIN KG/MIN Cp BTU/LB-F Cp KJ/Kg-K h BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN

H2O 15.61 133181 83721.3 3910.4 1777.4 1110.9 532.2 4,344,159 4122

CO2 13.09 94224 59231.6 6769.3 3077.0 0.2047 0.054 127,325 121

O2 13.94 100327 63068.2 5233.9 2379.0 0.2152 0.057 103,513 98

N2 72.91 524795 329900.7 23975.3 10897.9 0.2474 0.066 544,944 517

SO2 0.00 9 5.6 0.9 0.4 0.2047 0.054 17 0

NO 0.02 152 95.3 7.7 3.5 0.2047 0.054 145 0CO 0.04 254 159.7 11.6 5.3 0.2047 0.054 218 0

TOTAL 100 852941 536182 39909 18141 5,120,321 4858

DIFFERENCE 98718

CCC-SO2-BACT WET-SCRUBBER 22 OF 38

10/20/2008

INLET GAS VOLUME 16872 AM3/MIN

595386 ACFM

SCRUBBER DIAMETER 9.8 M

SCRUBBER AREA 75.3 M2

VELOCITY 224.0 M/MIN

HEIGHT/DIAMETER 4.0

HEIGHT 39.2 M

LIQUID GAS RATIO 7.13 M3/KM3

RECIRCULATION 120.3 M3/MIN

31626.0 GAL/MIN

HEAD 21.3 M

DENSITY 1.15

OXIDATION BLOWER 3 M3/M3

360.90 NM3/MIN

HEAD 6.63 M

261.0 IN WC

REAGENT FEED 0.5 M3/MIN

131.4 GAL/MIN

HEAD 29.8 M

DENSITY 1.25

GYPSUM SLURRY 1.7 M3/MIN

436.4 GAL/MIN

29.8 M

1.25

SLURRY DISCHARGE 0.75 M3/MIN

197.0 GAL/MIN

16.2 M

1.15

WATER MAKEUP

GYPSUM PRODUCTION


10/20/2008

SO2 REMOVED 228.4 KG/HR

SULFUR 114.2 KG/HR

GYPSUM 487.0 KG/HR ANHYDRATE

615.5 KG/HR HYDRATED

WATER 128.4 KG/HR HYDRATED

PRODUCTION 5,443 TONNE/DAY

226.8 TONNE/HR

GYPSUM 2.71 KG/TONNE

2,696 TONNE/YR

FREE MOISTURE 10 %

REAGENT USAGE CaCO3 358.6 KG/HR

1.6 KG/TONNE

1570.6 TONNE/YR

WATER LOSS FREE 61.5 KG/HR

HYDRATE 128.4 KG/HR

STACK WATER LOSS -6651.7 KG/HR

BLOWDOWN TOTAL 0.63 %

(RECIRCULATION) TOTAL 0.8 M3/MIN

WATER 42.7 M3/HR

42,520 KG/HR

SOLIDS(WEIGHT) 6.2 %

WATER MAKE-UP 36,059 KG/HR

0.60 M3/MIN

158.86 GPM

SO2 REMOVAL BASELINE 1.32 KG/TONNE

PRODUCTION 1,986,755 TONNE/YR

2613 TONNE/YR

1957 T/YR MILL-IN

923 T/YR MILL-OUT

2880 T/YR ANNUAL

CONTROLLED 261 TONNE/YR


10/20/2008

288 T/YR ANNUAL

REDUCTION 2352 TONNE/YR

2592 T/YR ANNUAL

B. STEAM ENTHALPY AT ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE

A0 A1 A2 C

H2O 4.5630E-01 1.6660E-05 2.2320E-07 1.0690E+03


10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

SCRUBBER COMPOMENTS SCRUBBER BODY

VALVES,PUMPS

DUCTWORK

CIVIL

ELECTRICAL

N.GAS SERVICE

ID FAN

SLUDGE TREATMENT


STACK/REHEAT


OTHER INSTRUMENTS 0.10 1,191,854

TAXES 0.05 595,927

FREIGHT 0.05 595,927

PEC TOTAL 14,302,252

INSTALLATION FOUNDATIONS 0.12 1,716,270

ERECTION 0.60 8,581,351

ELECTRICAL 0.10 1,430,225

DUCTING 0.30 4,290,676



TOTAL 1.15 16,447,590


INDIRECT COSTS ENGINEERING/DESIGN 0.20 2,860,450


CONTR.FEE 0.05 715,113

START-UP 0.01 143,023



TOTAL 5,005,788



CCC-SO2-BACT COST-WET-SCRUBBER 26 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


