Maine Department of Environmental Protection 

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision 

Under the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

August 20, 2009 
1. Introduction 

Background and Requirements 

The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) gives the states primary responsibility for achieving the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The NAAQS are established by the U.S . Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) as the maximum concentrations in the atmosphere for specific air 

contaminants to protect public health and welfare. The principal mechanism at the state level for 

complying with the CAA is the State Implementation Plan (SIP). A SIP includes the regulatory 

programs, actions, and commitments a state will carry out to implement its responsibilities under the 

CAA. Once approved by the EPA, a SIP is legally enforceable under both federal and state law. 

This document is a SIP revision for meeting the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements mandated under the CAA and regulations related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 

CAA requires that states achieve the NAAQS by specified dates, based on the severity of an area's air 

quality problem. Maintaining concentrations of ground level ozone below the health-based standard is 

important because ozone is a serious human health threat, and can also cause damage to important food 

crops, forests and wildlife. Repeated exposure to ozone pollution may cause a variety of adverse 

health effects for both healthy people and those with existing conditions including difficulty breathing, 

chest pains, coughing, nausea, throat irritation and congestion . It can exacerbate bronchitis, heart 

disease, emphysema, and asthma, and reduce lung capacity. 

Ozone is generally not directly emitted to the atmosphere; rather it is formed in the atmosphere by 

photochemical reactions between volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the 

presence of sunlight. Consequently, in order to reduce ozone concentrations in the ambient air, the 

CAA requires all nonattainment areas to apply controls on VOC/NOx emission sources to achieve 

emission reductions . Among the effective control measures, the Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) controls play a major role in reducing emissions from stationary sources. 

The EPA has defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of 

meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological 

and economic feasibility (44 FR 53761, September 17, 1979). Section 182 of the CAA establishes two 

separate RACT requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. The first requirement, contained in 

section 182(a)(A) of the CAA, and referred to as RACT fix-up, requires the correction of RACT rules 

for which EPA identified deficiencies before the CAA was amended in 1990. Maine has no 

deficiencies to correct under this section of the CAA. The second requirement, set forth in Section 

182(b)(2) of the CAA, applies to moderate or worse ozone nonattainment areas as well as to marginal 

and attainment areas in Ozone Transport Regions (OTRs) established pursuant to Section 184 of the 

CAA, and requires these nonattainment areas to implement RACT controls on all major VOC and NOx 

emission sources and on all sources and source categories covered by a Control Technique Guideline' 

document issued by EPA. 

Under section 183 of the CAA, EPA was required to issue by certain timeframes several guidance 

documents for RACT controls that would help states meet the requirements of section 182(b)(2). This 

requirement upon EPA includes developing (1) Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) documents for 

1 A Control Technique Guideline (CTG) is an EPA guidance document intended to provide information to assist state and 

local air pollution authorities in determining RACT for VOC sources. A CTG is not a regulation, but instead a 

recommendation based on cost-effective control strategies that are currently in use. 

2 
control of VOC emissions from stationary sources, and (2) Alternate Control Techniques (ACT) 

documents for control of VOC and NOx emissions from stationary sources. 

EPA issued three groups of Control Techniques Guideline documents establishing a "presumptive 

norm" for RACT for various categories of VOC sources: 

1) Group I, issued before January 1978 including 15 CTGs ; 

2) Group II, issued in 1978 including 9 CTGs; and 

3) Group III, issued in the early 1980s with 5 CTGs. 

Sources not covered by the issued CTGs are referred to as non-CTG sources. Section 182(b)(2) of the 

CAA requires states with ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or worse to develop RACT 

controls for all pre-enactment (i .e ., pre-1990) CTG source categories, for all sources subject to postenactment (i .e ., post-1990) CTGs, and for all non-CTG major sources in their nonattainment areas. 

The EPA has also issued more than 12 ACTs for various categories of VOCs and NOx sources. 

Maine's Ozone Air Quality Status 

Nine Maine counties were designated as nonattainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS under the 1990 

CAA: York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc counties (Planning Area 1) ; Androscoggin and Kennebec 

counties (Planning Area 2); and Knox and Lincoln counties (Planning Area 3) were designated as 

"moderate" nonattainment, while Hancock and Waldo counties (Planning Area 4) were designated as 

"marginal" nonattainment for ozone. 2 Maine had two nonattainment areas under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. The Portland Nonattainment area consists of the 57 cities and towns comprising York, 

Cumberland and Sagadahoc Counties along with Durham, Maine in Androscoggin County, and was' 

been designated as "marginal" nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard, while the MidCoast 

Nonattainment Area consists of 55 coastal towns and islands in Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo 

counties, and was designated as a "Basic/General" nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone standard . 

Based on ambient air quality monitoring data for the period from 2003-2005, both the Portland and 

MidCoast 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas were attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS3, and were 

redesignated to attainment on 12/11/06 (70 FR 71489). 

The 1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas are illustrated in Figure 1 . 

For the purpose of regulating stationary sources, the entire State of Maine is considered a "moderate" 

nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS because it is in the Ozone Transport Region 

established under operation of law under Section 184 of the CAA. Sections 172(c)(1) and 182(b)(2) 

and (f) of the CAA require owners and operators of sources in ozone nonattainment areas to implement 

RACT for sources that are subject to Control Technique Guidelines (CTG) issued by EPA and for 

"major" sources of VOC and NOx4, which are ozone precursors . RACT requirements are specified in 

2 Hancock and Waldo counties were redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard in 1996. 

3 These areas continue to meet the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 

4 On March 24, 2005, the Maine DEP submitted an exemption request from the NO, control requirements contained in 

section 182(f) of the CAA for Northern Maine. This exemption request demonstrated that NO,, emissions in Oxford, 

Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot, Waldo, Hancock, Washington and Aroostook counties are not impacting 

Maine's (former) 8-hour nonattainment, or other 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) 

during times when elevated ozone levels are monitored in these areas. Section 182(f) of the CAA along with other sections 

3 
the CAA to assure that significant categories of major source emissions are controlled to a "reasonable 

extent, but not necessarily to the more stringent Best Available Control Technology (BACT) 

Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) or Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) 

levels . 

~~: ~ zone~'Ihrtiand Bhr~Nonattainment~areas 

. . 

d0 80 Miles 

Createdby Merthe Web~ter,MEDEP-BAA reHSed 02f1595 

Figure 1 

® 

Legend 

8hr nonattainment 

I IhrNonattainment 

G 1 hr Maintenance Area 

f -I Attainment 

According to the EPA's Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612, November 

29, 2005), areas classified as "moderate" nonattainment or higher must submit a demonstration, as a 

revision to the SIP, that their current rules fulfill 8-hour ozone RACT requirements for all CTG 

categories and all major, non-CTG sources5 . Such a demonstration can be made with either a new 

RACT determination or a certification that previously-required RACT controls represent RACT for the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The certification should be accompanied by appropriate supporting 

information, such as information received during the public comment period and consideration of new 

data, that may supplement existing RACT guidance documents that were developed for the 1-hour 

of the CAA requires states in the Ozone Transport Region to adopt reasonably available control technology rules for major 

stationary sources of NO., and to provide for nonattainment area new source review for new sources and modifications that 

meet or exceed the major source threshold for NO,,. The areas included in the section 182(f) "NO,, Waiver" are therefore 

not subject to RACT, or new source review offset and lowest achievable emission rate control requirements . The section 

182(f) NOx Waiver was approved on February 3, 2006 (71 FR 5791) . 

5 The applicable EPA major source thresholds for RACT in Maine under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS are 50 tons per 

year for VOC and 100 tons per year for NOx. Table 3 indicates which Maine sources are major under these thresholds . 

4 
standard, such that State SIPs accurately reflect RACT for the 8-hour ozone standard based on the 

current availability of technically and economically feasible controls. Adoption of new RACT 

regulation(s) shall occur when states have new stationary sources not covered by existing RACT 

regulations, or when new data or technical information indicates that a previously adopted RACT 

measure does not represent a newly-available RACT control level. Pursuant to EPA's Phase 2 Rule, 

Maine was required to submit a SIP addressing 8-hour ozone RACT requirements within 29 months of 

EPA's April 15, 2005 non-attainment areas designation. 

2. Certification of VOC and NOx RACT Requirements 

The Department is certifying through this SIP that its federally-approved SIP meets the RACT 

requirements for the 50 tons per year (tpy) non-CTG VOC sources and for the 100 tpy NOx sources, 

and that all CTG-covered source categories in effect on April 15, 2005 are addressed at the emission 

thresholds set forth in the CTG. This certification is based on a combination of the following: 1) 

certification that previously-adopted RACT controls approved by EPA as revisions to Maine's SIP 

under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are based on the currently available technically and economically 

feasible controls, and that they represent RACT for 8-hour implementation purposes; and 2) the 

adoption of more recent regulations that represent RACT controls. Based on the foregoing, the 

Department finds that all of its existing and amended rules (see below) that apply to ozone precursor 

emissions fulfill RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Moreover, the Department 

finds that all CTG sources and major non-CTG sources under its jurisdiction are controlled to RACT 

or more stringent standards. 

Table 1 lists the VOC source categories for which EPA issued CTGs prior to April 15, 2005, and the 

existing negative declaration indicating that there are no sources in Maine, or the Maine RACT 

regulation for each of these categories. For all CTG categories, the Maine regulations either 

incorporated the CTG recommended controls or achieved reductions equivalent to the CTG and were 

approved by EPA for 1-hour RACT purposes. 

Negative Declarations 

The CTG categories for which Maine previously submitted negative declarations stating that it did not 

have sources within a CTG category are also listed in Table 1 . Maine performed an inventory of 

existing and operating VOC sources and their applicable CTG categories by reviewing its point source 

database for facilities with the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes that 

correspond to the CTG categories for which Maine previously submitted negative declarations, 

reviewing its air emission license database, and conferring with field services staff to confirm the 

presence (or lack of) a source category in Maine. The Department's analysis confirmed that there are 

no emission sources in Maine subject to the following CTG requirements : 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume 11 : Surface 

Coating of Coils, EPA-450/2-77- 008, May 1977 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume IV : Surface 

Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire, EPA-450/2-77- 034, December 1977 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume 11 : Surface 

Coating of Automobiles and Light-duty Trucks, EPA-450/2-77- 008, May 1977 
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume V: Surface 

Coating of Large Appliances, EPA-450/2-77- 034, December 1977 

Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit 

Turnarounds, EPA-450/2-77-025, October 1977 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical 

Products, EPA-450/2-78-029, December 1978 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners, EPA450-3-82-009, September 1982 . 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Equipment Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing and Polymer Manufacturing Equipment, EPA-450/3-83-006, March 1984 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Equipment Leaks from Air oxidation Processes in 

Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry, EPA-450/3-84-015, March 1984 

Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation 

Operations in SOCMI, EPA-450/4-91-031, November 1993 

Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment, EPA450/2-78-036, June 1978 

Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Petroleum Liquid Storage in External 

Floating Roof Tanks, EPA-450/2-78-036, June 1978 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacturing Vegetable Oils, EPA-450/2-78-

035, June 1978 

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires, EPA450/2-78-030, December 1978 

Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing 

Plants, EPA-450/2-83-007, December 1983 

Certification 

The certification process began with the Department's staff reviewing the federal and state 

requirements, including CTGs, Available Control Technology (ACT) documents, federal Standards of 

Performance for New Stationary Sources (NSPS), National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAPS), and Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) for the applicable 

source categories . Each regulation adopted by the Department has been evaluated against applicable 

CTGs and ACTs, and found to fulfill RACT for all applicable source categories with the exception of 

asphalt paving. 

