E?/l-6QO/2-76-032a
February 1978 Environmental Protection Technology Series
SOURCE ASSESSMENT:
£
PRIORITIZATJON OF STATIONARY
AIR POLLUTION SOURCES-
MODEL DESCRIPTION
—••---•
industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Besearsh Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
EPA-600/2-76-032a
February 1976
SOURCE ASSESSMENT:
PRIORITIZATION OF STATIONARY
AIR POLLUTION SOURCES—MODEL DESCRIPTION
by
Edward C. Elmutis
Monsanto Research Corporation
1515 Nicholas Road
Dayton, Ohio 45407
Contract No. 68-02-1874
ROAP No. 21AVA-003
Program Element No. 1AB015
EPA Project Officer: Dale A. Denny
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
PREFACE
The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory (IERL) of
EPA has the responsibility for insuring that air pollution
control technology is available for stationary sources.
If control technology is unavailable, inadequate, uneconomical
or socially unacceptable, then development of the needed
control techniques is conducted by IERL. Approaches
considered include process modifications, feedstock modifi-
cations, add-on control devices, and complete process
substitution. The scale of control technology programs
range from bench to full scale demonstration plants.
The Chemical Processes Branch of IERL has the responsibility
for developing control technology for a large number (>500)
of operations in the chemical and related industries. As
in any technical program the first step is to identify the
unsolved problems.
Each of the industries is to be examined in detail to
determine if there is sufficient potential environmental
risk to justify the development of control technology by
IERL. As a first step, Monsanto Research Corporation (MRC)
has developed a priority listing of the industries in each
of four categories: combustion, organic materials, inor-
ganic materials, and open sources. The purpose and intended
use of this listing is that it serve as one of several
guides to the selection of those sources for which MRC will
111
-------
perform detailed source assessments. Source assessment
documents will be produced by MRC and used by EPA to make
decisions regarding the need for developing additional control
technology for each specific source.
Prioritization listings were developed to aid in the selection
of specific sources of air emissions for detailed assessment.
This report describes the general prioritization model, the
manner and form of its implementation, and detailed examples
of use.
This prioritization work was initiated under Task XIV,
Development of Source Assessment Documents, of Contract
68-02-1320, Quick Reaction Engineering and Technical Services
(Multiple Option Services Contract); it was continued and
completed under Contract 68-02-1874, Source Assessment.
IV
-------
CONTENTS -
Section Page
I Introduction 1
II Model Development and General Structure 3
A. Mathematical Structure 6
B. Assumptions and Limitations 10
C. Application of the Model 13
1. Derivation of the Ground Level 13
Concentration
2. Data Availability and Computational 15
Form
a. Population Sensitive Calculations 16
b. Location Sensitive Calculations 17
c. Detailed Input Calculations 18
d. Open Source Calculations 18
3. Uncertainty Levels 19
4. Prioritization Sensitivity Analyses 20
5. Priority Listings of the Four 23
Categories: Combustion, Inorganic
Materials, Organic Materials, and
Open Sources
III Appendixes - Detailed Examples Using 35
Prioritization Model
A. Use of Model with Common Inputs 36
B. Example of Population Sensitive Calculation 40
C. Location Sensitive Calculation 50
D. Example of Detailed Calculation 58
E. Example of Open Sources Calculation 67
IV References 75
-------
TABLES
Table
1
2
3
4
5
Effect of Changes in Input Variables
on Impact Factor
Prioritization Listing - Combustion
Sources
Prioritization Listing - Inorganic
Sources
Prioritization Listing - Organic Sources
Prioritization Listing - Open Sources
Page
21
24
25
27
32
Figure
1
FIGURES
Acrylonitrile Impact Factor vs. TLV
(Organics)
Page
22
VI
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
This report provides: a general description of the priori-
tization model and the various factors that it can incor-
porate; a description of the actual application of the model;
a description of the types of calculations that were per-
formed depending upon the degree of input aggregation; the
results of sensitivity analyses to show how the prioritization
model responds to changes in input; and, detailed examples
of use of the model.
The relative rank ordering or prioritization of source types
was accomplished by computing a relative environmental
impact factor for each source type. A source type is
defined as an operation, process, combustion method, or
industry that emits common species and has similar emission
factors for those species. For example, acrylonitrile
manufacturing, coal-fired utility boilers, glass manufacturing,
beef cattle feed lots, and open mining of coal represent five
different source types. To date, over 600 source types have
been identified.
In its implemented form, the prioritization model has taken
several aspects. Because of a time constraint and due to
the size of the data base, it was necessary in many cases
to aggregate the input data. Regardless of the degree of
data aggregation, the basic form of the prioritization
1
-------
model was identical in all cases; only the level of detail
in the input was altered.
This model does not attempt, in any fashion, to relate
industrial emissions to their effect on public health.
Based upon a set of common assumptions, which are clearly
identified, the model provides a relative rank ordering
(within the framework of these assumptions) of stationary
sources of air pollution. A priority listing was developed
for each of four categories: combustion, organic materials,
inorganic materials, and open sources. Four priority
listings were produced since all of the source types could
not be grouped into one category. Differences in the nature
of the emissions which result from broad dissimilarities in
fuel consumption patterns and/or types of products manufactured
precluded this.
-------
SECTION II
MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND GENERAL STRUCTURE
The basic proposition of this prioritization model is that
emission sources can be ranked, based upon the potential
degree of hazard that they impose upon individuals in their
environment. This degree of hazard can be expressed in
different ways. A traditional method of expressing degree
of hazard has been to use the mass of emissions from various
source types. Other techniques have used ambient air
contributions of a given source type and the resulting
degradation of ambient air quality as an indicator of source
severity.
The air pollution severity of a given source should in some
way be proportional to the degree of potential hazard it
imposes upon individuals in its environment. The relative
hazard, H, from a specific emission can be defined as being
proportional to the ratio of the delivered dose to the
toxicity of the material, probability of dose delivery, and
number of people who would receive it as follows:
L
LD50
where N = number of persons
= lethal dose for 50% of the people exposed
P = probability of dose delivery
-------
T = delivered dose = B'R-/x(t)dt
B = average breathing rate
R = lung retention factor
X(t) = concentration time history
A relative or potential hazard, H , is defined as the ratio
of the dose of the pollutant delivered to a population,
relative to some potentially hazardous dose. Since LDso
data are not available for human beings, another measure of
potentially hazardous dosage was used.
The potentially hazardous dose for a given pollutant from a
specific point source in a given region is thus defined as
follows:
r2 '
¥F = NBR / TLV(t) K dt (2)
tl
where ^ = potentially hazardous dose, g
population exposed to a specific source, persons
average breathing rate, m3/sec-person
lung retention factor for the pollutant of
interest (dimensionless factor, 0
-------
Similarly, a hazard potential factor, F, is defined as:
F = TLV-K (4)
Since TLV is a constant,
*_, = N'B'R'T-F (5)
The actual pollutant dose delivered, Ya, from a given point
A
source can be calculated as follows:
r2
= N-B-R / x (t) dt (6)
where x(t) = tne actual ground level concentration time
history of a pollutant of interest emitted by
a specific point source, g/m3
The value of \(t) is very difficult to obtain and was there-
fore approximated by an average value, x". (Procedures for
obtaining x are discussed in a later section of this report.)
The total actual dose delivered for a specific pollutant
from a specific source is then:
V = N-B'R'T'x" (7)
f\
Since our measure of potential source hazard, H_, was defined
as the ratio of the two dosages, then:
w
A N«B«'R«lTl«
N'B'R'T-F
or Hp = X . (9)
-------
A.
MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURE
The relative degree of hazard or potential hazard created
^ 1. ^ l_
by the i — material in the region around the j — source is
expressed as the ratio of x"
. .
to F., i.e.,
Degree of hazard =
F.
(10)
In a similar manner, it may be stated that there already
exists some ambient level, x1-•/ °f tne i— material at the
th x^
j— source. If there is an ambient air quality standard,
S., for this emission then a weighting factor, W.., is
defined as follows:
r^ when s •> > 1.0
'i i
X'i:i .
1.0 when „ J _ 1.0
(11)
1.0 when S. is undefined (i.e., for
1 non-criteria pollutants)
For the purpose of this prioritization study, particulates,
sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide were designated as criteria pollutants. Oxidants
are not included in that category because they are not
emitted from point sources but instead are formed from
nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons released to the atmosphere,
-------
If the degree of hazard, ^—L, in equation 10 is multiplied
by the population density, P., in the region around the j —
source, a measure of the severity, SV.^., imposed on individuals
* y^ ^l-
by the i— material at the j— source, is obtained:
Ai-
Severity = SV. . = P. ==-
iJ D i
(12)
.th
For the j— source, the severity vector, SV., is defined by:
/ V^
SV. =
Fi
P. *Nj
(13)
where N = number of emitted species. The existing criteria
standard or weight vector, W., is defined by:
W. =
X
(14)
-------
Ideally, at the j— source the severity vector should be zero.
Thus, to get a measure of the severity associated with the
j— source, the Euclidean distance is computed between the
calculated severity vector, SV., and the zero vector,
weighted by the ratio of ambient criteria level to the
standard vector, W.. This distance is also referred to as
the length of SV. and is given by:
Length of SV. =
N
SV .2 W..I1/2
i=l
(15)
or.
sv.| I = P..
1/2
(16)
The next step is to assign some numerical value called
the impact factor, I , to the original source type x in
X
such a way that the impact factors for different source
types can be compared and ranked. One possible method is
to let the impact factor be the largest of the lengths of
the severity vectors associated with the sources j = 1,
K
x'
i.e.
I = max
A
|SV.
D ~
K
x
(17)
However, this assigns a high impact factor to a source type
that severely pollutes from one point source and has little
or no pollution from all other point sources within that
source type.
Another possible method of assigning impact factor values
is to let Ix be the mean of the lengths of the severity
vectors. However, this definition suffers from the varying
8
-------
number K of point sources in the different source types.
vt
For example, if K =10 for one source type and all severity
J\
vectors have unit length, then their mean would be 1, and
I would have a value of 1. On the other hand, if K = 100
X X
for another source type and all the severity vectors in
this source type are also of unit length, then again the
mean value would be 1 and I would have the same value as
J^
before. However, it is reasonable to assume that the
latter source type should have more impact on the environ-
ment than the former.
Accordingly, the impact factor, I , associated with a given
X
source type x is defined to be the sum of the lengths of
the individual severity vectors associated with the point
sources within the source type. Thus:
I. =
N
1/2
(18)
where I = impact factor, persons/km2
*i
K = number of sources emitting materials associated
with source type x
N = number of materials emitted by each source
P . = population density in the region associated
-* with the j_ source, persons/km2
X- . = calculated maximum ground level concentration
^ of the ii£ material emitted by the jHl source,
g/m3
F. = environmental hazard potential factor of the
1 iih material, g/m3
X ' . . = ambient concentration of the i — material in
-1
the region associated with the jl source
S . = corresponding standard for the i — material
1 (used only for criteria emissions, otherwise
set equal to one)
-------
B. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
In this study, the prioritization model was to be computer-
ized, all data handling programs were to be written, and
all input data were to be collected and processed within a
period of three months. The input data in this case meant
descriptions of all stationary air pollution sources in the
United States.
Before discussing the actual application of the model, it is
appropriate to restate the objectives of the prioritization
model, list the elements that it can treat, and indicate
the elements that were specifically excluded. (It is not
within the scope of this report to provide an exhaustive
list of all the things that the model cannot do or was not
intended to do. Some objections have been raised regarding
various structures and procedures, and these will be addressed
in the best way possible without trying to be exhaustive
and without trying to anticipate every objection possible.)
The prioritization model was designed to rank order source
types in each of four predetermined categories: organic
materials, inorganic materials, combustion, and open sources.
A concentrated effort was expended to obtain individual
category listings for the purpose of providing a basis on
which to select areas for future assessment. This means
that if in a given priority listing, Source Type A has an
impact factor one order of magnitude higher than Source
Type B, this does not indicate that any health problems
associated with Source Type A are one order of magnitude
more severe than those associated with Source Type B.
What it does indicate is that within the level of uncertainty
in the input data, Source Type A has a potentially greater
impact on the environment than Source Type B. Th.e difference
in impact factor values cannot be quantitatively interpreted
10
-------
since this model gives only a relative ranking of source
severity.