UTILITIES ID FAN STATIC PRESSURE 8.00 IN H2O

FAN VOLUME 670651 ACFM

FAN POWER 1211.00 BHP

FAN STATIC PRESSURE 5.00 IN H2O

COMBUSTION FAN VOLUME 7120 ACFM

FAN POWER 8.04 BHP

SATURATED GASES 595386.17 ACFM

GPM 67065.10 GPM

RECIRCULATION PUMPS(4) 3027 BHP



PULSE PUMP 285.00 BHP



POWER 3776.78 KWHr




N.GAS(FLUE GAS REHEAT) 0.00 GJ/HR

COST 14.777 $/GJ

ANNUAL COST 0 $/YR

REAGENT REAGENT USAGE 1731.26 TON/YR

COST 25.00 $/TON


WASTE DISPOSAL GYPSUM 2696 TON/YR

50.00 $/TON

COST 134790 $/YR

WATER TREATMENT DISCHARGE 373650 M3/YR

COST 2.00 $/M3

ANNUAL COST 747301 $/YR




COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 42,000


COST $/HR 19.00

COST $/YR 38,000


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 9,000




10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


$/YR 53,400

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42

$/YR 150,174

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 357,556


$/YR 715,113


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.109795

$/YR 3,925,776

TOTAL INDIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR 5,202,019



% 90.00



10/20/2008

INPUTS FLUE GAS STREAM

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR % PPM(WET) PPM(DRY)

CO 11.60 5.27 695.84 159.58 253.9 0.03 297.5 352.5

O2 5233.87 2379.03 314032.41 63068.18 100326.8 11.76

N2 23975.34 10897.88 1438520.56 330140.47 525176.5 61.55

SO2 0.93 0.42 55.82 5.61 8.9 0.00 10.4

NO 7.69 3.49 461.28 63.96 101.8 0.01 119.2

H2O 3910.38 1777.45 234622.93 83721.28 133181.0 15.61CO2 6769.33 3076.97 406159.55 59231.60 94223.7 11.04

TOTAL(WET) 39909.14 18140.52 2394548.38 536390.67 853272.5 100.00

TOTAL(DRY) 35998.76 16363.07 2159925.46 452669.39 720091.5

INLET 593165.54 ACFM

1012738.04 AM3/HR

123.89 oF

51.05 C

BURNER COMBUSTION AIR

LB/MIN KG/MIN

DRY AIR 514.79 234.00

O2 119.43 54.29

N2 395.36 179.71

H2O 11.23 5.11WET AIR 526.02 239.10

MOISTURE 0.0218 lb/lb DA

0.0218 KG/KG DA

T= 70 oF

21 C

RH 50 %

HEAT BALANCE FOR REHEAT FLUE GASES (WET SCRUBBER)

