INTERNATIONAL@PAPER

Ticonderoga Mill

568 Shore Airport Road

Ticonderoga NY 12883

518-585-5300

December 6, 2011

Sent Via Electronic Mail Followed By

Federal Express Tracking #795477490684

Mr. Michael Sundberg, P.E.

New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation

232 GolfCourse Road

P.O. Box 220

Warrensburg, New York 12885

Subject: Response to Comments on the International Paper Ticonderoga Mill's Best Available Retrofit

Technology (BART) Analysis

Dear Mr. Sundberg:

The enclosed document is in response to your email on August 12, 2011 requesting additional

information related to the BART Analysis submitted to NYSDEC in October 2010. This document is

intended to supplement but not repeat the previous analysis and therefore is not an entirely stand alone

document. For reference we have included the original EPAlFLMINYSDEC comments as Enclosure 1.

The mill's response to these comments is included as Enclosure 2 along with Appendices A through E.

Please contact Amy Dostie at 518-585-5344 if you need additional information concerning this submittal.

Sincerely,

INTERNATIONAL PAPER

Kirk Carlson

Mill Manager

enclosures

cc: D. Messner, Environmental, Health and Safety Manager

G. Rives, Corporate Environmental

Scott Griffin

NYSDEC - Division of Air Resources

Bureau of Air Quality Planning

625 Broadway, Floor

Albany, NY I 1
Enclosure 1: NYSDEC Re uest for Additional Information

EPA Comments on International Paper Ticonderoga Mill

Power Boiler (80% NO.6 Fuel Oil (1.5% S) and 20% wood bark)

This boiler currently has a 24-hour average permitted limit of 309 Ib/hr S02 [EPA calculates this is

equivalent to 0.36 Ib/MM BTU and 1353 TPY based upon 24hr/365days] using a NaOH wet scrubber for

control. This equates to approximately 78% S02 reduction when combusting 1.5% sulfur [EPA calculates

this is equivalent to about 1.65 Ib/MM BTU] No.6 Fuel Oil. IP/NY has determined that even if the S02

emission limit could be reduced to 0.20 Ib/MM BTU (NSPS requirement for oil fired boiler), the visibility

modeling results in an insignificant visibility impact. EPA agrees with FWS' comment that EPA's BART

Guidelines provide that an upgrade/improved operation of existing control devices should be

considered as a BART alternative. For NaOH wet scrubbing, EPA believes that perhaps 95-98% removal

efficiency may be a possible from the existing 78% removal efficiency, equivalent to emissions in the

range of 0.03 to 0.08 Ib/MM BTU. EPA believes this upgrade should be evaluated for BART.

IP/NY concludes that BART for NOx is the continued use of LNB/FGR to achieve emissions of 0.25 Ib/MM

BTU. IP did not conduct any 5-factor BART analysis but concludes that no further controls are needed

since modeling shows only small visibility improvement when assuming that the future NY NOx RACT

emission limit of 0.15 Ib/MM BTU would be met. EPA agrees with FWS' comment that a

technical/economic evaluation of pre and post combustion controls needs to be conducted along with a

determination of cost/dv.

Recovery Boiler (Black Liquor + up to 10% No.6 Fuel Oil)

IP should conduct a 5-factor BART analysis for controlling S02 emissions with wet scrubbing and semidry scrubbing. EPA agrees with FWS' comments. Also, please provide additional explanation as to how

"staged combustion systems" is a control measure for S02 emissions as EPA is unfamiliar with it.

EPA concurs with FWS' recommendation to examine "low-temperature oxidation" as a BART measure

for controlling NOx emissions.

EPA agrees with the FWS' recommendation to examine the implementation of additional collection

fields for upgrading the performance of the existing ESP for control of PM emissions.

Additional Federal Land Manager Comments on International Paper Ticonderoga Mill

Regarding S02 control on the Recovery Boiler, IP stated that of the three wet scrubbers installed on

recovery boilers in the United States, none was installed for S02 control. However, the Ft. James

recovery furnace wet-scrubber in Camas, Washington, was installed for S02 control following the ESP.

This alternative should be examined for the IP Recovery Boiler.
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

I. POWER BOILER BART EVALUATION

A. BACKGROUND - POWER BOILER AND CONTROL DESCRIPTION

The Ticonderoga Power Boiler is an Erie City multi-fuel fired spreader stoker boiler designed with a

maximum steam rating of 600 kpph and a fuel heat input rating of 855 MMBtu/hr. The boiler was initially

constructed in 1969 and is a BART eligible unit because it began initial operation during the 15 year

period between 1962 and 1977 as defined in the Clean Air Act. It is the mill's only power boiler. The

power boiler operates in a swing capacity varying steam production based on process demand and also

serves as the only control device for non-condensible gases (NCGs) generated from various pulping

operations. The boiler is designed to burn wood residue and No.6 fuel oil and typically operates with a

fuel mix of 80% oil and 20% wood residue (heat input basis). It is equipped with primary and secondary

combustion air systems and low NOx oil burners. Combustion exhaust gases pass through superheater

and economizer tube sections for heat recovery and then through multi-clones and a wet scrubber

before exhausting to atmosphere through a 205 foot stack.

The power boiler is currently subject to emission limits for sulfur dioxide (S02), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and

filterable particulate (PM), the three major precursors of regional haze. Emission limits for these

pollutants originate from Best Available Control Technology (BACT), Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT) as well as NY state regulations. The boiler is also subject to Maximum Available

Control Technology (MACT) regulations and will be required to meet emission limits for PM-HAP, acid

gases, HAP metals and organic HAP once requirements become effective in 20151

.

The follOWing table summarizes permitted emission limits that currently apply to the boiler relative to a

24-hour averaging period. Maximum allowable emissions are underlined and shown in bold font. These

same emission limits are also expressed in approximate equivalent forms (as denoted by brackets) to

allow "apples to apples" comparison between these existing performance levels and Best Available

Retrofit (BART) alternatives.

POWER BOILER EMISSION LIMITS AT MAX DESIGN CAPACITY 855 MMBTU/HR

POLLUTANT LB/HR LB/MMBTU CONC. AT 8% 02

PM-FILT [85.5] 0.10 [0.047 GR/DSCF]

S02 309 [0.36] [145 PPM,DV]

NOx [214] 0.25 [139 PPM,DV]

The March 21, 2011 Boiler MACT (76 Fed. Reg. 15608) requires existing sources to be in compliance with new

requirements no later than March 21, 2014. This date has been suspended pending further rule revisions. EPA anticipates

a mid 2015 final compliance date associated with the revised Boiler MACT rule.

2
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

As described more fully in the October 1, 2010 submission2, baseline emissions of S02 and NOx used in

the BART modeling analysis were the maximum single day emission rates recorded by the continuous

emission monitors (CEMS) during the 5 year baseline period (2005 2009) while baseline PM emissions

were derived from stack test measurements and the highest single heat input rate (698 MMBtu/hr)

recorded during the same five year baseline period. The following table shows the maximum Ib/hr

emission rates used in the modeling analysis and also expresses these rates in approximate equivalent

terms to allow direct comparison with emission limits or performance levels that may be expressed in

alternative formats.

POWER BOILER BASELINE EMISSIONS

(MAX SINGLE DAY 24-HOUR AVG BETWEEN 2005 AND 2009)

POLLUTANT LB/HR LB/MMBTU CONC. AT 8% 02

PM-FILT 47.5 0.07 0.032 GR/DSCF

S02 273.5 0.39 157 PPM,DV

NOx 178 0.25 142 PPM,DV

B. POWER BOILER S02: EPA/FWS COMMENTS AND IP RESPONSES

1. EPA/FWS Comment: EPA notes that the existing S02 emission limit of 309 Ibs/hr corresponds to a

removal efficiency of only 78% for S02, although 95 to 98% removal may be possible.

IP RESPONSE: Because the power boiler also serves as the control device for Non-Condensible

Gases (NCGs), the sulfur content of these gases also contribute to S02 emissions. Had the sulfur

from these gases (~229 Ibs/hr) been taken into account, EPA's calculations would reflect an

uncontrolled S02 rate of 2,117 Ib/hr (2.48 Ib S02/MMBtu) showing a scrubber removal efficiency of

approximately 85%. Additional detail related to NCG sulfur contribution to boiler emissions is

included as Appendix A. Considerations for improving S02 removal efficiency are discussed below.

2. EPA/FWS Comment: Upgrades or improvements to the existing scrubber should be evaluated

since 95 to 98% S02 removal (equivalent to range of 0.03 to 0.08 Ib/MMBtu) may be possible.

IP RESPONSE: We believe this comment stems from the BART guidelines3 which say "you should

consider ways to improve the performance of existing control devices particularly when a control

device is not achieving the level of control that other similar sources are achieving in practice".

Available options for increasing the amount of S02 removed in the scrubber are significantly limited

by the fact that the device is designed as a PM scrubber and therefore should not be compared to

performance levels of devices designed specifically for the purpose of removing S02. If physical or

operational changes are made to increase S02 removal these changes could not be allowed to

"Five Factor BART Analysis for International Paper Ticonderoga Mill", prepared by AECOM, October 1, 2010.

70 FR 39166, column, July 6, 2005.

3
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

adversely affect PM removal efficiency or jeopardize the ability to comply with PM emission limits.

Similarly, because the boiler serves as the only control device for burning NCGs, both the boiler and

scrubber must be able to operate continuously without unplanned shutdowns or failures. Failure

or malfunction of the mill's only power boiler or scrubber triggers immediate, emergency

shutdown of all process operations at the facility including venting of uncontrolled NCG gases

under certain situations. For these reasons, BART alternatives that involve physical or operational

changes to improve 502 removal from the existing scrubber must be limited to those that can strike

an appropriate balance between control of 502, PM and NCG emissions.

The following considers each of the "five factor" BART evaluation steps as they relate to physical or

operational changes to improve 502 removal from the existing scrubber.

Step 1: Identify Available Retrofit Control Technologies:

The principle techniques for improving 502 removal involve either: 1) increasing gas-liquid contact

or 2) using additional caustic to increase the rate of absorption. Increasing the gas-liquid

interaction requires expanding the amount of surface area for the gas and liquid to contact which is

commonly accomplished in a 502 absorber by adding trays or packing and by designing the height

and diameter of the absorber to optimize Iiquid- gas interaction and residence time.

The scrubber on the power boiler is an Entoleter Centrifield design installed in 1995 to control PM.

It is a medium energy design that relies on its geometry and exhaust gas flow patterns to remove

PM without the energy penalty required by a high pressure drop venturi design. This type of

scrubber was one of eight "novel" PM control technologies evaluated by EPA in a study4 focused on

fine PM removal capabilities of nonconventional particulate control systems. Described in brief,

exhaust gases enter the bottom of the scrubber through narrow openings in a fixed vane cage.

Alkaline liquid is sprayed into the gas as it accelerates through narrow openings where the liquid is

atomized into very small droplets, similar to the effect achieved in the throat of a venturi scrubber.

The scrubber dimensions and geometry direct the gas into a swirling vortex motion to create a

concentrated "cloud" of small liquid droplets which intercept and remove PM from the gases

before passing through a second level of liquid spray prior to passing through a demister and

exhausting to the atmosphere. Scrubber dimensions and liquid and gas flow patterns are

fundamental design elements affecting the PM removal performance of this scrubber type.

