& EPA
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Acencv
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
EPA-45:/R-94-016
December 1994
Air
PM-10 SERIOUS NONATTAINMENT
AREA EXAMPLE BEST AVAILABLE
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
ANALYSIS FOR A READY MIX
CONCRETE FACILITY
-------
-------
EPA-452/R-94-016
u\/r m
-------
-------
Disclaimer
document has been reviewed by the Air Quality Management Division of the Office
faliwTlannlng and Standards (OAQPS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
ana approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products is not
intended to constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Copies
for a fee, from the National Technical Information Services, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, Virginia 22161.
11
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
............ 1
I. Introduction ..... ............... ............. 3
II. Facility Information ..... .......................... ' 3
A. Location of Facilities ....... • • • ........ ' ' ............. 5
1 . County Map ........ • • .........................
B. San Emigdio Quarry ....... .........................
1. Area Map ........ ............... .............
2. Plot Plans .......... ................ .... ......
3. Process Flow Diagram ..... • • ..................
4. Process Description ...... ....... .................
C. Bakersfield Plant ................................... 2Q
1 . Area Map ............... ..................
2. Plot Plans ... .................... ............. 25
3. Process Flow Diagram ............. • ..............
4. Process Description . .............................
D. Portable Plant
1 . Area Map
2. Plot Plans .................. ..................
3 Process Flow Diagram ............................
. . ..... 36
4. Process Description .......... • .............
III. BACT Analysis of CAL-MAT Facilities . .................... • • ^
A. San Emigdio Quarry ............ • .............. ..... ^
1. PM-10 Emission Sources and Calculations ................
2. Control Technologies ....... * ...............
3. Efficiencies and Costs Controls .......................
4. Energy, Environmental and Economic Impacts . .............
111
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
B. Bakersfield Plant 52
1. PM-10 Emission Sources and Calculations 52
2. Control Technologies 55
3. Efficiencies and Costs of Controls 57
4. Energy, Environmental and Economic Impacts . . 53
C. Portable Plant 5g
1. PM-10 Emission Sources and Calculations 58
2. Control Technologies 61
3. Efficiencies and Costs of Controls 53
4. Energy, Environmental and Economic Impacts 64
IV. Estimating Annualized Cost 64
V. References ^0
Oo
VI. Appendix A - Detailed Emission Calculations JQ
A. San Emigdio Quarry 7J
B. Bakersfield Plant 84
C. Portable Plant 9?
VII. Appendix B - Vendor and Cost Information 98
A. Road Controls , 99
B. Transfer Point Controls , , 101
C. Process Unit Controls ! . . . . 102
D. Point Source Controls . , 104
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
In the 1970's the U S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established National Ambient
AhQualUy^tlndardl(NAAQS) for Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) matter. Particulate
matter's generally considered to be any dispersed solid material that can become airborne and
Edtend?finedTaLording to particle size. The TSP is considered to be particulate matter that
ranges in size from 0.1 to approximately 100 microns in diameter Particulate.matter wrih an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers is designated as PM 10.
As a result of evidence that particles ten (10) microns and smaller in diameter ™
area A moderate nonattainment area may be ^classified as a
erious noaanment area if the EPA determines that it cannot
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, or if the attainment date has passed and the area has
failed to attain the standard.
State Imolementation Plans (SIP's) for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must prescribe
tote^S^°R^onably Available Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably
ZuSlTontro Technology (RACT), to reduce PM-10 emissions from existing sources
fsec^n 189(aT Serious area'siP's must provide for implementation of Best Available Control
Measures (RACM) including the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT),
S^S^^'o^-loWS 189 (b)(l)(B)]. Although section 189(b)(l)(B) requires
BACM a5c uding BACT) to be implemented in serious PM-10 nonattainment areas, the Act does
not define eWierBACM or BACT for PM-10 nonattainment purposes. Where a statute is silen
or ambSuous with respect to the meaning of a statutory term, the agency is authorized to adopt
an hLjretation reasonably accommodated to the purpose of the statutory provisions.
Congress defined the term "best available control technology" in secti on 169(3) ^ of 1 She 1977
Amendments for use in implementing the requirement to prevent significant detenomtion (PSD
of air quality under part C, title I, of that Act. This definition was modified by section 403(d)
of L 1990 Amendments. The EPA believes that it is reasonable to consider the term BACT
as applied in the PSD program under section 169(3) as an analogue ™^ei^J£™*™
PM-10 nonattainment purposes. Therefore, EPA's interpretation of BACM (including BACT
finition of BACT for
P- nonaanmen . ,
foVserious PM-10 noiktainment areas will generally be similar to the definition of BACT for
the PSD program.
For serious PM-10 nonattainment purposes, BACT can be defined as an emissions limitation
based on the maximum degree of reduction achievable for PM-10 and PM-10 precursors emitted
from a sourcfnm identiffed as de minimis. Reductions occur through the use of production
process modifications and available methods, systems, and techniques for control of each such
pollutant The BACT is determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into accoun energy,
envko^iental, and economic impacts an- other costs. If it is determined that technological or
econorS Li ations on the application oi control methodology to a particular emission source
would ^te the imposition of an emission standard infeasible, an equipment, work practice,
-------
operation standard, or combination thereof, may be prescribed instead to satisfy the requirement
forBACT.
As noted above, EPA will interpret PSD BACT and PM-10 BACM (including BACT) as
generally similar but, despite the similarity in terminology, certain key differences exist between
control measures applicable in the PSD and PM-10 serious nonattainment area programs. The
BACT under the PSD program applies only in areas already meeting the NAAQS, while PM-10
BACM applies to existing source categories hi areas which are seriously violating the NAAQS.
It is EPA's policy that BACT for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas be determined using the
analytical methodology established in the reviewing authority's current PSD program to the
extent that it is consistent with guidance contained in the Addendum to the General Preamble
for Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, entitled State Implementation Plan
Requirements for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment areas (59 FR 41998, August 16, 1994). The
analytical methodology used should, at a minimum, consider a representative range of available
controls (including the most stringent, those capable of meeting standards of performance under
40 CFR part 60 or 61, and those identified by commenters during the public comment period).
Selection of a particular control system as BACT must be justified by a comparison of the
candidate control systems considering energy, environmental, and economic impacts, and other
costs, and be supported by the record. It is important to note, that although the analytical
procedures are essentially similar, retrofit considerations may have a more important role in
determining BACT for serious PM-10 nonattainment areas than would be the case in determining
BACT for the PSD program.
The purpose of this document is to present an analytical methodology that may be used to
perform a BACT analysis on an existing source located in a PM-10 serious nonattainment area.
Section III of this document contains example BACT analyses for a rock quarry, a permanent
aggregate and ready-mix concrete batch plant, and a portable aggregate and ready-mix concrete
batch plant. These facilities, owned and operated by CAL-MAT of Central California, Inc.,
(CAL-MAT), were chosen because they reside within a region that has been reclassified by the
EPA from a moderate to a serious nonattainment area for PM-10. The background facility
information presented in Section II., obtained from CAL-MAT and the Kern County Air
Pollution Control District, will provide the basis for the example BACT analyses.
The analyses that follow are based on guidance contained in EPA's New Source Review
Workshop Manual (Draft), October 1990 and is provided for illustrative purposes only. A more
thorough discussion of the requirement for the application of BACT and other PM-10 serious
nonattainment area requirements can be found in the Addendum to the General Preamble for
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, entitled State Implementation Plan
Requirements for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Areas.
* Kern County is located within the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
-------
II FACILITY INFORMATION
aggregate materials.
The second^^^^^^^^^^'
LmeTSd quaS aggregates on site. The plant produces ready-mix
cement and aggregate materials with water.
The third facmty, a,so located at 8517
is a portable aggregate handling and concrf." oh this plant has been
reassembled at a different location within a few days.
II.A. LOCATION OF FACILITIES
A general county map of Kern County, California is provided to show the location of the three
plants with respect to the city of Bakersfield and to each other.
-------
-------
II.A. 1. GENERAL COUNTY MAP
-------
-------
BAKERS
.
| Concrete Batchj
.1 &'* *gfS£i±**n\o
V BUENA VIST* ^OiSt... •'•
ACRE'S" «"'« ^
• San Emigd
.Quarry "/•
^•>V"
^_tt c _ s=._.,....... ^_- c, , i >•-
.[,.1. »-ooi 01. "li-c i1 \£/'->--- "^-,'-!=. / , N so*"
,..iL if Ptuoi / "anWHEELER RIDGE :,--:-!s>/ «*
f V ^ ^^-%..
C - \—^Uv-^ ' - •*
••awr Ai -V-3- ' /
•"^^>
PLE1TO -.
HILLS
c
cN| Av ^^
w-vEV1NE ^*: % '35. \
0,w...wPc.V ^
.^SIVU '. C.,, V \
' V?«i. --'• \
.? STATE,
» HISTORK
CAL-MAT Facility Locations
gCALE
Kern County, CA
-------
-------
II.B. SAN EMIGDIO QUARRY
depleted sections of the quarry.
An area map plot plan, and process flow diagram of the San Emigdio Quarry are provided in
£e ?oUo^ng pages to show the location, layout, and operation of the facility.
-------
-------
II.B.l. AREA MAP
-------
-------
r.
3.r~
-\,
^1
m/n Ouadrangle
ol Cpmwr SW, Gfll/f. /1955J
"""'
AREA MAP
F\
San Emtgdio Quarry
California
-------
-------
II.B.2. PLOT PLANS
-------
-------
SCA-E •: 1 rci-, = 1000 Fee:
Pio: F&r>
Emi
T?C
Ken Cojrr.y. CA
51=1; *C.€::T i FLE c .
i I
916*92 ' Ot?'— 006" 5s---.'
R--1
-------
Station
(Entrance)
Conveyor
System
Extents o'
r— Ouorrymg. Activity
Conveyoi
Ca'-/,5* Lease
SCA.E •:-=- = 403 F
-------
II B 3 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
SAN EMIGDIO QUARRY
12
-------
-------
LJ
I—
(T.
>-
(fl
I
I
!<
^®\
V
<
<£-
K
<
<
!^r^
-------
-------
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LEGEND
SAN EMIGDIO QUARRY
Item No. Description
Item No. Description
1. Raw Material.
2. Bulldozers.
3. Front-End Loaders. .
4. Grizzly.
5 Primary Crusher (Jaw Crusher).
6 Crusher Collection Conveyor.
7' Quarry Transport Conveyors.
8 Transfer Station.
9. Surge Pile Feed Conveyor.
10. Syntron Tunnel Feeder.
11 Surge Pile.
12. Primary Screen Feed Conveyor.
13. Primary Screen No. 1.
14 Primary Screen No. 2.
15' Oversize Material Conveyor.
16 Undersize Material Conveyor.
11 Secondary Crusher Feed Bin No
18. Secondary Crusher Feed Bin No. 2.
19. Secondary Crusher No. 1.
20 Secondary Crusher No. 2.
2i' Secondary Crusher Reclaim Belt.
22'. Secondary Screen Collection Belt.
23. Secondary Screen No. 4.
1.
24. Secondary Screen No. 5.
25. Product Bins.
26. Secondary Screen No. 1.
27. Secondary Screen No. 2.
28 Secondary Screen No. 3.
29. Water Wash Settling Tank.
30. Sand Screw Conveyor.
31. Cyclone Separator.
32. Sand Product Conveyor.
33. Sand Product Pile.
34. Wash Water Sump Tank.
35. Water Drain Piping.
36. Settling Ponds.
37. Product Bin Conveyor.
38 Tertiary Screen No. 1.
39. Oversize Collection Conveyor.
40 Round Product Silo,
41'. Base Product Pile Conveyor.
42 Base Product Pile.
43' One-inch Product Pile Conveyor.
44 One-inch Product Pile.
45' Square Product Silo Conveyor.
46. Square Product Silo.
14
-------
-------
II.B.4. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Quarry Pit
The San Emigdio Quarry is a typical At the San fcimgaio sue, uuuu—
_:„*.,«. ic t^n miQhpd from the outer quarry area to tne cemci yi me v , r?«,«*_*n^
mixture is then ^.^**£*£g agega oil into s.ll mounds. Front-end
ZS^^^^^^*^^™^-****"
discharges the material to a vibrating grizzly .
Grizzly and Primary Crusher
purpose of the griZZ,y is .0 separate the to dirt a — o ^ grave, from large
is
then discharged onto the crusher collection conveyor.
to operate for several days, even if the pit area shuts down.
Primary Screen No. 1
f «« thP «iroe nile to the primary screen conveyor, wmcn uicu cainwB —
from the surge pile to me pi^ y ft surge pUe material into three
^Ste^t^" 1V* inch dTameter) medium aggregate (1V, to 2V, inch diameter) and large
aggregate (greater than 2V2 inch diameter).
Secondary Screen No. 1
to
ig and separation, ana tne unucisi^c iuaiwii«. « —rr
Screen No. 3.