Major sources of VOC and NOx emissions not covered by a CTG are subject to Maine's Chapter 134 

Reasonably Available Control Technology for Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC 

RACT) rule and the Chapter 138 Reasonably Available Technology For Facilities that Emit Nitrogen 

Oxides (NOx RACT) rule. These sources are also subject to the Chapter 115 Major and Minor Source 

6 
Air Emission License Regulations and Chapter 140 Part 70 Air Emission License Regulations, which 

specify the requirements for new or modified major and minor sources in Maine. These regulations 

require that owners and operators of such new or modified sources comply with the Lowest 

Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) requirements for VOC and NOxb. These sources would also be 

subject to the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements mandated for the SIPapproved Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program if they emit increased amounts of 

VOC or NOx above certain significance levels . MACT is an emission limitation based on the 

maximum degree of emission reduction (considering energy, environmental, and economic impacts) 

achievable through application of production processes and available methods, systems and 

techniques . BACT does not allow emissions in excess of those allowed under any applicable federal 

CAA provision. A review of the emission levels for sources permitted under LAER/BACT after the 

implementation of RACT for the 1-hour NAAQS shows LAER control measures to be as stringent, or 

more restrictive than emission levels required by RACT. In addition to the BACT/LAER requirements 

for new or modified major sources subject to NSR, the Department requires new sources that do not 

qualify for review under major source NSR to instead implement best practical treatment (BPT) 

pursuant to 38 M.R.S .A. § 601 . 

RACT Revisions 

In 2004, the Department amended its Chapter 130 Solvent Cleaners rule to require the use of very low 

vapor pressure solvents7 in cold cleaning operations, and established several new work practice 

requirements. These amendments were based on a 2001 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Model 

rule, and were subsequently incorporated into the Maine SIPB. 

Maine has also determined that its previous asphalt paving regulations no longer constitute RACT 

under the 8-hour ozone standard . Asphalt paving is used to pave, seal and repair surfaces such as 

roads, parking lots, and walkways. Asphalt paving is grouped into three general categories : hot mix, 

cutback and emulsified . Hot-mix asphalt, the most commonly used paving asphalt, produces minimal 

VOC emissions. Cutback asphalt is prepared by blending asphalt cement with a diluent, typically from 

25 to 45 percent by volume of petroleum distillates. Emulsified asphalt is a lower emitting alternative 

to cutback asphalt; emulsified asphalts use a blend of asphalt cement, water and an emulsifying agent, 

such as soap. Some emulsified asphalts may contain virtually no VOCs ; others may contain up to 12% 

VOC by volume. 

The EPA published a CTG for the use of cutback asphalt in December 1977. The CTG recommended 

replacing cutback asphalt binders with emulsified asphalt during the ozone season . In 1979, EPA 

added a specification for emulsified asphalt to the CTG recommendations to limit the content of oil 

distillate in emulsified asphalt to no greater than 7 percent oil distillate . Maine's regulation, 06-096 

CMR Chapter 131 Cutback Asphalt and Emulsified Asphalt, incorporated the CTG requirements for 

this sector and met 1-hour RACT as noted in Table 1 . It prohibited the use of cutback asphalt on 

public roads during the ozone season, but allowed for a number of exemptions. 

During its review of additional control measures that states should consider adopting as part of the 

OTC regional 8-hour ozone attainment strategy, the OTC identified asphalt paving as a category where 

6 Excepting the 182(f) NOx Waiver area, which is subject to BACT. 

7 The amended Chapter 130 limits solvent vapor pressure to less than or equal to 1 .0 millimeters of mercury (mmHG) 

measured at 20'C (68 IF), or containing less than or equal to 5% VOC by weight. 

g (5/26/05, 70 FR 30367) 
further VOC emission reductions could be achieved. It developed a model rule for the asphalt paving 

control measures that prohibits the use of cutback asphalt during the ozone season and limits the use of 

emulsified asphalt to that which contains not more than 0.5 mL of oil distillate from a 200 ml sample 

(as determined using American Society for Testing and Materials Methods)9 regardless of the 

application. 

After reviewing the OTC model rule, along with regulations in other northeastern states, Maine has 

amended its Chapter 131 Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt rule to limit the VOC content of cutback and 

emulsified asphalt, eliminate exempted uses of cutback asphalt, and extend the scope of the regulation 

to all asphalt paving activities. 

Certification of VOC RACT Requirements 

Table 1 lists each of the Department's VOC RACT regulations, the RACT basis for the regulation 

(CTG, ACT, etc.), the citation of EPA's approval of the SIP revision, the RACT rule applicability and 

requirements, and certification that the current rule represents RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Where Maine has certified that a current SIP-approved regulation represents RACT under the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, the Department states that it is not aware of any significant changes in control 

technology that affect the original RACT determination. The Department previously used a range of 

$3000-5000/ton of VOC as a benchmark value when determining cost-effective control technology for 

VOC sources subject to the RACT requirements adopted for the 1-hour ozone standard. Due to 

increased energy costs, those previously determined cost-effective controls continue to represent 

RACT for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS because VOC control technology has not substantially changed 

since the mid-1990s. 

In addition to the federally-required CTG and ACT-based regulations, the Department is also including 

several regulations based on model rules developed by the Ozone Transport Commission in this 

certification. The Department believes that these rules, which are based on the 2001 Model Rules for 

Portable Fuel Containers, Mobile Equipment Refinishing and Repair, Consumer Products (along with 

the 2006 OTC Model Rule), and Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings establish a 

benchmark for reasonably available control technology for these source categories. 

Certification of NOx RACT Requirements 

Table 2 lists the Department's NOx RACT regulations, the basis for the regulation, the citation of 

EPA's approval of the SIP revision, the RACT rule applicability and requirements, and certification 

that the current rule represents RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Where Maine has certified 

that a current SIP-approved regulation represents RACT under the 8-hour ozone standard, it states that 

it is not aware of any significant changes in control technology that affect the original RACT 

determination . The Department previously used (for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS) a cost of $1,500 /ton 

of NOx as a benchmark value when determining cost-effective control technology for NOx sources 

subject to the Chapter 138 Reasonably Available Technology For Facilities that Emit Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOx RACT) requirements. These controls continue to represent RACT for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

because NOx control technologies have not changed substantially since the mid-1990's. Although 

capital ; costs for certain control technologies such as SCR and low-NOx burners have remained fairly 

constant, the annual operating costs have significantly increased due to price increases for urea, 

electricity and operating labor. 

9 This is equivalent to a VOC content of 0.25 percent. 
The Department's other NOx RACT regulation, the Chapter 148 Emissions From Smaller-Scale 

Electric Generating Resources rule, addresses multiple pollutants from stationary generators having a 

capacity equal to or greater than 50 kilowatts. This rule requires non-emergency generators to meet an 

emission limit that is equivalent to the use of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) when applied to 

stationary diesel engines . 

Major Source VOC and NOx RACT 

As previously noted, the CAA also requires RACT be applied to any major existing stationary source 

with the potential to emit 50 tons or greater per year of VOC or 100 tons or greater of NOx in the 

Ozone Transport Region. Maine's Chapter 134 Reasonably Available Control Technology for 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC RACT) rule applies to all Maine sources with 

potential VOC emissions of 40 tpy that are not regulated specific regulationl°, while the Chapter 138 

Reasonably Available Technology For Facilities that Emit Nitrogen Oxides (NOx RACT) rule applies 

to all Maine sources with potential NOx emissions of 100 tpy that are not located within the region 

subject to the section 182(f) NOx Waiver. 

Table 3 lists all major sources in Maine, along with their licensed (potential to emit) emissions of VOC 

and NOx. It should be noted that many NOx sources are located within the nine-county NOx Waiver 

area, and are thus exempt from federal NOx RACT requirements . Many VOC sources are also exempt 

from the requirements of the SIP-approved Chapter 134, which states : 

C. Exempted VOC emitting equipment or process. The following VOC-emitting equipment or 

processes are exempted in determining a facility's total VOC emissions: 

(1) VOC-emitting equipment or processes that are subject to regulation under 40 CFR Part 61 : National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS); 

(2) VOC-emitting equipment or processes that achieves Best Available Control Technology for VOC or 

the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate for VOC, as determined by the Department and imposed in 

an air emission license which contains specific emission limitations for all affected VOC-emitting 

equipment or processes and was issued pursuant to federally approved permitting regulations or 

regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); 

(3) VOC-emitting equipment or processes that receive RACT, as determined by the Department in 

accordance with the following: 

(a) Pursuant to a VOC control regulation approved by the EPA for which a Control Techniques 

Guideline (CTG) document was written, or 

(b) As contained in a federally enforceable air emission license issued by the Department prior to 

the applicable effective date; 

(4) VOC-emitting equipment from which the VOCs emitted are from the incomplete combustion of any 

material, except where material is heated, burned, combusted or otherwise chemically changed 

under oxygen-deficient conditions by design; 

(5) Kraft Recovery Boilers ; 

(6) Indirect contact wood kilns and wood yards; and 

'o Specific processes at these facilities may be covered by a CTG. 

9 
(7) Paper machine area emissions which include paper machines, and the finishing and converting 

areas. 

After reviewing existing stationary sources in Maine, the Department has determined that all major 

sources of VOC and NOx are currently meeting RACT requirements" (see Table 3). The Department 

has determined, however, that the single-source VOC RACT determination for McCain Foods USA, 

Inc., Tatermeal Facility (Tatermeal) (air emission license amendment #A-459-71-D-A) was not 

submitted to EPA for incorporation into the SIP at the time of issuance. This SIP submittal therefore 

includes, as Appendix A, the Tatermeal single-source VOC RACT air emission license amendment for 

incorporation in the Maine SIP . 

In addition to the currently-licensed major sources outlined in Table 3, a number of single source 

RACT determinations have been previously issued to sources that are now permanently closed . These 

sources and their RACT approvals are summarized in Table 4. 