Step 2: Eliminate Technically Infeasible Options:

Because of the design and operating principles associated with this scrubber, physical changes to

the design or geometry to significantly increase liquid-gas interaction would alter gas flow and

liquid atomization patterns both of which are critical for PM removal. For this reason, IP concludes

that physical modification of the scrubber would adversely affect PM control and are therefore not

technically feasible BART alternatives.

Evaluation ofEight Novel Fine Particle Collection Devices, Final Task Report Feb-Nov 1975, EPA-600/2-76-035.

4
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

Step 3: Evaluate the Control Effectiveness of Feasible Technologies:

Increasing caustic addition rates can theoretically enhance S02 removal as long as there is sufficient

liquid and gas mixing to allow the chemical reaction to occur. Increasing the rate of caustic will

create higher solids concentrations in the recirculation liquid from both the caustic and the sulfite

and sulfate salts formed by the chemical scrubbing action. While historical stack tests show that

the power boiler scrubber consistently removes PM at levels to satisfy permit limits, actual

emissions are generally about 70-80% of the limit leaving a relatively small compliance margin.

Since high solids content in scrubber liquids can be stripped out by the exhaust gas and cause PM

emissions to increase, additional fresh water makeup will be required to maintain an adequate

compliance margin for PM.

Prospects of increasing caustic rates also raise notable concerns over scale formation and its

potential impact on long term operational reliability and particularly the length of run time

between scheduled maintenance outages since these factors impact mill-wide operations.

Excessive scale bUildup can adversely impact pumps, piping and liquid spray patterns, features that

are critical factors affecting the performance of any scrubber and likely even more important

relative to this unique scrubber design. To predict the possible impact of increased caustic addition

on the rate of scale and to determine if chemical additives could effectively manage scale buildup,

mill personnel and a specialty chemical vendor performed a limited series of short term trials.

Overall, the trials demonstrated that chemical additives can be used up to a point to manage scale

buildup when combined with management of scrubber liquid and freshwater makeup.

Balancing PM emissions, scale buildup and reliability concerns, IP concludes that increasing the rate

of caustic is a technically feasible alternative up to a certain point. Based on a review of boiler

operations and emissions during the BART baseline period (Appendix B), lowering the maximum

24-hour emission limit by 59 Ib/hr (from 309 Ib/hr to 250 Ib/hr) would require additional S02

reduction on an average of 239 days/yr as seen below (to consistently average 250 Ib/hr or less the

mill estimates targeting an operational setpoint of approximately 225 Ib/hr, thus leading to a

maximum actual less than the permitted value). This alternative is believed to be the lowest

achievable emission rate during periods where steam demand is high and bark/wood residue is not

available.

Number of Days Avg 502 Emission Rates

are Above/Below 225 Ib/hr

... 300 ttl 239 OJ

> - ... 200 _.~_._~ --~-----_. - -- --- ... _---~----". ~-_._~,,-~-

OJ

0-

III 110

>ttl 100 I I:

- - - -- -- - ----~,,- --~~~-

c

....

0

ci a -- - - --------T --- -----------,,--~---~

Z

:5 225 > 225

5
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

As detailed in Appendix B, this alternative would be expected to reduce the maximum single day

S02 emission rate by 49 Ib/hr. A summary of the impact of this emission reduction alternative

compared to existing levels of controlled and uncontrolled emissions is included in the following

table.

Effectiveness of BART Alternative Compared to Existing S02 Emissions

La/

% REDUCTION

La/HR

MMBTU FROM SINGLE

DESCRIPTION

(AT SINGLE TPY FROM FROM DAVMAX

DAY MAX UNCTRL ALLOWABLE ACTUALLB/HR

MMBTU)

UNCONTROLLED 1,897 2.72 8,309 - - -

ALLOWABLE 309 0.44 1,353 84% - -

AVG ANNUAL BASELINE ACTUAL 217 0.31 952 89% 30% 21%

BASELINE ACTUAL SINGLE DAY MAX 274 0.39

CAUSTIC ADDITION ALTERNATIVE:

ALTERNATIVE LIMIT 250 0.36 1,095 87% - 9%

EXPECTED ACTUAL ANNUAL AVG 215.5 0.31 903 89% 33% 21%

EXPECTED SINGLE DAY MAX 225 0.32 - 18%

Step 4: Determine the Impacts of Implementing Feasible Technologies

Operating costs to implement the described alternative are estimated to be $109,000 per year

(Appendix C). Based on IPs standard management practices to retain a margin of compliance, the

operating point for S02 emissions will need to be set at 225 Ib/hr. As seen below, daily average S02

emissions were higher than this rate an average of 239 days/yr over the 5 yr BART baseline period.

6
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

;:: 175 < 200 <': 200 < 225 <': 225 < 250 ;:: 250

S02 Emission Rate

< 175

200

iiii

>

III

... 150

e

Ql

.~

4i 100 <II

III

co

....

0:: SO

co

...

> a >III

C

#

Distribution of Daily S02 Emission Rates

Power Boiler

-----------------------------------------186--------------- 400

350

300

250 2l

#

200

150 ::J

100 E

::J

SO V

a

On average during the 5 yr baseline period, daily 502 emission rates exceeded 225 Ib/hr during

these days by an average rate of 17 Ibjhr. Based on these historical operations this alternative

would be expected to reduce average annual emissions by approximately 49 tons of 502 (From 952

to 903 tpy) reflecting a cost effectiveness of approximately $2,200jton 502 removed.

As detailed in the Appendix, implementation of this alternative would require 4.7 million gallons of

additional fresh water, 8,900 Ibs of additional chemical additives and would send an additional 98

tonsjyr of solids to the wastewater treatment facility that would require removal and disposal in the

landfill.

Step 5: Determine the Visibility Improvement from Implementing Feasible Technologies

The BART regulations rely on the "deciview" as the metric for expressing changes in visibility. The

deciview is a measure to describe visibility change using a common or standardized measure that

applies regardless of the level of background impairment. A change of one deciview is defined as a

small but noticeable change in visibility under most circumstances_s

Visibility modeling analyses included in the October 2010 evaluation predicted maximum impacts

from power boiler emissions at the Lye Brook Wilderness Area which is the Class I Area closest to

the Ticonderoga mill. The analysis predicted that peak emissions from the power boiler could have

a maximum visibility impact ranging from 0.64 to 0.73 DV compared to natural background visibility

presuming the absence of any man-made emissions. The reported DV range reflects the two

different impacts predicted using the two meteorological data bases required by NY5DEC for

visibility contribution modeling.

Implementation of the described caustic 502 reduction alternative is predicted to theoretically

improve visibility at Lye Brook on the maximum single impact day by a range of 0.02 to 0.11

5 64 Federal Register, page 35725, July 1, 1999_

7
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

deciviews, depending upon the meterological data set used to represent natural background

conditions.

Visibility Improvement (dv)

Class I Area

Max Single Impact Day

AECOM Met VTDEC Met

Data Data

Acadia National Park 0.02 0.01

Brigantine Wilderness 0.00 0.00

Dolly Sods Wilderness 0.01 0.00

Great Gulf Wilderness 0.04 0.00

Lye Brook Wilderness 0.02 0.11

Otter Creek Wilderness 0.01 0.00

Presidential Range 0.02 0.04

TOTAL (all combined) 0.12 0.17

$/dv improvement $908,000 $641,000

The visibility improvement at each of the region's Class I areas associated with the BART alternative

is shown below and compared to the level of change that can be discerned by the human eye. The

final graph shows the number of days per year that the model predicts visibility impairment would

be in each ofthe listed ranges at Lye Brook, ifthe maximum emission rate occurred each and every

day.

8
Enclosure 2: IP Res onse BART Supplemental Information

Theoretical Visibility Improvement from BART

S02 Alternative

1.2

"> 1

> 0.8

:c

·iii

.s; 0.6

.:

:0 0.4 c

ro<5 0.2

o

IIAECOM Met

Data

IIVTDEC Met

f)rltrl - ..._...

..---

-.-..-

-- ...-- ~" ~" ~" ,," ~" q;. ~1> ~I<> ~I<> ~I<> ~I<> ~I<> I<>.Ji

r!- r!- r!- or!- r!- 1>~ ~v

~~?J ~~?J ~~?J ~~?J ~~ ~o ~~ .:01> .:00

~1> I<> 0" J:- 2fr .ol<>~ I<>'Q

.:o~ ~v ,&1> ,.,0 ~0 <0,0 ef<; ~e;

(,1> ~,I<> .9J ~-4.. 1<>1> ,l 1<>' 1>~ "?' <0'''- ,p (§ O<:? v<$' X'

50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Max Visibility Impact from Ti Power Boiler

Lye Brook, VT Class I Area

•••••••••••••••••• 313

<1.9 0

<0.8 0

'iii'

~<0.7 1 :~u

OJ

9.<0.6 1 ...

c

OJ

E<0.5 2

·iii

a..

.E<0.4

>

~<0.3

:>

-0

$<0.2

.!:!

-0

OJ

et<O.l

0

No. Days Modeled Impact Predicted by Impairment Level

9
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

Power Boiler BART 502 Conclusion:

IP does not believe that S02 reduction is warranted to satisfy BART objectives. S02 emissions are

currently well controlled and satisfy presumptive BART benchmarks outlined for oil-fired utility boilers.

Implementing the described alternative would be expensive relative to an imperceptible level of

theoretical visibility improvement. Implementing the alternative would require significant quantities of

fresh water and chemicals, and create additional wastewater and solid waste. In addition, because the

emission control systems will be substantially changed to address boiler MACT obligations in the near

future and because the boiler already performs at levels recognized to be presumptive BART, IP

concludes that existing S02 controls and performance levels satisfy S02 BART for the power boiler.

C. POWER BOILER NOx BART; EPA/FWS COMMENTS AND IP RESPONSES

1. EPAIFWS Comment: A technical/economic evaluation of pre- and post combustion NOx

controls should be conducted.

IP RESPONSE: IP is currently assessing alternatives for reducing NOx emissions to satisfy NY NOx

Reasonably Available Control Requirements (RACT). The power boiler is already equipped with

low NOx burners, over fired air and flue gas recirculation. The objective of the current

assessment is to identify operational measures, system enhancements, physical changes

and/or equipment needed to satisfy the new 0.15 Ib/ MMBtu standard for NOx while

simultaneously achieving carbon monoxide (CO) emissions reductions necessary to satisfy

Boiler MACT requirements. This analysis will be submitted by year end.

10
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

RECOVERY FURNACE BART EVALUATION

A. BACKGROUND - RECOVERY FURNACE AND CONTROL DESCRIPTION

The Ticonderoga recovery furnace (RF) is a noncontact Babcock & Wilcox low odor design installed

in ~1969 having a maximum permitted black liquor firing capacity of 48 TBLS/hr. The unit is

designed with secondary and tertiary combustion air and is equipped with oil burners for startup

operations and use in upset conditions. Exhaust gases are routed through superheater and

economizer sections to recover heat prior to exhausting through three separate electrostatic

precipitators (ESPs). Two of these precipitators exhaust through a common stack; the other

exhausts through its own stack.