Some of the factors that the prioritization model is
capable of treating in the list of sources developed are
shown below :
a varying number of air pollutants emitted by
a given source type
the hazard potential of emitted particles
production capacity associated with an emission
factor to yield emission rates
varying heights of emissions
population density in the region of a source
existing ambient concentrations of emitted
materials
local meteorological data
distances from source to receptors (populated
areas)
measured or estimated emission rates
growth or decline of source types
measured ambient air concentrations of
emitted materials
atmospheric decay of emitted materials
While the model structure is capable of treating the above
factors, not all of them were used in the initial prior-
itization. Those inputs that were used are identified
explicitly in Section II.C.
There are certain clarifying points to be made regarding
the model structure and the inclusion of specific terms.
The safety factor, K = [(40/168)(1/100)], is used to compensate
for the fact that TLV's were established for a five day
work week exposure, and that the general population is a
higher risk group than healthy workers for which the TLV
values were established. Since this factor is constant for
11
-------
all emitted species, and for all source types, its inclusion
into the prioritization model does not affect the ranking.
It was kept, however, to preserve computational commonality
with other forms of equations that were developed later for
describing source severity.
The model does not account for differences in dose/response
relationships between pollutant agents; rather, a linear
relationship for all materials is assumed. Since the
prioritization model and resulting listings are only one of
many management tools being used by EPA in the source
assessment program, it was not felt that the detailed
investigation of dose/response relationships would be
beneficial at the time. The model assumes additivity of
effects, a technique recommended by ACGIH.
The model does not account for air pollutant persistence,
long range transport, and transformation characteristics.
Based on the objectives of the prioritization effort and
the time constraint, it was thought that the data base used
to define the atmospheric transformations and long range
transport of a wide variety of pollutants was not sufficiently
developed to be usefully included. In a subsequent section
of this report, a procedure is described for asking questions
about the effect of changes in emitted materials based on
the use of sensitivity analysis. Specific examples of this
approach include the conversion of all emitted S02 to
sulfate (using the sulfate TLV), and the conversion of all
hydrocarbons to photochemical oxidants (using the photo-
chemical oxidant TLV).
12
-------
C. APPLICATION OF THE MODEL
1. Derivation of the Ground Level Concentration
Determining the ground level concentration, x» requires the
use of a dispersion model. The simple Gaussian Plume
equation for ground level receptors at the plume center-
line was used:1
X =
Q
*
(19)
where x = ground level concentration, g/m3
a = lateral dispersion coefficient, m
a = vertical dispersion coefficient, m
h = effective emission height, m
Q = emission rate, g/sec
u = wind speed, m/sec
x = distance from source to receptor, m
X = decay constant, sec"1
The dispersion coefficients are power law functions of
downwind distance and atmospheric stability:2
o = ax0-9031 (20)
cr = bxc + d (21)
turner, D. B. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates,
Publication No. 191482, May 1970.
2Eimutis, E. C., and M. G. Konicek. Derivations of Continu-
ous Functions for the Lateral and Vertical Atmospheric
Dispersion Coefficients. Atmospheric Environment, 6:859-
863, 1972.
13
-------
Coefficients a, b, c, and d were derived for the various
stability categories.2
It was noted that compiling data on distances from sources
to receptors would not prove feasible. Hence, there
remained atmospheric stability, wind speed, and decay
constants as required inputs. After a review of the priori-
tization objectives and projected use of the prioritization
listings, it was decided that decay constants would not be
used, and that constant average values would be used as input
for wind speed and atmospheric stability.
Since emission height data were compiled, the maximum
ground level concentration, X , was computed from the
following:3
2Qa
Xmax = (22)
where Q = emission rate, g/sec
e = base e = 2.72
u = wind speed, m/sec
h = emission height, m
For neutral or slightly unstable conditions, a = a ,3
and:
i»i
The national average wind speed was used as a constant
input (approximately 10 mph or 4.5 m/sec). The average
3Slade, H. S. (ed.). Meteorology and Atomic Energy. Publi-
cation TID 24190, July 1968.
14
-------
concentration, x» is a function of sampling time, t, and
can be related to the maximum concentration, x » by the
UlciX
following:1
X « Xmax t- (24)
where 0.17 < p < 0.2
Since a relative rank ordering was being performed, the
choice of constants d
was used directly for
choice of constants did not affect the ordering and x
max
The buoyancy and momentum data needed to estimate plume
rise could not be compiled within the project time frame.
The emission height thus corresponds to the physical and
not the effective emission height. Fall-out, washout,
surface adsorption and vegetative absorption were not
included in the implemented model.
2. Data Availability and Computational Form
Data availability can be summarized in two categories: little
or no data available for a given source type; or, thousands of
pages of computerized printout of point source information.
It was quickly evident that, for the latter case, some form
of input data aggregation would have to be performed.
It should be noted that the basic model structure was not
changed; only the level of detail was altered for those
source types with emission points numbering in the thousands
•and, in some cases, in the hundreds of thousands. Four
types of calculations and procedures were implemented:
15
-------
Population sensitive calculations - Examples
include industrial boilers, asphalt plants,
ready-mix concrete plants, etc. These industries
were assumed to be located, preferentially, in
areas of higher population or distributed accord-
ing to population fraction.
Location sensitive calculations - Examples include
cotton gins, mining operations, etc. These
source types are located only in certain areas
of the country.
Detailed source calculations - These are the source
types with only a small (less than 10) number of
plants. An example is acrylonitrile manufacturing
plants. In this case, the prioritization model
in it's detailed form was used. Each plant was
included as a separate point source.
Open source calculations - These source types were
categorized as population sensitive, area sensitive,
or location sensitive. Separate programs were
written to deal with the differing inputs which
the open sources calculation required.
a. Population Sensitive Calculations
For population sensitive calculations, the population fraction
of each state was taken from the 1970 Census. The national
yearly capacity or fuel consumption for a given source type
was then distributed as follows:
PF = (25)
where PF . = population fraction in the j — state
P . = population of the j — state
16
-------
Then, for the i — pollutant,
Qij = I (Kf) (EiHPF.) (CAP) (26)
where Q. . = emission rate, g/sec
f = frequency of operation, days/365 days
E. = emission factor, Ibs of i — emission/tons of
product or fuel
CAP = national yearly capacity or fuel consumption,
tons
K, = conversion factor (Ibs/year to g/sec)
The frequency factor was included since many industries and
operations exist that are intermittent or seasonal. If a
process operates for 100 days out of a year, then the
emissions rate is 3.65 times higher than it would be if one
had assumed continuous yearly operation.
Ambient air averages for the criteria pollutants were used
for each state and the model was exercised as previously
described. A full listing of the state data base is pre-
sented later in Tables A-l and A-2 of Appendix A.
b. Location Sensitive Calculations
For some source types, capacity information was available
on a state by state basis. For example, for coal-fired
steam electric utilities, data are published on fuel consump-
tion on a state basis. Knowing the capacity and its dis-
tribution across the states for each emission, the emission
rate is calculated as follows:
(Kf) (E^ (CAP..) . (27)
17
-------
The impact factor is then calculated in the usual fashion
and summed over K states.
J\.
c. Detailed Input Calculations
Detailed input calculations were segregated by county for
population densities. Since the county ambient air summaries
were not available, corresponding state values were used.
Individual plant capacities were used to calculate the
emission rates and the summation extended over the number
of plants in a given source type.
d. Open Source Calculations
Open source calculations were further divided into three
types: (1) population sensitive, (2) area sensitive, and
(3) location sensitive. Population sensitive calculations
were performed as previously described. Area sensitive
calculations were performed using:
AF = 5! (28)
where AF . = area fraction of the j — region or state
A. = area of the j — region or state, mi2
Then,
j = j (CAP) (Ej) (AFj) (Kf) (29)
and the national capacity is apportioned according to area
Open source location sensitive calculations were performed
as previously described.
18
-------
These descriptions of the various calculation methods have
been brief and are meant to serve as an introduction. Detailed
examples of their use are included in the Appendix.
3. Uncertainty Levels
There is a level of uncertainty associated with each impact
factor. While that level cannot be quantified, it can be
assumed to vary as a function of the quality of available
information on a specific source type. Using this rationale,
the priority index uncertainty levels were defined as follows:
Level Meaning
A Adequate data of reasonable
accuracy
B Partly estimated data of
indeterminate accuracy
C Totally estimated data of
indeterminate accuracy
D Missing data on known emissions
of toxic substances
• Example of Level A - Adequate data of reasonable accuracy
are available for the gas-fired steam electric utilities.
Emissions are known and emission factors are published for
this industry.
• Example of Level B - Partly estimated data are available
for oil-fired industrial/commercial boilers. These data
represent best engineering estimates.
• Example of Level C - Totally estimated data are the type
available for the emissions from all types of structural
fires.
19
-------
. Example of Level D - If it is known that a source is
emitting asbestos, mercury, beryllium, cadmium, POM's,
benzenoid aromatics, or other suspected carcinogens and yet
no quantitative data for such emissions are available, then
that source type has an uncertainty level of D. Coal refuse
piles - open burning is an example of this level of uncertainty.
The above defined uncertainty levels are subjective. They
were assigned by the individual responsible for generating
data for a specific source type. Even with the lowest un-
certainty level, Level A, attempts to quantify the uncertainty
would present a formidable task. However, sensitivity analyses
were performed on the prioritization model in order to observe
its response to changes in the inputs. These results are
discussed in the following section.
4. Prioritization Sensitivity Analyses
The sensitivity, AI , of the impact factor, I , to changes
x x
in various inputs was defined as:
= ioo( x(new) - Ix(base) J
\ I _ /i \ /
(30)
x(base)
where Ix(t,ase) = imPact factor based on original input
Ix(new) = imPact factor based on revised input
Coal-fired steam electric utilities were selected as an
example source type for thi's sensitivity analysis. In the
calculation, one input variable at a time is either increased
or decreased by a constant factor and the percent AI is
X
noted. This process was performed on several of the input
variables. The following table summarizes the variables
altered (Z), and the corresponding percent changes in the
impact factor.
20
-------
Table 1. EFFECT OF CHANGES IN INPUT VARIABLES
ON IMPACT FACTOR
Input variable (Z )
AI (%) when input
variable is 1.5 Z
AI (%) when input
variable is 0.5 Z
Frequency
Wind speed
TLV
Criteria standard
Emission height
Emission factor
Criteria concentration
Capacity
Population density
-33.3
-33.3
-33.3
•18.4
•55.6
50.0
22.5
50.0
50.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
41.4
300.0
-50.0
-29.3
-50.0
-50.0
In another test of sensitivity, the effect of pollutant
transformation was investigated. The specific example was
the conversion to sulfate of all S02 emitted by a coal-
fired electric utility. Using TLV's as indicators of
sensitivity, the following results were computed:
S02
Sulfate
TLV, g/m3
0.014
0.0042
I (normalized)
J\
100
247
In this case, a 70% decrease in TLV value produced a 147%
increase in the impact factor.
In another instance, questions were raised concerning S02
emission factors. The impact factors for coal-fired
utilities were computed with a base-line emission factor
and with a factor three times higher (i.e., 200% increase)
The impact factor showed a corresponding 190% increase.
21
-------
Another example of sensitivity was shown using acrylonitrile
manufacturing as an example. By varying the TLV's of three
emissions (acrylonitrile, propane, and propylene) the results
shown in Figure 1 were obtained.
10»r
10'
106
10
10
TIV, g/m
10
Figure 1. Acrylonitrile impact factor vs. TLV (organics)
22
-------
5. Priority Listings of the Four Categories: Combustion,
Inorganic Materials, Organic Materials and Open Sources
Several data management routines were written in FORTRAN IV
and these were interfaced with impact factor calculation
routines, sorting, file manipulation and reporting programs.
Priority listings were produced for the combustion, inorganic
materials, organic materials, and open sources categories and
these are presented in Tables 2 through 5. The column labeled
"UL" refers to the uncertainty level as described earlier
in Section II.C.3, and the column labeled "CALC" refers to
the type of calculation used as described earlier in Section
II.C.2.