15
-------
Secondary Screen No. 2
Secondary Screen No. 2 splits the oversize material into three streams (l'/2, 1 and 3/s inch
diameters) and sends them to individual storage silos, called bunkers. The wash water and
solids that pass through Secondary Screen No. 2 are discharged into a pipe which carries the
slurry to the sand classifying tank.
Secondary Screen No. 3
Secondary Screen No. 3 receives the undersize material from Secondary Screen No 1 and
separates it from the wash water and fines. The small aggregate (V4 inch diameter) is sent to
a storage bunker while the wash water and fines, consisting of sand, silt and clay, are sent to
the sand classifying tank for removal of the sand.
Sand Classifying Tank
The sand classifying tank separates the sand from the dirt and water by allowing the sand to
settle on the tank bottom. The sand is removed from the classifying tank through a rotary valve
and is discharged to a screw conveyor. While in the screw conveyor, the sand is continuously
washed with water from the sump tank before it is discharged onto a collection conveyor The
collection conveyor then dumps the sand onto a sand storage pile.
The wash water from the classifying tank is sent to a sump tank. A small amount of water is
orawn off, sent through a cyclone and used as wash water for the sand in the screw conveyor
Ihe rest of the water is sent to a series of settling ponds, which allow the silt and clay to settle
out Several pumps return the "filtered" water back to the main plant for reuse. Makeup water
tor the mam plant wash processes is provided by a deep water well.
Secondary Crusher No. 1
The medium and large aggregate streams (greater than l]/2 inch diameter) from Primary Screen
wo. i are dropped onto a conveyor that transports the material to Feed Silo No 1 The silo
discharges the aggregate into Secondary Crusher No. 1 for additional size reduction Aggregate
product from this crusher is dropped onto a conveyor that transports the material to Primary
screen No. 2 for separation.
Primary Screen No. 2
The material from Secondary Crusher No. 1 is separated into three streams: two oversize
streams (greater than 1 'A and 7/8 inch diameters, respectively) and an undersize stream (less than
/s men diameter). The oversize streams are discharged onto a conveyor that transports the
material to either Feed Silo No. 1, which discharges into Secondary Crusher No. 1, or Feed Silo
No. 2, which discharges into Secondary Crusher No. 2. The undersize material is dropped onto
a conveyor which carries the aggregate to Secondary Screen No 4
16
-------
Secondary Crusher No. 2
The oversize aggregate (greater than V, inch diarne^ from Primary ^ ^ _^ _
onto a conveyor that transports the ^"^^^ size reduction. Aggregate product from
aggregate into Secondary Crushe^No.^ o^ ^^ ^ ^^.^ ^ primary Scr£en No> 2 for
this crusher is dropped omo
additional separation.
Secondary Screen No. 4
Secondary Screen No. 5
The oversee aggregate streams
to individual storage bunkers.
Product Storage Bunkers
underneath the bunkers.
Tertiary Screen No. 1
H me Mend- aggregate is to be use, at a -Crete r
17
-------
aggregate to a round, elevated storage bunker. The bunker is then used to load the blended
aggregate into haul trucks.
Material that will not be used at a ready-mix plant is discharged from the three-way splitter to
a base stockpile or sent to a two-way splitter. The two-way splitter is used to send the aggregate
blend to a square, elevated bunker. When only one-inch material is required, the two-way
splitter sends the aggregate to the one-inch aggregate stockpile.
II.C. BAKERSFIELD PLANT
The Bakersfield Plant is located at 8517 Panama Lane in Bakersfield, Kern County/California
This facility is a permanent aggregate handling and concrete batching plant that receives,
processes and mixes the quarry aggregate with sand, cement and water to produce ready-mix
concrete. The Bakersfield Plant can produce a maximum of 200 cubic yards (yd3) of ready-mix
concrete per hour, equivalent to about 300 tons per hour.
An area map, plot plan and process flow diagram of the Bakersfield Plant are provided on the
following pages to show the location, layout and operation of the facility.
18
-------
II.C.I. AREA MAP
19
-------
-------
-------
-------
II.C.2. PLOT PLAN
BAKERSFIELD PLANT
21
-------
-------
-------
-------
PLOT PLAN LEGEND
BAKERSFIELD PLANT
Item No. Description
1. Aggregate Stockpiles.
2. Underground Aggregate Storage Bunkers (silos).
3. Tunnel Conveyor.
4. Transfer Station.
5. Storage Bin Feed Conveyor.
6 Elevated Aggregate Storage Bins.
7 Ground-level Cement Storage Silo.
8. Ground-level Cement Silo baghouse.
9. Elevated Cement Storage Silo.
10 Elevated Cement Silo baghouses (3).
Ill Concrete Mixer Feed Conveyor,
12. Central Concrete Mixer.
13. Concrete Mixer Baghouse.
14. Cement Transit Truck Loadout Chute.
15. Cement Transit Mix Trucks.
16. Dust Control Collection Hopper
17. Cyclone
23
-------
-------
II C 3. PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
BAKERSFIELD PLANT
24
-------
-------
£
i
^
-------
-------
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LEGEND
BAKERSFIELD PLANT
Item No. Description
1 Aggregate Stockpiles.
2 Aggregate Delivery by Haul Trucks.
3'. Aggregate Unloading Area (grizzly grates).
4. Tunnel Conveyor.
5. Transfer Station.
6 Storage Bin Feed Conveyor.
7 Elevated Aggregate Storage Bins.
8. Weigh Hopper Feed Conveyor.
9 Aggregate Weigh Hopper.
10 Cement Delivery by Haul Trucks.
11'. Cement Transfer to Storage Silo (pneumatic).
12 Elevated Cement Storage Silo.
13 Cement Silo Controls (baghouses).
14'. Cement Weigh Hopper Feed Conveyor.
15. Cement Weigh Hopper.
16. Mixer Feed Conveyor.
17. Central Cement Mixer.
18. Water Supply.
19 Mixer Emission Control (baghouse).
20. Cement Transit Truck Loadout Chute.
21. Cement Transit Mix Trucks.
26
-------
-------
II.C.4. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Bakersfield Plant is a batch mix facility that produces ready-mix concrete from •*
nd water Naturally occurring and processed aggregate, consisting of sand and
gLel s delivered to the plant by haul trucks. The trucks are driven to the material
area located at the south end of the plant, and positioned over a ground-level grate^
i. the bed is raised and the aggregate falls through the grate and into
a receiving silo (bunker) underneath.
The cement is transported to the plant site by cement haul trucks and is pneumatically transferred
torn te hau met into one of two elevated cement storage silos. The water that is used in the
produSLn of concrete is drawn from an on-site water well and is used directly in the process
without prior storage.
Ready-mix concrete is produced as follows: The plant operator selects a size of aggregate to
u^e In the concrete and'starts the aggregate feed system. The specified aggregate £ urJoaded
from the aDoroDriate storage silo by an automatic feeder and dumped onto the first transfer
' ' el
g
oneyor, bdt. Ths process takes place underneath the grate area. The tunnel
bek carries the aggregate up from the grate area and dumps it to a transfer station, wh ch
discharges the material onJthe aggregate feed conveyor. The feed conveyor transports the
aggregate into one of the five aggregate storage silos.
After the storage silos are full, the plant operator begins the blending of the different agg negate
materials The blending is accomplished by opening gates on the silos, which discharge a
SSr! ^amount of rock or sand into a single weigh hopper. Once the correct amount of material
is obtained, the aggregate is conveyed to the central mixer for mixing.
Unlike the aggregate, the cement is not weighed in a hopper. After the silo is loaded, the
cement is weighed in the silo itself. The gate at the bottom of the silo is then opened and a
specified amount of cement is discharged from the silo to the central mixer via a pneumatic line
or by simple gravity flow using a short chute. Once all the ingredients are loaded into the
mixer the unit is rurned on and the materials are mixed for a specified amount of time,
depending on the product. After the mixing is completed, the concrete mixer is ti ted and Ae
concrete is poured into the truck loadout hopper, which funnels the concrete to the transit ruck
(via a rubber spout). When the loading process is finished, the mixer is tilted back, the truck
operator washes the truck and leaves for the job site.
II.D. PORTABLE PLANT
The Portable Plant is presently located at 8517 Panama Lane in Bakersfield, Kern County
California This facility performs the same operations as the permanent aggregate handling and
concrete batching plant in that it receives, processes and mixes the quarry aggregate with sand,
cement and water to produce ready-mix concrete. The Portable Plant is a transient unit and can
be readily moved from one location to another within a few days. Transient concrete batch
plants typically have smaller production capacities than permanent facilities. This Portable plant
has a maximum production capacity of 100 yd3 of concrete per hour.
27
-------
-------
II.D.I. AREA MAP
28
-------
-------
18 ;-
?-;-*tii
-------
-------
II.D.2. PLOT PLAN
PORTABLE PLANT
30
-------
-------
-------
-------
PLOT PLAN LEGEND
PORTABLE PLANT
Item No. Description
1. Aggregate Stockpiles.
2. Aggregate Feed Hopper.
3. Storage Bin Feed Conveyor.
4. Elevated Aggregate Storage Bins.
5. Ground-level Cement Storage Silo.
6. Elevated Cement Storage Silo.
7. Cement Silo baghouse.
8. Concrete Batch Conveyor.
9. Cement Transit Truck Loadout Chute.
10. Cement Transit Mix Trucks.
32
-------
-------
II.D. 3. PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
PORTABLE PLANT
33
-------
-------
-------
-------
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LEGEND
PORTABLE PLANT
Item No. Description
1. Aggregate Delivery by Haul Trucks.
2. Aggregate Unloading Area.
3. Radial Stacker.
4. Aggregate Transfer to Plant Feed Conveyor (via PEL).
5. Aggregate Bin Feed Conveyor.
6 Elevated Aggregate Storage Bins.
7. Aggregate Weigh Hopper Feed Conveyor.
8. Aggregate Weight Hopper.
9. Cement Delivery by Haul Trucks.
10. Cement Transfer to Storage Silo (pneumatic).
11. Elevated Cement Storage Silo.
12. Cement Silo Controls (Baghouses).
13. Cement Weigh Hopper Feed Conveyor.
14. Cement Weigh Hopper.
15. Loadout Conveyor.
16. Water Supply.
17. Cement Transit Truck Loadout Chute.
18. Cement Transit Mix Trucks.
35
-------
-------
II.D.4. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Portable Plant is a batch mix design facility and operates in the same manner as the
LlaLnt Plant which also located at the Panama Lane site. Raw aggregate, consisting of sand
KraveIt delfvered to the plant site by haul trucks and stored in stockpiles. The cemen is
ttTnsported to the plant site by haul trucks and stored in one of two storage silos The water is
drawn from an on site water well and used directly in the production of concrete.
transports the aggregate into the truck loadout hopper.
The cement is handled in a manner similar to the handling of the aggregate. The cement is
nneumaTca ly transported from the cement haul truck to the cement storage silo and then
SSdSy convenor to the cement weigh hopper. After weighing the cement is discharged
dkec^nto the truck loadout hopper. The loadout hopper funnels the aggregate and cement
mix into the transit cement truck via a rubber discharge spout.
Once the loading process is uuiupicic, uu, tiuwn. ^^^^—
washes the transit trucK's exienur with water to prevent the cement dust from caking on the
truck. After washing, the truck operator proceeds to the job site.
36
-------
III. BACT ANALYSIS OF CAL-MAT FACILITIES
A BACT analysis can be performed on the CAL-MAT facilities by following the requirements
and criteria, specified in the PSD Workshop Manual. To perform a thorough BACT analysis
requires a complete knowledge of the facility and its emission sources because the location and
operation, as well as the contaminants that are emitted from the plant often determine the type
of control that is chosen.
The last step of the analysis, the selection of BACT for each emission source, will not be
performed for any of the CAL-MAT facilities or their emission sources. The purpose of this
document is not to determine what constitutes BACT for the various emission sources at the
CAL-MAT facilities, but rather to show the steps that may be followed when performing a
BACT analysis for emission sources that reside in serious PM-10 nonattainment areas.
III.A. SAN EMIGDIO QUARRY
The first step in the BACT analysis is to identify the emission sources at the facility. Besides
performing this step, the applicant should also identify the location of the plant as well, since
location often determines the level of control that is considered BACT by a regulatory agency.
The San Emigdio Quarry is located in a remote area, about 25 miles south of Bakersfield, Kern
County, California. The quarry covers approximately 640 acres and is within a region that is
used primarily for ranching and livestock grazing. The nearest residence is located more than
two miles from the plant.