The purpose of a Kraft recovery furnace is to reclaim sodium and sulfur chemicals in a form suitable

for regenerating cooking liquor. To achieve this purpose, furnaces are inherently designed and

operated in a manner to optimize chemical recovery. S02 emissions represent an unintended loss of

process chemicals and thus furnaces are designed and operated to minimize these losses. The

lower portion of a recovery furnace is operated to form a reducing zone to convert sodium and

sulfur compounds into molten smelt. The upper furnace is operated as an oxidizing zone to burn

organic materials to create heat to evaporate water from the cooking liquor, drive chemical

reactions in the lower furnace. Combustion air is spatially distributed throughout the furnace or

"staged" to control and manage the amount of air introduced into each functional zone and to

minimize entrainment of chemicals in the furnace exhaust gases.

The Ticonderoga recovery furnace is subject to emission limits for filterable PM, and NOx as shown

below. These limits originate from MACT, RACT as well as NY state regulations. Maximum

allowable emissions are underlined and shown in bold font in the form and format of the emission

requirement as well as shown in roughly equivalent alternative formats (as denoted by brackets).

RECOVERY FURNACE EMISSION LIMITS [48 TBLS/HR]

POLLUTANT LB/HR LB/TBLS CONC. AT 8% 02

PM-FILT [29.8] [0.62] 0.03 GR/DSCF

NOx [82.6] [1.72] 100PPM,DV

11
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

RECOVERY FURNACE BASELINE ACTUAL EMISSIONS (48 TBLS/HR)

MAX 24-HOUR AVG (2005-2009)

POLLUTANT LB/HR LBS/TBLS CONC. AT 8% 02

PM-Fill 8.1 0.17 0.008 GR/DSCF

S02 0.7 0.02 0.6 PPMDV

NOx 64.8 1.35 72 PPMDV

B. RECOVERY FURNACE S02 BART: EPA/FWS COMMENTS AND IP RESPONSE

1. EPA/FWS Comment: IP should perform a 5-factor analysis for controlling 502 from the Recovery

Boiler considering both wet and semi-dry scrubbing.

IP RESPONSE: 502 emissions from the Ticonderoga RF are currently as low as the most stringent

emission limits established for any US RF, including limits for brand new installations. A search of

EPA's RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse6 (RBCL) which is summarized in Appendix D shows that the

lowest 502 emission limit for any US recovery furnace is 10 parts per million (ppm) (dry volume

basis at 8% O2), Except for the two heat recovery scrubbers installed at the Camas Washington mill,

none of the other case-by-case permit decisions listed in RGB identifies add-on controls as the basis

502 limits for Recovery Furnaces. All remaining permit decisions have been based on pollution

prevention measures or have identified that no feasible controls are available.

The Ticonderoga RF is already equipped with design features and operating practices necessary to

promote good operation and low 502 emissions. Stack test measurements conducted over the last

several years have shown emissions to be between 1 and 10 ppm. Because emissions from the

Ticonderoga RF are already equivalent to or better than levels achieved by the best performing

furnaces and because important furnace design features and operational practices identified as

potentially influencing 502 emissions are already in place, IP does not believe that further

evaluation of RF 502 controls is warranted. Consistent with the guidelines promulgated at 40 CFR

51, Appendix Vwhich states that "If you find that a BART source has controls already in place which

are the most stringent controls available (note that this means that all possible improvements to

any control devices have been made), then it is not necessary to comprehensively complete each

following step of the BART analysis in this section." IP concludes that the operation and

EPA Clean Air Center Technology: (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/rblc/) EPA established the RACT/BACT/LAER

Clearinghouse, or RBLC, to prOVide a central data base of air pollution technology information including past RACT, BACT,

and LAER NSR decisions, to promote the sharing of information among permitting agencies and to aid in future case-by-case

determinations.

12
Enclosure 2: IP Res onse BART Su plemental Information

performance of the Ti RF already represent BART for 502 and no further improvements are

considered.

2. EPA/FWS Comment: Explain how "staged combustion systems" is a control measure for 502

emissions.

IP RESPONSE: As described above, the primary purpose of a Kraft Recovery Furnace is to reclaim

cooking chemicals. Managing the amount of air introduced into the lower portion of the furnace

ensures the reducing atmosphere needed to drive chemical reactions and to form molten smelt.

Controlling the distribution of air throughout the furnace (or staging the combustion process) allows

the temperature and oxygen profiles throughout the furnace to be managed as well as at the

molten smelt char bed level. When sulfur and sodium combine to form smelt, sulfur is captured not

released to the flue gas and therefore not available to form 502 emissions. Black liquor solids

typically contain about 4 % sulfur by weight and more than 99% of the sulfur entering the furnace is

recovered in the molten smelt or subsequently in the ESP with only a small fraction being emitted as

502•

3. FWS Comment: The Federal Land Manager (FLM) disagrees with the statement on page 3-6 of

IP's October 2010 BART Analysis which claims that scrubbers have not been installed on US

recovery boilers for the purpose of removing 502, The FLM comment states "However, the Ft.

James recovery furnace wet scrubber in Camas, Washington was installedfor S02 controlfollowing

the ESP. This alternative should be examinedfor the IP Recovery Boiler".

IP RESPONSE: The summary statement included in our October 2010 BART Analysis remains

accurate, 502 scrubbers have not been installed on any US recovery furnace. Our conclusion was

based on information available from the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI)

document "Retrofit Control Technology Assessment for NOx, 502, and PM Emissions from Kraft

Pulp and Paper Mill Unit Operations,,7 a copy of which was included along with our original October

2010 report. NCASI is an independent, non-profit research institute that focuses on technical

solutions for minimizing environmental impacts from the pulp and paper industry and is a

recognized authority and leading source of reliable information related to environmental data and

control practices used at North American pulp and paper mills. NCASI describes the application of

502 scrubbers on Recovery Furnaces as follows:

13
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Su plemental Information

"There is no experience in the pulp and paper industry with the use of dedicated, add-on flue gas

desulfurization technologies on Kraft recovery furnaces. Although there are a few scrubbers on U.S.

Kraft recovery furnaces, none ofthese were installed for S02 removal. Only one U. S. recovery furnace

does not use an ESP for particulate control; this unit has venturi scrubbers instead. All ofthe other

scrubbers follow an ESP. Two were installed for heat recovery reasons, although some S02 scrubbing

may also be occurring especially when caustic is added to the scrubbing solution. One scrubber

following an ESP was installed with the main purpose of achieving incremental particulate matter

removal. Another scrubber following an ESP was installed on a furnace with a direct contact evaporator

to control black liquor droplets being entrained in the cascade and traveling all the way throughout the

ESP and out the stack. Even if these scrubbers had been installed to reduce S02 emissions, the

removal costs in terms of dollars per ton ofS02 removed would be large due to high gas flows and sitespecific retrofit considerations. Significant capital would be required for the large gas handling

equipment and additional induced fan capacity needed to overcome the increased pressure drop

across the scrubber."

The FLM comment refers to a 1991 permit decision in EPA's Clearinghouse (RBLC ID# WA-0222)

that lists "add-on control" as the basis for an S02 BACT decision for two recovery furnaces at the

Fort James mill in Camas, Washington (now owned by Georgia Pacific). Close review of the Fort

James permit determination shows that the devices were not S02 scrubbers but instead were direct

contact heat exchangers used to supplement the mill's process hot water supply system.

C. RECOVERY FURNACE NOx: EPA/FWS COMMENTS AND IP RESPONSE

1. EPA/FWS Comment: IP should evaluate "low-temperature oxidation" as a BART measure for

controlling NOx from the Recovery Boiler.

IP RESPONSE: IP is not familiar with the "low temperature oxidation" control technique referenced

by EPA and FWS. Our search of the RBCL for NOx determinations (Appendix E) did not identify any

US location where this technique had been applied as BACT, RACT or LAER for recovery furnaces.

With the exception of a 1996 permit decision for Apple Grove Pulp and Paper in WV which was

never built, the RBLC does not contain any records of decisions requiring add-on NOx controls for

recovery furnaces. About one-third of the recent determinations have found that there were no

feasible controls available and the balance have identified "Pollution Prevention" methods such as

"combustion control", "good design, combustion practices" or "staged combustion" as the basis for

BACT and LAER permit limits.

The lowest NOx limit in the RBCL is 75 ppm (at 8% 02) based on a May 2005 permit BACT decision

at IP's Courtland, AL mill. With one exception, all permit decisions since 2006 have been in the

range of range of 80 to 100 ppm (at 8% 02), or generally in the 1.50 to 2.30 Ibs NOx per ton of

black liquor solids when limits are expressed in terms of production throughput. Several of these

recent decisions have applied to brand new furnaces or significant modifications at existing RFs

14
Enclosure 2: IP Response BART Supplemental Information

involving capacity increases or fundamental changes to furnace design not available in the late

1960's when the Ticonderoga furnace was designed and installed.

As noted earlier, the Ticonderoga recovery furnace is currently subject to a RACT NOx limit of 100

ppm (at 8% 02) (~ 1.72 Lb[TBLS). Stack measurements have consistently demonstrated NOx

emission levels in the range of 60 - 75 ppm. The Ti furnace is equipped with design features to

promote good operation and combustion practices, including a three level combustion air system.

Since NOx emissions are already demonstrated to be as low as those from most new furnaces and

because there are no add-on controls technologies available for recovery furnaces, IP concludes

that existing design and operations of the Ticonderoga recovery furnace satisfies NOx BART.

D. RECOVERY FURNACE PM: EPA/FWS COMMENTS AND IP RESPONSE

1. EPA/FWS Comment: IP should evaluate adding additional collection fields to the ESP used to

control PM from the Recovery Boiler.

IP RESPONSE: The Ticonderoga recovery furnace is already subject to MACT PM-HAP controls.

The MACT standard was promulgated in 2001 and became effective in 2004. There have been

no significant advances or new technologies for controlling PM since the MACT was developed.

EPA's BART Guidelines state "We believe that in many cases, it will be unlikely that States will

identify emission controls more stringent than the MACT standards without identifying control

options that would cost many thousands of dollars per ton. Unless there are new technologies

subsequent to the MACT standards which would lead to cost effective increases in the level of

control, you may rely on the MACT standards for purposes of BART.8

Because the MACT PM-HAP control level continues to reflect the best available technology and

there have not been significant advances or new technologies, IP concludes that the existing RF

PM control levels satisfy BART.