CALC Meaning
1 Population sensitive calculation
2 Location sensitive calculation
3 Detailed input calculation
4 Open source calculation
23
-------
Table 2. PRIORITIZATION LISTING - COMBUSTION SOURCES
COMBUSTION SOURCES
SOURCE TYPE
COAL REFUSE PILES. OUTCROPS AND ABANDONED NINES
PRESCRIBED BURNING
AGRICULTURAL OPEN BURNING
FUEL BURNING ENGINES - RECIPROCATING '
OIL FIRED INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL BOILERS
FUEL BURNING ENGINES - TURBINE
COAL FIXED RESIDENTIAL SPACE HEATING
OIL FIRED RtSIOENTIAL SPACE HEATING
CHARCOAL MANUFACTURE
GAS FIRED RESIDENTIAL SPACE HEATING
SWIMMING POOL HEATING
INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL SPACE HEATING
OIL-FIRED STEAM ELECTRIC UTILITIES
COAL-FIREU STEAM ELECTRIC UTILITIES
GAS FIRED AIR CONDITIONING
GAS FIRED INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL BOILERS
RESIDENTIAL INCINERATION
GAS FIRED LAUNORY DRYING
CHCHARO HEATING
GAS FIRED RESIDENTIAL WATER HEATING
WOOD WASTE INCINERATION
COAL-FIRLLl IiMl'USTMAL/COMMERCIAL BOILERS
WOOD FIRED RESIDENTIAL SPACE HEATING
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 1" WASTE
RLFUSE INCINERATION/PYROLYSIS - STEAM GENERATION
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 6" WASTE
OPEN BURNING OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE
MUNICIPAL INCINERATION
MUNICIPAL REFUSE/COAL FIRED UTILITIES
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 0" WASTE
JET ENGINE TESTING
GAS-FIRED STEAM ELECTRIC UTILITIES
COVERED WIRE INCINERATION
AUT0800Y INCINERATION
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 2" WASTE
OPEN BURNING OF WOOD WASTE
INCINERATION OF "TYPE H" WASTE
OPEN BURNING OF JET FUEL
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 3" WASTE
INCINERATION OF "TYPE 5" WASTE
DRUM INCINERATION
SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATION
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT WINDING RECLAMATION
OPEN PIT INCINERATION
HOSPITAL UASTE INCINERATION
OPEN BURNING OF RAIL CARS
EXPLOSIVES BURNING
BRAKE SHOE DEBONCING
LAND CLEARING - OPEN BURNING
OPEN BURNING OF AUTO BODIES
ON SITE BURNING - OPEN BURNING
MUNICIPAL DUMPS - OPEN BURNING
ROCKET ENGINE
STRUCTURAL FIRES
NATURAL FIRES
IMPACT FACTOR
UL CALC
900.000,000
200,000.000
200,000,000
100.000.000
60,000.000
50.000.000
30.000. 000
10,000.000
6.000.000
s.ooo.ooo
4.000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
2.000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
90U.OOO
900.000
900.000
500.000
too, ooo
300, COO
200,000
200,000
100.000
100.000
90,000
70.000
60,000
60,000
30.000
30.000
20,000
20,000
10,000
10.000
9,000
9,000
9.000
9.000
5,000
3,000
2.000
2,000
100
0
c
B
c
B
c
B
B
c
B
c
0
B
B
c
B
c
c
0
a
c
B
c
D
B
0
D
B
0
0
D
A
D
B
0
C
C
D
D
0
D
C
D
0
D
C
0
D
2
2
2
1
3
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1'
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
24
-------
Table 3. PRIORITIZATION LISTING
INORGANIC SOURCES
- INORGANIC SOURCES
SOURCE TYPE
COTTON SINS
PRODUCTION OF LEAD STORAGE BATTERIES
PIG IRON PRODUCTION
COKE MANUFACTURE
BRICK KILNS AND DRIERS
IRON FOUNDRIES
ASBESTOS PRODUCTS
TOBACCO
PRIMARY ZINC SMELTING
SECONDARY LEAD SMELTING AND REFINING
STEEL PRODUCTION
LEAD CARBONATE AND SULFATE • UNITE LEAD
CADMIUM PIGMENTS - CADMIUM SULFIDE. SULFOSELENIDE, LITHOPONE
AMMONIA
LE.AO OXIDE • RED LEAD AND LITHARGE - PIGMENTS ONLT
TITANIUM DIOXIDE - PIGMENT
COAL CLEANING PLANTS - THERMAL DRYING
SECONDARY 2INC SMELTING
COBALT COMPOUNDS - ACETATE* CARBONATE. HALIDES. ETC.
GLASS INDUSTRY
SILVER COMPOUNDS - N03, DIFLUORIDEi FLUOROBORATE, S04
PRIMARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION
SULFURIC ACID
PRIMARY LEAD SMELTING AND REFINING
ZINC CHLORIDE - SO DEGREE BAuME*
VITREOUS KAOLIN PRODUCTS
ELECTROLYTIC PRODUCTION OF CHLORINE
FERROALLOY PRODUCTION
ZINC OXIDE - PIGMENT
REFRACTORIES
LIME KILNS
AMMONIUM NITRATE
SECONDARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION
FERTILIZERS - BULK BLENDING PLANTS
COPPER SULFATE - PENTAHYORATE
PHOSPHORIC ACID . WET PROCESS
SUEL FOUNDRIES
CALCIUM CARBIDE
POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE
BRASS AND BRONZE INGOT PRODUCTION
MERCURY COMPOUNDS - HALIOES, NITRATES, OXIDES, ETC.
CEMENT
AMMONIUM SULFATE
CC.AL CLEANING PLANTS - PNEUMATIC
BORIC ACID AND BORAX - SODIUM TETRABORATE
SODIUM CHROMATE AND SODIUM DICHROMATE
SODIUM TRIPOLYPHOSPHATE
MINERAL WOOL
PHOSPHATE ROCK - DRYING, GRINDING, CALCINING
TRIPLE SUPERPHOSPHATES
ALUMINUM OXIDE - ALUMINA
CHLOROSULFOMC ACID - INORGANIC ACIDS
NICKEL SULFATE
AMMONIUM PHOSPHATES
LEAD ARSENATE - ACID ORTHO-ARSENATE - 'BASIC ORTHO-ARSENATE
NITRIC ACID
CHROMIC ACID
ZINC GALVANIZING OPERATIONS
CALCIUM CHLORIDE
SUPERPHOSPHATE - NORMAL
PHOSPHORIC ACIO - THERMAL PROCESS
PHOSPHORUS PENTASULFIDE
MANGANESE SULFATE
POTASSIUM BICHROMATE AND POTASSIUM CHROMATE
SODIUM SILICOFLUORIDE
PHOSPHORUS TRICHLORIDE
IhON OXIDE - PIGMENTS
LEAD CHROMATE - CHROME YELLOW AND ORANGE
PHIMARY COPPER SMELTING
HYDROFLUORIC ACID
SODIUM CARBONATE - SYNTHETIC
PHOSPHORUS - ELEMENTAL
LEAD COMPOUNDS - HALIOES, HYDROXIDES, DIOXIDE, NITRATE, ETC.
FLUORINE
GYPSUM
PHOSPHATE ROCK DEFLUORINATION
ALUMINUM FLUORIDE.
IMPACT FACTOR
UL CALC
200,000,000
30,000.000
20.000,000
20,000.000
2.000.000
2.000.000
2,000,000
1,000,000
1.000.000
1.000.000
900.000
800.000
800,000
800,000
700,000
500,000
500,000
1*00,000
400,000
000.000
300,000
300.000
300,000
300,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200.000
200,000
100,000
loo.ooo
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
90,000
90,000
90,000
90,000
80,000
60,000
80,000
70,000
60.000
50,000
50,000
to, ooo
to.ooo
40,000
40,000
40,000
30,000
30,000
30,000
30,000
2U, 000
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
20.000
20,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10.000
10,000
10,000
10,000
9,000
. 9,000
9,000
B
c
c
D
c
c
B
c
c
0
c
0
c
A
D
B
c
c
A
0
c
B
C
D
C
8
C
B
B
A
B
D
C
C
B
0
B
C
C
D
B
C
B
C
C
b
a
B
C
0
c
6
D
A
C
B
C
B
A
C
C
c
0
c
B
C
B
0
D
B
B
C
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
1
3
2
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
3
3
1
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
I
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
S
2
3
2
25
-------
Table 3 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING -
INORGANIC SOURCES
SODIUM SILICATES 9,000 2
POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE AND MANGANESE DIOXIDE 9,000 C 3
FERTILIZER MIXING - AMMONIATION - GRANULATION PLANTS 7,000 6 2
CHROMIUM OXIDE - INORGANIC PIGMENT 7,000 C 3
ANTIMONY OXIDE 7,000 0 3
ZINC CHROMATE - PIGMENT 7,000 0 3
BARIUM SULFATE - PIGMENT 6,000 C 3
CALCIUM PHOSPHATE 6,000 3
SODIUM SULFIDE 6,000 C 3
TIN COMPOUNDS - HALIDES, OXIDES, SULFATCS. OTHERS 6,000 C 3
POTASH - POTASSIUM SALTS s.ooo c 3
ARSENIC TRIOXIDE S.OOO 0 3
FERTILIZER MIXING - LI8UIO MIX PLANTS 5,000 8 2
ALUMINUM HYDROXIDE- 5.000 C 2
HYDROCHLORIC ACIU 5.000 8 2
PERLITE MANUFACTURING If.OCO C 2
ABRASIVE PRODUCTS "4.000 C 2
SODIUM FLUORIDE *,ooo c 3
HYDRAZINE <»,000 C 3
BARIUM CARBONATE 3.000 C 3
HYDROGEN CYANIDE 3,000 B 3
CALCIUM CARBONATE 3.000 C 3
SODIUM SULFAU - NATURAL PROCESS ONLT 2,000 C 3
ALUMINUM SULFSTE 2,000 C 2
SODIUM ARSENITE 2,000 0 2
EXFOLIATED VLRMIcULlTE 2.000 C 2
SODIUM HYDROSULFIDE - SODIUM BISULFIDE OR SULFHYDRATE 1.000 C 3
NICKEL COMPOUMIS - EXCEPT NICKEL SULFATE l.OCO C 2
ALUMINUM CHLORIDE - ANHYDROUS 1.000 C 2
MAGNESIUM COMPOUNDS - CARBONATE, CHLORIDE, OXIDE S HYDROXIDE 1.000 C 2
SODIUM THIOSULFATE - SODIUM HYPOSULFITE 1,000 C 3
SODIUM SULFITE 600 C 3
IHON CHLOKIDE • FFRRIC soo c 2
SODIUI* CHLORATE. 700 C 3
«CRYLLIUM CO«f"JUfgDS bOO D *
CALCIUM ARSE.NATE "»00 0 3
"»00 C ?
HYDROSULFITL ^00 C 3
SODIU* CARBONATE - NATURAL HOO C 3
CONVERSION OF CRUDE IODINE TO RESUBLIMED AND IODINE PRODUCTS 300 C 2
POTASSIUM SULFATE 300 C 3
MISCELLANEOUS SODIUM COMPOUNDS 100 C 2
CHROMIUM COMPOUNDS - ACETATE, BORIDES. HALIDLS. ETC. 100 D 2
SODIUM NITRITE. 70 C 3
SULFUR MONOCHLORIDE AND DICHLORIDE 50 C 3
LITHIUM SALTS - LITHIUP CARBONATE AND LITHIUM HYDROXIDE 7 C 3
CRUDE IODINE - DOMESTIC PRODUCTION 6 C 3
PHOSPHORUS OXYCHLORIDE 2 C 3
SECONDARY MAGMLSIUM SMELTING 2 C 2
26
-------
Table 4. PRIORITIZATION LISTING - ORGANIC SOURCES
ORGANIC SOURCES
SOURCE TYPE
SOLVENT EVAPORATION - DECREASING
FAdRIC SCOUR INb
PETROLEUM REFINING - FUGITIVE EMISSIONS
THICHLOROETHYLENE - FROM ETHYLENE
PETROLEUM REFINING - WASTE WATER PLANT
PETROLEUM EXTRACTION
NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION
GASOLINE DISTRIBUTION - AUTOMOBILE TANK LOADING
SURFACE COATING . SHEET, STRIP AND COIL COATING
PETROLEUM REFINING - BLENDING AND STORAGE
SURFACE COATING . PAPER AND PAPERBOARD COATING
POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
NATURAL GAS EXTRACTION
SOLVENT EVAPORATION - RUBBER AND PLASTIC PROCESSING
SOLVENT EVAPOOATION - ORYCLEANING
SURFACE COATING - FABRIC TREATMENT
SOLVENT EVAPORATION - PRINTING AND PUBLISHING
ASHHALT PAVING - HOT MIX
SOLVENT EVAPORATION - SURFACE COATING - AUTO PAINTING
ASPHALT ROOFING
PETROLEUM REFINING - CATALYTIC CRACKING
SURFACE COATING - MAJOR APPLIANCE FINISHING
EThYLEME OICHLORIDE - OXYCHLORINATION
EThYLEHE OICHLORIDE - ETHYLENE CHLORlNATION
VARNISH MANUFACTURERS
PHTH4LIC ANHYDRIDE - 0-XYLENE
GASOLINE DISTRIBUTION - SERVICE STATION TANKS
EThYLE'JE-PROPYLENE RUBBER
ACRYLIC ACID
AKTIFICIAL RIPENING OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
DEEP FRYING
NSOPRENE
MALT BEVERAGE PRODUCTION
PETROLEUM REFINING - VACUUM DISTILLATION
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CANNING
VINYL CHLORIDE - ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
ETHYL CHLORIDE
SURFACE COATING - INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY FINISHING
TRICHLOROETHYLEfE - FROM ACETYLENE
SURFACE COATING - METAL FURNITURE FINISHING
PETROLEUM REFINING - SULFUR PLANT
f-ETROLEUM REFINING • ASPHALT PLANT
PRINTINP INK
2-i.THYL-l-HEXANOL
UIMETHYL TEREPHTHALATE
SURFACE COATING - WOOD FURNITURE FINISHING
ACETONE - FROf CUMENE
WOOD PROCESSING - KRAFT OR SULFATE PROCESS
SURFACE COATING - SMALL APPLIANCE FINISHING
PERCHLOROETHYLENE - CHLORlNATION Of PROPANE
CAhHON TETRACHLORIDE - CHLORlNATION OF PROPANE
POLYFTHYLENE RESIN - HI&H DENSITY
PtTROLEU" REFINING - CRUDE OISlILLATICN
POLYSTYRENE RESH.