III.A.I. PM-10 EMISSION SOURCES AND CALCULATIONS
The second step of the BACT analysis requires that the applicant determine the emission rate
for every emission source at the plant. This step proved to be formidable because all of the
equipment used at the San Emigdio Quarry can produce dust emissions. Quarry operations, such
as vehicle traffic, soil scraping by bulldozer and material transfer by the front-end loaders
(FELs) can produce large amounts of PM-10. In addition, PM-10 is also emitted from the
various screening, crushing and conveying operations at the quarry and at the main plant. It is
important to keep in mind that, although most of the conveyors used at the facility are not
equipped with controls, most of material transfer points, such as from one conveyor to another,
typically use partial enclosures to reduce dust emissions.
The detailed calculations used to estimate the emissions from each source at the San Emigdio
Quarry are presented in Appendix A. To establish a baseline for comparing the efficiencies of
the controls and to show how much PM-10 could actually be emitted from the quarry, the
calculations given in Appendix A do not consider the controls that were in use at the quarry
during the plant visit in August 1992.
VEHICLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
Fugitive paniculate matter emissions from vehicle traffic on the quarry roads and bulldozer
37
-------
activity in the quarry pit area were emulated using the equation from Section 11.2.1 (Unpaved
Roads) of AP-42: ;
Hourly
Annual
where:
EF = 5.9 (k) (s/12) (S/30) (w/4)0'5
EH = (EF) (V) (M) (T)
EF = 5.9 (k) (s/12) (S/30) (w/4)°-5 (W/3)°-7 [(365-pA)/365]
EA = (EF) (V) (M) (T) (AS)/ (2,000 Ibs/ton)
EF = emission factor, pounds of particulate per vehicle mile traveled (Ib/VMT)
k = pTrticle size multiplier, 0.36 for PM-10, dimens.onless
s = silt content of soil, percent
S = mean vehicle speed, miles per hour (mph)
w = mean number of wheels on vehicle
W = mean vehicle weight, tons
EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Pounds per hour (Ibs/hr)
T = total number °gt^Sj^gX 0dUgys with at least 0.01 inches of rain per year
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons per year (tons/yr)
AS = annual operating schedule, hours per year (hrs/yr)
Total Hourly Emissions = 52.807 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 51.722 tons/yr
CRUSHING AND SCREENING EMISSIONS
Screening:
Crushing:
Hourly
Annual
Hourly
Annual
where:
.waow- were based on factors from Section 8.19.1
.2 (Crushed Stone Processing) of AP-42.
EH = (0.12 Ibs/ton) (MHPR)
EA = (0.12 Ibs/ton) (MHPR) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
EH = (0.017 Ibs/ton) (MHPR)
EA = (0.017 Ibs/ton) (MHPR) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
n = total number of controls used
MHPR = maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
38
-------
The uncontrolled quarry emissions were calculated using maximum processing rates and an
annual operating schedule of 2,200 hours per year.
Total Hourly Emissions = 378.682 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 416.550 tons/yr
MATERIAL HANDLING EMISSIONS
-Fugitive particulate matter emissions from handling of aggregate material were calculated using
the empirical equation given in Section 11.2.3 (Aggregate Handling and Storage) of AP-42:
EF = 0.0032 (k) [(U/5)1'3 / (M/2)1-4]
Hourly EH = (N) (EF) (MHPR)
Annual EA = (N) (EF) (MHPR) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
where: EF = emission factor, Ibs/ton-transfer point
k = particle size multiplier, 0.35 for PM-10, dimensionless
U = average wind speed, mph
M = material moisture content, percent
EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
N = number of material transfer points
MHPR = maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
The uncontrolled emissions from each material transfer point were calculated using an average
wind speed of 6.4 mph, a quarry aggregate moisture content of 4.0 percent, a wet material
moisture content of 20 percent and an annual operating schedule of 2,200 hours per year.
QUARRY PIT AKF.A
The emissions from the transfer points in the quarry pit area are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 5.289 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 5.818 tons/yr
MAIN PLANT
The emissions from the transfer points that handle the dry aggregate are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 2.781 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 3.062 tons/yr
The emissions from the transfer points that handle washed aggregate are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.103 Ibs/hr
39
-------
Total Annual Emissions = 0.117 tons/yr
The emissions from the transfer points that handle aggregate destined for ready-mix plants are:
Total Hourly Emissions =0.018lbs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.020 tons/yr
AGGREGATE STOCKPILE EMISSIONS
Fugitive emissions of particulate matter from the aggregate and sand stockpiles were calculated
Sng emission factors from Section 8.19.1 (Sand and Gravel Processing) of AP-42.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (day/24 hrs)
Annual EA = (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (365 days/yr) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
Inactive: Hourly EH = (1.7 Ib/acre-day) (TISA) (day/24 hrs)
Annual EA = (1.7 Ib/acre-day) (TISA) (365 days/yr) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
where: EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
TASA = total active stockpile area, acres
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
TISA = total inactive stockpile area, acres
The uncontrolled emissions from the quarry stockpiles were calculated based on continuous
erosion, 24 hours per day and 365 days per year.
Active: Total Hourly Emissions = 1.487 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 6.507 tons/yr
Inactive: Total Hourly Emissions = 0.401 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 1.756 tons/yr
III.A.2. CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
At this point in the BACT analysis, the applicant identifies all of the possible control
techt o£e s ma?canbe used on each of the emission sources. Once the controls are identified,
SSS eliminates those controls that are technically infeasible. Because this document i
fs because a control that is technically feasible for an emission source under a specific set of
condSons may be infeasible for another source, particularly if the other source does not operate
under the same conditions.
40
-------
As stated earlier in the document, CAL-MAT uses controls for the majority of the emission
sources at the San Emigdio Quarry. For the purposes of this document, the emission sources
are assumed to be uncontrolled. The control options that have been identified for the San
Emigdio Quarry are based on extensive research of emission controls used at existing quarry
operations, stone and gravel operations, and ready-mix plants.
Road Traffic Emissions
The emissions from vehicle traffic are generated by bulldozers, front-end loaders (FELs) and
aggregate haul trucks. The possible controls are:
• Water sprays.
• Asphalt emulsions (typically used only on the quarry roads).
• Oils (typically used only on the quarry roads)
• Chemical suppressants.
• Paving (typically used only on the quarry roads).
• Mechanical or vacuum sweeping (typically used only on paved roads).
• Combination of controls.
Since the quarry pit area contains the aggregate product, asphalt emulsions and oils are not
practical choices for minimizing dust emissions. These controls can result in the agglomeration
of dirt particles, which may cause problems for the processing equipment downstream of the pit.
Quarry Pit Equipment
The feed hopper, grizzly (primary screen) and primary crusher all have the potential to emit
large quantities of dust. The controls that can be used on these sources are:
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
Partial enclosures.
Full enclosures (alone or venting to a control device such as a baghouse).
Combination of controls.
Although full enclosures provide higher emission reductions, they are not a good choice because
the pit equipment cannot be fully enclosed and still operate as designed. The entire pit system
could be fully enclosed, however, this approach would cause problems when the equipment
needs to be relocated to another work site.
Pit Conveying System
The aggregate collection conveyor, the eight aggregate transport conveyors and the radial stacker
all emit dust, especially at the transfer points. Typical controls for these sources are:
41
-------
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
Partial enclosures.
Full enclosures (open on both ends).
Combination of controls.
or vemtag to a control device) are typically not used on long conveyors.
Surge Pile and Syntron Feeder System
Uncontrolled emissions from the surge pile and the Syntron feeder system, which includes a
transfer conveyor, may be controlled by the following methods:
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
• Full enclosures (open on both ends).
• Combination of controls.
If full enclosures are to be used, provisions must be made to allow flexibility in the operation
and location of the equipment inside the enclosure.
Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Screens
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
• Full enclosures (open at two points).
• Combination of controls.
In practice, most screens use partial enclosures to minimize dust emissions however because
some screens wash the aggregate they do not need to use additional controls.
Secondary Crushers
sources can be controlled by:
42
-------
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
• Full enclosures (alone or venting to a control device).
• Combination of controls.
Some of the secondary crushers that were listed in the BACT/LAER Clearinghouse data do use
full enclosures and/or control devices such as baghouses, however there may have been
extenuating circumstances, such as proximity of the plant to residences that required this level
of control.
Additional Aggregate Handling
The aggregate that is processed at the plant is transported by a complex conveyor system with
many transfer points. The controls that can be used for these sources are:
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
• Full enclosures (alone or venting to a control device).
• Combination of controls.
Raw Material and Product Stockpiles
Some of the aggregate material that is produced at the quarry is stored in bunkers (silos), which
are almost fully enclosed. The rest of the aggregate is stored in stockpiles. The emissions from
the stockpiles can be controlled by:
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
Partial enclosures.
Full enclosures (alone or vented to a control device).
Combination of controls.
Although asphalt emulsions and oils can be used in theory on stockpiles, they are typically
reserved for use on roads because they cause the aggregates to clump together. In addition, the
use of these compounds has the potential to cause problems when the aggregate is mixed with
cement and water.
III.A.3. EFFICIENCIES AND COST OF CONTROLS
All of the alternate control options that have been mentioned in the preceding section were
obtained through research of other ready-mix plants, similar industries and the EPA
BACT/LAER Clearinghouse, a database of control technology maintained by the EPA to assist
industry and the regulatory community in identifying alternate controls for emission sources.
43
-------
Because economics often play a crucial role in determining which controls can be used for a
particular source, special efforts were made to obtain cost information for the various controls.
During this stage of the analysis cost data from many vendors and manufacturers were compiled
and sorted to establish a cost range for each method of control.
It is important to note that some of the figures given in this section are based on cost information
for entry-level controls, for example, a plain, base-model baghouse. Therefore, the cost ranges
for each control should not be taken literally. Actual costs for the various controls will depend
on such variables as location of the plant, accessibility of the emission source, type and amount
of emissions being controlled, the type of environment in which the control will be used and
finally, the degree of control efficiency that is required.
The control options that were identified for the quarry include water sprays, asphalt emulsions,
oil, chemical suppressants, paving, paving with water, paving with mechanical sweeping, paving
with vacuum sweeping, partial enclosures, full enclosures and dedicated control devices such as
cyclones, baghouses, cartridge filter systems, scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs).
Type of Control
Water Sprays/Watering
Asphalt Emulsions
Oil
Chemical
Suppressants/Roads
Chemical
Suppressant/Transfer Points
Paving
Partial Enclosures -
Crushers & Hoppers
Full Enclosures** -
Crushers & Hoppers
Conveyor Enclosures
Radial Stacker Enclosures
Cyclones
Baghouses
Scrubbers
Electrostatic Precipitators
Efficiency Range
50-80
60-80
60-80
70-90
75-85
85-90 +
70-90
70-99 +
70-99 +
70-99 +
50-80
80-99 +
80-99 +
80-99 +
Capital Cost*
Not Available (Note 1)
$45.00-$100.00***
per 500 ft2 area per year
Not Available (Note 2)
$40.00 - $125.00 ***
per 500 ft2 area per year
0.020/ton material processed
No existing base: $7-9.00/yd2
Existing base: $3.50-$4.50/yd2
Not Available (Note 3)
Not Available (Note 3)
$6.25-$10.00 per ft retrofit
30% of purchase price new
30% of purchase price
$0.50-$5.00 per cfm airflow
depending on options included
$1.50-$20.00 per cfm airflow
depending on options included
Venturi: $0.50-$9.00 per cfm
lmpingement:$0.60-$10 per cfm
depending on options included
$4.00-$5.00 per cfm airflow
44
-------
* Cost range is based on information from several vendors (See Appendix B).
** Full enclosures achieve efficiencies of 99+ % only when vented to a control device.
*** All chemical suppressant information from vendors was given in different units {ft2, yd2,
gal/lb) and application frequency varied, therefore, all data was normalized to a one year
period and a 500 ft2 application area.
NOTE 1: Water spray costing is site specific dependent on throughput, control efficiency desired,
location of source, nozzle materials of construction, environmental considerations, etc.
Therefore, no vendor was able to state a price range. A vendor should be contacted directly.
(See Appendix B).
NOTE 2: Oiling is not generally used or recommended for dust control due to its negative environmental
impact on drinking water and stormwater runoff.
NOTE 3: Most crushers, hoppers, mixers, etc. can be purchased with enclosures. If a retrofit is
needed, most manufacturers recommend contacting a steel supplier and constructing the
enclosure on-site.
III.A.4. ENERGY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Once the controls are narrowed down to a few choices, the applicant must decide which control
is most appropriate for the emission source in question. The "best available control" is usually
determined after taking into account the energy, environmental and economic impacts for each
of the remaining controls. These impacts will vary from case to case because no two facilities
operate in the same manner, even if they are within the same geographic region and use similar,
or identical equipment.
When performing this last step in the BACT analysis, the applicant must weigh many factors,
other than the emission reduction efficiencies of the control methods, before making a decision
as to which control will be used. Only after the controls are evaluated side-by-side can the
applicant determine the "best" one to use on his/her emission source.