Post- 2005 CTGs 

Eleven new CTGs have been issued by EPA since September 2006. These include: Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents, EPA-453/R-06-001 ; Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, EPA-453/R-06-002 ; 

Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing, EPA-453/R-06-003 ; Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, EPA-453/R-06-004 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Paper, Film and Foil Coatings, EPA-453/R-07-003 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for Large 

Appliance Coatings, EPA-453/R-07-004 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings, 

EPA-453/R-07-005 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-003 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials, EPA-453/R-08-004 ; Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives, 

EPA-453/R-08-005 ; and Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-006 

The Department has determined that there are no applicable sources for two of these new CTG 

categories (Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings and Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings) and will be submitting negative 

declarations . For the remaining categories, the Department will be undertaking rulemaking in the near 

future . 

" A number of major sources are subject to BACT/LAER; RACT is less stringent than either of these control levels, so 

these facilities already meet RACT under existing permits. 

10 
0 

.H 

`V 

=V 

W 

.H 

U 

U 

U 

0 

W -0 

04 1. 

d 

Ey e~a 

v 

0 

0 

N 

i . 

O x 

. . . 

w 

0 

U 

p i G1 o ai o ai o ai o °' ° °' ° °' ° °' ° v ° °' ° °' 

v o o "~ U c c c c c c c c c ~ 

~r M 

O 

~ w 

au a$ N ro v v ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ > 

F-i 

O 

L 

~' O 

L 

r O ~ O F O ~ O ~ O ~ O 

F 

O ~ O 

y~y, 4V 

V1 

~ 

I~I 1~1 

^ 

^ 

d. M 

r+ 

^ 

~ M 

^I 

rl 

^ 

^ 

M 

^ 

~I 

~ M 

^ 

^ 

~ M 

^ 

~ M 

^ 

^ 

~ M 

^ 

^ 

~ M 

~I 

^ 

~. M 

Crr ~ C~ ~ ' P ~ r 

~o, ^°, ~a, ^o, ^o, ^ o~ '"o~ ^o~ ^o~ ^~ 

G~ O 

. '~ . " 

y Z 

A Y ~ J 

h 

O ~ r, ~' , 

w 

z z z z z z z z z z 

0 . 

x 

0 

E o, z ~ w a~ ~ w 

° °~ ~ ~ ° ° ~ w 

o ~~ o °~'~ c4 

c 

on 

~ 

on 

c ~= 

~ 

° 3 A- o, a~ ~ o a, c ~ o o 0 0, 

o 

c 

F 

V 

.o . 

-d 

.o 

° ~ .a 

- 

a. 

E ~S 

~, 

~ ~ 

(, ,) ~ ~ ~ > C Z ~ ~ 

~w 

N ~ 

"CE 

U v F"' o ~4 !~I 4~ ~ ~ 4W ° ~ 

p.i .. . c~i 3 M ~ ~ ~ v~ VD f ~ d .6 5 o, 24 r- w .., 
c 

° F~ ° 

a 

° c o f- o0 

c _ 

° ~ 

a 

°c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° 

'~U~ U~ 

~ " ~ . L " L " L " L O Uj 

'"' ~ ~ V] 

c y v~ 

a~ 

c d v~ 

a~ 

c C v~ 

a~ 

N ~n 

a~ 

c d v~ 

U 

y y 

° v~ O O~ 

N 

y ~n O O~ 

L ° o ° ~ ° o a d o °- ¢ ~, o .~ F, o .~ ~, o L ~, o L ~, o c o U °L' o 4 z 

a o U °: o L z 

~! ~!1 V1 Vl 

o 

Vl 1 M 

M ~ M ~ M ~ M ~ M 

M 

y~ M ~ M 

P4 ~ C4 ~ CC ~' C4 

~w ~w ~w ~w c~w o~w ~w 

a~ a~ a~ ° a~ 

cz 

.O L p 

cd N ' y 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C o D C bA p ln cd bA bA 

~ ~ 

~ O 

~ 

U C ` bLD d w p ~ 

" O aL+ . + -' Q "Y ~ y LbA .L.+' L ' U ~ . G ° '~ ~~ N °U iC 

b.p o ~ U ~3 y ~ ~ `~ 

~ ' ° ~ > ~ 

~ w ~ U o 

~ 

v' w o p o L , v ~ v~ ~ >C t .o p U U 

c0 a' . 2 

.^ '' a) 4. 'v~ cC U a) U ~ C p L a) L N U ~ U 

~a a ~ N p ~ o 

p Q' 

w a~ " ~ L L .'r p bA p a U bA E C ° m o a7 ~ t~p p y ,. 

d d Q " ' V ~ ~' ~ " ~ ~ G 

z z z z z 

O U O ~O L c~ al ai ,~ cC L O. L ~ k oQ ~- > ~~ .Oj) b ~ U .=J5 C U ~ 

~ L p~ ,~ O p O cc3 o ~- L~ Ua Uw ~ 

o 

= ~~ 

- 

Q ai ° 'o ~ E U ° '~ ° c w 

p 

o 

U 01 U ~ ~ 

M CJ .1 ` O E O 4~. o, > l- U 

C.' '- ci~ O j O ~ cC GJ .N ~ W " y !'' ~ ."' ~ U 

~ ~' 

~ _ 

C ~ ~ " 7 +L' U U ~' U 

~ 

L s . + 

CC L Vl 

~ 

R$ ~ ~ >y U r n ~ ~ y C 7 l~ 

.-U ~(~O p .,g4 ~' a ~ UG~ v'U Ci ~° c i 

N 
° 

° L 

o U .° ~ yo oU E"' N ~ N N 

o a . ~ ~. , o y ~ " y ~ ~ L 

N N -~ > O cd (~ 

N p 

h~~cn caOUU 

o F~ o0 o F- 00 o F-~ o0 o F~ o0 

" 

U 'y U 

S 

L ~ ~ p V j ~ ~ y o p /~ ~ 

G' ~, L p V U v~ y. p V U ~n y, o d U ln L ° a 

'p Q" r- ~ OQ 'p ~ G' O ~ p U2 ~ .~z z U 2, z UL~~z 

O 

M 

O 

M ,-, M d" M ~ M ~ M 

IZ w~R w 

Q~ N l~ O~ N O ~ O~ 

~O v1 N v1 ~O v1 v~ l~ ~O vi 

U L .C N s.N. ~ bA U 

`~ 

on 

cz v 

o ~ an o u ~cd 

ou ~ ~ °dn 

~ ° E c .° A < 

" 

o ~_ >, _~a ~ =S ' 7~5 ~ U_ o a~ ~ ° ~ = 

U ~ 

U ~ to L I ° E _S 

C U U ~ ' ~ ~ " 

y " > 

" = a~ S iC 

c..~.~ " ~ ~0 .^ .D 'C cUd N ~ N > U y" '~ iC n' w L 

O 

> ' > °M 

~ "_ U 3 a~ 

^ "b 'O ~ y O 4~ ~ cC 

~ 

~ 

. 

cpC 

~ O p ° ~, O E O~ 

_ 

U > ° `~ ^ r n + "' N 

> cC 'O p ``" ~ " 

_ 

a ~ vi . ~ U C Q ' E ~"' ~ 

,r 

b D 

o ~. :; c 'c4 " °- :2 g E ~ E ~ ~ " ~ 06 o N o 

bp p ~ 

" 

.~ 

p ~ 'D ~ ~ ~ U bA O 

' 

L c~ iC " ~ p~,p O ~ a, L N L' 'C a~ U 7 O 

a 

L '^ ~ v~ ~ E 

a~ ~ ' > 

3 ° 

i ~ a ~ o o c a~ 

L N ° ~ > 3 ° 

°? ° ~ w a~ 

.a ~ O 

. U o ~? _ U E . 

10 

~ " ~ ~ ~ '° U 

a~~, + ~ c c~ o o c 

- 

~ "

2 

T 'a N W ~ °L' = c ~ s` " ' "'C 

> ~ w a> cz ~ ° ` U c 

p ' O a"~ ° ~, o 

U 'q O U 

r- E ? Q " «3 `n "O O cG 

. 

U O ~ cd O U ~ ° U ~ 'Q 'O C U U s'"' 

_ 

> O Y U Q " cC 

x 

bq " " 

~' CG C 

.~ 'O V1 G. U ~ 

~ 

.'" 

~ U O 7 O O .r a) O ~ 3 '' i a~ ~ a ~ o 

U ~ ~ C p ~ U ~ C O 

bA 

U ._ ~ o _ N c'' -o U U S . °n ,., i ' o °° c,, ~n v~ 

p O 

°° E ~ ~ ~ a~ -o ~ L L y .Y 

0. 15 

cC 

~ ' :_ 

~ ~ C a~ 6. ,r cd O h 

~ 

L 

' " 

.= 

E ~ p 

U 

o 

0.. 

~ 

p 

U w 

~ °~ 

E 

y o 

ai O ~r F-~ L O ~n L N '~ 

° 

O E" 

4 ? 

~n 

m 

U W 

° L '-o 

O 

cd 

U 

a 

> ° O F-' ~ c 

L " .= 

~ 

U ~fY . U W F. 

L 

w a 

0 o v 

bb 

. 

bio 

. 

U 

o ~ o 

U~ 

` 

v 

w ~n + ~ ~n ~ w 

ci ,~ 

, 

cn .d 

p 

°° 

p 

~ 

O, 

~ 

_" ~a~ 

p p. N~r NC ,

M 
o E-r o0 o F- o0 

i ~ y N ~ sU. ~, 

~~ L oa ~~Loa 

L 

y 

N 

L 

N L Q y ~ 

~ L Q 

y., 

L 

~ 

u 2 

° ° y~ M M 

M 

M `p M 

y~ M ,,~~ Vl 

~w 

7 O~ 

cr, w w 

N ° ° ^~ 

~ C O ~ ~ M O C ~ 

L 

O 

b11 V 'O 

~ ~ ~ ~ c~d 

. 

N ~." . .O c d 

c9 4 " O fn y,U, ~ ~ ~ 

C y T3 cd " O j 

bA Q ~ ~ U ~ O ~ ~ ~y CC O. f~JJ bA 

_ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~ ~bA .' ;^ w E cNd 

0 M 

" ~, OA ^ -hr L' C N ^ 

" 

U C yr Q W O ~ ~', . .~. rj, 

O ' 'J 

. L y+ . 

L ~ RS U C U 

cz U U ~ .~ O m N O c C cd 

~ ~ 0U ? " ~ O 

L 7., ~ ^~j 

= = 

'~ 

~ ~ O ~ y '3 ,~ 

8 

O ~ ~ o ~ 'O p au C C 

C ~ 

W .L~'~ N U O N O 

X 

~ ~ .C C 

O y. 

.. 

= G' ~ 

b E > ~ c~ 

t 

qp 

C 

pv 

N 

~, 

~ 

C " 

L 

6-1 

.LU 

O .C ~ v' y ~ .O bJJ E E 

to 

O ~ ~ L [~/1 U C Uu 

tt O CA ° ~., O [-' N c~ rWn O 

A 

~ ~' LU + 

> CZ b °o, > 

~ ~~ ~ 

~ 

.~ >, 

. 