70 Federal Register 39164, July 6, 2005, 39164.

15
~'

Appendix A: Sulfur Content of NCGs

Total Fuel Heat Input (MMBtu/hr) 855

% from Fuel Oil 80%

% from Bark 20%

#6 Fuel Oil (MMBtu/hr) 684

Wt% S 1.5%

API gravity 5.0

Density (Ibs/gal) 8.65

Heat Content (MMBtu/gal) 0.15

Lbs S/hr from Oil 591.4 1.51bs Sl100 Ibs Oil "8.65Ibs Oil/gal Oil" gal oi1/0.15 MMBtu" 684 MMBtu/hr =/bs Slhr

Lbs S02/MMBtu Oil 1.73

Bark (MMBtu/hr) 171

Wt% S, dry basis 0.05%

Heat Content (Btu/lb, dry basis) 8,300

Lbs S/hr from Bark 10.3 0.051bs Sl100 Ibs dry Bark *Ib dry bark/8300 Btu * 10"6 BtulMMBtu *171.6 MMBtulhr =Ibs Slhr

% Sulfur converted to H2S04 (%) 0.1%

% Sulfur converted to S02 (%) 99.9%

100.0%

Pollutant Input by Fuel/Gas Stream (Ib/hr) Scrubber

Compound

LVHC HVLC #6 Fuel Bark Total to

UOM

Gases Gases Oil Boiler

Dimethyl Disulfide Ib/hr 42.9 16.5 0.0 0.0 99.8

Dimethyl Sulfide Ib/hr 56.6 24.5 0.0 0.0 123.0 Emiss to

Atmos

Hydrogen Sulfide Ib/hr 51.7 13.4 0.0 0.0 126.4 Ib/hr

Methyl Mercaptan Ib/hr 73.0 55.3 0.0 0.0 213.7 .Power

Boller Rem

Effie eorresp

to

Allowable

Total Sulfur Ib/hr 155.7 73.4 591.4 10.3 1059.7 1059.7 85.3% 155.6

Sulfur Dioxide Ib/hr 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2117.4 85.4% 309.0

Sulfuric Acid Mist Ib/hr 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 3.2
Appendix B: Analysis of Baseline Power Boiler 502 Emissions

Power Boiler Avg 502 Ib/hr (24-hr) 250 250 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

:lYK Max

225 225 225 225 225 225 225 Day Rank Avg anyYR

1 271.8 264.3 273.5 259.3 269.2 268 274 42.6

.~ 34.3 44.2

2 I 269.2 263.7 266.9 253.9 260.5 263 269 37.8 28.9 35.5

3 268.2 263.3 266.1 252.6 258.4 262 268 36.7 43.2 41.1 27.6 33.4

4 267.2 262.8 263.7 252.1 35.7 42.1 .7 27.1 32.7

5 266.6 262.3 263.2 251.8 2 267 35.2 41.6 38.2 26.8 32.0

6 266.5 262.0 262.7 251.6 25 . 34.8 41.5.5 7.7 26.6 31.2

7 9 261.6 261.6 251.2 255.4 259 265 33.9 39.9 39.9 36.6 36.6 26.2 30.4

.7 261.3 260.6 251.1 253.6 258 264 33.1 38.7 38.7 36.3 35.6 26.1 28.6

260.9 260.2 251.0 253.5 258 263 32.8 ~35.2 26.0 28.5

1 260.7 259.8 250.9 253.1 257 262 32.4 .3 34.8 25.9 28.1

250.5 252.7 257 262 31.9 . 36.7 35.6 33.9 25.5 27.7

12 261. 252.6 257 261 31.7 36.4 36.4 35.4 33.8 25.2 27.6

13 252.2 256 261 31.5 36.4 36.4~ 33.3 25.2 27.2

0 260.1 258.2 250.1 252.2 256 261 31.3 36.0 36.0 .1 33.2 25.1 27.2

1 5 260.1 257.8 249.9 252.0 256 261 31.1 35.5 35.5 32.8 24.9 27.0

16 260.2 260.1 257.7 249.4 251.9 256 260 30.9 35.2 35.2 35.1 32.7 24.4 26.9

17 260.0 260.0 257.7 249.2 251.6 256 260 30.7 35.0 35.0 35.0 32.7 24.2 26.6

18 259.7 260.0 257.6 249.1 251.1 256 260 30.5 35.0 34.7 35.0 32.6 24.1 26.1

19 259.4 259.9 257.3 248.9 250.9 255 260 30.3 1m4 34.9 32.3 23.9 25.9

20 259.0 259.8 257.0 248.7 250.9 255 260 30.1 .0 34.8 31.9 23.7 25.9

21 258.6 259.8 256.3 248.6 250.7 255 260 29.8 3 . 33.6 34.8 31.3 23.6 25.7

22 258.5 259.5 256.1 248.6 250.3 255 259 29.6 34.5 33.5 34.5 31.1 23.6 25.3

23 258.3 259.3 255.6 248.4 250.2 254 259 29.4 34.3 33.3 34.3 30.6 23.4 25.2

24 258.3 259.3 255.4 248.3 250.2 254 259 29.3 34.3 33.3 34.3 30.4 23.3 25.2

25 258.0 259.1 254.7 248.3 250.1 254 259 29.0 34.1 33.0 34.1 29.7 23.3 25.1

26 257.7 259.0 253.6 248.3 250.0 254 259 28.7 34.0 32.7 34.0 28.6 23.3 25.0

27 257.7 9.0 253.1 248.1 250.0 254 259 28.6 34.0 32.7 34.0 28.1 23.1 25.0

28 257.1 8.6 253.0 247.9 250.0 253 259 28.3 33.6 32.1 33.6 28.0 22.9 25.0

29 257.1 258.4 252.3 247.9 249.9 253 258 28.1 33.4 32.1 33.4 27.3 22.9 24.9

30 256.9 258.4 251.8 247.9 249.6 253 258 27.9 33.4 31.9 33.4 26.8 22.9 24.6

31 256.9 258.4 251.8 247.9 249.6 253 258 27.9 33.4 31.9 33.4 26.8 22.9 24.6

32 256.3 258.3 251.7 247.8 249.4 253 258 27.7 33.3 31.3 33.3 26.7 22.8 24.4

33 255.8 258.2 251.6 247.6 249.2 252 258 27.5 33.2 30.8 33.2 26.6 22.6 24.2

34 255.6 258.1 251.3 247.5 248.9 252 258 27.3 33.1 30.6 33.1 26.3 22.5 23.9

35 255.4 258.1 251.2 247.5 248.7 252 258 27.2 33.1 30.4 33.1 26.2 22.5 23.7

36 255.3 258.0 251.0 247.4 248.2 252 258 27.0 33.0 30.3 33.0 26.0 22.4 23.2

37 255.2 257.9 250.8 247.4 248.2 252 258 26.9 32.9 30.2 32.9 25.8 22.4 23.2

38 255.1 257.9 250.2 247.3 248.1 252 258 26.7 32.9 30.1 32.9 25.2 22.3 23.1

39 255.0 257.7 250.2 247.2 248.0 252 258 26.6 32.7 30.0 32.7 25.2 22.2 23.0

40 254.5 257.7 250.1 247.2 248.0 252 258 26.5 32.7 29.5 32.7 25.1 22.2 23.0

41 254.4 257.7 249.9 247.0 247.8 251 258 26.4 32.7 29.4 32.7 24.9 22.0 22.8

42 254.4 257.7 249.9 246.9 247.8 251 258 26.3 32.7 29.4 32.7 24.9 21.9 22.8

43 254.2 257.6 249.7 246.9 247.8 251 258 26.2 32.6 29.2 32.6 I 24.7 21.9 22.8

44 254.2 7.5 249.6 246.9 247.8 251 258 26.2 32.5 29.2 32.5 24.6 21.9 22.8

45 254.1 257.4 249.4 246.8 247.7 251 257 26.1 32.4 29.1 32.4 24.4 21.8 22.7

46 254.1 257.3 249.3 246.7 247.5 251 257 26.0 32.3 29.1 32.3 24.3 21.7 22.5

47 253.9 257.2 249.3 246.5 247.4 251 257 25.8 32.2 28.9 32.2 24.3 21.5 22.4

48 253.4 256.9 249.1 246.4 247.4 251 257 25.6 31.9 28.4 31.9 24.1 21.4 22.4

49 253.1 256.8 248.9 246.4 247.4 250 257 25.5 31.8 28.1 31.8 23.9 21.

50 2530 256.6 248.4 246.3 247.3 250 257 25.3 31.6 28.0 m23

.4

21.3 22.3

51

2531=

256.4 247.6 246.3 246.9 2501156 25.0 31.4 28.0 22.6 21.3 21.9

52 252. 256.1 247.3 246.1 246.9 250 56 24.9 31.1 27.9 3 22.3 21.1 21.9

53 252. 256.1 247.2 245.9 246.7 250 256 24.7 31.1 27.7 i 31.1 1 22.2 20.9 21.7

54 252.7 256.0 247.0 245.8 2 50 256 24.7 31.0 27.7 • 31.0 22.0 20.8 21.7

55 252.5 256.0 246.9 2 50 256 24.6 31.0 27.51 31.0~ 21.7

56 252.4 256.0 245.8 2 49 256 24.2 31.0 27.4 31.0 21.3

57 252.2 2560 245.3 2 49 256 iFlf 27.210 20.6 21.2

58 252.1 255.9 2452 246.2 249 256 .9 27.1 .9 20.2 20.6 21.2

59 252.0 2558 245.2 246. 49 256 0.8 270 .8 20.2~6 21.1

60 251.9 255.8 245.1 246.0 256 0.8 26.9 8 20.1 1 21.0

61 251.9 255.7 245.1 2 245.9 249 256 23.7 30.7 26.9 7 20.1 20.0 20.9
62 251.5 255.4 245.1 245.0 245.7 249 255 23.5 30.4 26.5 30.4 20.1 20.0 20.7