CRESOL - SYNTHETIC
POLYETHYLENE RESIN - LOW DENSITY
POLYHETHYLENE POLYPHENYL ISOCYANATE
CARBON BLACK • FuRNACE
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE FREEZING
METHYL METHACRYLATE
CYCLOHEXANONE
ASPHALT PAVING - DRYER DRUM PROCESS
ADIPONITRILE
METHYL IS09UTYL KETONE
ACETIC ANHYDRIDE
PLYWOOD AND VENEER DRYING
PHENYLKERCURY OLEATE
PHENOL - CUMENE PROCESS
FORMALDEHYDE
GLYCERIN TRIPOLYOXYPROPYLENE ETHER
ACRYLONITRILE
MALE1C ANHYDRIDE FROM BENZENE
PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE - NAPHTHALENE
GASOLINE DISTRIBUTION - TERMINAL LOADING AND STORAGE
i/INYL ACETATE - FROM ETHYLENE
FUMARIC ACID
IMPACT FACTOR
UL CALC
100, 000, (100,000
1,000,000,000
JOO.000,000
200,000,000
60,000,000
50.000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
10,000,000
10,000,000
10,000,000
a. ooo, ooo
7,000,000
6,000,000
3,000,000
3,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
POO, 000
700,000
700,000
700,000
600.000
UOO.OOO
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
300,000
200,000
200,000
200.000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200.000
200,000
200,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
IOC, 000
100.000
100.000
100,000
100, OCO
100.000
100.000
100,000.
100.000
90.000
80,000
BO, 000
70,000
70.000
60,000
60,000
60.000
60,000
30,000
30,000
SO. 000
50,000
to, ooo
to, ooo
HO, 000
HO, 000
30,000
30,000
B
D
c
B
c
B
B
A
c
c
c
A
B
C
c
c
c
B
C
C
B
C
B
B
0
B
A
C
B
D
D
A
C
B
C
B
B
C
B
C
B
B
D
B
C
C
C
9
C
B
8
B
R
C
B
B
C
B
C
B
B
0
C
C
B
C
0
B
C
C
B
B
B
A
B
C
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
Z
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
3
2
3
1
3
3
1
1
3
2
2
?
3
3
2
I
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
1
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
27
-------
Table 4 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING -
ORGANIC SOURCES
SURFACE COATINS - FARM MACHINERY FINISHING 30,000 C 2
SURFACE COATINS - COMMERCIAL MACHINERY FINISHING 30.000 C 2
VINYL CHLORIDE . ACETYLENE 30,000 8 3
GLYCERIN - ALLYL ALCOHOL 30,000 C 3
NATURAL GAS PROCESSING 30,000 a 2
PAJNT MANUFACTURING 20,000 0 2
POLYESTER RESINS - UNSATURATEO 20,000 C 2
HOOD PROCESSING . SULFITE PROCESS 20.000 8 2
OICHLORODIFLUOROMETHANE *• 20.000 C 3
HEXAMETHYLENE.1ETRAMINE 20.000 C 3
KELTHANE 10,000 D 3
GLYCERIN . ACHOLEIN 10,000 C 3
METHANOL 10,000 C 3
COTTONSEED OIL MILLING 10.000 C 2
SOAP AND OETERGFNTS 10,000 C 2
POLYCHLORINATLO 8IPHENYLS 10.000 C 3
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE • METHANE 10.000 8 3
AKINO RESINS 10,000 c 2
SUGAR PROCESSING 10.000 0 2
ACETIC ACID 9.000 B 3
0-XYLE.NE 6,000 C 3
P-XTLENE 8.000 8 2
PETROLEUM REFINING - FLARES 6.000 B 2
NTLON kt ' 6.000 B 2
D01ECYLBENZENE SULFONIC ACID - SODIUM SALT 6.000 C 2
VEGETABLE OIL MILLING 6.000 C 2
GLYCERIN - ALLYL CHLORIDE 7,000 C 3
N-BUTYL ALCOHOL 7.000 C 3
COFFEE ROASTING 7,000 B 2
MALATHION 7.000 D 3
METHYL PAKATM10N 6.000 C 3
ACETALDEHYOE - OXIDATION OF ETHANOL 6.000 C 3
WOOD PROCESSING - NEUTRAL SULFITE SEMI-CHEMICAL 6.000 B 2
POLYVINYLVINYLIDENE CHLORIDE 5,000 D 3
LEATHER 5,000 0 1
AOIPIC ACID 5,000 B 3
PETROLEUM REFINING - ETHYLENE I»L*NT 5,000 C 2
CUMENE 5.000 C 2
STYRENE H.OOO B 3
CHLOROSULFONIC ACID 4,000 C 3
DOOECYLBENZENE - HARD 4.000 C 3
DOT 4,000 C 3
PtNTAERYTHRITOL . 4,000 C 3
ISOCYANATES 4.000 B 3
POLYACRYLONITRILE - POLYMERIZATION SOLUTION 4,000 C 3
CYCLOHEXANE 4,000 C 3
ACETYLLNE 1,000 C 3
EPICHLOROHYDRIH • 4,000 8 3
UET CORN MILLING 4,000 D 2
OODECYLBENZENE SULFONIC ACID 4,000 C 2
ACETONE CYANOHYDRIN 3,000 C 3
POLYURETHANE ELASTOMER 3.000 C 2
ACETIC ACID - FROM METHANOL 3,000 C 3
METHYLENE CHLORIDE - CHLORINATIQN OF BETHANE 3,000 B 3
ACETYL CHLORIDE 3,000 D 3
POLYURETHANE SURFACE COATING RESINS 3.000 D 2
CRESYLIC ACID 3,000 B 2
PETROLEUM REFINING - CATALYTIC REFORMING 3.000 B 2
NYLON 6 3.0CO B 2
MIXED OLEFINIC PRODUCT 3,000 C 3
MIXED LINEAR ALCOHOL 3,000 C 2
PETROLEUM REFINING - CATALYTIC HYDROREFINING (HOS) 3,000 B 2
UREA 3,000 C 2
FORMIC ACID 3.000 C 3
LINEAR ALKYLBENZENE 3.000 C 3
HEPTACHLOR 3.000 C 3
ENORIN 3.000 D 3
WASTE SOLVENT PROCESSING 2.000 0 1
NONYLPHENOL 2.000 C 3
OODECYLRENZENE SULFONIC ACID • CALCIUn SALT 2.000 C 3
MEAT SMOKEHOUSES 2,000 D 2
DISTILLED LIQUOR 2,000 C 1
TOLUENE DIISOCYANATE 2.000 C 3
TEREPHTHALIC ACID 2.000 B 3
0-UICHLOROBENZLNE 2.000 B 3
HYOROOUINONE 2,000 C 3
CARBON TCTRACHLORIDE - CARBON OISULFIDE 2.000 B 3
ISOPRENE - 2-METHYL-1.3-BUTAOIENE 2.000 C 3
HEPTENE 2,0.00 C 3
DI-2-ETHYLHEXYL PHTHALATE ' 2.000 C 2
ETHYLENE DIBROMIDE 2,000 C 3
28
-------
Table 4 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING -
ORGANIC SOURCES
NITROBENZENE
NAPHTHALENE - COAL TAR
N-PARAFFIN CHLORIDE
ENOOSULFAfi - THIOOAN
PROPYLENE OXIDE - CHLOROHYORIN PROCESS
ALKYD RESINS
PCLYAMIDE RESINS
ETMYLENE OXIDE
CELLULOSE ACETATE
POLYURETHANE FIBERS
ALDFIN
iPOXY RESINS - UNMODIFIED
S-3UTYL ALCOHOL
RAYON - SEMI SYNTHETIC VISCOSE RAYON
TOLUENE SULFONATE - HYOROTROPE
LTHYLENE - PROPYLENE TERPOLYMEK
ISOPHTHALIC ACID
OXALIC ACID
lil.l-TRICHLOROETHANt
FOOD PREPARATION
0X0 PROCESS
BENZYL CHLORIDE
CARBON OISULFIOE
CHLOROACETIC ACID
SORBITOL
OIISOOECYL PHTHALATE
AMMONIUM QXALATE
CHLOROPHENOL
CHLOROFORM
0X0 MIXED LINEAR ALCOHOLS
KETONE ALCOHOL .OIL
DECYL ALCOHOL
BISPHENOL-A
ACETALOEHTOE - HYORATION OF ETHYLENE
ASCORBIC ACID - VITAMIN C
POLYESTER POLYOLS
METHYL CHLORIDE
P-DICHLOR08ENZENE
METHYL ETHYL KETONE
POLYVINYL ALCOHOL RESINS
SALICYLIC ACID
N-OCTYL-N-OECYL PHTHALATE
POLYPROPYLENE
CHLOROBENZENE
ANTHELMINTICS
OIISOOCTAL PHTHALATE
HEXAMETHYLENEOIAMINE - ADIPONITRILE
SULFATfO FTHOXYLATES - AEOS
TPIMETHYLANINL
CAKBARYL-SEVIN
PARAFORMALOEHYDE
LINDANE
TETRACYCLINE
GLYCERIN - EPICHLOHOHYORIN
ANILINE
VINYL ACETATE - FROM ACETYLENE
FISH AND SEAFOOD CANNING
POLYVINYL ACETATE RESINS
Z.t-U - DIMETHYLAMINE SALT
MONOETHYLAMINE
ETHAMOL
TKlETHYLfll"IINE
SYM-TRIMETHYLtNE-TRINITPAMINE
SACCHARIN
DODECYLBENZENE SULFONIC ACID - ISOPROpYLENINE SALT
ASPIRIN
"OOACRYLIC FIBERS
DIETHYLAMINE
ETHANOLAP1NE - MONO-. DI-. AND TRI
PYRETHRINS
ACETONE - FROM ISOPROPANOL
POLYRA1
TFICHLOROTRIFLUOROETHANE
DOOECYLBENZENE SULFONIC ACID - TRIETHYLAMINE SALT
M-XYLENE
2.