~ o c ;o c cz 

, L y Y 9 y A. c~ ~, ~ ~ 'O N p, C O > `~ C O O 

cqi 

~ o ~ `~ .°3 ~ o F - °L' '~ ° a . ° w E .°3 ~ o a F -~ .°3 3 o n ~ u an ~ ou °: > ~cs ° .5 

0 0 

3 

U- o ^ 

. 

O r 

U 

U 

L - _C 

" 

C ~+ 

N ~ 

N Cir 

M O 

N ~1 
o F- o0 0 E- o0 o F~ oo 

¢ " = ° U ~ 

c ~ y c a~ ~ c 

V1 i.L 

O V ~ VJ y, O V 

'$""" (n yy O 

~ 

V 

L ~ Cu L Q 

"r 

L, ~ QJ L. Q ~+ ~ N L 

^ 

Q 

~ ~ ~ 

0 z 

p 

M 

M 

M 

CI 

_' 

~ W ~w ~w o~w 

N 

bp ~ .~ ,_r O 

" 

~ O O 

to 

~ 

cz "iC ~ G' N 

" 

N y ~ '~ O 

" 

" ~ ^ ~ G 

U C ~ ~ Q~ 4~ O ~ C Q " U G N s . ~ 

1 

~ ~ j 

y pA s" ~ y~ U E C . v~ 

t 

. 

s. w ,F? > O ~' 

3 

~ ~ ~ ~ ° N 

i 

cd 

^ 

5 ° c 

> 

O ~ ~ U U U 

a 

~ 

~' 

CZ 

° o 'os-r ` ' 

" ~ U O 

w 

~ 

,x 

. > " O '7 O ~ sW.. s. 

U cC ~ U O ~ C ct 'O r a >> L' cC O y cC ^1> rn U 'L7 Q" '7 a+ 

A. c C 

~ 

'115 

-' 

U O N U W ~i U U O O ~ 

bp ~ cd ~ ~ 

v' O ~ 

~ ~ 

O 'O '- ' L1 ~' 

M ~ . C 

'-' 

N pp 

C O O " ~ OU 

" 

s" 

C s-. 

C . ~ 

Q" L' 

'O U 

^ 

 M 

~ C O 

O ~ " a ~ «Y 

y ' ~ ~ W ~ U 3 O 

2 2 

¢' w 

~ CIO 

~ U . '~~' y ^~ v~ 

~ ~. . ~ 

a" v~ CJ 

. 

i' O CC 

> 

O . a 

'O 

U 

U o w ~ Q " N ~, ~ a. . 

x `Y ° 3 '° ¢ 

U 

' 

cz 

U ~ 

U- 

~ ~. " + c c~ oj 

I G 

> 

ct 

cw G 

N ~ p ~ b A .y ~ p O,' 

U 

IC 

Cy ~,^ U 

~O U ~ ~ C O 

~ 

O 

o f-L- °:~' '~ u ~a.~. ° w E °3 

O 

-"o o a"- rx F~-" op ~ 

U 

L 

> 

L 

O 

O 

y 

'x ~ a 

U ^ U 

^ 

~ a cd 

bA 

O O 

w 

N w N ~23 c`°~, `. 
-" «Y 

°~o a~ ~ "~ c 

O = 

-a 

to 

o ~ 

,Cd .v ~ 

. 

U 

" 

= 

«3 =' N 

3 0 s Q" - U . - 

O 

- 

.`~ 'U ~" 

c~ W LL cd N o o ~, o E 

_ ++aS dj L -0 C-4 L;:; 

- p  C 7 CL. 

E ~ - u 

a~ >, 

~ 

> 

' 

N b=~ A ~ 

s 

~ 

a~ 

N 

U 

~ ~ 

U on o > 

~ ~ p O .~b A ~ U 

~ a ~ ~ 3 0 3 E-~ ° 

p c C 

~ 9 w d r n ° ' -~ . 0 s~ . c - . L 

o E~ oo U ~ o 

'~U~ Q o~ " 

a4 a~ c ~ y N ~,:, 

L O O bD C) ~ ~ 

ti 

7~ ¢ o Q 

-7 

" S ' r U~~~~z z 

00 

O~ ~ M 

M 

N N 

u cd " 

p 

" E 

~ p ~ N ~ p ~ ~ 7 ~ 

~ 

a' L ~ " ~ Q O 

. 

T.

~ ~ . U 

fl p 4r 

o 0 3 .`~~° o o Q, ~ r ,.~ ° c ~ ,~ Y ~ aL~ 

L 3 orn ~'' p ~ p a~ = 'a ~ -

: 

O . 

U °" 

o .o 

' ' C. 

~ 

~ N ,O a) O, 

s~ 

~ ~ c o ~ ~~ 

Q +- 

y 

~ 

. 

~ Y 

N 

_ ^" U 

O 

'L ^' , " O. '~ 't/ ~ ,O ~+ ~ 

=s 

" O C ~C, O > ~ 

. 

L ~ ct L T 

L r ~ ~ 

m o' 

O 

C~. c u , ° 

U 

cd 

~ 

,

~ 

.., "~ 

`~° a 

p 4~ 

~ 

y 

,7, -0 

O .~ 

H .b ~ 

v~ p 

~ 

Q 

~ ~ 

~ a) 

3 

C 

c s U ~ ~ C W .o CZ -0 U 

p 

. 

o '-' a, L 

- -

;, aao 

" " ~ 

~ 

-d _~ ~ w 

1 p O L 

7 ~J 

~ C~ ~ ~ ~ 

" 

U C~ ~ ~ ~ ^~ U L 

1~0 v 

on bA 7 O p [/ ~ L u p ~ ~ r" Sa ~" ' L", v bA C GL ~ Sr ~, C~ y >' °, O ~ i.+ p ~ ~ L~°' ., O 

~ 

- , CC ~ 3 .~ 

~ 

° 

o 

:c o 

O 

-- °L' ~ s ~ ~ 8 a~ o N o ~ 

o ~ n < p N a~ 

~o .c o ~ 

o Q E- cn cc 

~p a~ 

o ci. r~ F- L c, n. ~. a a~ ~ . .. 

00 

N 

O'w 

p ~ U 

~ o ~ vi A 

p ~ pp 

'b ~ N L 

oo °` a, 

N ~ N U 
H 

¢ o 

o 

N 

p 

M 

M 

M 

o~ w 

N p 

GJ w ^1 V ~ ~ 'G N ~,' 

~ bD 

M N 

; 

N C 

bA N 

~D 

a~ 

o v' 

~ ~ ~ y 

" 5 ' E ' ~' ~ o `~ 

~ }, 

`~ ~ 

~ .c 

`~ 3 

w 

0 

a) M ~ U U >, V ~ c~ O i 

cd '~ C T7 .fl~' E U U 

o 

U v' 

cc ct 

~ 

~ = 

x o v ~'A y 

o A 

Cy, ' m 

U 

~ ~ 

U Y ~ V 

r 

.+ E

~ 

_

N a O -0 

"- ¢ 

cc , 

ca 

V 

C 00 G~ ._ O+' N 

L L ca M ~ O L; U 3 ,~' w Y 

°- ~ >, o 3 

~ 

~ 0 ~ ~ o 

o .x z-- ~, ~ o ° ~ > a? ~ ~ ~ 

ca C N 

~ ro 

V .~ N 

u 

~ U 

o E- U to M s~, m . ~ ~ . ~ , ~ 

o ~ 

. 

C~ -o , 

~ .o 

y ~ U 

~ _ lu 

p C's O 

M E'-' U 
a . ~ ~ a _ a o 0 0 

E L J 

22 

L 

z Es 

i~ ~i 

m a 

0 

C, 

72 

C', 

C', cl, rq V5 ce u 

5 0 r4 

u C, 

E ;= U .- u CZ 

z QJ 

U 

C7, 

":r rn m m 

C=~ wl 

C=> C'l m 

r4 

m 

C4 

00 00 C:, r, 

- CA kn 

C) 

7:3 

C~ 

u 0j) 

z 

cz :2 

cz 

C7, C5, C) t: C:? 0 

C:, 

2 ON 

olu 

tw 

tw r- C~ll to 

C-1 En cu 

gi . m 

00 
o 

w 

on ,~ 

c 

°° 

3 N 3 d o 

`o C ~ 

G . ^ L E v, p e~ ~ ~ o 

a a~ " v 

O "y ~ 0 ~ w ~ O N 

y ~ ~, 

~ ~ a~ - a ~ o0 

. . " y " ~ " c~ " cC ~ 

' 

C1 C ~ E 

" L U p 0. Z '~ ~`" ^ '" 

~'C 

~ " ~ L 

. 

o a~ o o,U o 

o 

~ 

o a O 

E-cC . ~ O C, E sU. U C W ~d ~ r n> V~ d U 

y O E^ 00 

o ~ ~ U ~ 

LN Y C C' 00 

o ~ ~ U ~ 

~ ~ b [~^ 00 

o ~ U ~ 

~ Y b ~^ 

o ct 

^ 

. 

U 

" 

a~ v (n U c - 

° U' 

a~ a~ y y C 

~ W 0 v' 

y y Q 

d ' 

a~ U y U 

L C L Vi L O a 

' y ~ ~ y n 7 

~, C ~ V7 L O a 

~ ~ y s N 

_ L C VI L O a L C y Vi L p a 

O'" G1 . ~ O d 

Es Y~-i ~ L Q 

L O" C. b O d 

/ 

N_ C L L u L v, 

L R" b O d 

`_/~ ~ Uy, ~ u N L 

a"' C CL 

E'~ Vi U L L '~ S~' z ~ ~ U L L ~ S," z F"~ V1 U L ~ 5., z E~' ~ U L L ~ S z 

l~ 

~D 

N 

00 

l~ 

~p N 

l~ _M 

O kr) ~ 

M 

v1 OM 

V1 

G~. ~ CC, 

R 

O L~i 

~O W 

~ 0.~ 

W N . W 

O O N O ~ O 

M l- ^~ I- v1 l~ N [~ 

aJ ~ a~ U w " C 

" U 

L a~ a~ N 

~ " O OL C c13 

O "N w 

L S~ CL cd U ~ 

~ ~ 

a3 cC cd 

t 

U p ~ U U ~ > . " O ~ O ~ O c~a 

~ m 

t 3 

p O ~ ~ " ~ U p CL y ~ 'r bA ~ 

p 

y U U 

cd w O 

~ a" 

. w L ~ 

~ o o 

"L.~." v °? >, Q ~ 

o '~ ~ o 

~ ~n ~ c 

~' 

_ ~ o a, o 

c "~ "o 

o c 

_a~ "~ '^ L 

" 

U 

E 

U Vi ¢~, C 

O ~ 4~ ~ ~ ro 

~ U ~ ¢- 

Cl 

U U ~ ~ ~ 

c ~ 

"

- 

bp ~' 

" " ~ 

, 'C_' ~ N v~ 

~ " ~C bD 

~ C 

+ C ._. C 

1:10 

" " ' U 

M cd ~ v~ cC . U 

U cC "U 

~ '^ 

G E 

^' 'T~ . U. 