63 251.4 255.2 245.1 244.8 245.6 248 255 23.4 30.2 26.4 30.2 20.1 19.8 20.6

64 251.4 255.2 244.8 244.5 245.5 248 255 23.3 30.2 26.4 30.2 19.8 19.5 20.5

65 251.3 255.1 244.8 244.4 244.9 248 255 23.1 30.1 26.3 30.1 19.8 19.4 19.9

66 251.3 254.9 244.6 244.4 244.8 248 255 23.0 29.9 26.3 29.9 19.6 19.4 19.8

67 251.2 254.9 244.6 244.3 244.6, 24: 255 22.9 29.9 26.2 29.9 19.6 19.3 19.6

68 251.0 I 254.9 244.5 244.2 255 22.8 29.9 26.0 29.9 19.5 I 19.2 19.5

69 250.9 I 254.8 244.5 244.1 244. 22.7 29.8 25.9 29.8 19.5 ! 19.1 19.3

70 250.9 254.8 244.4 244.0 244.0 22.6 29.8 25.8 29.8 19.4 • 19.0 19.0

71 250.8 254.8 244.4 243.9 243.9 22.6 29.8 25.8 29.8 19.4 18.9 18.9

72 250.8 254.2 244.2 243.7 243.6 247 22.3 29.2 25.8 29.2 19.2 18.7 18.6

73 250.7 254.1 243.8 243.4 243.5 247 254 22.1 29.1 25.7 29.1 18.8 18.4 18.5

74 250.6 253.9 243.5 243.3 243.1 247 254 21.9 28.9 25.6 28.9 18.5 18.3 18.1

75 250.6 253.9 243.2 243.3 242.9 247 254 21.8 28.9 25.6 28.9 18.2 18.3 17.9

76 250.4 253.5 243.0 243.3 242.9 247 254 21.6 28.5 25.4 28.5 18.0 18.3 17.9

77 250.3 253.5 242.9 42.7 247 254 21.5 28.5 25.3 28.5 17.9 18.3 17.7

~250.3 253.5 242.9 243.2 242.7 246 253 215 28.5 253 28.5 17.9 18.2 17.7

7 250.2 253.4 242.8 243.0 242.6 246 253 21.4 28.4 25.2 28.4 17.8 18.0 17.6

8 250.1 253.3 242.7 243.0 242.6 246 253 21.3 28.3 25.1 28.3 17.7 18.0 17.6

81 250.0 253.3 242.7 242.9 242.5 246 253 21.3 28.3 25.0 28.3 17.7 17.9 17.5

82 249.7 253.3 242.6 242.7 242.4 246 253 21.1 28.3 24.7 28.3 17.6 17.7 17.4

83 249.6 253.2 242.6 242.6 242.3 246 253 21.1 28.2 24.6 28.2 17.6 17.6 17.3

84 249.5 252.9 242.4 242.5 242.1 246 253 20.9 27.9 24.5 27.9 17.4 17.5 17.1

85 249.4 252.7 242.2 242.5 241.9 246 253 20.8 27.7 24.4 27.7 17.2 17.5 16.9

86 249.4 252.5 242.0 242.5 241.8 246 253 20.6 27.5 24.4 27.5 17.0 17.5 16.8

87 249.3 252.4 241.9 242.4 241.8 246 252 20.6 27.4 24.3 27.4 16.9 17.4 16.8

88 249.3 252.3 241.9 242.4 241.7 246 252 20.5 27.3 24.3 27.3 16.9 17.4 16.7

89 249.3 252.3 241.7 242.3 241.6 245 252 20.4 27.3 24.3 27.3 16.7 17.3 16.6

90 249.2 252.2 241.5 242.3 241.6 245 252 20.4 27.2 24.2 27.2 16.5 17.3 16.6

91 249ffim241.5 242.1 241.4 245 252 20.3 27.1 24.2 27.1 16.5 17.1 16.4

92 249.1 .0 241.3 242.0 241.0 245 252 20.1 27.0 24.1 27.0 16.3 17.0 16.0

93 249.0 251.5 241.2 242.0 241.0 245 251 19.9 '65Ea' 17.0 16.0

94 248.8 251.4 241.0 241.9 240.8 245 251 19.8 26.4 23.8 0 16.9 15.8

95 248.8 251.2 240.7 241.9 240.7 245 251 19.6 26.2 15.7 16.9 15.7

96 248.5 250.7 240.6 241.8 240.5 244 251 19.4 25.7 15.6 16.8 15.5

97 248.4 250.4 240.6 241.8 240.1 244 250 19.2 25.4 23.4 25.4 15.6 16.8 15.1

98 248.4 250.3 240.5 241.7 239.9 244 250 19.2 25.3 23.4 25.3 15.5 16.7 14.9

99 248.3 250.2 240.4 241.6 239.6 244 250 19.0 25.2 23.3 25.2 15.4 16.6 14.6

100 248.2 250.2 240.4 241.4 239.1 244 250 25.2 23.2 25.2 15.4 16.4 14.1

101 248.1 249.9 240.3 241.3 238.9 244 250 24.9 23.1 24.9 15.3 16.3 13.9

102 248.0 249.8 240.1 241.3 238.9 244 250 18.6 24.8 23.0 24.8 15.1 16.3 13.9

103 247.9 249.5 239.7 240.9 238.9 243 249 18.4 24.5 22.9 24.5 14.7 15.9 13.9

104 247.8 249.4 239.6 240.9 238.7 243 249 18.3 24.4 22.8 24.4 14.6rli 13.7

105 247.7 249.3 239.5 240.8 238.6 243 249 18.2 24.3 22.7 24.3 14.5 13.6

106 247.6 249.3 239.5 240.8 238.5 243 249 18.1 24.3 22.6 24.3 14.5 15.8 13.5

107 247.6 249.2 239.1 240.8 238.5 243 249 18.0 24.2 22.6 24.2 14.1 15.8 13.5

108 247.5 249.1 239.0 240.7 238.4 243 249 18.0 24.1 22.5 24.1 14.0 15.7 13.4

109 247.4 249.0 239.0 240.5 238.4 243 249 17.9 24.0 22.4 24.0 14.0 15.5 13.4

110 247.2 248.9 238.8 240.3 237.7 243 249 17.6 23.9 22.2 23.9 13.8 15.3 12.7

111 247.2 248.9 238.7 240.2 2377[ =243 249 17.5 23.9 L.j.\:I .7 15.2 12.7

112 247.0 248.9 238.7 2401 237.5 242 249 17.4 23.9 22.0 23.9 13.7 15.1 12.5

113 246.8 248.6 238.6 240.1 237.4 242 249 17.3 23.6 21.8 23.6 13.6 15.1 12.4

114 246.8~38.3 240.1 237.3 242 249 17.2 23.6 21.8 23.6 13.3 15.1 12.3

115 246.6 38.2 240.0 237.0 242 248 17.0 23.5 23.5 13.2 15.0 12.0

116 246tt 248.2 238.1 239.8 237.0 242 248 16.9 23.2 23.2 13.1 14.8 12.0

117 246. 248.1 238.0 239.6 236.9 242 248 16.8 23.1 21.5 23.1 13.0 14.6 11.9

118 246.5 248.0 239.6 236.9 242 248 23.0 21.5 23.0 13.0 14.6 11.9

119 246.4 247.9 2396 2369 242 248 22.9 21.4 22.9 13.0 14.6 11.9

120 246.4 247.9 237.9 23 236.9 242 248 22.9 21.4 22.9 12.9 14.5 11.9

121 246.3 247.7 237.8 23 242 248 22.7 21.3

;gm::~ 11.7

122 246.1 2477 237.7 .4 248 5 22.7 21.1 11.6

123 246.1 247.3 2377 .3 247 4 22.3 21.1 22.3 14.3 11.5

124 246.0 I 247.3 237.6 239.1 236.1 2 22.3 21.0 22.3 14.1 11.1

125 246 247.2 237.5 235.2 6.0 22.2 210 22.2 14.1 10.2

126 246. 16.0 22.1 21.0 22.1 14.1 10.2

127 246. 235.2 15.9 22.1 21.0 22.1 12.4 13.9 10.2

128 245.9 2469 2373 238.8 235.0 241 247 15.8 21.9 209 21.9 123 I 13.8 10.0
237.3 238.6 241 21.9 20.8 21.9 12.3 10.0

237.3 237.9 241 21.8 20.7 21.8 12.3 9.9

237.2 237.8 240 20.7 20.7 20.7 12.2 9.9

237.0 237.8 240 20.7 20.6 20.7 12.0 9.7

236.8 237.8 240 20.5 20.5 20.2 11.8

236.7 237.7 240 20.4 20.4 20.1 11.7

236.5 237.7 240 20.4 20.4 19.5 11.5

236.3 237.7 239 20.1 20.1 19.3 11.3

236.2 237.5 239 20.0 20.0 19.1 11.2

236.2 237.5 239 19.9 19.9 19.1 11.2

236.1 237.5 19.9 19.9 18.8 11.1

7.4 19.9 19.9 18.7 11.1

.4 19.8 19.8 18.6 11.0

237.4 239 14.0 19.8 19.8 18.6 10.9

237.2 239 13.9 19.6 19.6 18.6 10.6

237.2 239 13.8 19.6 19.6 18.6 10.5

237.0 239 13.7 19.5 19.5 18.4 10.5

236.8 239 13.5 19.3 19.3 18.3 10.3

236.8 238 13.5 19.2 19.2 18.2 10.3

236.8 238 13.4 19.2 19.2 17.9 10.2

236.7 238 13.3 18.7 17.9 10.2

.6 238 13.1 18.7 17.6 9.8

242.5 234.5 236.5 238 13.0 18.7 17.5 9.5

242.4 234.4 236.4 238 12.8 18.2 17.4 9.4 11.4

242.4 234.1 236.3 238 12.7 18.2 17.4 9.1 11.3

242.2 233.8 236.1 238 12.6 18.2 17.2 8.8 11.1

3.1 242.2 233.8 236.1 238 12.5 18.1 17.2 8.8 11.1 7.4

156 242.9 242.1 233.7 235.9 237 12.3 17.9 17.1 8.7 10.9 7.0

157 242.9 242.0 233.6 235.8 237 12.3 17.9 17.0 8.6 10.8 7.0

158 242.8 242.0 233.5 235.7 237 12.2 17.8 17.0 8.5 10.7 7.0

159 242.7 242.0 233.1 235.7 237 12.1 17.7 17.0 8.1 10.7 7.0

160 242.6 241.7 232.8 235.6 237 11.9 17.6 16.7 7.8 10.6 6.8

161 242.4 241.7 232.6 235.6 237 11.8 17.4 16.7 7.6 10.6 6.7

162 242.3 241.6 232.5 235.5 237 11.7 17.3 16.6 7.5 10.5 6.7

163 242.2 241.6 232.5 235.4 237 11.6 17.2 16.6 7.5 10.4 4

164 242.2 241.4 232.3 235.2 236 11.5 17.2 16.4 7.3 10.2 .3

165 242.1 241.4 232.3 235.2 236 11.4 17.1 16.4 7.3 10.2 6.2

166 242.0 241.4 232.2 235.1 236 11.4 17.0 16.4 7.2 10.1 6.2

167 241.9 241.1 232.1 235.1 236 11.2 16.9 16.1 7.1 10.1 6.0

168 241.7 241.0 231.8 234.9 236 11.1 16.7 16.0 6.8 9.9 5.9

169 241.7 41.0 231.8 234.5 236 10.9 16.7 16.0 6.8 9.5 5.7

170 241. 231.4 234.5 236 10.8 16.6 16.0 6.4 9.5 5.7

171 241. 231.2 234.5 236 10.7 16.5 16.0 6.2 9.5 5.5

172 241.4 240.6 231.1 234.5 236 10.5 16.4 15.6 6.1 9.5

173 241.4 240.6 231.1 234.1 235 10.5 16.4 15.6 6.0 9.1

174 241.3 240.3 230.4 233.9 235 10.2 16.3 15.3 5.4 8.9

175 241.2 240.1 230.3 233.8 235 10.1 16.2 15.1 5.3 8.8

176 241.2 240.0 230.2 233.8 235 10.0 16.2 15.0 5.2 8.8

177 241.1 239.8 229.3 233.8 235 9.8 16.1 14.8 4.3 8.8

178 241.1 239.7 229.2 233.6 235 9.7 16.1 14.7 4.2 8.6

179 241.1 239.3 228.9 233.5 235 9.5 16.1 14.3 3.9 8.5

180 241.0 239.3 228.8 233.5 234 9.4 16.0 14.3 3.8 8.5

181 240.9 2392 227.7 233.4 234 9.1 15.9 14.2 2.7 8.4

182 240.8 239.1 227.3 233.3 234 8.9 15.8 14.1 2.3 8.3

183 240.7 239.1 2272 233.3 234 8.8 15.7 14.1 2.2 8.3

184 240.7 238.9 227.2 233.2 234 8.8 15.7 13.9 2.2 8.2

240.6 2386 227.1 233.2 234 8.6 15.6 13.6 2.1 8.2

240.6 238.4 227.0 233.2 8 15.6 13.4 1.9 8.2

187 240.5 238.4 226.8 233.2 8.4 15.5 8 8.2

188 240.4 238.2 225.8 233.1 8.1 15.4 8 8.1

189 240.4 238.2 225.7 233.0 8.1 .4 8.0

190 240.3 237.8 225.4 2327 7.8 .3 7.7

191 240.2 237.6 2 7.6 5.2 7.6

192 240.2 237.6 2 76

193 240.2 237.6 2 7.6

194 240.1 237.2 232.5 7.5

195 240.0 236.8 232.3 73
196 239.8 235.7 224.3 232.1 227.4 232 240 6.9 14.8 14.8 10.7 7.1 2.4

