1 MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Shrager, U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency, OAQPS\SPPD FROM: Amanda Singleton and Graham Gibson, ERG DATE: January, 2011 SUBJECT: Revised Standardization of Reporte d Data from the Public Comment Period and Questionnaire for Boilers, Process Heater s, Incinerators and Other Combustion Units

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This memorandum describes the processes used to standardize fuel type, emission test data, continuous emission monitor (CEM) data a nd other data reported by industry in the 2008 Questionnaire for Boilers, Process Heaters, Incinerators and Other Combustion Units 1 (ICR No. 2286.01, OMB Control No. 2060-0616, EPA Form N o. 5900-122), the 2009 Test Plan for Industrial, Commercial, and Institu tional Boilers and Process Heaters 2 (ICR No. 2286.02, OMB Control No. 2060-0616, EPA Form No. 5900-122), and the public comments and data received during and after the public comment period on the June 2010 proposal. ERG developed a comprehensive survey results database of all da ta reported by industry, as well as a consolidated emissions database. A data dictionary and descript ion of all the fields c ontained in the database are summarized in other memoranda. 3 This memorandum discusses only those data fields which required standardization, including (but not li mited to) emission values, design capacity values, fuel types and control devices. This memora ndum also explains the methodologies and any constants and conversion factors that were used to standardize these data fields.

Various types of reported qualitative and qua ntitative data were standardized by creating additional data fields in the ERG databases. Thes e fields were beneficial because they allowed manipulation of the raw data while maintaining a visual copy of the reported data. Further,2 knowing the reported data present alongside the ma nipulated data eased the process of quality assurance (QA) on the standardized fields.

Industry reported data in many different fo rmats, including a variety of units of measurement for pollutant emission values and nome nclature differences for a single fuel type. In order to make these categorizations, it was necessary to standardi ze this wide range of reported data.

This memorandum is divided into the following sections: 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Qualitative Data Standardizations 3.0 Standardization of Emission Data 4.0 Standardization of Design Capacities 5.0 Standardization of Fuel Analysis Data 6.0 References Appendix A: Glossary Appendix B: Conversion E quations and Lookup Tables Appendix C: Average F-Factors from ICCR Data

NOTE: Technical terms and acronyms used in the text, tables, and appendices of this memorandum are described in Appendix A

.3 2.0 QUALITATIVE DATA STANDARDIZATIONS

Reported fuel types and control devices we re standardized in order to categorize combustion units at separate facilities. E ach combustion unit was also assigned a specific classification based on its physical design to furt her aid in the categoriz ations. The processes used and assumptions made in standardizing these re ported data are discussed within this section.

2.1 Fuel Types

In order to assign combustion units to a fuel category and analyze data across different fuel types, these reported fuels needed to be stan dardized across all data tables where fuel type is used to characterize the unit. Table 1 shows each mention of fuel in the database where a corresponding standardized fuel field was genera ted. The reported design capacity fuels were not standardized because they may not necessarily represent the fuels routinely combusted in the combustion units.

Table 1 - Standardized Fuel Fields Table Reported Fuel Field Standardized Fuel Field

Data: CEMS Backgrnd TypFuel Common Fuel

MaxFuel Common MaxFuel Data: EmissionsTest Fuel Data FuelParameter_Type Common Fuel Data: Fuel Analysis Fu el_Material Common Fuel Data: Fuel Analysis Background Information Fuel_Material Common Fuel

Data: Materials Combusted StartupFuel Comm on StartupFuel

Fuel Common Fuel NRC_Fuel Common NRC_Fuel

Data: Non-Fossil Fuels NonFossilFuel Common Fuel4 A “common” fuel field was cr eated corresponding to each re ported fuel type in the database. In order to assign a common fuel t ype to each unique fuel reported, a table called LOOKUP: Common Fuels was created to map each reported fuel to a standardized fuel spelling and category. The level of detail within the common fuel categories were based on fuel categories provided in Appendix C of the Survey Overview Document 2 . If the reported fuel did not match any of the corresponding fuel categorie s in Appendix C, a new common fuel category was created.

Fuels were occasionally reported as a combina tion within a single re cord. Each reported fuel in the mixture was standardized to the form at listed in Appendix C of the Survey Overview Document 2 , separated by “and” or “/” in the standardiz ed fuel field. For example, a reported fuel of “#2 Fuel Oil, kerosene” was standardized to “No. 2 Distillate and Kerosene” or “No. 2 Distillate/Kerosene.” Combination fuels that app eared in a single data record were also included the LOOKUP: Common Fuels table.

Survey respondents were asked to select a fu el from a series of drop-down lists in the Microsoft ® Excel spreadsheet templates. These te mplates also allowed industry to select “other fuel” and enter a description of the type of fuel they combust. In these ca ses, the description was what was reported as the fuel t ype in the database. For data reported in the 2008 questionnaire, when an actual fuel was selected from the dr op down menu and comments were also entered in the other fuel type description field, the comments were reported as the fuel in the database instead of the fuel type selected from the drop- down list. In these cases, the original survey response template files were reviewed and the intended fuels were manually entered into the reported fuel fields of the database and the comm ents moved to the descri ption field. Then, the standardized fuel fields were update d using the format specified in the LOOKUP: Common Fuels table.5 2.2 Air Pollution Control Devices

In order to categorize and compare the current state of controls inst alled for various types of combustion units these reported de vices need to be standardized across all data tables where a control device used to characterize the da ta contained in a pa rticular record. Table 2 shows each mention of control device in the database wh ere a corresponding standardized control device field was generated.

Table 2 - Standardized Control Device Fields Table Reported Control Device Field Standardized Control Device Field Data: CEMS Backgrnd TypControl Standardized TypControl

Data: Control Device ControlDevice Standardized ControlDevice

PriorDevice Standardized PriorDevice Data: EmissionsTest

Background Info ControlDevice Standardized ControlDevice

In order to assign a standardized control de vice to each unique control reported, a table called LOOKUP: Control Devices was created to map each reported control device to a standardized control device spel ling and category. The standardiz ed control types were based on the list of control devices provided in the drop down lists in the Survey Answer Key. 4 If the reported fuel did not match any of the correspon ding control devices in the Answer Key, a new control device category was added to the LOOKUP: Control Devices table.

In the Data: CEMS Backgrnd and Data: EmissionsTest Background Info tables, the reported control devices were ofte n reported as “As listed in ques tion II.B.3.a1” or “As listed in question II.B.3.a6.” Both are re ferences to the entries for th at specific combustor in the Data: Control Device table. The former is a reference to the “ControlDevice” fi eld whereas the latter is a reference to the “PriorDevi ce” field. In those instances, the standardized control device field was populated with the standardized cont rol device data to which it referred.6 Occasionally, combinations of control de vices were entered when comments were entered as a result of selecting “other control device” from the drop-down list of controls in the Microsoft ® Excel template files. In these instan ces, each reported control device in the mixture was standardized, with individual control devices separated by “and” or “/” in the standardized field. For example, if a facility reported a cont rol device combination of “Flue gas recirculation/ low now burner”, this was standa rdized to “Low NOx Burners and Flue Gas Recirculation” or “Low NOx Burners/Flue Gas Recirculation.”

Survey respondents were asked to select a cont rol device from a series of drop-down lists in the Microsoft ® Excel spreadsheet templates. These templates also allowed industry to select “other control device” and enter a description of the control devi ce installed on the unit. In these cases, the description was what wa s reported as the fuel type in the database. For data reported in the 2008 questionnaire, when a specific control device was selected fr om the drop down menu and comments were also entered in the other fu el type description field, the comments were reported as the control device in the database instead of the c ontrol device selected from the drop-down list. In these cases, th e original survey response template files were reviewed and the intended control devices were manu ally entered into the reported control device fields of the database and the comments moved to the descripti on field. Then, the standardized control device fields were updated using th e format specified in the LOOKUP: Control Devices table.

2.3 Unit Classifications

The 2008 questionnaire collected data on several types of combustion un its. In order to analyze data on a particular subset of combusti on units, each unit was assigned to a classification of “Boiler,” “Process Heater” or “Other.” There was no clear and direct question within the questionnaire itself that asked whether a combus tion unit was a boiler, process heater or other unit. However there were a series of questions th at, if answered correctly or answered at all, would give enough information to deduce the type of unit. Table 3 shows the hierarchy used to classify all reported combustion units based on these indirect questionnaire questions.7 Table 3 - Combustor Classification Hierarchy Step Criteria Classification

1 If the facility selected a boile r design for the combustion unit (questions II.B.1.K and II.B.1.L of the Answer Key 4 ). Boiler If the facility selected a process heater design for the combustion unit (question II.B.1.M of the Answer Key 4 ). Process Heater

2 If the primary use of the combustion device was listed as steam generation and not also waste incineration (question II.B.1.I of the Answer Key 4 ). Boiler
If the primary use of the combustion device was listed as process heat and not also waste incineration or steam generation (question II.B .1.I of the Answer Key 4 ). Process Heater

3 If the fuel combusted was listed as being directly fed to a boiler (question II.C.2.B of the Answer Key 4 ). Boiler If the fuel combusted was listed as being directly fed to a process heater (question II. C.2.B of the Answer Key 4 ). Process Heater If the fuel combusted was listed as being directly fed to any other type of unit (question II.C.2.B of the Answer Key 4 ). Other

4 If the unit noted any cleaning/reconditioning or inspection of a feed water system (question II.B.3.C of the Answer Key 4 ). Boiler

5 If modifications to a unit’s c ontrol device(s) were made in order to comply with the now vacated 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD (question II.B.3.A.4 of the Answer Key 4 ). Boiler

6 If the facility selected an other combustor type design for the combustion unit (question II.B.1.N of the Answer Key 4 ). Other

7 If the facility-specified combustor ID contained any reference to the unit being a bo iler (for example, a combustor ID of “Boiler 1” would fit this description). Boiler
If the facility-specified combustor ID contained any reference to the unit being a pr ocess heater (for example, a combustor ID of “Heater 1” would fit this description). Process Heater
If the facility-specified combustor ID contained any reference to the unit being any other type of unit (for example, a combustor ID of “Kiln 1” would fit this description). Other

8 All remaining units. Other

If a unit met more than one of the criteria listed above, it was classified based on which criteria was listed first in the table. For exam ple, if a combustion unit’s primary use was steam generation (step 2) but also report ed feeding fuel directly to a process heater (step 3), the unit was classified as a boiler and not a process heater.8 After the eight steps in Table 3 were completed the data were reviewed to ensure that, even if the unit was a boiler, all assigned clas sifications were logical. The structure of the questionnaire itself allowed those reporting data to enter informati on about a boiler into a section about process heater designs, or vice versa. If the facility-assigned unit ID given to a combustion unit did not logically match the information th ey provided, then changes were made to the classification of the unit. For example, if a facility submitted data for a combustion unit named “Boiler 1,” but completed only sections dealing with process heaters, the combustion unit would have been classified as a process heater. In th is case, the classification would have been changed from process heater to boiler. For all similar in stances, the classifications were investigated and corrected using the same method.