Although the purpose of this document has already been stated many times, it is important for
the reader to understand that this document does not state what constitutes BACT for the
emission sources at the San Emigdio Quarry. The document merely shows (through example)
the level of detail that is required to perform a thorough BACT analysis. Thus, instead of
eliminating the possible controls for the emission sources at the quarry, each control will be
analyzed from energy, environmental and economic viewpoints. To make comparisons easier,
the results of the analysis will be presented in tabular form.
Water
The use of water to suppress dust emissions is one of the most common methods of control.
Water is used to control dust emissions from roads, material transfer points, conveyors, screens,
crushers and even silos. The following analysis covers the major impacts that the applicant
needs to keep in mind before proposing the use of water as BACT. Many other impacts can be
found depending on the site specific limitations.
45
-------
1
Type of Impact
Energy
L_ . —
Environmental
I Economic
| Advantages
Requires little energy to apply for
sources such as conveyors and
stockpiles. Slightly more energy (in
terms of water truck fuel usage) may
be required when water is used to
control road dust emissions.
Causes virtually no detrimental ettects
to surrounding areas.
Inexpensive to use.
,
Disadvantages
Because water eventually evaporates,
many applications may be necessary
to insure consistent control, especially
when controlling road emissions. Fuel
consumption also increases.
. .
Excessive use can cause runoff or
seepage into the ground, which can
carry contaminants into sensitive
ecological areas, or sources of
drinking water.
If the plant is located in an arid region
where water is scarce, water would
be relatively expensive to use, j
especially if several applications are
required to achieve the desired level of
control efficiency.
Asphalt Emulsions
The use of aspha* emuisions ,o con.ro! dust
or
I Type of Impact \ Advantages
'
Environmental
Economic
Requires about the same energy to
apply as water (in terms of truck fuel
usage) when used to control road dust.
In addition, only one application is
usually required. However, unlike
water, asphalt is not suitable for
emission sources such as conveyors,
screens and crushers.
..
No beneficial environmental benefits
have been identified for this material.
^—.————•"•"•••""
Fairly inexpensive to use, depending on
the location of the plant and the
availability of the material.
,
I Disadvantages
To achieve a uniform spray pattern,
the emulsion may have to be warmed
up, especially during cold weather.
Keeping the asphalt at optimum
temperature will require the use of
heaters on the asphalt storage tank.
Excessive use may result in the
contamination of drinking water
sources if the asphalt is carried away
by rainwater runoff. Can also contain
pollutants which cause additional
environmental regulation problems.
Since the asphalt emulsion is made
from petroleum products, the price will |
probably reflect the current market
cost of oil.
46
-------
Oils
Although they are available, oils are not used as frequently as water or asphalt emulsions in
fr°m """*• primari1^ beMUSC ^ •* ««• «t uTand
operauoilal costs ** result from frequent cleantog of
^Type of Impact | Advantages
Energy
See the advantages for asphalt
emulsion.
See the advantages for asphalt
emulsion.
See the advantages for asphalt
emulsion.
Chemical Suppressants
Disadvantages
See the disadvantages for asphalt
emulsion.
See the disadvantages for asphalt
emulsion.
See the disadvantages for asphalt
emulsion.
control
,SUppre^ants can be used <* most fugitive dust emission sources at a
utf h ^coa^ the benefits of -ter and asphalt emulsions/oils in
IHH v ' \ ^Often1re^uire °^ one 0^ two applications to achieve efficient
addm°n' Chemical suPPre^ants are often designed for specific uses, such as
attractive when
Require about the same energy to
Environmental
Chemical suppressants are typically
safer to use than asphalt emulsions
and oils because they are not used in
great quantities and most are
biodegradable.
^
Depending on the emission source,
chemical suppressants may actually be
cheaper to use than water.
Some suppressants are delivered in
powder form and require mixing with
water before use. The mixing is often
accomplished by using an electric, gas
or other type of mixer.
Like asphalt emulsions and oils,
excessive use of chemical
suppressants may result in the
contamination of water sources.
""™~™^—________
The cost for chemical suppressants
varies. In some cases, the applicant
may have to purchase the suppressant
n bulk quantities, resulting in large
nitial costs.
47
-------
Sweeping
The use of mechanical or vacuum sweeping is limited to minimizing dust from paved roads
Therefore thTmipacts can be considered secondary to those that result from the use of pavmg
to control dust emissions from roads.
Type of Impact
~
Energy
Economic
Most sweepers are used for general
housekeeping, therefore they are run
only during periods of heavy traffic
and/or excessive dust buildup.
^
Reduces the use of chemicals, asphalt,
or oils, which can cause problems if
they are carried off by rainwater.
Long life expectancy and low use make
sweeping a good choice when
controlling emissions from paved
roads.
sj^^s.™^—^-^———
Fuel usage may be fairly large
depending on the amount of road
traffic or the condition of the road
itself.
May cause general nuisance
conditions due to odor (caused by the
use of diesel fuel) and/or noise.
__———— — :—
As with any vehicle, sweepers require
constant maintenance to deliver peak
performance. In addition, spare parts
may be expensive and/or hard to find,
especially for older models.
Partial Enclosures
This type of control is used in situations where a semi-permanent method is required to control
emissions Partial enclosures are typically used on open sources such as screens, transfer
SSnsand conveyor belts. Because of their simplicity, partial enclosures are very inexpensive
Tcoitmct. They usually require accurate drawings, a good fabrication shop and raw
materials. In most cases, they can be made by plant personnel.
Type of Impact
=====
Energy
• ~
Environmental
™—•———•""•
Economic
Advantages
Require no energy to operate.
Partial enclosures are environmentally
sound.
Inexpensive to make. In most cases
they can be made on-site by plant
personnel.
Disadvantages
======
Require energy to construct.
No known disadvantages, but can use
valuable landfill space when discarded.
Large size enclosures can incur large
capital costs, depending on the raw
material used and if they are
purchased from an outside contractor.
48
-------
Full Enclosures
Full enclosures offer the same benefits as partial enclosures, but are more efficient in reducing
emissions from a source. However, they do not offer the same level of flexibility as partial
enclosures because, unless they are designed to be portable, they are very difficult to modify or
remove once they are installed. These types of controls are most suited for permanent facilities,
or equipment that will not require regular modification or relocation.
Type of Impact
Energy
Environmental
Economic
Advantages
See the advantages for partial
enclosures.
See the advantages for partial
enclosure.
See the advantages for partial
enclosure.
Disadvantages
See the disadvantages for partial
enclosure.
See the disadvantages for partial
enclosure.
See the disadvantages for partial
enclosure.
Cyclones
This type of equipment is typically used as a separation device in cases where recovery of large,
or pneumatically conveyed product is required. On occasion, cyclones are used to control dust
from silos, but their low efficiencies often prevent them from being used in situations when a
high degree of control is required, or when PM-10 is the air contaminant. The exhaust from
a cyclone is usually sent to a more efficient control device, such as a baghouse.
Type of Impact
Advantages
Disadvantages
Energy
Require no energy to operate on
pneumatic conveying systems.
Typically require the use of a self-
powered blower on nonpneumatic
emission sources or conveying
systems.
Environmental
Environmentally sound, however, the
applicant must either reuse the
collected material or dispose of it in a
proper manner.
No known disadvantages, but may use
valuable landfill space when discarded.
In cases where a toxic material is
being controlled, the cyclone merely
collects the material, but does not
destroy it.
Economic
Low to moderate costs when
compared to baghouses.
Low efficiency often requires the use
of more than one unit. In addition, the
applicant must purchase a blower
system and install the necessary
ducting and supporting structure(s).
49
-------
Baghouses
Baghouses are the most widely used devices for controlling dust emissions from sources such
as storage bins, silos and hoppers. Their high efficiency makes them ideal for situations where
a high level of control is required or when the emissions consist of small paniculate (PM-10).
Type of Impact
Advantages
Disadvantages
Energy
Low to moderate energy usage when
used on a low emission source.
Considerable energy is spent when
controlling emissions from several
sources that are some distance from
each other because a powerful blower
must be used and additional ductwork
is required.
Environmental
See the advantages for the use of the
cyclone.
See the disadvantages for the use of
the cyclone.
Economic
The higher efficiency results in lower
costs per ton of pollutant controlled
when compared to a cyclone.
Bags have to be replaced on a regular
basis, usually once every two or three
years, depending on the bag material.
This can add to the operational costs
of the unit.
Cartridge Filter Systems
These systems operate and have control efficiencies similar to baghouses, therefore they can be
considered as having the same advantages and disadvantages as baghouses. The only difference
between a cartridge filter and a bag filter is that bag filters are usually made of fabric, plastic
or fiberglass, while the cartridge filters are typically made out of pleated paper, fibers, or a
combination of the two. However, like automobile air filters, most cartridges must be discarded
after they have been used for a certain period of time and, depending on the situation, this may
increase the operational costs of the unit.
Type of Impact
Energy
Environmental
Economic
Advantages
See the advantages for the use of
baghouses.
See the advantages for the use of
baghouses.
See the advantages for the use of
baghouses.
Disadvantages
See the disadvantages
baghouses.
See the disadvantages
baghouses.
See the disadvantages
baghouses.
for the use of
for the use of
for the use of
50
-------
Scrubbers
Although scrubbers are not typically used in the ready-mix industry, they are commonly used
in similar industries, e.g., asphalt concrete plants. Like baghouses, scrubbers are very efficient
hi controlling fine dust emissions, however they must rely on a scrubbing solution (usually
water) to achieve high levels of control. Since the water is the capture media, it must be filtered
on a regular basis, otherwise the scrubber experiences a loss of efficiency.
Type of Impact
Advantages
Disadvantages
Energy
Scrubbers are typically powered by
electricity and thus do not emit any
additional air contaminants.
Besides using a blower, a scrubber
also requires a water pump for
recycling the water to and from a
filtering or settling system.
Environmental
If properly operated, the scrubber does
not cause an adverse impact on the
environment.
The solution water must be filtered
and/or the fines allowed to settle out
before the solution can be reused. If
settling ponds are used, special care
must be taken to reduce runoff and
seepage into other water sources.
Economic
The only component that must be
replaced frequently is the water.
Most scrubbers incur higher
operational costs because the system
is composed of several pieces of
equipment.
Electrostatic Precipitators
This type of control is usually used on emission sources that have the potential to emit hundreds
of tons of emissions per year. Because ESPs consume large amounts of electricity and are
physically large in size, they are best suited for large emission sources, such as electric power
generating stations that use coal as the primary fuel, steel mills and fiberglass manufacturing
plants. .
Type of Impact
Energy
Environmental
Economic
Advantages
See the advantages for the use of
scrubbers.
See the advantages for the use of
scrubbers.
ESPs have no moving parts, thus
minimizing downtime.
Disadvantages
Require large amounts of electrical
energy to operate at optimum
efficiency.
See the disadvantages for the use of
baghouses.
Capital and operating costs are high
compared to other controls.
51
-------
BAKERSFIELD PLANT
first step in the BACT
" «*-«»•'•••
ffl B 1 PM-10 EMISSION SOURCES AND CAI^ULATIONS
The second step of the
for every emission source at the plant. Dust emisa i processing of aggregate and
lit from vehicle traffic and *»*~ £23Lta» from each source a, the plam
cement. The detailed calculations used to estimaK ^tne ring the efflcienc.es of the
are presented in Appendix A. To ^* ^ be emitted ftom me Bakersfield Plan, the
SSSS ^^^ - controls ,h, Were in use durmg the plant
visit in August 1992.
VEHICLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
aU of the roads and
roads that is given in Sectton U.,6
(Industrial Paved Roads) of AP-42.
EF = 3.5 (k) (sL/0.35)0'3
Hourly EH = H-(EFF/100)1 (EF) (V) (M) (T)
EA = H-tEFF/1 00)1 (EF) (V) (M) (T) (AS) / (2,000 ,bs/ton)
Annua,
where:
EF = emission factor,
skL : *^
E = hourly emission rate of PM-1
FFF - efficiency of control, percent
V - tota number of vehicles traveling on road
M I o a SisTance each vehicle travels, m.les tr.p
T - total number of trips per hour, trips/hour
E '= annual emission rate of PM-1 0 tons/yr
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
dimensionless
(oz/Yd3)
(provided by CAL-MAT).
52
-------
Total Hourly Emissions = 6.925 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 7.618 tons/yr
MATERIAL HANDLING EMISSIONS
4Tedtse± i7^1ing °f aggregate' Cement and concr*e were
-nted in Section 11.2.3 (Aggregate Handling and Storage) of AP-42:
EF = 0.0032 (k) [(U/5)1-3 / (M/2)1-4]
Hourly EH = (N) (EF) [1-(EFF/100)] (MHPR)
Annual EA = (N) (EF) [1-(EFF/100)J (MHPR, (AS, / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
where: EF = emission factor, Ibs/ton-transfer point
k - particle size multiplier, 0.35 for PM-10, dimensionless
U = average wind speed, mph
M = material moisture content, percent
EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
N = number of material transfer points
EFF = efficiency of control method, percent
HPR - maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
, and
operating schedule of 2,200 tours per y"ar meteorological data) and an annual
°f «« -ated using
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.635 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.696 tons/yr
emissions from the handling of me cement were based on a moisture content of 2 percent.