CCC-SO2-BACT RHEAT 29 OF 38

10/20/2008


LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR

O2 119.43 54.29 7165.87 1439.60 2290.1

N2 395.36 179.71 23721.51 5440.13 8654.0

DRY GAS 514.79 234.00 30887.38 6879.74 10944.1H2O 11.2343 5.11 674.06 240.53 382.6

TOTAL 526.02 239.10 31561.44 7120.26 11326.7

TOTAL HEATER INPUTS

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR %WET %DRY

CO 11.60 5.271 695.84 159.58 253.9 0.03 0.03

O2 5353.30 2433.320 321198.28 64507.78 102616.8 11.87 14.04

N2 24370.70 11077.591 1462242.06 335580.60 533830.5 61.74 73.02

SO2 0.93 0.423 55.82 5.61 8.9 0.00 0.00

NO 7.69 3.495 461.28 63.96 101.8 0.01 0.01

CO2 6769.33 3076.966 406159.55 59231.60 94223.7 10.90 12.89

TOTAL 36513.55 16597.067 2190812.83 459549.13 731035.5H2O 3921.62 1782.553 235296.99 83961.81 133563.7 15.45

TOTAL 40435.16 18379.620 2426109.82 543510.94 864599.2 100.00 100.00

HHV FUELS

CO 4339 BTU/LB

0.0101 GJ/KG

N.G. 22077 BTU/LB

0.0512 GJ/KG

AUXILIARY FUEL RATE

N.G. 41.96 LB/MIN

19.07 KG/MIN

HEAT INPUTS

CO 50,321 BTU/MIN 5.15 %

0.053 GJ/MIN

3,019,240 BTU/HR

3.1823 GJ/HR

COMBUSTION AIR


10/20/2008


N.G. 926,451 BTU/MIN 94.85 %

0.976 GJ/HR

55,587,054 BTU/HR

58.589 GJ/HR

TOTAL 976,772 BTU/MIN

1.030 GJ/HR

58,606,294 BTU/HR

61.771 GJ/HR

FUEL ANALYSIS

CO % N.G.%

C 42.85 69.12

H 0.00 23.20

O 57.15 1.58

N 0.00 5.76S 0.00 0.34

TOTAL 100.00 100.00

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN

C-CO2 0.00 0 77.16 35.07 77.16 35.071

CO-CO2 6.61 3.00 0.00 0 6.61 3.005

H2-H2O 0.00 0 77.30 35.14 77.30 35.137

S-SO2 0.00 0 0.14 0.06 0.14 0.065N-NO 0.00 0 5.52 2.51 5.52 2.511

NET 6.61 3.00 160.12 72.78 166.73 75.788

O2 BOUND 6.63 3.01 0.66 0.30 7.29 3.314

O2 EXCESS -159.44 -72.474

COMBUSTION AIR 5353.30 2433.320

NET O2 EXCESS 5193.86 2360.846

OXYGEN REQUIRED

GASES N.G. TOTAL


10/20/2008


FLUE GASES NG INPUT TOTAL TOTALLB/MIN LB/MIN LB/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN SCFM NM3/HR %DRY %WET PPM DRY

CO2 18.19 106.16 6769.33 6893.68 3133.49 60398.94 96080.6 13.17 11.09

CO 0.00 0.00 11.60 11.60 5.27 159.58 253.9 0.03 0.03 347.9

H2O 0.00 87.04 3921.62 4008.65 1822.12 85825.29 136528.0 15.76

N2 0.00 0.00 24370.70 24366.87 11075.85 335561.10 533799.5 73.15 61.62

O2 EXCES 0.00 0.00 5193.86 5193.86 2360.85 62560.06 99518.5 13.64 11.49

SO2 0.00 0.29 0.93 1.22 0.55 7.32 11.6 0.00 0.00 16.0NO 0.00 0.51 7.69 8.20 3.73 68.72 109.3 0.01 0.01 149.8

TOTAL 18.19 194.00 40275.72 40484.08 18401.85 544581.00 100.00

TOTAL(DRY) 458755.72 100.00

MASS BALANCE 229.7 PPM NOX

LB/MIN KG/MIN

SOURCE GASES 39909.14 18140.51806

COMBUSTION AIR 526.02 239.1017988

N.GAS 41.96 19.07478561

TOTAL 40477.13 18398.69465

COMBUSTION PRODUCTS 40484.08 18401.85401

DIFFERENCE -0.02 -0.02 %

Cp-BTU/LB-oF Cp KJ/Kg-K T-oF LB/MIN KG/MIN h-BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN

N2 0.2474 0.066 123.89 23975.34 10897.883 544944.13 517

O2 0.2152 0.057 123.89 5233.87 2379.03341 103513.45 98

CO 0.2047 0.054 123.89 11.60 5.27149861 218.13 0

CO2 0.2047 0.054 123.89 6769.33 3076.96632 127324.96 121

SO2 0.1306 0.035 123.89 0.93 0.42287279 11.16 0

NO 0.2047 0.054 123.89 7.69 3.49451736 144.60 0H2O 1110.9 532.2362 123.89 3910.38 1777.44643 4344158.76 4122

TOTAL 39909.14 18140.5181 5,120,315 4858

FLUE GAS PRODUCTS

INPUT ENTHALPY FLUE GASES

FLOW


10/20/2008



N2 0.2468 0.066 70.00 395.36 179.708373 3707.38 4

O2 0.2147 0.057 70.00 119.43 54.2869042 974.39 1H2O 1086.3 520.5 70.00 11.23 5.10652205 12204.32 12

TOTAL 526.02 239.101799 16886 16

TOTAL GASES 5137201 4874

BTU/LB GJ/KG LB/MIN KG/MIN h-BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN

CO 4339.0 0.01 0.00 0 0 0NAT. GAS 22077 0.05 41.96 19.07478561 926451 879

FUEL TOTAL 926451 879

TOTAL 6,063,652

RADIATION LOSSES 2.00 121,273

NET ENTHALPY FLUE GASES 5,942,379

Cp-BTU/LB-oF Cp KJ/Kg-K T-oF LB/MIN KG/MIN h-BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN % wt SCFM NM3/HR PPM(WET)