3.0 STANDARDIZATION OF EMISSION DATA

Emission data were reported in the data tabl es in the consolidated emissions database entitled Data: EmissionsTest , Data: CEMS, and Data: CO and THC CEMS . All of the emission data were standardized according to th e procedures listed in this section.

3.1 Standardizations of Reported Emission Test and CEMS Data

The reported emissions data from emission test results and CEMS were standardized in order to provide a common basis for analyzi ng and comparing emission data from various potential boiler and process heater subcateg ories. The automated conversion equations, constants, and assumptions used to standardize em ission data are discussed within this section.

In order to allow for reporting of both non- detect data (with detection limits) and detectable emission data, all emission data were imported in a text field format. Numeric fields mirroring the contents of this text field were cr eated in order to apply mathematical operations on the emission data, and the reported detection li mits for non-detect emissions data. These data were reported as textual data due to the format in which non-detect da ta was reported; those completing the survey were asked to enter the det ection limit for that pollutant and test enclosed9 by brackets. Any reported data in this format was deemed non-detect and the value inside the brackets was used as the detection limit. Non-det ect data was also reported in other formats, so any reported data that included any text other than a numeric value was considered to be nondetect. For example, if the reported emission va lue was “ND 0.5” then the value was assumed to be non-detect and 0.5 was used as the detection limit. The format of the Questionnaire and Test Plan templates did not allow fo r monitoring data to be reporte d as non-detect values, so all reported data was assumed to be above detection limits.

Next, the units of measure were reviewed to identify any gaps or in consistencies in the reported units of measure. Sometimes the repor ted emission value included both the units and the emission value in the emission field, resulti ng in no units of measure reported in the emission unit column. In these cases, these units of m easure were separated from the emission value and the “Standardized Pollutant_Units” field was upd ated to include the intended units. For example, if the reported emission value was “ 10 ppm” and the reported emission value unit was null, the “Standardized Pollutant_Units” field was updated to “ppm” wh ile the “Standardized Pollutant_Value” field was updated to “10.”

Some combustion units reporte d an emission value but did not report any units of measurement corresponding to that value. These data points were compared to other data points from the same facility, combustor and pollutant. If there was additional data with reported units of measure and the value without units of measure was of the same order of magnitude, it was assumed that the units were consistent. Fo r example, if a combustion unit reported CO emissions to be “10 ppm,” “14 ppm,” and “12”, it was assumed that the “12” was intended to be “12 ppm.” If the reported emission value without any units of measure was not within the same order of magnitude, no units of measure were assi gned to the data points and those values were not standardized.

After both a numeric emission data point and a reported unit of measure had been assigned and reviewed, the emissions were standa rdized using a two-step process: First, the numeric emission values were converted to un its of either pounds per million British Thermal Units (lb/MMBtu) or a standard ized concentration, depending on the base units of measure10 associated with the emission data. If units were reported in a concentration format these concentrations needed to be standardized before proceeding to the second step of the standardization process. Generally, pollutant s that are emitted as gases (i.e., organic and inorganic hazardous air pollutants) are reported on a relative basis, such as volume of pollutant per volume of stack gas. Pollutants that are emitt ed as solids or particulate matter are reported on an absolute basis, such as mass of pollutant per volume of stack gas. Table 4 shows the units of measure resulting from step 1 of the emission data conversions.

Table 4 – Standardized Units of Measure fo r Step 1 of the Stan dardization Process Reported Units of Measure Pollutant Type Resulting Units of Measure After Step 1

Concentration Metals (As, Be, Cr, Co, Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni, Sb, Se),

Particulate Matter μ g/dscm @ 3% O 2 Nonmetals (CO, Cl 2 , HCl, HF, formaldehyde) ppb @ 3% O 2 Dioxin/Furans TEQ μ g/dscm @ 3% O 2

7-PAH, 15-PAH, 16-PAH μ g/dscm @ 3% O 2 ppb @ 3% O 2

Mass Per Unit of Time Metals, Nonmetals, PAH lb/MMBtu
Dioxin/Furans TEQ lb/MMBtu

Mass Per Unit of Heat Input Metals, Nonmetals, PAH lb/MMBtu
Dioxin/Furans TEQ lb/MMBtu

A comprehensive list of all reported emissi on units was generated and a unit conversion equation was developed for each individual reporte d unit. These equations convert the numeric emission test values into the preferred units of measure. The database table LOOKUP: Unit Conversions was created to assign each reported unit of measure to a conversion equation ID in order to automate the data standa rdization process. Each equation ID is labeled according to the type of conversion it represents. Table 5 shows the equation ID prefix es given to the different types of conversion equations.11 Table 5 – Conversion Equation ID Prefixes Equation Type ID Prefix Concentration Conversions CEq Fuel Input- or Heat Input-Based Conversions HI

F-Factor Conversions FF
Units of Measure Not Able to be Converted -

Reported units of measure that were not in concentration, mass per time or mass per heat input format were not converted. Alt hough those units are also located in the LOOKUP: Unit Conversions table, they were assigned an “NED” Un it Format, or “No Equation Developed.” A complete list of all these conve rsion equations can be found in Table B-1 of Appendix B

.

3.2 Standardizations of Other Emission Test Parameters

As shown in Appendix B , the conversion factor needed to standardize emission test data may be a numeric multiplier, based on a series of constants to convert from one unit of measure to another. Alternately, the conversion factor may require other parameters (e.g., fuel input, exhaust flowrate, oxygen correction) during the test run to be in corporated into the conversion factor. If these parameters are used in a conversion equation they must also be standardized to ensure accurate conversion of th e emission test data. Additional fields were created for the standardization of each additional conversion parameter. Only those values that were standardized will have a value in the standardized field. If the data could not be standardized, the standardized field was left as a null value. Table 6 shows the types of emission test and CEM parameters that needed standardization.12 Table 6 - Additional St andardized Parameters Data Category Standardized Units of Measure Total Heat Input MMBtu/hr Fuel Input Rate MMBtu/hr Amount of Oxygen in Process Exhaust %, O 2 Amount of Moisture in Process Exhaust %, H 2 O

Exhaust Flowrate dscfm Exhaust Temperature °F

Molecular Weight g/g-mol

For each of the parameters discussed belo w, a numeric field was created to apply necessary mathematical operations in order to sta ndardize the parameter to the preferred units of measure. These numeric fields mirrored the origin al text fields containi ng the reported values for each parameter. However, the database would not automatically convert the numeric fields if the data was not numeric. In these cases, the parameters needed to be cleaned up and manually entered in the numeric fields. For example, if a reported numeric value used a comma in place of a decimal point, that value would not be auto matically converted; so, the comma was replaced with a decimal and the numeric value was manually entered.

3.2.1 Heat and Fuel Input Rates Some emission data conversion equations requir ed the heat input or fuel input during the test to be standardized to MMBtu/hr. If emi ssions were reported as a pollutant mass per unit of time, the total reported heat input during the te st run was the preferred conversion parameter. However, if a facility did not report a total heat input value and instead repo rted fuel input rates, the sum of all standardized fuel input rates we re used to convert the emission test values.

Some emission data were reported as a mass of emissions per mass of fuel combusted. In order to standardize these reported values into units of lb/MMBtu, the average higher heating13 value (HHV) reported in the questionnaire for each fuel listed as an input was needed to convert the emission data. The standardizati on of all HHV values is discussed in Section 5.0 . If a combination of fuels was reported, an equally weighted mixture was assumed and the HHV for each constituent fuel was averaged. Sometimes the fuel reported with the design capacity units was a generic “fuel oil” or “coal.” Any unspecifi ed specification of fuel oil was assumed to be No. 2 Distillate because it is the most common specification of oil reported to be combusted in the questionnaire. An unspecified type of coal was assigned the HHV of bituminous coal because it was the most common type of coal report ed to be combusted in the questionnaire. All types of wood were assumed to have the same HHV as was assumed in the Memorandum from Jack Johnson, ERG, to Fred Porter, US EPA 5 . A list of HHV for specific fuel types can be found in Table B-2 of Appendix B

.

The conversions used to standardize the fuel and heat input rates ar e identical to those used to standardize the design capacity of each combustion unit (as described in Section 4.0 ). A list of these conversions can be found in Table B-3 of Appendix B

.
3.2.2 Exhaust Oxygen and Moisture Content Some emission data conversions required the amount of oxygen (O 2 ) and/or moisture present in the exhaust stream to be standardi zed to a percent. The 2008 Combustion Survey and 2009 Test Plan requested O 2 and moisture be reported as percent and it was assumed that all reported values were already in these units sinc e the survey respondent could not specify other units of measure. Values such as “0.05” we re assumed to be “0.05%” and not “5%” since the survey specifically asked for units in percent format.

Since a percentage cannot be greater than 100, the O 2 and moisture contents were reviewed to ensure that no repor ted data were above that threshol d. If a facility did not submit O 2 or moisture data, the standardized fi elds were not populated with anything. O 2 data was only a requirement when reporting carbon monoxide data in the 2008 Questionnaire. Oxygen percentages were requested for all pollutants in the 2009 Test Pl an. If the reported units of measure required an O 2 concentration for standardization, an O 2 concentration of zero percent14 was used in the conversion calcula tion if a percentage was not reported and if the pollutant was not carbon monoxide.

3.2.3 Exhaust Flowrate Some emission conversions required the exhaust stream flowrate to be standardized to dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscfm). A ny reported unit of measur e that listed contained the letter “D” was assumed to be an abbreviati on for “dry.” Similarly, any reported unit of measure that listed an “S” was assumed to be an abbreviation for “standar d.” If a unit reported an “S” but no “D” (such as “scfm,” an acronym fo r “standard cubic feet per minute”), the units were assumed to be at dry standa rd conditions. A list of all exha ust flowrate conversions can be found in Table B-4 of Appendix B

.
3.2.4 Exhaust Temperature Some emission conversions required the exhaust stream temperature to be standardized to degrees Fahrenheit (°F). Any standardized temperature greater than 2,000 °F was compared against the other temperatures repor ted at that facility in the attemp t to find typographical errors. If the reported temperature was subject to a typo graphical error, the order of magnitude for the reported and standardized temperature values wa s reduced in order to maintain consistency between all data points at that facility. For example, if a f acility reported te mperatures of “356.746 °F,” “359.617 °F” and “364223 °F,” the latt er was changed to “364.223 °F.” A list of all exhaust temperature conversions can be found in Table B-5 of Appendix B

.
3.2.5 Molecular Weights Some emission conversions required the molecu lar weights of specific pollutants in order to convert the emissions test data. The database table LOOKUP: Pollutant Molecular Weights assigns a molecular weight, in grams per gram-mole (g/g-mol), for all pollutants specified in the survey. Since polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) data is reported cumulatively for all associated components, the molecular weights of the components of each PAH group were summed to get a cumulative molecular weight. Table 7 shows the compounds that make up the PAH groups and the groupings to which they belong.15 Table 7 - PAH Constituent Compounds Compound 7-PAH 15-PAH 16-PAH
Benzo[a]anthracene X X X Chrysene X X X Benzo(b)fluoranthene X X X Benzo(k)fluoranthene X X X Benzo(a)pyrene X X X

Indeno(1,2,3-

cd)pyrene X X X
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene X X X Naphthalene X Acenaphthylene X X

Acenaphthene X X

Fluorene X X

Phenanthrene X X

Anthracene X X

Fluoranthene X X
Pyrene X X Benzo(g,h,i)perylene X X

Dibenzofuran

Some facilities did not test for specific PAH compounds in the PAH groupings. This was reflected as a written note accompanying the em ission test data, telling which constituent compounds were not included in the emission value. In these instances, the reported pollutant16 was changed to reflect the corresponding P AH group, minus the selective compounds. For example, if the note specified that the test was for all constituents of 7-PAH except for chrysene, the pollutant field was changed to “7-PAH not chrysene.” Additional molecular weights were generated for these altered PAH groups and were used in the conversions where applicable.