197 239.7 235.6 224.2 232.0 227.3 232 240 6.8 =14.7 14.7 10.6 7.0 2.3

198 239.4 235.3 224.1 232.0 226.9 232 239 6.6 14.4 14.4 10.3 7.0 1.9

199 239.4 235.3 224.1 231.9 226.9 232 239 6.5 14.4 14.4 10.3 6.9 1.9

200 239.2 235.2 223.8 231.8 226.9 231 239 6.4 14.2 14.2 10.2 6.8 1.9

201 239.0 235.1 223.5 231.8 226.9 231 239 6.3 14.0 14.0 10.1 6.8 1.9

202 238.6 235.0 223.5 231.8 226.9 231 239 6.2 13.6 13.6 10.0 6.8 1.9

203 238.3 234.8 223.2 231.8 226.6 231 238 5.9 13.3 13.3 9.8 6.8 1.6

204 238.2 234.8 223.2 231. 26.4 231 238 5.9 13.2 13.2 9.8 6.8 1.4

205 238.2 234.8 223.0 231. 26.2 231 238 5.8 13.2 13.2 9.8 6.7 1.1

206 238.0 234.8 222.7 26.1 231 238 13.0 13.0 9.8 6.6 1.1

207 26.1 231 238 13.0 13.0 9.3 6.6 1.1

208 230 238 5.3 12.9 12.9 9.3 6.4 0.8

209 238 5.2 12.9 12.9 8.9 6.3 0.7

210 238 4.9 12.7 12.7 8.8 6.2 0.3

211 237.4 233.8 22 237 4.7 12.4 12.4 8.7 6.1 0.0

212 237.3 233.6 22 237 4.4 12.3 12.3 8.6 6.0

213 237.2 233.5 22 224.3 I 229 237 4.3 12.2 12.2 8.5 6.0

214 237.2 233.5 220.5 230.9 237 4.2 12.2 12.2 8.5 5.9

215 237.0 233.1 220.3 230.8 237 4.1 12.0 12.0 8.1 5.8

216 237.0 233.1 219.3 230.8 237 3.8 12.0 12.0 8.1 5.8

217 236.8 233.0 219.0 230.8 229 237 3.5 11.8 11.8 8.0 5.8

218 236.6 232.9 219.0 230.7 223.0 228 237 3.4 11.6 11.6 7.9 5.7

219 236.2 232.6 218.9 230.7 222.8 228 236 11.2 11.2 7.6 5.7

220 235.5 232.5 218.8

.=??A 235 2.9 10.5 10.5 7.5 5.6

221 235.4 232.4 218.4 22 228 235 2.8 10.4 10.4 7.4 5.5

222 235.3 232.1 218.4 22. 228 235 2.6 10.3 10.3 7.1 5.3

223 234.9 231.8 218.3 230. 22.1 227 235 2.5 9.9 9.9 6.8 5.2

224 234.4 231.8 218.1 230. 221.9 227 234 2.3 9.4 9.4 6.8 5.1

225 234.2 231.6 217.9 229.9 221.7 227 234 2.1 9.2 9.2 6.6 4.9

226 234.1 231.3 217.5 229.9 221.2 227 234 1.8 9.1 9.1 6.3 4.9

227 233.6 231.2 217.5 229.9 .2 227 234 1.7 8.6 8.6 6.2 4.9

228 233.4 231.2 217.5 229.9 227 233 1.5 8.4 8.4 6.2 4.9

229 233.4 230.9 217.4 229.7 220.4 226 233 1.4 8.4 8.4 5.9 4.7

230 233.3 230.8 217.2 229.6 220.4 226 233 1.3 8.3 8.3 5.8 4.6

231 233.2 230.5 217.2 229.5 220.2 226 233 1.1 8.2 8.2 5.5 4.5

232 233.2 230.4 217.1 229.~etf.20.0 226 233 1.0 8.2 8.2 5.4 4.3

233 232.8 230.4 215.4 229.2 19.8 226 233 0.5 7.8 7.8 5.4 4.2

234 232.5 230.1 215.3 229.0 219.3 225 233 0.2 7.5 7.5 5.1 4.0

235 232.3 229.8 214.5 229.0 219.3 225 232 0.2 7.3 7.3 4.8 4.0

236 231.3 229.8 214.4 228.9 219.2 225 231 0.2 6.3 6.3 4.8 3.9

237 231.3 229.8 214.4 228.8 219.2 225 231 0.2 6.3 6.3 4.8 3.8

238 231.2 229.6 214.3 228.5 219.2 225 231 0.1 6.2 6.2 4.6 3.5

239 230.9 229.5 213.9 228.4 219.1~ 231 0.1 5.9 5.9 4.5 3.4

240 230.9 229.0 213.9 228.4 219.1 224 231 5.9 5.9 4.0 3.4

241 230.8 229.0 213.7 228.3 219.0 224 231 5.8 5.8 4.0 3.3

242 230.8 228.9 212.7 228.2 218.9 224 231 5.8 5.8 3.9 3.2

243 230.4 228.9 212.4 228.1 218.7 224 230 5.4 5.4 3.9 3.1

244 230.3 228.5 212.4 228.1 2m 224 230 5.3 5.3 3.5 3.1

245 229.9 228.5 212.0 227.8 21 223

230~ 4.9 3.5 2.8

246 229.8 228.2 212.0 227.7 21 223 230 4.8 4.8 3.2 2.7

247 2298 228.1 211.8 227.1 218.3 223 230 4.8 ~4.8 3.1 2.1

248 229.7 228.0 211.0 226.9 218.1 223 230 4.7 4.7 3.0 1.9

249 229.4 227.7 211.0 226.8 218.0 223 229 4.4 4.4 2.7 1.8

250 229.1 227.6 210.7 226.7 218.0 222 229 4.1 4.1 2.6 1.7

251~ 227.5 210.1 226.7 216.8 222 229 1.7

252 227.3 209.9 226.2 216.3 222 229 3. 3.9 2.3 1.2

253 228.8 226.9 208.9+:12 216.1 221 229 3.8 3.8 1.2

254 228.5 226.7 208.8 .7 215.7 221 229 3.5 3.5 0.7

255 228.5 226.7 208.5 .7 215.6 221 229 I 3.5 3.5 1.7 0.7

256 IIIf08' 225.7 ~221 228 0.7

257 228 208.1 225.4 221 228 3.0 .0 0.4

258 2078 225.4 215.4 220 228 2.8 .8 0.4

259 207.5 225.3 215.4 220 228 2.6 2.6 0.3 0.3

260 227.5 206.5 225.3 2152 220 228 2.5 2.5 0.0 0.3

261 227.5 224.6 206.1 225.3 215.2 220 227 2.5 2.5 0.3
262 227.2 223,7 15,2 219 227 2,2 2,2 0,3

263 227,1 223.2 215,0 219 227 2,1 2,1

264 226,9 223,1 205,2 224,5 2~ 219 227 1,9 1,9

265 226,9 223,0 204,9 224.4 21 219 227 fa 1,9

266 226,6 221,8 204,7 224,3 213,8 218 227 1,6

267 225,8 221.4 204.5 223.8 213,5 218 226 0.8

268 225,5 221,0 204.4 223.6 213.3 218 226 0,5

269 220,8 203.8 223,5 213.0 217 225 0.0 0,0

270 224.1 220.2 202,5 223.4 213.0 217 224

271 223.4 219.9 202,2 223,0 212.8 216 223

272 223.3 219.9 202,1 216 223

273 223.2 219.8 201.6 216 223

274 223,0 219,5~ 212.1 15 223

275 222.4 219.3 15 222

276 222.3 218.9 199,3 211,5 214 222

277 222,1 218.4 199.1 219,8 14 222

278 222,1 218,3 198.4 219,8 14 222

279 221,1 217,9 197.9 219,0 213 221

280 221.1 217.8 197,3 218.2 211.3 213 221

281 220.4 217.6 197.0 217,7 210,1 213 220

282 219.6 216.7 196.7 217.4 209.4 212 220

283 218.9 216.4 196.3 217.3 208,1 211 219

284 218.3 215.9 195,6 .11 218

285 217,7 215.4 195.0 10 218

286 216,9 215.0 194.4 2 2 10 217

287 216.6 214.7 194.2

2 09 217

288 216.5 213.9 193,5 215.8 204, 209 216

289 215.6 213.8 193.5 ~-fH+203.9 208 216

290 215.5 213.7 193.5 214. 203.8 208 216

291 215,1 213,6 193.0 214.0 203.8 208 215

292 215.0 213.0 192.8 213,0 202,3 207 215

293 213.4 212.9 192.6 212,7 201.4 207 213

294 213.3 212.8 192,1 212.3 201.3 206 213

295 213.2 212.4 191.6 212.0 201.2 206 213

296 212.4 212.3 188.5 211.5 201.0 205 212

297 212.4 211.8 188,1 211 ,5 2~m 205 212

298 212.2 211.1 186,9 210.8 20 204 212

299 210,8 210,9 185.4 210.8

I 199.5 203 211

300 210,5 210.4 185.3 210.1 199,0 203 210

301 209,7 210.0 184.4 210,0 198.5 203 210

302 209.7 209.5 184.3 209.6 198.4 202 210

303 208,6 209.5 183.5 209.5 198.4 202 210

304 208.4 208.8 183.2 209.4 197.9 202 209

305 208.0 208,5 182.4 209.3 197.4 201 209

306 207.8 207.9 182,3 209.1 197

1 209

307 207,5 207,8 182,2 208.5 196.3 200 208

308 206,9 207.4 181.5 207,6 195.0 200 208

309 206.4 206,7 181.4 207.5 193.6 199 208

310 205.2 206,1 180.3 207,2 193.2 198 207

311 204.7 205.1 180.0 206.9 192.4 198 207

312 204,3 203,9 179.7 205.0 191.4 197 205

313 203.9 203,2 179,6 llir 205

314 202,9 203,1 178,8 204,7 19 196 205

315 202.7 203.0 178,8 196 205

316I 202,5 202,9 177.8 188. 95 205

317 202. 202.0 177.3 204,1 186,9 194 204

318 201, 201,7 177.2 203.9 185,6 194 204

319 201.2 201,1 176,1 203.7 185.0 193 204

320 200.3 200.4 175.6 203.6 184.3 193 204

~3 199.8 175.4 202.4 181,6 192 202 3 2 199,6 175.2 202.2 177.0 191 202

323 200,1 1973 174,5 201.1 175 190 201

~9 1968 173,8 2006 174 189 201 3 .9 1964 172.0 199,9 1718 188 200 3 .5 1956 171,9 199,1 171.7 1~H 199

32 .2 1948 1718 198,6 171.6 18 199

328 197.6 1947 1675 197,9 164,8 185 198
329 196.9 194.6 165.9 197.1 150.3 181 197