N2 0.2481 0.066 190.86 24366.87 11075.9 960391 911 60.19 335531.9 533753.0

O2 0.2159 0.057 190.86 5193.86 2360.8 178149 169 12.83 62586.0 99559.8

CO2 0.2078 0.055 190.86 6893.68 3133.5 227550 216 17.03 60319.7 95954.5

CO 0.2078 0.055 190.86 11.60 5.3 383 0 0.03 159.6 253.9 293.08

SO2 0.1361 0.036 190.86 1.22 0.6 26 0 0.00 7.3 11.7

NO 0.2078 0.055 190.86 8.20 3.7 271 0 0.02 68.2 108.5H2O 1141.49 546.9 190.86 4008.65 1822.1 4575846 4341 9.90 85825.3 136528.0

TOTAL 40484.08 18401.9 5942614 5638 100 544498.0 866169.3

NET DIFFERENCE 235

REHEAT TEMPERATURE 190.9oF NOX EF= 83.00 LB/MMFT3

88.3OC NOX 19.43 T/YR

41.96 LB/MIN

N.GAS USAGE 19.07 KG/MIN CO EF= 61.00 LB/MMFT3

N.GAS USAGE 55.59 MMBTU/HR CO 14.28 T/YR

58.59 GJ/HR

SO2 EF= 0.60 LB/MMFT3

FLUE GAS OXYGEN 13.64 % SO2 0.14 T/YR

INLET FUEL CONCENTRATION 1.70 BTU/SCF

OUTPUT ENTHALPY

INPUT ENTHALPY PRIMARY AIR


10/20/2008


DSCFM NM3/HR WSCFM NM3/HR ACFM AM3/HR

INLET 452669 720091 536391 853272 661206 1128787OUTLET 458756 729773 544581 866301 671302 1146023

STEAM ENTHALPY AT ATMOSHERIC PRESSURE

A0 A1 A2 C

H2O 4.563E-01 1.666E-05 2.232E-07 1.069E+03

FLUE GAS VOLUME SUMMARY @ COMBUSTOR


10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

SCRUBBER COMPOMENTS SCRUBBER BODY

VALVES,PUMPS

DUCTWORK

CIVIL

ELECTRICAL

N.GAS SERVICE

ID FAN

SLUDGE TREATMENT


STACK/REHEAT 1,500,000


OTHER INSTRUMENTS 0.10 1,341,854

TAXES 0.05 670,927

FREIGHT 0.05 670,927

PEC TOTAL 16,102,252

INSTALLATION FOUNDATIONS 0.12 1,932,270

ERECTION 0.60 9,661,351

ELECTRICAL 0.10 1,610,225

DUCTING 0.30 4,830,676



TOTAL 1.15 18,517,590


INDIRECT COSTS ENGINEERING/DESIGN 0.20 3,220,450


CONTR.FEE 0.05 805,113

START-UP 0.01 161,023



TOTAL 5,635,788



CCC-SO2-BACT COST-WET-SCRUBBER W-REHEAT 35 OF 38

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


UTILITIES ID FAN STATIC PRESSURE 8.00 IN H2O

FAN VOLUME 670651 ACFM

FAN POWER 1211.00 BHP

FAN STATIC PRESSURE 5.00 IN H2O

COMBUSTION FAN VOLUME 7120 ACFM

FAN POWER 8.04 BHP

SATURATED GASES 595386.17 ACFM

GPM 67065.10 GPM

RECIRCULATION PUMPS(4) 3027 BHP



PULSE PUMP 285.00 BHP



POWER 3776.78 KWHr




N.GAS(FLUE GAS REHEAT) 58.59 GJ/HR

COST 14.777 $/GJ


REAGENT REAGENT USAGE 1731.26 TON/YR

COST 25.00 $/TON


WASTE DISPOSAL GYPSUM 2696 TON/YR

50.00 $/TON

COST 134790 $/YR

WATER TREATMENT DISCHARGE 373650 M3/YR

COST 2.00 $/M3

ANNUAL COST 747301 $/YR




COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 42,000


COST $/HR 19.00

COST $/YR 38,000


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 9,000




10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

WET SCRUBBER


$/YR 53,400

PROPERTY TAX % 0.42

$/YR 169,074

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 402,556


$/YR 805,113


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.109795

$/YR 4,419,852

TOTAL INDIRECT OPERATING COST $/YR 5,849,994



% 90.00



10/20/2008

POWER COST 0.055 $/KWH

PROPERTY TAX RATE 0.42 $/100 New Hanover

0.4200 %

CAPITAL RECOVERY RATE 7 %

LABOR COSTS

SUPERVISOR 30.00 $/HR

OPERATOR 25.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS MAINTENANCE 21.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS ELECTRICIAN 21.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS WELDER 21.00 $/HR