After these parameters were standardized, th ey could be used in any of the conversion equations applied to the emission data and emission limits. Figures 1-3 show examples of emission test data and emission mo nitoring data linked to the tabl es which hold these parameters.

Figure 1 - CEMS Conversion Field Linkage

Figure 2 - ET Conversion Field Linkage17 Figure 3 –ET Conversion Field Linkage, 2

3.3 Applying and Tracking Em ission Conversion Equations

Once all of the reported emission and associat ed parameter data were standardized a series of update queries were programmed to make the conversions. Thes e queries converted the numeric emissions data fields ( by multiplying by the conversion fact or assigned to each base unit in the LOOKUP: Unit Conversions table) and updated the standa rdized emission unit of measure fields with the appropriate unit. Figures 4-5 show examples of fields in the Data: EmissionsTest and Data: CEMS tables, respectively, that were conve rted using these conversion equations.

Figure 4 – ET Fields Standardized via Conversion Queries

Figure 5 - CEMS Fields Standardized via Conversion Queries

Additionally, these queries tagge d each of the records conve rted in the emission data tables with the conversion ID that was used to convert the reported data. If a record was missing18 any of the test parameters necessary to run th e conversion, or if the re ported unit of measure could not be standardized, the que ries tagged the record with a not e to indicate why the data was not standardized in lieu of assi gning the record a conversion ID. For example, if the reported data was in units of pounds per hour, but the faci lity did not provide heat and/or fuel input information during for the specific test, the “Conversion Eq Used” field would have been populated with “Not Able to Convert – THI Value.”

This programmed update query approach to data standardization was beneficial for several reasons: First, these que ries did not manipulate the raw survey data in any way. The presence of any conversion errors would not resu lt in the loss of data as the “Standardized Pollutant_Value” field could easily be repopulatedand reconverted based on the original textbased data field. As previously mentioned, a ny typographical errors were corrected in the reported data fields, so repopulat ing the standardized field woul d not require manual entry each time. Secondly, updating the “Standardized Poll utant_Units” fields as part of each query allowed the programmer and reviewer to review any records that coul d not be converted. Tagging each record with its associ ated conversion ID provided revi ewers with an opportunity to isolate and check the converted values associated with each conversion ID.

After all emission conversion update queries were completed on the Data: EmissionsTest data table, each emission record in the data table would be standard ized to one of the units listed in Table 4 or the record would contain a note that th e data could not be converted. Similarly, each emission record in the Data: CEMS and Data: CO and THC CEMS data tables was standardized to one of the units listed in Table 4 or the record would cont ain a note that the data could not be converted.

The standardized numeric fields were inve stigated to ensure that the conversions themselves had run correctly. A ny blatantly obvious er rors in conversions were corrected. The range of numeric values at both th e facility level and for the entire database were investigated to find questionable data points. If a facility had standardized values that differed by orders of magnitude, its individual data point s were investigated further to determine if they were subject to typographical errors. These erro rs were usually a result of the facility not entering a decimal19 with the reported values. For example, if a facility reported “5.67,” “5.84” and “574” the latter value is obviously a typographical error and was changed to “5.74.” For all remaining questionable data values, the numeric value was s till standardized but a no te was entered stating that the value was inconceivable and is not used in any further analyses.

3.4 Applying Fuel Factors (F-fa ctors) to Emission Data

After the emission data were st andardized as described in Sections 3.1 to 3.3 above, step two of the emission data processi ng was to convert the data into the preferred standard units of measure used in the development of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants at Industrial, Commercial , and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters. Table 8 shows the preferred units of measure for sp ecific pollutants following F-Fact or conversions. In order to convert the data to these units of measure, an F- factor was necessary to re late exhaust volumes to fuel energy inputs.

Table 8 - Standardized Unit s of Measure for the F-Fact or Standardization Process
Pollutant Resulting Units of Measure After FFactor Conversions CO, NOx, SO 2 , Total Hydrocarbons (as propane), Formaldehyde ppm @ 3% O 2

Total Mass Dioxins/Furans ng/dscm @ 7% O 2

Toxic Equivalent (TEQ) Dioxins/Furans TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O 2
All Other Pollutants lb/MMBtu

F-Factors themselves are fuel-specific. A unique F-Factor was assigned to each emission test based on the fuel reported during the test, an d that value was used in the standardization of the reported data. A list of a ll F-Factors used in converting em ission test and CEM data (and the sources from which the F-Factors were found) can be found in the LOOKUP: F-Factors database table.20 Three data sources were used to develop F-Factors. The primary source was the EPA Method 19 table, which included F-Factors for wood, bark, tire derived fuel, petroleum coke, gaseous fuel and oil (crude, dist illate and residual). It was assumed that the wood F-Factor applied to all types of wood. Fu els not present in the Method 19 table were located in alternate sources, including the emission test database developed fo r the Industrial Combustion Coordinated Rulemaking (ICCR) and the vacate d boiler MACT and an EPRI report containing field demonstrations from biodiesel. 7,8,9 All data sources are specified in the LOOKUP: FFactors table of the Emissions Database for Boilers and Pro cess Heaters Contai ning Stack Test, CEM, & Fuel Analysis Data Reported under ICR No. 2286.01 & ICR No. 2286.03 (version 5) . If an emission test reported combusting more than on e type of fuel during the test, an average of the F-Factors for each fuel type in the mix were used. If an emission test reported a fuel for which no F-Factor could be found, the data po ints corresponding to that fuel were not standardized in this step. Sim ilarly, if an emission test reporte d a fuel combination and one or more of the constituent fuels had no F-Factor assigned, only the fuels wi th known F-Factors were averaged to get the final value. Emission test data for CO from area source biomass boilers were obtained from the Fuels for Schools program. Thes e data were reported with test-specific FFactors, which were used to convert th e Fuels for Schools data where necessary.

Once each emission test or CEM record was a ssigned an F-Factor, these F-factors were used as a parameter in the ten F-factor equations beginning with the prefix “FF” that are listed in the LOOKUP: Unit Conversions table. These equations can also be found in Table B-1 of Appendix B . These F-factor equations were applied in a series of programmed update queries, similar to the update discussion in Section 3.3 above. These queries updated the final standardized emission values and units of meas ure and tagged each record with the F-factor equation used to convert the data. If there wa s no F-factor available for the fuels corresponding to the emission data, the queries tagged the reco rd with a note to indicate why the data was not standardized in lieu of assigni ng the record a conversion ID. Figures 7-8 show which fields in the Data: EmissionsTest and Data: CEMStables, respectively, were converted using these FFactor conversion equations.21 Figure 7 - ET Fields Standardized via F-Factor Conversion Queries

Figure 8 - CEMS Fields Standardized via F-Factor Conversion Queries

After all F-factor update queries were completed on the Data: EmissionsTest data table, each emission record in the data table would be standardized to one of the units listed in Table 8 or the record would contain a not e that the data could not be converted. After all F-Factor conversion update queries were completed on the Data: CEMS data table, each emission record in the table corresponding to CO and PM data were standardized to one of the units listed in Table 8 or the record would contain a note th at the data could not be converted.

The values generated from the F-Factor convers ions were investigated to ensure that the conversions themselves had run correctly. Data ranges were also investigated as mentioned in Section 3.3 above. Reported data that ended up not converted by the F-Factor queries were investigated to make sure that the data pertaine d to an emission test burning a fuel which was not assigned an F-Factor.

3.5 Total Mass Dioxin/Furan Emissions

The 2009 Test Plan requested emission data for dioxin/furans on a mass basis. Data were submitted as both a total dioxin/furan emission value, as well as emissions for specific congeners. A total dioxin/furan emission value was generated on a total mass basis for each combustion unit that reported dioxi n/furan data. If a total dioxin /furan value was reported, it was selected as the total mass value for that combusti on unit. If no total mass value was reported, but data were reported for individual congeners, th e sum of the emission values for each congener was used as the total mass value. Table 10 shows the individual congeners for which data were reported.22 Table 10 – Dioxin/Furan Congeners Dioxin/Furan Congener
1,2,3,4,6,5,7,8 OCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDF

1,2,3,4,6,5,7,8 OCDF 1,2,3,7,8 PeCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDD 1,2,3,7,8 PeCDF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDD
1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9 OCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDD 2,3,4,6,7,8 HxCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDF 2,3,4,7,8 PeCDF
1,2,3,4,7,8,9 HpCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDD 2,3,7,8-TCDF
1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8 PeCDD 1,2,3,7,8 PeCDD
1,2,3,7,8 PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8 PeCDF
1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDD
1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDF
2,3,4,6,7,8 HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8 HxCDF

It was assumed that if data was reported fo r a subset of all conge ners, there were zero emissions of the congeners with missing data. If a facility reported a total mass dioxin/furan value and data for the individual congeners, the reported total mass value was selected. A table named Data: Total PCDD/PCDF Emissions (TEQ & Total Mass) was generated to hold the total mass values for each combustion unit. Total mass va lues were calculated on the test run level for each unique emission test.23 For each combustion unit that reported indi vidual congener data, a toxic equivalent (TEQ) value was calculated using the World Health Organization 2005 Toxic Equivalency Factors (TEF) 5 . These factors standardize the emission values of individual congeners to a health-based comparison of the congener 2,3,7,8-TCDD. For example, the TEF for 1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDD is 0.1, meaning that 1 gr am of 1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDD has the sa me adverse health potential as 0.1 gram of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. A lis t of all TEF can be found in Table B-10 of Appendix B and in the LOOKUP: Toxic Equivalency Factors database table.

The emission values for each congener were multiplied by the TEQ factor in order to obtain a TEQ emission value for each congener. Then, the TEQ values were summed for each test run for each specific emission test . The TEQ values were appended to the Data: Total PCDD/PCDF Emissions (TEQ & Total Mass) , located in the same r ecord as the corresponding total mass value calculated for the combustion un it’s emission test. Since some combustion units reported a total mass value but not individual cong ener data, a TEQ value could not be calculated for each unit with total mass data.