G ' O ^ U ~ d ~n 

O ~ 

" 

p 

C a~ 

O 

i' 4, U "13 

p - 

a~ ~ ~ 

U 

a~ " C ~ O " ~ a~ 

d O 

L G 

U 

b'D 

O S1 ~ p >, C~ 

A 

L 

.r ~ O O L w cd" U "~C "

~ c cd" 

. .- ~ cd C C.' 'x ~ ~ C p 

L O U 

U ~ 

J 

~ ~ U ~ Y ~ ~ 

c o U ~ cS n " a c U 3 

p " 

U U ~ U ~ a 

~p N ~ 

0 1

y bA \O .-2 y ~ \p bp 7"

U

. U p "= 

cU~ o . 

o `° 

~ cd 

i 

O !. F-' O cz3 U O , Or F' O 0~ O. O ~ F-~ O L 7 _C O f/~ F-~ O w w 

~ O ~ O 

vi 

' 

C N C N 

i i 

~ Q~ C U 

p ~" 

C " ~:' 

O ~ O.q O v O v O O y 

" 

" '° b " a ~ 

. 

~ ' " U 

O i-U 00" 00"' ~ 0 .~ 6~ O 7 

U U 

- ° 

UW 

~ E 

t~ 

~ a t: O 7= 

OQ . :~ ~ 

Clo 

. ~ °~ . ~ p~o o~, a - N ~ a ro 

C ~ U 

cod 

N ~ 

C O G1 O Lt U 

?? ~ C O bA C p 

N 4~ O O 4~ N 4~ ~ ~ N W ~ Y W 

Q C ~ C 

" 

C C C 

O 

_ 

ON O " ~ 

:~ 

ON 7 ON 'O 

O x Ow 

O A"' ON 7 y 

d W O x ; 

N 7 OO 

0 a r r a O c ~ N 
o F~ o0 

'~U~ 

`' C c 

~ o v~ 

=~~oa 

L ~ N L Q 

~ fr' 0 

M 

O 

O 

w 

v ~o 

a3 U ~ 

°~ .E U ~cG c~o ~ ~a 

L 

L . 

, ~ LI W ~, 

7 Y U ~

.`ti ^ O 

. 

°w ~ :°[-^ ;o 0 

o ° o. i "~ ~ a cL w ~ - ~, o 

>, O ~ ~ ~ U 

M ~ U a `'~ w° c~ 

c a ~a U ~° E . ~ ` ° 

G , s' ~ ~ _ n a~ 

V s~ bl) ~ O ~; _y a~ a~ 

O . .-. 

' d c 

O U > F-~ Q ~ p.. O 

U 

V 00 _

.O 

O `~ 

L7 " 

E'~ U 

0 o Z 

O 

N 
0 

.. 

i. 

U 

U 

O 

N b 

w 

E V 

0 

N 

0 x 

00 

a 

w 

A 

.~ 

0 

0 

.~ z ~. 

~U 

X w 

V 

v ~ H o 

cn ;, U cn 

o F~ o0 o F- o0 

A ~ o ~ e~ 

. .. ~ ~ o0 0 -4a ~ ~ o ~ ~ L ooa 

~ .~ CIO o 

~ N oa~ 

V 

ci 

O ~ ¢ 

~, 

.2 lN 

I~ O ¢ ~ U ~ ~ U~.w~ C O 

~ .~z ,~, U ~. 

~ C O ~w 

00 

rq r- o 0 

~ w `~'w 

LL 

Q 

c~ o 

> 

Z 

A 

ro ° °p ~ ~ a '_ 

cC '~ L k O T a) cC 

Qz ce to 

V 

F 

_ " _T .b ~ ~ ¢' 

. 

C/~ ~ O 

^i 4 

W 

~ V 

~ ~ 

Cj ~ 

~ 

E 'n O 

E 

0 Cd O ~`~+ 

o' 

" 

~ i ccf cd 

o 

r 

~ 

°' 

vl ~  

a~ N 

cG 

Ey ~ 

~ 

aj C13 

~ 

o cG ~ ,Y o 

U o .~ .~ b4 O MU -o o a, 00 

y ., 

~ 

cc 

w U ~ ~ o ;; ;? 00 ` t n, m c 

. 

VN V 

~ 

L' GJ N 

on O, L 

a oz 

~ ~ T-i Y 

" ° - ~ ~ y ~ a~ ° . 

r .o -°z O ~ w ~- °° w kr) . 

w c 

:O 

o F-~ O f--~ U ~ 3 z o r~ F-~ cn ~ N 

N 'L' ~ ?? 

O 

00 

'" 

C O. ~ O . 

R3 O 

m ~ a~ F-' W O E a ~ o. 

u lu 

~ 00 

" 

0 0 ~ ~ y N c 

M ' ~ 

F ~I 

~ ~ 

r~ o 

~ N ,~ p O ~ . yO 

~ , ~Oa.'N o.. .o ~ 

[-' Q j (~ O a~ _~ ~ , ~_ 

a~ .~ 

' a~ Q O M O ~ 

H° ~ . W~ 

U ~ 

~ T ~ ~ U `°N 

~ c o ~ c~ ¢ : ~ o n 0

v~ ~ ~ ' U 'O N 

C4 

X 

O J 7~ 

~ o E ~ ~ !r W ~ ~ 

O O ~ O N O O. U 

UrnUa ~ cncn F-O 
M 

h 

0 

F 

U 

~. 

a 

C . 

.~ 

O 

z 

i." 

4o O 

a> 

cr 

s. 

0 

0 . 

U X O 0 

cC ~ a~ 'O ~p ` R ~ . C 

~~M~z N~m ~"~ I 

i 

- 

w 

a 

d ~ ~ ~~ ~ v a ~ ~ ~ e ; ~a m °° " w .~ m ~ co 

Q 

m 

¢ 

m 

¢ 

m 

Q 

m 

a ~ 

m 

a 

, 

m E ; 

y 

X ~ .9 ca >, ~ f1" ~ O U 7 " ~ C .O 'O "cflC .J , 

z °~ c 

~ o, ^ N W .n ti_ 

wv, .o uuU ca UW ~=o "a a.a~ 

N 

72 

U 

I ay~, a~ c 

Y 

o~ ~ E 

R II. ,-~ O > -^ X ? 

, 

X U ~ y Z 

° 

O A.Y 

o ~ Z 

~ 

Py ~ ¢ '3 c3 C' 

" 

Gi' 3 Q ' w N ' 

D p ~ ~ R n ~ 

w o ~ ° F °w' N ° ~' c z_ F~- 

.O 

~ Y = 

V'1 !/7 U m F'~ ol { _U U E' w ` 

a 

8 rpn O 

y Y 

~ ti 

y 

. cr 

0 

m ~ 

CIO 

. Q ~ i 

~+ a 

. 

U '>U "'

o 

U 

o 

U 0 YC' 

o 

u 

' p _ o = p U o C p C o C' p 

C 

p 

y p 

ic' ° o> X o 

! . +r 

a 

>~ 

N 

z 

d0" 

z 

O 

z 

M 

z 

M 

z 

n 

z 

N 

>_ 

'IT _ .. 

z __ 

O~ 

N 

z 

O~ 

N 

z 

kn 

N 

z 

(op 

~ 

z 

M 

~ 

O, . 

V . z 4 w 

~ 

H 

w a 

i M ,O o0 

C' 

N 

M 

~n O~ M o0 00 O ~O i t~ I~p 

a ~ O V ~!1 V O 

N 

V V M M 

t . 

. a 

; 

F~" = °_ .b 

u ` ~ rj) ~ p 

~ ~ 

`° 

m ¢~ 

o 

w ~a 'o v~w > ~v~ ow a:-~ pU o

cz 

~ F- E w 

a 

U 

G 

i 

a 

O 0. 4 C % >, 

r ° 

a ~ ', 

°° 

c, o ° cls 

: E', .o `° U o 

U 

o 

U U U U a 

c 

o I , 

.v . o a cn ..~ a U U 

w o .a .~ 

2 

° 

Q 

~ 

w° 

v 

z 

~ 

VD 

~ 

V) 

~ 

~c 

m 

a°. 

O 

~ 

a 

~ 

~ ~ 

~ 

ca 

a. 

° 

__ `° 

ro 

m 

`o 

m 

o 

m 

`o 

m 

o 

m 

`o 

m 

~a 

U 

F" 

U 

o 

U 

o 

U 

ca 

O 

o 

O 

~ L] o 

4 ~ 

V 

. M 

M 

. M l~ t~ ~n oo 

~n 

~ v~ 

t N 

~ [~ 

lO 

oo 

~ 

M 

oo 

N 

I~ 

O 

~O 

~ 

,~ 

p1 

1- 

N 

"-~ 

O~ 

o0 

M 

~ 

N ~O N M M 

~ o0 

N 

a 

li) 

V 

. _ ~.~ .- ' 
¬ i 

- 

---- -'-L .-_- 

' 

c °' ° O ti 

- 

¬ > o 

' . ~ a 3 p, 3 o 

m 

° Q 

 ~s °' ° .= 

^ 

iz d d ; d ~ c 3v`-'U N vn d 

° 

i 

a cnF" ~ o j 

w = Q . ~ ~ y _` 

~ ~ - `~p f~ .°3 . .o o E °' ~ 

u U 

¬ 

I, - ~ ro ai UO 

~ .°,

. 

r.0 

3A 

y _Q' ~O cd ~ > 

> O ^ k 

O 

~O 'ca =_ ' 

p > 'O 

U ~ O >'w = U U 

co .0- Ep~ : 

C6 

00 

u u 

00 

001, u U 

> > 

CZ. 

7Z rL 

C4 

61 LEI t: EU 

u 

U C~ c, u u u u 

E: 

Gj 

l 

0 

M. 

o 

C: 

0 

Ur- I 

0 

- 

o 

clb 

0 0 

u 

0 0 ) 

> 

> z 2 z z z z 

lz 

z 

z 

z Z LZ 1> Z LZ 

z 

lr~ lr~ 

n 

r4 

I& 

L 

- 

'4R 

00 

r 

= 

C4 

It 

cq 

~q - 

It C, 11 

10 

00 C-~ 

0~ 

( U 

O 

m 

- . 

~ M 

~ 

~ 

~ 

CO 

O 

~ 

n r 

O 

~ 

~ 

v1 

' 

¬ ,-. 

~ ~ 

~ V 

¬ 

~ 4 m 

^ 

O 

T 

G 

(V 

O M 

. 

i 

i 

I 

O 

N 

s ~ ~ ro c=a c`a c .y o ~ ~ 

w ^~ c~a ~ ,c o 

~ ~ 

~ 

~ ~ ~3 o z ~x w ~ a ' r 

a 

j 

R ; 

¬ 

[ 

T ( 

! 