-------
Table 4 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING -
ORGANIC SOURCES
ISOOCTAL ALCOHOLS 200 C 3
2t
-------
Table 4 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING
ORGANIC SOURCES
VINYL BROMIDE
ETHYL ETHER
TOLUENE-2. <»-UIAMINE
ACROLEIN
POLYISOPRENE
PkOPYLENE TRIMER
N-HUTYRALOEHYOE
PYROGALLIC AGIO
CATECHOL
BUTYLENE OIMEN - OIISOBUTYLENE
AMMONIUM TARTRATE
OIQUAT
POLYCARBONATE RESINS
POLYISOBUTYLENE - ISOPRENE BUTYL
DOOECENE - NON-LINEAR
HETHANEARSONIC ACID - NONOSODIUM SALT - MMA
ETHOXTLATED OcTYLPHENOL
ETHOXYETHANOL
CYCLOHEXYLAMINE
XYLENE SULFONATE - SODIUM SALT
S-BUTOXYETHANOL
2.t.5-I
BEN2EHE
MEVINPHOS
METHANEARSONIC ACIO - CALCIUM SALT . CALAR
ALLYL ALCOHOL
PETROLEUM REFINING - AROMATICS/ISOMERIZ»TION
PtNICILLIN G - PROCA1NE
OICHLOROBENZONITRILE
PHENYIHERCURY ACETATE - PMA . PMAS
ETHYL BENZENE
PROPIOMC ACIO
DI-SYSTON
ETHYL PYROPHOSPHATE - TEPP
ETHOXYLATED MUED LINEAR ALCOHOLS
OALAPON
PETROLEUM REFHUNG - ALKYLATION
CUMENE SULFONATE - AMMONIUM SALT
DI BUTYL PHTHALATE
UUHSBAN
CUMENE SULFONIC ACIO
TOLUENE SULFONIC ACID
DIUTROBENZENL
1.5-CYCLOOCTADIENE
ALCOHOL SULFATE - SODIUM SALT
ISOPROPYL ACETATE
AMMONIUM BENZOATE
CAPTAN
AMMONIUM THIOCYANATE
CINITROPHENOL
XYLENE SJLFOUATE - AMMONIUM SALT
ALCOHOL SULFATES - TklETHANOLAMINE SALT
lilTHOGLYCLRINE
ALCOHOL SULFATES - AMMONIUM SALT
2-ETHOXYETHYL ACETATE
BINZONITRILE
CHOTO^ALDEHYDE
METHYL ACETATE
AKYL ACETATE
LINEAK ALCOHOLS - ZIEGLER PROCESS
T-8UTYL ALCOHOL
NlTROPARiFINS
HYDROXYLAMINE
XYLENE SULFONATF - POTASSIUM SALT
LI-2-ETHYLHEXYL AOIPATE
URUCINE ALKALOID
ALLYL CHLORIDE
OLEIC ACID
GUTHION
N-BUTYRIC ACID
ETHYL BUTTRATE
CARBON BLACK - THERMAL
STYHENE - BUTADIENE COPOLYMER RESINS
DIMETHYL HYORAZINE
HYDROXYLAMINE SULFATE
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10 '
9
9
9
9
9
6
7
7
7
7
6
6
3
5
5
5
5
S
S
3
n
<*
u
It
n
14
3
i
i
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
C
a
B
c
c
c
0
0
c
0
0
B
C
c
c
0
c
c
c
c
0
c
0
c
0
B
c
0
0
c
c
c
0
c
0
c
D
c
0
0
D
D
C
C
C
c
D
0
D
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
C
D
C
C
B
0
C
C
D
B
C
C
D
C
A
B
D
D
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
31
-------
Table 5. PRIORITIZATION LISTING - OPEN SOURCES
OPEN SOURCES
SOUHCE TYPE
FIELD FOP*ULATIOfc OF PESTICIDES
UNHAVED ROADS
AGRICULTURAL TILLING
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
WIND EROSION UF SOIL FROM DORMANT LAND
HLASTING OF SULFUR STORAGE PILES
PARAThlON APPLICATION ON CROPS
CRUSHED GRANITE
TOXAPHENE APPLICATION ON CHOPS
CRUSHES SANDSTONE
HANDLING OF GRAIN
C01T1N HARVESTING
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
TRANSPORT OF SAND ANO GRAVEL
OPEN MINING OF COAL
COAL ASH DISPOSAL
LOADING OF SAND AND GRAVEL
GRAIN HARVESTING
UAKITE MILLINf-
ABPASIVE CLEANING OF OUTDOOR STRUCTURES
CRUSHED STONE/TRAPROCK
DEFOLIATION Of COTTON
INDUSTRIAL SAMD HANDLING
COAL FINES DISPOSAL
PAPER HILL BUILDING EMISSIONS
CRUSHINGt SIZIHG OF SAND ANO GRAVEL
OPEN STORAGE PF SAND AND GRAVEL
CHLOR1NATION OF SHIMMING POOLS
STORAGE OF ANIMAL RENDERINGS
POULTRT DRESSING
SIZING. GRINDING, FIBERIZING OF ASBESTOS
SAND AND GRAVEL UNLOADING
BUILDING DEMOLITION
HANDLING OF CONCRETE PRODUCTS
SCREENING. CRUSHING OF CLAT
H V TRANSMISSION LINES
COAL TRANSPORT
DISPOSAL OF AbBESTOS WASTE ORE
BEEF CATTLE FEEDLOTS
CONVEYING OF SAND AND GRAVEL
MINING ANO BLASTING OF ASBESTOS ORE
PHOSPHATE ROCK OPEN STORAGE
PHOSPHATE ROCK LOADING
REFUSE ASH DISPOSAL
• SEWERAGE CHLORINATION TANKS
LOADING HEADY-MIX CEMENT
STORAGE OF WOOD CHIPS
CLAY PROCESSING AREA
REFUSE UNLOADING
LOADING HfORAULIC CEMENT
DISPOSAL OF CONCRETE BLOCK WASTES
STORAGE OF ASHESTOS ORE
TRANSPORT OF ASBESTOS ORE
TRANSPORT OF CLAY
IMPACT FACTOR
UL CALC
2.000. 000. 000.000
800,000,000.000
300.000.000.000
100.000.000.000
70.000.000.000
6. 000*000.000
3.000,000.000
3.000.000,000
2.000.000.000
2>000,000.000
2.000,000,000
2.000,000,000
1.000.000,000
900,000.009
500,000.000
400.000.000
000
30,000.000
20.000,000
20<000(000
20(000(000
10(000(000
10.00U.OOO
10,000,000
10,000,000
10,000(000
10(000,000
9,000,000
7,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
6,000.000
0,000,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000.000
?. 000. 000
900,000
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
B
c
c
c
c
c
B
B
D
c
B
B
c
D
c
B
c
D
0
B
c
D
0
c
c
0
c
B
c
B
A
A
0
c
B
D
A
D
8
0
B
B
n
s
4
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
?
2
?
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
4
2
2
2
2
2
?
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
32
-------
Table 5 (continued). PRIORITIZATION LISTING -
OPEN SOURCES
SlOHAGf OP SAUUUST 800,000 0 2
COAL CONVEYING 800,000 0 1
ALKALI ANO CHLORINE PLANT WASTES 700,000 C 2
LOADING LIME 600,000 C 2
SEWERAGE TRICKLING FILTER 500,000 C 1
SAW MILL WASTE STORAGE 500,000 C 2
COAL STORAGE 300,000 A 2
LJhILLING OIL AND GAS - BEFORE WELL HIT 200,000 B 2
OPEN MINING OF TALC 200.000 C 2
ASBESTOS PROCESSING AREA 100,000 D 2
TRANSPORT OF SULFUR iou,ooo c 2
LOADING OF FINISHED CLAY . 90,000 P 2
STORAGE OF RAW CLAY 90,000 D 2
CLAY SILOS - KAOLIN 70,000 A 2
SfWERAGE AERATION 60,000 C 1
STORAGE OF SULFUR 60,000 C 2
OPEN MINING AND GRINDING OF PUMICE 50,000 C 2
TKANSPORT OF TALC ORE 50,000 C 2
STORAGE OF TALC ORE »0,000 c 2
SEWtRAGE VACCUUK FILTER 30,000 C 1
BARITE STORAGL 30,000 8 2
BARITE TRANSPORT 20,000 8 2
OPEN MINING ANU STORAGE OF MICA 20,000 c 2
OPEN CLAY MINING 20,000 0 2
33
-------
SECTION III
APPENDIXES
DETAILED EXAMPLES USING PRIORITIZATION MODEL
A. Use of Model with Common Inputs
B. Example of Population Sensitive Calculation
C. Location Sensitive Calculations
D. Example of Detailed Calculation
E. Example of Open Sources Calculation
35
-------
APPENDIX A
USE OF MODEL WITH COMMON IMPUTS
Since published standards exist for the five criteria
pollutants, it was deemed inappropriate to use TLVs for
these materials. Instead, the primary standard, S, was
set equal to the hazard potential factor, F. Common
constants used were:.
u = wind speed = 4.5 m/sec
e = 2.72
TT = 3.14
aln the organic materials category, emissions that were
specifically identified as organic were termed "named
hydrocarbons" to differentiate them from the criteria
hydrocarbon emissions of indeterminate composition. The
hazard potential factor for these materials was defined
as follows:
(TLV.K if TLV.K < S0-
F = I HC
( SHC if TLV.K > SHC
where SHC = hydrocarbon standard = 0.16 mg/m3
and K = (40/168)(1/100)
36
-------
Table A-l gives the population and area data for the 50
states.1* Table A-2 lists the ambient air quality for the
criteria pollutants.5
uThe World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1974.
5Air Quality Data - 1972 Annual Statistics. Publication
No. EPA-450/2-74-001.
37
-------
Table A-l. POPULATION AND AREA DATA BY STATE
1
2
3
4
b
6
7
H
~f
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I')
20
21
22
*3
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
so
STATf
ALABAMA
ALASKA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLOKAUQ
CONNECTICUT
UELAWARE
FLORIDA
uEOKOIA
HAWAII
IDAHO
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MAINE
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSLTTi
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
MONTANA
NEBRASKA
NEVADA
NEW HAMPirtlHt
NEW JERSEY
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
N CAHOLINA
N DAKOTu
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISL'M
S CAROLINA
S DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
WYOMING
POPULATION
3521000.
325000.
1963000.
20U80UO.
2U411000.
2364000.
3080000.
571000.
7347000.
4733000.
816000.
7550UO.
11244000.
5286000.
2684000.
2268000.
3306000.
3738000.
1026000.
4800000,
5796000.
9013000.
36770UO.
2256000.
4747000.
716000.
1523000.
533000.
774000.
7349000.
1076000.
18367000.
5221000.
634000.
10722000.
2633COO.
2185000.
11905000.
969000.
2668000.
680000.
40720UO.
11604000.
1127000.
4600UO.
4765000.
3418000.
1795000.
4526000.
346000.
POPULATION
FRACTION
0.0169U93
0.0015608
0.0094272
O.OU96433
0.0980223
0.0113529
0.0147915
O.OU27422
0.0352834
0.0227299
0.0039186
0.0036256
0.0539985
0.0253856
0.0136502
U. 0108919
0.0158768
0.0179515
0.0049273
0.0230516
0.0276349
0.0432843
0.0186190
0.0108343
0.0227971
0.0034385
0.0073381
0.0025597
0,0037171
0.0352930
0.0051674
0.0882062
0.0250735
0.0030447
0.0514916 .
0.0126448
0.0104933
0.0571729
0.0046536
0.0129069
0.0032657
0.0195555
0.0557274
0.0054123
0.0022091
0.0228836
0.0164147
0.0086204
0.0217358
0.0016616
AREA
51609.
586412.
113909.
53104.
158693.
104247.
5009.
2057.
58560.
58876.
6450.
83557.
56400.
36291.
56290.
82264.
40395.
48523.
33215.
10577.
8257.
58216.
84068.
47716.
69666.
147138.
77227.
110540.
9304,
7836.
121666.
49576.
52586.
70665.
41222.
69919.
96981.
45333.
1214.
31055.
77047.
42244.
267338.
84916.
9609.
40817.
68192.
24181.
56154.
97914.
AREA
FRACTION
0.01428
0.16221
0.03151
0.01469
0.04390
0.02884
0.00139
0.00057
0.01620
0.01629
0.00178
0.02311
0.0156'!
0.01004
0.01557
0.02276
0.01117
0.01342
0.00919
0.00293
0.00226
0.01610
0.02325
0.01320
0.01926
0.04070
0.02136
0.03058
0.00257
0.00217
0.03366
0.01371
0.01455
0.01955
0.01140
0.01934
0.02683
0.01254
0.00034
0.00859
0.02131
0.01169
0.07395
0.02349
0.00266
0.01129
0.01886
0.00669
0,01553
0.02709
NO OF (
COUNTIES
67.
29.
14.
75.
58.
63.
8.
3.
67.
159.
5.
44.
102.
92.
99.
105.
120.
64.
16.
23.
14.
83.
87.
62.
114.
56.
93.
16.
10.
21.
32.
62.
100.
53.
88.
77.
36.
67.
5.
46.
67.
95.
254.
29.
14.
96.
39.
55.
72.
23.
'OPULATW
UENSHV
66.223
0.554
17.233
37.S13
128.619
22.677
614.893
277. Sli*
125.461
80.389
126.512
9.U36
199.362
145.656
51.* 13
27.570
61.842
77.U36
30.89U
453.815
701. 95U
154.820
46.117
47.28U
66.12U
4.866
19.7B6
4.822
83.190
937. 8S1
8.844
370.482
99.285
*. 972
260. 1U4
37.658
22.530
26'. 612
798.188
«6.bb6
£ . 026
96.392
43.406
13.272
47.H72
116.741
50.123
74.232
80.6UU
3.534
TOTALS
208228064.
l.OOOU
3615055.