4.0 STANDARDIZATION OF DESIGN CAPACITIES

The reported design capacity of each boiler and process heater was standardized to units of million British thermal units per hour (MMB tu/hr) in order to provide a common basis for analyzing and comparing data from various sizes of boilers and process heaters. The automated conversion equations, constants, and assumpti ons used to standardize emission data are discussed within this section.

First, two data fields calle d “Standardized Capacity” and “Standardized CapacityUnit” were created in the Data: Unit Design/Operation table to hold the sta ndardized design capacity data. These fields were created so as to not overwrite the data originally reporte d data during the standardization process. Additi onally, since the reported design capacity was a text-based field the “Standardized Capacity” field was created as a numeric field. This allowed mathematical operations to be applied to the reported design capacities in order to standardize the parameter to the preferred units of measure. Next, a list was created to identify unique units of measure24 reported with each design capacity. This list was reviewed to identify and update design capacities without reported units of measure. Missing units of meas ure were corrected in one of three ways:

 If the reported design capacity value included the units of measure and the reported “CapacityUnit” field was null, the “Standardized CapacityUnit” field was updated to include the intended units. For example, if the reported design capacity was listed as “100 MMBtu/hr” a nd the reported design capacity unit was null, the “Standardized CapacityUnit” fi eld was updated to “MMBtu/hr” while the “Standardized Capacity” fi eld was updated to “100.”

 For units that reported a design capacity value but did not re port any units, the design capacity was compared to design cap acities from other combustion units at the same facility. If additional combusto rs of a similar size were reported with units of measure and the value was of the same order of magnitude, it was assumed that the units were consistent. For example, if Boiler 1 and Boiler 2 were located at the same facility, and Bo iler 1 reported a design capacity of “100 MMBtu/hr” while Boiler 2 reported a desi gn capacity of “120,” and did not report any units, it was assumed that the “120” was intended to be “120 MMBtu/hr.” In this case, the “Standardized Capacity Unit” field was updated to “MMBtu/hr” while the “Standardized Capacity” field wa s updated to “120.” If no distinction could be made for the unit with missing units of measure, the “Standardized CapacityUnit” field was updated to “unknown.”

 If the user selected units of measure fo r the design capacity from the survey drop down menu and also provided a note about these units in the field reserved for collecting “other” units of measure, this description was reported as the units of measure in the database. In these case s original Microsoft ® Excel templates were reviewed and the correct units of m easure were entered in the standardized design capacity and design capacity unit fields.25 After these units of measure were corre cted, a lookup table was created in the comprehensive survey results database to map all of the unique reported units of measure to their appropriate conversion equations and conversion factors. This lookup table is entitled LOOKUP: Design Capacity Conversions . The aim of this lookup table was to create a method for automatically converting large quantities of design capacity values. A list of all design capacity and heat input convers ion factors can be found in Table B-3 of Appendix B

.

As shown in Appendix B , the conversion factor needed to standardize design capacities may be a numeric multiplier, based on a series of constants and assumed efficiencies to convert from one unit of measure to another. Alternat ely, the conversion factor for design capacities expressed in terms of fuel input rates may require the fuel high er heating value (HHV) in order to standardize the design capacit y. If these parameters are calle d into a conversion equation they must also be standardized to ensure accura te conversion of the emission test data.

If a higher heating value (HHV) was necessa ry for a design capacity conversions, the type of fuel was determined based on the fuel re ported to be associated w ith the design capacity. The standardization of all HHV values is discussed in Section 5.0 . Sometimes the fuel reported with the design capacity units was a generic “fuel oil” or “coal.” Any unspecified specification of fuel oil was assumed to be No. 2 Distillate because it is the most common specification of oil reported to be combusted in the questionnaire. An unspecified type of coal was assigned the HHV of bituminous coal because it was the most co mmon type of coal reported to be combusted in the 2008 Questionnaire. All types of wood were assumed to have the same HHV as was assumed in the Memorandum from Jack Johnson, ERG, to Fred Porter, US EPA 5 . A list of HHV for specific fuel types can be found in Table B-2 of Appendix B

.
After all of the reported desi gn capacity units and HHV were standardized, a series of update queries were programmed to make the c onversions. These queries converted the numeric design capacities by multiplying by the conversion factor assigned to each base unit in the LOOKUP: Design Capacity Conversions table, and incorporating the appropriate HHV into the conversion, when necessary. For design capac ities that could not be converted, the “Standardized CapacityUnit” field was updated to “unknown.”26 Design capacities for multiple units at the same facility were compared in order to find errors in the conversions. The total ranges of converted design capacities for each group of reported units of measure were inve stigated to ensure that there we re no questionable data points. Standardized design capacities greater than 1,800 MMBtu/hr were deemed illogical and the “Standardized CapacityUnit” field was updated to “unknown” for those combustion units.

5.0 STANDARDIZATION OF FUEL ANALYSIS DATA

Fuel analysis data were sta ndardized in order to impleme nt emission data conversions and develop emission factors for mercury, HCl, a nd metallic HAP at uncontrolled liquid fuel units. The automated conversion equations, cons tants, and assumptions used to standardize emission data are discussed within this section.

5.1 Standardization of Higher Heating Values

Higher heating values (HHV) were a requi red parameter for some emission data conversion equations. In order to st andardize HHV, two data fields called “ParameterValueNumeric” (a numeric field) an d “CorrectedParameter_Units” were created in the Data: Fuel Analysis table to hold the standardized HHV. These fields were created so as to not overwrite the data originally reported data during the standa rdization process. Additionally, since the reported HHV were in a text-based field the “ParameterValueNumeric” field was created as a numeric field to allow mathematical operations to be applie d to the reported HHV in order to standardize the parameter to the prefer red units of measure. Sometimes the reported HHV included both the units of measure and the valu e in the HHV field, resulting in no units of measure reported in the HHV unit column. In thes e cases, these units of measure were separated from the HHV and the “Standardized Paramete r _Units” field was updated to include the intended units. Table 11 shows the preferred units for all HHV values based on the state of matter of the corresponding fuel.27 Table 11 – Preferred Units of Measure for HHV Fuel State of Matter HHV Unit

Solid Btu/lb Liquid Btu/gal

Gaseous Btu/scf

If HHV were reported in terms of Btu/gallon, a density of each of the fuels was needed to develop an emission factor with units of lb/MMBtu. Table B-6 of Appendix B shows a list of all the liquid fuel densities and assumptions used to estimate de nsities in order to convert HHV from Btu/gallon into Btu/lb.

After these units of measure were corre cted, a lookup table was created in the comprehensive survey results database to map all of the unique reported units of measure to their appropriate conversion equations and conversion factors. This lookup table is entitled LOOKUP: Fuel Input Conversions/HHVs . The purpose of this lookup table was to create a method for automatically converting large quantitie s of fuel HHV. A list of all HHV conversion factors can be found in Table B-7 of Appendix B . After all of the units for HHV were standardized, a series of update queries were programmed to make the HHV conversions. These queries converted the numeric HHV by multiplyi ng by the conversion factor assigned to each base unit in the LOOKUP: Fuel Input Conversions/HHVs table.

As a final step, the standardized HHV for each common fuel type were averaged in order to establish an average (mean) HHV for each common fuel type reported in the 2008 questionnaire and 2009 Test Plan. Standardized HHV were averaged for all data points that represented data measured on an “as received” ba sis. The ranges of standardized HHV for each fuel type were investigated in or der to determine outliers. Any va lues that were inconsistent by a factor of 10 were compared to similar data from the same facility in order to determine if a typographical error had been made. Typographica l errors were corrected. For the remaining questionable values, the “Standardized Paramete r _Units” field for each was populated with a28 note describing the reported data as inconceivable. The questionable numeric values were still standardized, but none were us ed in any further analyses.

5.2 Standardization of Fuel Parameters

Many liquid fuel boiler and process heaters do not have any air pollution control devices installed to control emissions of mercury, HCl, or metallic HAP. In the absence of control devices, the Agency assumed that all of the merc ury and metallic HAP contained in the fuel was emitted and all of the chlorine contained in th e liquid fuel was emitted as HCl. Although fuel analysis would only be considered for uncontrolled liquid units, da ta were standardized for all fuel types so other analyses such as fuel content variability could be done.

For each of the fuel analysis parameters discussed below, a numeric field called “ParameterValueNumeric” was created in order to mirror the data reported in the text-based “Parameter_Value” field. This numeric field allo wed mathematical operators to be applied to the data in order to calculate emission factors. If the parameter was reported as non-detect, the brackets and other symbols reported in non-detect records were removed from the data prior to populating the “ParameterValueNumeric” field. The “ParameterValueisNonDetect” field was updated to “ND” if the parameter was reported as a detection limit a nd “Numeric value not provided” if the parameter was reported as non- detect but no detection limit was reported for the parameter. In addition, a fiel d called “CorrectedParameter_Units” was created to hold all of the units of measure after correc ting for typographical errors or notes contained in the “Parameter_Units” field.

5.2.1 Moisture Content The preferred format of sta ndard concentrations of mercur y, chlorine, and metallic HAP were milligram per gram on a dry basis. In order to calculate these concentrations, any analysis reported on an “as received” basis and reported moisture content potentially had to be adjusted to a dry basis as shown in Equation 1, where “Fuel Parameter” is either the HHV, or mercury, chlorine, or metallic HAP content of the fuel.29 Equation 1 – Moisture Correction for Dry Basis



### (%) 1[ ] 100% Fuel Parameter Reported Moisture Content 



The moistures were all reported in units of percent and so no conversions were necessary to standardize these moisture contents. Some of the moisture contents were reported as “<0.05,” and in these cases the numeric value wa s used as the percent moisture in Equation 1 above. Some of the moisture contents were reported to be greater than 100 percent and these values were not used in any equations as they were unrea listic values for moisture content. If the data was reported on an as received basis but no moistu re content was reported, the moisture content was assumed to be zero for the purpose of standardizing to a dry basis.

5.2.2 Mercury, Chlorine and Metals Content The fuel analysis parameters for mercury, ch lorine, and metals were reported as either concentrations or emission factors. The data reported as concentr ations were first standardized to units of milligram per gram on a dry basis, befo re they were converted into emission factors. A table was developed to assign each of the reported units to the appropriate conversion equation. Each equation was labeled with the prefix “FA” for fuel analysis followed by the appropriate equation ID. A list of th ese conversion equations is shown in Table B-8 of Appendix B . The “StdParemeterConc(mgperg dry)” field contains the result of multiplying the “ParameterValueNumeric” field by th e appropriate conversion equation.

Next, the reported emission factor data was standardized to lb/MMBtu and the standardized concentration data was converted to standardized emission factors in units of lb/MMBtu. Mercury and metals concentration data were converted into mercury and metals emission factors. Chlorine concentration data wa s converted into HCl emission factors. A list of the conversion equations used to standardize emission f actors to units of lb /MMBtu is shown in Table B-9 of Appendix B . The “StdParameter for EF” field c ontains the result of multiplying the “StdParemeterConc(mgperg dry)” fiel d (for concentration data) or the30 “ParameterValueNumeric” field (for emission factor data) by the appropriate conversion equation.