330 195.3 194.6 161.9 194.2 146.2 178 195

331 194.5 flA fl 160.2 193.7 145.5 178 195

332 192.6 192.1 159.4 190.4 137.4 174 193

333 190.0 187.8 159.2 190.3 125.0 170 190

334 187.7 184.3 156.0 188.4 167 188

335 184.1 183.0 152.7 187.4 163 187

336 183.2 181.9 151.9 159 187

337 187

338 179.1 171.7 .1 18 186

339 I 179.1 I 170.0 184.4 184

340 178.6 163.8 180.3 180

341 178.4 161.8 100.4 178.8 179

342 177.2 160.5 59.2 176.5 43 177

343 172.6 153.1 56.6 174.4 139 174

344 172.5 141.9 41.0 172.3 132 173

345 169.5 134.1 34.5 170.7 127 171

346 169.4 106.0 28.4 169.4 118 169

347 147.4 78.2 22.9 135.8 96 147

348 146.2 69.7 6.5 135.8 90 146

349 127.9 5.8 135.1 90 135

350 118.6 125.9 122 126

351 101.4 123.5 112 123

352 81.2 78.1 80 81

353 41.5 51.7 47 52

354 39.5 11.1 25 39

355 37.3 37 37

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 5YR

AVG

355 348 349 354 340 349

) 232.2 233.8 218.7 227.7 223.5 227.2

) 989.2 976.5 915.8 967.1 911.9 952.1

268 259 192 262 210 239

244.9 245.5 242.1 238.4 239.4 242.1

19.9 20.5 17.1 13.4 14.4 17.1

64.1 63.7 39.4 42.2 36.2 49.1

Count (days/yr) with emissions

Avg Ib/hr (op days

Baseline Annual Emis (tpy

# of days> 225 Ib/hr 802

Avg 802 on days> 225 Ib/hr

Ib/hr Red to achieve 225. high days

TPY Red from lowering High days

Avg Ib/hr (oper days

Annual TPY 802

502 Alternative - Emission Rates

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AVG

) 217.2 218.6 209.3 217.7 214.6 215.5

925.2 912.9 876.4 924.9 875.7 903.0

D

Average Emission Rates by Category

aily Emiss Rate Avg 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AVG

< 175 117.3 137.3 119.7 123.6 118.7 123.4

~175<200 188.9 192.2 187.1 189.8 191.7 189.9

200 < 225 212.4 213.4 214.6 213.3 215.2 213.8

225 < 250 240.1 238.5 238.3 237.7 237.2 238.4

250 255.9 256.5 256.7 251.9 253.4 254.9
o

No. of Days

aily Emiss Rate Avg 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AVG

< 175 13 11 27 12 17 16

175 < 200 19 17 47 18 26 25

200 < 225 55 61 83 62 87 69

225 < 250 187 159 152 248 182 185

250 81 100 40 14 28 54

TOTAL 355 348 349 354 340 349
Appendix C: Operating Cost Associated with Increased Caustic BART Alternative

Annual Operating Cost - Increased Caustic/S02 Removal

Stoichiometry

Na' + OH- + SO, -> NaHSO,

2Na' + 20H + SO, + ---> Na,SO, + H20

2 moles NaOH req to react with 1 mole S02

2 x 40/64 1,3 Ibs NaOH per Ib S02

Scrubber Liquid Solids

Each mole S02 forms 1 mole Na2S03

126 Ib Na,SO,/64 Ib S02 " 2,0 Ib Scrub solids

48 gal H20/ib solids to maintain,; 0,5 ,,1%

Annual Operating Days 355

Annual Operating Hours 8400 hrs/yr

Pump Energy Requirements

kw" ((0,746)(0.252)"60 tt) '1/pump eft (0,7)

kw·hrs/yr" kw ' days >225 '24 hrs

Ibs/hr

Ibs/hr

Ibs/hr

Ibs/hr

Ibs/hr

days/yr

Ibs/hr

tons/yr

tons/yr

MMBtu/hr

Ibs/hr

.

heat input 124-hr 8vg) 698

Ie day SO,124-hr 8vg) 275

2 5-yr Base period 952

ngle day S02 (24-hr avg) 225

Base, single day max 50

ays in Base> 225 Ib/hr 239

req for Base days >225 17

Base SO, emissions 903

in Ann S02 emissions 49

Current Max S02 Limit

Lower Limit Evaluated

Reduction

BART Baseline Period 12004 2009)

Max Boiler

Max sing

Max si

Avg Ann SO tons/yr

Emissions Exoected under 250 Ib/hr limit

Red from

Avg#d

Avg Red

Ann Avg

Change

Operational Requirements

per Ib S02 Removed

Direct Annual Operating Costs (DC)

Total Direct Annual Cost $109,000

$0

$15,309

Waste Treatment & Disposal

Utilities

Maintenance

Replacement Materials

Labor

Operator '''''' •••',•• $up;:;6Iiso.r.','''

Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) $2,236
Appendix D: RBCL Summary--Recovery Furnace S02 Emissions

PERMIT BLS CTRL CONTROL METHOD S02 PPMDV LB S021 RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # ISSUE DATE RFID# MMLBSI POL CODE CONTROL METHOD KEY DESCRIPTION @8%02 HR LB S02ITBLS CASE-BY·CASE.._BASIS

DAY

APPLE (.,OOIIC 01" P AND

PAPER WV 6/1711996 RF 5.50 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION EFFICIENT COMBUSTION 10 25 BACT-PSD

- CAMAS WA IPSD·883 & DE 88· 9/26/1991 RF#4 S02 A ADD-ON EQUIPMENT HEAT RECOVERY 10 BACT-PSD 360 MODIFICAT SCRUBBER

WA IPSD·88-3 & DE-88- 9/26/1991 RF#3 S02 A ADD·ON EauIPMENT HEAT RECOVERY 10 BACT-PSD 360 MODIFICAT SCRUBBER

.nl IN . nV'Inr 212211989 RF 300 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION HIGH SOLIDS FIRING 50 BACT-PSD

WA IPSD·01-03, AMEND "'~ '. IV". 111112006 RF#15 230 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 60 OTHER 2

WA IPSD·01-03, AMEND 111112006 RF#18 2.40 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 60 BACT-PSD 2

WA IPSD-01-03, AMEND cv"""" I.". 111112006 RF#19 400 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 60 BACT-PSD 2

DOMTAR NEKOOSA WI 03·DCF·310 412312004 RF#14 180 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION GOOD OPERATING 60 BACT-PSD PRACTICES

PORT HUDSON (M-2) 1/25/2002 RF#1 396 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 143 ! BACT-PSD

(M-2) 1/2512002 RF#1 281 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 120 106 BACT-PSD

COURTLAND "' M

519/2005 RF#3 4.88 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 BACT-PSD

_ ,'AA, . n w. AL "' 9/20/2005 RF#3 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 170 BACT-PSD

,,,nr nr 12/1012002 RF#1 440 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 75 BACT-PSD MARLBORO

vVILI.f\MEHE MARLBORO SC 1680-0043 4117/1996 RF 400 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION GOOD COMBUSTION 75 186 OTHER CONTROL

ME "L ,,-" -E·NP 7118/1989 RF#4 400 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 100 206 BACT-PSD

MANSFIELD PSD-LA-93(M-7) 712212004 RF#1&2 403 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION GOOD PROCESS CONTROLS 218 258 BACT-PSD

nn, 'Tn AL 105-0001·X022 9/1512003 432 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 100 BACT-PSD

PAPER AL 105-0001-X027 1211011997 394 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION PROPER DESIGN & 100 221 BACT-PSD OPERATION

ALABAMA RIVER AL 106-0010 112211990 RF#2 550 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 314 BACT-PSD

LONGV'''H '-'0"" WA X81-lOA 712711990 RF#22 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION BOILER DESIGN &GOOD 120 BACT-PSD COMBUSTION PRACTICES

FIBRE WA PSD-01-03 AMEND 111112006 RF#22 390 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 120 OTHER 2

-LA MILL PSD-LA-564 2/411991 335 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 1 230 BACT-PSD DESIGN

PAPER AL 105-0001. X022, 3/1211991 RF#3 330 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION PROPER DESIGN & 150 253 BACT-PSD X024. X025. AN OPERATION
PERMIT BLS CTRL CONTROL METHOD S02PPMDV LB S021 RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # ISSUE DATE RFID# MMLBSI POL CODE CONTROL METHOD KEY DESCRIPTION @8%02 HR LBS021TBLS CASE·BY·CASE.BASIS

DAY

'Mr", M PIli P & ME ,", '" "n 9/25/1991 190 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 150 BACT-PSD

AL 211·0004 10/1/1988 RF#2 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 144 404 BACT-PSD

VA 40126 31111991 3.00 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 145 BACT·PSD

""nn", n.n,"'" 1111511985 RF#5 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 150 N/A

AL 211-0004 10/911996 270 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION BOILER DESIGN & 144 243 4.32 BACT·PSD COMBUSTION CONTROL

~IoUII ' (,""OAMV AL eM "A'. VA" 6115/1992 RF#8 2,94 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 150 290 BACT·PSD

COLUMBUS MS 168().00044 10/2411989 500 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION PROCESS CONTROLS 153 517 BACT-PSD

ID 412511983 4.32 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 200 450 500 BACT-PSD

WILLAMETTE KY C-93-0441 077-1580 911411993 RF#l 210 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION PROPER COMBUSTION 200 225 BACT-PSD 0005 CONTROL

PAPER AR 101111985 440 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 250 BACT-PSD

PAPER 1011712000 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 250 206 OTHER

LA (M-6) 811412001 RF#1&2 3.41 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION GOOD PROCESS CONTROLS 510 BACT-PSD

"R",r::nwnN,"" NC 03138R16 511012001 559 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION GOOD COMBUSTION 979 BACT-PSD PRACTICE

SOUTHERN PAPER GA 2631-049-10296 121811989 RF#1 3.05 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 300 535 BACT-PSD

SOUTHERN PAPER GA 2631-049-10296 121811989 RF#2 3,05 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 300 535 BACT-PSD

WHITE PAPER WA PSD-01-07 AMEND 21112006 340 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 500 BACT-PSD 1

WHITE PAPER WA PSD-Ol-07 AMEND 21112006 3.40 S02 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 500 BACT-PSD 1

RIVER MILL PSD-LA·562(M-2) 5124/2006 RF#3 640 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION PROPER DESIGN & 20 BACT-PSD OPERATION

RAPIDS MILL NC 01649R29 7/31/1998 277 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION FURNACE DESIGN & 75 BACT-PSD COMBUSTION OPTIMIZATION

"" Dr, "Ave RAPIDS NC 1649R34 3/3/2004 RF#7 3.00 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION FURNACE DESIGN & 75 COMBUSTION OPTIMIZATION

WILLAMETTE KY C-84-77 8/611984 RF#1 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION LOW ODOR FURNACE 100 BACT-PSD

COLUMBUS MS PSD-MS-027 5/2211980 7,44 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 100 BACT-PSD

PAPER 24-306-003 12/9/1992 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION CONTROLLED BY DESIGN 110 614 OTHER

,"rADr, OM"O,n CORP ME 0 ...' D "0 411211989 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 150 373 BACT-PSD
PERMIT BLS CTRL CONTROL METHOD S02 PPMDV LB S02 I RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # RF 10# MMLBSI POL CONTROL METHOD KEY LB S02ITBLS CASE·BY·CASE_BASIS ISSUE DATE DAY CODE DESCRIPTION @8%02 HR

SD IM"",\EfJ ME '7 \In 612311988 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 150 158 BACT-PSD

MS 168(M)0044 911011996 700 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION FURNACE DESIGN & 153 BACT-PSD EFFICIENT OPER

"" "CTTC in, nAnA SC 1660-0043 912911988 RF#l S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION LOW ODOR DESIGN 200 BACT-PSD

EASTOVER 51111989 RF#4 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION BOILER DESIGN &GOOD 200 BACT-PSD COMBUSTION PRACTICES

It:Ar KJVcr FOREST MS MS035 311411980 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION 300 458 BACT-PSD