GENERAL LABOR 19.00 $/HR

NATURAL GAS 14.78 $/GJ 14.02 $/MMBTU PSNC

FUEL OIL 5.41 $/GJ 5.13 $/MMBTU

COAL 3.73 $/GJ 3.54 $/MMBTU =$85/TON

COKE 0 $/GJ 0 $/MMBTU

CKD DISPOSAL 7.27 $/TONNE 8.00 $/TON

GYPSUM WASTE DISPOSAL 45.45 $/TONNE 50.00 $/TON

MICROFINE LIME 140.91 $/TONNE 155 $/TON

LIMESTONE REAGENT 22.73 $/TONNE 25 $/TON

WATER COST 0.0000 $/M3 0 $/MM gal

WATER TREATMENT 2.0000 $/M3 7571 $/MM gal

PLANT COSTS

CCC-SO2-BACT PLANT COSTS 38 OF 38

APPENDIX C

COST CALCULATIONS FOR NOX

10/20/2008

PRODUCTION 5,443 MT/D 6,000 ST/D

365.0 Days/yr 365.0 Days/yr

1,986,755 Tonnes/yr 2,190,000 ST/YR

PLANT CAPACITY 100.0 %

NOX FACTOR (BASELINE) 1.27 Kg/Tonne 2.80 LB/TON

CONTROL FACTOR 0 % 0 %

NOX EMISSIONS UNCONTROLLED

ANNUAL NOX 2781.46 Tonnes/yr 3066.00 TON/YR

317.52 Kg/HR 700.00 LB/HR

OPERATING HOURS 8,760 HRS/YR AT 100% CAPACITY

MILL-IN 7,884 HRS/YR 90.00%

MILL-DOWN 876 HRS/YR 10.00%

NOTE: Reformatted to separate SO2 calculations 10/20/08.

NOx calculations have not been changed.

CASTLE HAYNE PLANT

KILN DESIGN DATA

CCC-NOX-BACT CURRENT 1 OF 13

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

SNCR NOX CONTROL OPTION

FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

BASIC UREA UNIT 1,200,000



TAXES 0.05 60,000

FREIGHT 0.05 60,000

TOTAL 1,440,000


ERECTION 0.20 288,000


PIPING 0.10 144,000



TOTAL 0.60 864,000




CONTR.FEE 0.05 72,000

START-UP 0.02 28,800



TOTAL 403,200

RETROFIT PREMIUM (20% OF DIRECT & INDIRECT COST) 0


CCC-NOX-BACT COST-SNCR 2 OF 13

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



UTILITIES PUMP PRESSURE 80.00 PSIG

LIQUOR DENSITY 11.00 LB/GAL

1.32 SG

0.0122 FT3/LB

PUMP VOLUME 20 GPM

13200 LB/HR

PUMP HORSEPOWER 124.00 BHP


POWER 92.47 KWHr




NATURAL GAS 0.00 MMBTU/HR

COST 7.097 $/MMBTU

ANNUAL COST 0 $/YR

REAGENTS UTILIZATION 0.70

MOLAR RATIO 1.00

USAGE 5713 T/YR

UNIT COST 0.12 $/LB

COST $1,371,130


5% OF DIRECT CAPITAL COST 115,200 $/YR


COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 10,500

OPERATOR LABOR HR/YR 500

COST $/HR 25.00

COST $/YR 12,500


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 6,000

TOTAL DIRECT OPERATING COST 1,545,301


10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



$/YR 17,400

PROPERTY TAX % 1.46

$/YR 39,497

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 27,072


$/YR 54,144


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.131474

$/YR 355,926

TOTAL INDIRECT OPERATING COST 494,039

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $/YR $2,039,340

EXPECTED NOx(PRE-SNCR) LB/TON 2.80

T/YR 3066

EXPECTED NOx(POST-SNCR) LB/TON 1.95

REDUCTION T/YR 931

% 30

$/TON $2,191

$/TON-CLK $0.93


10/20/2008

INPUTS FLUE GAS STREAM

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR % PPM(WET) PPM(DRY)