1 

~I 

o a~ >, 

~ 

: n, 

U 

~ i c '° 

~ 

'° 

U 

~ 

~ 

E ~ 

4 ~ 

°° 

~ 

.°_ 

s ,~ ~ 

`° 

>, 

a, 

>, 

a ° R ¬ ~ . .Y C, 

- ° 

~ 

U U U a 

 o a a = 

o 

a 

° I 

U 

cLn 

c ¬ 

w ~ 

a 

a 

a~ 

c 

~ a~ 

E 

~ a~ 

`° 

~ 

a~ 

~ 

. ran 

t'a 

a~ 

¬ `° 

~° 

w° w° 

= 

F'~ c 

~ 

g U 

-° 

k 

w 

( 

~ 

w ~

G. 3 i i 

w ~ 

i 

w 

i 

w 

N O C7 

, , 

C7 

O 

~ 

O 

x 

c c 

` > 

c 

` cC 

~C 

~ 

R 

aC 

on 

C 

aB 

' N 

oo N 

~c 

~o 

m 

oo 00 ~ 

m 

m a 

`c 

oo N 

~n 

~ 

N 

v 

j 

~ , N 

N ~ 

~o 

~ 

~c 

,~ 

v 

°, ' 

o 

v 

~ 

m 

N 

~n N 

^n 

o a' 

~c 0 

v 

-'T 0 

-- 

i 

! ~ 

!!!I 

LL 

M 

N 
i F T ~ 

U 

~ o ~ ~ 

' ~ 

~ ~ ~,o 

J . 

Q c 

p 

~a c o ~ 

~ 

~ ~ i. cd 

_ C >, 

O o C. = c3 ~ U " U 

o ~ y ~ ° 3 c4 

~ 0. ~ Q C cd "C 

~ w o w U ° N 

`~ o o ~ ° U ° : 

; o 

m a 

o ~' 

c a O ti - Q "n F ~ ° "~ m Q Q m 

m m o ca a, c a o. : 

~ i c~ s ~ o ~ 

Q i~ v 

. o 

=ULQ.~ o ~ 

Q ~ c c c 

pz','~t/Zvoy., 

~U F a~ c~¢ F i oU ° p 

p O 

N 

a. _ 

~ ° ~ N O ~ V 

`_. _ C 

7 LJ ~ 

C' 7aJ .~ U 

Q 

Q `° 

. 

° - a a w 

O ~3 0 Qcnv~o,~O ° 

( - .. U 

°' 3U ~ o_- ~o'ro ;r O 

A O c~' "~ ~ Q . cpd 

o v m Q v0 0 °_? ~ o~ 

° a ~ ~ ~ ° 9 ° °°U 

N ¢ ~ "C3 _ ~ N ~ 

Q! 

~ ~ ~ 

" ,3 

`3" (~ p 

C 

~ 

. R O >

' rn ~ J 

~ 

w a 

~ 

w 

r 

v, 

'3 cC 

c. c ~ 

~ _ 

~,, u. v o ° ~ w 

3 

\~ ° ~~ o .n ~o ~ o c Y ~ c a W 

o ~ 

~ 

~ o o ~ 

ca ~ o o .~ o ~ o o+ 

v v~ o~ cn 01 UmF UUU=U o, 

U U 

a Q 

=y 

yU, 

p 

~ 

7 

O 

U 

~ 

O 

U U 

~ 7 

~ O 

O 

n 

~ O O O 

p 

O O 

p 

~. ~. pp ~. O C O 

1 C' 

' 

~ > i C/1 > UO > V] > 

. 4 

> 

j a a d U ~= O~ 

>~ 

U O 

> 

U O 

> 

x °= 

Ooz~ 

~ 

o 

z 

U 

O 

> 

x '~ 

Oa 

z~ 

c 

o 

z 

c 0 

z 

°c o 

z 

U °

: ~ 2, 

Oa O~ 

>~ z~ 

U 

O 

> 

U ~ °: 

OOA- 

>z~ 

" 

~ 

~ 

~ 

01 

01 1

l~ l~ ^ 

00 

CC 

00 

~O 

I~ 

N 

~ 

~ 

M M 

V 

m p p 

O 

M 

M 

~n ~ 

N 

~ 0 

t~ 

fV 

~n 'n 

0 1 

~n 

C 

M 

M 

' 

N 

N 

1~ 

~ N 

O, 

~n 

~p 

v~ 

l\ 

~O 

00 

o0 ~ 

~ 

l~ 

d" 

.--~ 

' 

~n # o 

l N 

N 

10 

O 

N 

N O 

N 

O ~O 

ID 

~ V N 

(8 

F 

19 3 , "a 

i U N 

a i 

j N~+ 

i G 7 l 

o 

U 

a 

_ 

~ ~ `a 

" ~ 

1 ~ 

a z 

~ 

~ 

m 

Y 

w 

~^ ~ 

` ~ 

¢ 

~ 

V 

~ 

CO 

o_n 

. 

O 

E 

~ 

d 

~ 

° 

Y 

1 ! a .~ ~ v ~ aC 

, 

i 

` 

[ ~ a 

` 

;3 0 I u ~ R ' ~ o a, - 

" Z U c ~ 

o 

°- E a~ °' 

o 

G V o 

~ o ~ i U ~ ~ ~ o m O~ ¬ 

" 

"R .'0 

N 

7 g' ' a' ~ p= 

~ 

^ "_O U y ° ~' a. vol 

F 77 U ', J O 

. . 

Q Q Q 

"n Q CG p U c/1 , 

> 

a 

` o 

° 

o ' 3 

° 

`a z c .N 

113 

~ z 

ac . ~ ~ ~ c .n c w _ > 

w ~ a ~C o ° °" o 

U 

c ro 

U ' ° O 

Y 

>, 

~ 

° _, ~ ~ ~ 

~d E 

G_ p p cC ~ U 

4 y 

U O >, t ~ ° 

~ O c _ O 

l~ N ( N 

m 

e~ M 

~ 

N 

v 

~ 

M [- ~ 

N 

~ m 

i 

! O 

N 
a 

bt1o 

O 

 a 

a 

.n a. N 

N > 

T T 

c b 

U 

T 

R 

.C V 

Go 

v 

° 

^  

x `~ ~ a 

w U °' o 

y z O o 0 

o ? ti bc, 

~ 4, o 

N ~C 40 ., .N. 

~ _a~ c~a .~o 

°' o `° 3 .o 

U p- cG 'b o _~, 

O o `° 

> ~ N N Y s°' 

N 

o .°9 W Cc, 

c`a ° 

w ~ ~ a 3 

" U x c° o ~ ~° 8 

cd U .~ N V N 

cc V O 7 

G ro ¢ CL ,~ o 

b 

N p^ N V 

a~ Y C7 a~ c~ 

i~ o bn .c ~-' 

_ `a c " ~? ° 

w o a~ y_ " 3  ^ ~a 

-o 

," ~ _ v ~ ro W U U b 

o ~ ~a 

o ~ ~ c~a ~ o o ca 

N .CC ,O U ._ CT L" _ 

z 

° . 

o 

° `c' u~.. F- = T  o ~1 °r 

`o U o ° - U a~ ° on 

a=, "y ~ ~ 

c" _^ 

c ^ y <t ~_ i 

Q 

bA ~ V T O a~ ° "p 'fl V E O_. -p U ~ = V L' 'O = r}, 

= L O V C O N 

N O 

b11 Q V Cd CC y V N V 

U ~ N ~ N 

o ~ y ^= U~ p . 

o ~ > .~ ~ a`~ g N ~ .~ _ > o °' .o 

N cUa C LL, " U a ~ U ~3 

c~ ~ o t ~ R a~ > a ° ,o 

~ V ~ t' R ~ y b T = 

y F" ~ N 3  ~, ~ o = T 'o .fl o 

N V V bD N ~ y N ° 

a 3 

o ° a=, 3 0 0 ?, 3 .0 3 

0 0. ay - o °, ` o ~0 

°' `o °= a o o ~ ~= o = ° 

N a> ~ o - 

~, °' ~_ o a~ U ~ ~ = N Y c 

E 

o. . 

II. '~ ~ U ~ ~ CC 'D '3 U o ° N 

y a~ ca ~ a~ ~ c a~ ~ ` `d 

?~ V nn ~ en cd CID ! M 

" ~ bU = y cd O C cd = ^ a> > 

i .r C N N O ^ OTA O O 

O ^ .= X a~ 

" N " N ~ ' .~ G" ~ a~ ° ~" V 

z °' U U o ; U U v t= 

o O °' on O p a `~ '° 
Table 4 

Previously-Approved RACT Determinations for Major Sources of VOC and NOx in Maine That 

are Now Permanently Closed 

Name Applicable RACT Rule EPA SIP Approval Date 

Tree Free Fiber LLC, 096-096 Chapter 138 Reasonably 9/9/02 

Augusta Available Technology For Facilities that 67 FR 57154 

Emit Nitrogen Oxides (NOx RACT) 

(Formerly Statler Tissue) 

Scott Paper, Winslow 096-096 Chapter 138 Reasonably 9/9/02 

Available Technology For Facilities that 67 FR 57154 

Emit Nitrogen Oxides (NOx RACT) 

Georgia Pacific Chip and 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 4/18/00 

Saw, Available Control Technology for 65 FR 20754 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compound s (VOC RACT) 

Prime Tanning, Berwick 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 4/18/00 

Available Control Technology for 65 FR 20753 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC RACT) 

Nissen Bakeries 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 4/18/00 

Available Control Technology for 65 FR 20753 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC RACT) 

Moosehead Manufacturing, 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 5/20/02 

Dover-Foxcroft Available Control Technology for 67 FR 35441 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC RACT) 

Moosehead Manufacturing, 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 5/20/02 

Monson Available Control Technology for 67 FR 35441 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC RACT) 

Dexter Shoe, Dexter 06-096 Chapter 134 Reasonably 4/18/00 

Available Control Technology for 65 FR 20754 

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC RACT) 
APPENDIX A 
STATE OF MAINE 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

JOHN ELIAS BALDACCI 

GOVERNOR 

DAWN R . GALLAGHER 

COMMISSIONER 

McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A ) Amendment #2 

After review of the air emissions license amendment application, staff investigation 

reports and other documents in the applicant's file in the Bureau of Air Quality, pursuant 

to 38 M.R .S .A., Section 344 and Section 590, the Department finds the following facts: 

I. REGISTRATION 

A. Introduction 

1 . McCain Foods USA, Inc. was issued license A-459-72-B-R for their 

Tatermeal facility (Tatermeal) in Presque Isle, Maine on April 22, 1997. 

2. McCain Foods USA, Inc. has requested an amendment to their license to 

address VOC RACT for the Tatermeal facility as required by Chapter 134 of 

the Department's regulations. 