For parameter values reported as concentr ations, the HHV of the fuel was needed to standardize the concentrations to a heat input basis. The HHV had to be from the same test date and sample run in order to standardize the parameter concentration; no average HHV values were used to standardize fuel an alysis data where a HHV for the sample was not present. If the HHV and the sample concentration were reporte d on the same basis (i .e., dry basis or as received), the HHV was applied to the parameter concentration using the appropriate equation from Table B-9 of Appendix B . If the HHV and parameter concentration were on a different basis, the parameter that was reported on an ‘as r eceived’ basis was corrected to a dry basis using Equation 1

.31 6.0 REFERENCES

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008 Qu estionnaire for Boilers, Process Heaters, Incinerators and Other Combustion Units (ICR No. 2286.01, OMB Control No. 2060- 0616, EPA Form No. 5900-122) 2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009 Te st Plan for Boilers and Process Heaters ICR No. 2286.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0616, EPA Form No. 5900-122 3. McClutchey, S. and G. Gibson, ERG. Revi sed Data Dictionary for Boiler, Process Heater, and Other Combustion Unit Survey Databases. January 2011. 4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Answer Key for 2008 Questionnaire for Boilers, Process Heaters, Incinerators and Other Combustion Units.

5. Johnson, J., ERG. Emissions Data Conversions and Calculations in the ICCR Emissions Test Database. June 25, 1999.

6. World Health Organization Toxi c Equivalency Factors, 2005. <http://www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/tef_update/en/>

7. Alvis, J. and C. Burlew, ERG. Development of the Emissions Test Database for the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process Heater s National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants. October 2002. See Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR2002-0058-0018.

8. Emissions Test Database Used in the Deve lopment of the Boiler NESHAP. A-96-47 IIB-2. See Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058-0016.

9. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Bi odiesel Co-Firing Demonstration Results. April 2007. Report number 1014844.32 APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY33 Table A-1: Glossary NOTE: Many descriptions have been taken fr om the Memorandum from Jack Johnson, ERG, to Fred Porter, EPA/ESD, entitled Emissions Data Conversions A nd Calculations in the ICCR Emissions Test Database . June 25, 1999.

Term Description 0.075 Density of air, in grams per c ubic centimeter, at dry conditions. Value used in converting weight-b ased emission values to volumebased emission values. 1.0732 Constant used to convert Nm3 to dscm. One dry standard cubic meter at 20 degrees Celsius equates to 1.0732 Normal cubic meters at zero degrees Celsius. 1.205 Density of air, in grams per cubic centimeter at normal conditions. Value used in converting weight-b ased emission values to volumebased emission values. 1.528 Density of hydrogen chloride, in grams per cubic centimeter. Value used in converting weight-based emission values to volume-based emission values. 2.2 One kilogram equates to 2.2 pounds. Value used in calculations for converting from English units to metric units, and vice versa. 20 Standard temperature in degrees Celsius.

20.946 The amount of oxygen in the ambient air, expressed as a percent. Value used in converting concentr ations and gas volumes from “as measured” to “3% O2.” 22.4 One mole of gas at dry standard conditions equates to 22.4 liters. Value used in calculations for converting pollutant emissions expressed on a volume basis (e .g.; ppm; ppb) to emissions expressed on a mass basis (e.g., pounds), and vice versa. 35.315 One cubic meter equates to 35.315 cubic feet. Value used in calculations for converting from En glish units to metric units, and vice versa. 68 Standard temperature in degrees Fahrenheit.

252.16 One British thermal unit equates to 252.16 calories. Value used in converting higher heating values from metric units to English units, and vice versa. 385.34 Volume in cubic feet of one mo le of gas at one atmosphere of pressure and at 68 degrees Fahrenhe it. Value used in calculations for converting pollutant emissi ons expressed on a volume basis (e.g.; ppm; ppb) to emissions expressed on a mass basis (e.g., pounds), and vice versa.34 Term Description 453.59 One pound equates to 453.59 grams. Value used in calculations for converting from English units to metric units, and vice versa. 459.67 A measurement of temperature on the Rankine scale used in adjusting gas volumes for changes in temperature. Zero degrees Fahrenheit equates to 459.67 degrees Rankine. 35475 One boiler horsepower equates to 35475 Btu/hr. Value used in calculations for converting combus tor power in boiler horsepower to British thermal units. 7000 One pound equates to 7000 grains. Value used in calculations for converting from grains to pounds, and vice versa. 8760 The total number of hours per year . It is impossible for any unit to operate longer than 8760 hours in any calendar year. % Percent. A relative unit of m easurement; used to express relative concentrations on a mass or volume basis. @ 3% O2; @ 7% O2; @ 8% O2; etc Used in conjunction with emissions concentration units to show that the emissions are based on th e indicated percent of O 2 in the stack gas. Generally indicates that em issions concentrations based on the actual O 2 concentration in the stack ga s have been adjusted to the indicated percent of O 2 in the stack gas. 1000lb-steam/hr One thousand pounds of st eam generation per hour. A unit of measurement for output power in large capacity boilers. 15-PAH A grouping of 15 different polyc yclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) including benzo[a]anthracene, ch rysene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, benzo[a] pyrene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene, dibenzo[a,h]anthracene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluroanthene, pyrene and benzo[g,h,i]perylene. 16-PAH A grouping of 16 different polyc yclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) including those listed as consti tuents of 15-PAH as well as napthalene. 7-PAH A grouping of 7 different polyc yclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) including benzo[a]anthracene, ch rysene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, benzo[a] pyrene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene and dibenzo[a,h]anthracene. acfm; ascfm Actual cubic foot per minut e. A unit of measurement for exhaust gas volumetric flowrate; one cubic foot of gas per minute at observed or measured pressure, te mperature and percent moisture. BHP Boiler horsepower. A un it of measurement for power.35 Term Description Btu British thermal unit. A unit of measurement for energy.

cal Calorie. A unit of measurement for energy.

CEq A term that identifies a con centration-based emission conversion factor ID in the comprehensive survey results database. CO Carbon Monoxide. A common pollutant produced due to the incomplete combustion of fuel. Detection Limit; Method Detection Limit The smallest concentration of a targ et pollutant in a sample that can be detected by the sampling method used. When the actual pollutant concentration is below th e detection limit and the pollutant was not detected in the sample, th e reported concentration is based on the detection limit value. Dry Used to describe the basis for emissions concentrations. Concentrations reported as “dry” are based on a stack gas moisture content of zero percent. dscf Dry standard cubic feet. A unit of measurement for exhaust gas volume; one cubic foot of gas at one atmosphere of pressure, 68 degrees Fahrenheit, and zero percent moisture content. dscfm; scfm Dry standard cubic feet per minute. A unit of measurement for exhaust gas volumetric flowrate; one cubic foot of gas per minute at one atmosphere of pressure, 68 degr ees Fahrenheit, and zero percent moisture conditions. dscm Dry standard cubic meters. A unit of measurement for exhaust gas volume; one cubic meter of gas at one atmosphere of pressure, 20 degrees Celsius, and zero percent moisture content. ESP Electrostatic Precipitator. An ESP is a type of add-on pollution control device that removes particle s from an exhaust gas stream by inducing an elec trical charge. F Fahrenheit. A unit of measurement for temperature. All exhaust temperatures were standardized to degrees Fahrenheit. FF A term that identifies an emi ssion conversion ID based on a Fuel Factor (F-Factor) conversion in th e comprehensive survey results database. See also Fuel Factor (F-Factor) and Table B-2 in Appendix B

. Flue Gas Any gas that exits a process vi a a "flue" such as a pipe, stack or chimney. Front Half The front part of a sampling train; usually consists of a heated filter, probe, and nozzle. Pollutants that are generally emitted as solid particulate matter are colle cted in the front half.36 Term Description Fuel Factor (F-factor) The ratio of the products of combustion of a fuel to the heat content of the fuel, expressed as dscf/MMB tu @ 0% O2. F-factors are fuelspecific and are determined by a laboratory analysis of the constituents of the fuel. g Gram. A unit of measurement for mass.

Gal Gallon. A unit of measurement for volume.

GCV Gross calorific value. A unit of measurement for higher heating values. For calculational purpose, GCV are assumed equivalent to British thermal units per pound. See also HHV

. gr Grain. A unit of measurement for mass.

HCl Hydrogen Chloride.

Heat Input The amount of en ergy input into a combustor as a result of the heat content of the fuel. Heat inputs we re used in standardizing emission data. HHV Higher Heating Value. The am ount of energy released during the combustion of a set quantity of fuel. HI A term that indentifies a Heat Input-based emission conversion factor ID in the comprehensive su rvey results database. See also Table B-1 in Appendix B

. hr Hour. A unit of measurement for time.

kcal Kilocalorie. A unit of measurement for energy.

kW Kilowatt. A unit of measurement for power.

L Liter. A unit of measurement for volume.

lb Pound. A unit of measurement for mass.

lb/1000lb exhaust One pound per thousand pounds of exhaust gas. A unit of measurement for pollutant emission concentration.37 Term Description lb/hour; #/hour; pound/hour Pounds of pollutant emissions per hour. A unit of measurement for amount of pollutants emitted pe r unit of energy from fuel combustion. lb/MMBtu Pounds of pollutant emissions per million British Thermal Units. A unit of measurement for amount of pollutants emitted per unit of energy from fuel combustion. This is the preferred unit of measure for all emissions data except data pertaining to carbon monoxide; to which all other reported pollu tant emission value units are standardized. lb/trillion Btu Pounds of pollutant emissi ons per trillion Brit ish Thermal Units. See lb/MMBtu. M Metal. A code used to identify pollutants that are metals or are generally emitted as solid particulate matter. m^3 Cubic meter. A unit of measurement for volume.

mg Milligram. A unit of measurement for mass.

MMBtu One million British Thermal Units. See Btu.

MMBtu/hr One million British Thermal Units per hour. A unit of measurement for power. This is the preferred un it of measure for all heat inputs. mol Mole. One mole of a s ubstance is equal to 6.022 x 10 23 atoms, molecules, or other component. Mo lecular weights are expressed as weights on a molar basis. Mol Wt Molecular Weight. The mass of one molecule of a substance. Molecular weights used in converting concentrations on a mass basis to concentrations on a we ight basis, and vice versa. MW Megawatt. A unit of measurement for power.