CO 11.65 5.30 699.18 160.34 255.1 0.03 294.1 353.2

O2 5020.57 2282.08 301234.38 60497.90 96238.1 11.10

N2 24090.40 10950.18 1445424.06 331724.82 527696.8 60.84

SO2 3.75 1.71 225.30 22.62 36.0 0.00 41.5

NO 7.61 3.46 456.51 63.30 100.7 0.01 116.1

H2O 4263.82 1938.10 255828.90 91288.28 145218.4 16.74CO2 7028.33 3194.70 421700.06 61497.93 97828.9 11.28

TOTAL(WET) 40426.14 18375.52 2425568.39 545255.20 867373.9 100.00

TOTAL(DRY) 36162.32 16437.42 2169739.49 453966.92 722155.5

INLET 672133.18 ACFM

1147629.82 AM3/HR

190.86 oF

88.26 C

BURNER COMBUSTION AIR

LB/MIN KG/MIN

DRY AIR 5832.1 2650.95

O2 1353.04 615.02 424.15 MMBTU/HR

N2 4479.04 2035.93 8.3 LB/1000BTU

H2O 63.64 28.93 5832.1 LB/MINWET AIR 5895.72 2679.87

MOISTURE 0.0109 lb/lb DA

0.0109 KG/KG DA

T= 70 oF

21 C

RH 50 %

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR

O2 1353.04 615.02 81182.61 16309.37 25944.4

N2 4479.04 2035.93 268742.43 61631.60 98041.5

DRY GAS 5832.08 2650.95 349925.04 77940.97 123985.9H2O 63.6373 28.93 3818.24 1362.48 2167.4

TOTAL 5895.72 2679.87 353743.28 79303.44 126153.3

HEAT BALANCE FOR REHEAT FLUE GASES (SCR)