1.0000
Legend
Area is given in square miles.
Population density is given in persons/mi2
33
-------
Table A-2. AMBIENT AIR QUALITY DATA BY STATE
FOR CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
STATE PANTICULATES
1 63 0.22366003
2 111 0.34200E-03
i 32 0.31672E-OJ
4 32 0.14731E-03
5 19 0.21937E-03
6 69 0.28899E-03
7 26 0.1838SE-03
h 16 C.17169E-03
<» 43 0.12393E-03
10 31 Q.1.19451-03
11 m 0.14300E-03
12 30 0.2f.080L-03
13 ft U.11204E-03
14 128 U.20084E-03
IS 3U 0.21S10E-03
1(> 39 0.19697E-03
17 90 D.17910E-03
IS 12 0.17267E-03
19 7 0.83000E-04
21. 85 0.15182E-03
21 52 C.15679E-03
?V 109 0.20440E-03
?5 59 0.14237E-03
?4 2 0.93000E-04
«!5 49 0.20S90E-03
?o 2 0.92000E-04
27 36 0.16975E-03
2h "41 0.371001-03
2V 26 0.14292E-03
3li 79 0.13514L-03
31 28 0.248UOS.-03
32 233 0.1-J260E-03
.53 199 0.1B053(-03
34 16 0.2223fl£-03
35 137 0.27228E-03
.16 9b G.19453E-03
37 48 0.16067E-03
Jo 105 0.24043E-03
39 23 0.14004E-03
40 75 0.20008E-03
41 2 0.13650L-03
42 96 0.1H928E-03
43 192 0.231UBL-03
44 • 8 0.43513L-03
45 2 0.16000L-03
4fr 122 0.198UOL-03
47 57 O.P.1718E-03
4(i 38 0.20964E.-03
4'j 7 0.14586E-03
50 4 0.95750E-04
CAKBOM HONOXIOL
2
1
2
0
51
1
0
0
6
?
1
0
1
3
2
5
7
3
0
19
3
3
3
0
10
0
1
1
0
22
1
13
2
0
12
3
2
2
2
0
1
4
1
4
0
9
10
1
1
0
0.15200E-01
0.46UOOE-01
C.552UOC-01
0.4UUOOE-01
0.21300E-U1
0.494UOE-01
C.HOUOOE-01
0.4UUOOE-01
0.23900C-01
0.23UOOE-01
0.37HOOE-01
U.40000E-01
0.27faUOC-Ul
0.12100E-01
0.13200E-01
U.26200E-01
0.27^00E-01
O.ltt^OOE-01
U.40UOOE-01
U.19ZOOE-01
0.326UOC-01
0.1304
O.B6700E-04
U.95500F-0»>
0.43700E-04
0.79700E-04
C.11640E-03
0.95SOOE-04
0.11730E-03
0.26000E-04
0.73500E-04
0.13000E-U4
0.11720E-03
0.46270E-03
0.10750F-03
0.73200E-04
0.25200E-04
0.13360C-03
0.69900E-04
0.80000E-04
0.14450E-03
0.794UOE-04
0.99000£'04
0.71300C-04
0.14780E-03
U.44100E-04
0.70000E-05
0.29000E-04
0.26100E-04
0.50000E-04
U.80000E-04
0.79300E-04
0.52800E-04
0.11630E-03
0.61300E-04
0.13SOOE-04
NITGN UIOXIUE
13
I
5
?
14
2
4
3
22
13
11
n
4
40
2
29
3^
4
1
38
42
6
3
2
4
1
3
0
4
8
7
8
72
n
30
19
1
14
15
16
1
23
13
A
0
6
10
1
3
2
0.71400C-04
0.96500F-04
0.h69COL-04
n. (\03onr.-04
0.1762'.lL-n3
0.8630nE-04
0.15340E-03
0.88700E-04
n.ii76nE-n3
0.42iur>r.04
0.4370'JF-04
0.100001-0}
O.ltlilOC-0'5
n.i0740E-ns
0.84000E-04
5.3270CE-04
o.tieonr-oi.
0.105brl-03
o.35ounr-ou
0.71500L-04
0.770COE-C4.
n,13?7nE-n3
0.9b30PE-04
0.61800E-04
0.92300E-04
0.240COE-04
0.65SOOE-04
0.10000E-03
0.25600E-04
0.10980E-03
0.497UOE-04
0.10540E-03
0.450UGE:-04
U.10000E-OS
0.146tOE-03
0.51900E-04
0.12SOOE-03
0.10190E-OJ
0.84000E-04
0.47800E-04
0.38000E-04
0.51000E-04
0.94100E-04
0.1S9COE-t!J
0.10000E-03
0.863UOE-04
0.86800E-04
0.11500E-0?
0.77200E-04
0.28500E-01*
HYDROCARBONS
2
0
2
0
37
1
0
U
1
'1
0
0
1
0
0
0
7
U
0
12
0
b
2
0
9
U
0
1
0
4
0
10
1
0
2
U
1
1
0
0
U
0
0
c
0
1
3
0
U
0
0.10839E-01
o.noooOE*oo
U.48880E-02
o.onoooE»oo
U.9'i077E-02
".H1790E-02
O.OOUOOE+00
o.onocoE*oo
0.21940E-02
I.S1870E-02
U.OOUOOf»00
O.OOOOOE*00
0.'i0510E-OJi
O.OOUUOE+00
U.OOUOOE«00
0.'35000E*OU
P.91224E-0«!
'J.OOOOOE + OU
n.noooor»no
O.S2366E-02
n .OOUOOE+OO
n.OOOOOFtOO
0.f56525E-Oi:
0,OOOOOF»QO
0.67977E-02
O.OOOUOr.CO
O.OOOOOE+00
0.50540E-02
O.OPOOOE»00
0.10846E-01
O.OCOUOE+CO
0.7?356E-02
0.65300F.-02
O.OOOOOFtOO
0.92795E-02
O.OOUUOE4-OU
0.34720E-0;;
0.59850E-02
3.00000E+00
O.OOOOOE4-00
U.OUOOOE*00
O.OOUOOEtOO
O.OOOCOE*00
I.'.OOO:OE*OO
O.OOUOOE+00
O.»7760f-n2
0.57633E-02
U.OOOOOF «05
O.OOOUOEtOO
o.oooooc+oo
LEGEND
Column 1 is the state code which corresponds to that used
in Table A-l.
The columns of integers preceeding the corresponding
criteria levels are the number of points used in computing
that state average.
For particulates and SOz, the maximum observed 24-hr
averages were used in the subsequent state average
calculation.
For N02, the annual average values from individual stations
were used to compute the state average.
For CO and hydrocarbons, the maximum observed 1-hr averages
were used.
A value of zero for a given state indicates unreported
data. For those points we set x '/S = 1.0.
39
-------
APPENDIX B
EXAMPLE OF POPULATION SENSITIVE CALCULATION
1.
SOURCE INFORMATION
Source Type; Asphalt Paving-Hot Mix
* Basic Data; Table B-l contains the basic data which
will be used to calculate the impact factor, I .
Jt
Additional Data:
Frequency of operation (f) = 0.17
Total capacity of asphalt industry (CAP) = 2.9478
x 108 Mg/yr
Number of materials emitted (N) = 7
Height of emissions (h) = 15.24
Table B-l. ASPHALT PAVING-HOT MIX INPUT DATA
Pollutant
Particulates
Sulfur oxides
Nitrogen oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon monoxide
POM3
Aldehydes
Primary
standard ,
g/m3
S = 2.6 x lQ~k
S2 = 3.65 x ID"4
S3 = 1.0 x ID"4
S4 = 1.60 x lQ~k
S5 = 4.00 x 10~2
TLV,
g/m3
TLV, = 5.1 x 10~6
b
TLV7 = 3.000 x 10~3
Emission factor,
g/Mg product
EI = 800.14
E2 = 400.07
E3 = 45.01
E. = 3.70
4
E = 5.00
E,. = 3.60 x 10~3
b
E? = 4.95 x 10"1
POM = Polycyclic Organic Material.
40
-------
2. PROCEDURE FOR CALCULATION OF IMPACT FACTOR
The equation used for determining impact factor is given as:
K
[X = E
N
E
Fi
X'i.
Si
1/2
(B-l)
For the asphalt industry having plants located in all 50
states and emitting seven pollutants, the above equation is
written as:
or
50
zx = E
7
E
Fi
- p
7
E
+ P,
Fi
lii
F.
Si
_ii
si
X'i.
Si
1/2
1/2
1/2
50
7
E
x1,
i50
Fi
Si
1/2
This can be simplified as:
(B-2)
'50
41
-------
where
I = p.
xl -
7
z
lil
Y1
x i
Si
1/2
(B-3)
I can be defined as the contribution to the total impact
xl
factor I by the 1st state, i.e., Alabama. I can also be
X X-*
written for the seven emitted species as:
pi
V *u \
\F1 )
11
21
X'
71
\
1/2
(B-4)
To calculate the total impact factor, I , it is necessary
X
'"s,
to the impact factor by each state.
to first determine I ,1 , I , the contribution
xl X2 X50
3. CONTRIBUTION TO THE IMPACT FACTOR BY THE FIRST STATE
I (ALABAMA)
Xl
Basic Information for Alabama
Stored data for state : 01 (Alabama)
Population fraction PF, = 1.69 x 10~2
Population density P, = 26.34 persons/km2
Capacity for Alabama (CAP,)
CAP1' = (PF^ (CAP)
-j^ = (1.69 x 10~2)(2.95 x 108)
l = 4.985 x 106 Mg/yr
42
-------
c. Emission rate for particulate for Alabama (Q,)
Q1 = j (YPS) (CAP1) (E^
where:
3.1688088 x 10"8 years
second
''Ql = rTm3-17 x 10"8)(4-985 x 1Q6) (SOO.14)
Q., = 743.47 g/sec
Dimensional analysis shows
0 = [ x
v sec / year Mg sec
d. X for particulates for Alabama (X )
—max c max, —
2Q
X
maxl 7Th2eu
where:
h2 = (15.24)2 m2
h2 = 232.26 m2
_ 2 (734.47) g/m3
(3.14) (232.26) (2.72) (4.47)
X = 1.65 x 10'1 g/m-
maxl
Dimensional analysis shows
y _ g x sec"1 _ g_
m2(msec l) m3
43
-------
e . Hazard Potential Factor (F.^ ) for particulates for Alabama
Fx = S1 = 2.6 x 10'1* g/m3
(All states have same F,)
f . Other Pollutants for Alabama
Using the procedure described in Section 3. a through 3.c
above, values for Q
max
and F are calculated for all
pollutants from Alabama. These values are then used to
calculate the impact factor for Alabama according to the
following formula:
X'
21
S2
1/2
(B-5)
where
[ = impact factor contribution by each of seven
xl .pollutants from Alabama
P, = population density of Alabama
= x f°r particulate in Alabama
ITlcLX
= particulate ambient air level in Alabama
= 2.24 x 10'^ g/m3
F '
S =
F2 '
S2 =
hazard potential factor for particulate
primary standard for particulate
X for sulfur oxides in Alabama
max
sulfur oxide ambient air level in Alabama
hazard potential factor for sulfur oxides
primary standard for sulfur oxide
44
-------
Other single digit subscripts identify specific pollutants
as listed in Table B-l, e.g., F-, F., FS/ F- and F_ refer to
the hazard potential factor for nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons,
carbon monoxide, polycyclic organic material and aldehydes,
respectively. In double digit subscripts, the first digit
identifies the pollutant as before, while the second digit
identifies the state, e.g., x~51» X52 and X53 refer to xmax
for carbon monoxide in Alabama, Alaska, and Arizona, respec-
tively.
g. Impact Factor Contributions by All Seven Pollutants
for Alabama
X 11 ? ?4 v 1 o~ **
£>•___ J--L f. , f.t A J.U f> nr
Since, —=— = - u.ob
2.6 x 10
then
and,
X'
11
= 1.0
I =
26.352
1.65 x 10
V 2.6 x 10"
(1.0)
• * • • •
1/2
x
= ["(694.