ND Non-Detect. In pollutant emissi on testing, when the actual pollutant concentration is below the detection limit and the pollutant was not detected in the sample. The recorded concentration in these cases would be based on the detection limit value. NM Non-metal. A code used to iden tify pollutants that are not metals or are generally emitted as gases or vapors.38 Term Description
Nm3 Normal cubic meter. A unit of measurement for volume. Assumed to be one cubic meter at one atmos phere of pressure at zero degrees Celsius and zero percent moisture co ntent. One dry standard cubic meter at 20 degrees Celsius equates to 1.0732 Normal cubic meters at zero degrees Celsius. NOx Nitrogen oxides. A grouping of bi nary compounds composed of the elements nitrogen and oxygen, includ ing nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), nitrous oxide (N2O ), dinitrogen trioxide (N2O3), dinitrogen tetroxide (N2O4), and dinitrogen pentoxide (N2O5). Operation Hours The number of hours per year a combustion unit is in operating mode. It is impossible for any unit to operate longer than 8760 hours in any calendar year. PCDD/PCDF Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins.

pg Picogram. A unit of measurement for mass.

ppb Parts per billion. A unit of m easurement for pollutant emission concentration. For calculation pur pose, emissions reported in ppb are assumed to be on a dry, volume basis. ppm Parts per million. A unit of measurement for pollutant emission concentration. For calculational pu rpose, emissions reported in ppm are assumed to be on a dry, volume basis. ppmw Parts per million on a weight basis. A unit of measurement for pollutant emission concentrati on. Emissions reported in ppmw were corrected to a dry, volume ba sis using the densities of the pollutant and air. QA Quality Assurance. For our purpose, QA refers to the process of correcting errors in the repor ted and standardized data. RunExhaustTemp A term that identifies a vari able in the computer code that converts emissions data to standard concen trations. The variable is the temperature of the exhaust gas, st andardized to degrees Fahrenheit. RunMoisture(%) A term that identifies a vari able in the computer code that converts emissions data to standard concen trations. The variable is the moisture content of the exhaust ga s, standardized to a percentage. RunO2(%) A term that identifies a variable in the computer code that converts emissions data to standard concen trations. The variable is the oxygen content of the exhaust gas, standardized to a percentage. s; sec Second. A unit of measurement for time.39 Term Description SOx Sulfur oxides. A grouping of binary compounds composed of the elements sulfur and oxygen, includin g sulfur monoxide (SO), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), sulfur trioxide (SO 3 ), lower sulfur oxides (S n O, S 7 O 2 , S 6 O 2 ) and higher sulfur oxides (SO 3+x where 0<x ≤ 1). TEQ Toxicity Equivalent. Used to measure all toxic dioxins and furans in terms of the most toxic dioxin: 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Total (including condensibles) The total of all solid and liquid particulate matter, including gases or vapors that condense to form particulate matter. Wet Used to describe the basis for emissions concentrations. Concentrations reported as “wet” are based on the actual moisture content of the stack gas. For comparison, concentrations measured as “dry” (e.g., dscf) are based on a mo isture content of zero percent. μ g Microgram. A unit of measurement for mass.

μ g/dscm Micrograms per dry standard cubic meter. A unit of measurement for pollutant emission concentration.40 APPENDIX B CONVERSIONS EQUATIONS AND LOOKUP TABLES41 Table B-1: Pollutant Emissions Conversion Equations Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units

μ g/dscf 1 Metals & PM CEq1 * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
ppm (wet) 1 Non-metals CEq2 * ((100-RunMoisture%)/100)) * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

ppmw 2 Non-metals CEq3 * (1/10^6) * ((1.205 g/cm^3 air)/(1.528 g/cm^3 HCl)) * (10^9) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

ppb 1 Non-metals CEq4 * ((20.946-3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

μ g/L 1 Metals & PM CEq5 * (1000 L/dscm) * ((459.67+RunExhaustTemp (F)) / (459.67+68)) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

gr/dscf @

10% O2 Metals & PM CEq6 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946 - 10)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

gr/dscf @

8% O2 Metals & PM CEq7 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315

dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-8)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

gr/dscf 1 Metals & PM CEq8 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 grains/dscf

@ 50% excess air 1 Metals & PM CEq9 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

grams/ft^3 1,3 Metals & PM CEq10 * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * (459.67+RunExhaustTemp (F)/459.67+68)) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm @ 7% O2 Metals & PM CEq11 * ((20.946-3)/(20.946-7)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm 1 Metals & PM CEq12 * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O242 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units Vol % Non-metals CEq13 * (100/1000000000) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-RunO2(%)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppm @ 3% O2 Non-metals CEq14 * (1000 ppb/ppm) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm; ppm (dry) 1 Non-metals CEq15 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2
ppm @ 15% O2 Non-metals CEq16 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-15)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppm @ 4.2% O2 Non-metals CEq17 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-4.2)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppm @ 4.7% O2 Non-metals CEq18 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-4.7)) ppb @ 3% O2
ppm @ 7% O2 Non-metals CEq19 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppm @ 8% O2 Non-metals CEq20 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-8)) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm; ppm (dry) Non-metals CEq21 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946-RunO2(%)) ppb @ 3% O2
mg/dscm @ 7% O2 Metals & PM CEq22 * (1000 μ g/mg) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm @ 7% O2 Non-metals CEq23 * (1/1000000 g/ μ g) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) *

(0.001 m^3/L) * (10^9) *

((20.946-3)/(20.946-7)) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm 1 Metals & PM CEq24 * (1/10^6) * (22.4 mol/dsL) * (1000 L/m^3) * (Mol Wt g/mol)

* (10^6) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 ppm @ 18.25% O2 Non-metals CEq25 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-18.25)) ppb @ 3% O2
ppm @ 18.40% O2 Non-metals CEq26 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-18.40)) ppb @ 3% O2

g/dscm 4 Metals & PM CEq27 * (1000000 μ g/g) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O243 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units

grains/acf 1 Metals & PM CEq28 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * ((459.67+RunExhaustTemp (F))/(459.67+68)) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

grains/dscf

@ 7%O2 Metals & PM CEq29 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315

dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

grains/dscf @ 12% CO2 Metals & PM CEq30 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315

dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-12)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

lb/dscf 1 Metals & PM CEq31 * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

lb/dscf*10^- 6 1 Metals & PM CEq32 * (10^6) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
mg/dscm 1 Metals & PM CEq33 * (1000 μ g/mg) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

μg/dscm 1 Non-metals CEq34 * (1/1000000 g/ μ g) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) * (1/1000 m^3/L) * (10^9) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

lb/dscf 1 Non-metals CEq35 * (453.59 g/lb) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 dsL/mol) * (1/28.32 ft^3/L) * (10^9) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

lb/MMCF 1,5 Non-metals CEq36 * (1/10^6 mmscf/scf) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) * (1/28.32 10ft^3/L) * (10^9) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

mg/dscm @ 7% O2 Non-metals CEq37 * (1/1000 g/mg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) * (1/1000 m^3/L) * (10^9) *

((20.946-3)/(20.946-7)) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm @ 4%O2 Non-metals CEq39 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-4)) ppb @ 3% O244 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units ppm @ 15% O2 Non-metals CEq40 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-15)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppm @ 3.5% O2 Non-metals CEq41 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-3.5)) ppb @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 Non-metals CEq42 * (1/1000000 g/ μ g) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) *

(1/1000 m^3/L) * (10^9) ppb @ 3% O2

ng/dscm Metals & PM CEq44 * (1/1000 μ g/ng) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 ppm @ 10.3% O2 Non-metals CEq45 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-10.3)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppb @ 3% O2 Non-metals CEq46 1 ppb @ 3% O2

pg/dscf 1 Metals & PM CEq47 * (1/1000000 μ g/pg) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) * (1/0.028316847 ft^3/m^3) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 mg/Nm^3 @ 10%O2 Metals & PM CEq48 * (1000 μ g/mg) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-10)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 ng/dscm 1 Metals & PM CEq51 * (1/1000 μg/ng) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

ug/ml 1 Non-metals CEq52 * (1/1000000 g/μg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (22.4 dsL/mol) * (1000

mL/L) * (1000000000 ppb) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm @ 3% O2 Non-metals CEq53 * (1000 ppb/ppm) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm Non-metals CEq54 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-O2 Correction %)) ppb @ 3% O2 ppmvd @

7% O2 Non-metals CEq56 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-7)) ppb @ 3% O2

Percent 1 Metals & PM CEq58 * (1/100 parts/%) * (1000000 ppm/parts) * (Mol Wt g/mol) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) * (1000 dsL/dscm) * (1000000 μg/g) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O245 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units gr/dscm 1 Metals & PM CEq59 * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μg/g) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 ppm (wet) @ 10% O2 Non-metals CEq60 * ((100-RunMoisture%)/100) * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-10)) ppb @ 3% O2
ppm @ 12% CO2 Non-metals CEq61 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-12)) ppb @ 3% O2

ppm @ 10% O2 Metals & PM CEq62 * (1/1000000 1/ppm) * (1/22.4 mol/dsL) * (1000 L/m^3) * (Mol

Wt g/mol) * (1000000 μg/g) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946-10)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
mg/dscm @ 10% O2 Metals & PM CEq63 * (1000 μ g/mg) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-10)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
mg/dscm @ 10% O2 Non-metals CEq64 * (g/1000 mg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (22.4 dsL/mol) * (1/1000 m3/L) * (1000000000 ppb) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946-10)) ppb @ 3% O2

gr/dscf @

3% O2 Metals & PM CEq65 * (lb/7000 gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
gr/dscf @

6% O2 Metals & PM CEq66 * (lb/7000 gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315

dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-6)) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

Weight % Non-metals CEq67 * (1/100 parts/%) * (1000000000 ppb/parts) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946- RunO2(%)) ppb @ 3% O2

grains/100 dscf 1 Metals & PM CEq68 * (1/100 1/dscf) * (1/7000 lb/gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2
ppm @ 10% O2 Non-metals CEq69 * (1000 ppb/ppm) * ((20.946- 3)/(20.946-10)) ppb @ 3% O2
ng/dscm @

10% O2 Dioxins/Furans CEq70 * ((20.946-7)/(20.946-10)) ng/dscm @ 7% O2 ng/dscm 1 Dioxins/Furans CEq71 * ((20.946-7)/20.946) ng/dscm @ 7% O246 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units gr/dscf@7% O2 Dioxins/Furans CEq72 * (lb/7000 gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000000 ng/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) ng/dscm @ 7% O2 gr TEQ/dscf

@ 7% O2 Dioxins/Furans CEq73 * (lb/7000 gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000000 ng/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2 gr/dscf TEQ 1 Dioxins/Furans CEq74 * (lb/7000 gr) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000000 ng/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-7)/20.946) TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2 TEQ (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) Dioxins/Furans CEq75 1 TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2 TEQ ng/dscm Not incl. NDs or

EMPCs 1 Dioxins/Furans CEq76 * ((20.946-7)/20.946) TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2 TEQ ng/dscm @10% O2 Not incl. NDs or EMPCs Dioxins/Furans CEq77 * ((20.946-7)/(20.946-10)) TEQ ng/dscm @ 7% O2

PCDD/PCD F (ng/dscm @ 7% O2) Dioxins/Furans CEq78 1 PCDD/PCDF ng/dscm @ 7% O2

lb/MMcf 1 Metals & PM CEq79 * (1/1000000 mmscf/scf) * ((459.67+RunExhaustTemp(F))/