COMBUSTION AIR

CCC-NOX-BACT RHEAT-SCR 5 OF 13

10/20/2008


TOTAL HEATER INPUTS

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/HR SCFM NM3/HR %WET %DRY

CO 11.65 5.297 699.18 160.34 255.1 0.03 0.03

O2 6373.62 2897.098 382416.99 76807.27 122182.5 12.30 14.44

N2 28569.44 12986.110 1714166.49 393356.42 625738.3 62.98 73.95

SO2 3.75 1.707 225.30 22.62 36.0 0.00 0.00

NO 7.61 3.458 456.51 63.30 100.7 0.01 0.01

CO2 7028.33 3194.697 421700.06 61497.93 97828.9 9.85 11.56

TOTAL 41994.41 19088.368 2519664.52 531907.89 846141.4H2O 4327.45 1967.024 259647.14 92650.75 147385.7 14.83

TOTAL 46321.86 21055.391 2779311.66 624558.64 993527.2 100.00 100.00

HHV FUELS

CO 4339 BTU/LB

0.0101 GJ/KG

N.G. 22077 BTU/LB

0.0512 GJ/KG

AUXILIARY FUEL RATE

N.G. 320.21 LB/MIN

145.55 KG/MIN

HEAT INPUTS

CO 0 BTU/MIN 0.00 %

0.000 GJ/MIN

3,033,730 BTU/HR

3.1976 GJ/HR

N.G. 7,069,193 BTU/MIN 100.00 %

7.451 GJ/HR

424,151,559 BTU/HR

447.056 GJ/HR

TOTAL 7,069,193 BTU/MIN

7.451 GJ/HR

427,185,289 BTU/HR

450.253 GJ/HR


10/20/2008


FUEL ANALYSIS

CO % N.G.%

C 42.85 69.12

H 0.00 23.20

O 57.15 1.58

N 0.00 5.76S 0.00 0.34

TOTAL 100.00 100.00

LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN

C-CO2 0.00 0 588.73 267.60 588.73 267.604

CO-CO2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.000

H2-H2O 0.00 0 589.85 268.11 589.85 268.112

S-SO2 0.00 0 1.09 0.49 1.09 0.495N-NO 0.00 0 42.14 19.16 42.14 19.156

NET 0.00 0.00 1221.81 555.37 1221.81 555.367

O2 BOUND 6.66 3.03 5.06 2.30 11.72 5.327

O2 EXCESS -1210.09 -550.040

COMBUSTION AIR 6373.62 2897.098

NET O2 EXCESS 5163.53 2347.058

CO REMOVAL 0.00 %

FLUE GASES NG INPUT TOTAL TOTALLB/MIN LB/MIN LB/MIN LB/MIN KG/MIN SCFM NM3/HR %DRY %WET PPM DRY

CO2 0.00 810.06 7028.33 7838.39 3562.90 68676.05 109247.6 13.09 10.88

CO 0.00 0.00 11.65 11.65 5.30 160.34 255.1 0.03 0.03 305.7

H2O 0.00 664.13 4327.45 4991.59 2268.90 106869.85 170005.0 16.93

N2 0.00 0.00 28569.44 28565.65 12984.39 393383.31 625781.1 75.00 62.30

O2 EXCESS 0.00 0.00 5163.53 5163.53 2347.06 62194.70 98937.3 11.86 9.85

SO2 0.00 2.18 3.75 5.93 2.70 35.71 56.8 0.01 0.01 68.1NO 0.00 0.51 7.61 8.12 3.69 68.05 108.3 0.01 0.01 129.7

TOTAL 0.00 1476.88 45111.77 46584.86 21174.94 631388.01 100.00

TOTAL(DRY) 524518.16 100.00

TOTAL

FLOW

OXYGEN REQUIRED

FLUE GAS PRODUCTS

GASES N.G.


10/20/2008


MASS BALANCE 198.9 PPM NOX

LB/MIN KG/MIN

SOURCE GASES 40426.14 18375.51807

COMBUSTION AIR 5895.72 2679.873302

N.GAS 320.21 145.5482806

TOTAL 46642.07 21200.93966

COMBUSTION PRODUCTS 46584.86 21174.93693

DIFFERENCE 0.12 0.12 %


N2 0.2481 0.066 190.86 24090.40 10950.18229 949493.68 901

O2 0.2159 0.057 190.86 5020.57 2282.078624 172204.88 163

CO 0.2078 0.055 190.86 11.65 5.296796695 384.65 0

CO2 0.2078 0.055 190.86 7028.33 3194.697445 231994.50 220

SO2 0.1361 0.036 190.86 3.75 1.7067954 81.19 0

NO 0.2078 0.055 190.86 7.61 3.458393635 251.14 0H2O 1141.5 546.8783 190.86 4263.82 1938.09773 4867109.74 4618

TOTAL 40426.14 18375.51807 6,221,520 5903


N2 0.2468 0.066 70.00 4479.04 2035.927486 42001.13 40

O2 0.2147 0.057 70.00 1353.04 615.0197612 11038.94 10H2O 1086.3 520.5 70.00 63.64 28.92605517 69131.77 66

TOTAL 5895.72 2679.873302 122172 116

TOTAL GASES 6343692 6019

BTU/LB GJ/KG LB/MIN KG/MIN h-BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN

CO 4339.0 0.01 0.00 0 0 0NAT. GAS 22077 0.05 320.21 145.5482806 7069193 6707

FUEL TOTAL 7069193 6707

TOTAL 13,412,884

RADIATION LOSSES 2.00 268,258

NET ENTHALPY FLUE GASES 13,144,627

INPUT ENTHALPY PRIMARY AIR

INPUT ENTHALPY FLUE GASES


10/20/2008


Cp-BTU/LB-oF Cp KJ/Kg-K T-oF LB/MIN KG/MIN h-BTU/MIN h KJ/MIN % wt SCFM NM3/HR PPM(WET)

N2 0.2531 0.067 644.00 28565.65 12984.4 4424460 4198 61.32 393349.0 625726.6

O2 0.2204 0.059 644.00 5163.53 2347.1 696608 661 11.08 62220.5 98978.3

CO2 0.2286 0.061 644.00 7838.39 3562.9 1096731 1041 16.83 68585.9 109104.2

CO 0.2286 0.061 644.00 11.65 5.3 1630 2 0.03 160.3 255.1 254.00

SO2 0.1736 0.046 644.00 5.93 2.7 630 1 0.01 35.7 56.9

NO 0.2286 0.061 644.00 8.12 3.7 1136 1 0.02 67.6 107.5H2O 1348.27 645.9 644.00 4991.59 2268.9 6729985 6385 10.72 106869.8 170005.0