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.185 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.204 tons/yr
The emissions from the handling of the concrete were based on a moisture content of 20 percent.
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.309 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.340 tons/yr
53
-------
AGGREGATE STOCKPILE EMISSIONS
BSKSL-sr.srsJJS3isftas.-sr"
Aotlue.
'
,nactiye.
Hou,,y EH,l1-(EFF/10cn,6.3,b/acre-d=v,,TASA,,daW24hrS,
Annua,
Hourly EH , n-.EFmOO,, U.7 >b/acre-d.yHT,SAMday,24
Annual
h rp.
= hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.550 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 2.409 tons/yr
MISCELLANEOUS SOURCE EMISSIONS
and concrete mixer, are
to
The emissions from cement si,os are
which have very high
calculated usmg outlet gram
factors were not included
f air that is pulled tough the system,
^ ^ ^^.^ m efflaency
back-ca,cu,ated oy using a simple equatio,
UE = (CE) / (1-(EFF/100)1
UE
CE
EFF
Uncontrolled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
Controlled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
Efficiency of control, percent
estimate rate for emissions that
source, but since the scope of
the
54
-------
The point sources at the Bakersfield Plant that are cnn-pntiv ^t^n A u
the concrete mixer and the two cement silo, ulTT Y u by C°ntro1 devices are
thor, UIC lwu ^emeni snos. Using the equation above the pmiccirmo f™™
these sources were back-calculated acc,,mi«« « „!-„, -1 • 7!',e emissi°ns from
less than th
The uncontrolled emissions from the concrete mixer are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 7.175 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 7.875 tons/yr
The uncontrolled emissions from the large cement silo:
Total Hourly Emissions = 43.275 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 47.625 tons/yr
And finally, the uncontrolled emissions from the smaller cement silo are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 14.125 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 15.550 tons/yr
III.B.2 CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
Road Traffic Emissions
(FELS)
• Water sprays.
• Asphalt emulsions (typically used only on unpaved roads)
Oils (typically used only on unpaved roads)
• Chemical suppressants.
55
-------
Santa. or vacuum sweeping (typically used only on paved roads).
Combination of controls.
emission reductions.
Aggregate Unloading and Storage
controls for both of these sources are:
« Water sprays.
« Chemical suppressants.
or vented to a contro, device, such as a baghouse,
• Combination of controls.
AsphaK emulsions and ous could be -d or
^rry r
unpaved (dirt) roads.
Cement Unloading and Storage
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
or vented to a contro, device, such as a baghouse).
Dedicated control devices.
Combination of controls.
Aggregate Material Transfer
56
-------
using the following controls:
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
• Full enclosures (alone or vented to a control device, such as a baghouse)
• Dedicated control devices.
• Combination of controls.
The only exception is water sprays. When the dry cement comes in contact with the water it
will harden and potentially damage any equipment it adheres to. '
Concrete Production
emissions' however- "* teroduction of
* Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
Partial enclosures.
to a contro1 device' such
• Combination of controls.
III.B.3. EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS OF CONTROLS
**' haVe been mentioned in the Preced^g Action were
ready'mix plants' similar industries
rekoTofZrTV-015 ^ manufacturers was so^ to establish a cost range for
method of control. It is important to note that the figures given in this section are h* JH
ctrf^
accss LS of th Van°US C°ntr0lS WUI depend °n Such variables as location of the plam'
accessibility of the emission source, type and amount of emissions being controlled the tvoe of
™6nt m WWCh "
Plant indude the use of
suppressants, partial enclosures, full enclosures and dedicated
temS' SCrubbers and ^to Sd
C°St estimates *» *ese controls
57
-------
IIIB4 ENERGY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
III.C. PORTABLE PLANT
The Portable Plant is a transient unit and[canJ> ^ Bakersiieia jvciu
within a few days. It is presently located atJ^1/fi£Jj? erforms the same operations as the
California, alongside ^ pra^J?^ ^ m ^ u receiveS! processes and
and water to produce ready-mix concrete.
Did PM-10 EMISSION SOURCES AND CALCULATIONS
The second step of the BACT ana,ysis
for every emission source at the plant. Dust ^sions ir om F aggregate and cement.
torn vehide traffic and from the '^•£^<££ZZ£2aJl me Portable Plan,
I,? «* - account the controls that ,ere
in use during the plant visit in August 1992.
VEHICLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
The vehicles at tie Panama Une si« ^service both £
emissions generated by vehtc es that serve ^ JPomWe
r«^±^-K^^^s^e
^^ ^ ^ ^ &
-2-1
-------
V
M
T
PA
EA
AS
- total number of vehicles traveling on road
= total distance each vehicle travels, miles per trip (miles/trip)
- total number of trips per hour (trips/hr)
= annual precipitation index, days with at least 0.01 inches of rain per year
= annual emiss.on rate of PM-10, tons per year (tons/yr)
= annual operating schedule, hours per year (hrs/yr)
Annual
where:
EF =
3.5 (k) (sL/0.35)0-3
Hourly EH = [1-(EFF/100>] (EF) (V) (M) (T)
EF
k
sL
EFF
V
M
T
AS =
= [1-(EFF/100)] (EF) (V) (M) (T) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
= emission factor, Ibs/VMT
= particle size multiplier, 0.22 for PM-10, dimensionless
- road surface silt loading, ounces per square yard (oz/yd3)
= hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
= efficiency of control, percent
= total number of vehicles traveling on road
= total distance each vehicle travels, miles/trip
= total number of trips per hour, trips/hour
annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
MATERIAL HANDLING EMISSIONS
Hourly
Annual
where:
EF
E =
= 0.0032 (k) [(U/5)1-3 / (M/2)1-4]
(N) (EF) (MHPR)
EA = (N) {EF) (MHPR) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
EF
k
N
U
M
Eu =
MHPR
EA
AS
= emission factor, Ibs/ton
= particle size multiplier, 0.35 for PM-10, dimensionless
= number of drop points
= average wind speed, mph
= material moisture content, percent
= hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
= maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
= annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
= annual operating schedule, tons/yr
59
-------
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.557 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.611 tons/yr •:
The emissions from the handling of the cement were based on a moisture content of 2 percent.
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.093 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions =0.102 tons/yr
The emissions from the handling of the mixture of aggregate and cement were based on a
combined moisture content of about 4.5 percent.
Total Hourly Emissions = 0.119 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 0.131 tons/yr
AGGREGATE STOCKPILE EMISSIONS
Active- Hourly EH = [1-(EFF/100)] (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (day/24 hrs)
Annual EA = t1-(EFF/100)l (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (365 days/yr) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
.nactive: Hourly EH - [1-(EFF/100)1 (1.7 -b/acre-day) (T.SA) (day/24 hrs)
Annual EA - [1-(EFF/100)J (1.7 Ib/acre-day) (T.SA) (365 days/yr) / (2,000 ,bs/ton)
where- EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
wnere. « _ , method, percent
TAsI I total actL stockpile area, 50 percent of tota, area, acres
P - annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
TISA : "taMnaSive'stockpile area, 50 percent of tota, area, acres
MISCELLANEOUS EMISSION SOURCES
The emissions from cement sUos are
: back-calculated for each source by using
;oiiiJH->.utu ^ij.iioji*-'"»—-
the following equation:
UE = (CE)/d-(EFF/100)l
wnere. UE = Uncontrolled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
60
-------
CE = Controlled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
EFF = Efficiency of control, percent
t S°me °f ^ P°int S°Urces at ^ Portable Plant were estimated
using the equation given in the preceding page. A control efficiency of 96 percent was assumed "
for every control device used at the Portable Plant. assumed
The emissions from the elevated cement silo are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 14.425 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 15.875 tons/yr
The emissions from the aggregate/cement weigh hopper are:
Total Hourly Emissions =1.500 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 1.650 tons/yr
The emissions from the Fruehauf cement silo are:
Total Hourly Emissions = 28.850 Ibs/hr
Total Annual Emissions = 31.750 tons/yr
III.C.2. CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
f theKBACT analysis> the aPP»cant identifies all of the possible control
tha can be used on each of the emission sources and then eliminates the
0t b£ d°ne because the Pu
-------
. Aspnau euuu^ (typically used Only on unpaved roads).
. Oils (typically used only on unpaved roads)
• Chemical suppressants.
I Mechanical or vacuum sweeping (typicaUy used only on paved roads).
• Combination of controls.
greater emission reductions.
Aggregate Unloading and Storage
sources are:
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
or vented ,o a control device, such as a baghouse).
Combination of controls.
AspnaU emutsions >nd oils could
ST-S S, eissions excep, on unpaved
(dirt) roads.
Cement Unloading and Storage
Water sprays.
Chemical suppressants.
sone or vented to a control device, such as a baghouse).
Dedicated control devices.
Combination of controls.
The use of water and/or chemical '
62
-------
Aggregate Material Transfer
• Water sprays.
• Chemical suppressants.
• Partial enclosures.
to a contt°l
Combination of controls.
water sprays should
Concrete Production
III.C.3. EFFICIENCIES AND COSTS OF CONTROLS
been rtioned in the
P ' Slmilar indUStri£S and the EPA
63
-------
III.C.4. ENERGY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS
energy, environmental andeconomic
Qua,, an, the H-ftU Han,
IV ESTIMATING ANNUALIZED COSTS
• • RAPT for a source is estimating the annualized cost of the
Chapters 5, 6, and 9.
annualized cost of the control method In fenera1' d _h one of ^se factors can be
Sis stt£ — d cost
is discussed here.
Ca = [CRF x
(Ce + Cc)] + C0 + 0.5C0 + G, (D
Factor (See Equan 2),
C = Direct Capital Costs (See Equation 3)
r - Indirect Capital Costs (See Equation 4),
CC - Annual Direct Operating Costs (See Equatiori ^5>' elated to ^ control
&o = Overhead Cost Rate - ^^^^T^grt*. social security,
^£££?^^ fringe bLefUs and system costs le.
c -
and system:
• n 4- iV
CRF =_J_O_±J)
(1 + i)n - 1
64
ta.es into account the real interest rate ofborrowed funds
(2)
-------
where: i = Annual interest rate,
n = Economic life of the control system in years.
Ce = Ec + In + ps + is (3)
Where: E = required t
Where E =
~
C =
I, - Installation Support Costs - ie.
(Ct)
site preparation, utility connections, etc.
expenses not
=E, + F. + C.
(4)
Engineering and administrative costs such as development of desisn and
™ -£* - 4S a^
exPen/e.|ndudin« "ie use of buildings, warehouses, repair-work areas
of
.
ttm '
Contractor fees and contingency expense. '
(Q) are the costs to maintain and operate a control system on
C. = Cu + C, + C, + Cm + Cb + C,
(5)
Where:
- Annual Direct Maintenance/Repair Costs (See Equation 5c)
=
C, - Annual Direct Fuel Costs - ie. fuel
from me
usage required for control device It i,
65
-------
Cr = (CfxN)x(l + FV +FL)
where: Cf
N
Fv
FL
Cost per raw material unit ($/unit),
Total units required,
Price Variation Factor,
: Loss Factor.
where- F = Supervision allowance factor of 1-15>
W- = Hourly wage rate for labor category i ($/hour),
= Total annual hours for labor category i.
,-n • r^ctc (C \ are determined by the recommendations specified
being used. If maintenance labor
be added to the regular cost
expensive than operating »?i^^^To percent higher than operating labor
c J> would equal maintenance labor
is more
costs.
The cost of maintenance/repairs also i
fluids, lubricants, replacement parts, eu;.
of these expenses, material costs can be
costs.
Cm =
of to*, —nee ,abor
(5c)
where: W5
Hi
Cs
CP
C,
CRF
i=l
Hourly wage rate for category i,
Total annual hours for labor category i,
induding taxes and freight (S),
for r^acement parts; Hfe span is specified by
manufacturer of part (See Equation 2).
66
-------
is necded to
iaiKe cos's is to estimate the hours required for each
mi>Itiply by *• iabor
Cper
Cper
Cin
rec
-ins
(6a)
(6b)
where Cig =
Cper =
and
C,
Government Costs,
Additional labor cost to review and issue new or renewal permits
- Additional labor cost to carry out enforcement action, issue warnings, fines
and administrative/legal proceedings,
= Site inspections and testing costs.