(459.67+68)) * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000 μ g/g) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946-3)/20.946) μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 Metals & PM CEq80 1 μ g/dscm @ 3% O2

mg/NM3 Non-metals CEq81 * (g/1000 mg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (22.4 dsL/mol) * (1/1000 m3/L) * (1000000000

ppb) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946- O2%)) ppb @ 3% O2

mg/Nm3 @10%O2 Non-metals CEq82 * (g/1000 mg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (22.4 dsL/mol) * (1/1000 m3/L) * (1000000000 ppb) * ((20.946-3)/(20.946-10)) ppb @ 3% O247 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units ng/dscm @ 7% O2 Dioxins/Furans CEq84 1 ng/dscm @ 7% O2 ppb Non-metals CEq85 ((20.946-3)/20.946-RunO2(%)) ppb @ 3% O2

lb/Trillion Btu All pollutants HI1 * (1/100000 0 tBtu/mmBtu) lb/MMBtu

g/bhp-hr 6 All pollutants HI2 * (0.00009174 g/bhp-hr / lb/MMbtu) lb/MMBtu

lb/1000lb

steam All pollutants HI3 * (1/1000 klb/lb) * (1/1150 lb steam/Btu) * (1000000 Btu/mmBtu) lb/MMBtu

lb/MMBtu All pollutants HI4 1 lb/MMBtu

mg/hr All pollutants HI5 * (1/1000 g/mg) * (1/453.59 lb/g) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

g/hr All pollutants HI6 * (1/453.59 lb/g) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

lb/day 8 All pollutants HI7 * (1/24 day/hr) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

lb/hr All pollutants HI8 * (1/Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)) lb/MMBtu

ton/yr All pollutants HI9 * (2000/(OperationHours*Heat Input (MMBtu/hr))) lb/MMBtu

lb/1000lb exhaust gas 7 All pollutants HI10 * (exhaust flowrate (dscfm)) * (60 min/hr) * ((0.075 lb/ft^3)/(1000 lb air*Heat Input (MMBtu/hr))) lb/MMBtu

g/sec All pollutants HI20 * (3600 sec/hr) / (Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)*453.59 g/lb) lb/MMBtu

lb/yr All pollutants HI21 * (1/(OperationHours*Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)) lb/MMBtu

mg/min All pollutants HI22 * (0.0000022 lb/mg) * (60 min/hr) / (Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)) lb/MMBtu48 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units kg/hr All pollutants HI23 * (2.2 lb/kg) / (Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)) lb/MMBtu

TEQ lb/hr Dioxins/Furans HI24 * (1/Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)) TEQ lb/MMBtu

sum of 2,3,7,8- TCDD TEQ ug/hr including 1/2 D.L. Dioxins/Furans HI25 * (1/1000000 g/ug) * (1/453.59 lb/g) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) 2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ lb/MMBtu

tons/day 8 All pollutants HI26 * (2000 lb/ton) * (1/24 day/hour) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

lb./1000lbs.

wet gas @50% E.A. All pollutants HI27 * (Exhaust Flowrate (dscfm)) * (60 min/hr) * (0.075 lb/ft^3) / (1000 lb air * Heat Input

(mmBtu/hr)) * ((100- RunMoisture%) / 100) lb/MMBtu

g/day 8 All pollutants HI28 * (1/24 day/hr) * (1/453.59 lb/g) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

kg/day 8 All pollutants HI29 * (1/24 day/hr) * (1000 g/kg) * (1/453.59 lb/g) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

ton/month 9 All pollutants HI30 * (1/30 month/day) * (1/24 day/hr) * (2000 lb/ton) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

grains/day 8 All pollutants HI31 * (1/24 day/hr) * (1/7000 lb/gr) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

lb/month 9 All pollutants HI32 * (1/30 mo/day) * (1/24 day/hr) / Heat Input (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

tons/hr All pollutants HI33 * (2000 lb/ton) / H.I. (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

g/sec All pollutants HI34 * (3600 sec/hr) * (1/453.59 lb/g) / H.I. (mmBtu/hr) lb/MMBtu

lb/MW-hr All pollutants HI35 * (0.29307 MW-hr/MMBtu) lb/MMBtu

lb/3-hour All pollutants HI36 * (1/3 1/hr) * (1 / H.I. (mmBtu/hr)) lb/MMBtu49 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units lb/hr (TEQ) Dioxins/Furans HI37 1 / H.I. (mmBtu/hr) TEQ lb/MMBtu

PCDD/PCD F Tons/year Dioxins/Furans HI38 * (2000 lb/ton) / (OperationHours * H.I. (in mmBtu/hr)) PCDD/PCDF lb/MMBtu sum of 2,3,7,8- TCDD TEQ ug/hr including 1/2 D.L. Dioxins/Furans HI39 * (1/1000000 g/ug) * (1/453.59 lb/g) * (1/H.I. (mmBtu/hr)) TCDD lb/MMBtu

lbs/hr PCDD/PCD F TEQ Dioxins/Furans HI40 1 / H.I. (mmBtu/hr) PCDD/PCDF lb/MMBtu lb/hr 2,3,7,8- TCDD Equivalents Dioxins/Furans HI41 1 / H.I. (mmBtu/hr) TCDD lb/MMBtu

lb/MMBtu Metals & PM FF1 10 1 lb/MMBtu

ppb @ 3% O2 Metals & PM FF2 10 * (1/1000000000 1/ppb) * (MolWt lb/lb-mole) * (1/385.34 lbmol/dscf) * (F-Factor dscf/mmBtu) * (20.946/(20.946- 3)) lb/MMBtu

μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 Metals & PM FF3 10 * (1/1000000 g/ μ g) * (1/453.59 lb/g) * (1/35.315 dscm/dscf) * (F-Factor dscf/mmBtu) * (20.946/(20.946-3)) lb/MMBtu

lb/MMBtu 1 Non-metals FF4 10 * (1/F-Factor mmBtu/dscf) * (1/Mol Wt lb-mole/lb) * (385.34 dscf/lb-mole) * ((20.946- 3)/20.946) * (1000000 ppm) ppm @ 3% O2

ppb @ 3% O2 Non-metals FF5 10 * (1/1000 ppm/ppb) ppm @ 3% O2

μ g/dscm @ 3% O2 Non-metals FF6 10 * (1/1000000 g/μg) * (1/Mol Wt mol/g) * (22.4 dsL/mol) * (1/1000 dscm/L) * (1000000 ppm) ppm @ 3% O2

ng/dscm @ 7% O2 Dioxins/Furans FF7 10 1 ng/dscm @ 7% O250 Reported Emission

Units Associated Pollutants EQ ID Conversion Equation Resulting Converted Emission Units

lb/MMBtu 1 Dioxins/Furans FF8 10 * (453.59 g/lb) * (1000000000 ng/g) * (1/F-Factor mmBtu/dscf) * (35.315 dscf/dscm) * ((20.946- 7)/20.946) ng/dscm @ 7% O2

1 For emission test data repo rted in the survey, if O 2 adjustment was not reported, it was estimated to be zero for all pollutants except for CO. For CO, a standardized value was not calculated unless the O2 level was reported during the emission test. For CEMS data, data was only conv erted when the CEMS measurements included an O2 correction. For all data reported in the phase II test data , the values were converted only when oxygen corrections were provided. Most of the phase II test data did not require these conversions since emission data was requested using a single unit of measure. 2 Assumed ppmw is ppm by weight at standard conditions; density of air assumed to be roughly equivalent to density of exhaust stream. 3 Assumed cubic feet of exhaust flow volume were reported at dry standard conditions when not otherwise specified. 4 Individual test files were reviewed and emissions were reported at 7% O 2 . 5 Assumed MMCF is million cubic feet at actual conditions. 6 Assumed 85% boiler efficiency. 7 Assumed 1000 lbs exhaust gas is dry exhaust; density of air at dry conditions is 0.075 lb/ft 3

. 8 Assumed one day is equivalent to 24 hours of operating time and nothing less. 9 Assumed one month is equivalent to 30 days of operating time and nothing less. 10 To convert PM, metals, and acid gas data reported in concentrations data from their standardized concentrations toan emission rate, and to convert CO, NOx, and other organic HAP data from emission rates to concentrations, FFactors were applied to relate exhaust volumes to fuel energy inputs during the tests. The 8 conversion equations with the prefix “FF” call an F-factor into the conversion equation to standard ize the data. F-Factors themselves are fuel-specific. A unique F-Factor was a ssigned to each emission test based on th e fuel reported during the test, and that value was used in the standardization of the reported data. A list of all F-Factors used in converting emission test and CEM data (and the sources from which the F-Factors were found) can be found in the LOOKUP: ET Fuel F-Factors database table. If an emission test reported combusting more than one type of fuel during the test, an average of the F-Factors for each fuel type in the mix were used. If an emission test reported a fuel for which no FFactor could be found, the data points corresponding to that fuel were not standardized in this step. Similarly, if an emission test reported a fuel combination and one or more of the constituent fuels had no F-Factor assigned, only the fuels with known F-Factors were av eraged to get the final value.51 Table B-2: Higher Heating Values

Fuel HHV Value Standardized HHV Unit of Measurement Bagasse 2 3722.75 Btu/lb Bio liquids 2 137930 Btu/gallon

Biogas 2 638.78 Btu/scf

Biomass 1,3 8623 Btu/lb Black Liquor 2 2876.27 Btu/lb

Blast Furnace Gas 2 92.96 Btu/scf

Coal: Anthracite 2 8532.47 Btu/lb

Coal: Bituminous 2 12474.46 Btu/lb

Coal: Sub-bituminous 2 9503.03 Btu/lb

Coke Oven Gas 2 509.09 Btu/scf Corrugate Cardboard or Container Scraps 2 6599.25 Btu/lb Deinking Residuals 2 2466 Btu/lb

Diesel fuel 2 136953.75 Btu/gallon Hog Fuel 1,3 8623 Btu/lb Hydrogen 2 281.17 Btu/scf Industrial Sludge 2 3623.68 Btu/lb

Landfill Gas 2 510.04 Btu/scf Natural gas 2 1012.75 Btu/scf

No. 2 Distillate 2 136158.68 Btu/gallon

No. 4 Fuel oil 2 146131.70 Btu/gallon52 Fuel HHV Value Standardized HHV Unit of Measurement No. 5 Fuel oil 2 152134.55 Btu/gallon

No. 6 Residual oil 2 152349.27 Btu/gallon Paper and Paper Residues 2 8025.68 Btu/lb Petrochemical process gas 2 894.13 Btu/scf

Petroleum Coke 2 14065.08 Btu/lb Plant-based Agricultural Residue 2 7181.69 Btu/lb

Plastics 2 8030.75 Btu/lb
Process gas 2 2075.56 Btu/scf Refinery gas 2 1000.85 Btu/scf