TOTAL 46584.86 21174.9 12951180 12288 100 631289.0 1004233.5

NET DIFFERENCE -193446

REHEAT TEMPERATURE 644.0oF NOX EF= 83.00 LB/MMFT3

340.0OC NOX T/YR

N.GAS USAGE 320.21 LB/MIN

N.GAS USAGE 145.55 KG/MIN CO EF= 61.00 LB/MMFT3

N.GAS USAGE 424.15 MMBTU/HR CO T/YR

447.06 GJ/HR

SO2 EF= 0.60 LB/MMFT3

FLUE GAS OXYGEN 11.86 % SO2 T/YR

INLET FUEL CONCENTRATION 11.32 BTU/SCF

DSCFM NM3/HR WSCFM NM3/HR ACFM AM3/HR

INLET 453967 722156 545255 867374 1140079 1946302OUTLET 524518 834386 631388 1004391 1320175 2253756

STEAM ENTHALPY AT ATMOSHERIC PRESSURE

A0 A1 A2 C

H2O 4.563E-01 1.666E-05 2.232E-07 1.069E+03

FLUE GAS VOLUME SUMMARY @ COMBUSTOR

OUTPUT ENTHALPY


10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE

SCR NOX CONTROL OPTION

FACTOR COST

CAPITAL COSTS

DIRECT COST

BASIC SCR UNIT 2,000,000


OTHER INSTRUMENTS 100,000

TAXES 0.06 120,000

FREIGHT 0.10 200,000

TOTAL 2,420,000


ERECTION 0.14 338,800


PIPING 0.15 363,000



TOTAL 0.50 1,210,000




CONTR.FEE 0.03 72,600

START-UP 0.01 24,200



TOTAL 968,000

RETROFIT PREMIUM (N/A) 0


CCC-NOX-BACT COST-SCR 10 OF 13

10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



UTILITIES PUMP PRESSURE 80.00 PSIG

LIQUOR DENSITY 11.00 LB/GAL

1.32 SG

0.0122 FT3/LB

PUMP VOLUME 20 GPM

13200 LB/HR

PUMP HORSEPOWER 124.00 BHP


POWER 92.47 KWHr




NATURAL GAS 424.15 MMBTU/HR

COST 7.097 $/MMBTU


REAGENTS UTILIZATION 0.70

MOLAR RATIO 1.00

USAGE 5713 T/YR

UNIT COST 0.12 $/LB

COST $1,371,130


15% OF DIRECT CAPITAL COST 689,700 $/YR

(INCLUDES CATALYST REPLACEMENT EVERY 3 YEARS)


COST $/HR 21.00

COST $/YR 21,000

OPERATOR LABOR HR/YR 8760

COST $/HR 25.00

COST $/YR 219,000


COST $/HR 30.00

COST $/YR 52,560

TOTAL DIRECT OPERATING COST 28,751,906


10/20/2008

COST ESTIMATE



$/YR 128,726

PROPERTY TAX % 1.46

$/YR 67,083

INSURANCE % 1.00

$/YR 45,980


$/YR 91,960


LIFE-YEARS 15.00

FACTOR 0.131474

$/YR 604,516

TOTAL INDIRECT OPERATING COST 938,266

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $/YR $29,690,172

EXPECTED NOx(PRE-SCR) LB/TON 2.80

T/YR 3066

EXPECTED NOx(PRE-SCR) LB/TON 1.120

REDUCTION T/YR 1,840

% 60

$/TON $16,139

$/TON-CLK $13.56


10/20/2008

POWER COST 0.037 $/KWH

PROPERTY TAX RATE 2.4316 $/100 @ 60%

1.4590 %

CAPITAL RECOVERY RATE 10 %

LABOR COSTS

SUPERVISOR 30.00 $/HR

OPERATOR 25.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS MAINTENANCE 21.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS ELECTRICIAN 21.00 $/HR

1ST CLASS WELDER 21.00 $/HR

GENERAL LABOR 19.00 $/HR

NATURAL GAS 7.48 $/GJ 7.10 $/MMBTU

FUEL OIL 5.40702 $/GJ 5.13 $/MMBTU

COAL 2.2661 $/GJ 2.15 $/MMBTU

COKE 0 $/GJ 0 $/MMBTU

CKD DISPOSAL 7.27 $/TONNE 8 $/TON

GYPSUM WASTE DISPOSAL 45.53 $/TONNE 50.08 $/TON ASSUME 30 MILES

MICROFINE LIME 54.55 $/TONNE 60 $/TON

LIMESTONE REAGENT 22.73 $/TONNE 25 $/TON

WATER COST 0.0000 $/M3 0 $/MM gal

WATER TREATMENT 2.0000 $/M3 7571 $/MM gal

PLANT COSTS

CCC-NOX-BACT PLANT COSTS1 13 OF 13

TAB G

PLOT PLANS, SURVEY MAPS, AND PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMS –

REVISED PAGES