1 L
3) (633) +
• • • • • I
1/2
I = 18,327 (i.e., the impact factor contribution
xl for all seven pollutants for Alabama)
Dimensional analysis shows
(persons/km2)
or
I = persons/km2
xl
1/2
45
-------
4. CONTRIBUTION TO THE IMPACT FACTOR BY THE SECOND STATE
(ALASKA)
a. Basic Information for Alaska
Stored data for state : 02 (Alaska)
Population fraction PF2 = 1.56 x 10~3
Population density P_ = 2.14 x 10"1 persons/km2
b. Capacity for Alaska (CAP^)
CAP2 = (PF2)(CAP)
CAP2 = (1.56 x 10~3) (2.95 x 108)
CAP2 = 4.60 x 105 Mg/year
c. Emission rate for particulate for Alaska (Qg)
Q2 = ^T~ (YPS) (CAP2} (E1)
Q2 = ^-Jy (3.17 x 10~8)(4.60 x 105)(800.14)
Q2 = 68.6 g/sec
d. x for particulate for Alaska (X_ )
ItlclX • " — • - ^
2 (68.6) , :
g/m-
(232.26) (3.14) (2.72) (4.47)
e. Other Pollutants for Alaska
Similarly, Q2/ xmax / and F are calculated for all pollutants
from Alaska and these values are used to calculate the
46
-------
impact factor for Alaska using the following equation:
x, N2
substituting:
(2.14 x
X'
12
+ P.
'- \2
C22
X1
22
X72
P.,
X'
72
1/2
,2.60 x lQ~k
I = I 4.6 x 10"2 (59.6)2 +
X2
(B-6)
2 -i 1/2
(1.0)
1/2
where I = 15.5 = sum of impact factor contributions by
X2 • each of seven pollutants for Alaska.
5. CONTRIBUTION TO THE IMPACT FACTOR BY THE REMAINING STATES
Using the same procedure as outlined above for Alabama and
Alaska, the respective contributions of each of the remain-
ing 48 states to the impact factor are calculated. These
calculations will not be repeated, but follow by induction.
Therefore, the following relationship is achieved.
X 1 O O
Finally, for Asphalt Paving-Hot Mix,
Ix = 3,221,290
47
-------
and, after rounding to one significant figure,
I = 3,000,000
x
The input data form used for prioritization is shown in
Table B-2.
48
-------
Table B-2.
op-i
POPULATION SENSITIVE PRIORITIZATION DATA
CATEGORY Organic Chemicals
Log No.
Confidence
Leve1 B
SOURCE DESCRIPTION Asphalt Paving - Hot Mix
SCC 3-05-002-99 .
SOURCE CAPACITY 2.9478 x 108
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION
17
.Megagrams/year
(% OF YEAR)
NUMBER OF MATERIALS EMITTED_
NUMBER OF PLANTS/SITES
4800
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF EMISSION
15.24
-Meters
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICIPATE
SOX
NOX
HC
CO
POM
Aldehydes
TLV
(g/m3).
5.10 x 10"6
3.00 x 10"3
EMISSION FACTOR
(g/Mg)
800.14
400.07
45.01
3.70
5.00
3.60 x 10~3
4.95 x 10"1
REFERENCE
Vandegrift, A.E., et al.
"Particulate Emission Syst.
Study." Volume I - Mass
Emissions. MRI. NTIS
# PB203-128
Hangebrauch, R. P.,
VonLehmden, D. J. , and
Meeker, J. E. "Sources of
Polynuclear Hydrocarbons in
the Atmosphere." Environmental
Health Series. AIR-136.
PB 174706
MRC Engineering Estimates
49
-------
APPENDIX C
LOCATION SENSITIVE CALCULATIONS
1. SOURCE INFORMATION
• Source Type: Coal-Fired Steam Electric Utilities
• Input Data;
Total Capacity (CAP) = 3.9 x 108 Mg/yr coal burned
Frequency of operation (f) = 1.0
Number of materials emitted (N) = 19
Height of emission (h) = 82.3 m
2.
IMPACT FACTOR CALCULATION
The following equation will be used to calculate the impact
factor for the first state:
= Pi
19
1/2
(C-l)
Since there are 19 materials emitted in each of the states
the calculations will be shown for only three materials
(particulate, sulfur oxides, and aldehydes) in one state
(Alabama), and the remaining calculation steps follow by
induction.
50
-------
a. Data for First State: 01 (Alabama)
Population density (Pi) = 26.3 persons/km2
Capacity (CAP^ = 1.842 x 10 7 Mg/yr
X'n = 2.24 x 10"1* g/m3
X'21 = 1.08 x 10"5 g/m3
b. For Particulates
Emission factor (E,) = 15,600 g/Mg of coal burned
Ql =(|)(YPS) (CAPi)
Q1 = (3.17 x 10~8 ) (1.842 x 107)(15,600)
= 9,109 g/sec
2Q
Xmax = TTH'eu
2 (9109)
max (3.14159)16773.3) (2.72) (4.47)
= °-0705 ^/m3
x'
Defining A =
X 11 X -11
and since -5 — < 1.0, then set -5 — =1.0
Sl Sl
07052
2.60 x
= 73524
51
-------
c. For Sulfur Oxides
SO emission factor (E9) = 4.75 x 101* g/Mg
Q2 =y(YPS) (CAP^ (E2)
= j (3.17 x 10"8) (1.842 x 107)(4.75 x
= 27,736 g/sec
max Treuh2
(2) (27736)
(38.43) (82.3) 2
= 0.213 g/m3
/7 \ 2 /v1 \
/ X21 l I * 21 1
Defining A = U^ -5^
^ \F2 / \ S2 /
/ 0.213 \2
3.65 x 10
(1.0)
A2 = 340544
d. For Aldehydes
Aldehyde emission factor (Eg) = 2.5 g/Mg
Q = (YPS) (CAP^ (Eg)
(3.17 x 10~8) (1.842 x 107) (2.5)
Q_ = 1.46 g/sec
52
-------
x = (2)(1.46)
max (38.43)(82.3)2
3
*max = 1-12 x lO'* g/m
2
X71 \ / X'
Defining A = I -j±.
I \ * -i
Since S7 is undefined for aldehydes, then;
and
Since aldehyde TLV = 3 x 10~3 g/m3
then F? = (3 x 10~3)(2.38 x 10~3)
F? = 7.14 x 10"6 g/m3
«* A /1.12 x 10"5 \ 2 M n,
and A_ = / ] (1.0)
V7.14 x 10~6
A? = 2.46
then
1/2
+ A + ---- + A + ---- + A) '
I = (26.3) (73524. + 340544. + ... + 2.5 + ..
Xl
I = 50,421
Xl
53
-------
The above procecure is repeated for the remaining states
to obtain:
I = 50421 + + I
x
I = 2,289,560
j£
and after rounding,
I = 2,000,000
JC
The input data forms used for the above location sensitive
calculations are shown in Tables C-l through C-3.
54
-------
Table C-l.
CATEGORY
LOCATION SENSITIVE PRIORITIZATION DATA Pa9e I of 1
Confidence
Level B
Combustion
SOURCE DESCRIPTION Coal-Fired Steam Electric Utilities
SCC '_
TOTAL PRODUCTION 4.30 x 108 ____
(Fuel Consumption!
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION 100
NUMBER OF PLANTS/SITES
.(TONS/YEAR)
(% OF YEAR)
NUMBER OF MATERIALS EMITTED
19
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICULATE
SOX
NOX
HC
CO
Aldehydes
Arsenic
Beryllium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Vanadium
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Copper
POM
Selenium
Zinc
TLV
(g/m3)
3 x 10~3
5 x lO""*
2 x 1C"6
5 x 10~3
1 X 10~5
1 x 10"
5 x 10"
_i<
5 x '10
10 x 10"
1 x lO"*1
1 x 10~3
10 x 10"6
2 x io"1*
5 x 10~3
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Ibs/ton)
31.2
95.0
18
0.3
1.0
0.005
3 x IO"3
3.7 x IO"3
a x io"2
4 x 10'1*
-it
6 x 10
-4
7 x 10
15 x 10~3
18 x IO"3
1 x IO"3
2.5 x IO"3
1.4 x 10~6
2.5 x IB"3
17 x 10" 3
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT (ft)
270
i
\
t
t
270
REFERENCE
55
-------
Table C-2.
OF 2a
LOCATION SENSITIVE PRIORITIgATION DATA
STATE INFORMATION
Page 2 of 3
SOURCE DESCRIPTION_
AVERAGE PLANT SIZE
NUMBER OF STATES
Coal-Fired Steam-Electric Utilities
(TONS/YEAR)
42
STATE
CODE
(XX)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
STATE PRODUCTION
(TONS/YEAR)
2.03 X 107
5.02 x 103
5.23 x 105
0
0
5.12 x 106
3.24 x lO1*
9.53 x 10s
7.4 x 106
1.21 x 107
0
0
3.63 x 107
3.00 x 107
5.92 x 106
1.16 x 10«
7.50 x 107
0
0
4.60 x 10s
1.45 x 1011
2.29 x 10 7
7.71 x 106
1.34 x 10 6
1.74 x 10 7
9.97 x 10 5
1.50 x 10 6
4.31 x 10 6
1.16 x 10 6
2.66 x 106
8.38 x 10 6
NUMBER
OF
PLANTS
REFERENCE
,
56
-------
Table C-3.
OF- 2a
LOCATION SENSITIVE .•HIORITIi'.ATJ i_N UATA
STATE INFORMATION
Page 3 of 3
SOURCE DESCRIPTION Coal-Fired Steam Electric Utilities
AVERAGE PLANT SIZE (TONS/YEAR)
NUMBER OF STATES
STATE
CODE
(XX)
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
STATE PRODUCTION
(TONS/YEAR)
6.50 x 106
2.22 X 107
5.39 x 106
4.86 x 107
2.23 x 103
0
4.34 x 107
0
6.10 x 106
4.01 x 105
1.95 x 107
5.28 x 106
1.10 x 106
3.35 x 101*
5.51 x 106
4.17 x 106
2.54 x 107
1.13 x 107
6.47 x 106
NUMBER
OF
PLANTS
REFERENCE
57
-------
APPENDIX D
EXAMPLE OF DETAILED CALCULATION
1. SOURCE INFORMATION
• Source Type; Acrylonitrile Manufacturing
• Input Data for all Plants
Total Capacity (CAP) = 530706 Mg
Frequency of operation (f) = 1.0
Number of emitted materials (N) = 10
Height of emissions (h) = 30.5 m
Material
emitted
Particulate
SO
X
N0x
CO
Acrylonitrile
Acetonitrile
Hydrogen cyanide
Propylene
Propane
Lube oil
TLV,
g/m3
0.045
0.070
0.011
1.88
1.97
0.067
Emission
factor,
g/Mg
20.0
26,000.0
7,300.0
178,500.0
9,500.0
9,000.0
1,300.0
101,000.0
140,000.0
3,550.0
Emission
height,
m
30.5
H
ii
ii
H
ii
ii
H
n
11
58
-------
Input Data for Plant 1
Plant capacity (CAP^ = 81647 Mg/yr
County population density (P, ) = 1103 persons/km2
2. IMPACT FACTOR CALCULATION
The emission rate for particulates (Q,) is calculated as
follows:
Ql = ? (YPS) (CAPl) {s
(3.17 x 10"8) (81647) (20)
Q, = 0.0518 g/sec
(2) (0.0518)
maxl (38.43) (30.50)2
' 2'9 x 10"6 */m3
Defining A -
F1
The first plant is in Louisiana, and from Table A-2, x' -
1.73 x 10~u g/m3), and since x'/S < 1.0, we set this ratio
x'/s = i.o.
/2 92 x 10~6 \ 2
Then, A, = / ^ x u— | (1.0)
1 \2.6 x 10'* /
A, = 1.24 x lQ~k
59
-------
and for acrylonitrile:
Emission factor (E5) : 9500 g/Mg
TLV = 0.045 g/m3
F5 = 1.07 x 10"4 g/m
Q5 = (3-17 x 10"8) (81647) (9500)
Q5 = 24.6 g/sec
= (2) (24.6)
maX5 (38.43) (30. 5)2
*max5 = 1-38 x 10-3 g/m3
Since S is undefined for acrylonitrile, we set:
= 1.0
&
/x \2
and define Ac = =^i (1.0)
a _ . 1-38 X
A5 ~
1.07 x
A5 = 166.
This process is repeated for the ten emitted materials and
the impact factor for the first plant is:
60
-------
I = (1103) [1.94 x lQ~k + ... -I- 166 + ... AirJ1/2
x x u
I = (1103) [551]1/2
Xl
I = 25,891
Xl
The data for the next plant capacity and county population
density are then read and the process continues in the same
fashion until all five impact factors are computed. The
final impact factor is then:
I = 25,891 + ... + I
J\. ** f
Ix = 41,709
and after rounding
I = 40,000
A
Detailed input data used in this calculation are presented
In Tables D-l through D-5.