= Industry Costs,
Crcc - Recordkeeping associated with the control equipment,
JnS reukdonsPreParati°n C°St ^ ^"^ compliance t>estinS cost required by
me umnoer or tons Of DOlmtanf ramnvprl n\ror- tV.^ Q^JO*: ii__^ . . . J
($
For example: Total Annualized Cost for Control of Source A = $21,450 per year
Total Uncontrolled Emission Rate for Source A = 91 tons/yr
Total Controlled Emission Rate for Source A = 44 tons/yr
Therefore $21,4507(91 - 44) = $456 annual control cost / ton of pollutant removed
67
-------
V. REFERENCES
1 . Operating Permit Files for CAL-MAT of Central California, Kern County Air Pollution
Control District, Bakersfield, CA, 1992.
2. Efficiencies for Particulate Emission Controls, Kern County Air Pollution Control
District, Bakersfield, CA, 1992.
3. CAL-MAT of Central California, Plant Process Information, Bakersfield, CA, 1992.
4 BACT/LAER Clearinghouse Information System, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1992.
5. Compilation of Air Pollution Erosion ^ ^^
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
6. Air Pollution Engineering Manual Air & Waste Management Association, New York,
NY, 1992. . ' .
7 F Record and W T. Herniate, Particulate Emission Factors for the Construction
Agnate Industv, Draft Report, GCA-TR-CH-83-02, EPA Contract No. 68-02-3510,
GA Corp., Chapel Hill, NC, February 1983.
9 Efficiencies for Particulate Emission Controls Mechanical Division, Permits Program,
' Texas Air Control Board, Austin, Texas, February 1992.
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, September 1987. EPA/625/5-87/022.
EPA/450/3-88-008.
EPA/450/2-92-004.
13 OAQPS Control Cost Manual f Edition, Office of Air f""^ ™
Smndards, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
January 1990. EPA/450/3-90-006.
68
-------
V. REFERENCES (con't)
14. OAQPS Control Cost Manual 4th Edition, Supplement 1, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC, February 1992. EPA/450/3-90-006a.
15. OAQPS Control Cost Manual 4h Edition, Supplement 2, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC, October 1992. EPA/450/3-90-006b.
16. DRAFT New Source Review Workshop Manual: Prevention of Significant
Deterioration in Nonattainment Area Permitting, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park NC
October 1990.
69
-------
APPENDIX A
DETAILED EMISSION CALCULATIONS
70
-------
-------
t nf iK emission sources, the control
VIA SAN EMIGDIO QUARRY ^^
VFWTCLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
VEHICLh l KA
"
the
Hourly EF , 6.
E = [1-(EFF/100)] (EF) (V) (M) (T)
"
- (1.t6FF/10Oll (EF) (V) (Ml (T) (AS./ 12,000 Ibsfton)
where:
W = mean vehicle "«8M'Jf™ ds per hour (Ibs/hr)
E = hourly emission rate otnvi i u, H
« Pfficiency of control used, percent
T number o, «-. P« h« p. Q Q, inches of tain pe, ye,r
p. , .nnual precipitat,on mdex days wth ^
Efficiency of control,
year
„ .....
from AP-42 (Section 11.2.1)
71
-------
1. Bulldozers: Unpaved work area.
Total trip distance = 100 ft
No. of "wheels" = Q
Truck speed = 10mph N0-
Hou,,v EF . 5.3 ,0.36;,,0/12H,0/30,(S,4l«(40,3,.
weight
M ??' °f trips
No. of bulldozers
= 40 tons
= 20 trips/hr
= 2
dozers,
Annual EF
2. Front-End Loaders: Unpaved work areas.
Total trip distance
No. of wheels
Loader speed
No. of loaders
= 50 ft
= 4
= 10 mnh
= 2
Hourly EF = 5.9 (0.36)(10/12,(10/30)(4/4,°-5(24/3
= 2.529 Ibs/VMT
,*, . u
Weight loaded
We.ght empty
Average weight
No. of trips
= 28 tons
= 20 tons
= 24 tons
= 20 trips/hr
Annual EF
mi./triPK20 trips/hr)(2 FELs,
^
3. Dump Trucks: Unpaved roads.
Total trip distance
No. of wheels
Truck speed
No. of trucks
= 0.5 mile
= 6
=10mDh
= 2
hrs/yr,(2 FELs,/(2,000 ,bs/ton,
u, • u
6'9ht loaded
We.ght empty
Average weight
No. of trips
= 46 tons
= 20 tons
= 33 tons
= 2 trips/hr
Annue, EF .
Wucks,/(2.000
72
-------
4 Haul Trucks: Unpaved roads.
Total trip distance
No. of wheels
Truck speed
No. of trucks
,
= 0.8 mile
=18
= 15 mph
= 5
weight loaded
Weight empty
Average weight
No. of trips
= 46 tons
= 20 tons
= 33 tons
= 1 tnp/hr
= 40.232 Ibs/hr
E
A
= 39.406 tons/yr
CRUSHING AND SCREENING EMISSIONS
Hourly
Annual
Hourly
Annual
EH = [(1-EFF/100)]n (0.12 Ibs/ton) (MHPR)
i KALI am i A<^ / (2 000
EA = H1-EFF/100)]n (0.12 Ibs/ton) (MHPR) (AS) ,
EH =[n-EFF/100)]n (0.017 Ibs/ton) (MHPR)
_ pfficiency of control method, percent
I hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
"
AS - annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
, «• -Onrv EFF = 0 percent for all controls
Control efficiency, ti-r " H
-
1. Grizzly: 800 tons/hr.
F - (0 1 2 lbs/ton)(800 tons'/hr)
E
Hourly
= Q00 ,bs/hr
73
-------
Annual
EA =
2. Primary Crusher: 400 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.017 lbs/ton){400 tons/hr)
= 6.800 Ibs/hr
3. Primary Screen No. 1: 750 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.12 Ibs/ton) (750 tons/hr)
= 90.000 Ibs/hr
4. Primary Screen No. 2: 250 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.12 Ibs/ton) (250 tons/hr)
= 30.000 Ibs/hr
5. Secondary Crusher No. 1: 210 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.01 7 lbs/ton)(210 tons/hr)
= 3.570 Ibs/hr
6. Secondary Crusher No. 2: 136 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.01 7 lbs/ton)(1 36 tons/hr)
= 2.31 2 Ibs/hr
hrs/yr,/,2,000 ,bs/ton,
nrs/yr,/(2,000 Ibs/ton,
nrs/yr)/(2,000 .bs/ton,
l»*Vrl«2.000 lbs/,on,
"r./yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
t0nS/hr)(2'20° hrs/yr,/(2,000 Ibs/ton,
7. Secondary Screen No. 1: 500 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (0.12 Ibs/ton) (500 tons/hr)
= 60.000 Ibs/hr
EA = (0.1
= 66.000 tons/yr
hrs/yr,/(2,000 Ibs/ton,
74
-------
8. Secondary Screen No. 2: 200 tons/hr.
, p = (0.1 2 Ibs/ton) {200 tons/hr)
Hourly EH = ^QQQ |bs/hr
E _(o12,bs/ton)(200tons/hr)(2,200hrs/yr)/(2,000,bs/ton)
Annual ^ = 26.400 tons/yr
9. Secondary Screen No. 3: 100 tons/hr.
F - (0 12 Ibs/ton) (100 tons/hr)
Hourly EH - ^ QQQ
- (0 12 ,bs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/<2,000 ,bs/ton)
E
Annual A = 13.200 tons/yr
10. Secondary Screen No. 4: 200 tons/hr.
F - (0 12 Ibs/ton) {200 tons/hr)
Hourly EH ; ^ Q00 ,bs/nr
E - (0 1 2 ,bs/ton)(200 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Annual ^ = 26.400 tons/yr
11. Secondary Screen No. 5: 100 tons/hr.
F - (0 12 Ibs/ton) (100 tons/hr)
Hourly EH - ^^Q Ib8/hr -
E - (0 12 ,bs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Annual EA = ^ 3 2QO tons/yr
12. Tertiary Screen No. 1: 150 tons/hr.
F = (0.1 2 Ibs/ton) (150 tons/hr)
Hourly EH = \Ug Q00 ,bs/hr
E - (0 1 2 ,bs/ton)(1 50 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Annual tA = ^ g 8QO tons/yr
MATERIAL HANDLING EMISSIONS
EF , 0.0032 (k>t(U/5)"/(M;2)'4)
Hourly E. - '"I
-------
u
M
EH
N
EFF
MHPR
EA
AS
- average wind speed, mph
= material moisture content, percent
- hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
- number of material transfer points
- efficiency of control method, percent
- maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
- annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
- annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
The emissions of PM-10 from each transfer point were
Average wind speed, U
Material moisture content, M
Efficiency of control, EFF
Annual operating schedule, AS
= 6.4 miles/hour
= 4.0 percent (quarry aggregate)
- 20.0 percent (wet material)
= 0 percent for all controls
'= 2,200 hrs/yr
*» "— *—
operatino schedul.
QUARRY PTT
Quany aggrega«e has a moisture content of about 4 percent, therefore the emission factor is:
EF = 0.0032 (
= 5.850x1 0-4lbs/ton-transfer point
1-2. FEL to grizzly feed hopper to grizzly: 800 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (2)(5.85x10-4lbs/ton)(800 tons/hr)
= 0.936 Ibs/hr
nrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton,
3.
Grizzly to pit collection conveyor: 560 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (D(5.85x10-4lbs/ton)(560 tons/hr)
= 0.328 Ibs/hr
,ons/hrl(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,ooo lbs/ton)
4-5. Grizzly to jaw crusher to collection conveyor: 240 tons/hr.
Hourly
EH = (2X5.85x10-4lbs/ton)(240 tons/hr)
= 0.281 Ibs/hr
tons/hr)(2,200
76
-------
6-13. Pit collection conveyor to seven pit conveyors: 800 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (7)(5.85x10'4 Ibs/ton)(800 tons/hr)
= 3.276 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (7H5.85X10-4 lbs/ton)(800 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 3.604 tons/yr
14. Radial stacker conveyor to surge pile: 800 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(5.85x1Q-4 lbs/ton)(800 tons/hr)
= 0.468 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1H5.85X10-4 ,bs/ton)(800 tons/hr)<2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 ,bs/ton)
= 0.515 tons/yr
MAIN PLANT , Uh water which increases the
EF = 0.0032 (O..
= 4. 280x1 0'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
1-2. Syntron to Conveyor No. 1 to Primary Screen No. 1: 750 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x10'4 lbs/ton)(750 tons/hr)
= 0.642 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ,2)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(750 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.706 tons/yr
3-4. Primary Screen No. 1 to Conveyor No. 6 to Secondary Screen No. 1: 500 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x10'4 lbs/ton)(500 tons/hr)
= 0.428 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (2)(4.28x10-< lbs/ton)(500 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.471 tons/yr
The emission factor for the aggregate mat is washed ta the secondary screens is based on a
moisture content of 20 percent.
EF = 0.0032 (0.35)[(6.4/5)1-3/(20/2)1'4]
= 6.1 46x1 0'5 Ibs/ton-transfer point
5. Sec. Screen No. 1 to Sec. Screen No. 2: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(6. 146x1 0'5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.012 Ibs/hr
77
-------
Annual
6. Sec. Screen No
Hourly EH
Annual
7. Sec. Screen No
Hourly EH
Annual EA
8. Sec. Screen No
Hourly EH
= (1)(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr) (2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.014 tons/yr
1 to Sec. Screen No. 3: 300 tons/hr.
= (1 1(6.146x1 0'5 Ibs/ton) (300 tons/hr)
= 0.018 Ibs/hr
= (1)(6.146x10-5 Ibs/ton) (300 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/{2,000 Ibs/ton)
= O.O20 tons/yr
2 to Sand Classifier: 200 tons/hr.
= (1)(6.146x10- lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.012 Ibs/hr
= (1)(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.014 tons/yr
. 2 to Bunker: 100 tons/hr.
= (1)(6.146x10'5 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)
= 6. 146x10'3 Ibs/hr
Annual
E =
9. Sec. Screen No.
Hourly EH
Annual
E =
n>(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
6. 761 x10'3 tons/yr
3 to Sand Classifier: 200 tons/hr.
(1)(6. 146x1 0'5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
0.012 Ibs/hr
(1)(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr}(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
0.014 tons/yr
10. Sec. Screen No.
Hourly EH
Annual
E =
3 to Bunker: 100 tons/hr.