Refuse 2 8500 Btu/lb
Tall oil, tall oil derivatives 2 16800 Btu/gallon

Tar 2 12880 Btu/lb Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) 2 14194.83 Btu/lb Tires (whole) 2 12478.25 Btu/lb

Turpentine 2 133700 Btu/gallon

Used Petroleum-based Oils 2 140543.2 Btu/gallon

Wood: Bark 1,3 8623 Btu/lb

Wood: Painted or Varnished 1,3 8623 Btu/lb Wood: Plywood, Particleboard (containing glues or resins) 1,3 8623 Btu/lb

Wood: Treated 1,3 8623 Btu/lb Wood: Unadulterated Lumber 1,3 8623 Btu/lb53 Fuel HHV Value Standardized HHV Unit of Measurement Wood: Unadulterated Timber 1,3 8623 Btu/lb

1 From Memorandum from Jack Johnson, ER G, to Fred Porter, EPA/ESD, entitled Emissions Data Conversions And Calculations in the ICCR Emissions Test Database . June 25, 1999. 2 Average of “As Received” reported data in ICR database. 3 Assumed all types of wood have the same HHV.54 Table B-3: Design Capacity a nd Heat Input Conversion Factors
Original Design

Capacity Unit Fuel Assoc w/ Original Design Capacity Conversion Factor Converted Design Capacity Unit 1000 lb steam/hr All Fuels 1.15 million Btu/hr

BHP All Fuels 0.03939 million Btu/hr

Btu/hr All Fuels 0.000001 million Btu/hr

Gal/HR No. 2 Distillate 0.14 million Btu/hr gallons/minute 1 (blanks) 8.32 million Btu/hr gallons/minute No. 2 Distillate 8.32 million Btu/hr gallons/minute Used Petroleum-based Oils 9 million Btu/hr

HP All Fuels 0.003 million Btu/hr

kW All Fuels 0.00344 million Btu/hr

lb steam/hour All Fuels 0.00115 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Biomass 2 0.0086 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Coal: Bituminous 0.01233 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Coal: Sub-bituminous 0.01341 million Btu/hr lb/hour Hog Fuel 2 0.0086 million Btu/hr lb/hour Natural gas 0.022 million Btu/hr

lb/hour No. 2 Distillate 0.01946 million Btu/hr

lb/hour No. 2 Distillate or N o. 4 Fuel Oil 0.01946 million Btu/hr

lb/hour No. 6 Residual oil 0.01827 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Other Petroleum-based Products 0.01827 million Btu/hr55 Original Design

Capacity Unit Fuel Assoc w/ Original Design Capacity Conversion Factor Converted Design Capacity Unit lb/hour Paper and Paper Residues 0.00585 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Wood: Bark 2 0.0086 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Wood: Plywood, Particleboard (containing glues or resins)2 0.0086 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Wood: Saw Dust 2 0.0086 million Btu/hr

lb/hour Wood: Unadulterated Lumber 2 0.0086 million Btu/hr million Btu/day All Fuels 0.04167 million Btu/hr

million Btu/hr All Fuels 1 million Btu/hr million lb/day Black Liquor 229.167 million Btu/hr

MW All Fuels 3.44 million Btu/hr scfm Natural gas 0.0612 million Btu/hr ton/hour of fired product Coal: Bituminous 24.654 million Btu/hr tons/day Coal: Bituminous 1.02725 million Btu/hr tons/day Natural gas 1.8333 million Btu/hr tons/day Wood: Unadulterated 2 0.7167 million Btu/hr

1 Assumed that combustors that reported gallon per minute units of measure and did not list a fuel type were oilburning combustors burning only No. 2 Distillate. 2 Assumed all types of wood have identical heat content.56 Table B-4: Exhaust Flowrate Conversion Factors

Reported Exhaust Flowrate Unit Eq ID Exhaust Flowrate Conversion Factor Standardized Flowrate Unit

dscfm Flow1 dscfm * (1 dscfm/dscfm) dscfm

acfh Flow2 acfh * (hour/60sec) * ((459.67+68) / (459.67+RunExhaustTemp (F))) * (1- (%Moisture/100)) dscfm

acfm Flow3 acfm * ((459.67+68) / (459.67+RunExhaustTemp (F))) * (1- (%Moisture/100)) dscfm

M DSCFM Flow4 M DSCFM * (1,000 dscfm/Mdscfm) dscfm

mscfh Flow5 mscfh * (1,000 dscfm/Mdscfm) / (60 sec/hour) dscfm

x10+4 dscfm Flow6 x10+4 dscfm * (10,000 dscfm/x10+4 dscfm) dscfm

dscfh Flow7 dscfh / (60 sec/hour) dscfm57 Table B-5: Exhaust Temperature Conversion Factors

Reported Exhaust Temperature Unit Conversion Equation Standardized Exhaust Temperature Unit Celsius, C ((9/5)* Exhaust Temp, C ) + 32 Fahrenheit, F

Fahrenheit, F Exhaust Temp, F * (1 F/F) Fahrenheit, F

Kelvin, K ((9/5)* Exhaust Temp, K ) - 459.67 Fahrenheit, F

Rankine, R Exhaust Temp, R - 459.67 Fahrenheit, F58 Table B-6: Fuel Densities for HHV Standardizations

Fuel Density (lb/gal) Fuel Density (lb/gal) Animal Fat/Oils/Tallow 7 7.328 No. 5 Fuel oil 8 7.890

Bio Liquids 7 7.328 No. 5 Fuel oil and No. 6 Residual oil 4 7.990

Brown Grease 7 7.328 No. 6 Residual oil 8 8.095

Diesel Fuel 1 7.130 No. 6 Residual oil and Natural gas 8,10 8.095

Heavy Recycle 2 8.095 No. 6 Residual oil and No. 5 Fuel oil and Used Petroleum-based

Oils (on-spec) 4 7.990

Jet Fuel 9 7.000 Other Petroleumbased Oils 2 8.095

Kerosene 8 6.790 Tall oil, tall oil derivatives 6 5.100

No. 2 Distillate 8 7.130 Used Petroleumbased Oils 2 8.095

No. 2 Distillate and Kerosene 3 6.960 Used Petroleumbased Oils (onspec) 2 8.095

No. 2 Distillate and Natural gas 8,10 7.130 Used Petroleumbased Oils (onspec) and No. 6

Residual oil 2 8.095

No. 4 Fuel oil 8 7.670 Vegetable Oil 7 7.328 No. 4 Fuel oil and

No. 2 Distillate and No. 6 Residual oil 5 7.630 yellow grease (used cooking oil) 7 7.328

1 Assumed to have the same density as No. 2 Distillate. 2 Assumed to have the same density as No. 6 Residual oil. 3 Average of No. 2 Distillate and Kerosene densities. 4 Average of No. 5 Fuel oil and No. 6 Residual oil densities. 5 Average of No. 2 Distillate, No. 4 Fuel oil and No. 6 Residual oil densities. 6 Density from Tall Oil Recovery System and Apparatus , April 1982.

<http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=1 982000260&IA=US19810009 27&DISPLAY=DESC>.59 7 Density from J. Tuttle and T. von Kuegelgen, Biodiesel Handling and Use Guidelines—Third Edition , National

Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2004. 8 Density from Steam 40th ed. P 8-15. 9 Density from Federal CAA Toolbox—Fire Fighter Training.

<http://www.afcee.brooks.af.mi l/products/air/federal/emise st/firetraining.html>. 10 Density for Natural Gas assumed to be negligible on the density of oil.60 Table B-7: Conversion Factors for Standardizing HHV Units of Measure

Reported HHV Unit of Measure Fuel State of Matter Conversion Factor Standardized HHV Unit of Measure

Btu 1 Solid 1 Btu/lb Liquid * (Density lb/gal) Btu/gal Btu/gal Liquid 1 Btu/gal Btu/kscf Gaseous * (1/1000 kscf/scf) Btu/scf

Btu/lb Solid 1 Btu/lb Liquid * (Density lb/gal) Btu/gal Gaseous * (Density lb/gal ) * (7.481 gal/scf) Btu/scf

Btu/scf Liquid * (1/7.481 scf/gal) Btu/gal

Gaseous 1 Btu/scf

GCV 1 Solid 1 Btu/lb Liquid * (Density lb/gal) Btu/gal kcal/kg Solid * (1000 cal/kcal) * (1/252.16 Btu/cal) * (1/1000 kg/g) * (453.59 g/lb) Btu/lb

MMBtu/lb Solid * (1000000 Btu/MMBtu) Btu/lb Liquid * (1000000 Btu/MMBtu) * (Density lb/gal) Btu/gal

MMBtu/ton Solid * (1/2000 ton/lb) * (1000000 Btu/MMBtu) Btu/lb

1 Assumed equivalent to Btu/lb.61 Table B-8: Basis Correction Equations for Fuel Constituent Concentrations Reported Concentration Unit of Measure Reported Basis EQ ID Conversion Equation Corrected Unit of Measurement and Basis mg/kg As Received FA1 * (0.001) / (1-Moisture%) mg/g, Dry

ppm As Received FA2 * (0.001) / (1-Moisture%) mg/g, Dry mg/g Dry FA3 1 mg/g, Dry mg/kg

Dry FA4 0.001 mg/g, Dry mg/L

ppm

μ g/g ng/g Dry FA5 0.000001 mg/g, Dry ppb

μ g /kg Weight % Dry FA6 10 mg/g, Dry62 Table B-9: Conversion Equations for Fuel-Based Emission Factors

Reported Unit of Measurement Fuel Constituent EQ ID Conversion Equation Standardized Emission Factor Unit of Measurement mg/g (dry) Cl FA6 * (1.028) * (1/1000 g/mg) / (HHV MMBtu/lb (dry)) lb/MMBtu, HCl mg/g (dry) Hg FA7 * (1/1000 g/mg) / (HHV MMBtu/lb (dry)) lb/MMBtu, Hg

lb/MMBtu Cl FA9 1.028 lb/MMBtu, HCl lb/MMBtu Hg FA10 1 lb/MMBtu, Hg

lb/TBtu Hg FA11 * (1/1000000 TBtu/MMBtu) lb/MMBtu, Hg63 Table B-10: Toxic Equivalency Factors

Dioxin/Furan Congener Toxic Equivalency Factor 1

1,2,3,4,6,5,7,8 OCDD 0.0003
1,2,3,4,6,5,7,8 OCDF 0.0003
1,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDD 0.01
1,2,3,4,6,7,8 HpCDF 0.01
1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDD 0.1
1,2,3,4,7,8 HxCDF 0.1
1,2,3,4,7,8,9 HpCDF 0.01
1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDD 0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8 HxCDF 0.1

1,2,3,7,8 PeCDD 1
1,2,3,7,8 PeCDF 0.03
1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDD 0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9 HxCDF 0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8 HxCDF 0.1

2,3,4,7,8 PeCDF 0.3

2,3,7,8-TCDD 1
2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.1

1 Source: World Health Organization Toxic Equivalency Factors, 2005.

<http://www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/tef_update/en/>