B. Emission Equipment 

Tatermeal is authorized to operate the following equipment: 

Fuel Burning Equipment 

Equipment 

Maximum 

Design 

Capacity 

Maximum 

Design 

Firing Rate Fuel Type, Date of Control Stack # 

MMBtu/hr al/hr % sulfur Const. Device 

-Kiln #1 30 215 #6 oil, 2.0% Pre 1974 cyclone 1 

Kiln #2 30 215 #6 oil, 2 .0% Pre 1974 cyclone 2 

~ Kiln #3 ~ 60 ~ 428 #6 oil, 2 .0% 1980 cyclone 3 

C. Application Classification 

This application for Tatermeal is to address VOC RACT requirements as per 

Chapter 134 of the Department's regulations and to address new VOC emission 

data that was revealed in stack testing results. The application is considered an 

amendment and is being processed as such. 

AUGUSTA 

17 STATE HOUSE STATION 

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0017 

(207) 287-7688 

RAY BLDG., HOSPITAL ST. 

BANGOR PORTLAND PRESQUE ISLE 

106 HOGAN ROAD 312 CANCO ROAD 1235 CENTRAL DRIVE, SKYWAY PARK 

BANGOR, MAINE 04401 PORTLAND, MAINE 04103 PRESQUE ISLE, MAINE 04769-2094 

(207) 941-4570 FAX: (207) 941-4584 (207) 822-6300 FAX: (207) 822-6303 (207) 764-6477 FAX: (207) 764-1507 

web site: www".,tate .tne .u~idep printed on recycled paper 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 2 Amendment #2 

II . AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION 

A. McCain Foods USA, Inc ., on November 13, 2002, submitted an application to 

amend their license to address reasonable available control technology (RACT) 

for volatile organic compounds (VOC) as required by Chapter 134 of the 

Department's regulations for their potato waste drying facility (Tatermeal) located 

in Presque Isle, Maine. 

Chapter 134 of the Department's regulations requires that any facility that has the 

potential to emit 40 tons or more of VOC per calendar year is subject to the 

requirements of Chapter 134. The facility was not thought of in the past to emit 

VOC in quantities in excess of 40 tons per year. However, after stack testing 

performed in November, 2001 revealed that VOC emissions are higher than 

originally licensed, it has been determined by the Department that the facility is 

subject to Chapter 134. 

On August 14, 2002, the Department requested that McCain Foods USA, Inc. 

submit a VOC RACT analysis in accordance with Chapter 134 Part 3, Subpart A. 

McCain Foods USA, Inc. conducted an alternative feasibility study in accordance 

with the plan requirements for Option C: VOC Alternative Reduction Program 

(Source Specific RACT Determination) of Chapter 134. 

B. Equipment Description 

Tatermeal operates three dryers that dehydrate primarily potato wastes to produce 

a material used as a binder and nutritional supplement in animal feed. The potato 

waste is supplied by McCain's operations in Easton, Maine and other regional 

food-processing plants, as well as by local growers . The three dryers are directcontact rotary dryers that combust #6 fuel oil with a sulfur content no greater than 

2.0% sulfur by weight . Potential VOC emissions from fuel combustion in the 

three dryers is approximately 1 .7 tons per year based on a 1 .28 pound of VOC per 

1000 gallons of #6 fuel emission factor that was taken from the Environmental 

Protection Agency's (EPA) Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors 

(AP-42) and the current license annual fuel usage limit of 2,628,000 gallons of #6 

fuel oil per year. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 3 Amendment #2 

As stack testing has revealed, there is significant VOC emissions from the drying 

of the potato waste in addition to the small amount of VOC emissions from the 

fuel combustion. During stack testing, three test runs were made for each of the 

smaller dryers, Dryers #1 and #2, while four test runs were performed for Dryer 

#3 . Testing was conducted for various mixtures of potato waste and the results 

indicated a wide variation in hourly VOC emissions rates . Potential VOC 

emissions were estimated for each unit assuming the highest measured hourly 

emission rate occurs for each of the 8,760 hours of the year and adding a 15% 

safety margin to account for operational variability and flexibility. Using this 

approach, potential VOC emissions from the three dryers is estimated at 70.0 tons 

per year for Dryers #1 and #2 each and 65 .6 tons per year for Dryer #3, for a total 

of approximately 205.5 tons of VOC as carbon per year for all dryers combined. 

Tatermeal also utilizes a Safety-Kleen parts degreaser that is used to clean 

equipment parts . The degreaser utilizes Safety-Kleen Premium Solvent, which is 

100% VOCs. The facility uses no more than 50 gallons of solvent per year in the 

degreaser, which amounts to VOC emissions of approximately 0.2 tons per year. 

C. Feasibility of Add-On VOC Control Equipment 

As required under the Option C Plan Requirements of Chapter 134, McCain 

Foods USA, Inc. examined the technical and economic feasibility of available 

add-on control device equipment for the dryers at the Tatermeal facility . This 

examination included consideration of incineration, condensation, wet and dry 

scrubbing and biological treatment . 

. 1 . Thermal Oxidizer/Incinerator 

Both thermal and catalytic incineration was considered in the VOC RACT 

feasibility study. Incineration is an oxidation process in which organic 

compounds are converted to carbon dioxide and water. 

a. Thermal incinerators are classified as either regenerative or recuperative . 

The regenerative incinerator utilizes a flame-based combustion chamber 

that connects two or three fixed beds containing inert (i .e . ceramic) 

packing . The exhaust stream enters the incinerator through a bed, which 

preheats the gas to near its final oxidation temperature. The gas then flows 

into the combustion chamber, where it is oxidized . The regenerative 

incinerator typically achieves efficiencies of from 95% to 99%. This 

design has a high initial and operational cost associated with it . 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 4 Amendment #2 

b. The recuperative incinerator utilizes a shell and tube heat exchanger to 

preheat exhaust gases before they enter a combustion chamber where, 

exposed to a flame, volatile organic compounds are incinerated. This 

design is typically used in applications with low gas flow rates and high 

VOC densities and in these applications can achieve efficiencies of 98% to 

99.9%. However, this design has a much lower thermal efficiency, and as 

a result is far less economical for applications with high flow rates and 

low VOC concentrations such as those from Taterrneal . 

c. Catalytic incinerators are similar to recuperative incinerators, modifying 

the flame-based incinerator to utilize a catalyst to promote incineration at 

lower temperatures . Catalytic incinerators are most effective in 

applications where there is little change in VOC concentrations and where 

contaminants that could foul the catalyst are not present. Where the 

concentration of volatile organic compounds is inconsistent and the 

likeliness of clogging or deactivation of the catalyst from particulate 

matter carried in the exhaust stream from drying potato waste, a catalytic 

incinerator is not a viable candidate for this application. The catalyst is 

also subject to contamination from sulfur and vanadium from the use of 

auxiliary fuel burning. Tatermeal will be firing #6 fuel oil with a sulfur 

content of 2.0% sulfur by weight in the dryers, which would cause a 

decrease in catalyst life and as a result a decrease in the systems overall 

efficiency. For these reasons, use of a catalytic incinerator is not 

technically feasible for this application . 

d. Given the limitations of recuperative thermal oxidizers and catalytic 

oxidizers, McCain Foods USA, Inc . examined the cost associated with 

installation and operation of a regenerative thermal oxidizer to determine 

the economic feasibility of this design for use in VOC emissions reduction 

for the Tatermeal operation. Based on vendor information provided to 

McCain Foods USA, Inc. from Quality Engineered Solutions, Ltd. (QES) 

of Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, the total capital investment for 

an RTO, including purchased equipment costs and direct and indirect 

installation costs, would be approximately $2,349,470. The annual cost to 

operate and maintain the RTO were estimated to be approximately 

$1,161,961 per year, assuming the use of 0.5% sulfur #6 fuel oil as 

auxiliary fuel . Based on information from QES as provided by several 

incinerator suppliers, 95% VOC removal efficiency was assumed for the 

RTO for the purpose of the cost evaluation. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 5 Amendment #2 

As indicated above, potential VOC emissions as carbon from the three 

dryers are approximately 205 .5 tons per year and assuming a 95°Io 

efficiency of the RTO, VOC emissions would be reduced by 195 .2 tons 

per year. The resulting cost effectiveness based on capital and annual cost 

would be approximately $ 17,989 per ton of VOC removed. If the capital 

costs are annualized assuming a ten-year economic life for the control 

equipment and a seven percent interest rate, the cost effectiveness would 

be approximately $7,667 per ton of VOC reduction . Based on this 

analysis, discussions with vendors, and EPA documentation, the high 

capital and operating costs associated with use of an RTO make this 

technology infeasible for control of VOC emissions from the dryers at 

Tatermeal . 

2 . Condensation 

Applications with a condenser alone, a condenser with refrigeration and a 

condenser with chemical oxidation were considered in the VOC RACT 

feasibility study. Condensation is a process in which volatile organic 

compounds are separated from the gas stream through saturation followed by 

a phase change. The phase change is achieved either by increasing the system 

pressure at a given temperature, or by lowering the temperature at a constant 

pressure . In a two component system in which one of the components is 

non-condensable (i .e ., air), condensation occurs at dew point (saturation) 

when the partial pressure of the volatile organic compound is equal to its 

vapor pressure . The more volatile the compound, the larger the amount that 

can remain as vapor at a given temperature, hence the lower the temperature 

required for condensation. 

a. QES conducted sampling in order to estimate the VOC reduction that 

could be expected from Tatermeal's dryers if condensation was utilized as 

VOC control. QES estimated that the lowest temperature that the dryer 

exhaust could reasonably be reduced to was from between 150°F and 

206°F down to between 80°F and 85°F. Thus, this temperature range was 

maintained during QES sampling. The exhaust gas sample was analyzed 

in accordance with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health Method 1500 and based on that analysis it was determined that the 

majority of VOCs in the dryer exhaust are not condensable at the 80°F and 

85'F temperature range. Therefore, a condenser alone would not be a 

technically feasible option for Tatermeal. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 6 Amendment #2 

b . The use of a refrigerated condenser was next evaluated . This type of 

technology is often utilized to obtain low temperatures required for 

acceptable removal efficiencies . This type of system is normally used for 

operations with exhaust stream VOC concentrations above 5000 ppm, 

such as gasoline bulk terminals and storage. According to U.S . EPA, 

office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Survey of Control 

Technologies for Low Concentration Organic Vapor Gas Streams", 

condensation is not generally applicable to gases with organic vapor 

concentrations at levels below several thousand ppm. If this technology 

were utilized, it would also generate a large volume of wastewater that 

would require the facility to construct an onsite wastewater treatment 

plant, further increasing the cost and operational burden of Tatenneal. The 

large volume of exhaust gas flow and the relatively low concentrations of 

VOCs in the exhaust stream, coupled with the need for wastewater 

treatment, make this technology a technically infeasible option for VOC 

control for the dryers at Tatermeal. 

c. QES investigated the use of a condenser in conjunction with chemical 

oxidation as a control device . According to QES, the design of the 

condenser would be a function of the total exhaust flow from the dryers . 