(1)(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)
6.1 46x1 0'3 Ibs/hr
(1)(6 146x10- lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr) (2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
b. 76 1x1 0'J tons/yr
C°nvey0r to
No. 8 to the Sand Pile: 200
Hourly
Annual
EH = (3){6. 146x1 0'5 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.037 Ibs/hr
EA = (3)(6.146x10-5 lbs/ton){200 tons/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.041 tons/yr
78
-------
" "
EF = 0.0032 (Q.3S)[(6.W'3I(WA]
_ 4 280x10'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
14-15. Primary Screen No. 1 to Conveyor No. 4 to Feed Silo No. 1:150 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x10'4 lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)
= 0.128 Ibs/hr
Annua. EA = (2)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.141 tons/yr
16.19 Feed SUo No. ! to Conveyor No. 4A to Se, Crusher No. ! to Conveyor No. 2 to
Conveyor No. 3: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = {4)(4.28x1Q-4 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.342 Ibs/hr
Annua, E. , (4,,1-0.8,(4.28x10-',bs,,on,(200 ,ons/hr,(2,200 hrs,yr,/(2,000 ,bs,ton,
= 0.377 tons/yr
20. Conveyor No. 2 to Conveyor No. 1: 100 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)
= 0.043 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ,1)(4.28x10-4 ,bs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.047 tons/yr
21. Conveyor No. 3 to Primary Screen No. 2: 250 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(250 tons/hr)
= 0.107 Ibs/hr
Annua, E. - (1)14.28x10- lbs«on,(250 «ons,hr,(2,200 hrrtrtrt2.000 ,bs/,on)
= 0.118 tons/yr
Hourly EH = (5)(4.28x1CT» lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)
= 0.321 Ibs/hr
Annual EA ,(5,(4.28x10Mbs/,onH150tonS/hm2,200hrs,vr,/(2,000,bS/,c,n,
= 0.353 tons/yr
^ vr« 7 tn <5pr Screen No. 4: 200 tons/hr.
27-28. Primary Screen No. 2 to Conveyor No. 7 to Sec. Screen «
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x1Q-4 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.171 Ibs/hr
79
-------
Annual
EA = <2><4 28x10* lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
— u. loo tons/yr
29. Sec. Screen No. 4 to Bunker: 100 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (1){4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(1 00 tons/hr)
= 0.043 Ibs/hr
E =
Ibs/ton) (100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/<2,000 Ibs/ton)
30. Sec. Screen No. 4 to Sec. Screen No. 5: 100 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(1 00 tons/hr)
= 0.043 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1)(4.28x10- lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= U.U47 tons/yr
31-33. Bunkers to Conveyor No. 9 to Conveyor No. 13 to Square Bunker: 150 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (3) (4. 28x1 0'4 Ibs/ton) (150 tons/hr)
= 0.193 Ibs/hr
Annual EA =
Ibs/ton) (1 50 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
34. Conveyor No. 9 to Conveyor No. 12: 150 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(4. 28x1 0'4 lbs/ton)(1 50 tons/hr)
= 0.064 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = MM4.28x10^ lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= u.o/1 tons/yr
35. Conveyor No. 12 to 1-inch pile: 150 tons/hr.
Hourly £H = (1)(4.28x1Q-4 lbs/ton)(1 50 tons/hr)
= 0.064 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = n)(4.28xia* lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
— u.u/l tons/yr
36. Conveyor No. 9 to Conveyor No. 11: 150 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1 ) (4.28x1 0'4 Ibs/ton) (1 50 tons/hr)
= 0.064 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1)(4 28x10- lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= U.O/1 tons/yr
80
-------
37.
Conveyor No. 11 to base pile: 150 tons/hr.
Hourly
EH = (1)(4.28x10^ Ibs7ton)(1 50 tons/hr)
= 0.064 Ibs/hr
,
Annual
E - (1)(4 28x10- lbs/ton)(150 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
CA ~~ I'M-"--"-
= 0.071 tons/yr
38.
Conveyor No. 9 to Tertiary Screen No. 1:150 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(4.28x1Q4 lbs/ton)(1 50 tons/hr)
Annu,,
_ 0.064 Ibs/hr
- HH4.28.10- ,bs,,°nm50
-------
1. Quarry Stockpiles and Work Areas: 4.2 total acres.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(4.2 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.551 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ^^^1(4.2 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr}/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Inactive: Hourly EH = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(4.2 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.149 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ^5">£^V>W.2 acres)(0.5)(365 dayS/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
2. Main Plant Surge Pile: 0.12 total acres.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.12 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.016 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = JJ^^^ay}(0.12 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Inactive: Hourly EH = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(0.12 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.004 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ^^^-^(0.12 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
3. Finished Sand Pile: 0.08 total acres.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.011 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = 1*™££*«Y)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2/000 Ibs/ton)
Inactive: Hourly EH = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.003 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1.7 ^^VJW.OB acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
4. Base Pile: 0.08 total acres.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 Ib/acre-day)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.011 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = ^b/Wd-y)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Inactive: Hourly EH =(1.7 lb/acre-day)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.003 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (i 7 lb/acre-day)(0.08 acres)(0.5)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= U.O12 tons/yr
82
-------
5. Gravel Piles: 1.84 total acres.
Active: Hourly
Annual
Inactive: Hourly
Annual
EH = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(1.84 acres)(0.5)(day/24 hrs)
= 0 242 Ibs/hr
E. . ,6.3 ,b,acre-dav,(1.84 ac,es,,0.5,,366 davs/vr,/(2,000
= 1.058 tons/yr
EH = n.7lb/acre-day)(1.84acres)(0.5)(day/24hrs)
= 0 065 Ibs/hr
EA . ,1.7 l.,/ac,e-day,n.84 acresHO.5,,365 days,y,>«2.000 Ibsfton,
= 0.285 tons/yr
6. Miscellaneous Work Piles: 5.0 total acres.
Active: Hourly
: = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(5 acres)(day/24 hrs)
'H -' Ibs/hr
Annual
Inactive: Hourly
Annual
,._ _..,,- \c3RK riav/s/vrmz.vuu Ibs/ton)
£ = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(5
= 2.874 tons/yr '
EH = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(2.5 acres)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.177 Ibs/hr
» (1.7 lb/acre-day)(2.5 acres)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 .bs/ton)
i tons/yr
83
-------
-------
VT B BAKERSFIELD PLANT
VLB- vehicle traffic and material
-
VEHICLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
the equation given in Section ll.-i.o
EF = 3.5 (k) (sL/0.35)0'3
Hourly EH = H-lEFF/100)] (EF) (V) (M) (T)
where:
EL I hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
cnc efficiency of control, percent
A| = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
t d bv vehicle traffic »ere ca,cu.ated b^ed on the following parameters:
The emissions generated by vehicle tram
Note- The silt loading was obtained
from CAL-MAT.
1. Aggregate Haul Trucks: Paved roads.
Total trip distance = 600 ft
No. of trips = 1 tr.p/hr
No. of trucks = 5
EF = 3.5(0.22)(11/0.35)°'3
= 2.166lbs/VMT
ft f\ o *i |hs/hr
~ • ft, M9 900 hr/vr){5 trucks)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
._ 1 -3KA tnns/vr
= 1.354 tons/yr
84
-------
2. Cement Haul Trucks: Paved roads.
Total trip distance = 600 ft
No. of trips = 1 trip/hr
No. of Trucks = 1
EF = 3.5 (0.22K11/0.35)0-3
= 2.166 Ibs/VMT
Hour,y • EH .
Annua, EA .
, ^^(600/5,280, m,/trip](1 trip/hr,n truck,
mi,/t,p](1
3. Innovator Cement Trucks: Paved roads.
Total trip distance = 200 ft
No. of trips = 2trips/hr
No. of trucks =3
= 3.5 (0.22)(11/0.35)°-3
= 2.166 IbsA/MT
Hour,y EH .
Annua,
4. Regular Cement Trucks: Paved roads.
Total distance = 200 ft
No. of trips = 2trips/hr
No. of trucks = 12
EF = 3.5 (0.22)(11/0.35)°-3
= 2.166 Ibs/VMT
trip/hrt(2,200 hr/yr)(8
,,s/VMT)I(2oo/5,2ao, mi./tripII2 trips/hr)(12 trucks)
Annu,
5. Front-End Loader: Paved work areas.
Total distance = 0.5 mile
No. of trips = 2 trips/hr
No. of FELs = 1
EF = 3.5 (0.22)(11/0.35}°-3
= 2. 166 Ibs/VMT
85
-------
— "2 h"vml FEU"2'000 lbs'tonl
2.383 tons/yr
HANDLING EMISSIONS
» 0.0032 (k) UU/5)'-3 /
-------
Annua,
2. Grizzly grate system to tunnel conveyor: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = n)(4.28x10" lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.086 fbs/hr
Annua, EA .
t0ns/hr,(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 lbs/ton)
3. Tunnel conveyor to aggregate bin feed conveyor: 200 tons/hr
Hourly EH - (1J(4.28x1O*lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.086 Ibs/hr
Annua, EA .
tons/hrH2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/top)
4. Bin feed conveyor to aggregate bins: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (D(4.28x10-lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.086 Ibs/hr
tons/hr)(2,200
Hourly
btos to weish
«„
EII , (21(4.28x10- lbs/tor,}(160 tons/hr|
= O.I 37 Ibs/hr
tons/hr)(2,200
weigh hopper: 160
Hourly
Annual
0.0032 (0.35)[(6.4/5)1-3/(2/2)'--']
1.544x10'3 Ibs/ton-transfer point
EH .
EA .
,3,,,^^.,
moisture. The
«. mixer
. 87
-------
The next two transfer points handle the aggregate that is delivered to the ready-mix plant. The
emission factor for handling this material is:
EF = 0.0032 (0,35)[(6.4/5)1'3/(5/2)1-4]
= 4.280x1 0'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
10. Aggregate weigh hopper to mixer charge (feed) conveyor: 160 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1K4.28X10-4 lbs/ton)(160 tons/hr)
= 0.068 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = <1)<4.28x1O* lbs/ton)(160 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.075 tons/yr
11. Mixer charge conveyor to cement mixer: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1){4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.086 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (11(4.28x10* lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.094 tons/yr
The !ast transfer point handles the concrete, which has a moisture content of approximately 20
percent. The emission factor for the concrete is:
EF = 0.0032 (0.35)[(6.4/5)1-3/(20/2)1'4]
= 6. 146x1 0'5 Ibs/ton-transfer point
12. Cement mixer to loadout chute: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1)(6.146x10-6 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
.= 0.309 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1)(6.146x10- .bs/ton)(200 tons/hr) (2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.340 tons/yr
AGGREGATE STOCKPILE EMISSIONS
Active- Hourly EH - [1-IEFF/100)] (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (day/24 hrs)
Annual EA - I1-
-------
EFF = efficiency of control method, percent
TASA = total active stockpile area, 50 percent of total area, acres
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
TISA = total inactive stockpile area, 50 percent of total area, acres
The emissions were calculated assuming an active area equal to 50 percent of the total area and
continuous erosion (24 hours per day, 365 days per year).
1. Aggregate Stockpiles (for entire Panama Lane site): 3.3 acres total area.
Active: Hourly EH = (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(3.3 acres)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.433 Ibs/hr
Annual
Inactive: Hourly
EA - (6.3 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(3.3 acres){365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 1.897 tons/yr
EH = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(3.3 acres)(day/24 hrs)
= 0.117 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = (1.7 lb/acre-day)(0.5)(3.3 acres)(365 days/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.512 tons/yr
CONTROL DEVICE EMISSIONS
The uncontrolled emissions from some of the point sources at the plant, such as the cement silos
have ZCheee T^' are,f oCUlt l° qUantify b£CaUSe rdiable -ission factors and/or™qu t on
SThSS.! 'V!10ped ' A^ Pr°ViSi0nS f°r deVd°ping HCCeptable factors or e^^tiL wa
of reasoning. ^ Pr°JeCt' *" emiSSi°nS Were estimated usinS the following *
arel?ica11? controlled ^ «mttol devices, such as baghouses,
^--
The emissions
that have ve
calculated from outlet grain loading
basically converts the baghouse's outlet grain loading, ii
:, to an emissions rate, in pounds per hour.
Hourly CEH = FR (60 min/hour) [(460 + 68)°R]/[(460+ T)°R] [1-(MC/100)J (GL) (lb/7,000 gr)
Annual CEA = (EH) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
where: CEH = controlled hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
FR = air flowrate through control device, actual cubic feet per minute (acfm)
i - temperature of air going through control device, °F
MC = moisture content of air going through control device, percent
rpL - outlet gram loading of control device, grains per dry standard cubic feet (gr/dscf)
CEA = controlled annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr IU-/USCTJ
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
At the time of writing.
89
-------
UE = (CE) / (1-(EFF/100)1
i IF - uncontrolled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
Where>- « = comrolled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
EFF = efficiency of control, percent
AUhough the method deserved tso
emission rate for an otherwise unquantifiab le sourc «•£« r which is protably
-i ' «*•
Xne point sources ,Kat are
ige daytime temperature of 80C
usedT^me"calculation of the controlled emissions.