FOREST MS 2200-00005 711411992 6.40 S02 P POLLUTION PREVENTION COMBUSTION CONTROL 300 BACT-PSD
Appendix E: RBCl Summary ··RBCl Recovery Furnace NOx

INITIAL RF BLS CTRL NOx NOx CASE·BY·CASE RBLC ID FACILITY ST PERMIT # PERMIT UNIT 10 MMLBSI POL CTRL CODE KEY PPMDV NOx LB/HR ISSUE DATE STARTUP DAY CODE @8%O2 LBfTBLS BASIS

WV Jun-96 RF NOT BUILT 55 NOx A ADD-ON EQUIPMENT 40 72 BACT-PSD

X018 May-05 RF#3 1991 49 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 lAS BACT-PSD

IlL PERDUE HILL Jan-90 RF#2 1992 5.5 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 169 1 BACT-PSD

AL PERDUE HILI.. 106-0010- Feb-08 RF 1992 75 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 244 BACT-PSD

X012

('"' lOTI 11"\ AL Jul-89 RF#3 1991 49 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 75 170 1.67 BACT-PSD

-CAMPTI 562(M-2) May-06 RF#3 2008 64 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 150 BACT-PSD

p<;n_FI.??R

Sep-95 RF#4 1976 50 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 1.55 BACT-PSD

P<;I.FI.1a;

FL & 1250001- Aug-08 RF#2 1965 2.2 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 70 1.55 BACT·PSD

p<:;n.f'1.1Q7

- FOLEY & Aug-08 RF#3 1975 2.1 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 80 68 1.55 BACT-PSD

-215-"-B- f::f'"r"CI -DACIFIC ME ME Apr-89 RF 1986 4.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 143 1.55 BACT-PSD AIR

- INT FALLS MN 102A-89·OT-2 May-89 RF 1976 2.7 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 87 1.55 BACT-PSD

RIVER NEW MS 2200-00005 Apr-91 RF 1984 60 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 1.55 BACT-PSD AUGUSTA

IAJEw'" .r", "'''I 1<:; MS 1680-00044 Sep-96 RF 1990 7.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 1.55 BACT-PSD

2400-0005- Oct-01 RF#3 2_9 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 80 1.55 BACT-PSD CO-CT

PSD-FL-380

PALATKA FL & 1070005- May-07 RF#4 1976 5.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 169 BACT-PSD

PAPERS WI WI 86-AJH-001B Jan-87 RF 14 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 80 72 BACT-PSD

IP MANSFIELD PSD-LA93(M Jul-04 RF#1&2 1981 4.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 83 1.60 BACT-PSD 7)

RUMFOr,D ME A-214-71-E- Jul-89 RF 1980 4.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 83 BACT-PSD AIR
BLS NOx CASE·BY·CASE RBLC 10 FACILITY ST PERMIT # PERMIT UNIT 10 INITIAL RF MMLBSI POL CTRL CTRL CODE KEY PPMDV NOx LB/HR NOx

ISSUE DATE START UP DAY CODE @8%O2 LBITBLS BASIS

105"0001,

m:WlPflll'O: Mar"91 RF#3 1992 33 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 90 109 BACT"PSD

DEMOPOLIS X027 Dec"97 RF 1992 39 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 90 143 BACT"PSD

MILL WI co ~"r 0'0 Apr"04 RF 1991 1,8 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 90 114 BACT"PSD

X036 Jun"92 RF#8 29 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 90 125 BACHSD

" COLUMBUS MS pSD" ,~S"027 May"80 RF 1990 36 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 92 130 BACT-PSD

COLUMBUS MS 1680-00044 OcI-89 RF 1990 36 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 92 130 BACT-PSD

I 'U"L WA X81-lOA Jul-90 RF#22 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 95 1.84 BACT-PSD

I WA

PSD-01-03, -IO"t:. Nov-06 RF#15 2.3 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 95 1.84 OTHER 2

I WA

PSD·01-03,

' rIO"t: AMEND 2 Nov-06 RF#18 2.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 95 1,84 BACT-PSD

PSD-01-03,

LONGVIEW FIBRE WA AMEND 2 Nov·06 RF#19 1992 40 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 95 1.84 BACT-PSD

I mll'l/I!=W FIBRE WA

PSD01-03,

AMEND 2 Nov-06 RF#22 39 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 95 1.84 OTHER

WI 95-RV-040 Dec·OO RF#21 0.8 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 95 1.84 BACT-PSD

WARREN ME ME AIR Jun-88 RF 1.6 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 97 51 1.88 BACT-PSD

FL L-171 Jun-91 RF 1976 5,0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 1.94 BACT-PSD

. RI!=I'!=I wnnfl NC 03138R16 May-01 RF#5 1982 5,6 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 225 1.94 BACT-PSD

, RI!=I'!=I \NI'V,fl NC 03138R21 Mar-04 RF#5 1982 67 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 1.94

NC 1649R34 Mar-04 RF#7 1974 3,0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 1.94

,con MAor,c

WEYCO '0t:1'1't: I "VILLE DG Dec-02 RF#1 1990 4.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 1.94 BACT-PSD

MILL LA PSD-LA-564 Feb-91 RF 1966 33 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 138 BACT-PSD
PERMIT INITIAL RF BLS CTRL NOx NOx CASE·BY·CASE RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # ISSUE DATE UNIT 10 START UP MMLBS/ POL CODE CTRL CODE KEY PPMOV NOxLB/HR LBITBLS BASIS DAY @8%O2

WILLAMETTE - 1680-0043 Apr-96 RF#1 1990 40 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 100 178 OTHER BENNETTSVILLE

- MANSFIELD LA PSD-LA-93 Aug-Ol RF#1&2 1981 3.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 108 148 BACT-PSD (M-6)

AR An n

GKU""l:1 May-07 RF#8 1981 69 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 110 276 BACT-PSD

RIVER- NEW MS 2200-00005 Jul-92 RF 1984 6.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 110 2.13 BACT-PSD AUGUSTA

ROANOKE NC 01649R29 Jul-98 RF#7 1974 28 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 110 2.13 BACT-PSD RAPIDS

"tNN I t:Gli PAf'ERS - PA PA 24-306-003 Dec-92 RF NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 110 2.13 BACT-PSD

DEMOPOLIS Sep-03 RF 1992 4.3 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 110 200 BACT-PSD X022

pnTIATr~ CYPRESS

BEND AR 271-AOP-Rl Mar-OO 1977 2.6 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 110 162 BACT-PSD

MARHT AL 211-0004 Oct-88 RF#2 1990 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 112 2.17 BACT-PSD

V CORP VA 40126 Mar-91 RF 3.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 112 135 2,17 BACT-PSD

HUDSON PSD-LA-581 Jan-02 RF#2 1976 40 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 112 192 OTHER (M-2)

MEAD MARHT AL 211-0004 Oct-96 RF 1966 27 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 112 136 2.42 BACT-PSD

IP- ERIE PA 25-028 Dec-94 RF 1971 16 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 114 73 220 RACT

JAMES RIV 101-0001

PENNINGTON AL X024, AND Aug-90 RF#4 1993 5.4 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 115 298 BACT-PSD

-ORANGE TX TX 9654A / PSD- Sep-05 RF 1967 2.0 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 119 95 LAER TX-833M2

MACON GA 2631-011- Dec-90 RF#3 1994 3.5 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 120 2.32 BACT-PSD 10630

SOUTHRN CEDAR GA 2631-049- Dec·89 RF#1 1974 3.1 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 125 154 BACT-PSD SPRGS 10296

SOUTHRN GA 2631-049- Dec-89 RF#2 1991 3.1 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS '/25 154 BACT-PSD SPRGS 10296

HUDSON LA PSD-LA-581 Jan-02 RF#1 28 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION '/25 142 Other (M-2)
BLS NOx NOx CASE·BY-CASE RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # PERMIT UNIT ID INITIALRF MMLBS/ POL CTRL CTRL CODE KEY PPMDV NOx LB/HR ISSUE DATE STARTUP DAY CODE @8%O2 LBITBLS BASIS

~~~~~IV~:~~'I SC Feb-81 RF#10 1984 45 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 142 258 2.75 BACT-PSD

WILLAMETTE - KY

C-93-044 I

Sep-93 RF#1 1987 2.1 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 150 2.90 BACT-PSD

HAWESVILLE

SC 1680-0043 Sep-88 RF#1 1990 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 150 2.90 BACT-PSD

BENNETTSVILLE

[UNIONf" AD May-89 RF#2 1991 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 150 2.90 BACT-PSD

oml 'Tf', LEWISTON ID Apr-83 RF 1972 43 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 184 321 BACT-PSD

LINCOLN -ME ME A-1 -?lAIR Sep-91 RF 1972 1.9 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 200 211 BACT-PSD

[UNION CAMP· tA:O IUVtK SC 1900-0046 RF#1 1984 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 200 3.87 BACT-PSD

IUNION 0U-qyqon May-82 RF#1 1984 29 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 210 4.06 BACT-PSD

[UNION CAMP- Feb-82 RF#1 1984 2.3 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 210 4.06 BACT·PSD

lUI CAMP EASTOVER Feb·82 RF#1 1984 2.6 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 210 4.06 BACT-PSD

PAPER -AL AL 068 Jan-81 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 242 BACT-PSD

HAMMERMILL SELMA PSD-AL-062 Mar-80 RF#2 1981 7 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 114 BACT-PSD

KRAFT 413-0025- Feb-83 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 32 BACT·PSD X00108

S AIIIANf:F_

PINES AL 309-0006 Sep-98 RF#4 1976 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 339 OTHER

LP SAMOA Feb·89 1990 30 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION BACT-PSD

PALATKA FL PSD-FL-079 Nov-85 RF#5 1976 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION BACT-PSD

CAMPTI LA pc;n_1 A_'iR? Feb-91 RF NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 206 BACT-PSD

. MONTICELLO 1500-00007 Jul-03 RF#1 1967 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 200 BACT-PSD

- MONTICELLO MS 1500-00007 Jul-03 RF#2 1968 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 200 BACT·PSD
BLS CTRL NOx NOx CASE·BY-CASE RBLCID FACILITY ST PERMIT # PERMIT UNITID INITIAL RF MMLBS/ POL CTRL CODE KEY PPMDV NOxLB/HR ISSUE DATE START UP DAY CODE @8%O2 LBITBLS BASIS

M()~lTIr:"11 () MS May-04 RF#1 1967 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 200 BACT-PSD

!A()tHII''' I . () MS May-04 RF#2 1968 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 200 BACT-PSD

TX-231 Aug-80 RF NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION 68 BACT-PSD

LUFKIN p"n_TI<_,l'H Oct-OO RF NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 55 OTHER

ItJl HII' , nPlItJr::"

PSD-TXOct-04 1967 NOx BACT-PSD 684M1 RF#1&2 N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 90

PSD-TX

Jan-06 RF#2EIW 1978 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 112 BACT-PSD 778M2 AND

PSD-TX

178M2 AND Jan-06 RF#1n/s 1972 NOx N NO FEASIBLE CONTROLS 63 BACT-PSD

PSD-88-3 &

CAMAS WA DF-88-360 Sep-91 RF#4 1965 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION BACT-PSD

PSD-88-3 &

WA Sep-91 RF#3 1957 NOx P POLLUTION PREVENTION BACT-PSD