The condenser would need to be large enough to provide adequate contact 

time between the exhaust gas and the cooling water for sufficient energy 

transfer . It was assumed that a cooling tower would be needed to cool the 

water from the condenser to a temperature adequate for condensation . 

Where the condenser would remove a certain amount of VOCs, a scrubber 

could be utilized to remove the non-condensable VOCs that remain in the 

exhaust stream . The scrubber could be placed in the system downstream of 

the condenser and a chemical reagent could be injected into the scrubber 

to oxidize the non-condensable compounds trapped by the scrubber 

solution and a second reagent would be needed to control solution pH. The 

VOC removal efficiency of this type of system is uncertain, although QES 

has estimated the efficiency to be between 50°7o and 90%. QES has 

indicated that an actual efficiency could not be determined without a 

substantial commitment in time and expense to piloting activities . 

d. Given the limitations of utilizing a condenser alone or a refrigerated 

condenser, McCain Foods USA, Inc. examined the economic feasibility of 

the installation and operation of a condenser used in conjunction with a 

scrubber injected with a chemical oxidizer. Based on vendor information 

provided by QES, the total capital investment for a condensation/chemical 

oxidation system, including purchased equipment costs, direct and indirect 

installation costs, would be approximately $2,348,625. The annual cost to 

operate and maintain the system were estimated at approximately 

$986,667 per year. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 7 Amendment #2 

As indicated above, potential dryer VOC emissions as carbon are 

approximately 205 .5 tons per year and for the purpose of this evaluation, 

the VOC removal efficiency of the system was assumed to be 70%. This 

would provide for a VOC emission reduction of approximately 143 .9 tons 

of VOC per year. The resulting cost effectiveness based on capital and 

annual cost would be approximately $23,186 per ton of VOC removed. If 

the capital costs are annualized assuming a fifteen-year economic life for 

the control equipment and a seven percent interest rate, the cost 

effectiveness would be approximately $8,652 per ton of VOC reduction . 

These estimated costs do not include purchase, installation and operating 

costs of an onsite wastewater treatment operation . Based on this analysis, 

discussions with vendors, and EPA documentation, the high capital and 

operating costs associated with use of an RTO make this technology 

infeasible for control of VOC emissions from the dryers at Tatermeal . 

3 . Adsorption/Dry Scrubbing 

Adsorption is a process in which molecules adhere to a solid surface in a thin 

layer. In this type of system, the exhaust stream gases would pass through a 

porous solid and the volatile organic compounds would collect on the solid 

surfaces. This design can achieve efficiencies of 95% to 98% in applications 

where the VOC concentrations are between 500 ppm and 2000 ppm. Where 

the VOC concentration in the Tatermeal dryer exhaust is lower than these 

numbers, lower removal efficiency may result . QES found that vendors would 

not recommend this technology for application at Tatermeal because 

particulate matter in the dryer exhaust gases would likely cause plugging. 

Furthermore, this design does not accommodate large gas flow rates . 

Therefore, this technology is not a technically feasible option for Tatermeal . 

4. Wet Scrubber/Absorption 

A wet scrubber design would allow for the removal of organic and inorganic 

vapors in the gas stream by dissolving them in a liquid, usually water. Typical 

removal efficiencies for organic gases ranges from 70% to 99% depending on 

the gas, type of solvent and type of absorber . However, this design in 

applications for organic gas removal is subject to several limitations and 

problems, including the availability of a suitable solvent and the availability of 

vapor/liquid equilibrium data for the specific organic/solvent system of 

concern. The design is also susceptible to plugging if used in an application 

where there is a great deal of particulate matter in the gas stream . The wet 

scrubber design is more typically used in applications where gas 

concentrations are high. The tall towers, long contact ties and high liquid to 

gas ratios needed to obtain sufficient VOC removal may not make this 

technology economically feasible. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 8 Amendment #2 

For a wet scrubber to be effective, the vapors to be absorbed must be soluble 

in the fluid to be used, as only vapors that are soluble can be removed. Based 

on information supplied from QES, a large variety of the VOCs emitted from 

the dryers are not soluble in water. In addition, a waste material and solvent 

medium treatment or disposal issue is created and as indicated above, 

Tatermeal does not already have a wastewater treatment facility and the local 

municipality is not interested in taking on the burden of treating the large 

quantities of VOC laden wastewater. For these reasons, use of this design is 

not considered technically or economically feasible . 

5 . Biological Treatment 

Biofiltration is the process of bringing the gas stream into contact with a 

biologically active material and microorganisms will break down the 

compounds into carbon dioxide, water, mineral salts and microbial biomass. 

Typical filter media are mixtures of compost, peat or biologically active soils. 

This technique is typically suitable for applications where the gas stream is of 

constant composition, ambient temperature, humidity and virtually free of 

particulate matter which would act to clog the bed pores. This design can be 

fragile and very sensitive to changes in temperature, pH and moisture that 

could cause bed sterilization . In order for this design to be effective at 

Tatermeal, the facility would have to increase the airflow to the exhaust gas 

stream to reduce the relative humidity of the gas stream to 50%. The biofilter 

itself would have to be approximately 2.5 acres in size to accommodate the 

large high flow rates of the exhaust gas and added air. No documentation 

could be found and no vendors could provide any examples where biological 

treatment has been successful in controlling emissions similar to those from 

Tatermeal's dryers, therefore this design is not considered technically feasible . 

D. The EPA RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC) was searched for any 

RACT determination made for equipment or processes similar to the potato waste 

drying process at Tatermeal. No entries were found in the Clearinghouse for any 

potato waste drying operations similar to those at Tatermeal . However, seven 

facilities were identified having the same Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 

code as Tatermeal, i :e ., 2048, Prepared Feeds . Only one of the seven facilities 

addressed VOC emissions, Superior Agresources . BACT for VOC emissions for 

the dryers and pelletizing equipment at this facility was determined to be the use 

of natural gas, implying that VOC emissions were generated from fuel burning. 

Where natural gas is not available at this time in Presque Isle and where the 

majority of VOC emissions are generated from the drying potato waste, 

converting to natural gas is not a technically or economically feasible approach to 

reducing VOC emissions. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 9 Amendment #2 

E. The alternative feasibility study for VOC RACT also requires examination of the 

technical and economic feasibility of changing to low VOC emitting processes, 

i.e ., pollution prevention options. As discussed above, the vast majority of VOC 

emissions from the dryers are generated from the drying potato waste and the 

contribution to the VOC emissions from fuel combustion is slightly less than 

0 .1% of the total VOC emissions. Any changes in fuel oil type or usage would 

result in relatively little VOC emissions reduction. Furthermore, reduction in 

drying time may result in a product with that has an unstable shelf life . 

McCain Foods USA, Inc . has made operational changes at the Tatermeal facility 

to reduce fugitive VOC emissions from the potato waste prior to the drying 

process. These changes include processing the oldest waste first and not accepting 

potato waste that has gone septic . However, it is not possible to quantify any 

actual emissions reductions that may result from these changes. 

F. VOC Emissions 

McCain Foods USA, Inc. has agreed to restrict Tatermeal's total annual VOC 

emissions to 208 tons per year on a twelve-month rolling total basis. Tatermeal 

shall maintain VOC emissions records to demonstrate compliance with the VOC 

emission restriction. The records shall be maintained on a monthly and twelvemonth rolling total basis. A copy of the record shall be submitted to the 

Department on a semiannual basis with submittals due within 30 days after the 

end of the second and fourth calendar quarters. 

For the purposes of estimating the annual VOC emissions from the drying process 

at Tatermeal, an emission factor of 79 .5 pounds of VOC per 1,000 gallons of fuel 

combusted may be used, as proposed by McCain Foods USA, Inc. The factor was 

calculated based on stack test data from testing performed in November, 2001 and 

assuming a linear relationship between VOC emissions, product produced and 

fuel consumed. 

The current license for the Tatermeal facility includes an annual fuel restriction of 

2,628,000 gallons of #6 fuel at a sulfur content of 2 .0 % sulfur by weight based on 

a twelve-month rolling total. Due to the calculation of the annual fuel restriction 

times the VOC emission factor being much less than the 208 tons of VOC 

restriction, maintaining this annual fuel restriction will ensure that the Tatermeal 

facility will not exceed the annual VOC emissions restriction. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility 

Aroostook County 

Presque Isle, Maine 

A-459-71-D-A 

G. Annual Emissions 

) Departmental 

) Findings of Fact and Order 

) Air Emission License 

10 Amendment #2 

Tatermeal has the following annual VOC emissions, based on a 12-month rolling 

total : 

Total Allowable Annual Emission for the Facility 

(used to calculate the annual license fee) 

Pollutant 

VOC 

Tons/Year 

208 

ORDER 

The Department hereby grants Air Emission License Amendment A-459-71-D-A 

. .subject to the conditions found in Air Emission License A-459-72-B-R, in 

amendment A-459-71-C-M and in the following conditions : 

The following shall be in 

A-459-72-B-R: 

g. 

h. 

addition to Condition (12) of Air Emission License 

Tatermeal shall not exceed an annual fuel use limit of 2,628,000 gallons of #6 fuel 

oil, with a sulfur content of no greater than 2 .0°Io sulfur by weight, based on a 

twelve-month rolling total. 

McCain Foods USA, Inc. shall maintain fuel use records for the Tatermeal dryer 

system . The records shall be maintained on a monthly and twelve-month rolling 

total basis. 

The following is a new condition: 

(17) VOC Emissions 

A. 

B. 

C. 

Tatermeal's total annual VOC emissions shall be restricted to 208 tons per 

year based on a twelve-month rolling total basis. 

Tatermeal shall maintain a record of annual VOC emissions . The record shall 

be maintained on a monthly and a twelve-month rolling total basis. 

Tatermeal shall submit a copy of the record to the Department on a 

semiannual basis with the initial semiannual report due January 30, 2004, for 

the period of July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003. Subsequent reports 

shall be due on July 30 and January 30 of each year. 
McCain Foods USA, Inc., Tatermeal Facility ) Departmental 

Aroostook County ) Findings of Fact and Order 

Presque Isle, Maine ) Air Emission License 

A-459-71-D-A 11 Amendment #2 

(18) This amendment shall expire concurrently with Air Emission License 

A-459-72-B-R: 

DONE AND DATED IN AUGUSTA, MAINE THIS /Q,o DAY OF 1104,4 2003. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

PLEASE NOTE ATTACHED SHEET FOR GUIDANCE ON APPEAL PROCEDURES 

DAWN R. GALLAG~R~COMMISSIONER 

Date of initial receipt of application: November 13, 2002 

Date of application acceptance: November 14, 2002 

Date filed with the Board of Environmental Protection: 

MAR 2 0 2003 

BOARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROT. 

- AINE 

This Order prepared by, Peter G. Carleton, Bureau of Air Quality