1. Cement Mixer Baghouse.
r t ,|pd CE = (3,600 ft3/min)(60min/hour)(528/540)(1-0.05)(0.01
Uontroiiea H = Q ^ ^^
CEA = (0.287 lbs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.315 tons/yr
Uncontrolled UEH = (0.287 lbs/hr)/[1 -(96/100)]
= 7.175 Ibs/hr
UEA = {0.315 tons/yr)/[1-196/100)]
= 7.875 tons/yr
2 Three Elevated Cement Silo Baghouses.
' „ H CE - d 800 ft3/min)(60 min/hour)(528/540)(1-0.02)(0.039 Br/H-,(.b/7.000 flr)
Controlled CEH - H;8O ^^
CEA = (0.577 lbs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.635 tons/yr
Uncontrolled UEH = (0.577 .bs/hr)/[1 -(96/100)1
= 14.425 Ibs/hr
UEA = (0.635 tons/yr)/[1 -(96/100)1
= 15.875 tons/yr
90
-------
Controlled
CEH = (1,
min/hOUr)(528/540)(1-°-02)<0.039gr/ft3)(lb/7,OOOgr)
CEA = (0.577 Ibs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.635 tons/yr
Uncontrolled UEH =
(0.577 lbs/hr)/[1 -(96/100)]
14.425 Ibs/hr
(0.635 tons/yr)/[1-(96/100)]
15.875 tons/yr
Controlled
CEH = (1,
min/h°ur)(528/540><1-0.02)(0.043 gr/ft'Hlb/7,000 gr)
CEA = (0.565 Ibs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.622 tons/yr
Uncontrolled UEH =
(0.565 lbs/hr)/[1-(96/100)]
14.125 Ibs/hr
(0.622 tons/yr)/[1-(96/100)]
15.550 tons/yr
3. Ground-level Cement Silo Baghouse.
Controlled
CEH =
min/hour)(528/540)(1-0.02)(0.043 gr/ft-)(.b/7,000 gr)
CEA = (0.565 lbs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 0.622 tons/yr
Uncontrolled UEU =
UEA =
(0.565 lbs/hr)/[1-(96/100)]
14.125 Ibs/hr
(0.622 tons/yr)/[1-(96/100)]
15.550 tons/yr
91
-------
VIC PORTABLE PLANT
The a, co— s (TSP
two types of processes: vehicle traffic and matenal
^^ ^ ^ ready.mlx
VEHICLE TRAFFIC EMISSIONS
Hourly
Annual
EF
EH
EA
si
E
EFF
EFV
M-
T
E
AS
3.5 (k) (sL/0.35)0'3
[1-(EFF/100)1 (EF) (V) (M) (T)
H-lEFF/100)] (EF) (V) (M) (T) (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
20, di.ension.ess
road surface silt loading, oz/yd •
hourly emission rate of PM-10,lbs/hr
efficiency of control method, percent
S number of vehic.es trave.ing on road
total distance each vehicie trave to , mi. np
total number of trips per hour (tnps/hr)
annual emission rate of PM-10 tons/yr
annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
located at the Panama Lane site.
MATERIAL HANDLING EMISSIONS
Fugitive .
empirical equations given in Section 11.2.
EF = 0.0032 (k) [(U/5)1'3 / (M/2)1'4]
Hourly
Annual
EH = (N) (EF) [1-(EFF/100)1 (MHPR)
EA = (N) (EF) t1-(EFF/100)] (MHPR) (AS) / (2,000 lb.Aton)
3B for PM-10, dimension.ess
92
-------
N = number of drop points
U = average wind speed, mph
M = material moisture content, percent
EH = hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
EFF = efficiency of control method, percent
MHPR = maximum hourly processing rate, tons/hr
EA = annual emission rate of PM-10, tons/yr
AS = annual operating schedule, tons/yr
The following parameters were used to calculate emissions from the material transfer points:
Average wind speed, U = 6.4 miles/hour
Material moisture content, M = 2 percent (cement)
= 5 percent (quarry aggregate)
t-ff. . =10 percent (mixed material)
Ann, J nCV C°ntr01' EFF = 7°-80 percent for w^er sprays
Annual operating schedule, AS = 2,200 hrs/yr
Note: The silt loading was obtained from Table 1126-1 of AP 42 anH
from CAL-MAT. The contro, efficiencies were^afn^m
EF = 0.0032 (0.35)1(6
= 4.280x1 0'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
1-2. Haul trucks to unloading hopper to radial stacker: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x1Q-4 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.171 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = <2><4.28x1O« ,bs/ton)(200 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr,/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
— u. i oo tons/yr
3. Radial stacker to stockpiles: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (1 )(4.28x1 0* lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.086 Ibs/hr
Annual EA = n , „« ^ ,bs/ton,(200 tonS/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(2,000 .bs/ton)
4-5. FEL to aggregate bin feed conveyor to aggregate bins: 200 tons/hr.
Hourly EH = (2)(4.28x1O4 lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)
= 0.171 Ibs/hr
Annual EA =
* lbs/ton)(200 tons/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 .bs/ton)
93
-------
„ Aggregau bins to Weigh hopper feeo condor to aggregate Weig» hopper: XOO
tons/hr.
P - <2)(4 28x1 0-4 lbs/ton)(1 00 tons/hr)
Urn tnv tw — \^.M^'*-
Hourly H |bs/hr
^- ***"•• ' The
emission factor for the cement is therefore.
EF = 0 0032 (O..
= 1 544x1 0'3 Ibs/ton-transfer point
= 1 544x ' s-
conveyor: 20 tons/hr.
= 0102tons/yr
= 0 0032 (..
= 4 280x1 0'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
EF = 0 0032 (0.35m.W'SlWA]
= 4.28x1 0'4 Ibs/ton-transfer point
Hourly EH = D^SxIO"4 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)
Houny
;u wo onn hrs/vr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
Annual EA = (1)(4.28x10-4 lbs/ton)(100 tons/hr)(2,200 hrs/yr)/(
= 0.047 tons/yr
a«^^
approximated using percentages as a follows:
MC = (6)I100/(100 + 20)1 + (2)[20/(100 + 20)1
= 4.5 percent
94
-------
EF = 0.0032 ((
= 4.961x10'4 Ibs/ton-transfer' point
12-13. Truck charge conveyor to loadout chute to trucks: 120 tons/hr.
Hourly
Annual
EH = (2)(4.961 x10-4 lbs/ton)(120 tons/hr)
= 0.119 Ibs/hr
EA =
hr/yr,/(2,000 ,bs/ton,
AGGREGATE STOCKPILE EMISSIONS
Active:
Inactive:
Hourly
Annual
Hourly
Annual
where:
EH
EA
EH
EA
EH
EFF
TASA
TISA
nTl9TrSaTa^era88rfS'e St°CkpiIeS WCre cateula*0 ***
n s.iy.i (band and Gravel Processing) of AP-42.
= [1-(EFF/100,] (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (day/24 hrs)
= I1-(EFF/100)] (6.3 Ib/acre-day) (TASA) (365 days/yr, / (2,000 Ibs/ton)
= [1-(EFF/100,] (1.7 Ib/acre-day) (TISA) (day/24 hrs,
= IHEFF/IOO)] (1.7 Ib/acre-day, (TISA) (365 days/yr, / (2,000 Ibs/ton,
= hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
= efficiency of control method, percent
- total active stockpile area, 50 percent of total area, acres
= annual emiss.on rate of PM-10, tons/yr
- total inactive stockpile area, 50 percent of total area, acres
permanent and portable plants, therefore
(see Section III.B. of this report).
CONTROL DEVICE EMISSIONS
emiss,ions from sources
emissions were estimated using mfoUo % ^~' *' **
cubic feet, to an emissions rate, in ™***' m grains Per ^ standard
Hourly CEH = FR (60 min/hour, [(460 + 68)°R]/f(460+ T)°R] [1
Annual CEA = (EH> (AS) / (2,000 Ibs/ton,
where: CEH = controlled hourly emission rate of PM-10, Ibs/hr
95
-------
FR . a,r fiowrate through con.ro, device, actual cubic ,eet per minute .acfm,
FT = temperature of air going ^B^^^ice, percent
^SSsSSssK"-"--'
^*CA . J.:_« o^harllllfi. hfS/Vr
AS = annual operating schedule, hrs/yr
UE = (CE)/(1-(EFF/100)]
UE = uncontrolled emissic
CE = controlled emission
EFF = efficiency of control, percent
, ,F - uncontrolled emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
Where: S I T^oL emission rate, Ibs/hr or tons/yr
The — froffi
efficiency of 96 percent. A smgle ba^ouse ^rf to
silos and from the aggregate/cement wegh tapper and silos was esnmated a, 2
controlled emissions.
t Silo Baghouse.
,^(,,7,000 9r)
1 Elevated Cement Silo Baghouse.
d CE _ (
Controlled CEH -
Annual CEA - (0-577 ,bs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 ,bs/ton)
= 0.635 tons/yr
+ iiori UE = (0.577 lbs/hr)/H-(96/100)1
Uncontrolled UEH = ^ 425 ,bs/hr
UE = (0.635 tons/yr)/H-(96/100)]
A = 15.875 tons/yr
Aggregate/Cement Weigh Hopper Baghouse.
An™,. CE. - (0
= 0.066 tons/yr
= 0.060 Ibs/hr
= (0.060 lbs/hr)(2,200 hr/yr)/(2,000 Ibs/ton)
= 1.500 Ibs/hr
96
-------
UEA = (0.066 tons/yr)/[1-(96/100)]
= 1.650 tons/yr
3. Two Fruehauf Cement Storage Silo Baghouses.
Hour,y CEH . (1
min/hour,(528/540)(1-0.02)(0.039
Annual CEA =
-------
APPENDIX B
VENDOR AND COST INFORMATION
98
-------
-------
VILA. ROAD CONTROLS
1. Chemical Suppressants
KPN International Inc.
887 Main Street
Monroe, CT 06468
(203) 459-0433
Fax: (203) 459-0434
Lignotech
100 Highway 51
Rothchild, WI 54474-1198
(713) 359-6544
Midwest Industrial Supply Company
P O. Box 8431
Canton, OH 44711
1-800-321-0699 or (216) 456-3121
Fax: (216) 456-3247
3M Company
Environmental Protection Products
3M Center Building , 223-6S-04
St. Paul, MN 55144-1000
(612) 733-4931
Fax: (612) 733-6791
2. ravins - Chec* the .oca, yeUow pages under PAVING for a —or located in your area.
Able Blacktop Co. - Asphalt, Base, Concrete
Houston, TX
(713)461-1919
Ace Asphalt Contracting and Paving
P.O. Box 82
Austin, TX 78767
(512) 892-0250
(512) 288-6666
Allied Asphalt Services
Dallas, TX
(817) 572-4130
99
-------
Asphalt Incorporated
P.O. Box 951
Round Rock, TX 78680
(512) 251-3741
Pavemaster Asphalt
107 High Gabriel Drive
Austin, TX 78641
(512) 259-5558
Professional Interstate Paving Co
Houston, TX
(713) 941-6028
3. Asphalt Emulsions
Gulf States Asphalt Co., Inc.
Houston, TX
(713) 947-4900
(713) 941-4410
Murphey Asphalt Corporation
Houston, TX
(713) 691-4291
Wright Asphalt Products
Houston, TX
(713) 452-9084
100
-------
VII.B. TRANSFER POINT CONTROLS
1. Chemical Suppressants
Martin Marietta Magnesia Specialties, Inc
Executive Plaza II
Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030
1-800-648-7400 or (410) 527-3700
Fax: (410) 527-3861
2. Water Sprays
The Raring Corporation
Contact: David Raring
11800 NE 95th Street
Vancouver, WA 98682
(206) 892-1659
Fax: (206) 892-1624
Spray Systems
N. Avenue @ Schmale Road
P O. Box 7900
Wheaton, IL 60189-7900
(708) 665-5000
Fax: (708) 260-9727
101
-------
-------
VII.C. PROCESS UNIT CONTROLS
1. Conveyors
Continental Conveyor and Equipment Company
P.O. Box 400
Winfield, AL 35594
(205) 487-6492
Fax: (205) 487-4233
Dover Conveyor and Equipment Co., Inc
Contact: Robert D.Wilsterman
Box 300 Midvale, OH 44653
(614) 922-9390
Fax: (614) 922-9391
Interlate Conveyor Systems
550 Warrenville Road
Lisle, IL 60532
1-800-468-3752
Michigan Aggregate Machinery
P.O. Box 838
Northville, MI 48167
(313) 349-8887
Fax: (313)349-6091
2. Crushers
Aliss Mineral Systems
Appleton, WI
54913-2219
(414) 734-9831
Fax: (414) 734-9756
Deister Machine Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 5188
Fort Wayne, IN 46895
(219) 426-7495
Fax: (219)422-1523
Hewitt-Robins
Crushing & Vibrating Equipment
P.O. Box 23227
Columbia, SC 29224-3227
(803) 788-1424
Fax: (803) 736-3634
102
Fax: (502) 637-03TO
American Air Filter/Enviro-Tech
P.O. Box 160337
San Antonio,TX 78280
(512) 340-2533
104
-------
Michigan Aggregate Machinery
P.O. Box 838
Northville, MI 48167
(313) 349-8887
Fax: (313) 349-6091
------- |