61
-------
Table D-l.
l-F-3
CATEGORY
DETAILED INPUT PRIORITIZATION DATA
Organic
Log No. 1005
Uncertainty
Level^ B
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
scc 3-01-026-08
Acrylonitrile
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION American Cyanamide, Fortier, La.
SOURCE CAPACITY 90.000
(PRODUCTION, FUEL USAGE)
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION _1.0
(TONS/YEAR)
NUMBER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMITTED
COUNTY POPULATION DENSITY 2857
10
(PERSONS/SQUARE MILE)
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICULATE
SOX
NOX
HC
CO
Acrylonitrile
Acetonitrile
Hydrogen Cyanide
Propylene
Propane
Lube Oil
TLV
(g/m3)
0.045
0.070
0.011
1.88
1.97
0.067
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Ibs/ton)
0.04
52.0
14.6
357
19.0
18.0
2.6
202.
280.
7.1
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT (ft
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
AMBIENT CONC.
(g/m3)
•
REFERENCE
62
-------
Table D-2.
IT-3
CATEGORY
IHvTAILED INPUT PRIORITIZATJON DATA
Organic
Log No. 1005
Uncertainty
Level
SOURCE DESCRIPTION Acrylonitrile
SCC
3-01-026-08
SO.URCE IDENTIFICATION DuPont, Memphis, Tennessee
SOURCE CAPACITY 81,000
(PRODUCTION, FUEL USAGE)
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION 1.0
(TONS/YEAR)
NUMBER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMITTED 1Q
COUNTY POPULATION DENSITY 962
(PERSONS/SQUARE MILE)
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICULATE
SOX
NOX
IIC
CO
TLV ,
(g/m3)
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Ibs/ton)
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT (ft)
AMBIENT CONC.
(g/m3)
REFERENCE
63
-------
Table D-3.
l'F-3
CATEGORY
III'TAILED INPUT PRI01UTIZATION DATA
Organic
Log No. 1005
Uncertainty
Level B_
SOURCE DESCRIPTION Acrylonitrile
sec
3-01-026-08
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION DuPont, Beaumont, Texas
SOURCE CAPACITY 90,000
(PRODUCTION, FUEL USAGE)
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION 1.0
(TONS/YEAR)
NUMBER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMITTED 1Q
COUNTY POPULATION DENSITY 255
(PERSONS/SQUARE MILE)
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICULATE
SOX
NOX
I1C
CO
TLV
(g/m3)
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Ibs/ton)
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT (ft)
AMBIENT CONC.
(g/m3)
REFERENCE
64
-------
Table D-4.
l'F-3
CATEGORY
DETAILED INPUT PRIOIUTIZATION DATA
Organic
Log No. 1005
Uncertainty
Level B_
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
scc 3-01-026-08
Aerylonitrile
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION Monsanto, Chocolate Bayou, Texas
SOURCE CAPACITY
(PRODUCTION, FUEL USAGE)
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION
166,000
(TONS/YEAR)
1.0
NUMBER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMITTED
COUNTY POPULATION DENSITY 75
10
(PERSONS/SQUARE MILE)
MATERIAL EMITTED
PARTICULAR'S
SOX
NOX
IIC
CO
TLV
(g/m'3)
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Ibs/ton)
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT(ft)
AMBIENT CONC.
(g/m3)
REFERENCE
65
-------
Table D-5.
l-F-3
CATEGORY
Dl'TAILED INPUT PRIOH ITI7.ATION DATA
Organic
Log No. 1005
Uncertainty
Level n_
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
scc 3-01-026-08
Acrylonitrile
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
SOURCE CAPACITY
(PRODUCTION, FUEL USAGE)
FREQUENCY OF OPERATION
Vistron. Lima, Ohio
158.000
(TONS/YEAR)
1.0
NUMBER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FJ1ITTED
COUNTY POPULATION DENSITY 270
10
(PERSONS/SQUARE MILE)
MATERIAL EMITTED
PAKTICULATE
SOX
NOX
ilC -
CO
TLV
(g/m3)
EMISSION
FACTOR
(Itos/ton)
AVG.
EMISSION
HEIGHT(ft)
AMBIENT CONC.
(g/m3)
REFERENCE
66
-------
APPENDIX E
EXAMPLE OF OPEN SOURCES CALCULATION
1. APPROACH
In almost all cases, open sources were found to emit
particulates. These emitted particulates vary widely in
composition among the various source types. Thus, instead
of substituting the primary standard for the potential
hazard factor, a composite TLV was computed using the
following:
1'° - (E-l)
N f
£ -^
/^ TLV..^
where , N
f
c.
TLV = composite TLV, g/m3
f = fraction of i— component
TLV. = threshold limit value of the i— component,
g/m3
N = number of components
67
-------
Since there is only one emitted material, the impact
factor equation reduces to:
(E-2)
where, S = particulate standard = 2.6 x lQ~k g/m3.
For ground level releases (h=0), the Gaussian Plume equation
reduces to:
X =
It is obvious that there is no maximum concentration for a
ground level release. Two options were available to avoid
this problem. The first method would be to select an
average constant distance from source to receptor. In a
relative rank ordering, this constant distance could be
arbitrary since it would only affect the magnitudes of the
impact factors and not their order. Another approach was
to select an arbitrary imaginary height and use the x
equation. This latter approach was used to preserve
computational compatibility with other source type calcu-
lations.
For open source location sensitive calculations, the
production capacity on a single county or multi-county
basis was known. For a given state, the population in the
affected counties was summed and divided by the sum of the
county areas in order to compute the population density of
the j— region.
As can be seen from the input data sheet (Table E-l), the
sum of the state capacities does not equal the U.S. total
68
-------
capacity. To preserve the confidentiality of individual
manufacturers' production data, the Minerals Yearbook does
not publish data for states with only a few individual manu-
facturers. These data are included in the national total
as unreported capacity.
For these calculations, the last stage in computing I is
as follows:
_ . Impact factor
x (Sum of reported quantity handled/total U.S. quantity)
2. SOURCE INFORMATION
• Sample Type; Barite Milling
• Composite TLV (TLV )
Particulate consists of 92% Barite (BaSO^) with a TLV of
0.5 x 10~3 g/m3 and 8% inert dust with a TLV of 1.0 x 10"2
g/m3. Therefore,
1.0
= ~ """~
composite ~~ inert fraction BaSOi^ fraction
TLVinert TLV
TLV = -
c 0.92 . 0.08
0.5 x 10~3 1 x 10~2
TLVc = 0.54 x 10~3 g/m3
69
-------
Input Data;
Total U.S. Capacity (CAP): 1,466,926 Mg/year
Emission height (h): 3.05 m
Other data' are presented in Table E-l.
Table E-l. PRIORITIZATION DATA (OPEN SOURCES)
SOURCE: Barite Milling
TOTAL U.S. QUANTITY: 1,466,926
AVERAGE HEIGHT: 3.05 meters
DISTRIBUTION: POP AREA
FREQUENCY: 1.0
UNITS: Megagrams
LOG /
Location
18
25
43
28
4
Total
Quantity
handled,
Mg
459,945
210,468
181,438
174,181
154,222
1,180,254
Emission
factor,
g/Mg
2,500
it
H
M
H
Composite
TLV,
g/m3
0.54 x 10"3
H
H
H
H
Population,
people
585,787
15,015
2,093,840
2,630
21,498
Area,
km2
531
1,968
8,972
14,558
1,608
3. IMPACT FACTOR CALCULATION
a. For State 18 (Louisiana)
Capacity (CAP^ = 459,945 Mg/yr
Population density (P,) = (585787) (0.3858)
= 1,102 persons/km2
X1 for particulates = 1.73 x 10"1* g/m3
70
-------
Frequency of operation (f) = 1.0
Emission factor (E) = 2,500 g/Mg
and
Q-L = (— ) (E) (CAP^ (YPS)
where YPS = 3.17 x 10~8 years/second
Ql =JL-(250°) (459945) (3-17 x 10~8)
Q, = 36.5 g/sec
= (2)(36.5)
max (38.43) (3.05)2
X = 0.204 g/m3
Amax ^'
and • 1/2
= P
Pl F
where F = (0.54 x 10~3)(40/168)(1/100)
F = 1.29 x 10~6 g/m3
= (1102)
xl \1.29 x 10~6
I = 1.75 x 101
xl
71
-------
b. For State 25 (Missouri)
X1 = 2.06 x 10~" g/m3
• V '
• .*- = 1.0
CAP2 = 210,468 Mg/year
f = 1.0
E = 2500 g/Mg
P_ = 7.6 persons/km2
Q2 = (Y-%) (2500) (210468) (3.17 x 10~8)
Q2 = 16.68 g/sec
(2) (16.68)
Xmax2 (38.43)(9.3)
xmax = 9'3 X 10~2 g//m3
and
I = 7.6 /-9-'-3 x 10~2
X2 \1.29 x 10~6
I = 5.5 x 105
X2
c. For State 43 (Texas)
X1 = 2.3 x I0~k g/m3
. Y '
• -|- = 1.0
CAP3 = 181,438 Mg/year
f = 1.0
P, = 234 persons/km2
Q3 = (j7§) (181438) (2500) (3.17 x 10"8)
Qo = 14.4 g/sec
72 •
-------
28.8
357.4
Xmax3 = 8.06 x 10~2
! = 234 /8.06 x IP"2
• X3 \1.29 x 10"6
I = 1.46 x 107
X3
d. For State 28 (Nevada)
CAP4 = 174,181 Mg/yr
?4 = 0.18 persons/km2
X1 = 3.74 x 10~"
3.74 x 10"
S 2.60 x lO""
= 1.054
Q4 = (2500) (174181) (3.17 x 10""8)
Q4 = 13.8 g/sec
Xmax. = 7.7 x 10 2 g/m3
4 ,, x 1/2
= (PJUr1
4'\F /\ S
I = (0.18)(5.97 x 10k) (1.03)
X4
I = 1.1 x 10k
X4
e. For State 4 (Arkansas)
CAP5 = 154,222 Mg/yr
PS = 13.4 persons/km2
X1 = 1.5 x 10"" g/m3
73
-------
Q5 = 12.2 g/sec
= 6.9 x 10^
I = (13.4)(5.4 x 104)(1.0)
X5
I = 7.24 x 105
X5
I =1 + . . . + I
X X, X,.
Ix = 1.91 x 108
Since the reported totals are 80.5% of the U.S. total
capacity,
1.91 x 10
8
x 0.805
I = 2.37 x 108
X
74
-------
SECTION IV
REFERENCES
1. Turner, D. B. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion
Estimates. Publication No. 191482, May 1970.
2. Eimutis, E. C., and M. G. Konicek. Derivations of
Continuous Functions for the Lateral and Vertical
Atmospheric Dispersion Coefficients. Atmospheric
Environment, 6_: 859-863, 1972.
3. Slade, H. S. (ed.). Meteorology and Atomic Energy.
Publication TID 24190, July 1968.
4. The World Almanac Book of Facts, 1974.
5. Air Quality Data - 1972 Annual Statistics. Publication
No. EPA-450/2-74-001.
75
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-76-032a
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Source Assessment: Prioritization of Stationary
Air Pollution Sources--Model Description
5. REPORT DATE
February 1976
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOH(S)
Edward C. Eimutis
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
MRC-DA-508
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Monsanto Research Corporation
1515 Nicholas Road
Dayton, Ohio 45407
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1AB015; 21AVA-003
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-1874
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Task Final; 3/75-10/75
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTEsEpA_650/2-75-019a was the first report in this series.
EPA project officer for this report is D.A. Denny, 919/549-8411, Ext 2547.
16. ABSTRACT
The report describes a prioritization model for the rank-ordering of
stationary air pollution sources. The source types were rank-ordered or prior-
itized by computing a relative environmental impact factor for each source type.
A priority listing was developed for each of four categories: combustion, organic
materials, inorganic materials, and open sources. The report also describes both
the actual application of the model and the types of calculations that were performed
depending upon the degree of input aggregation. The report also gives detailed
examples of use, as well as results of sensitivity analyses, showing how the
prioritization model responds to input changes.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Air Pollution
Order (Sequence)
Mathematical Models
Environmental Engineering
Combustion
Organic Compounds
Inorganic Compounds
3. DISTRIBUTION STATfcMENT
Unlimited
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Air Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Pollutant Sources
Environmental Impact
Open Sources
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport}
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
Unclassified
c. COSATi Field/Group
13B
12A
05E
2 IB
07C
07B
21. NO. OF PAGES
83
22. PRICE
EFA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
77
------- |